Land Force: Land 400 - A tale of two similar requirements? | ADM Feb 2010
Land 400 is a major component of our Army 2030 and there are striking similarities between the requirements of the Australian Future Combat Vehicle and the US Ground Combat Vehicle.
Is a merger on the cards?
Tom Muir | Canberra
Last October was a busy month for those concerned with land combat capabilities.
In Washington there was the US Army Capability Modernisation Forum, which included representation from Defence's Land Development Branch, together with the AUSA Conference & Expo.
Further afield there were briefings for industry on the US Army's planned Ground Combat Vehicle in October and in November.
Spearheading the Australian presence was Brigadier Steve Dunn, outgoing Director General Land Development, and his replacement Brigadier Mal Rerden.
The following month saw an Armoured Vehicle Conference held in Canberra where, surprise, surprise, the US Army's Colonel Mike Smith, who is director of training, doctrine and combat development, discussed how the US Army took lessons learned during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan into concepts and capabilities for the future Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) and beyond.
What must have been evident not only to BRIG Rerden, but other scions of Land Capability Development, such as BRIG Paul McLachlan and even Major General John Caligari, Head of Army Modernisation, were the broad similarities of the systems sought for the Australian requirement and the US Army's GCV, even to the priority for an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV).
And by way of introducing himself to industry, BRIG Mal Rerden is to hold an Army Objective Force workshop at Puckapunyal on 25-26 February.
No doubt Land 400 will be up for discussion and, ADM suspects, the US GCV program.
The FRES program
But are we drawing too long a bow?
Wasn't the British Future Rapid Effects System (FRES) going to provide a model for the Australian program?
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) launched three competitions in November 2006 to select the FRES utility vehicles design, the utility vehicles integrator and a system of systems integrator.
In June 2007 three vehicles were selected for trial-the ARTEC Boxer from Germany and the Netherlands, General Dynamics and MOWAG Piranha Evolution, and Nexter's vehicule blinde de combat d'infantrie (VBCI) from France.
But the MoD was criticised for its selection of wheeled APCs for its infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) finalists, and garnered even more criticism for making the Boxer MRAV one of those finalists after spending so much time and money on FRES development.
In the end, GD MOWAG's Piranha V won the utility vehicle competition.
However mid-year the winning bidder's preferred status was revoked, and that entire phase will now take a back seat to the FRS-SV scout version.
In the meantime we can look at seemingly common attributes of the Australian and US future combat vehicle programs.
Australian Future Combat Vehicle
According to the original request for information released to industry, the purpose of the Land 400 capability is to enhance the survivability and combat effectiveness of ground forces in close combat through the provision of a cost effective, integrated Future Combat Vehicle System (FCVS).
The overall capability is expected to deliver an FCVS which incorporates platforms capable of being employed in a variety of roles including IFV, APC, C2 network support, ISTAR, medevac, logistic support, air and missile defence, and recovery.
Some of these roles will be conducted using integral onboard sub-systems delivered as part of the platform.
Other roles may require the integration of hosted sub-systems delivered by other Defence projects, such as an advanced air defence weapon system.
Although it is also expected that the bulk of these platforms will be manned, the use of unmanned systems to conduct these roles or functions will be considered.
US Army Ground Combat Vehicle
The US Army is planning on developing and fielding, in an incremental approach, a class of ground combat vehicles that will be integrated into the Army's Brigade Combat Teams (BCT).
The new GCV will replace the recently cancelled Manned Ground Vehicle (MGV) element of the Future Combat Systems program, introducing highly survivable, lethal and supportable ground combat vehicles.
The new vehicle platforms will introduce, over time, several variants in an incremental acquisition approach starting with a lead vehicle development effort.
Based on the Army's experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, mobility has been raised to the top of the key operational design criteria.
The vehicle's design will focus on sustainability more than has been done to date in procuring an Army major weapons system.
The first variant the Army needs the most would be the IFV, replacing the Bradley IFV and the M113 APCs currently in service.
GCV design principles
Operational attributes include:
• Versatility-start by replacing the Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) (currently the Bradley) with capability to expand to other mission packages (eg command and control). Meet protection, network, and mobility requirements in a single vehicle. Operate across full range of military operations. Design with growth potential to adapt as technologies mature.
• Expeditionary-deploys by land, sea, and air for projection and sustainment of Army forces. Modular design reconfigured to support different lift assets and mission profiles.
• Lethality-lethal self-protection with each variant able to defeat like systems. Hosts non-lethal systems to enable operations among population.
• Force Protection-provide large IED, MRAP-like blast protection and scalable protection based on threat and mission. Provide 360 degree observation and protection.
• Network Integration & Interoperability-host the Army's battle command network systems. Facilitate soldier integration in the network and access to joint capabilities.
• Mobility-negotiate the confined spaces presented in complex urban terrain. Facilitate cross-country mobility.
• Sustainability-meet availability rate equivalent to Stryker. Consume less fuel than current vehicles of similar weight and power.
Industry Days
On 16 October last year, a formal briefing to industry outlining the GCV program, was held in Dearborn, Michigan.
The event provided an opportunity for interested industries to familiarise themselves with the vehicle requirement, proposal requirements and discuss potential synergies among potential program participants.
Participants were also advised on the MGV technologies developed under the FCS program.
While these did not provide the overall solution for GCV
some technologies were seen as applicable.
Those with potential for leveraging included armour, turret drive, ammo loader, sights, hit-avoidance systems, hydro-pneumatic suspension and lithium-ion batteries.
However, industry was advised to focus on the final
GCV RFP which would contain all the requirements.
Attendees included many with interests in the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and the Australian Land 121 Phase 4 vehicle programs.
Timing
At the first US industry day, slides presented by Colonel Mike Smith, showed the GCV as encompassing three increments, the first (the Infantry Fighting Vehicle) would be fielded by 2017.
The second and third increments would be fielded in roughly 2022 and 2025 respectively.
According to Land 400 documentation (seen in the previous Defence Capability Plan but not the current iteration thanks to the truncated timeline), the life of type of current land fighting vehicle systems, the ASLAV and M113A1, are seen as being around 2020 but that replacement of some elements of the system could begin in 2015.
As we have previously opined, while Land 400 progresses slowly through its various requirements definition and costing phases, there will be growing realisation that these so-called combat vehicle systems are not up to the fast-encroaching tasks ahead.
Land 400 should then be used to fast track the acquisition of an Infantry Fighting Vehicle that, as with the GCV, features as the primary ground vehicle requirement-QED.
FCVS system attributes
Five system attributes define the Land 400 FCVS capability.
They include:
• Mobility - tactical and battlefield mobility and strategic and administrative transportability.
• Knowledge - all platform sub-systems which relate to communication, sensing and data display.
• Survivability - low signature, active and passive protection, internal crew protection and damage repair.
• Lethality - neutralisation and/or destruction of troops, vehicles, static targets with the capability tailored to level of threat. Coordination and direction of integral firepower, and/or Joint/Coalition firepower.
• Sustainability - the FCVS should not require major mid-life upgrades to reach the projected 30 year Life of Type (LOT).