Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Infantry Fighting Vehicles a Top Army Priority, Secretary Says
Military.com ^ | 05/01/18 | Matthew Cox

Posted on 05/01/2018 6:32:10 PM PDT by Simon Green

The U.S. Army's top official said Tuesday that the service's Next Generation Combat Vehicle program will focus first on fielding a replacement for the Bradley fighting vehicle.

Building a fleet of NGCVs to replace the M1 tank and the Bradley is the Army's second-highest modernization priority.

Over the last six months, Army leaders have stressed that NGCVs will have to be manned as well as unmanned, but Army Secretary Mark Esper revealed that the service will focus first on the "new infantry fighting vehicle, which is what the first Next Generation Combat Vehicle will be."

"It should provide us with a great deal of capability with our armored formations," Esper told an audience at the Atlantic Council.

This is not the first time the Army has attempted to replace the Cold War-era infantry fighting vehicle. It was four years ago that the service killed its last effort to replace the Bradley, known as the Ground Combat Vehicle program.

The Army launched the GCV program in 2009 shortly after the Pentagon canceled the service's Future Combat Systems program -- a multi-billion-dollar modernization effort that included manned ground vehicles designed to replace the M1, Bradley and other legacy combat vehicles.

Replacing the Bradley then became the Army's top modernization priority. The first prototype was designed to carry a nine-soldier squad; it featured a hybrid drive engine for greater power and an active protection system designed to defeat enemy missiles. It was heavy, though, with a base weight of approximately 53 tons.

(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: army; bradley; ifv; tank
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 05/01/2018 6:32:10 PM PDT by Simon Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

First question. Is it IED proof?


2 posted on 05/01/2018 6:34:11 PM PDT by McGruff (Bring our troops home. Defend our border.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Are they as wide as a small Toyota pickup. If not they’ll only be good in the US.


3 posted on 05/01/2018 6:36:33 PM PDT by DIRTYSECRET (urope. Why do they put up with this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

At 53 tons it seems it could easily get stuck in mud or sand.


4 posted on 05/01/2018 6:37:09 PM PDT by MtnClimber (For phtos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

Almost 20 years ago, the army was pushing the Future Combat System which included many new armored vehicles. It ran into trouble and seemed terribly expensive, so it was cancelled by Rumsfeld.

I wonder if maybe that was a mistake.

But, bottom line — DOD acquisition is really broken and anything they try to buy is going to cost too much and take too long. I know Trump is a little busy at the moment, but if he could reform acquisitions it would be huge.


5 posted on 05/01/2018 6:37:20 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

How will this take? Ten years until a prototype is developed, five years after that for tests, another eight years until it’s mass-produced?


6 posted on 05/01/2018 6:39:55 PM PDT by wastedyears (Americans are dreamers too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

There is no such thing. You build one to withstand 50# they use 75#, etc, etc.
The Miners are always ahead of the ant-Miners!


7 posted on 05/01/2018 6:44:16 PM PDT by TaMoDee (Go Pack Go! The Pack will be back in 2018!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: McGruff
First question. Is it IED proof?

Have you ever seen a M1 hull upside down in the middle of the road with the turret in a ditch? There is no such thing as an IED proof vehicle.

8 posted on 05/01/2018 6:44:29 PM PDT by centurion316 (Back from exile from 4/2016 until 4/2018)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
How will this take? Ten years until a prototype is developed, five years after that for tests, another eight years until it’s mass-produced?

In the case of the Bradley, from proposal to the first units being equipped took 11 years.

9 posted on 05/01/2018 6:45:52 PM PDT by Simon Green ("Arm your daughter, sir, and pay no attention to petty bureaucrats.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

10 posted on 05/01/2018 6:53:38 PM PDT by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber
And like most vehicles that size, worthless in 3rd world countries. Most $hitholes don't have the infrastructure to support such sizes. Great for Europe. Not so much in Obama land.
11 posted on 05/01/2018 6:54:18 PM PDT by Theoria (I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green
it's gonna probably look like this, at least until it gets to $50,000,000/vehicle level:


12 posted on 05/01/2018 6:57:02 PM PDT by catnipman ( Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

It cannot be IED proof. Iran, putin’s ally, used shape charges to kill many Americans in Abrams tanks. A nations state, like Iran, allied with a state prostrated to the will of an autocrat like putin, can dedicate its resources to produce many IEDs that will defeat armor. The mad mullahs, allied with putin, will get plenty of support in the political arena too from the putinista bitch brigade.


13 posted on 05/01/2018 7:08:51 PM PDT by elhombrelibre (Cogito ergo sum a conservative pro-American.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

There’s a place for armor still, but there sure are a lot of new things that can neutralize it.


14 posted on 05/01/2018 7:25:24 PM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
FCS was doomed soon soon after it's start. Not only did it include armored vehicles (9 variants), it also had the robotic "mule", two other vehicles, unmanned ground vehicles, aerial drones, a complete soldier system, a battlefield network, computer operating systems, munitions, and sensors! Add to that reorganizing the Army into Brigade Combat Teams -- that part happened.

Leftovers from FCS moved on, for example the Ground Combat Vehicle, which too was cancelled. Before FCS, the Army tried Armored System Modernization, cancelled when the cold war "ended." A good system was cancelled just before product; the XM8 Armored Gun System. It was to replace the M551 Sheridan, which is gone without a replacement.

The Army hasn't done well with major ground systems since the end of the Reagan/Bush era. Don't count on that changing.

15 posted on 05/01/2018 7:44:40 PM PDT by IndispensableDestiny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

If I remember correctly, the South Africans had some great wheeled APC’s that were almost land mine proof.


16 posted on 05/01/2018 8:16:10 PM PDT by armourenthusiast (Trumperific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Simon Green

At some point you are going to have to fight another conventional war against a standing army with MBT’s... not every war will be against insurgents with IEDs.
Not saying MBT’s are the best to use against insurgents either, but tank crews still had a much higher survival rate than lesser armored vehicles against IEDs.


17 posted on 05/01/2018 8:16:25 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

You know that’s a lot bigger than an early WWII tank.


18 posted on 05/01/2018 8:17:53 PM PDT by armourenthusiast (Trumperific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

How will this take?

Get a copy of “the pentagon wars” movie.


19 posted on 05/01/2018 8:18:52 PM PDT by Mouton (The MSM is a clear and present danger to the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: armourenthusiast

“If I remember correctly, the South Africans had some great wheeled APC’s that were almost land mine proof.”

The keyword is “almost”.

L


20 posted on 05/01/2018 8:21:48 PM PDT by Lurker (President Trump isn't our last chance. President Trump is THEIR last chance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson