Industry this week got its first detailed look at what the Army wants in a new light tank or other vehicle that will satisfy the service’s need for light mobile vehicles for infantry brigades.

The Army Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Ga., on Aug. 9 held an industry day to discuss with interested vendors the preliminary requirements and acquisition strategy for what it calls Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF).

A light armored vehicle prototype fires an integrated 30mm cannon during a live fire demonstration July 15 at Fort Benning, Ga. Photo: Army.
A light armored vehicle prototype fires an integrated 30mm cannon during a live fire demonstration July 15 at Fort Benning, Ga. Photo: Army.

Without knowing precisely what the Army is looking for in an MPF – many familiar with the program and the Army’s requirements have described it as a light tank – industry is preparing to mount sophisticated sensor-turret-cannon combinations atop existing, lightly-armored tracked and wheeled vehicles.

Engineers from the Army and General Dynamics [GD] held a demonstration of such a hybrid vehicle last month at Fort Benning, where two vehicle prototypes fire integrated belt-fed 30mm cannons manufactured by Orbital ATK [OA].

During that demo, a ground mobility vehicle (GMV) 1.1 prototype fired a roof-mounted M230LF 30mm cannon – the same weapon mounted on AH-64 Apache gunships. GMV 1.1 is a Special Operations Command acquisition program to find a fast, quick-insertion vehicle for commandos.

A larger Light Armored Vehicle Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (LAV-R) prototype fired a MK44 mounted on a Kongsberg turret – nearly the same setup the Army has ordered for some Stryker wheeled vehicles that will deploy to Europe. The MK44 is the same cannon mounted on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.

Industry sources who attended the Eurosatory international defense trade show in Paris in June reported a parade of vehicle-turret combinations from a surprising number of vehicle, weapon and sensor manufacturers. Instead of cobbled-together turret systems, the sources described a noticeable trend toward remote weapon stations with high-caliber cannon integrated with sophisticated distributed aperture, target identification and sensor systems.  

The Army plans to publish more precise requirements around the annual Association of the U.S. Army annual trade show in early October.

On hand at this week’s meeting to explain in finer resolution what the Army wants in an MPF were the Armored Fighting Vehicles program manager (PM AFV) and representative from the Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) representatives. Interested vehicle and component manufacturers are not required to publicize their attendance at industry days.

A description of the industry day published on the government contracting website, says the Army described to industry the operational context and MPF capability requirements from a “high level” and the current plan for acquiring a non-developmental or modified existing vehicle to fit the bill.

Industry was provided with unclassified information at the For-Official-Use-Only (FOUO) level about lethality, mobility, protection, transportability, sustainability, energy and cyber requirements, the Army said.

A July 14 solicitation for MPF asked for information on non-development or modified vehicles that could provide Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (IBCT) with an unspecified mobile, long-range fire capability. The new-start program garnered $10 million in research and development funds in the Army’s fiscal 2017 budget request. The Army’s Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy (CVMS), approved by the service secretary and chief of staff in April 2015, includes funding for MPF from fiscal years 2017 to 20-2021. 

The program was broadly defined as an effort to boost the mobility and lethality of IBCT during a high-end combined-arms maneuver fight with a near-peer adversary. MPF requirements describe a protected, long-range, precision direct-fire platform that also is highly mobile and capable of both offensive and defensive operations.

Industry MPF responses to the solicitation are due by Aug. 19. They will be used to determine if any platforms exist that can or with minor modifications could meet the Army’s requirements as they are currently written. Based on industry feedback, the Army plans to update its formal requirements in time for the annual Association of the U.S. Army convention in October.

An Army requirements oversight council in June decided to proceed with a request for materiel development decision (MDD) and start planning for an analysis of alternatives (AoA) in fiscal 2017. A competitive request for proposals (RFP) is scheduled for release in fiscal 2018 with award the following fiscal year, according to the Army.  The acquisition strategy will focus on NDI vehicles with minimal to moderate modifications. The results received from the sources sought solicitation will help inform the AoA.