Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV)

Moose said:
Well that's unexpected. Guess AM General is in trouble now.
Click to expand...
Bloomberg is quoting $400k per most likely stripped.. 55k units is not enough.
 
http://news.usni.org/2015/12/17/lockheed-martin-will-file-in-court-of-federal-claims-after-gao-dismisses-jltv-protest
 
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2016/02/02/dod-weapons-tester-dote-report-sheds-light-jltv-competition/79703534/

"JLTVs generally also don’t have “sufficient capability” to carry equipment, supplies and water longer than a day-long mission, Gilmore reported. “This limits the types and duration of missions for which JLTV is effective,” he writes,” or will require more vehicles or trailers.

Also, while it’s not a current JLTV requirement, Gilmore noted that the utility variant does not have the same capability as the Humvee Cargo/Troop carrier.

The prototypes also “suffered from poor command, control, and communication equipment integration by the vendor affecting the unit commander’s ability to command and control platoons, maintain situational awareness, and complete mission tasks during the LUT,” Gilmore wrote.

Moreover, because of small rear windows and blind spots, Gilmore noted, the JLTVs do not provide the crews with “sufficient” visibility during missions."
 
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/03/24/jltv-program-cost-estimate-drops-6-billion/82224406/
 
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/04/13/jltv-initial-capability-milestone-delayed/83010182/

Not good, not to mention that there are some rather dubious explanations for the slippage.
 
jsport said:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2016/02/02/dod-weapons-tester-dote-report-sheds-light-jltv-competition/79703534/

"JLTVs generally also don’t have “sufficient capability” to carry equipment, supplies and water longer than a day-long mission, Gilmore reported. “This limits the types and duration of missions for which JLTV is effective,” he writes,” or will require more vehicles or trailers.

Also, while it’s not a current JLTV requirement, Gilmore noted that the utility variant does not have the same capability as the Humvee Cargo/Troop carrier.

The prototypes also “suffered from poor command, control, and communication equipment integration by the vendor affecting the unit commander’s ability to command and control platoons, maintain situational awareness, and complete mission tasks during the LUT,” Gilmore wrote.

Moreover, because of small rear windows and blind spots, Gilmore noted, the JLTVs do not provide the crews with “sufficient” visibility during missions."
Click to expand...

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/04/13/jltv-initial-capability-milestone-delayed/83010182/

"savvy acquisition strategy" really?

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=2122
"Army Officials Paint Dire Picture of the State of the Force"

no decent vehicle on the horizon more like it. Oshkosh had some interesting cab forward genuinely armored designs which would cost more but might start meeting the bill.
 
JLTV at maximum yearly acquisition quantity will account for ~ 5% of the Army's procurement budget.
And there's been plenty of time (by design) to correct the deficiencies uncovered during the testing of the EMD prototypes.

My favorite excerpt from the EMD testing was the full bullet point that indicates that DOT&E may be dimly aware of tactics and operational art.

Due to small rear windows and blind spots around the
vehicles, the JLTVs did not provide the Army and Marine
Corps crews with sufficient visibility throughout the missions.
Crews shared information of potential threats, movements,
and activities while moving to maintain shared situational
awareness for unit security.
Click to expand...
 
Grey Havoc said:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/03/army-nixes-light-recon-vehicle-taps-humvee-replacement-mission.html

This will not end well. At all.
Click to expand...
 
I don't see how. It's far superior to HMMWV in protection overall and better then something like Wiesel at resisting mine/IED attacks.
 
Kat Tsun said:
I don't see how. It's far superior to HMMWV in protection overall and better then something like Wiesel at resisting mine/IED attacks.
Click to expand...

I'd also be excited by the quieter noise profile on the ground, as well as the reduced logistics burden and increased redundancy from the hybrid power system. Depending on how the system is designed the electric motors could provide more low-speed torque and faster reactions to slippage - allowing it to pull a larger trailer than an equivalent pure gas design.
 
http://www.janes.com/article/63662/jltv-deliveries-to-begin-in-september
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLbiKIe3Dlc

JLTVs at AUSA 2016
 
Calling the 30mm on a Stryker (which never should have been abandoned in the first place) and the jokeish JTLV "Overmatch" . Please see Overmatch attached.
 

Attachments

  • BTR 100mm.jpg
    BTR 100mm.jpg
    96.6 KB · Views: 516
United Kingdom – Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) and Accessories

WASHINGTON, Jul. 10, 2017 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign
Military Sale to the United Kingdom for Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) and accessories. The estimated
cost is $1.035 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying
Congress of this possible sale today.

The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested a possible sale of up to two thousand seven
hundred forty-seven (2,747) Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV). This possible sale also includes baseline
integration kits, basic issue item kits, B-kit armor, engine arctic kits, fording kits, run-flat kits, spare tire kits,
silent watch kits, power expansion kits cargo cover kits, maintainer and operator training, U.S. government
technical assistance and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support.
Total estimated cost is $1.035 billion.

This proposed sale supports the foreign policy and national security policies of the United States by helping
to improve the security of a NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, an important partner on critical
foreign policy and defense issues.

The proposed sale will help improve the UK’s Light Tactical Vehicle Fleet and enhance its ability to meet
current and future threats. The UK will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.

The proposed sale will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

The principal contractor of this sale will be Oshkosh Defense, LLC, Oshkosh, Wisconsin. The procured items
will require minimum contractor support until the foreign customer can eventually transition to internal organic
support. There is no known offset agreement associated with this proposed sale.

There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.

All questions regarding this proposed Foreign Military Sale should be directed to the State Department's Bureau
of Political Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs, pm-cpa@state.gov.
 
defence-blog.com

NODAR to develop 3D vision systems for US Army’s autonomous ground vehicles

The U.S. Army issued a contract award to develop 3D vision systems for its off-road autonomous ground vehicles. The Army awarded the $1.67M SBIR Phase II contract to NODAR to develop 3D vision systems for military off-road autonomous ground vehicles. NODAR will be working with the U.S. Army in...
defence-blog.com defence-blog.com
 
Lc89 said:
Moose said:
In a mild shock, AM General has successfully unseated Oshkosh for the JLTV-A2 contract:
www.defensenews.com

AM General unseats Oshkosh to build Joint Light Tactical Vehicle

The Army has chosen to oust incumbent Oshkosh in favor of AM General to build Joint Light Tactical Vehicles.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
Click to expand...
Will AM General's JLTV be identical to the Oshkosh JLTV in terms of design and aesthetics?
Click to expand...
The Army bought the technical data package from Oshkosh and then put production out to bid, so it's going to look pretty close. I expect an AM General-style slotted grill will replace the Oshkosh arch, and this is an -A2 so there may be some changes just related to the improvements in the vehicle.
 
Slightly OT, but I'm trying to track down a developmental prototype that may have played into the JLTV armor designs and suspension setup. I found it on Wiki back before the JLTV contract was awarded, but now I cannot find any links to it. It had a somewhat rounded shape, still faceted, but the upper sides of the cab angled inwards instead of vertical slabs. IIRC it was built by one of the military support bureaus, not a commercial vendor. Had an adjustable ride height suspension. Was doing a bunch of testing in the western US.

Name was something like Close Combat Support Vehicle or some weirdness like that.

I'm very frustrated, my old favorites file got corrupted and I have not been able to find that wiki page since... Anyone got suggestions?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Slightly OT, but I'm trying to track down a developmental prototype that may have played into the JLTV armor designs and suspension setup. I found it on Wiki back before the JLTV contract was awarded, but now I cannot find any links to it. It had a somewhat rounded shape, still faceted, but the upper sides of the cab angled inwards instead of vertical slabs. IIRC it was built by one of the military support bureaus, not a commercial vendor. Had an adjustable ride height suspension. Was doing a bunch of testing in the western US.

Name was something like Close Combat Support Vehicle or some weirdness like that.

I'm very frustrated, my old favorites file got corrupted and I have not been able to find that wiki page since... Anyone got suggestions?
Click to expand...
defensereview.com

DefRev Exclusive: Advanced Ground Mobility Vehicle (AGMV) JLTV Tech Demonstrator

by David Crane defrev at gmail.com All photographic images contained in this article were taken by DefenseReview.com, and they are the exclusive property of DefenseReview.com. DefenseReview.com owns the copyright on these photos. All photos were shot with a 7.2-megapixel Sony Cyber-shot...
defensereview.com defensereview.com
maybe
 
jsport said:
defensereview.com

DefRev Exclusive: Advanced Ground Mobility Vehicle (AGMV) JLTV Tech Demonstrator

by David Crane defrev at gmail.com All photographic images contained in this article were taken by DefenseReview.com, and they are the exclusive property of DefenseReview.com. DefenseReview.com owns the copyright on these photos. All photos were shot with a 7.2-megapixel Sony Cyber-shot...
defensereview.com defensereview.com
maybe
Click to expand...
That's the right cab shape for sure!

The pictures I saw of the beast in the desert had steps on the sides to the doors (may have been tool boxes), and I don't remember the wiki article having any mention of diesel-electric power. May still have been a hybrid, I just don't remember.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom