Even though SAIC [SAIC] was eliminated from the Army’s new light tank program, the company’s second major vehicle loss in the last year, the company will continue exploring combat vehicle opportunities, according to a company spokeswoman.

Lauren Presti said the company plans to work with its partners to prepare for the imminent release of the Army’s proposal request for its Next-Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) effort to find an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) to replace its Bradley fleet.

SAIC’s Mobile Protected Firepower offering at the AUSA Conference. Photo: Matthew Beinart.

“Of course, we are disappointed that our Mobile Protected Firepower vehicle prototype was not selected by the Army. We believe that our vehicle, developed with our teammates ST Engineering Land Systems, CMI Defence, and Plasan, is an innovative solution at best value to meet current and future requirements,” Presti told Defense Daily. “As for other combat vehicle markets, we [are] anticipating the Army’s release of a draft RFP for OMFV with great interest. We will continue to work with our partners ST Engineering, CMI Defense, Plasan, and other technology providers to assess and evaluate the Army’s requirements in this program.”

BAE Systems and General Dynamics [GD] on Monday were selected over SAIC to deliver prototype vehicles for Mobile Protected Firepower, the Army’s effort to find a light tanks for its infantry brigades (Defense Daily, Dec. 17).

In June, the Marine Corps went with BAE Systems over SAIC to build its new amphibious combat vehicle (Defense Daily, June 19).

“For SAIC, we view the loss as disappointing. Mobile Protected Firepower represented an opportunity to expand its platform business and contribute 1-point of organic growth,” analysts with Jefferies wrote in a report following Monday’s contract announcement.

SAIC primarily serves as a technology integrator, and officials have said the company will maintain its partnerships from MPF for potential NGCV opportunities.

Analysts from Capital Alpha Partners wrote SAIC’s loss may mean the program will face less budgeting pressure against programs such as Stryker upgrades and OMFV than it would had either of the two larger companies lost out.

“We don’t believe that defense contract awards are made with industrial base ramifications as a paramount factor. That said, the MPF awards to the two established U.S. armored vehicle providers may help with the program’s longevity,” Capital Alpha Partners wrote. “Had SAIC been selected over either BAE or General Dynamics, the losing bidder may have fought harder against the MPF in 2019 and beyond.”

The Capital Alpha Partners’ report also suggests the recent nomination of Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may provide a critical proponent for MPF in future budget negotiations.

“He’s been a strong proponent of MPF, which aims to provide Army Infantry Brigade Combat Teams with more firepower, particularly in European contingencies,” analysts wrote. “However, MPF will compete for funding against other Army programs and priorities and broader DoD needs.”