Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV)

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
1,429
Moose said:
Well that's unexpected. Guess AM General is in trouble now.
Bloomberg is quoting $400k per most likely stripped.. 55k units is not enough.
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
16,999
Reaction score
6,635
http://news.usni.org/2015/12/17/lockheed-martin-will-file-in-court-of-federal-claims-after-gao-dismisses-jltv-protest
 

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
1,429
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2016/02/02/dod-weapons-tester-dote-report-sheds-light-jltv-competition/79703534/

"JLTVs generally also don’t have “sufficient capability” to carry equipment, supplies and water longer than a day-long mission, Gilmore reported. “This limits the types and duration of missions for which JLTV is effective,” he writes,” or will require more vehicles or trailers.

Also, while it’s not a current JLTV requirement, Gilmore noted that the utility variant does not have the same capability as the Humvee Cargo/Troop carrier.

The prototypes also “suffered from poor command, control, and communication equipment integration by the vendor affecting the unit commander’s ability to command and control platoons, maintain situational awareness, and complete mission tasks during the LUT,” Gilmore wrote.

Moreover, because of small rear windows and blind spots, Gilmore noted, the JLTVs do not provide the crews with “sufficient” visibility during missions."
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,346
Reaction score
2,946
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/03/24/jltv-program-cost-estimate-drops-6-billion/82224406/
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
16,999
Reaction score
6,635
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/04/13/jltv-initial-capability-milestone-delayed/83010182/

Not good, not to mention that there are some rather dubious explanations for the slippage.
 

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
1,429
jsport said:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2016/02/02/dod-weapons-tester-dote-report-sheds-light-jltv-competition/79703534/

"JLTVs generally also don’t have “sufficient capability” to carry equipment, supplies and water longer than a day-long mission, Gilmore reported. “This limits the types and duration of missions for which JLTV is effective,” he writes,” or will require more vehicles or trailers.

Also, while it’s not a current JLTV requirement, Gilmore noted that the utility variant does not have the same capability as the Humvee Cargo/Troop carrier.

The prototypes also “suffered from poor command, control, and communication equipment integration by the vendor affecting the unit commander’s ability to command and control platoons, maintain situational awareness, and complete mission tasks during the LUT,” Gilmore wrote.

Moreover, because of small rear windows and blind spots, Gilmore noted, the JLTVs do not provide the crews with “sufficient” visibility during missions."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/army/2016/04/13/jltv-initial-capability-milestone-delayed/83010182/

"savvy acquisition strategy" really?

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=2122
"Army Officials Paint Dire Picture of the State of the Force"

no decent vehicle on the horizon more like it. Oshkosh had some interesting cab forward genuinely armored designs which would cost more but might start meeting the bill.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
523
JLTV at maximum yearly acquisition quantity will account for ~ 5% of the Army's procurement budget.
And there's been plenty of time (by design) to correct the deficiencies uncovered during the testing of the EMD prototypes.

My favorite excerpt from the EMD testing was the full bullet point that indicates that DOT&E may be dimly aware of tactics and operational art.

Due to small rear windows and blind spots around the
vehicles, the JLTVs did not provide the Army and Marine
Corps crews with sufficient visibility throughout the missions.
Crews shared information of potential threats, movements,
and activities while moving to maintain shared situational
awareness for unit security.
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
16,999
Reaction score
6,635
Grey Havoc said:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/03/army-nixes-light-recon-vehicle-taps-humvee-replacement-mission.html

This will not end well. At all.
 

Kat Tsun

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 16, 2013
Messages
227
Reaction score
189
I don't see how. It's far superior to HMMWV in protection overall and better then something like Wiesel at resisting mine/IED attacks.
 

Avimimus

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
248
Kat Tsun said:
I don't see how. It's far superior to HMMWV in protection overall and better then something like Wiesel at resisting mine/IED attacks.

I'd also be excited by the quieter noise profile on the ground, as well as the reduced logistics burden and increased redundancy from the hybrid power system. Depending on how the system is designed the electric motors could provide more low-speed torque and faster reactions to slippage - allowing it to pull a larger trailer than an equivalent pure gas design.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,346
Reaction score
2,946
http://www.janes.com/article/63662/jltv-deliveries-to-begin-in-september
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,346
Reaction score
2,946
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLbiKIe3Dlc

JLTVs at AUSA 2016
 

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
1,429
Calling the 30mm on a Stryker (which never should have been abandoned in the first place) and the jokeish JTLV "Overmatch" . Please see Overmatch attached.
 

Attachments

  • BTR 100mm.jpg
    BTR 100mm.jpg
    96.6 KB · Views: 460

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
523
United Kingdom – Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) and Accessories

WASHINGTON, Jul. 10, 2017 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign
Military Sale to the United Kingdom for Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) and accessories. The estimated
cost is $1.035 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying
Congress of this possible sale today.

The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested a possible sale of up to two thousand seven
hundred forty-seven (2,747) Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV). This possible sale also includes baseline
integration kits, basic issue item kits, B-kit armor, engine arctic kits, fording kits, run-flat kits, spare tire kits,
silent watch kits, power expansion kits cargo cover kits, maintainer and operator training, U.S. government
technical assistance and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support.
Total estimated cost is $1.035 billion.

This proposed sale supports the foreign policy and national security policies of the United States by helping
to improve the security of a NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, an important partner on critical
foreign policy and defense issues.

The proposed sale will help improve the UK’s Light Tactical Vehicle Fleet and enhance its ability to meet
current and future threats. The UK will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.

The proposed sale will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

The principal contractor of this sale will be Oshkosh Defense, LLC, Oshkosh, Wisconsin. The procured items
will require minimum contractor support until the foreign customer can eventually transition to internal organic
support. There is no known offset agreement associated with this proposed sale.

There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.

All questions regarding this proposed Foreign Military Sale should be directed to the State Department's Bureau
of Political Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs, pm-cpa@state.gov.
 

jsport

what do you know about surfing Major? you're from-
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,746
Reaction score
1,429
 
Top