Army and Marine Corps pick JLTV winners

Army and Marine Corps pick JLTV winners

The U.S. Army and Marine Corps awarded Oshkosh, AM General and Lockheed Martin 27-month contracts to compete in the engineering and manufacturing development phase of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle competition — the last round before a winner is selected to build the Humvee replacement fleet.

Service officials surprised many by choosing AM General and Oshkosh over BAE Systems’ and General Dynamics’ bids considering BAE Systems and General Dynamics had taken part in the technology development phase of the program. AM General announced it’s independent bid from General Dynamics just days before bids were due to compete for the EMD phase.

The announcement was made official when it was post on FedBizOps​.gov, a government contracting website, Wednesday night. Many analysts and industry officials didn’t expect the announcement until Friday.

The three winners will have 27 months to build 22 prototype trucks to be judged by the services. Army and Marine Corps leaders have stipulated the per vehicle truck price must fall under $250,000. Adjusting the price ceiling to under $250,000 was one of the major breakthroughs that kept the JLTV program alive when many thought it might be replaced by the Humvee Recapitalization program.

The Army plans to buy at least 50,000 vehicles and the Marine Corps plans to buy 5,000 more in one of the largest contracts available to defense companies as the Defense Department shrinks its modernization budget along with other planned spending cuts.

The three industry teams that entered the technology development phase of the competition included General Tactical Vehicles (General Dynamics and AM General); BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin; and Navistar and BAE Systems. Oshkosh announced it’s intentions to bid on the EMD phase of the contract months before the March deadline.

Oshkosh, AM General and Navistar made last minute independent bids after the Army and Marine Corps submitted a new set of requirements in hopes of reducing the price and keeping Congress from canceling the program. Oshkosh and AM General’s bids paid off.

AM General President and CEO Charles M. Hall highlighted “the 300,000 operational test miles and demonstrated high reliability and maintainability” of their offering, the  Blast-Resistant Vehicle-Off Road. AM General is also the manufacturer who built the Humvee.

“AM General is uniquely focused on meeting the needs of the U.S. armed forces and our team is prepared to move forward,” Hall said in a statement.

Ahead of the award announcement, Oshkosh officials invited a group of military journalists down to Stafford, Va., near their offices to ride in their vehicle offering, the Light Combat Tactical All-Terrain Vehicle (L-ATV). Many officials in the industry took notice of Oshkosh’s confidence to host such an event before the Army and Marine Corps picked the winners.

“This vehicle is designed to provide MRAP level protection in a vehicle that is less than half the weight of existing MRAPs,” said John Bryant, vice president and general manager for Joint Marine Corps Programs at Oshkosh Defense.

Navistar’s bet to submit their Saratoga vehicle independent from BAE Systems didn’t pay off in the same way as AM General’s. Leaders of the company hope the Saratoga will catch on in other countries.

“We still feel strongly about the capabilities of our Saratoga JLTV vehicle, which is designed to be delivered to market quickly with less investment than traditional defense programs, and we believe it is appealing to nations facing uncertain futures and limited budgets,” said Elissa Koc, a Navistar spokeswoman, in a statement.

Join the Conversation

so its the independents AM General and Oskosh — who are specialist in this area — against the largest defence contractor.
Gee , I wonder how its going to turn out ?

Award protest in 3..2…1.…

The AM General BRV-O is essentially the original General Tactical Vehicles entry. When the competition was modified, GD changed the GTV entry to a derivative of GD Europe’s Eagle IV. AM General split out in order to give the old truck a chance, with adjustments and a new name, which appears to have been a good move since they’re on to the next round.

Oshkosh is a mild upset, but considering the amount of work they’ve done for the Army lately it’s hardly coming out of left field.

The one that really surprises me is Lockheed beating BAE Systems for the last spot. I’ve been under the impression that the Valanx was something of a darling of the program up ’till now.

Does any one know why GD, BAE or Navistar didn’t get the contract? What were/are the reasons?

I believe that AM General/ Oshkosh should bring in Howe & Howe Tech / Ibis Tech as independant consultation services for their JLTV…just saying…

oshkosh builds all of the armys trucks pls het hemtt and soon the jltv

BAE made out ok as they are also on the LM team.

They should just go with a Toyota truck made in San Antonia. You can’t kill ‘em with a stick.

I say bring back the Jeep!

oshkosh will win the jltv contract in 27 mo

Where the JLTV is now necessary — it shouldn’t be an outright replacement for the Humvee — it should be a supplement. But why did the JLTV become necessary in the first place? Whats the root of the problem?

The problem of IEDs really started because the USA completely failed to invade Iraq with sufficient troops to secure the country. Period. Ammo dumps with millions of tons of ordnance were simply left behind during the invasion — unguarded — because there weren’t sufficient troops (or even mercenaries) to guard them. And when the mercenaries did arrive — months after the end of the invasion — the ammo dumps were EMPTY. The ordnance that had been stored in those depots was then used to kill US troops and Iraqi citizens during the insurgency that followed.

The insurgency was fueled not only back the inability for the US to provide security in the cities and towns — but also because Ambassador L. Paul Bremer simply disbanded the Iraqi army and sent everyone home — leaving a LOT of armed, trained, and unemployed/unpaid people so sit and rot — amongst many other terrible errors of judgement that contributed to the problem.

Hence — a huge amount of the IED problem was squarely the fault of the USA and its appalling lack of planning for the aftermath of the invasion (a task for which then Sec Def Rumsfeld openly threatened to punish anyone who had the temerity to plan for) — because the Bush Administration simply didn’t want to believe Gen. Eric Shinseki’s assessment that over 400k troops would be required to invade and secure the country (a number that turned out to be complete accurate).

God help the US if it ever does anything as stupid as invading a weakling nation like Iraq to settle a personal score — but if we do — we’ll save ourselves a lot of trouble — and lives — if we thoroughly secure the country and its people.

This statement has nothing to do with the JLTV vehicle.… Just saying.

The AM General BRV-O is essentially the original General Tactical Vehicles entry. When the competition was modified, GD changed the GTV entry to a derivative of GD Europe’s Eagle IV. AM General split out in order to give the old truck a chance, with adjustments and a new name, which appears to have been a good move since they’re on to the next round.

Get your facts right and take off your tinfoil hat.

Tom Roemer was never CEO of Oshkosh, he was just one board member. Before that he had been on the 9/11 Commission, and before that he was in Congress. Robert Bohn was CEO of Oshkosh for 13 years from ’97 to 2010, and chairman of the board for most of that time.

As for for money to the DNC, all defense contractors in the US give heavily to political candidates, parties, and groups. OEPAC, the employees’ PAC for Oshkosh workers, supports Democrats but Oshkosh execuctive donations heavily favor the GOP. http://​www​.buybackyourvote​.com/​c​o​m​p​a​n​y​/​o​s​h​k​o​s​h#t=

Tim Roemer, not Tom, my apologies.

It does in the sense that one of the primary reasons for replacing the HMMWV is that it is flat bottomed and incapable of dealing with most underbody threats. That being said, the reason that IEDs and EFPs and the like have been around for so long is that they are inexpensive, easy to make, and effective so planning or no planning, they would have found their way into theater.

Glad the US companies own over the Euro zone. H however the designs are all too BIG and bulky for the job. A small maneuverable vehicles is needed. more wasted money we dont have.


This vehicle is supposed to be “light” as in easy to transport, airlift, get unstuck, lift for maintenance, be pushed or towed by troops and trucks. It ain’t. It’s a freak’n ground F-22. Don’t know if our current crops of troops can service it without a year-long school. What kind of facilities and warehousing have to be built for this 13,000 pound behemoth? Can we really afford this with trillion-dollar deficits?

Leaves an opening for a lighter vehicle for US Europe Korea base and exercises. Or will that be a role for the ‘old’ hummvee

Geez — How did I ever survive the Cold War with an M151 that cost around $2500?

YEAH! You tell ‘em… back in the day, a loaf of bread cost a nickle. And gas was 10 cents. And we LIKED IT. A private got $50 a month and tough nuts if they wanted more.

The JLTV isn’t a replacement for the HMMWV it is a supplement. There’s 260,000 HMMWVs in the Army inventory and 44k in the Marines. 50k JLTV’s is about 17% of the utility type vehicles we use.

You would not be saying that if you have ever seen what happens to vehicles that are too small and too light. The JLTV program has certain requirements to meet. (ie: meeting blast pressure and impact resistance minimums). These are going to help save lives.…. money should not be a main concern. Stop building a few “smart bombs” Those things cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to build, just to be destroyed. The 250k is a small price to pay to help our troops stay alive, and you can use it more then once.

Maybe because the Cold War stayed cold?

The HMMWV with the Frag 7 level armor weighs in at over 16,000 pounds. However it was not able to deal with IED blast in anyway. The JLTV has to have MRAP level protection but only weigh in at a third of some of the MRAPs weights. The wheel mechanics school is 10 weeks long to learn how to use TMs and basic understanding of tools and certain equipment. OJT (On Job Training) is how our troops learn how to do their jobs. That and a specialized team of FSR (Field Service Reps.) will be needed for some of the vehicles more complex systems. I have personally seen our troops fix vehicle with little to no experience on that vehicle and get it done quickly and correctly. Again the HMMWV weighs at or over 16,000 pounds without the protection you are going to get for the $250k JLTV. HMMWV cost about the same when all said and done. When you consider it would take a major overhaul of the current HMMWV to reach levels of protection close to the MRAPs it would cost more then starting from scratch. Besides these companies are fronting a lot of the expenses of R&D and man power to compete in this contest. That is why the mil did a contest and not just throw money out there like they did with the MRAPs.

Waste of money. more m-3 braleys or a MRAP is better e new Humvee replacement is too BIG and BIG target for the front lines.

Does that $250,000 price tag include all the GFE that will go into the vehicle?

Col J: You got it. Toyota is it!

M-2/3 (bradly) and the MRAPs are huge compared to the JLTVs. They also cost three to four times as much for just the base models. The M-ATV which is one of the smaller and less expensive MRAP base model cost $400k and weighs in a 25,000 lbs. Then add all the supplemental equipment and it cost 1.4 million dollars a piece. So if the JLTV base starts at $250k figure sup. equip adds about a mil on any vehicle including the HMMWV. That is a rough guess since every vehicle has different configs. and designs. But then again the HMMWV started out at about $140k in the 80s. So figure with the rise in cost and what not it would stand to reason that the JLTVs base cost of $250k is not really at all that big. Since even the lowest cost MRAP you could almost get two for it.

Our enemies don’t use sticks.

Um… Not all ieds are ordnance-based

I’m eager to see the how and why of the selection decisions, but it just occurred to me if the JLTV ends up being a slimmed down MATV also made by Oshkosh then the O&M side will look better since the JLTV will share parts and tool sets with a couple MRAP variants that we’re going back and forth on what to do with. Right now pretty much every version of the MRAP requires contracted maintenance with manufacturer-specific tools and getting commonality would make budget projections and training a better selling point.

Hardly a first for US military history. If not for our poor tactics and strategy in the air war in Vietnam a great deal of EW/SEADs equipment may never have been developed, to say nothing of the tactics. The Wild Weasel was a direct response to the mounting casualties from SAMs. If we would have just used a sound strategy and bombed the hell out of the Mig and SAM sites uniformly we might have never developed the systems we did. Same argument for MRAPs and countering IEDs really. Not that we should have replace brains and good tactics with tech, but some very useful tech has been born of bad strategy.

The opposite is also true though as you point out, had we moved in and properly secured the nation promptly, the insurgency might have never taken hold. It’s a good argument for not dithering in any security issue, they don’t get better the longer they are ignored. Iran and North Korea stand as prime examples.

The JLTV was in the planning prior to 9/11. I, like you, loath Rumsfeld also, but your main point is false. Part of his reasoning for not purchasing MRAPs was the fact that he was already investing into the JLTV; a plan for the distant future, and not what was needed at the very moment.

When Gates took over, he was shocked at this, and began purchasing the MRAP.

Tim Roemer was a Congressman in IN’s 3rd district for 12 years. IN’s 3rd district being home to AM General’s HQ and manufacturing plants.

I somewhat agree. A smart bomb is only going to be around for 1 mission. These platforms need to be able to perform for years…

Because nobody ever shot at you? Just a guess.

$50 a month bought a lot in Saigon circa 1967!

JLTV isn’t a replacement for HMMWV any more — but it was originally supposed to be. Go back and read the mission need statement that justified the program, and you’ll find that the primary argument was the need to replace the aging HMMWV fleet. The focus on force protection came later, and ended up driving up the cost by more than enough to guarantee that JLTV cannot meet that original mission need.

Don’t lose sight of the fact that the $250k number everyone is throwing around is for just the base vehicle — it’s not the sticker price for what gets fielded. By the time you add in all of the GFE (mostly comms) and optional armor, it’s more like $750k each to buy.

No. See above, in reply to Jay F.

Yes thank you. The base price for the M-ATV is $400k and around $1.4million all said and done. The MAXPRO is double that. The Cougar is about the same as the MAXPRO. The list goes on and on. To be able to start with a base price of $250k is really very small when you compare it to the other “MRAPs”, not saying the J-LTV is an MRAP in anyway. However it will offer MRAP level of protection at such a low starting point. Oh and just so everyone knows, I am in Afghanistan right now, I have been working on MRAPs for 8 years now with 13 years experence on military vehicles. I did work for Oshkosh Defense for three years. So I am very familiar with that is going on with the MRAPs and the J-LTV programs.

No.… however as an axample, the M-ATV base is $400k add in all the extras totals out over $1.4 million each. So even if that were to stand true for the J-LTV you would still save hundreds of thousands of dollars per vehicle. Oh FYI the M-ATV is one of the lowest costing MRAPs out there. The MAXPRO is double if not triple the prices of the M-ATV. In my opinion the J-LTV is a very smart choice for our gov., since they are making it a contest and having the different companies battle it out for the contract. Unlike the MRAPs where they just through money at a problem and ended up with milti. million dollar vehicles.

It’s probably easier to bury artillery shells than to cook up ANFO and emplace it.

oshkosh will win the jltv contract not am general

Well in Afghanistan the primary IED that is found is AMFO. It is easy to mix, set up, transport, and hide. That and it is reliable, unlike anything about and shell based IED. In Iraq there was tons of 155 shells left over in bunkers. That is why we saw a large number of ordanace based IEDs in the begining, but as the time goes on the “bad guys” learn and adapt just like we do. So yes ANFO is the primary IED type you see/hear about. I am in Afgnainstan at this momment. My prior contract was with MRAPs and now I am working in a different field that exposes me to info about threats here. I do have some great “inside” info on these matters. To keep things on Subject the J-LTV will have to be able to withstand slow and fast moving explosives. (Fuel being a slow explosive and C-4 the fast, just for examples.) So in all honesty the one that scares everyone is the shape charge. It is known for almost cutting armored vehicles in half. A realtive small amount of explosives with the right material can make a very dangerous and deadly IED. So the J-LTV is going to have to deal with that too. All in All the price point and size of the J-LTV is small,very small when you consider everything it has to deal with.

No question a JLTV will be cheaper than an MRAP. But it isn’t an MRAP replacement — it’s a Humvee replacement. When you compare the sticker prices on that basis (or, for that matter, with the Jeep that the Humvee replaced), you can’t possibly consider the price “really very small”.

What has actually happened, through the back door, is that the Army has decided that there is no military utility in a traditional “light tactical vehicle”. That decision has huge, sweeping implications for all sorts of things, but has never been stated explicitly.

HMMWV base price about $140k in the early 90s. That was for a vehicle with an all aluminium body. No armor, not even small arms fire protection. The military decided to add armor later at different levels over the years. Adding more then a double the cost of every HMMWV that was upgraded. So it is basically a waste of money considering that once all the items were installed on the HMMWV it is the same price as what the J-LTV cost. At least with the J-LTV program you get MRAP level armor protection, and at the same cost as a fully loaded HMMWV with frag 7 armor and all the upgraded equipment.

I didn’t think you could improvise shaped charges using low explosives like ANFO.

You’re missing my point(s):

1. A fully-kitted HMMWV costs the same as the wishcast base price for JLTV. It is simply not true that “it is the same price”.
2. You do not get MRAP-level protection in a JLTV. You get more than an UAH, and less than an MRAP. There’s no cure for that; MRAP-level armor means MRAP-level weight, and there’s not way around that.
3. As a result, JLTV is either a hugely over-protected tactical vehicle, or an underprotected combat vehicle. And, again, there’s no way around that — the laws of physics don’t care how badly you want MRAP-level protection combined with HMMWV-level mobility.

Will future conflicts have no role for tactical vehicles? I don’t know, but I do know that JLTV is too heavy and too expensive to replace the HMMWV mission, and too light to replace the MRAP mission. Which either means that the Army has slipped a major doctrinal change through the cat flap, or that they are at risk of buying an expensive system that doesn’t meet either mission need. Does it meet some new third mission need? Perhaps, but that doesn’t help fill the gaps that originally motivated the program.

The guys on “Top Gear” placed one on top of a twenty story building that was imploded. They found the truck and it started right up. They still have it on the set of their show. I’m not a big Toyota fan; but they tried everything to get that thing to fail. They sank it in the Enlgish Channel, and dropped a trailer on it; and it still ran.


Is the US getting the data package for the vehicle so they can compete the later flights of vehicles like in the Army truck contracts?

No it isn’t getting the TDP.

From the Army Times:

Soldiers will see four JLTV variants with companion trailers:

• The utility carrier and shelter (JLTV-UTL). This two-seat prime mover has an open bed for nonshelter cargo and can tow everything from 105mm howitzers to Q-36 radars.

• The general-purpose vehicle (JLTV-GP) is designed to move troops and small supply items around the battlefield. With a kit upgrade, it can become a command-and-control platform that provides access to the network and applications that support maneuver, fires, aviation, intelligence, signal and logistics.

• The heavy guns carrier (JLTV-HGC) is a JLTV-GP mission package that accommodates mounted crew-served weapons in a protected gun mount.

• The close-combat weapons carrier (JLTV-CCWC) is an anti-tank/anti-armor platform that will employ the Army’s TOW-Improved Target Acquisition System and the Marine Corps’ Saber weapons, and direct-fire kinetic weapons such as the M2 .50-cal machine gun.

The utility variant is a two-seater. All others have four seats. The JLTV-GP and CCWC can carry 5,100 pounds. The trailer can carry 6,000 pounds and the JLTV-UTL can haul 11,000 pounds.

The Pentagon requires at least 600 mean miles before an essential function failure. The JLTV must also operate in altitudes from minus 500 feet to 12,000 feet and maintain full mission capability in temperatures from minus 40 degrees to 125 degrees, according to established requirements. When temperatures drop well below zero, the JLTV must start within one minute with no external aids, kits or prior warming of the batteries.

Once fired up, the vehicle can go 350 paved miles at 35 mph or 300 miles in operational terrain on a single tank of JP-8 fuel. The JLTV can go from 0 to 30 mph in seven seconds on dry, level, hard terrain, and can ford 60 inches of saltwater obstacle without a fording kit, in forward and reverse, while maintaining contact with the ground.

The JLTV will be required to perform as well as or better than the Humvee in practically every category. It will have a 25-foot turning radius and can take on 24-inch vertical obstacles in forward and reverse. It can drive off an 18-inch vertical step at 15 mph and sustain no mechanical damage. It can traverse a 20-degree V-ditch that is 25 feet wide at an approach angle of 45 degrees. It can jump a 6-inch parallel curb at 15 mph and traverse a 20-foot flight of stairs at 5 mph. It can handle a 60 percent dry, hard-surfaced grade and can traverse a 40 percent slope with no degradation in driver control.

Weighing in at no more than 12,660 pounds, the JLTV can be prepared in 30 minutes for transport by aircraft, Maritime Prepositioning Force ships or rail. This is aided by an adjustable-height suspension that includes five heights.

To keep costs down, the Army opted for an “incrementally scalable” C4ISR solution. Simply put, you take only what you need.

But some cool features are common to all the vehicles. One example is the Central Tire Inflation System, which allows the driver to adjust vehicle tires to any one of four preset tire pressures: highway, cross country, mud/snow/sand and emergency. It takes two minutes to deflate from one setting to the next, and from two to six minutes to inflate, depending on the setting. A visual indicator warns the driver of excessive speed at pressure conditions.

Safety is a key factor in the vehicle’s design. Two soldiers can install B-kit armor in five hours. An 800-pound rocket-propelled grenade protection kit can be installed in two hours at field-level maintenance and completed by the crew within 30 minutes. Each vehicle has a backup viewing capability that also provides a 25-foot situational awareness to your six o’clock.

The JLTV also has an automatic fire-extinguishing system to protect the crew cabin and engine compartment. Fixed fuel tanks are self-sealing, mounted externally and shielded by the JLTV structure. Each crew seat has a combined seat and blast restraint device. Ingress time for a crew of four in combat equipment is 30 seconds or less. Egress with B-kit doors is within 10 seconds.

And let us not forget the creature comforts.

The heater can raise the crew compartment from a bitter minus 40 degrees to a comfortable 65 degrees in one hour. The air conditioner can drop the temp from 120 degrees to 90 degrees within 40 minutes. That leaves plenty of time to put the adjustable driver seat in the right position.

And when the road is long, the driver and commander can place their 12– or 24-ounce drinks in the JLTV’s two cup holders.

That’s great to hear! **** BAE…they’re selfish and need to spread the wealth…

I can’t remember a military system that actually met its reliability requirement. The Pentagon may require 600 miles between EFFs, but that doesn’t mean they will ever get it.

Not just because I was in Oshkosh in July for the EAA annual Fly-In and the Oshkosh military vehicles were on display, but I specifically asked about the JLTV competition with a sales rep who happened to be a vet from Iraq.
Oskosh LISTENS to the troops for quality feedback to their R & D department. They consistently strive to improve their vehicles to increase crew safety and combat sustainability.
THAT in and of itself will probably allow the other firms to get the contract. The Pentagon doesn’t want to listen to the enlisted personnel who are the vast majority of the vehicle operators in our recent combat zones. That would make far too much sense.

Pentagon doesn’t listen to the operators, huh?

So where do the requirements for the next generation come from, I wonder?

Oshkosh will win if all the parts are interchangeable with out 7 tons and the M-ATV it only makes sense..

The JLTV would become the Army’s primary lightweight tactical vehicle by filling the capability gaps of the HMMWV, though not intended to replace the HMMWV “one for one.” At an estimated cost of around $300 thousand, the JLTV would also be less expensive to procure than the MRAP Family of Vehicles which cost $430 — $900 thousand a piece. Though the cost of the JLTV exceeds that of an up-armored HMMWV, the cost does not preclude the JLTV from replacing the HMMWV as outlined in the 2010 US Army Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Strategy due to the following factors: decisions as to the number of JLTVs requested driven by the tactical wheeled vehicle fleet reduction; recent events such as the cancellation of the HMMWV Recapitalization Program; and the reduction of the projected cost by about $100 thousand per vehicle by trimming extras.

Each has its own advantages, so why not split the contracts into three different works of art? I do like the need for speed offered by Cummins/Allison the Lockheed Martin. Then again there needs to be ongoing innovation so that they morph into the latest and greatest. No sales in the consumer market as the Hummer 1/2/3 were absolutely nothing like the real thing A M General offered the armed services.

The other MULE program is also promising as our engineers offer innovation and derivatives. I like the ability to find IED and or mines and have a robotic are place a detonator on the mine, move away and BOOM. The missile, machine guns, smoke bombs and the user friendly common game XBOX or Play Station controls from troops miles away.


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 | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2015 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.