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
THEN & NOW


of the enemy weapons that the Army’s future combat vehicles will need to defend Soldiers against.


ESSENTIAL CAPABILITIES Te Army is not starting from scratch in developing the Next Generation Combat Vehicle family. It will feature a number of combat-tested capabilities introduced to the current fleet through incremental upgrades, including the double-V hull, Coffman said.


Another technology that holds promise for future combat vehi- cles is the Stryker urban kit, basically a large cage on the vehicle designed to keep rocket-propelled grenades and thrown explo- sive devices from hitting the vehicle itself. Additional battle-tested technologies include see-through armor; jamming technologies to defeat enemy radio capabilities used to detonate bombs; and bomb-removal systems.


Size, weight and power are perennial concerns for combat vehi- cles. Current issues include:


• The engine must not only generate enough power for what the first model will do, but have sufficient excess capacity to allow the Army to add requirements as technology advances. Ditto for space in the vehicle. The reason the present-day Bradley cannot accommodate any more upgrades is that there is no reserve space, weight and power capacity left.


• The vehicles cannot run continuously on the battlefield, for reasons of stealth and fuel efficiency. The Bradley replacement, as well as other combat vehicles, will need to have a silent capa- bility in its power source, a battery backup allowing the crew to operate without running the engine.


• The vehicle’s power supply must fit the Army’s logistical needs. The Army is looking at a variety of power sources, including hybrids, pure hydrogen and pure electric. “What we really have to decide as an Army is which technology provides the logis- tics at range and the ready-now capability for our Soldiers that we want on the next battlefield,” Coffman said. “For instance, if you went totally electric, it takes time to recharge a battery. It takes about seven minutes to refuel a tank. So if you can’t recharge the battery in under seven minutes, I’m not sure that’s a technology that is going to make us better on the battlefield.”


PLAN NOW TO UPGRADE LATER Incremental upgrades are an established concept in combat vehi- cle development. Te Next Generation Combat Vehicle initiative is just taking it to a new level of planning.


“Now we’re going into it with a set plan, with both schedule and monies allocated,” Coffman said. “Rather than seeking every- thing that we desire on the first increment that is fielded to the force, through prototypes and incremental upgrades we’re able to identify those technologies that aren’t quite mature yet. We now have a plan to upgrade the systems through time to main- tain pace with technology and outpace our adversaries. And that is a new thing for the Army.”


Trough the five-year program objective memorandum, Army Futures Command can estimate spending for future upgrades.


“So we understand what the costs are, and if that funding remains as predicted, we absolutely have a plan to spend it. We also under- stand that things change … and we lay that out over time.”


A LIFESAVING UPGRADE


The double-V hull added to Stryker combat vehicles starting in 2011 deflects the force of explosive blasts away from the Soldiers inside. (U.S. Army photo)


Te Army is working with industry to plan ahead for upgrades in the design and development of the next generation of combat vehicles, Coffman said. “We need not only our [vehicles] capable of handling increased weights, but we need electrical upgrad- ability. As technologies advance and we want to put additional systems onto an existing vehicle, we have to have the reserve power onboard to be able to handle multiple electrical require- ments from these systems.”


Also necessary is “sufficient space to handle increased technol- ogies, because while we expect that as technology advances it


https://asc.ar my.mil


123


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