Archives
Recent
Ground Combat Vehicle
The senior leadership of the U.S. Army is becoming a bigger threat to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle than insurgents in Southwest Asia. The service's top uniformed acquisition official, Lt. Gen. William Phillips, told Congress on October 26 that the Bradley is "the second-most attrited vehicle" in
. . . Read more
Date:
11/18/2011
The Army Systems Acquisition Review Council held a meeting about combat vehicle modernization this week, and the one message that came out of deliberations loud and clear is that the service can't afford all of the initiatives it is planning. The general consensus among members of the service's
. . . Read more
Date:
6/10/2011
The U.S. Army can’t seem to catch a break. Its new Chief of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, was barely in the job a month before President Obama nominated him to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Retired Army General, Malcolm O’Neil, currently that service’s reform-minded Assistant Secretary
. . . Read more
Date:
6/7/2011
We are about to see the results of the Army's latest effort to fix its broken acquisition system. The Army currently is evaluating three proposals for its new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV). Last year, confronting the likelihood of a procurement disaster, the Army withdrew its Request for Proposal
. . . Read more
Date:
5/16/2011
Pretty soon the Army’s only hope of salvaging anything from its ill-fated Future Combat System (FCS) program will rest with the new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV). Just last week the Army announced its decision not to equip its combat brigades with the Network Integration Kits which had been intended
. . . Read more
Date:
1/25/2011
Lt. Col. Mark B. Elfendahl, Chief of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command's Joint and Army Concepts Division, sent us the following response to Dan Goure's December 8 critique of the Ground Combat Vehicle program. We thought our readers would benefit from hearing how the Army views future
. . . Read more
Date:
1/4/2011
Last week the U.S. Army released its revised request for proposal (RFP) for the new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV). The initial proposal had been criticized as dictating too many key performance parameters which resulted, according to reports, in industry responses that were deemed technically risky
. . . Read more
Date:
12/8/2010
If the bleak findings of the bipartisan deficit reduction commission released today weren't enough to get defense contractors thinking about diversification, then maybe the Army's revised solicitation for a future Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) will do the trick. GCV is all that's left of the family
. . . Read more
Date:
12/1/2010
The Army did something brave this Summer without even visiting a war zone. It retracted a request-for-proposals on its future Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) because senior leaders decided the requirements were too demanding. The reason that was a brave thing to do is because anytime a solicitation
. . . Read more
Date:
11/8/2010
If you were a betting person, what chances would you give the Army’s Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program of actually producing a new system? The GCV is the Army’s attempt to salvage something from the debacle of the Future Combat System program which was sought to create a futuristic system-of-systems
. . . Read more
Date:
10/5/2010
Not long ago, modernization of the U.S. Army centered on the Future Combat System (FCS), a networked collection of 18 ground and aerial, manned and unmanned platforms tied together by a network. When most of that program was cancelled -- except for some near-term elements that would support the
. . . Read more
Date:
9/14/2010
Very shortly, the Army will announce the winners of initial contracts to build its new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV). The GCV program was the Secretary of Defense’s consolation prize to the Army when he cancelled the manned ground vehicle portion of its Future Combat System (FCS) program. Gone are
. . . Read more
Date:
8/13/2010
The U.S. Army has been working very hard to reinvent itself. It has published a new Capstone concept that defines the future security environment and broadly what it demands of the Army in the way of capabilities. It has a draft operating concept that defines in more detail the missions the Army
. . . Read more
Date:
7/9/2010