Posted on Dec 14, 2016
BAE Delivers First Amphibious Combat Vehicles to Marine Corps - Defensetech
2.82K
15
14
5
5
0
The first four of 16 amphibious combat vehicle 1.1 prototypes made by BAE Systems was ceremonially delivered to the Marine Corps for testing Tuesday as the company celebrated a rare achievement for defense acquisition: meeting a milestone ahead of schedule.
The amphibious combat vehicle is planned to replace amphibious assault vehicles that date from the end of the Vietnam War. Unlike the AAV, which runs on tracks, the ACV will have eight sturdy wheels. There are two companies competing to build the vehicle: BAE, a British defense company, and SAIC, based in McLean, Virginia. Both were selected from a field of competitors in late 2015, and worked through a contract protest in order to stay on schedule so they could deliver 16 vehicles each to the Marine Corps for a year of testing beginning in early 2017.
BAE partnered with Italian company IVECO Defence Vehicles to build the ACV offering, which comes with a 700 horsepower engine, making it more powerful over land and water than its predecessor.
John Swift, BAE’s director of the ACV program, told an audience at BAE’s manufacturing facility in York, Pennsylvania Tuesday that the company had a legacy of building vehicles for the Marine Corps that dated back to World War II, when LVT-4 amphibious landing craft, made by BAE predecessor FMC, stormed the beaches of Iwo Jima.
Thanks to a Marine sergeant who assaulted the beach in one of those vehicles and brought back a unique souvenir, every BAE-made ACV would have a piece of that history, he said.
“Every single vehicle that we make we’ll put a vial of Iwo Jima sand to remind them of the legacy of what’s gone before,” he said.
While the ACV 1.1 is supposed to excel at all-terrain mobility, with a 1.2 version expected to add additional speed and capacity, and a notional ACV 2.0 envisioned swim at high speeds in the water, Marine Corps Advanced Amphibious Assault Program Manager John Garner said BAE’s ACV 1.1 may be able to accomplish ACV 1.2 tasks as well.
“Once we test it we’re going to know and we’re going to know this time next year,” he said. “There’s a very good possibility that vehicles of this type with potentially some modifications will be capable of filling this assault role and the armored combat mobility ashore.”
The sturdiness of the Marines’ amphibious vehicles and their longevity meant that the vehicles now being delivered to the Marine Corps
“Marines who are not born today will ride in these vehicles,” Garner said.
@ SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas Capt Christopher MuellerCOL Mikel J. BurroughsSgt Joe LaBrancheSSgt (Join to see)Capt Seid WaddellSrA Christopher Wright LTC Stephen F.PO2 Ed C. PO2 Mark Saffell MSG Tom EarleyPVT James Strait Alan K. PO1 William "Chip" NagelSGT John " Mac " McConnellSSG Leo Bell SFC William Farrell LTC (Join to see) SPC Britanny *Winnie* Balthaser
The amphibious combat vehicle is planned to replace amphibious assault vehicles that date from the end of the Vietnam War. Unlike the AAV, which runs on tracks, the ACV will have eight sturdy wheels. There are two companies competing to build the vehicle: BAE, a British defense company, and SAIC, based in McLean, Virginia. Both were selected from a field of competitors in late 2015, and worked through a contract protest in order to stay on schedule so they could deliver 16 vehicles each to the Marine Corps for a year of testing beginning in early 2017.
BAE partnered with Italian company IVECO Defence Vehicles to build the ACV offering, which comes with a 700 horsepower engine, making it more powerful over land and water than its predecessor.
John Swift, BAE’s director of the ACV program, told an audience at BAE’s manufacturing facility in York, Pennsylvania Tuesday that the company had a legacy of building vehicles for the Marine Corps that dated back to World War II, when LVT-4 amphibious landing craft, made by BAE predecessor FMC, stormed the beaches of Iwo Jima.
Thanks to a Marine sergeant who assaulted the beach in one of those vehicles and brought back a unique souvenir, every BAE-made ACV would have a piece of that history, he said.
“Every single vehicle that we make we’ll put a vial of Iwo Jima sand to remind them of the legacy of what’s gone before,” he said.
While the ACV 1.1 is supposed to excel at all-terrain mobility, with a 1.2 version expected to add additional speed and capacity, and a notional ACV 2.0 envisioned swim at high speeds in the water, Marine Corps Advanced Amphibious Assault Program Manager John Garner said BAE’s ACV 1.1 may be able to accomplish ACV 1.2 tasks as well.
“Once we test it we’re going to know and we’re going to know this time next year,” he said. “There’s a very good possibility that vehicles of this type with potentially some modifications will be capable of filling this assault role and the armored combat mobility ashore.”
The sturdiness of the Marines’ amphibious vehicles and their longevity meant that the vehicles now being delivered to the Marine Corps
“Marines who are not born today will ride in these vehicles,” Garner said.
@ SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas Capt Christopher MuellerCOL Mikel J. BurroughsSgt Joe LaBrancheSSgt (Join to see)Capt Seid WaddellSrA Christopher Wright LTC Stephen F.PO2 Ed C. PO2 Mark Saffell MSG Tom EarleyPVT James Strait Alan K. PO1 William "Chip" NagelSGT John " Mac " McConnellSSG Leo Bell SFC William Farrell LTC (Join to see) SPC Britanny *Winnie* Balthaser
BAE Delivers First Amphibious Combat Vehicles to Marine Corps - Defensetech
Posted from defensetech.org
Equipment
Technology
BAE Systems, Inc.
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 6
3
3
0
Be very interesting to see the run off results, these vehicles are VERY LARGE compared to the older AAV, taller and longer. I have seen both prototypes. Which ever one winds will be a win for Marine Corps and all out AAV folks and the Marines who ride in the back. Semper Fi.
YATYAS: You ain't TANKS you ain't S!@#
Yes, I know trackers....I like you guys too, but I was an old M48/M60 tanker....
YATYAS: You ain't TANKS you ain't S!@#
Yes, I know trackers....I like you guys too, but I was an old M48/M60 tanker....
(3)
(0)
(1)
(0)
Capt Tom Brown
SP5 Mark Kuzinski - I see from one article they will carry a full rifle squad of 13 plus a crew of 3. So much better keeping the squad integrity and trying to assemble units split loaded. Helos are esp bad this way.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Michael Caldwell
Ok, as a past 1833 crewchief/section lead we could carry 25 combat loaded Marines and three crew personal or 10,000lbs of gear, had a range of 300 miles and could do 10 knots.
This is the P-7, I've out ran m'60A1 tanks in speed test where there may have been some kind of liquid bet involved lol.
Pull many a wheeled vehicles out of stuck situations, went up and down steep inclines where wheeled vehicles couldn't even make it half way, had a wounderfull M-85 cal. .50 machinegun in a cupola.
So why oh why would the Corps want to go to so wheeled vehicle that carrys less Combat Personal, travels only 12 miles in water and needs more crewmen too try and carry out the same mission the P-7 is better at?
Granted it's got more HP, but they could upgrade the pack that's in the current Tracks as well as the water jets.
Save the Money that it would cost to build New Assault Vehicle's up grade what we got, and take the extra money and buy better weapons, go back too the .45 that would actually stop people when you hit them not that dam 9mm.
Stop trying to justify your procurement/development cushy jobs by just spending money on Equipment that doesn't meet the mission, cost to darn much, brakes down more then it's Combat Effective. hard to work on without BN. Ment. Support.
Try to think about the end users instead of the Manufacture Lobbyist who pay for party's, Vacation, Dinners and such.
This is the P-7, I've out ran m'60A1 tanks in speed test where there may have been some kind of liquid bet involved lol.
Pull many a wheeled vehicles out of stuck situations, went up and down steep inclines where wheeled vehicles couldn't even make it half way, had a wounderfull M-85 cal. .50 machinegun in a cupola.
So why oh why would the Corps want to go to so wheeled vehicle that carrys less Combat Personal, travels only 12 miles in water and needs more crewmen too try and carry out the same mission the P-7 is better at?
Granted it's got more HP, but they could upgrade the pack that's in the current Tracks as well as the water jets.
Save the Money that it would cost to build New Assault Vehicle's up grade what we got, and take the extra money and buy better weapons, go back too the .45 that would actually stop people when you hit them not that dam 9mm.
Stop trying to justify your procurement/development cushy jobs by just spending money on Equipment that doesn't meet the mission, cost to darn much, brakes down more then it's Combat Effective. hard to work on without BN. Ment. Support.
Try to think about the end users instead of the Manufacture Lobbyist who pay for party's, Vacation, Dinners and such.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Kudos to BAE Systems and it it's Italian partner IVECO Defence Vehicles for meeting a milestone ahead of schedule SP5 Mark Kuzinski
This is refreshing and I hope it happens much more over in the coming years.
Hopefully the Amphibious Combat Vehicles prototypes will be thoroughly evaluated and any requires system modifications will be corrected ASAP.
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL LTC Stephen C. Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) SFC William Farrell SSgt (Join to see) SGT (Join to see) SGT Forrest Stewart SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher Wright Maj William W. "Bill" Price Capt Tom Brown SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4"SSgt Robert Marx TSgt Joe C. SGT Robert George PO2 Ed C.
This is refreshing and I hope it happens much more over in the coming years.
Hopefully the Amphibious Combat Vehicles prototypes will be thoroughly evaluated and any requires system modifications will be corrected ASAP.
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL LTC Stephen C. Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) SFC William Farrell SSgt (Join to see) SGT (Join to see) SGT Forrest Stewart SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher Wright Maj William W. "Bill" Price Capt Tom Brown SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4"SSgt Robert Marx TSgt Joe C. SGT Robert George PO2 Ed C.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
interesting, article... I hope this works better than the navy's new Destroyers...
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google