search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
NEXT GENERATION ON TRACK


BATTLE LINES BEING DRAWN


The Next Generation Combat Vehi- cle Cross-Functional Team is preparing to develop five new vehi- cles to replace the current generation in the field, which include the Brad- ley Fighting Vehicle and the Armored Personnel Carrier. (U.S. Army photo)


Te conference kicked off a competition to identify and develop “the best concept or concepts to fill the future role of the follow-on Ml, M2 and M3.” Te Army chose four industry teams to evaluate technologies and trade-offs and produce detailed designs of the selected concepts. Also taking on the challenge was an in-house team.


A year later and after several in-progress reviews, the industry and in-house teams would present their final concepts of next- generation combat vehicles to TACOM for review. A team of experts from the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command and the Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command, the predecessor to U.S. Army Materiel Command, would then evaluate and rate the concepts.


The most promising of them would provide the framework for technology test beds with the objective of resolving


“critical issues in components, subsys- tems and total system concepts,” Bradley wrote. “Results of these test-bed evalua- tions and other supporting technologies will then form the technical basis for the specifications for the next family of future close-combat vehicles.”


If the process has a familiar ring to it, there’s a reason. Nearly 40 years later, the


122 Army AL&T Magazine Spring 2019


Army is emphasizing collaboration with industry and across the doctrinal, combat development, test and evaluation and Soldier-user communities as it modern- izes at unprecedented speed.


ON TO THE NEXT GENERATION Back to the present: Te Bradley’s 2026 replacement will not only have to domi- nate against enemy anti-access and area denial strategies, likely in an urban setting, but also defend itself against enemy attack. Gone are the days when the United States could count on neutralizing enemy forces with airstrikes to clear the way for ground troops to enter a relatively uncontested battlespace on open ground.


Weapon systems on the next genera- tion of combat vehicles will have to aim higher and lower than present combat vehicle-mounted guns—a characteristic known as elevate and depress—“so that you can fight the enemy in tall buildings or in basements,” said Coffman, whose first operational assignment was as an armored cavalry platoon leader in Oper- ations Desert Shield and Desert Storm; one of his most recent was as a heavy infantry battalion commander in Oper- ation Iraqi Freedom. “Our legacy fleet was designed to fight in Eastern Europe against a known enemy in known terrain.


Te elevation and depression was not as important,” he said.


Enemy capabilities will have matured, Coffman noted. “While we’ve been fight- ing wars over the last decade and a half, our potential adversaries have begun to modernize their equipment. And we must again not settle for parity, but seek over- match. Tat’s why this modernization effort is so important.”


Te Bradley replacement will be capable of


“an increased degree of engagement, as well as increasing effectiveness of munitions that [can] not just glance on buildings, but actually can engage and destroy the enemy … in these tall buildings,” Coff- man said. “So if the enemy fires something at a vehicle, the vehicle has a response that destroys that before it strikes the vehicle.”


Combat vehicles also must protect the Soldiers riding in them, as the U.S. mili- tary’s experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown. Te rampant threat of impro- vised explosive devices and mines, for example, drove key innovations, includ- ing the double-V hull introduced in 2011 for the Stryker fleet. Te double-V hull deflects blasts away from the vehicle and the Soldiers inside. Rocket-propelled grenades and Russian RKG3 parachute- equipped hand grenades are just a couple


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  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128