• Cruise Missile
• Performance Engineering
• Andrew Feickert

EFV 125 • The EFV Program Office announced its intention to incorporate a new, different aluminum alloy in the hull. Woodbridge, Virginia executive summary. Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV). Marines and naval personnel in Woodbridge. The program office management strategy includes planning for life cycle.

An Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle moves at high-water speed while undergoing cold-weather testing in Alaska's Prince William Sound. Photo courtesy of EFV Program Office. Subra Bettadapur, lead engineer for Materials and Corrosion Prevention for the EFV Program, said the new vehicle integrates design changes that will avoid water entrapment. In addition, he noted that the vehicle's 'robust production ready-paint system' contains significantly improved corrosion-resistant chemicals, primers, and paint. He added, 'Continued effort is being made to prevent dissimilar metals usage, and where not possible, provide adequate protection to prevent corrosion.' Compared to its precursor, the EFV also will use more titanium and stainless steel for structural components. Other corrosion-resistant materials, including aluminum alloys, also are being used to protect against oxidation, reduce weight, and improve ballistic properties.

'With regard to the welding process, friction stir welding, which has the potential for providing joint designs with superior strength, fatigue, and ballistic properties, but more significantly improved corrosion mitigation, is being developed specifically for EFV hull structures and is planned to be utilized for future EFV build,' said Battadapur. 'Also vehicle inspection, maintenance, and corrosion repair plans, and training methods, with repair kits, have been developed, and are being utilized to monitor and control in order to achieve significant corrosion prevention and control capability in the EFV.' Battadapur added that the EFV will boast impressive environmental credentials. It will not use conventional hexavalent pretreatment and paint primers and topcoats, which are carcinogenic. 'Extensive testing of the pretreatment chemicals and paint primers and paints was performed, and aerospace-quality chemicals and methods were selected,' he recalled. Three of the coatings selected include NAVAIR-developed trivalent chromium pretreatment, the corrosion preventive compound Navguard, and highly corrosion-resistant non-hexavalent primer and topcoat.

'In addition, titanium inserts were coated with a ceramic coating and used,' Battadapur said. 'Also, significantly superior Electro Magnetic Interference seals and method of sealing, and conductive paint were used. 'Water traps were eliminated through the use of improved seal materials and proper sealing techniques, with double environmental seals and 'enclosed' EMI seal, preventing contact with water. All these changes and improvements helped achieve superior corrosion prevention and control for the EFV.' Easier To Service From a maintenance and repair standpoint, the EFV should be quite forgiving—an important consideration for a vehicle designed to operate in combat situations. 'In the field, the EFV is designed to be much more modular than the AAV, allowing for Line Replaceable Units to be quickly swapped out once the on-board diagnostics systems have helped the maintainer to identify the problem,' said Pacheco. He also pointed out that the EFV will take advantage of a Class 5 Interactive Electronic Technical Manual operating from a hardened laptop (portable maintenance device).

Brogan of the EFV program office has. The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle program in. Work will be performed in Woodbridge.

The electronic manual will interact directly with the vehicle's diagnostic and health monitoring sensors to walk the troubleshooter through the process of quickly isolating and identifying one or more faulty components. 'The system has a requirement for maintainers to be able to swap out these modular components in an average time of 1.5 hours or less using standard Marine Corps tools, enabling vehicles to get repaired and back into the fight more quickly than their predecessors,' Pacheco continued.

After every six years or 900 hours of engine operation, the EFV will need to undergo a vehicle depot-level overhaul. A Condition-Based System Sustainment (CBSS) program, which is based on condition-based maintenance concepts, will provide proactive guidance to maintenance and repair personnel during overhaul periods. The AAV, by comparison, uses a reactive Inspect and Repair Only as Necessary depot maintenance program. 'A major advantage of CBSS is significantly reduced depot repair cycle times,' said Pacheco.

'By continuously collecting maintenance data being captured by vehicle health monitoring hardware/software such as embedded sensors and the Embedded Logistics Administration System, upgrades and repairs can be optimized to the specific condition of each vehicle.' During Tech Refresh/Insertion events conducted between depot periods in the field or in garrison, each EFV will receive a detailed technical inspection that includes removing the armor panels. Such inspections will provide yet another opportunity to observe any corrosion problems that may arise. 'During Depot Refurbishment, each vehicle is stripped-down to the space frame where every inch can be inspected,' added Pacheco. 'Spare space frames will be pulled from inventory to expedite the refurbishment process and worn space frames will be restored off the repair line and returned to inventory.' Building On A Proud Legacy Since Guadalcanal, the Marine Corps has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to successfully execute amphibious missions.

The EFV will significantly enhance this capability by facilitating the delivery of combat power ashore rapidly from over the visible horizon, said Pacheco. He added that the vehicle embodies the Corps' flexibility in responding to new combat challenges. 'In the 21st century threat environment, the capability for the Navy-Marine Corps team to initiate ship-to-objective maneuver from distances far off shore that provide both force protection to the sea base and surprise for the landing force will be central to the EFV's legacy,' Pacheco concluded.

'Additionally, along with that amphibious mobility, the EFV's day and night lethality, enhanced survivability, and robust communications will all substantially improve joint force capabilities.' © Copyright 2005-2018 Corr Defense.

Operational range land: 523 km (325 miles) water: 120 km (74 miles) Speed road: 72.41 km/h (45 mph) water: 46 km/h (28.6 mph) The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle ( EFV) (formerly known as the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle) was an developed by General Dynamics for use by the. It would have been launched at sea, from an beyond the, able to transport a full rifle squad to shore. It would maneuver with an agility and mobility equal to or greater than the. The EFV was designed to replace the aging (AAV), which entered service in 1972, and was the Marine Corps' number one priority ground weapon system acquisition. It was to have had three times the speed in water and about twice the armor of the AAV, as well as superior. The vehicle was to be deployed in 2015; however, on 6 January 2011, recommended the EFV program be canceled.

The program, which was projected to cost $15 billion, had already cost $3 billion. The Marines asked for the EFV to be canceled in favor of the Assault Amphibian Vehicle Service Life Extension Program and the, which itself became phase one of the. Contents. History In the 1980s, the US Marine Corps developed an 'over the horizon' strategy for ocean based assaults. The intention was to protect naval ships from enemy and shore defenses. It included the, the (LCAC), and the EFV. Development for the AAAV began in August 1974 with Landing Vehicle Assault (LVA) prototypes that continued in the early 1980s at the command.

The AAAV's predecessor, the LVTP7, had its life expectancy extended in 1983–84 by use of a service life extension program, which modified and upgraded many of the key systems, creating the LVTP7A1 and re-designated it the AAVP7A1. At the time these vehicles were released, the USMC had anticipated and communicated delivery of the AAAV by 1993. As a result of delays, the has received another service life extension-type upgrade in the mid 1990s while the USMC still awaits final development and delivery of the AAAV, 14 years behind original projected time frames. In 1988, defense officials authorized the concept exploration and definition phase.

In 1995, the program entered into the definition and risk reduction phase, where it won two DOD awards for successful cost and technology management. In June 1996, a contract was awarded to Land Systems to begin full-scale engineering development of their design. Based on the aforementioned early success of the program, the Marine Corps awarded a to General Dynamics in July 2001 for the systems development and demonstration phase of the program, expected to be completed by October 2003. The AAAV was renamed to EFV in September 2003. The would later state that the development phase of three years was insufficient, causing delays and prototype failures, particularly in reliability. After the 2006 Operational Assessment was plagued by reliability issues and maintenance burdens, the Corps began a redesign of the EFV, requiring a new contract for an additional US$143.5 million in February 2007.

That June, a reset of the development phase delayed completion an additional four years. Instead of initiating production as planned, the corps asked for seven new prototypes, to address the current deficiencies, which have caused an average of one failure for every four and a half hours of operation. On 7 April 2009, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that the EFV program will 'continue as-is', pending an amphibious review in the 2010.

The vehicle was called 'exquisite', which Gates usually reserved for programs he intends to cancel. He later questioned the EFV as the proper ship-to-shore platform on 3 May 2010, the day before the initial prototype was rolled out at a ceremony. The USMC had reduced the number to be purchased from 1,013 to 573 AAAVs by 2015 due to escalation in unit cost estimated at $22.3 million in 2007. The EFV might be a baseline vehicle for the, however it is more likely that the army will start a new program. (LRIP) was projected to begin in January 2012. Projected total program development cost of the type until first quarter of 2010 has been estimated at 15.9 billion dollars.

Controversy while sketched out a future for in which either the Marines will land unopposed or it will take a major effort using all the long range weapons of the United States armed forces to clear out ship-killing missiles so that amphibious ships can safely approach the hostile beach and neither scenario sees much use for the EFV. New families of guided anti-ship weapons have extended target ranges of well past 75 miles and the precision to target, making the EFV's capabilities less of a game-changer than originally hoped for. In a joint report, the U.S. And the called the EFV program wasteful spending and asked for its cancellation. The co-chairs of the have also supported the cancellation of the EFV. During a Pentagon briefing, on 6 January 2011, revealing budget efficiencies and reinvestment possibilities, Gates announced his intention to cancel the EFV program. In a statement released after Gates' press conference, General Amos said that he supports the cancellation of the EFV: Today the Secretary of Defense announced the termination of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) program.

I support his decision. After a thorough review of the program within the context of a broader Marine Corps force structure review, I personally recommended to both the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Navy that the EFV be cancelled and that the Marine Corps pursue a more affordable amphibious tracked fighting vehicle.

Despite the critical amphibious and war-fighting capability the EFV represents, the program is not affordable given likely Marine Corps procurement budgets. The procurement and operations/maintenance costs of this vehicle are onerous.

After examining multiple options to preserve the EFV, I concluded that none of the options meets what we consider reasonable affordability criteria. As a result, I decided to pursue a more affordable vehicle. —, 35th Commandant of the Marine Corps, of the, said that Amos had been ordered to give this statement, which did not reflect his actual feelings on the issue. In an interview on 5 January 2011 with, a member of the, anticipated the cancellation announcement by Gates. However, Hunter has predicted that his committee will reject the cancellation.

According to Lieutenant General George J. Flynn of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, the USMC will use funding from the cancelled EFV for other tactical ground vehicles over the next five years. The EFV program was cut from a 2012 proposed budget by the White House.

General Dynamics is offering a cut down version of the EFV without the hydroplaning or weapons. Has said that new defensive systems will allow navy ships to close to within 12 miles off hostile shores so a 25 knot amphibious tracked vehicle is no longer needed. Deputy Commandant George Flynn has said that the analysis of alternatives to replace the EFV will be accelerated to complete in six to nine months. In the 2012 appropriations bill, Congress ordered that the EFV be one of the alternatives considered in the study. Diagram of EFVP1 variant The EFV, designed by Land Systems, was an amphibious armored tracked vehicle with an aluminum hull.

The engine is a custom diesel (MT883) with two modes of operation; a high power mode for planing over the sea, and a low power mode for land travel. It has a crew of three and can transport 17 marines and their equipment. The EFV would have been the first heavy tactical vehicle with a structure. The hull had a actuated bow flap to aid with a maximum waterborne speed of 46 kilometres per hour (29 mph; 25 kn).

Cruise Missile

Performance Engineering

Shrouded are integrated into each side of the hull, which create over 2,800 horsepower of thrust. It was also outfitted with hydraulically actuated to cover the tracks while in seafaring mode. The vehicle uses an network connected by the Tactical Switch Router, based on the router for its internal and external communications.

Andrew Feickert

Armament The electrically powered two-man MK46 turret on the personnel variant accommodated the commander on the right and gunner on the left, a fire control system, and the main and. The standard version was to have had a 30 mm cannon, which fired up to 250 rounds per minute with, and capabilities up to 2,000 metres (2,200 yd) in all weather conditions. A general purpose with 600 rounds of ready-to-use ammunition was to be mounted coaxially with the main gun. Countermeasures. Retrieved 7 January 2011.

19 March 2009. Archived from on 27 March 2008.

Retrieved 6 January 2011. Retrieved 6 May 2010. ^ Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) (6 January 2011), archived from on 1 March 2011, retrieved 6 January 2011. ^ Garamone, Jim (6 January 2011), archived from on 8 January 2011, retrieved 6 January 2011. ^ Christopher P. Cavas (8 January 2010).

Gannett Government Media Corporation. Retrieved 10 January 2011.

Megan Scully (January 18, 2011). National Journal Group Inc. Retrieved 19 January 2011. Kuiper, Jahn R.

USMC, 22 March 2011. ^ Feickert, Andrew (3 August 2009).

Retrieved 6 May 2010. Merle, Renae (7 February 2007). The Washington Post. Retrieved 2010-05-02. Bennett, John T. (7 Apr 2009).

Retrieved 6 May 2010. Muradian, Vago; Osborn, Kris (28 September 2009). Defense News. Retrieved 6 May 2010. Bennett, John T. (4 May 2010).

Retrieved 6 May 2010. ^ McCullough, Amy (5 May 2010). Marine Corps Times. Retrieved 6 May 2010. Chavanne, Bettina H.; McLeary, Paul (8 Oct 2009). Retrieved 6 May 2010.

Exhibit P-40, Budget Item Justification Sheet February 2007., 1 December 2010. Robert O.

Hoffman, November 2010. Singer, Peter W. The Brookings Institution. Archived from on 14 May 2011. Retrieved 10 March 2011., 5 November 2010.

(PDF). 10 October 2010. Archived from (PDF) on 19 November 2010.

Retrieved 11 November 2010. Reed, John., 7 January 2010. Capaccio, Tony (6 January 2011), retrieved 7 January 2011. Tiron, Roxan (12 January 2011), retrieved 12 January 2011. 'Office of Management and Budget', 14 February 2011. Beidel, Eric.

National Defense Industrial Association, 25 January 2011. Steele, Jeanette. The San Diego Union-Tribune, 24 February 2011. Fabey, Michael. Aviation Week, 10 June 2011. Brannen, Kate.

Federal Times, 16 December 2011. Kelly, Kevin (4 July 2009). Retrieved 6 May 2010. Military Embedded Systems.

Retrieved 13 February 2015. Retrieved 13 February 2015. Retrieved 13 February 2015.

^ Lamothe, Dan (2 March 2010). Marine Corps Times. Retrieved 3 March 2010. Retrieved 13 February 2015. M Cubed Technologies, Inc. Press release, 13 October 2010.

External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to. on GlobalSecurity.org.