Posted on Feb 6, 2022
Army defends new squad vehicle after blistering combat review - Breaking Defense
855
17
4
9
9
0
After a scathing Pentagon report dubbed the US Army’s new Infantry Squad Vehicle “not operationally effective” for combat missions against near-peer threats, the program office responsible is defending the multi-million dollar program, saying that’s not what it’s meant to do in the first place.
“The ISV is not designed to defeat or counter specific threats nor is it intended to operate as a combat fighting platform,” Steve Herrick, product lead for ground mobility vehicles with the Program Executive Office for Combat Support and Combat Service Support, told Breaking Defense in a statement Wednesday. “The primary role of the ISV is as a troop carrier to provide ground mobility to designated Infantry rifles squads reducing their need to cover large areas of terrain on foot.”
Herrick’s statement came several days after the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation published a harsh review of the ISV in its annual report, listing several vehicle shortcomings ahead of the program’s full-rate production decision in May — many related to combat scenarios.
“The ISV is not designed to defeat or counter specific threats nor is it intended to operate as a combat fighting platform,” Steve Herrick, product lead for ground mobility vehicles with the Program Executive Office for Combat Support and Combat Service Support, told Breaking Defense in a statement Wednesday. “The primary role of the ISV is as a troop carrier to provide ground mobility to designated Infantry rifles squads reducing their need to cover large areas of terrain on foot.”
Herrick’s statement came several days after the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation published a harsh review of the ISV in its annual report, listing several vehicle shortcomings ahead of the program’s full-rate production decision in May — many related to combat scenarios.
Army defends new squad vehicle after blistering combat review - Breaking Defense
Posted from breakingdefense.com
Vehicle
Pentagon
Government Contracts
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
5
5
0
(5)
(0)
2
2
0
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
..."For instance, during the initial operational test and evaluation in August, the Pentagon testers said that the rifle company using ISVs failed to avoid enemy detection, ambushes and engagements during the majority of its missions. The report states the vehicle lacked ballistic armor, that soldiers’ individual weapons weren’t easily accessible in the event of an attack and it was difficult to operate a mounted machine gun while on the move.
While the program office said it is addressing several issues detailed in the report, such as engine cracks and steering loss, the office said that others, especially combat-related features, weren’t among the vehicle’s original requirements. An Army vehicle profile says the ISV is meant to “modernize Army Infantry Brigade Combat Teams” and to allow “Soldiers to close on an objective with less fatigue and greater readiness.”
“As there is no requirement for protection or armor, the unit on the ISV is intended to avoid threats, where possible,” Herrick said. “If engaged, units are intended to disengage and when appropriate disembark.”...
..."For instance, during the initial operational test and evaluation in August, the Pentagon testers said that the rifle company using ISVs failed to avoid enemy detection, ambushes and engagements during the majority of its missions. The report states the vehicle lacked ballistic armor, that soldiers’ individual weapons weren’t easily accessible in the event of an attack and it was difficult to operate a mounted machine gun while on the move.
While the program office said it is addressing several issues detailed in the report, such as engine cracks and steering loss, the office said that others, especially combat-related features, weren’t among the vehicle’s original requirements. An Army vehicle profile says the ISV is meant to “modernize Army Infantry Brigade Combat Teams” and to allow “Soldiers to close on an objective with less fatigue and greater readiness.”
“As there is no requirement for protection or armor, the unit on the ISV is intended to avoid threats, where possible,” Herrick said. “If engaged, units are intended to disengage and when appropriate disembark.”...
(2)
(0)
MCPO Hilary Kunz
So, cut and run if engaged? Wouldn’t want to hurt the feelings of the program managers…
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Things never seem to work as proposed and the folks responsible are always in the defensive crouch
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google