Planning for a new amphibious tractor to replace the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) could begin in earnest in October, when a study of options for the new vehicle may begin.
Col. Keith Moore, Marine Corps program manager for direct amphibious assault, is gearing up for the official analysis of alternatives (AoA) that will define the Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV). This nascent program will replace General Dynamics’ [GD] Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) effort, which the Pentagon announced last January it would cancel.
Moore’s office has worked with officials at Marine Corps Systems Command (MARSYSCOM) and Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC) to begin deducing what is technologically achievable for the ACV and what a range of costs for different technical-performance capabilities would be.
The idea, he said, is to “start to really define the (ACV) requirements from a very, very cost-informed standpoint.” That means trying to gauge “how mature is it, so what do we think the development budget would be, (and) how much does it actually cost to go buy the things; so (that would be) the procurement budget. But then also (we are looking at) what is a system of varying levels of complexity and all that. What is that really going to mean for the Marine Corps over a 20-year life cycle of supporting it in the fleet? So (that is) the operation and sustainment cost.”
This work is leading up to the official start of the AoA that will examine vehicle alternatives. The requirements definers at MCCDC hope to start the AoA in late October.
That analysis won’t start until a top-level Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) grants the ACV program permission to move forward into the next phase. A DAB meeting is expected for mid-October.
Moore said he hopes the AoA, a process that can take from 18 to 24 months, for the ACV will wrap up in less than a year. He believes that is possible because he said Marine Corps officials have tried to be “transparent” with the ACV planning thus far, through steps including having discussions with lawmakers and congressional staff.
While the MCCDC folks are officially in charge of generating the ACV requirements, Moore said he provides technical expertise to help inform them,
“I’m sort of a coach on the sidelines watching that whole process come together,” he said.
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos has said he wants to ride in an ACV before the end of his tour.
“He’s made it emphatically clear that he expects for us to move out with all deliberate speed to make sure that everything we’re doing is right, but do that as quickly as we can,” Moore said about Amos.
The EFV program, as it existed on the day of cancellation, will be one of the alternatives assessed in the AoA, Moore said.
The Marine Corps has been doing a slower-than-normal program shutdown with EFV. The service has worked to harvest as much technology as possible from the long-delayed amphibious tracked vehicle, which previously faced technical hurdles. In the EFV’s place, the Marine Corps is developing the new ACV while also planning to buy a Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC) and upgrade existing Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAVs).
All of those amphibious vehicle efforts were brought together in recent months, when the MPC and AAV efforts were moved under Moore at his office in Woodbridge, Va. His program office now is organized into three product lines, with separate directors for amphibious combat vehicles, AAV systems, and MPC. Engineering, logistics, test, and business functional areas support across all three of those efforts to allow for commonality when appropriate, he said. The EFV shutdown activities, meanwhile, are ongoing.
For the MPC, the service hopes to buy something that is “as close to off the shelf as possible,” Moore said. For the existing AAV fleet, Moore said improvements will include the addition of appliqué armor kits–intended to provide more protection against improvised explosive devices (IEDs)–on roughly 400 of the 1,000-plus vehicles in the inventory.
Moore said the Marine Corps’s “massive effort” to cancel the EFV and initiate the AAV planning has kept him busy.
“The last six to eight months have certainly been very challenging for the workforce here, for the (requirements) folks at (Combat Development and Integration) CD&I, (but) I think we’re starting to see some of that pay off and hopefully we’ll really see that come to full fruition as we move through the AoA,” she said. “So next summer into the FY ‘13 execution year (starting Oct. 1, 2012), I’m optimistic that we’ll really see sort of all the effort that we’ve been through over the last six to eight months come to fruition.”