November 4, 2021 | International, Land
Boeing and General Atomics are onboard to develop a 300-kilowatt laser weapon system for the U.S. Army.
May 9, 2024 | International, Land
The first iteration of the Replicator initiative aims to accelerate all-domain, attritable autonomous systems to warfighters at speed and scale.
August 29, 2019 | International, Land
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has picked an Oshkosh Defense and Flyer Defense LLC team, an SAIC and Polaris team, and GM Defense to competitively build Infantry Squad Vehicles intended to provide ground mobility for infantry brigade combat teams. Each industrial choice was awarded an OTA, or other transaction authority, task assignment under the National Advanced Mobility Consortium to deliver and test two prototypes each, said Steve Herrick, ground mobility vehicle product lead with the Army's Program Executive Office Combat Support & Combat Service Support, in a statement sent to Defense News. OTA is a congressionally authorized contracting mechanism meant to expedite prototyping efforts. The three received $1 million to build the vehicles and it's expected that the Army will take delivery of the prototypes on Nov. 13 at Aberdeen Test Center, Maryland. The prototypes will be evaluated in various performance, operational and characteristics tests through the end of the year and will then be transported to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, in January to be assessed by soldiers, Herrick said. Each industrial choice is expected to simultaneously deliver information to the Army on price, production and logistics. The Army will choose one vehicle for production in the second quarter of fiscal 2020 based on soldier feedback and response to a formal request for proposals leading to production. The Army Requirements Oversight Council approved an Army procurement object for 649 Infantry Squad Vehicles with an objective requirement of 2,065 ISVs in February. The ISV is intended to supplement and potentially replace vehicles the Army procured as version 1.1 of the Ground Mobility Vehicle. The ISV “is additive” to infantry brigade combat teams “and currently not planned as a replacement for current vehicles in the formation,” according to Herrick. Oshkosh and Flyer, in a way, represent the incumbent, as Flyer produced the GMV 1.1. vehicle currently fielded. Flyer Defense “is the design authority” and will lead the team in building the prototypes, according to a statement from the team. GM Defense's ISV is based on its Chevrolet Colorado midsize truck and its ZR2 and ZR2 Bison variants, according to a company statement, “supplemented with both custom and commercially available parts proven by Chevy performance engineering in more than 10,000 miles of punishing off-road development and desert racing in the Best of the Desert Racing series.” The SAIC-Polaris team is submitting the DAGOR vehicle, which “delivers off-road mobility while meeting the squad's payload demands, all within the weight and size restrictions that maximize tactical air transportability,” according to Jed Leonard, vice president of Polaris Government and Defense. The DAGOR ISV “will leverage and further enhance the already proven, production-ready solution that has been tested, certified and fielded to operational units in the U.S. Military and its Allies since 2015,” Leonard added. The prototype competition is a significant step toward a solution after years of uncertainty; the Army seemed geared toward holding a rapid competition to buy a GMV in 2016, but the plan was delayed without much explanation in favor of buying an interim vehicle already in use by special operations forces. Buying the GMV was a top priority following the fall 2015 release of the Army's Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy, which called for such a vehicle in future and current operations. But when a competition never materialized, rumors swirled that the Army might buy more of U.S. Special Operations Command's GMVs — General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems' Flyer 72 — even after the service had spent several years testing a wide variety of commercial off-the-shelf options. The Army bought quantities of the command's vehicle for five airborne infantry brigade combat teams. Congress spurred the effort in its FY18 defense policy bill, mandating the Army hold a competition and move forward with a program. PEO CS&CSS' product lead for the GMV stated on its website that the Army planned to pursue a competition for the GMV — calling it an ISV — as a formal program of record late last year. The office also released a market survey asking for a vehicle that provides mobility for a nine-soldier infantry squad as well as associated equipment to “move around the close battle area.” The vehicle should be lightweight, highly mobile and transportable “by all means” to include CH-47 Chinook cargo helicopters, UH-60 Black Hawk utility helicopters, and via low-velocity airdrop. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/08/28/us-army-picks-3-teams-to-build-infantry-squad-vehicle-prototypes
December 31, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
By PAUL MCLEARY The release of the 2020 defense budget is still over a month away, and it's already been a wild ride. A look at what has happened, and what might happen next. WASHINGTON: If there's one complaint that has sounded a consistent across the Joint Chiefs and Pentagon leadership in recent years, it has been the lack of predictability in year-to-year funding. If there's one thing we have learned about President Trump, it's that nothing is certain until the very end. And even when there's a decision, it can be flipped, rehashed, tinkered with or forgotten about in the time it take to knock out a Tweet on phone. After two years of budget certainty in 2018-19, the 2020 submission was humming along at $733 billion — until it wasn't. In late October, the number plummeted (relatively speaking) to $700 billion, until the president was convinced by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis — not yet on his way out at the time — to rocket it up to $750 billion. But even that number isn't certain. Most analysts see the 2020 submission settling around the $733 billion level. Visiting US troops at the Al Asad air base on Dec. 26, the president gave the latest vague update. “I mean, I want to see costs come down, too. But not when it comes to our military. You have to have the finest equipment anywhere in the world, and you have that — $716 billion. And this year, again, we're going to be — don't tell anybody because nobody else knows — even a little bit higher.” Whatever the number is, it appears likely that incoming acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan will be the one to deliver and defend it on Capitol Hill in February, as Mattis has been told to leave by Jan. 1. It's unclear what effect the firing of Mattis will have on the process, or if there will be any significant strategic shifts for the department given the change in leadership. As budget guru Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told me this week — specifically in reference to the Space Force, but it really applies across the entire budget — “the thing to keep in mind is that this is, so far, just the Pentagon's proposal to the White House. It's not clear if the White House is going to agree to this. The president has a way of sticking to his ideas even if his own administration recommends otherwise.” Here are a few of the stories we've done over the past months breaking down what is happening, and what might — might — happen next. Full article: https://breakingdefense.com/2018/12/budget-busters-what-to-look-for-in-2019-and-beyond