Highlights of the above document...
ACV Wargame
To develop the ACV MP, a wargame was conducted involving a representative group of subject matter experts (SMEs) who wargamed the individual scenarios to create the necessary details for tasks, events, duration and operating conditions. The participants had the opportunity to discuss their actions during each of the scenarios and their responses were collected. Once the tactical approach to the scenario was decided upon, the responses were focused on the time-phased representation of systems operation that is key to the OMS/MP. Refer to the ACV OMS/MP Wargame Final Report for further details.So the AAV turret is being tossed and they're going with a RWS with either a fifty cal or 40mm. Interesting. I wonder if this is priming the AAV Battalions to go down to a two man crew?
Each of the scenarios had a number of lethality engagements that supported the description of how the ACV’s weapon system would be employed. Each engagement was executed with the ACVs having a mix of a stabilized remote weapons system (RWS) equipped with either a .50 caliber M2 or a 40 mm Mk19 MOD. The ACV platoon had an equal mix of the two weapons (ACV platoon with 21 vehicles 11 x .50 cal and 10 x Mk19). During the scenario discussions, the participants were presented a threat engagement and given the opportunity to discuss their actions during engagement and then their responses were collected. Once the tactical approach to the engagement was decided, the responses were focused on how the weapons system was employed and rounds fired.
Littoral Penetration Summary (Scenario 1)
The first scenario in the ACV mission is a littoral penetration. A company team (Co Tm) comprised of an infantry company, an ACV platoon, a light armored reconnaissance (LAR) platoon and a tank platoon is part of a larger joint task force. The Co Tm has been staged near a border of a threat nation. This scenario starts with the infantry company mounted on ACVs moving under the cover of darkness to a launch point and crossing the surf of an estuary that is part of a border with the threat nation. During this water movement, there is an engagement with two ‘technical’ vehicles from cliffs above the estuary. After a 3 NM movement, the ACVs cross through another surf zone into the threat nation. Upon landing, the ACVs move along the beach to the beach exit and establish an assembly area where infantry disembark and await link up with the LAR and tank platoon.I'm still digesting this. In the document "Statement of Work for the ACV" they include this blurb...
Launching from Amphibious Ships Analysis
The Contractor shall perform an analysis of their vehicle design showing the capability of launching from amphibious ships identified in the ACV System Performance Specification. The analysis shall include the sub-sections listed below. The Contractor shall prepare and submit the Amphibious Ship Launching Capability Analysis in accordance with CDRL A066.So while it was never war gamed, it does appear that they're looking for the future Marine Personnel Carrier (aka ACV 1.1---NOTE! HQMC fix this naming nonsense!) will be at least analyzed in its ability to launch from amphibious ships.
Is this an actual requirement or a "like to have"?
Either way I want to thank the little bird that keeps dropping these crumbs on my window sill. You can download and read the documents yourself here.
NOTE! I stand by my earlier assessment that the USMC cannot afford these vehicles under current budget pressures. The work you see above is simply "residual" effects from Amos' tenure as Commandant. This was laid out and ready to go when Amos took office. To see it suddenly appear now is nothing but legacy building. Dunford will not be able to put his stamp on the Marine Corps...and this program for another 3 to 4 months. You're witnessing program "inertia"...everyone is waiting to see what the "new" guy has to say, in the mean time the work goes on.
