via DefenseMediaNetwork. Check out the entire article but this stood out and punched me in the eye.
ACV program plans seem to be coalescing around an approach outlined, “As approved at the ACV Material Development Decision (MDD), the ACV program has been approved to enter a combined Material Solution Analysis/Technology Development Phase. An In Process Review will be held after the Analysis of Alternatives (AoA), at which time the material solution will be set and the subsequent Milestones will be established. For this RFI, the government is looking for industry input into an incremental acquisition program to deliver a series of incremental capability upgrades in order to inform ongoing affordability analyses. This could be achieved either through delivery of a baseline new vehicle with subsequent planned upgrades, or a set of planned upgrades to the legacy vehicle. The overall intent is to minimize the per vehicle cost of each of the increments without stretching the program over more than three increments, and preferably only two.”Wow.
I don't know where I'm at with this type of thinking. "A set of planned upgrades to the legacy vehicle"...WTF!
HQMC initially stated that they would be upgrading the AAV while developing and getting into service the ACV.
Now we might be left with the laughable position of the AAV getting renamed and rewrapped again. Aviation----you're killing the ground side-----but if that is the game plan then it does make the Marines EXTREMELY frugal again.
Color me confused.
Was wondering when they would come out and just say it. They can't afford a new vehicle and get the f35. I'm I'm with the upgrades, just make sure the actual users (aav guys, especially the section leaders, and the mait guys!) In on the brainstorming! They know what they want and need, let them tell the companys what's they want have see what industry shows! We've seen that this works very well with rapid acquisition in theater
ReplyDeletewell if we're just going to upgrade the AAV then what about the MPC??? the MPC was suppose to fill the void in Infantry lift because of fewer EFV's. if we're actually going to have enough AAV/ACV's then do we still need the MPC?
ReplyDeleteGood question. I would say no, just because the money used on the MPC could be diverted to make the next gen ACV better or more importantly be dropped on better upgrades on the current Gators.
ReplyDeleteThe other part tells me to push the MPC as a next generation lav
that makes sense except that they just upgraded the LAV...but on the other hand LAV's were once known as Light Armored Infantry Battalions and not light armored recon...so who knows?
ReplyDeleteWell if I remember right they just upgrades to lav A2's.
ReplyDeleteAs for upgrading the aav fleet. A lot of things to work on. New weapon system, new armor kit with full coverage and defeats 20mm cannon fire while allowing it to float (yep composite get to work), kevlar line that hull, upgrade engine...just for starts.
totally agree but with the clarifying guidance you could be talking about an upgrade cycle that lasts anywhere from 5 to 10 years. pretty darn depressing. the Commandant will ride the "new" ACV but it'll just be a refurbished and upgraded AAV.
ReplyDeleteone question though. does the turret have to be manned or will the AAV community be ok with a RWS?
Well the rws I had seen just pulled the ugws out and replaced it with a seat and weapon sight pkg. I could see them just wanting a manned station just because we are amphibious and would want a mechanical backup to keep it going if the electronics failed. Most of our guys would take anything as long as we can actually fit in the thing
ReplyDelete