Friday, June 18, 2010

Ground Combat Vehicle. 70 tons? Really? Really!


A commenter made this statement on a previous post.

H.G. Rickover said... No IFV will weigh up to 70 tons, Sol. That is an exaggeration.

Armor adds weight, but not in the same manner as old-fashioned steel plates. Besides, APS is a sound attempt to reverse the weight-gain spiral.

Trophy and IronFist are both mature APS currently being adapted across IDF armor fleet.
He also used this Army Times article to back up his assertions...
“We’re looking at a vehicle that ranges in weight between 50 and 70 tons,” Chiarelli said Wednesday at the Army’s armor conference.
He said he’s been involved in some heated discussions lately about the GCV and the debate “always comes down to the weight of the vehicle.”
Critics point out that at 70 tons, the GCV would be the heaviest infantry fighting vehicle in existence and as heavy as the Abrams tank. Chiarelli said the extra weight in armor protection would be used only when needed.
“We’re not talking about a 70-ton vehicle, we’re talking about a 70-ton vehicle when we need it,” Chiarelli said.
The Army has been walking back the weight on this vehicle ever since people got wind of it and collectively said WTF!!!!

As a matter of fact, my buddy Johnathan (it would be nice if you included the author and publication!) sent me an article where the Army Chief of Staff is quoted as saying that he wants the GCV to weigh less than projected.

Parts of the Army is aware that this is a non-starter.  Parts of the Army is disturbed by the possibility of having a vehicle that will not be strategically mobile.

Parts of the Army (it appears) wants a different set of requirements.

The curse of FCS strikes again.

But back to the point of this entire exercise.  The GCV is slated to weigh up to 70 tons.  That my friends is a fact.

USAF rejects Pentagon price estimate for the F-35.


More bad news for the anti F-35 goons!  Via Defense News.
The U.S. Air Force's top acquisition official said June 18 that the service is not using the Pentagon's latest cost estimates as its baseline price in its negotiations for the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter."There is no vectoring by the [F-35] negotiating team" based on estimates by the Pentagon's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) office released this month predicting that the overall costs of the airplanes could reach as high as $92 million each, David Van Buren, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said during a briefing. "We're focused on the instant contract proposal at hand."
The Pentagon's top weapon buyer, Ashton Carter, "holds us accountable not to accept a will cost [estimate] but to drive for the lowest cost across the board," added Van Buren.
This means that Air Force negotiators are pushing aggressively for what "we believe is the appropriate cost" for the jets, Van Buren said. He did not elaborate on those numbers.
Read the whole thing here...but to sum it up, the F-35 will meet the original costs estimates.  The news of the F-35's demise has been exaggerated.

Exercise Desert Vortex 2010.

Photography: SAC Andy Masson/ SAC Neil Chapman/RAF/MOD/Crown Copyright 2010.

Terminal Lance for the Gear Freaks...


Terminal Lance says it much better than I ever could.  This passage from TL says it all...
Well this is a pretty easy subject, I suppose. Everyone knows the guys that go out and spend all of their money on any new piece of gear they can find. Anything that makes them look like someone out of a videogame or some BLACKHAWK! ad in Leatherneck Magazine. It’s the stuff that usually no one needs, but somehow it always finds it’s way into the hands of the guys who go outside the wire the least–if at all.
Go to his site to read the whole thing...and subscribe to the guy...you'll love his military humor.

Pic of the day. June 18, 2010.

Major Hat tip to StrategyPage.com

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. (June 4, 2010) Marines assigned to Bravo Company, 2nd Platoon of the 3rd Assault Amphibious Battalion (3rd AABN) conduct amphibious assault vehicle maneuvers on Red Beach at U.S. Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif. during Dawn Blitz 10. Dawn Blitz is a series of amphibious operations involving Sailors and Marines to reinvigorate the core competency of amphibious operations and enhance interaction between the Navy and the Marine Corps. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Joshua A. Rucker)

Australian Special Forces Vid.

Via Australian Ministry of Defense. I tried 3 different labels to describe this vid. It ranged from Propaganda to After Action Report. I didn't know how to classify it other than a General being proud of his troops.

You decide.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Christopher F. Foss on the Ground Combat Vehicle.


via Janes.
Combat weight could be more than 60 tonnes because of the high levels of protection required as a result of operational experience in Iraq and more recently Afghanistan. With such a heavy platform, there will be constraints as to where the vehicle can be deployed. It is expected that the GCV will be fitted with a remote-controlled turret armed with a 30/40mm ATK MK44 cannon and a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun.
I am so happy to see the "experts" finally weighing in on this concepts extreme weight.  Foss is the first of (I believe others will join him) many voices raising concerns about the strategic mobility of this vehicle.

As a side note, I wasn't aware that the Puma was 42 tons...a better option might be to simply upgrade Bradley's.  This GCV concept is sounding more and more like a terrible idea.