User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:19:09 PM EDT
 The U.S. Army and Marine Corps have finished testing prototypes of the Humvee replacement known as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle. But results of the evaluations haven’t been released and manufacturers are still waiting for the program office to issue a request for proposals — initially expected this month — to begin the next round of competition. Defense contracting giant Lockheed Martin Corp., truck-maker Oshkosh Corp. and Humvee-maker AM General LLC each delivered 22 JLTV prototypes to the Army for testing under engineering and manufacturing development contracts signed in 2012. Now, the companies are competing against each other to build 17,000 of the vehicles under a much bigger low-rate initial production contract. "Our JLTV solution draws upon real-world experience gained from supporting the ground operations that our soldiers and Marines perform every day,” Oshkosh Defense President John Urias said in a release announcing the end of limited-user testing, or LUT. The firm has built the Army fleets of medium– and heavy-duty and blast-resistant trucks. Jeff Adams, a spokesman for AM General, said the company has completed every milestone throughout the EMD phase, including LUT. "We are very pleased with the BRV-O’s performance and its demonstrated ability to fill the Capability Gap in Light Tactical Vehicles and look forward to the program down-select decision expected sometime in mid-2015,” he said in an e-mail. Overall, the Army aims to purchase about 49,000 JLTVs, while the Marine Corps plans to acquire about 5,500 of the armored trucks. Both services have pledged their commitment to the program despite facing automatic budget cuts known as sequestration. The Pentagon has estimated the effort to develop and build the vehicles at almost $23 billion, or about $400,000 per truck, according to a 2013 report from the Congressional Research Service. Leaders have maintained each vehicle will cost about $250,000. "I am absolutely convinced that the proposals will be less than what that unit cost will be,” Col. John Cavedo, who manages the Army and Marine Corps acquisition effort, said at an Army conference in October. The testing took place at Fort Stewart, Georgia, where soldiers and Marines evaluated 30 of the trucks in several mission scenarios, including off-road, towing and pushing cars from the road. "We have 30 JLTVs out here from three different vendors, all prototypes, all running concurrently,” Col. Ron McNamara, a director with the Army’s Operational Test Command, said, according to a release. "Make no mistake – this is a very large test.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkvT2qMV |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:23:18 PM EDT
[#1]
$250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement.
What exactly are the mission requirements? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:26:01 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: $250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:26:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: $250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? Feedback from troops is vital to improve the design of the vehicles, he said. "They figure out ways to make things work or not work that you’d never dream of in a laboratory, so you have to get this equipment into the hands of soldiers and then do an operational test,” he said. "See if it’s soldier proof.” He added, "What you don’t want are soldiers to drive it like it’s a borrowed Lamborghini. We want them to use it like they will in a combat situation.” Sgt. Tayler Cole, an infantryman with th 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, didn’t say which type of JLTV he thought outperformed the others. But he did say all were better than the Humvee. "Overall I think the JLTVs are way better than the Humvee,” he said. "I hope they get them to us as fast as they can.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkxgU2h6 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:28:18 PM EDT
[#4]
Oshkosh has been making trucks for a long time, so my money's on them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:32:37 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Feedback from troops is vital to improve the design of the vehicles, he said. "They figure out ways to make things work or not work that you’d never dream of in a laboratory, so you have to get this equipment into the hands of soldiers and then do an operational test,” he said. "See if it’s soldier proof.” He added, "What you don’t want are soldiers to drive it like it’s a borrowed Lamborghini. We want them to use it like they will in a combat situation.” Sgt. Tayler Cole, an infantryman with th 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, didn’t say which type of JLTV he thought outperformed the others. But he did say all were better than the Humvee. "Overall I think the JLTVs are way better than the Humvee,” he said. "I hope they get them to us as fast as they can.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkxgU2h6 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
$250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? "They figure out ways to make things work or not work that you’d never dream of in a laboratory, so you have to get this equipment into the hands of soldiers and then do an operational test,” he said. "See if it’s soldier proof.” He added, "What you don’t want are soldiers to drive it like it’s a borrowed Lamborghini. We want them to use it like they will in a combat situation.” Sgt. Tayler Cole, an infantryman with th 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, didn’t say which type of JLTV he thought outperformed the others. But he did say all were better than the Humvee. "Overall I think the JLTVs are way better than the Humvee,” he said. "I hope they get them to us as fast as they can.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkxgU2h6 Good luck with that one. You give a soldier a truck and the first thing he is going to do is try to tear it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:32:41 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? They have to be more survivable against IED's now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:32:43 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oshkosh has been making trucks for a long time, so my money's on them. http://www.modernoffroader.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Oshkosh-MRAP-All-Terrain-Vehicle-580x424.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:35:20 PM EDT
[#8]
I worked on some prototype parts for the Osh Kosh truck. Shits been going on for years. We thought it was dead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:35:56 PM EDT
[#9]
I would enjoy working on that project
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:37:04 PM EDT
[#10]
Whatever happens I just hope I don't see them in enemy hands again.
 I hate to see those ISIS fuckers riding around in our stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:38:12 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They have to be more survivable against IED's now. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: $250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? They have to be more survivable against IED's now. V-hull It will have IED Jammer technology |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:40:19 PM EDT
[#12]
Any time you see the word "Joint" you know the tax payers are getting screwed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:40:49 PM EDT
[#13]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:43:53 PM EDT
[#14]
Test proposals:
1) Park one in a gravel parking lot for 6 months. Attempt to start. 2) Have an E-3 use it as his daily driver. 3) Provide a bottle of Jack Daniels to 2 E-4s. Bring them to the field, and challenge them to one up eachother. 4) Assign someone to drive a Major around in one. Have the driver write down everything the Major complains about. I think my plan will foster a better product than the plan used to test ACUs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:46:31 PM EDT
[#15]
Here is the Lockheed model just fyi...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:49:37 PM EDT
[#16]
I know someone working this program at and he seems confident that the LM truck is best.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:51:40 PM EDT
[#17]
What is the best way to source who and when the contract is issued to?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:53:02 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What is the best way to source who and when the contract is issued to? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:56:21 PM EDT
[#19]
Bring back the Jeep Willy
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:00:01 PM EDT
[#20]
I sure hope it's Oshkosh, I know they are doing everything in their power to get it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:02:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Lockmart knows how to make pork
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:02:52 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I sure hope it's Oshkosh, I know they are doing everything in their power to get it I have the strangest boner 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:05:05 PM EDT
[#23]
Fuck LM with a rusty pitchfork. Give it to them and they'll be $5m each and ten years late. Oshkosh makes some capable (and damn attractive) trucks, I hope they win it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:06:40 PM EDT
[#24]
Brain says Oshkosh, gut says AM General would be the best overall, and it'll probably be Lockheed, delayed 20 years and 5 million each.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:08:28 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What is the best way to source who and when the contract is issued to?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:09:56 PM EDT
[#26]
I hope either of the companies that is not LM gets is. LM seems to ooze pork
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:12:27 PM EDT
[#27]
Only tangentially relevant, but I got to play with 2 versions of the BAE Systems entry (that got down-selected a while back) after they were donated to a museum.
Pretty cool stuff, and they definitely had some good get-up-and-go to them, despite a 15+ ton weight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:16:09 PM EDT
[#28]
You need a truck just to haul around the software specs.
Like the engine monitoring software tracks total cam revolutions, like ever. Along with about 50,000 other engine items. The vehicle probably generates 1Tb of data a day. Its about as far from a ww2 jeep as a F22 is from the wright brothers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:18:56 PM EDT
[#29]
In before the budget is quadrupled and the entire project is mission creeped to death anyways.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2014 10:22:13 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: $250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? Spare parts and training add a considerable amount to the bill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:03:59 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Only tangentially relevant, but I got to play with 2 versions of the BAE Systems entry (that got down-selected a while back) after they were donated to a museum. Pretty cool stuff, and they definitely had some good get-up-and-go to them, despite a 15+ ton weight. 15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:36:26 AM EDT
[#32]
Other people are about to select a GMV replacement that fits in a chinook or mv-22, hits speeds the hmmwv can't, and is very capable off road. Played the "buy bigger truck, they build bigger IEDs" game until we were bound to the roads by trucks that couldn't go anywhere else. It's not the best method. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:42:06 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8091/8371486574_0807036328_z.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Only tangentially relevant, but I got to play with 2 versions of the BAE Systems entry (that got down-selected a while back) after they were donated to a museum. Pretty cool stuff, and they definitely had some good get-up-and-go to them, despite a 15+ ton weight. 15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8091/8371486574_0807036328_z.jpg I think I'm probably wrong about the weight  , I'm trying to remember what was printed on the data panel for the thing's weight as cargo...which is probably higher than its actual curb weight.
It might only be ~8 empty. Been a year or two now since I've seen one. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:44:36 AM EDT
[#34]
If we could just get new HMMWVs to replace all my broken redlined ones, that'd be pretty great.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 1:46:02 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryI thought I saw a bunch of something like these outside of Vegas otw home last week. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:09:42 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Other people are about to select a GMV replacement that fits in a chinook or mv-22, hits speeds the hmmwv can't, and is very capable off road. Played the "buy bigger truck, they build bigger IEDs" game until we were bound to the roads by trucks that couldn't go anywhere else. It's not the best method. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:20:03 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Feedback from troops is vital to improve the design of the vehicles, he said. "They figure out ways to make things work or not work that you’d never dream of in a laboratory, so you have to get this equipment into the hands of soldiers and then do an operational test,” he said. "See if it’s soldier proof.” He added, "What you don’t want are soldiers to drive it like it’s a borrowed Lamborghini. We want them to use it like they will in a combat situation.” Sgt. Tayler Cole, an infantryman with th 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, didn’t say which type of JLTV he thought outperformed the others. But he did say all were better than the Humvee. "Overall I think the JLTVs are way better than the Humvee,” he said. "I hope they get them to us as fast as they can.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkxgU2h6 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
$250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? "They figure out ways to make things work or not work that you’d never dream of in a laboratory, so you have to get this equipment into the hands of soldiers and then do an operational test,” he said. "See if it’s soldier proof.” He added, "What you don’t want are soldiers to drive it like it’s a borrowed Lamborghini. We want them to use it like they will in a combat situation.” Sgt. Tayler Cole, an infantryman with th 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, didn’t say which type of JLTV he thought outperformed the others. But he did say all were better than the Humvee. "Overall I think the JLTVs are way better than the Humvee,” he said. "I hope they get them to us as fast as they can.” Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2014/11/21/army-marine-corps-finish-testing-jltv-prototypes/#ixzz3JkxgU2h6 Actually they aren't too far off if they are driving them like a borrowed Lamborghini - you can buy two Gallardoes for what those things cost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:20:52 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
makes sense. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Other people are about to select a GMV replacement that fits in a chinook or mv-22, hits speeds the hmmwv can't, and is very capable off road. Played the "buy bigger truck, they build bigger IEDs" game until we were bound to the roads by trucks that couldn't go anywhere else. It's not the best method. That's what the Boeing Badger is for, they're cool! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:23:00 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$250k-400k each seems a lot high for a Humvee replacement. What exactly are the mission requirements? Lockheed's involved? Shoot down sattelites and intercept missiles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:24:09 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oshkosh has been making trucks for a long time, so my money's on them. http://www.modernoffroader.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Oshkosh-MRAP-All-Terrain-Vehicle-580x424.jpg That was my thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:26:41 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oshkosh has been making trucks for a long time, so my money's on them. http://www.modernoffroader.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Oshkosh-MRAP-All-Terrain-Vehicle-580x424.jpg Those MATVs are the least comfortable things on earth to ride in. ETA: 95% of the time we just needed "A" truck. Hmmwvs were uncomfortable, leaky, and gas guzzlers. They should just get a fleet of stripped down 4 door ford rangers, paint them tan and put bench seats in the back. We can play with the uparmored stuff when we train. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:28:02 AM EDT
[#42]
Pic of all three
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:29:55 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was my thought. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Oshkosh has been making trucks for a long time, so my money's on them. http://www.modernoffroader.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Oshkosh-MRAP-All-Terrain-Vehicle-580x424.jpg That was my thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:29:58 AM EDT
[#44]
Hell, we had the answer to this back in '81
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:49:51 AM EDT
[#45]
Here's why I think OSK will win(and why I'm buying stock):
- M-ATV was a success. Their JLTV is basically a lighter M-ATV - OSK independent suspension is still superior to others in the same field - They would build the JLTV on the same production lines that currently produce FMTV, FHTV, and M-ATV trucks, which makes their production readiness evaluation better than Lockheed converting a munitions plant into a truck production facility - Historically on time and within budget As for cost, and the $250k to $400k being thrown around: $250k is for the base truck. The higher number is total cost when outfitted with comms, weapons, etc, so total cost to taxpayer might be $400k each, but total paid to one of the manufacturers will be $250k. Relevant to my interests, because OSK is a customer. With the drawdown on FMTV and other product lines, pretty slim pickings from them lately. Not that we'd be guaranteed anything from the JLTV. But a few months ago they sent us a print package of the entire truck frame and subcomponents for us to quote on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 2:57:57 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryBut can it take off vertically from a carrier? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 3:01:04 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In before the budget is quadrupled and the entire project is mission creeped to death anyways. It hasn't been yet, and this has been in the works for a number of years now. In fact, in my opinion, this has been one of the better competitive bids for a defense contract. It started with 3 companies, until the Pentagon indicated it was actually serious about doing it, and 3 grew to 5. Of those 5 design proposals, 3 were chosen and awarded Engineering contracts to provide 22 test vehicles. Those are the vehicles being tested right now. Even with sequestration, both the Army and the Marines have indicated they continue to support the project with their original budgets. Congress has indicated their support as well in their proposed budgets. I think it's going to come down to who makes the best truck, closest to budget, and has a proven track record of delivering on time. That's why I think OSK will win. If the goal of the project is to save AM General or throw Lockheed a bone, well, then we get what we get. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 3:02:10 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8091/8371486574_0807036328_z.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Only tangentially relevant, but I got to play with 2 versions of the BAE Systems entry (that got down-selected a while back) after they were donated to a museum. Pretty cool stuff, and they definitely had some good get-up-and-go to them, despite a 15+ ton weight. 15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8091/8371486574_0807036328_z.jpg Not once was I hit with a mine the three times my vehicle was hit in 2010. I'm Assuming you know the weapon of choice is an IED. Sitting outside a vehicle not only exposes you to the IED but to direct fire as well. Those days of riding on top of vehicles are over. Lining the floor with sandbags does nothing to protect you. If the blast is underneath and it don't blow right through, the over pressure would still get you. Even those days are mostly over, them using an old school IED. EFPs are where it's at and those will go through one side and right out the other. So yeah, non-armored, thin skinned vehicles are pretty much gone, just like the M113. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 3:05:14 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not once was I hit with a mine the three times my vehicle was hit in 2010. I'm Assuming you know the weapon of choice is an IED. Sitting outside a vehicle not only exposes you to the IED but to direct fire as well. Those days of riding on top of vehicles are over. Lining the floor with sandbags does nothing to protect you. If the blast is underneath and it don't blow right through, the over pressure would still get you. Even those days are mostly over, them using an old school IED. EFPs are where it's at and those will go through one side and right out the other. So yeah, non-armored, thin skinned vehicles are pretty much gone, just like the M113. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Only tangentially relevant, but I got to play with 2 versions of the BAE Systems entry (that got down-selected a while back) after they were donated to a museum. Pretty cool stuff, and they definitely had some good get-up-and-go to them, despite a 15+ ton weight. 15 tons??? An M113A2 was only 11 tons.
If you are worried about mines, line the floor with sand bags and sit on top. https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8091/8371486574_0807036328_z.jpg Not once was I hit with a mine the three times my vehicle was hit in 2010. I'm Assuming you know the weapon of choice is an IED. Sitting outside a vehicle not only exposes you to the IED but to direct fire as well. Those days of riding on top of vehicles are over. Lining the floor with sandbags does nothing to protect you. If the blast is underneath and it don't blow right through, the over pressure would still get you. Even those days are mostly over, them using an old school IED. EFPs are where it's at and those will go through one side and right out the other. So yeah, non-armored, thin skinned vehicles are pretty much gone, just like the M113. Lets not forget these vehicles are faster, more capable and less maintenance intensive, regardless of weight. I'd love to have an M113 though. For plowing snow or something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2014 3:05:19 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need a truck just to haul around the software specs. Like the engine monitoring software tracks total cam revolutions, like ever. Along with about 50,000 other engine items. The vehicle probably generates 1Tb of data a day. Its about as far from a ww2 jeep as a F22 is from the wright brothers. Why the fuck would you complicate the shit out a product meant to be used in harsh conditions with shit like that? That is as stupid as the gun tech for the Glock those computer clowns came up with. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
