Part of the information hole comes from the fact that the manufacturer was purchases by another player in the MRAP competition, BAE Systems. BAE's RG-31 and RG-33 vehicles occupy a prominent place in the news, in contrast. Do an MRAP image search and you're about as likely to recover a BAE image as a Force Protection one (Force Protection's Cougar is the media darling thus far).
With information so scant, it seems worth reporting this obscure tidbit that was announced in the news today:
In the most recent contract, BAE Systems Land Systems in South Africa, through its partnership with General Dynamics Land Systems Canada (GDLS-C), was awarded a $135 million order for 600 Category II RG31 Mk5E vehicles for the Marines. The vehicle is an extended version of the RG31 Mk5 currently in service and which has already proven to be highly effective against mines, IEDs and ballistic threats encountered by US and allied forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And with the recent acquisition of Armor Holdings, BAE Systems will be building 1,170 MRAPS vehicles based on the Caiman family of medium tactical vehicles following a $518.5 million order for 1,154 Category I and 16 Category II vehicles placed in July.
(Webwire)
It is impressive, on its face, that Armor Holdings garnered a bigger vehicle order from MRAP I than did BAE prior to the acquisition. The Armor Holdings contract seems substantially more expensive per vehicle, using the total contract amount divided by the number of vehicles ordered as a rough estimate.
BAE=$225,000
AH=$443,000
Did the Caiman perform particularly well with testing (better than the BAE vehicles, anyway) or is there some other reason for the surface disparity?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please remain on topic and keep coarse language to an absolute minimum. Comments in a language other than English will be assumed off topic.