Back to news

January 26, 2021 | International, Land

Infantry Squad Vehicle is a cramped ride, but US Army says it meets requirements

By:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army's new Infantry Squad Vehicle is a cramped ride and offers limited protection from certain threats, according to a recent report from the Pentagon's chief weapons tester, but it still meets the service's requirements in tests and evaluations, the product lead told Defense News.

The ISV “key requirements are being met and we are increasing soldier operational readiness by providing an operationally relevant vehicle that can transport small tactical units to a dismount point faster and in better physical and mental condition for the fight,” said Steven Herrick, the Army's product lead for ground mobility vehicles within the Program Executive Office Combat Support and Combat Service Support.

The vehicle was designed for easy transport to operational environments with the infantry's current rotary and fixed-wing transport platforms. The key performance parameters required that the vehicle's weight not exceed 5,000 pounds and that it fit inside a CH-47 Chinook cargo helicopter. Those requirements “force dimensional requirements only allowing the vehicle to be a certain height, width and length,” he said.

The requirements led to a vehicle that makes it hard for soldiers with all their gear needed for a 72-hour mission to comfortably fit inside and be able to access rucksacks on the move.

The Army assessed three vendors in developmental testing from December 2019 through January 2020. The service chose General Motors Defense to supply the vehicle to the force, with the company beating out an Oshkosh Defense and Flyer Defense team as well as an SAIC and Polaris team.

All offerings were capable of carrying a nine-soldier infantry squad with weapons and equipment during movement, the director of operational test and evaluation said in the report. But the Pentagon also noted the ISV “has not demonstrated the capability to carry the required mission equipment, supplies and water for a unit to sustain itself to cover a range of 300 miles within a 72-hour period.”

The Army, however, has assessed the ISV requirement and solution set is in alignment, Herrick said. The DOT&E report, he said, “indicates a desire to include more equipment than a standard nine-soldier squad would carry on a 72-hour mission.”

This lack of space, the report stated, “may create a logistics and operational burden” and might limit the type of missions and duration for ISVs.

The soldiers that participated in the touch point evaluating the vehicles were asked to bring their Advanced Combat Helmet and Improved Outer Tactical Vest with plates; individual weapon; night vision devices; and ruck with three days' worth of supplies, Herrick said.

“All vendors' ISVs are cramped and soldiers cannot reach, stow, and secure equipment as needed, degrading and slowing mission operations,” the report explained. During tests “soldiers on all ISVs could not readily access items in their rucksacks without stopping the movement, dismounting, and removing their rucksacks from the vehicle.”

The soldier touch point took into account soldier comfort, visibility and ability to execute the mission, Herrick said. This was all factored into the Army's decision to choose GM Defense's vehicle.

“Additionally, no current or planned combat or tactical vehicle allows access to rucksacks while moving to support operator safety,” Herrick noted. “Crew spaces on the ISV are designed to allow mission performance of specific duty tasks.”

Units also lacked reliable communication capability, according to the report, using hand-held or manpack radios between 62 and 300 miles. The ISV does not have a mounted radio requirement. “Communication between the squad leader, soldiers, and the platoon leader was intermittent and not reliable,” the report found.

Because of the concept of the ISV providing an effective aid to insert soldiers into combat operations, the requirements support just what the soldier carries, so there is no mounted requirement yet, Herrick said. That requirement could be added as a growth capability later.

The DOT&E report also noted that the ISV doesn't have an underbody and ballistic survivability requirement, which could mean the unit would be susceptible to certain threats, but the ISV's speed as well as its small, low profile might help deal with those issues. Adding protection to the vehicle would sacrifice the speed the squad needs to rapidly inject itself into operations.

Overall, GM Defense's vehicle had the highest reliability among the three vendors, demonstrating 585 mean miles between operational mission failures. The Army's user requirement is 1,200 mean miles for that situation.

Herrick noted that reliability and maintainability testing was not scheduled or conducted by Army Test and Evaluation Command or the program office, so the calculations used in the DOT&E report were “not supported by traditional [reliability and maintainability] RAM elements, such as scoring conferences and time for the vendor to implement changes.”

The mileage accumulated and referenced in the report was “not meant to evaluate RAM by the Army, but rather to provide the program office and contractor an initial insight on the capability of the system over 500 miles,” Herrick added. The vehicle's RAM testing is scheduled to begin this month, he added..

The service wasn't able to evaluate every aspect of the vehicle before moving into production, but it plans to test the vehicle's ability to be carried by a Chinook during its initial operational test and evaluation this year.

Now that the Army has chosen the GM Defense vehicle, it has already initiated developmental testing that will lead to an initial operational test and evaluation in August 2021 at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. That testing began in November 2020.

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/01/25/infantry-squad-vehicle-is-a-cramped-ride-but-army-says-it-meets-requirements/

On the same subject

  • US Army to free up another $10 billion for priorities

    June 3, 2019 | International, Land

    US Army to free up another $10 billion for priorities

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is freeing up another $10 billion to apply to its top priorities in its next five-year budget plan, according to the service's undersecretary. “We are about to slap the table on the [program objective memorandum] here by no later than the middle of June,” Ryan McCarthy told a group of reporters during a May 29 media roundtable in his office. As part of a rigorous review of programs and spending, the Army set out to find $10 billion within the budget that could be reallocated toward priorities in its fiscal 2021-2025 program objective memorandum. The money shook out through another round of what the Army informally calls “night court,” a review process that freed up $30 billion in the last budget cycle to get ambitious modernization programs off the ground. The night court process was inspired by similar reviews conducted under Robert Gates when he was defense secretary. Rather than make $182 billion worth of decisions in a few hours, the process is meant to establish a deliberate route to applying funds against priorities, McCarthy said. For example, if a program didn't contribute to a more lethal battlefield or to one of the Army's six modernization priorities, it was canceled or downsized. The Army set up a new four-star command — Army Futures Command — last year to tackle the service's top six modernization priorities: long-range precision fires, the next-generation combat vehicle, future vertical lift, the network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality. The review was conducted with the Army chief, vice chief, secretary and undersecretary at the head of the table last summer. But this year, to establish a more sustainable model, leadership fell to the major four-star commands and civilian heads in charge of major offices like acquisition and manpower. “Every dollar counts in this environment,” McCarthy said. “And so what we've done is we've realized that it's not a sustainable model to have the entire Army leadership hunkered down every summer, but should delegate to the appropriate echelon of authority.” Only the most difficult decisions will be brought to the top four Army leaders, he added. When it comes to finding another $10 billion across the five-year planning period to apply to priorities, McCarthy said, “we are in very good shape there.” The Army is also working to shift spending so that 50 percent is applied to new programs and 50 percent to legacy systems in the FY24-FY25 time frame. In FY17, the Army was applying 80 percent to legacy programs and 20 percent to bringing on new capabilities. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/05/31/army-freeing-up-another-10-billion-for-priorities/

  • NATO Secretary General launches his Annual Report for 2023

    March 14, 2024 | International, Security

    NATO Secretary General launches his Annual Report for 2023

    NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg launched his annual report for 2023 on Thursday (14 March 2024), which covers all aspects of the Alliance’s work over the past year.

  • Europe de la défense: entre Paris et Berlin, des ambitions et de la méfiance

    May 24, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

    Europe de la défense: entre Paris et Berlin, des ambitions et de la méfiance

    Char, avion de combat du futur: Paris et Berlin travaillent sur d'ambitieux projets industriels communs dans la défense, mais les rapports restent teintés de méfiance et marqués par des divergences de vue autour de la question des exportations d'armement. Face au Brexit, au rel'chement des liens transatlantiques sous l'ère Trump, et malgré une mauvaise passe dans la relation franco-allemande, Emmanuel Macron a fait de l'Europe de la défense l'un de ses grands chevaux de bataille, qui figure en bonne place dans le programme des candidats de son camp aux élections européennes de dimanche. Réunis par un même besoin de renouveler leurs capacités militaires à horizon 2035-2040, Français et Allemands ont convenu à l'été 2017 de développer main dans la main deux programmes d'équipements majeurs: le système de combat aérien du futur (SCAF), sous leadership du français Dassault, pour remplacer les Rafale et les Typhoon, et le char de combat du futur ayant vocation à remplacer les Leclerc et les Lepoard, sous leadership allemand. Concernant le SCAF, dont le premier contrat d'architecture a été notifié à Dassault et Airbus en janvier, Paris et Berlin comptent annoncer "cet été" le lancement des études de recherche et développement destinées à jeter les bases des démonstrateurs, pour un montant de 150 millions d'euros sur deux ans, selon des sources concordantes. - pas d'annonce au Bourget? - Il n'est toutefois pas certain que l'annonce soit faite mi-juin au salon aéronautique du Bourget comme initialement prévu, admet Paris. Objectif: développer un démonstrateur d'ici 2026 -- pour un coût estimé entre 2 et 3 milliards d'euros -- avant une entrée en service en 2040 de ce système associant avion de combat, drones, futurs missiles de croisière et drones évoluant en essaim. Pour le char, "les industriels préparent une offre pour l'étude d'architecture à horizon de l'été", indique-t-on de source gouvernementale française. Pour continuer à avancer, reste à venir à bout des inquiétudes et grincements de dents de part et d'autre du Rhin. Parmi les motifs de friction figure le partage des compétences de pointe censées alimenter ces grands programmes communs d'armement. En France, où le groupe Dassault a conduit seul le programme-phare du Rafale, certains ne cachent pas leur méfiance. "Il ne faudrait pas que les Allemands profitent de cette coopération pour chiper notre savoir-faire stratégique", glisse-t-on de source proche du dossier. En Allemagne, des parlementaires de la coalition au pouvoir reprochent au gouvernement d'Angela Merkel d'avoir mal négocié la répartition industrielle du projet SCAF et critiquent les exigences françaises en matière de propriété intellectuelle, affirme jeudi le quotidien allemand Die Welt. "Au regard des enjeux industriels et économiques du projet, j'attends de Mme Merkel et de Mme von der Leyen (ministre allemande de la Défense) qu'elles prennent en main ce dossier et en fassent une priorité, comme l'a fait le président Macron", déclare au journal le responsable défense du parti social-démocrate allemand (SPD), Thomas Hitschler. - ventes d'armes aux Saoudiens - "Des débats sur le partage des technologies, les questions de propriété intellectuelle peuvent exister mais ils sont en train de se résoudre. C'est normal que ça tiraille, derrière il y a des enjeux financiers et de compétences industrielles", relativise-t-on à Paris, où l'on préfère vanter "la rapidité" avec laquelle un projet de cette ampleur s'est mis en route. Autre obstacle à franchir: la question des conditions d'exportation des armements, objet de frictions ouvertes entre Paris et Berlin. Depuis l'assassinat fin 2018 du journaliste saoudien Jamal Khashoggi à Istanbul, le gouvernement allemand a décidé de geler les exports d?armes à destination de l'Arabie Saoudite, client controversé de l'industrie française de défense. Une décision vertement critiquée par Emmanuel Macron, puis par l'ambassadrice de France en Allemagne, qui a déploré fin mars "la politisation croissante du débat allemand sur les exportations d'armements", susceptible selon elle de "faire peser un risque sur la coopération de défense européenne". "On ne peut pas se mettre d'accord sur des projets d'une telle envergure sans trouver une position commune sur les conditions d'exportation", renchérit un haut responsable français. Or le sujet est politiquement ultra-sensible en Allemagne. "L'opinion publique allemande est vent debout contre les exports d'armement. Quel est l'homme politique allemand qui se risquera à aller contre ça?", souligne Gaëlle Winter, chercheuse associée à la Fondation pour la recherche stratégique (FRS). Paris accuse en outre Berlin de pratiquer un double jeu en feignant d'ignorer la livraison d'armement à Ryad par l'industriel allemand Rheinmetall, via ses filiales à l'étranger. "J'entends dans certaines capitales les protestations de vertus offusquées lorsqu'il s'agit d'exportations françaises, mais j'observe que les mêmes responsables ignorent volontiers ce que font les filiales ou les joint ventures de leurs champions nationaux de l'armement", s'est récemment agacée la ministre française des Armées Florence Parly. Sollicité par l'AFP, le ministère allemand de la Défense n'a pas donné suite. https://www.courrierinternational.com/depeche/europe-de-la-defense-entre-paris-et-berlin-des-ambitions-et-de-la-mefiance.afp.com.20190523.doc.1gt4y7.xml

All news