US Army: Next Generation Combat Vehicle

Wehrtechnik & Rüstung, Sicherheit und Verteidigung außerhalb Europas
theoderich
Beiträge: 4643
Registriert: So 29. Apr 2018, 17:13

Re: US Army: Next Generation Combat Vehicle

Beitrag von theoderich » Di 2. Jul 2019, 21:49



theoderich
Beiträge: 4643
Registriert: So 29. Apr 2018, 17:13

Re: US Army: Next Generation Combat Vehicle

Beitrag von theoderich » Fr 4. Okt 2019, 23:11

Lynx 41 disqualified from Bradley replacement competition
The Army has disqualified Raytheon and Rheinmetall’s bid for the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle prototype competition, Defense News has learned.
The Army would not comment on the disqualification and said in a statement sent to Defense News that the solicitation for the OMFV prototyping effort closed on Oct. 1 and “we are now in the competition sensitive Source Selection Evaluation process.”

The service noted in the statement that it “remains committed to rapidly execute the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle program,” its number two modernization priority.

But multiple sources have confirmed that the bid — Rheinmetall’s Lynx 41 Infantry Fighting Vehicle — was disqualified and the bid sample, the only one in existence, remains in Germany at the company’s facility in Unterluss.

The Army required the competitors to deliver a single bid sample — a full-up working vehicle — to Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, by Oct. 1.
The disqualification of the team means that General Dynamics Land Systems’ offering is the only vehicle remaining in the competition. According to sources, no other company submitted. Hanwha, a South Korean defense company, was interested in competing but chose not to participate, multiple sources claim.

Industry sources have said that several companies who wanted to compete or submitted bids had asked for extensions, roughly 90 days in the case of Rheinmetall, to meet requirements.

According to multiple sources, potential bidders expressed concern to the service that meeting the requirements, the timeline and a combination of the two wasn’t possible.

What snarled Rheinmetall, for instance, according to sources, was the timeline it needed to get approvals from the local municipal government to transport the vehicle by tractor trailer or rail and then via air.

Sources said that the company had requested a four-week extension to deliver the vehicle to Aberdeen and also offered to hand over the vehicle to the Army under lock and bond in Germany by the Oct. 1 deadline and both were denied.

But a larger issue, multiple sources conveyed, was the clear differences between what the Army acquisition community and what Army Futures Command wanted to do. Sources confirmed that the acquisition side of the house was willing to agree to extensions, for instance, but AFC, who is in charge of rapid requirements development and prototyping efforts ahead of programs of record, insisted the Army must adhere to the schedule.

Industry also expressed concern to the Army over the roughly 100 mandatory requirements, with just six tradeable ones, expected to be met over 15 months using non-developmental vehicles.
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/1 ... mpetition/


Pencils down: Bids are in to replace the US Army’s Bradley fighting vehicle (1. Oktober 2019)
The bids are in for a chance to build prototypes for the Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle that will replace its Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

Among them is a Raytheon and Rheinmetall team putting forward Rheinmetall’s Lynx 41 Infantry Fighting Vehicle, and General Dynamics Land Systems, which showcased its Griffin III technology demonstrator equipped with a 50mm cannon a year ago at the Association of the U.S. Army’s annual exposition.

It is currently unknown if any other teams submitted bids by the service’s set deadline of Oct. 1. None have come forward publicly despite rumors of a dark horse or two.
“General Dynamics Land Systems submitted our OMFV proposal and bid sample to the US Army on 27 September. GD’s bid sample was purpose built to address the desired system lethality, survivability and mobility as substantiation of our response to the Army’s request for proposal,” the company said in a statement sent to Defense News. The company did not provide details on the submission.

GDLS did note, however, that it is proposing a “purpose built vehicle” using technologies from other platforms and “years of investment in advanced capabilities to include a 50mm cannon,” according to the statement.
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/1 ... placement/

theoderich
Beiträge: 4643
Registriert: So 29. Apr 2018, 17:13

Re: US Army: Next Generation Combat Vehicle

Beitrag von theoderich » So 17. Nov 2019, 17:12

No contest: The trials and tribulations of the US Army’s OMFV competition
Just weeks later, at the start of October, when Raytheon Rheinmetall Land Systems submitted its written OMFV bid but not its bid sample, the service moved swiftly to cut the Lynx from the prototyping competition, leaving General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) as the sole candidate.

“We have been exceptionally consistent and open with [the] industry, for better than a year and a half, [with] what it is that we need, when bid samples are due, and we had a competitor who did not make that,” Army Futures Command (AFC) head General Mike Murray told reporters on 14 October. “So it really put the army in a hard place because we can either delay and then face the possibility of a protest or we can just stick with what we’ve been saying for a year and a half.”
To get there the army released a draft request for proposals (RFP) in January this year and sought industry feedback on the pending requirements. A spokeswoman for the army’s Program Executive Office for Ground Combat Systems reiterated that at the time the service took industry’s requirement concerns seriously.

“On multiple occasions prior to the release of the OMFV RFP in March 2019 the Next Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) Cross Functional Team (CFT) leadership and requirements developers met with members of industry,” she wrote in a 29 October email to Jane’s . “The CFT took industry’s feedback from those engagement sessions seriously and used the information to inform the OMFV RFP.”

Just before the final RFP came out in late March the director of the NGCV modernisation effort, Brigadier General Ross Coffman, briefed reporters on a few of the difficult requirement decisions the army had made to ensure that its OMFV goals were not too lofty when it came to balancing lethality, survivability, and mobility.

“In each of those areas the collective industry said, ‘We can do anything you ask in this draft RFP individually, but when you put it together we’re not going to be able to meet the transportability of this system,’” Brig Gen Coffman explained in March at the AUSA Global Force Symposium & Exposition in Huntsville, Alabama.

Since the service envisages transporting two OMFVs in a C-17 airlifter, it had to revisit its armour requirements and ended up requesting armour add-on kits, also called ‘coupons’.

“If you pushed the survivability standard so high, then you need incredible armoured protection; you need incredible height of the vehicle,” Brig Gen Coffman added. “So we’ve had to really sharpen the point on those three areas [lethality, survivability, and mobility] to ensure that it meets the weight so that we can move these vehicles to wherever in the world we need them with the appropriate assets.”
https://www.janes.com/images/assets/317 ... tition.pdf

Antworten