30 janvier 2019 | International, Naval, Terrestre

The Marine Corps wants three types of amphib vehicles ― including one with a 30mm cannon

By:

The Marine Corps is looking to plus up the firepower aboard its new amphibious combat vehicle with a 30mm cannon.

Officials with Marine Corps Systems Command posted a request for information on the government website FedBizOpps on Monday. The ACV will replace the aging assault amphibious vehicle, which entered service in the early 1970s.

The Marines want three variants of the ACV ― a command and control configuration, a recovery and maintenance setup and ACVs with 30mm medium-caliber cannons.

The older AAV had space for a 40mm grenade launcher, but in direct vehicle-on-vehicle fighting the 30mm cannon offers fast, high-volume direct fire.

BAE Systems was selected in 2018 to produce the ACV, which is expected to reach initial operational capability by fiscal year 2020. The company has built amphib vehicles for the military since 1941.

The ACV is a chief “connector” from ship to shore for Marine amphibious operations. it will include mine resistant ambush protected-level armor, and able to “negotiate two-foot significant wave height and four-foot plunging surf,” according to Program Executive Office-Land Systems.

The 30mm-cannon arming follows suit with making existing and future ground combat vehicles more lethal. The Army began upgunning its Stryker vehicles with a 30mm cannon, replacing its twin .50-caliber machine guns.

In 2018, the Army also put in place the common remotely operated weapon station for the Javelin missile on the Stryker, keeping soldiers inside the vehicle when firing the missile.

Those upgrades began first in Germany as a counter to increased capabilities in the Russian ground formations.

The Marines have also started upgrading their light armored vehicle, also a decades-old platform, to include a better powerpack, drive train and digitized instrument panels.

Late last year the Corps was still only looking at two ACV variants, according to official postings: the turreted assault vehicle and the command and control version.

At the annual Modern Day Marine Military Expo at Quantico, Virginia, John Swift, program director for BAE's amphibious vehicles, told Marine Corps Times that they expect to have 30 vehicles built by the end of summer 2019 to go through testing and modifications as the Corps decides the composition of the ACV fleet. Those will be basic testing platforms.

This most recent posting gives some indications of what the Corps needs.

Most recently the Corps was asking for 704 ACVs when full production begins in 2022. Those are expected to be done within six years.

And a previously ongoing contract with another company to perform survivability upgrades on an estimated 392 AAVs was cancelled last year in a move of funding from that program to more rapid modernization priorities.

The legacy AAV is a tracked vehicle, while its replacement will be an eight-wheel vehicle.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2019/01/29/the-marine-corps-want-three-types-of-amphib-vehicles-including-one-with-a-30mm-cannon

Sur le même sujet

  • British government to nationalize steel components maker in $3.54 million deal

    29 juillet 2021 | International, Naval

    British government to nationalize steel components maker in $3.54 million deal

    The deal, which must be approved by shareholders, assures the future of a company that is a key strategic industrial asset.

  • Why Microsoft (Not Amazon) Could Win The Pentagon Contract

    8 janvier 2019 | International, C4ISR

    Why Microsoft (Not Amazon) Could Win The Pentagon Contract

    Beth Kindig Summary The majority of forecasts favor Amazon for the Pentagon contract while overlooking the partnerships that MS has made with the DoD since Nadella became CEO in 2014. By the first quarter of 2019, Azure Government Secret will support "Secret U.S. classified data or Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) level 6" which is on par with Amazon. The question that remains is if the Pentagon will want to use Amazon for cloud infrastructure while using Microsoft for operating systems and software. In 2019, the biggest cloud customer in the world will be the United States Department of Defense. The DoD is currently reviewing bids to award a single cloud provider a multi-year contract. Obviously, this isn't your typical enterprise IT department, transferring from on-premise servers, or a startup who needs the flexibility of cloud infrastructure to scale. The program is called the Joint Enterprise Defense Initiative, or JEDI, and its purpose is to move the DoD's massive computing systems into the cloud. This one contract is worth $10 billion, or 25% of the current market, which currently stands at $40 billion in annual revenue. Many prognosticators and reporters unanimously believe the contract will go to Amazon Web Services. This belief is so strong that vendors, such as Oracle and IBM, made a rebuttal to Congress, believing the terms of the proposal favored Amazon. However, the majority of these forecasts overlook Microsoft's strength in security and IT, and the alliances Microsoft has been forming with the DoD since Satya Nadella became CEO in 2014. Admittedly, guessing a company other than Amazon will win the Pentagon contract is a pure gamble, however, there are strong indicators for Microsoft that should not be overlooked. Background on JEDI Contract The Pentagon contract will move 3.4 million users and 4 million devices off private servers and into the cloud. The security risks of using servers outside the Pentagon's domain are offset by physically separated government regions and hybrid solutions that extend on-premise servers by adding the cloud where necessary. The benefits of artificial intelligence, deep learning, and other technologies like virtual reality are essential for modern warfare as real-time data will inform missions when soldiers are in the field and also help to prepare them for combat. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4231824-microsoft-amazon-win-pentagon-contract

  • The US Navy’s modernization rush must not harm mine countermeasures

    11 mai 2020 | International, Naval

    The US Navy’s modernization rush must not harm mine countermeasures

    By: Rep. Rob Wittman As the world continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, we are reminded that even in a time of unprecedented technological growth and development, simple and primitive threats have the ability to radically alter our way of life. In spite of astonishing medical advancements, some threats, unfortunately, remain timeless. Many people have drawn comparisons between the current coronvirus pandemic and the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. The Spanish flu was caused by an H1N1 virus that was first identified in the United States in military personnel in the spring of 1918. It would eventually infect one-third of the global population, killing approximately 675,000 people in the United States and an estimated 50 million people worldwide. All of this was happening in the midst of the “war to end all wars” — World War I. While the homeland was battling the flu pandemic, the U.S. Navy was battling the U-boat threat in the Atlantic. In World War I, German submarines sank almost 5,000 ships, most of them merchant vessels. To help counter the U-boat threat, the United States and the United Kingdom embarked on an unprecedented and ambitious project: the construction of the North Sea Mine Barrage — a 230-mile-long underwater barrier of sea mines stretching from Aberdeen, Scotland, to Ekersund, Norway. The effort was a marvel of modern manufacturing, producing 1,000 sea mines every day. Over five months, the allies eventually laid over 70,000 sea mines, helping to contain the U-boat threat and protect allied shipping. As a second wave of the flu pandemic raged across the globe, World War I finally came to an end in November 1918. The American and British navies now had the task of cleaning up 70,000 live sea mines in the unforgiving North Sea. These primitive mines were anchored to the bottom of the sea, and the U.S. and U.K. had the advantage of knowing precisely where they were located because they had laid them. Despite those advantages, it took 82 ships and over 4,000 men — 10 times the assets that were required to lay the mines — to clean up the North Sea Mine Barrage. After almost a year of mine-clearing efforts, the operation was declared complete. Navy studies would later reveal that only approximately 40 percent of the American mines had actually been cleared, and mines continued to wash ashore for years after the end of the war. Fast forward a century and sea mines have proliferated around the world. Since the end World War II, sea mines have damaged or sunk four times as many U.S. Navy ships as any other method of attack. U.S. adversaries have paid attention. Russia was a pioneer in mine warfare and is estimated to have as many as 250,000 sea mines in its inventory. China is not far behind, with an inventory of around 100,000, including some of the world's most advanced mines. China has hundreds of mine-capable ships and aircraft, and could deploy thousands of mines a day during a conflict. To counter the mine threat, the U.S. Navy relies on 11 wooden-hulled Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships, 31 MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopters and a handful of explosive ordnance disposal platoons. The Navy wants to retire both the Avengers and Sea Dragons by 2025, while efforts to field any replacement capability have continued to falter. While the U.S. Navy has focused its research and funding on countering emerging threats such as advanced radars and hypersonic missiles, a time-tested threat waits patiently in the waters around the globe; and if we ignore the lessons of history, a centuries-old technology could lead to our defeat. Mine warfare, like public health, is an area that rarely attracts attention or significant investment until a crisis emerges. We should not wait until American lives are in peril before we take action. We need to change course immediately. First, the Navy must maintain its existing mine countermeasures forces until a credible replacement is fielded. Second, the Navy must make a significant investment to recapitalize the mine countermeasures force both in time and quantity to deliver a credible force. Unfortunately, the Navy has spent billions of dollars and wasted precious years pursuing a mine countermeasure module program that, even if it worked as advertised, would have neither the capability nor the capacity to effectively counter an enemy mine threat anticipated in our National Defense Strategy. Whether it's a pandemic or a proliferated naval threat, our citizens expect the United States to respond effectively, and we must make the necessary investments to counter the threats to our nation and our Navy. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/08/the-us-navys-modernization-rush-must-not-harm-mine-countermeasures/

Toutes les nouvelles