Ground Combat Vehicle - Research Paper Example

Ground Combat Vehicle Outline Introduction 2. Army Ground Combat Vehicles 3. Recent Major Program 4. Acquisition Process 5. Test and evaluation Process of Acquisition 6. Practical Test of a program 1. Introduction The Army uses ground combat vehicle as the preferred tools for confrontation and defense. These vehicles are quickly gaining popularity in the armed forces as the present and the future vehicles for fighting. The reason why the army majorly focuses on the use of ground combat vehicles is the agenda of improving the policy of establishment of the subsequent generation of fighting vehicles. Previously, the army used what was popularly known as the infantry fighting vehicles. The ground combat vehicles are essentially an improvement of the infantry fighting, hence are of better quality than them. It was designed and developed by a combination of proficient and highly qualified engineers. Ground combat vehicles are acquired through a special process known as the testing and evaluation. Departments of defense have in the recent past been keen on the application of Test and Evaluation (T & E) in acquisition of ground combat vehicles in the automobile industry. The process of evaluation takes a systematic review on three major documents related to the technical conditions of the vehicle before acquisition. The first document is the statement of objectives, which contains the parameters for ensuring that the combat vehicles are able to satisfy the objectives for which it is acquired. The next document is the statement of work. Statement of work contains information related to the working conditions of the vehicle. It seeks to confirm if the technical specification of the vehicle satisfies the requirements for the specified task and the possible life span. 2. Recent Major Program The United States of America has been in the process of acquiring major programs that is expected to replace the fragments of the Future Combat systems (FCS). An illustration to this is where the eight versions of the track controlled Ground Vehicle are replaced by the FCS. The US Federal Army is presently in the process of acquiring new combat vehicles to be produced under the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) program presently under formulation. TRADOC Company and Ft. Monroe are presently preparing a map for the capability-gaps that exist in the today situation and the future requirements. The requirement in this project is a single common vehicle. Alternatively, it can be satisfied by many types of Ground Combat Vehicles. The last evaluation of this study came out in the month of September 2009 and it was very critical because it helped in bringing very critical information to the limelight, and this benefited many people. The review of this program was also very vital in the implementation of the survivability lessons that were acquired in the recent combat activities by the United States Army in Iraq and Afghanistan. These became issues of major concern to the US Department of Defense about the previous operational program. As Lardner (2010) notes, the previous program has led to the inevitable quick acquisition of more than 20000 armed resisting forces, which used a special vehicles design in 2008 as well as in 2009. The Pentagon discovered that the threatening situation had already changed in recent years. The rival forces are facing considerably static uniform military organizations, full of modern asymmetric patterns of war. Their major tasks are matters of security, stability and the ability to manage emerging fragile security situations. This is in the view that some of the insurgence may not favor the quick environmental exploitation in highly mobile areas dominated by asymmetric war patterns. Management of fragile security situations is very critical because first, it helps in early detection of any security malpractice or any insecurity issue, and this greatly helps in reducing chances of security threats or chances of any enemy succeeding in his or her evil plan. Many security organs and institutions nowadays highly focus or emphasize on fragile security situations management because they understand clearly that this is the foundation of ensuring that people are safe. 3. Test and evaluation Process of Acquisition The department of defense in the recent programs and by extension the present programs have followed a classic test and Evaluation Strategy program (TES). In the United States of America, the Defense forces have applied a program known as the Operation test and Evaluation of Defense acquisition program. It spells out an emphasis on non partiality in the sense that no person involved in the supply of the combat vehicles should be part of the testing and evaluation process. This is to ensure that the federal defense forces acquire quality vehicles without compromise of quality. Special contractors are entrusted with the duty of setting up the test and evaluation criteria, providing technical and logistical support functions based on the criteria. The contractors conduct performance and failure analysis and the check on software and equipment functionality. System contractors work with the federal State government to design and develop the army combat vehicle systems. They also support the other non technical military staff to accomplish the acquisition through Test and Evaluation process in their various areas. Contractors oversee the establishment of the performance criteria for the ground combat vehicles and design the conceptual structure of the working vehicles prior to the preparation of the proposal and the process of evaluation and test (Kelly, 2006). They use practical models to simulate the actual military defense environment, in which they conduct performance and failure tests. After the test and evaluation strategy, what follows is the actual process of acquisition, which follows systematic sequence of activities as stated in the acquisition documents. The Army policy on Tests and Evaluation provides the flexibility that enables every acquisition procedure to customize the Test and evaluation strategy. This enables the test and evaluation process to get the best support for the program. 2. Acquisition Process The actual process of acquisition begins from the execution of a sound test and evaluation strategy for a working program. This is the pillar of an effective, practical and realistic test and evaluation program for ground combat vehicle acquisition. The principal aim of the operational level integrated product team is to plan the life cycle of the test and evaluation to identify and solve routine problems. The next step is to prepare test and evaluation documents. This includes many documents such as the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP), Critical Operational Issues and Criteria (COIC), System Evaluation Plan (SEP) and Event design Plan. These documents are the directives that guide the processes of evaluation and tests throughout the processes of acquisition, and they are therefore very critical in the acquisition process. Basically, the documents provide guidelines on what is supposed to be done in the process of evaluation and that of carrying out tests, and this greatly helps in the process of acquisitions. They also contain necessary information for supporting the process of system evaluation requirements. The next step is the Development Test and Operation Test. This is a process of product development test as well as comprehensive and holistic system test. A combination of the Development test and the Operational Test shortens the process of acquisition and suitability of the assessment and Continuous evaluation. System assessment takes place at the beginning and the end of every critical decision making points. The decisions are usually concerning the adequacy, effectiveness, as well as the recommendation for future improvements in the test and evaluations. Continuous assessment literally ensures continuous flow of the test and evaluation information. This continuous assessment basically facilitates fast and persistent streaming of the information related to the test and evaluation. 3. Practical Test of a program The practical assessment of the new requirements prompted the US Army to establish a group of combat soldiers with proper experience and technical preparedness to conduct a fresh review of the requirements. Part of the requirement included the capabilities, the technologies and the lessons received from the Future Combat Systems program. The group made recommendations to inform the TRADOC’s continuous operational prerequisites for the ground combat vehicle. A section of this assessment process addressed the expiry of the Paladin, which was an automatic (self propelled) gun. It was the most practical image of the MGV category of combat vehicles. In the review of the NLOS-C, it was discovered that owing to the exorbitant cost of its unique hybrid-electric power orientation, the self propelled cannon system find application in an existing Ground Combat Vehicle platform (Feickert, 2011). This could easily accommodate a replica of the present SP armaments. Ground Combat Vehicles should be able to support the requirements and capabilities of networking necessary for the future force. These vehicles should effectively coexist with the present units. A preliminary requisition for proposal for the Ground Combat Vehicle was supposed to be realized by 2010. Upon selecting prime contractor, the US Army was expected to acquire the first ground combat vehicles five or a maximum of seven years later. The Army was expected to appoint the prime contractors for every future program. The most likely contenders for the programs were the present producers of the tracked or wheeled types of combat vehicles. These models included the General Dynamics and BAE Systems. The two models shared the Future Combat System program subcontractors. References Feickert, A. (2011). Armys Future Combat System (FCS); Background and Issues for Congress. Collingdale: DIANE Publishing. Kelly, T. (2006). The U.S. combat and tactical wheeled vehicle fleets: Issues and suggestions for Congress. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Lardner, H. (2010). The Armys quest for a new ground combat vehicle. Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College. Read More