Combat Vehicles

HUNTSVILLE, AL -- The program executive office for ground combat systems is expecting approval from the Army Requirements Oversight Council this week on three Stryker combat vehicle lethality upgrades.

The Army is seeking to slow-roll procurement of the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, its personnel carrier replacement, to save money for other modernization projects, cutting the number of vehicles it was projected to buy in fiscal year 2021.

As the Army takes a running start toward preparing for multidomain battle in its fiscal year 2020 budget request -- rocketing to $57 billion for next-generation projects over the five-year defense plan -- the service's vehicle programs are the first to pay the bill, including the new Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.

The Army's $182.3 billion fiscal year 2020 budget request would advance key service priorities through new research and development projects, including funding for contract awards supporting the Next Generation Combat Vehicle program and completion of the initial design phase for a major helicopter replacement program.

The Marine Corps plans to move into the engineering and manufacturing development stage for its Organic Precision Fires-Mounted capability in fiscal year 2020, with a goal of fielding the system in FY-22.

The Marine Corps' new Amphibious Combat Vehicle performed effectively in 15 out of 16 missions, according to the Defense Department's top weapons tester, but should look into alterations to improve its steering issues.

Some $15 million of fiscal year 2018 funds previously intended to upgrade a limited quantity of Vietnam-era M113 armored personnel carriers has been reprogrammed "to fund higher priorities," according to the Army's acquisition executive.

The Navy spent $1.4 billion on backup helicopters "it did not need" until fiscal year 2020, and will spend $2 million annually to store those aircraft as a result of requirements offices not informing one another of schedule changes, according to a new government watchdog report.

Though Science Applications International Corp. fell short in pursuing two major military vehicle programs, the company's chief executive told Inside Defense he would not have changed the company's technical approach.