- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,551
- Reaction score
- 7,153
Army Still Wants Mobile Protected Firepower From An Air-Droppable Tank
Army officials gathered at Ft. Benning, GA, last week to discuss the future of the service's maneuver forces and consistently brought up a lingering capability gap for mobile protected firepower they say must be filled by a new vehicle. The Army's desire for a new "light tank," reminiscent of the air-droppable M551 Sheridan, was tempered, however, by discussions of declining budget resources, with some officials saying the issue is indicative of the growing mismatch between those who draw up an acquisition program's requirements and those who must fund them. "I just don't see another platform vehicle getting off the ground at this point," said a Pentagon official familiar with the matter.
The possibility of a new Army vehicle also left sources on Capitol Hill scratching their heads. "It's a pretty obvious capability gap for the light divisions -- has been for years," said one congressional source. "Cost will be an issue."
The stage has been set, however, to possibly provide the 82nd Airborne with a short-term, off-the-shelf solution until a final vehicle acquisition can be made, according to Col. Ed House, a Training and Doctrine Command capabilities manager for the infantry brigade combat team, who spoke at the Ft. Benning conference. House said TRADOC recently recommended acquiring a new form of mobile protected firepower and received the support from Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John Campbell. "We're pushing that really, really hard," House said. "Great support out of the department to provide a capability to the 82nd in the short-term -- a [commercial off-the-shelf or government off-the-shelf] solution, with a long-term strategy of working the [Joint Capabilities Integration Development System] process to develop the right thing."
Army sources said potential "stop-gap" solutions would likely be some form of humvee with significant firepower, though no decisions have been made. The Army has been down this acquisition path before, contracting BAE Systems in the 1990s to develop several Armored Gun System prototypes to replace the Sheridan. The AGS was jettisoned, however, in favor of the Stryker and various Future Combat Systems platforms. While the Stryker has proved successful, an air-droppable variant has yet to be developed (though there have been experiments) and FCS was terminated in 2009 due to skyrocketing costs. Hence, the requirement for a light tank remains. The AGS was on display during the Ft. Benning conference, according to an email from Stephanie Serkhoshian, a spokeswoman for BAE, and several officials brought it up during their presentations. The need for a light combat vehicle has become especially significant as the Army contemplates what role itwill play as the Defense Department shifts its focus to the Asia Pacific region and begins backing away from long-term conflicts to emphasize smaller, scalable operations.
Maj. Gen. John Nicholson, commander of the 82nd Airborne, said he and his rapidly deployable units require a vehicle that can allow them to drop into a combat zone and continue fighting even as the enemy masses forces to repel them. The Joint Light Tactical vehicle being developed by the Army and Marine Corps will be too heavy to accomplish such a mission and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles lack mobility, and neither vehicle has the required firepower, he explained. "If all we're doing is jumping in and then moving at the speed of a World War II paratrooper, we're going to lose the initiative we've gained," he said during a Sept. 11 panel at Ft. Benning. "If we instead get a force on the ground that's mobile and has firepower, well now we can retain that initiative." Nicholson said "specific platforms" were being looked at, but cautioned that the Army's declining resources in the present era of sequestration-driven budget cuts might delay any major decision for some time. Such budget considerations, however, may drive the Army to explore other options in the meantime.
"There's a requirement for something over the long-term, but I'm also interested in what can I have today?" Nicholson said. "I'm looking at our existing vehicle fleet today and how we could modify it and how we could make it available to give us that mobility." Nicholson said it was possible the Army could use thin-skinned humvees, rather than the up-armored configurations, because some environments where the 82nd Airborne would rapidly deploy, would not feature improvised explosive devices to the extent they are seen during long-term occupations like Afghanistan. "We have to make an intelligent choice on risk for what we can get in," he said. "For the up-armored stuff, can it be air-dropped? Can I afford to air-drop unarmored vehicles? There are certain sets of conditions where we would want a very light vehicle. There's other sets of conditions where it might be something a little heavier."
Meanwhile, Special Operations Command recently awarded a $562 million contract to General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems for a new Ground Mobility Vehicle. Nichols said he was familiar with the GMV, but did not want to discuss specific platforms
Army officials gathered at Ft. Benning, GA, last week to discuss the future of the service's maneuver forces and consistently brought up a lingering capability gap for mobile protected firepower they say must be filled by a new vehicle. The Army's desire for a new "light tank," reminiscent of the air-droppable M551 Sheridan, was tempered, however, by discussions of declining budget resources, with some officials saying the issue is indicative of the growing mismatch between those who draw up an acquisition program's requirements and those who must fund them. "I just don't see another platform vehicle getting off the ground at this point," said a Pentagon official familiar with the matter.
The possibility of a new Army vehicle also left sources on Capitol Hill scratching their heads. "It's a pretty obvious capability gap for the light divisions -- has been for years," said one congressional source. "Cost will be an issue."
The stage has been set, however, to possibly provide the 82nd Airborne with a short-term, off-the-shelf solution until a final vehicle acquisition can be made, according to Col. Ed House, a Training and Doctrine Command capabilities manager for the infantry brigade combat team, who spoke at the Ft. Benning conference. House said TRADOC recently recommended acquiring a new form of mobile protected firepower and received the support from Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John Campbell. "We're pushing that really, really hard," House said. "Great support out of the department to provide a capability to the 82nd in the short-term -- a [commercial off-the-shelf or government off-the-shelf] solution, with a long-term strategy of working the [Joint Capabilities Integration Development System] process to develop the right thing."
Army sources said potential "stop-gap" solutions would likely be some form of humvee with significant firepower, though no decisions have been made. The Army has been down this acquisition path before, contracting BAE Systems in the 1990s to develop several Armored Gun System prototypes to replace the Sheridan. The AGS was jettisoned, however, in favor of the Stryker and various Future Combat Systems platforms. While the Stryker has proved successful, an air-droppable variant has yet to be developed (though there have been experiments) and FCS was terminated in 2009 due to skyrocketing costs. Hence, the requirement for a light tank remains. The AGS was on display during the Ft. Benning conference, according to an email from Stephanie Serkhoshian, a spokeswoman for BAE, and several officials brought it up during their presentations. The need for a light combat vehicle has become especially significant as the Army contemplates what role itwill play as the Defense Department shifts its focus to the Asia Pacific region and begins backing away from long-term conflicts to emphasize smaller, scalable operations.
Maj. Gen. John Nicholson, commander of the 82nd Airborne, said he and his rapidly deployable units require a vehicle that can allow them to drop into a combat zone and continue fighting even as the enemy masses forces to repel them. The Joint Light Tactical vehicle being developed by the Army and Marine Corps will be too heavy to accomplish such a mission and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles lack mobility, and neither vehicle has the required firepower, he explained. "If all we're doing is jumping in and then moving at the speed of a World War II paratrooper, we're going to lose the initiative we've gained," he said during a Sept. 11 panel at Ft. Benning. "If we instead get a force on the ground that's mobile and has firepower, well now we can retain that initiative." Nicholson said "specific platforms" were being looked at, but cautioned that the Army's declining resources in the present era of sequestration-driven budget cuts might delay any major decision for some time. Such budget considerations, however, may drive the Army to explore other options in the meantime.
"There's a requirement for something over the long-term, but I'm also interested in what can I have today?" Nicholson said. "I'm looking at our existing vehicle fleet today and how we could modify it and how we could make it available to give us that mobility." Nicholson said it was possible the Army could use thin-skinned humvees, rather than the up-armored configurations, because some environments where the 82nd Airborne would rapidly deploy, would not feature improvised explosive devices to the extent they are seen during long-term occupations like Afghanistan. "We have to make an intelligent choice on risk for what we can get in," he said. "For the up-armored stuff, can it be air-dropped? Can I afford to air-drop unarmored vehicles? There are certain sets of conditions where we would want a very light vehicle. There's other sets of conditions where it might be something a little heavier."
Meanwhile, Special Operations Command recently awarded a $562 million contract to General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems for a new Ground Mobility Vehicle. Nichols said he was familiar with the GMV, but did not want to discuss specific platforms
