The Manned Ground Vehicles (MGV) was a family of lighter and more transportable ground vehicles developed by Boeing and subcontractors BAE Systems and General Dynamics as part of the U.S. Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. The MGV program was intended as a successor to the Stryker of the Interim Armored Vehicle program.
The MGV program was set in motion in 1999 by Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki.
The MGVs were based on a common tracked vehicle chassis.Manned Ground Vehicle overview . Boeing, 7 August 2008. The lead vehicle, and the only one to be produced as a prototype, was the XM1203 non-line-of-sight cannon. Seven other vehicle variants were to follow.
The MGV vehicles were conceived to be exceptionally lightweight (initially capped at 18 tons base weight) to meet the Army's intra-theatre air mobility requirements. The vehicles that the Army sought to replace with the MGVs ranged from 30 to 70 tons. In order to reduce weight, the Army substituted armor with passive and active protection systems.
The FCS program was terminated in 2009 due to concerns about the program's affordability and technology readiness. The MGV program was succeeded by the Ground Combat Vehicle program, which was canceled in 2014.
History
Initial Technology Demonstrator Vehicle by United Defense yielded both tracked and wheeled prototypes. Only the tracked variant was pursued further.
FCS-Wheeled (FCS-W) was an early concept designed to demonstrate a hybrid-electric drive system and two-man cockpit workstations. A Technology Demonstrator Vehicle was built by United Defense and was unveiled in 2002.
FCS-W was designed to deliver a top road speed of 75 mph and a top cross-country speed of 40 mph. The vehicle's armor utilized armor similar to the tracked variant but was lighter. The vehicle would have also had some type of active protection system. The arrangement of the turbine and drive motor provided for a two-man, side-by-side cockpit and a sizable payload compartment.
In May 2000, DARPA awarded four contracts to four industry teams to develop Future Combat Systems designs and in March 2002, the Army chose Boeing and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to serve as the "lead systems integrators" to oversee the development and eventual production of the FCS’ 18 systems. In October 2002 United Defense (UD) and Boeing/SAIC signed a memorandum of understanding to bring the Objective Force non-line-of-sight cannon under the FCS umbrella.
In January 2003, Boeing and SAIC reached an agreement with General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) and United Defense LP (UDLP) to develop the MGVs. UDLP was responsible for leading development of five of the vehicles (including the NLOS-C) while GDLS took responsibility for leading development of the other three.
In May 2003 the Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) approved the FCS’ next acquisition phase, and in August 2004 Boeing and SAIC awarded contracts to 21 companies to design and build its various platforms and hardware and software.
In December 2003, GDLS received a $2 billion MGV design contract from Boeing. Per the contract, GDLS would produce 8 Mounted Combat Systems, 6 command and control vehicles, and 4 reconnaissance and surveillance vehicle prototypes.
In March 2005, the Army's acquisition chief Claude Bolton told the House Armed Services subcommittee that getting the MGV's weight to under 19-tons was proving difficult. In 2005 the Army relented on the vehicle's requirement for roll-off C-130 transportability. Relaxing the C-130 requirement to allow vehicles to be transported in a stripped-down configuration allowed the weight cap to be increased from 18 tons per vehicle to 24 tons.
In August 2005, GDLS selected Detroit Diesel's 5L890 to power the eight variants.
The Department of Defense announced budget cuts in April 2009,"Military Budget Reflects a Shift in U.S. Strategy" . New York Times, April 7, 2009. Retrieved in April 2009. which resulted in the cancellation of the FCS Manned Ground Vehicles family.McLeary, Paul. "U.S. Army Ground Vehicles Up and Down". Aviation Week, 8 May 2009. The Army issued a stop-work order for MGV and NLOS-C efforts in June. In July the army terminated the MGV, but not the NLOS-C. In the news release the Army said cancelation would "negatively impact" NLOS-C development but said it was seeking a "viable path forward" for the NLOS-C.
The DoD determined that the proposed FCS vehicle designs would not provide sufficient protection against IEDs."Contractors vie for lucrative vehicle work" . The Hill, August 5, 2010. Retrieved on August 21, 2010.
The Army planned to restart from the beginning on manned ground vehicles.Military Deputy for Budget Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Mgt and Comptroller) Lt. Gen. Edgar Stanton and Acting Director, Army Budget Office William Campbell May 07, 2009, News Transcript , U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs). The program's heavier successor, the Ground Combat Vehicle, was cancelled in 2014.
Design
In order to reduce weight, the Army substituted armor with passive and active protection systems. This was hoped to provide a level of protection similar to the legacy armored vehicles being replaced.
Most vehicles were protected with hard-kill active protection systems capable of defeating most threats. The armor was a unique secret matrix that may be utilized by industry in the Ground Combat Vehicle program.
The common MGV chassis was required to provide full protection from 30 mm and 45 mm cannon fire in a 60-degree arc opening towards the front of the vehicle. 360-degree protection from small arms fire up to 14.5 mm heavy machine gun and 155 mm artillery shell air-bursts was planned. Protection from higher caliber rounds as well as anti-tank guided missiles would be provided by an active protection system manufactured by Raytheon known as "Quick Kill".
Use of a common chassis was to reduce the need for specialized training of personnel and allow for faster fielding of repairs. The MGV platform utilized a hybrid diesel-electric propulsion system. The MGV also employed numerous weight-saving features, including composite armor, composite and titanium structural elements, and continuous band tracks.
The 30 mm Mk44 Bushmaster II chain gun on the reconnaissance and surveillance vehicle and infantry carrier vehicle provided greater firepower, yet weighed 25% less than the M242 Bushmaster it would replace.
Weight growth Weight at full combat capability (FCC) was raised to 24 tons in June 2006, then to 27.4 tons in January. According to a former program official, MGV chassis weights entered a "death spiral," as any weight growth to the subsystems cascaded to the whole system (e.g. heavier armor required a stronger suspension to carry it). FCC weight was eventually raised to 30 tons.Pernin et al, Ch. 5, p. 95-118.
TRADOC was slow to update its expectations for the MGV. TRADOC recommended removing C-130 transportability requirements in 2007 and raising the weight limit to 27.4 tons in requirements drafted in 2007. However, TRADOC's essential combat configuration MGV weight remained capped at 38,000 pounds (19 tons) until the program's cancelation.
Armor and countermeasures MGVs in essential combat configuration were required to have all-around protection from 14.5 mm caliber ammunition, and 30 mm from the front. This requirement was changed later that year to 14.5 mm protection with add-on armor.
In 2008, the Army added a requirement for an add-on V-hull kit.
Vehicles + Comparison of variants Name DeveloperPernin et al, p. 197. Vehicle replacedCBO, Ch. 2, p. 17-27. Number per brigade XM1201 reconnaissance and surveillance vehicle (RSV) General Dynamics (GD) M3 Bradley 30 XM1202 mounted combat system (MCS) GD M1 Abrams 60 XM1203 non-line-of-sight cannon (NLOS-C) BAE Systems (BAE) M109 howitzer 18 XM1204 non-line-of-sight mortar (NLOS-M) BAE M1064 mortar carrier 24 XM1205 field recovery and maintenance vehicle (FRMV) BAE M88 Recovery Vehicle 10 XM1206 infantry carrier vehicle (ICV) BAE M2 Bradley and M113 102 XM1207 and XM1208 medical vehicle (MV) BAE N/A 29 XM1209 command and control vehicle (C2V) GD M113 command variant 49
Reconnaissance and surveillance vehicle
The XM1201 reconnaissance and surveillance vehicle (RSV) featured a suite of advanced sensors to detect, locate, track, classify and automatically identify targets under all climatic conditions, day or night.
The suite included a mast-mounted, long-range optoelectronic infrared sensor, an emitter mapping sensor for radio frequency interception and direction finding, chemical sensor and a multifunction radio frequency sensor.
The RSV also features the onboard capability to conduct automatic target detection, aided target recognition and level-one sensor fusion. To further enhance the scout capabilities, the RSV was also to be equipped with Unattended Ground Sensors, a Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle with various payloads and two unmanned aerial vehicles. It was to be armed with a 30 mm MK44 autocannon and a coaxial 7.62 mm M240 machine gun.
Mounted combat system
The XM1202 mounted combat system (MCS) was planned as a successor to the M1 Abrams main battle tank.
The MCS was to provide both direct and beyond-line-of-sight ('indirect') firepower capability and allowed for in-depth destruction of point targets up to away.
As of 2009 the MCS was to have had a crew of two and to be armed with an autoloaded 120 mm main gun, a 12.7 mm (.50) caliber machine gun, and a 40 mm automatic grenade launcher.
The MCS was intended to deliver precision fire at a rapid rate, in order to destroy multiple targets at standoff ranges quickly, and would complement the other systems in the unit of action. It would be capable of providing direct support to the dismounted infantry in an assault, defeating bunkers, and breaching walls during tactical assaults. It was also intended to be highly mobile, in order to maneuver out of contact and into positions of advantage; given the vehicle's light weight, this was especially important.
In May 2003, Army officials revealed a computer model of the MCS, allowing reporters to view the inside of the vehicle through a Cave automatic virtual environment. This concept used a crew of three.
The Picatinny Arsenal XM360 tank gun had been selected by September 2006. The gun underwent test firing at Aberdeen Proving Ground beginning in March 2008. General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products was awarded a $14 million contract in 2007 to develop the ammunition handling system. In January 2008, Raytheon was awarded a $232 million contract to develop the XM1111 Mid-Range Munition. The munition had been test-fired from an M1 Abrams as early as March 2007. The Army tested a 27-round magazine ammunition handling system at Aberdeen Proving Ground by July 2008.
This was considered the most complex of the three vehicles GDLS was contracted to build.
Non-line-of-sight cannon
The XM1203 non-line-of-sight cannon (NLOS-C) was a 155 mm self-propelled howitzer to succeed the M109 howitzer. This was the lead vehicle effort, and most far along when the program was terminated in 2009. The NLOS-C used technology from the canceled XM2001 Crusader project.
The NLOS-C incorporated the autoloader from the Crusader project. The NLOS-C featured an improved fire rate over the M109. It was capable of multiple rounds simultaneous impact (MRSI), where the cannon fires a sequence of several rounds at different trajectories such that the rounds all hit the same target at the same time. The system had the ability to switch shell types quickly on a one-by-one basis.
Improvements in the refueling arrangements and automation of ammunition reloading reduced the amount of time spent on resupply and during which the gun would be unavailable for combat support. This also allowed the system to use a crew of two instead of five.