United States Army Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy


Book Description

This document provides an enduring U.S. Army combat vehicle modernization strategy (CVMS). The strategy establishes the ends, ways and means to modernize Army combat vehicles in the near-, mid- and far- terms to meet the mobility, protection and lethality capability requirements of future Army formations.




The Army Modernization Imperative


Book Description

The U.S. Army currently faces a difficult truth: without changes to its modernization strategy, the Army risks losing qualitative tactical overmatch. A lost procurement decade and recent, significant modernization funding declines have resulted in an Army inventory that remains heavily leveraged on the “Big Five” programs, originally procured in the 1970s and 1980s. Meanwhile, technology proliferation has made potential state and nonstate adversaries increasingly capable; shrinking the U.S. overmatch advantage and in some cases surpassing it. While current and projected future Army modernization funding is below historical averages, necessitating increased modernization funding to ensure continued U.S. qualitative tactical overmatch, the Army’s modernization problem cannot be fixed only by increasing modernization funding. Additional funds also need to be accompanied by an updated Army modernization strategy that presents a compelling case for modernization funding and sets clear priorities for fulfilling future operational requirements.







Army Modernization Programs


Book Description




Army Acquisition and Modernization Programs


Book Description




A History of Innovation


Book Description

"The U.S. Army has a long record of fielding innovations that not only have enhanced its effectiveness on the battlefield but also sometimes had an impact far beyond warfare. General Editor Jon T. Hoffman has brought together eleven authors who cover the gamut from the invention of the M1 Garand rifle between the world wars through the development of the National Training Center in the 1980s ... This work is neither a historical account of how the Army has adapted over time nor a theoretical look at models that purport to show how innovation is best achieved. Instead, it captures a representative slice of stories of soldiers and Army civilians who have demonstrated repeatedly that determination and a good idea often carry the day in peace and war. Despite the perception of bureaucratic inertia, the institution's long history of benefiting from the inventiveness of its people indicates that it is an incubator of innovation after all"--Publisher's website.




The Army's Future Combat Systems Program and Alternatives


Book Description

In today's environment of rapidly evolving conflicts, the Army's goal is to have units that have the combat power of heavy units but that can be transported anywhere in the world in a matter of days. To address concerns about the armored vehicle fleet's aging and the difficulties involved in transporting it as well as to equip the Army more suitably to conduct operations overseas on short notice using forces based in the United States the service created the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program in 2000. A major modernization effort, the program is designed in part to develop and purchase vehicles to replace those now in the heavy forces; the new vehicles would be much lighter, thereby easing the deployment of units equipped with them. In the analysis presented in this report, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) examined the current status of the Army's fleet of armored vehicles and assessed the speed of deployment of the service's heavy forces. It also evaluated the FCS program, considering the program's costs as well as its advantages and disadvantages and comparing it with several alternative plans for modernizing the Army's heavy forces.




The Army's Future Combat Systems Program and Alternatives


Book Description

Roughly half of the Army's combat forces at the end of 2005 were so-called heavy units-forces that are equipped with armored vehicles and that provide significant firepower. To support those units, the Army maintains a fleet of approximately 28,000 armored vehicles. Now that the Cold War is over, some defense experts have questioned the relevance of such vehicles to the current national security strategy and their continued usefulness (notwithstanding their contributions to recent operations, such as Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom). The average age of the armored combat vehicle fleet at the end of 2005 was relatively high, and the fleet comprises vehicles designed several decades ago. Moreover, units equipped with the vehicles in the current fleet are too large and too heavy to be moved overseas easily and quickly by the Air Force's C-17s, the most numerous of its long-range transport planes. For all practical purposes, heavy units must be transported overseas by ship-a process that takes weeks. In today's environment of rapidly evolving conflicts, the Army's goal is to have units that have the combat power of heavy units but that can be transported anywhere in the world in a matter of days. To address concerns about the armored vehicle fleet's aging and the difficulties involved in transporting it-as well as to equip the Army more suitably to conduct operations overseas on short notice using forces based in the United States-the service created the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program in 2000. A major modernization effort, the program is designed in part to develop and purchase vehicles to replace those now in the heavy forces; the new vehicles would be much lighter, thereby easing the deployment of units equipped with them. But the FCS program, poised to develop a total of 18 new systems (including eight manned vehicles to replace those in the Army's current armored fleet) and a network to connect them all will not field any new vehicles until December 2014 at the earliest. Furthermore, because those new vehicles will be expensive, the Army plans to buy relatively small quantities of them each year. As a result, the armored vehicles now in the Army's combat units will not all be replaced by FCS components until after 2035, a prospect that has evoked concerns about the costs of maintaining those older vehicles and upgrading them to prevent their becoming obsolete. In addition, questions have been raised about the FCS program's technical feasibility and affordability. Some experts doubt that the Army can develop and test the necessary technologies in time to start producing lightweight manned vehicles by 2012-a requisite for meeting the deadline to field them according to the Army's current schedule. Another concern is funding for the quantities of FCS equipment that the Army is now planning to buy. Any reduction in the FCS procurement rate would force the Army to retain its already aging armored vehicles even longer and to invest more funds in their maintenance.




The Army's Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) Program


Book Description

In June 2018, in part due to congressional concerns, the Army announced a new modernization strategy and designated the Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) as the program to replace the M-2 Bradley. In October 2018, Army leadership decided to redesignate the NGCV as the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) and to add additional vehicle programs to what would be called the NGCV Program. The M-2 Bradley, which has been in service since 1981, is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) used to transport infantry on the battlefield and provide fire support to dismounted troops and suppress or destroy enemy fighting vehicles. Updated numerous times since its introduction, the M-2 Bradley is widely considered to have reached the technological limits of its capacity to accommodate new electronics, armor, and defense systems. Two past efforts to replace the M-2 Bradley-the Future Combat System (FCS) Program and the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program-were cancelled for programmatic and cost-associated reasons. In late 2018, the Army established Army Futures Command (AFC), intended to establish unity of command and effort while consolidating the Army's modernization process under one roof. AFC is intended to play a significant role in OMFV development and acquisition. Hoping to field the OMFV in FY2026, the Army plans to employ Section 804 Middle Tier Acquisition Authority for rapid prototyping. The Army plans to develop, in parallel, three complementary classes of Robotic Combat Vehicles (RCVs) intended to accompany the OMFV into combat both to protect the OMFV and provide additional fire support. For RCVs to be successfully developed, technical challenges with autonomous ground navigation may need to be resolved and artificial intelligence likely must evolve to permit the RCVs to function as intended. The Army has stated that a new congressionally granted acquisition authority-referred to as Section 804 authority-might also be used in RCV development. The Army requested $219 million in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) funding for the OMFV program and $160 million in RDT&E funding for the RCV in its FY2020 Budget Request. FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2500) authorizes an additional $ 6 million for OMFV RDT&E. H.R. 2500 also authorizes an additional $10 million for RCV RDT&E. FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1790) authorizes an additional $15 million for OMFV RDT&E. S. 1790 also authorizes an additional $25 million for RCV RDT&E. The Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 2020 (H.R. 2968), appropriates an additional $32 million for OMFV RDT&E. H.R. 2968 appropriates an additional $55 million for RCV RDT&E. S. 2474 appropriates an additional $26 million for OMFV RDT&E. S. 2474 decreases the RCV RDT&E funding by $46.621 million.




Army Acquisition and Modernization Programs


Book Description