Report: Army cancels Humvee Recap, places bets on JLTV

Report: Army cancels Humvee Recap, places bets on JLTV

Spending millions to rebuild the Army’s aging Humvee fleet apparently stopped making sense up on Capitol Hill.

Defense leaders, especially those in the Marine Corps, had said it was fool hardy to spend slightly less to rebuild the old fleet rather than invest in new trucks that will last longer. However, Congress pushed back pointing out how each service has recently struggled to deliver new vehicles.

AOL Defense reported last night that Congress has finally listened to those pleas from the Pentagon and agreed to cancel the Humvee Recapitalization program in the forthcoming defense budget with those funds transferred over to the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program.


It took a last minute compromise between the Army and the Marine Corps to save JLTV from Congress’ ever sharpening budget axe. However, an agreement to ease off strict weight requirements sliced $80,000 off the per vehicle cost of the JLTV.

Defense officials intended to replace the entire Humvee fleet with the JLTV. Spiraling costs and missed deadlines caused Army and Marine Corps officials to amend those expectations. Army leaders now want to replace a third of its 150,000-Humvee fleet with the JLTV and Marine generals plan to buy 5,500.

Of course, the JLTV would never have had to compete with the Humvee recap if the program had run smoothly. But thus is life in the defense acquisition world where a program that meets a deadline is the outlier.

Stories about titanium mufflers on JLTVs allowed the Humvee recap to gain momentum as a hedge for what looked more and more like another doomed modernization program for the Defense Department.

Truck companies got creative as they tried to build a Humvee that could withstand the improvised explosive device blasts shredding Humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan. AM General, the original Humvee manufacturer, even installed a chimney system built by Hardwire LLC  into its Humvee that funneled blast pressure through the vehicle rather than around it.

The fate of both programs always came down to per vehicle costs, though. Once Army and Marine Corps officials agreed to reduce the JLTV’s price tag below $300,000, it made investing $200,000 to rebuild each Humvee a tougher sell.

An official announcement from the Pentagon on the Humvee Recapitalization program will not come until the defense budget is unveiled. And companies involved in the Humvee Recap have plenty of friends on Capitol Hill.

If the Humvee recap is caneled it places all the pressure back on JLTV program leaders. The Defense Department would no longer have a back up plan to replace its fleet of trucks it started building in 1984.

Join the Conversation

America’s Military: “We put all our eggs in one basket”

They’re just trying to position the JLTV like the F-35, i.e., nothing to take its place. In other words, the program will be too important to cancel.

The humvee recap program is not only cheaper ! Hats off to “the creative truck” company that has developed an actual working vehicle which has sustained all blast testings! Simply because AM General originally designed a chimney system for its humvee doesn’t equate to effectiveness. It is common knowledge that technology only IMPROVES over time with continued research and development!!

Doesn’t sound like Washington is interested in saving the lives of our American men and women who risk theirs every day in the battlefield. Politics and pocketbooks are overriding the good wisdom here. These people will sit fat and happy all the while knowing that each and every day they are sacrificing America’s finest: the heroic men and women who stand up for our nation.

Isn’t it about time we gave back to THEM???

SUPPORT THE HUMVEE RECAP PROGRAM

Waste of money the HUMVEE is just fine. Like GCV and ICC these programs needs to die.

$16.5 Billion for not so much of a truck and not so many. They already have what they need. M-ATVs. Highter volume and they would have gotten their price point.

Since when did human life become a waste of $$???

jUST WHO ARE THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE REALLY BENEFITING?

M-ATV’s blow.

It smells like a lemon, rolls like the bitter yellow fruit, is a crew protective as one, squishes like one and no matter how much you think you can make lemonade from it without money = sugar, its still a lemon !
Smartest move the Army has made in years. You up armor them and they become slower and the gas mileage — which was already atrocious gets worse. Crew comfort and safety in a HMV, no matter how much you upgrade it, is still a bitter joke.

The blast chimney is great tech but I haven’t seen one model that can mount a weapon on the roof because of it. That’s pretty significant if you are looking for a combat vehicle.

Personally don’t have a preference but military vehicles fulill unique roles. If they can’t, it makes no sense to buy them no matter how much cheaper they are.

M-ATVs are largely road bound and too heavy for an expeditionary focused force.

Please speak from knowledge. The capsule IS lighter and MORE protective!

Are you amongst those who are sitting safe behind a desk affecting the livelihood of thousands of military personnel?

Put your kids in a soft skin HUMVEE and send them into IRQ…

Remember the HUMVEE is almost 30yrs old and in 1984 we were not fighting IED’s and a demand for alternative fuels so it did fine. But as the enemy evolves we need vehicles like the GCV and JLTV to evolve with them. Killing these prorgrams will save us money, but it will cost us LIVES.

The HUMVEE is bad it cost too much it is a very old design and it is time to seek for a better alternative. And so I think what the Army has made the right decision the JLTV is new and based on a modern design and it make no sense to refurbish 20–30 Years old HUMVEE them you can get for just a bit more Money a complete new and significant better Vehicle.

It’s a tough world. We’re either “we put all our eggs in one basket” or “never buy one when you can buy two at twice the price.”

M-ATVs are Ok, but they’re no Humvee replacement.

Sorry but we don’t need to spend a BILLION dollars on a vehicle to speed around base and the fact is the enemy has NOT evolved The Iraqi terrorist are no more different than the VC was in the 60s same guns similar traps and the fact is THERE IS NO MONEY FOR THIS PAL!

If you talking about a war with China Iran NK or Russia I wouldn’t go into combat in a stupid JLTV or HUMVEE a APC is preferred.

Are you serious? Where were you in 2005 when IEDs were tearing through hummers like paper?

Humvees are fine for stateside work or otherwise benign environments but for combat we need something better. MRAPs are good but aren’t very flexible and are very heavy. Provided that they can staighten out the JLTV program (which they seem to be trying to do) I’m glad to hear this news.

Are you serious? Where were you in 1966 when the VC were shredding M113s with IEDS and mines or the late 80s and 90s when Hezbullah were doing the Israelis over with IEDS. There was nothing new about 2005 except the US relearning 50 year old lessons. JLTV’s will still only be able to resist light wieght IED’s the tank and MRAP killers will still do over a JLTV or Hummer as the laws of physics can only be limited not ignored.

How about we just keep all the humvees we have as is , and spend the money on more helicopters…Helicopters are amazing and with the new UAV type we can do supply missions without worrying about loss of human life. Or better yet get out of Iraq/Afghanistan and get rid of these programs won’t have to worry about IED’s if we just did that.

HEY.…..WERE NOT GOING TO BE IN IRAQ FOREVER.…THE US MILITARY NEEDS TO EVOLVE TO STAY ON TOP!

I have never been a fan of the HMMWV, but the cost of the ReCap program has little to do with the HMMWV. ReCap is defined by Congress as being a depot level program. Of course it costs almost as much to ReCap a HMMWV as it does to buy a new one. ReCap replaces most of the vehicle.

Every component of the HMMWV can be replaced at the Field level. What cannot be done at Field are things like engine overhaul, but the engine is replaced at the Field level. Even the frame rails are replaced at the Field level. There are no Sustainment tasks (other than component overhaul), so if we want to save money, just have soldiers fix trucks. I realize that that is a novel concept, but why the heck do we train mechanics, then prevent them from doing their jobs?

I just hope the AC is in an easy place to get to…‘STAN sucked when the AC was out…
As many bullets and frag that went by and thru me, 150*F in the truck was what nearly
killed me.

This is going to turn into another system that get defined by bean counters and politicians; and the enlisted men and junior officers will pay the price. They’re the ones that have to ride these things in harms way. Time and again militaries all over the world have tried get by on the cheap; and only created future battle field detritus.

So you want to build a even more expensive vehicle?

We’re already out of Iraq and slowly starting to leave Afghanistan over the next 2 years… Where you been?

yes, evolving means being adequately equipped to handle war now and in the future! Yeah, we’re not in Iraq forever… but where do we go next? I guess there are those who believe that outside of Iraq, our world is one safe place.
Do we wait for for a crisis to get prepared? And what do we do about now???

We’ll always be in the middle east. Hot spots in other parts of the world.

know for a fact that the AC in a leading contender’s capsule keeps it chillin’ The guy behind this vehicle actually spent time in hot military trucks in Iraq and knows what he is doing!

Absolutely agree about the chimney and about the role of military vehicles.
However, there is one contender that has a sweet roof mount. Designed by a former navy seal. Full rotating protection. Vehicle also passed all ballistic phase testing with flying colors.

I say it’s politics…

Vehicle have a name?

If it’s the dunebuggy I’m thinking of it has even less protetction than a soft top/sided HMMWV.

No, the HMMWV is old. Older than the M151 it replaced and almost as old as the original jeep if you include the willy’s. HMMWVs have better mobility than jeeps but are no where near as deployable.

I’m not sold on our next vehicle needing MRAP level protection but Americans think bloodless wars are realistic. We are so casualty averse that it has become our Achilles heel which is why the enemy devotes so many resources to IEDs, a vicious circle.

Given our fellow citizen’s expectations and the reality that we have to replace the HMMWV the JLTV looks like the follow on. I’d prefer the Marine light approach but it’s just not going to fly with the Army who knows all too well it will be called upon to do the heavy lifting. It will also get the blame for not caring when we start filling body bags.

You might want to compare the cost of a vehicle (about $200K) and a helo (over $20mi). That’s 10 vehicles or 1 helo making 10 trips. Not a reasonable solution if you are trying to get guys in the fight quick.

General’s love shiny new hardware, it was inevitable that the HUMVEE Recap would be cancelled.
The next generation of truck will have to be more mine resistant than the HUMVEE by necessity,
The HUMVEE replaced the jeep, which had no protection. The next generation will have to be a light MRAP replacement. It remains to be seen how much it will weigh?

Uh-oh– a $100 million dollar SUV facing cheap Chinese rip-offs…

Since you could save more lives by spending the money elsewhere?

That’s the problem with these arguments. If you look at one vehicle in a vacuum, then of course you want it to have the best everything, and damn the cost. But when you have to balance all of your procurement needs across the force, you can’t have it all.

What would you be willing to give up in order to get the difference between a humvee and a JLTV for the whole fleet? Would you be willing to give up the CH-47 program? Apache Block III? M113 replacement? Those are the kinds of dollars we’re talking about.

Neither are JLTVs, if you can’t afford them. And if you insist on mobility like a humvee and force protection like an M-ATV, you can’t afford them.

Ryan, we’ve already left Iraq, and even when we leave Afghan the IED threat is NOT going away. IEDs are going to be a fixture in virtually all wars going forward, just like firearms and trucks.

Nothing is invincible. But I’d wager that you have a much better chance of surviving an IED blast in a JLTV with a reasonable degree of protection as opposed to a humvee with some token slabs of armor shoehorned on.
Body armor isn’t always going to stop enemy bullets, but if you shot 100 guys with it and 100 guys without, the former group is going to have a significantly larger number of survivors than the latter

That’s why there has to be a bit of a trade off. The JLTV needs to be a bridge between the two other classes. Less protection than an MRAP, but more than a humvee; less mobility than a humvee but more than an MRAP.

Can’t be. As I’ve said, this vehicle is as tight as a drum. Every feature thought through from a tactical point.

Name?

Wow! yet another example of what happens when DoD allows defense manufacturers to run projects on the money-sucking Time & Material (T&M) basis instead of payment upon delivery (Fixed Price or Fixed Fee). With T&M contracts, DoD pays the cost of everything to include the failures so that the expenditures are bound to run over budget. There is no incentive for the manufacturer to reduce costs or increase efficiencies: they get paid regardless until the product is delivered or the program is canceled. It’s all about the next job, not about the deliverable. When you buy a car, you don’t pay the dealer for what it will cost to design, test, develop, hire, train, test, develop, retrain, test, build, then deliver your car! You pay for the stated price of the car. The rest is the manufacturer’s cost of doing business. If defense manufacturers were required to quote the price of a vehicle, aircraft, ship, weapon, widget at the time the contract was initiated, then paid when the contracted price when the “item” is delivered, there would be no such thing as budget-overruns. It also helps if the DoD would train project officers to be PMI-qualified Project Managers instead of handing them a boatload of cash and telling them how much they can spend. Their motivation should be “How much can you save.” Infantry guys: How many times did you hear “Burn it up” or we lose it? Same philosophy. DoD knows how to spend, not how to save.

how many more, ships, planes, tanks, truck, humvees, and BDUs, DCU, ABCs do the taypayers gotta pay for? now a vehicles! what do they do with the old ones, cut them up or give, yes give, to some other country with all the parts. new vehicle, more parts, etc., etc and you want to cut pay, retirement, medical from the military? you can get all you want of the above, but you gotta have someone to start it, going to start the draft now?

How about buying something “off the shelf”??!
why re-invent the wheel?

I ask the same question. However in JLTV’s defense, it does take OIF/OEF into account. That said, how many can we afford? I hope this doesn’t end up like the F-35 et al. A real goat rope would be a mixed fleet of JLTV’s, HMMWV’s, MRAPS all cluttering up motorpools and fouling the logistics chain.

As it stands, many units here at Fort Bliss have a mix of: HMMWV, older M-35 5 ton trucks. FMTV and LMTV, up-armored versions of the FMTV/LMTV (with different tires and engines, not to mention needing training so you can drive them) and MRAPs (all flavors). And that’s just in one batallion!

Throwing JLTV into the mix would defeat the purpose. Either price it so it can replace some of those vehicles or don’t do it at all.

No draft (political suicide for any pol who’d push for it).

As to why the DoD can’t get it right?

1) distracted by the shiny new toys. Every new vehicle needs a new weapon system, radio etc. And thus new training and parts. The contractor wins, the taxpayer gets it in the wallet.

2) Just plain stuck on stupid. USMC came up with a winning cammo. Big Army wanted one but hey we can’t have soldiers look like marines! So their ‘winning’ cammo was a pattern that was DEAD LAST in PEO-Soldier’s tests. It’s ugly, don’t work but hey we don’t look like jarheads! Oh wait it don’t work…time for a new one! (cue #1)

3) vendors oversell, over promise and the Army believes them! See FCS, JTRS, DIVAD…then get yourself a bottle of Jack..

The Army didn’t say it didn’t want to look like Marines. The Marines copyrighted the pattern (first time in history) and refused twice to share it because they wanted to be “unique”.
http://​www​.armytimes​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​1​1​/​0​6​/​a​r​m​y​-​m​a​r​ine
http://​www​.armytimes​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​1​0​/​1​2​/​m​a​r​i​n​e​-​m​arp
http://​www​.armytimes​.com/​c​o​m​m​u​n​i​t​y​/​o​p​i​n​i​o​n​/​m​i​l​ita
http://​www​.leatherneck​.com/​f​o​r​u​m​s​/​s​h​o​w​t​h​r​e​a​d​.​php?…

tHE hUMvEE IS AN OVER COST VEHICLE, FOR MOST NEEDS GENERAL PRODUCTION PICKUPS COULD TO THE SAME JOB. tHE iNFANTRY WOULD BE SMARTER TO USE PRODUCTION ONE MAN VEHICLES JUST LIKE OUR OLD HORSE CAVALRY. oNE MAN AN A FAST VEHICLE CAN MANUEVER FASTER THAN
ANYONE ON FOOT AND BLOWING UP ONE SMALL VEHICLE NOT NEARLY AS USEFUL AS KNOCKING OUT A HUMVEE THEN DRAWING IN TWO OR THREE MORE HUMVEE TARGETS. oNE MAN INJURED ON FOOT COULD BE RESCUED BY ONE MAN ON A GATOR RATHER THAN A HUMVEE WITH 3 OR 4 MEN IN IT. AN INFANTRY SQUAD COULD AVOID DANGER AREAS EASIER THAN A HUMVEE AND PROVIDE EFFECTIVE FIRE IN MORE PLACES. AT ONCE.

Agree// Years ago I was on evaluation team for HSTVL. Small high speed tank with super 75mm gun that shot hole in M1. Three man crew, but we ran tests with only 1 man driving and firing (auto load) on RMS 4 course. Political killed the program to put money in M1. I still have DVD of tests. If we could get political handouts out of military procurement…

need to find out if I can release this info. Don’t want to piss anyone off.

“When you buy a car, you don’t pay the dealer for what it will cost to design, test, develop, hire, train, test, develop, retrain, test, build, then deliver your car! You pay for the stated price of the car.”

That’s not entirely true, the difference is that with a car all of that R&D, training, testing, shipping, etc. is all rolled into the stated price of the car. A more accurate description/metaphor would be to equate T&M contracts to being like buying a brand new model of car before it has been designed and built but all the while you’re paying the manufacturer for all the costs going into designing and building said car.

That’s because there’s nothing off the shelf that would meet the requirements. How many auto manufacturers make vehicles that have the required mobility, ruggedness, armor protection, and ability to mount weapons and are readily available off the shelf? It’s not like there’s a great demand for military type vehicles on the civilian market, the closest to that are armored limos but those won’t exactly work very well off of paved roads and probably not do very well in battlefield conditions.

Unfortunately, “less mobility than a humvee” pretty quickly means “can’t go off-road”, which is useless in a light tactical vehicle. There is no sweet spot here — halfway between an MRAP and a HMMWV is a vehicle that can’t do the mission, but isn’t protected well enough to defeat the threats you’re worried about. It’s the worst of both worlds. (Unless you make it out of titanium and composites, at which point you can’t afford it again.)

Contractors could quote a fixed price, but as long as the government insists on changing the requirements multiple times BEFORE delivery, T&M is a much better way to do business. The government seldom actually knows what they want, they just know that they don’t like what they bought.

If you were the General, I don’t think I’d like to be in your army. So… your going to gve me the same equipment as the enemy (a toyota pickup truck), and then put me in a combat situation (Iraq, Afgahnistan) where he has all the advantages (ability to mix/hide in the local population, choice of whether to engage/wait till later, ability to set ambushes/traps/IEDs, local support network, etc.), give me a handful of additional handicaps (clearing targets through the chain of command, complex rules of engagement, additional duties, etc.) and expect me to win the fight? And when I get ambushed, you are going to send a guy on an ATV to come rescue me? I’ll pass. (Do you really think that nobody in the Army has thought of buying pickups? Do you really think you know their needs better than they do?)

are the jobs at red river army depot in jeapordy?

Bingo David and I’m with you but how the heck do you counter the expectation that war should have no casualties?

So there’s a classified vehicle out there? Are they competing for the JLTV? Sounds fishy…

HSTVL? 75mm Gun penetrating an M1 Tank? Politics killed the program? What?

Sources?

I am old enough to remember Congress trying to kill the HMMWV because, though it could do things no other wheeled vehicle could, it was not meeting all its objectives. I remember seeing a later piece in one of the driving magazines about off-road testing their staff did on several vehicles civilians could buy, Including the H1, they were unhappy the Humvee went where they pointed it. No challenge.

Ha. I couldn’t have taken a 3/4 the places it can go, not unless I had an ARV to pull it out.

Sign me “Retired in 83.”

I remember that also. I was in college at the time. My ONLY heartburn with the HMMWV is it’s weight. When it replaced our jeeps in the 101st it had an immediate impact on ops. It took a lot more resources to lift.

Those days are long gone and a jeep type vehicle would be SHREDDED by the current threat though we’d have been a lot more mobile. Then again we didn’t field the troops necessary to do things right to get in win and leave.

America has a problem with casualties which is aggravated by our politicians tendency to do things on the cheap. The Army wanted 400K to invade Iraq. It got half that. McCrystal asked for 40K, he got 30 (six months later). Those factors force us to field more protected, heavier and more expensive vehicles instead of vehicles that would get the job done if we fought like we should in the first place and then leave.

If the hummwv is canceled?–Red River Army Depot might lose work/jobs?

you watch the army is going to pick oshkosh latv

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Become a fan on and follow us on
© 2013 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.