Will MRAPs Drain U.S. Army's JLTV, FCS Efforts?

YES. This has been another edition of simple answers to obvious questions.

DefenseNews asks the question.

Functionally, the [Mine Resistant Ambush Protected] is closest to the [Joint Light Tactical Vehicle]. Both are utility vehicles meant to perform the role of a Humvee while adding the kind of protection that can stand up to modern guerrilla weapons.

The Stryker has a different job — carrying an infantry squad into an assault — while the [Future Combat System] vehicles are meant to be the Army’s heavy-hitting force of the future.

And some officials with TACOM Life Cycle Management Command, which manages the Army’s vehicle-acquisition efforts, worry that the MRAP program might drain money and people from the JLTV and FCS.

As the TACOM MRAP office ramps up with more money and personnel, and commanders in Iraq express interest in replacing Humvees in the war zone with MRAP, “some here are concerned that MRAP will detract from the JLTV and other programs,” the TACOM official said.

Lt. Gen. Stephen Speakes, the Army’s deputy chief of staff, said the emergence of roadside bombs in Iraq of unprecedented power is forcing service planners to rethink the Army’s needs.

“We have some important questions that we’ll have to answer. How much can we pull the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program forward? Can we get the combination of performance, payload and protection all of us want in a more manageable package? None of us want a vehicle that weighs between 40,000 and 60,000 pounds,” Speakes said.

I'm surprised that the article didn't mention the Marine Corps' Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. It's also at risk, especially given that program's recent troubles. But when the Marines get into acquisition troubles, they get very, very quiet. Stealthy bastards. If they're not in the news, then they just might slip past this little issue of being seen as too ambitious for wanting MRAPs, JLTVs, and the EFV.

Yes, we all want our troops to be safe from IEDs. But these vehicles in and of themselves aren't going to help counter the insurgency. You still have to walk the streets and win over the Iraqi people, come the end of the day. And meanwhile, our future R&D investments shrink away, industry bitches, and more money shows up. Of course Congress will approve the $140 billion that Bush is going to ask for next year. That ought to tide things over - delaying the acquisition train wreck that is coming for another year.

Comments

[NVH]

Acquisition is already a train wreck J. , you just get better at sifting thru the wreckage and dealing with the Agency in Charge of investigating the accident...

[Galrahn]

FYI, the EFV was found to be vulnerable to IEDs, thus had to be changed again recently. It is one reason why the buy has been cut in half, and another reason the price ws raised to 18 million per vehicle.

More here:
http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2007/07/ever-expensive-expeditionary-fleet.html

I just found your blog, you do good work here.

[Grandjester]

Of course the EFV is vulnerable to IED's! It was never designed to encounter such a device, it is to put Marines on the beach quickly from an over the horizon lauch point PERIOD. MRAPS can't swim either, that's kinda how these things work, as no one vehicle can do all/be all for every mission.

[Joe Katzman]

The EFV cannot be altered to remove its IED vulnerability, since it needs a flat hull to plane over the water when the waterjets are on. I understand the idea of 25 mph water speed to allow amphibious launches from over the horizon (about 25 miles) - this gives the Navy 2 shots at incoming missiles headed for the launching ship. Still, there comes a point where you have to ask when the damage to the primary mission of armored troop transport becomes too great.

FCS will NEVER be the "heavy hitting force" it has been sold as, and experience in Iraq has proved that (vid. Objective Peach). Perfect information is impossible, and compensating with electronics for defense just skyrockets costs and maintenance - that's why armor is needed. At best, FCS becomes another medium force a la Stryker, and the SBCT units become National Guard assets where their wheeled mobility is a huge asset.

Finally, MRAP/JLTV. The issue with JLTV is that parents are going to want to military to spend money on vehicles that will save their kinds NOW, not some 5-year, $5 billion research wank. With MRAP production hitting its stride, it will also have Congressional backing to keep it going. With a huge maintenance overhang bill for its equipment coming due, FCS needing to be fed, and military budgets not getting a lot bigger, everyone will be looking for savings. If MRAP is doing the job and needs the funds, the JLTV R&D program starts looking like a good candidate for cuts.

I believe JLTV will die, and the USMC will place an order for an off-the shelf vehicle that can fit more easily into the decks of amphibious ships (MRAPs tend to be tall) and can be lifted by helicopter. Force Protection's Cheetah and Iveco's Panther CLV strike me as the likely candidates... though I'd prefer they think more broadly and consider BVS10 Viking tracked vehicles.