"We will have a vehicle before I leave office."
You're running out of time Commandant.
The same issues that doomed the EFV seem to be dooming the ACV...
*Lack of urgency on the part of Marine Corps Acquisitions Officials...
*A mindset that the AAV is good enough...
*Other priorities....
The problem is quite simply this. The AAV is as old as dinosaur bones. Its beyond time to get it replaced, and yet the US Army is showing more urgency, and is being more tenacious when it comes to replacing the Bradley IFV which is practically new when compared to the Marine's vehicle.
Since the AAV has been in service the US Army has fielded the following vehicles....
 |
| Ok, this is the Australian version of the M-113 but you get the point. The Army introduced this vehicle during the Vietnam War... |
 |
| The Bradley IFV...the current US Army Chief of Staff is not a fan of this vehicle. As a matter of fact he pretty much damned it, but if the truth be known it has performed quite well, has excellent off road agility and has outstanding firepower. They could have product improved this IFV but are choosing not to. |
 |
| The Stryker. I'm not as sold on this vehicle as the US Army is but they're selling the future of the Army on the capabilities...and weaknesses it has. Its all rather immaterial though. The GCV might end up relegating this vehicle to state side use. |
Three combat vehicles.
The US Army has done it and is now working on its next generation replacements for the Bradley and the M-113. Oh and don't be confused...they're two different programs.
While the US Marines can't get the AAV replacement off the ground.
Disgraceful!
