JLTV competitors confident despite delay potential

JLTV competitors confident despite delay potential

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – The defense companies in competition to build the military’s Humvee replacement did not seem worried about a potential delay in the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program brought on by the massive budget cuts facing the Pentagon.

Army officials said a delay in the JLTV competition is a possibility should Congress and the White House fail to come to an agreement and avoid the sequestration budget cuts set to hit the government March 1 that would cost the Pentagon $500 billion in planned defense spending over the next ten years.

The Army has already delayed the Ground Combat Vehicle program by six months while also subtracting two of the three contracts they planned to issue in the engineering and manufacturing development phase of the program because of budget cuts.

A similar fate could meet the JLTV program although the Army has already issued the three contracts for the EMD phase to AM General, Oshkosh and Lockheed Martin. All three defense companies attended the Association of the U.S. Army’s Winter Symposium here and officials from all three didn’t seem too worried about a delay.

Each company said they are progressing well in the production of the JLTV prototypes that the Army will test. The Army has asked for those 22 prototypes to be delivered in August ahead of their rigorous testing regimen.

“I don’t think a delay in the [in the overall program] would affect our ability” to continue the progress we’ve seen in the EMD phase, said Chris Vanslager, the vice president of program management and business development for AM General.

Lockheed Martin remains optimistic, although any potential delay really depends on the length of the delay and the timing of it, said Rick Vallario, director of business development for Lockheed Martin’s Tactical Missiles/Combat Maneuver Systems branch.

Executives for the three companies said they will continue to march on in the program until the Army tells them otherwise. Until then, the companies have no control over the decisions made to the Army’s budget.

“We are on schedule with our requirements and we’ll keep our nose to the grindstone,” said Mike Ivy, vice president and general manager for Oshkosh Defense.

Because Army issued the JLTV EMD contracts to the companies before sequestration hit, the funding is currently protected. Future investment, however, could obviously take a hit and change expectations for how much the Army and Marine Corps can spend on it should those budget cuts come to pass.

The JLTV program was nearly canceled when per vehicle costs reached $500,000. It was saved when the defense industry and Army leaders got together, eliminated unnecessary requirements, and dropped the per vehicle cost to $250,000.

Join the Conversation

I just hope the National Guard is “in” on the bottom floor of the evaluation process (stakeholder) so they can provide the big Army with civil support requirements. I just can’t see this vehicle being able to support floods, etc if it replaces the Hummer.

Well the HUMVEE is staying in service with JLTV The National Guard will stay with HUMVEEs for a long time anyway so JLTV is a none factor for a long time.

I think you meant non factor. Heaven forbid we provide the JLTV to the reserves so they can train on them prior to deploying for the “next” conflict. It’s that kind of thinking that will always seperate the services. Army leaders have been selling and promising the JLTV is the REPLACEMENT for the Hummer, not in addition to.……just go to JLTV’s web site and read it for yourself.

As I’ve been pointing out for about a year, you cannot replace 150,000 humvees with 50,000 JLTVs, even if you believe that DoD will eventually buy 50,000 JLTVs. Given the likely price of a JLTV with all its GFE, I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for them to buy more than about 20,000 of them.

Nothing wrong with the Humvees in the first place, they were a great improvement over the Jeep. A great multi-use vehicle for everything from moving troops to a light weapons platform.
Stupid ideas that come out of D.C. waste much money when money is already short. Keep the Humvees and get someone to build a plant to make them again. One problem that the military has always had is the stupid idea that if something is new it is better, as well as the notion we need to buy something new not to compete with our enemies but to compete with what we already have. We have the best military tech in the world, until the enemy catches up it is a waste of money to replace things that work better than anything our enemies have just because it is newer. Weapons and related systems need to be designed so they have room to grow and be updated instead of starting from scratch every 20 years or so. Look at the M-16/M-4 designed in the 50’s a still doing a great job today, look at the Abrams tank over 20 years old and nothing in the world can touch it, The C130 transport the worlds standard for prop-transport aircraft, and lets not forget the B-52 50 year old bombers still carpet bombing the crap out of our enemies.If it aint broke dont fix it!

In 2010 Textron made a simple bolt on armored capsule for the Humvee frame. It was the perfect upgrade that added IED protection to an already great vehicle without sacrificing much performance and was able to retrofitted to our already in-service vehicles. I think they called it the SCTV (Survivable Combat Tactical Vehicle) system. Did we look into purchasing these?

Link: http://​defensetech​.org/​2​0​1​0​/​0​2​/​2​4​/​t​e​x​t​r​o​n​-​u​n​v​e​ils

JLTV is a waste of money. This looks to me like just another move by defense contractors to soak up money from American tax payers.

If they want to keep running with humvee, they need to improve the fuel efficiency. Upgrading the powertrain would be cost-effective, any idea how much this capsule cost?

22,000lbs and they call it “light”? Did someone mixed up pounds and kilograms when they wrote the requirement?

JLTV may be a waste of money, but it’s a government driven waste of money. The government directed a new program and defined the requirements — often in abstract.
The contractors are only there to produce what has been directed by the government, not the other way around as would be the case in the private sector.

If the 4-wheel JLTV is going to weigh roughly half of what the 8-wheel HEMTT A4 weighs, then a good place to start would be to use HEMTT A4 components under the JLTV, same suspension, wheels, tires, drives, steering, etc. HEMTT is a well matured design. Simplifying the logistics would help to reduce costs. And pardon the phrase, but not reinventing the wheel would also save costs.

The 5000 lb M998 HMMWV replaced the venerable 3000 lb M151 Jeep. Up-armoring the HMMWV increased weight by more than half. And now the MJLTV may weigh in the neighborhood of half of what a HEMTT A4 weighs. What next, APCs for general purpose use?

A 22,000 pound curb weight Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) would be very similar in weight to the 4x4 short bed cargo truck variant of the Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR).

I guess you have never deployed in a HMMWV. You must be a contractor or something. The HMMWV allowed too many of my fellow soldiers to perish.

This is a serious question. Can someone tell me why we need this vehicle? Even at the “reduced” cost of $250,000.00 dollars apiece? And how did the manufacturer suddenly cut the price by HALF? Thanking you in advance.

War is not the answer guys

There is a plant that still makes the the HMMWV. It never closed, in Mishawaka IN.


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.