ARMY AL&T
Blasting a 155mm howitzer round during a gun-calibration exercise at Destiny Range, Mosul, Iraq, Soldiers make the earth tremble as they fire more than 30 rounds from an M109A6 Paladin, April 23, 2010. Possible commonality of DFCS with the Paladin self-propelled howitzer is being investigated. (U.S. Army photo by SPC Gregory Gieske, 2nd BCT, 3rd Infantry Division Public Affairs.)
having to be maintained. Commonality also provides for training similarities across platforms.
Challenges Each platform has unique performance and environmental requirements, such as shock loading and weight. Each platform has unique interface require- ments and a different schedule for development, refresh, obsolescence, production, and fielding. The M777A2 DFCS is nearing the obsolescence and refresh timeframe, whereas, the M119A3 is in development. Lining up software development with hard- ware development is also challenging. Software development teams will need hardware early in their process. Also, mandated hardware changes, such as
updated radio systems, may be service- unique. Each of these is a challenge to achieving commonality.
The survival of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) in the M119A2 shock environment is a known issue. Shock values when firing on the M119A2 are much higher than on the M777A2, so simply taking the INU currently on the M777A2 and putting it on the M119 was a non-starter. An effort was con- ducted to identify potential suppliers and evaluate the ability of their devices to meet M119A3 requirements while still being backward-compatible onto the M777A2.
Another commonality challenge is the DFCS power supply, since the size
In addition to the DFCS allowing the M119A3 to become more survivable on the battlefield by emplacing and displacing
faster and providing more responsive fires, ensuring LRU and software commonality will have a significant payback.
and weight of each system’s power supply is driven by its own system level requirements. The M777A2 has more LRUs to power, and its run-time requirements are greater. The digitized M119A2 system has lower weight requirements. A new power supply, common to both platforms, is being designed with both systems’ require- ments being taken into account.
Some technical risk because of differences between the dismounted 120mm mortar’s environment and the M119A2’s environment is also present. This will be addressed through qualification testing. If an engineering modification is needed as a result of this evaluation, an Engineering Change Proposal will have to be negotiated with the common platform or an agreement from the user obtained to relax the requirement through a cost-as-an- independent-variable exercise.
The weight requirement for the digi- tized M119A2 is 4,500 pounds or less. Weight plays a big factor in transport- ability and operability of the M119A2.
JULY –SEPTEMBER 2010 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96
