Force Protection offers updated Cheetah for M-ATV testing

DefenseNews.com delivered the expected news that Force Protection has submitted an updated Cheetah vehicle for M-ATV testing.

The pictures accompanying the story are borderline comical, consisting as they do of computer generated images superimposed on a set. The end result, as one person noted in the comments, makes them look like toys. Even the photos accompanying the updated Cheetah brochure at FPI's Web site were of strangely poor quality. But at least they offer better evidence that the vehicle exists in real life.

While the presentation may speak to some degree to the overall professionalism of the company, we ought to expect that it will be judged primarily on its merits along with the performance of the company overall.

Where's the Cheetah? (Updated)

With Navistar and Oshkosh announcing delivery of their M-ATV test vehicles to Aberdeen, one wonders about the other purported entrants. Force Protection, for example, has announced the Cheetah as its entry in the competition. But the Force Protection Web site does not yet have any announcement of a vehicle delivery posted.

The company has released a .pdf brochure for the Cheetah that indicates some significant changes in appearance, however.

Sometimes grainy photography serves to hide proprietary information. Whether or not that is the case, the Navistar and Oshkosh presentations look far more professional.


Update:

Not to pick on Force Protection when BAE Systems has apparently done even less to promote its rumored entry in the M-ATV competition. The Caiman CLT was supposed compete for MRAP-lite but has remained effectively out of the news.

Force Protection submits its M-ATV bid

As expected, the design is based on the Cheetah vehicle.

Force Protection Inc. said Thursday that is has submitted a lightweight armored vehicle to the U.S. Army in response to a solicitation from the service.

The vehicle, a new version of the company's 3-year-old Cheetah model, has a very low center of gravity, making it less prone to rolling over, the company said.

(Charleston.net)

The description of a "very low" center of gravity makes me flash back to criticisms FP fans made of the Navistar JLTV design. They ridiculed the failure to keep the hull up high. I'll be interested to see photos of the new Cheetah model for comparison.

Pentagon opts for armored vehicle patch

Instead of making the expected announcement of three JLTV contracts, the Pentagon announced its decision to prolong the JLTV competition while purchasing vehicles representing the transition between MRAPs and the JLTV, Kris Osborn reports for DefenseNews.com:

The U.S. Army and Marine Corps plan to rapidly develop and buy a fleet of 7- to 10-ton vehicles intended to fend off increasingly frequent roadside bombs yet be more mobile than MRAPs, a senior Pentagon official said.

And what vehicles might the Pentagon order during the interim period?

Army, Marine Corps and Pentagon acquisition officials are eyeing potential candidates, including Oshkosh's Sandcat and Force Protection's 7-ton Cheetah vehicle. Pentagon acquisition chief John Young plans to meet with Army and Marine Corps vehicle programmers, after the military announces the winners of three development contracts for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) early next week.

View the Oshkosh Sandcat here.

As for the Force Protection Cheetah, its parent company has been peddling it already as a light MRAP and as the apparent basis for the company's JLTV proposal.

Osborn's story goes on to mention that the JLTV development contracts are expected within a week. If the selection of the interim vehicle has bearing on the award of JLTV contracts, then Force Protection may have gained a slight advantage; enough to burnish its underdog status a bit, anyway. I don't know if that is how the Pentagon intends to play this one.

Armed forces after lighter, nimbler MRAPs?

Inside Defense (subscription required) reports that the Army is asking MRAP manufacturers to offer a version of the MRAP better suited to rough terrain and bad roads.

This development takes place after reports that MRAPs have encountered rollover problems, particularly in areas with bad bridges, weak road shoulders and rough terrain. Sound like Afghanistan to you?

In an earlier post, I mused that the emphasis on the relatively light RG-31 with the most recent MRAP order indicated that the vehicle was viewed as the MRAP best suited to the theater in Afghanistan. I further supposed that it probably meant no Force Protection Cheetah orders for Afghanistan.

On the first point I think I hit the mark. On the second it appears I may have spoken too soon. The Army apparently does want to explore the possibility of getting something better suited to Afghanistan than the RG-31.

The Cheetah probably cannot be counted out. Though each company involved in the MRAP program has its engineering wizards, the models they have produced thus far place limits on the possible degree of modification. If the Cheetah performs well with respect to the critical requirements offered by the Army then I can't see how it does not have the inside track toward a modest vehicle order.

The Force Protection story

The State published a good overview and history of Force Protection, Inc.

Considering that Force Protection is the hometown hero of sorts, the account by Noelle Phillips displays good balance and objectivity.

As Force Protection charts its future, it’s reviewing all of its facilities, including the plants in Roxboro and Ladson, Pruitt said. The company also has locations in Summerville and Edgefield.

“We’re still evaluating all of the facilities,” he said. “What does the business require and which building is best for the plan?”

Options include closing the Ladson plant and moving production to Roxboro.

(thestate.com)

The most memorable part of the story for me was the line at the end of a section about the JLTV competition. After relating FPI's opening of its Roxboro plant, outfitted for making the Cheetah vehicle for which no orders have yet been placed, Phillips quotes company spokesman Tony Pruitt: "We took a little bit of risk." The irony is probably Phillips' construction. I'd guess Pruitt was rhetorically downplaying the risk when he originally made the comment.

*****

Cheetah "excellent start" toward Force Protection JLTV

I've posted before about the role of the Force Protection Cheetah in the JLTV program. Force Protection reportedly pitched the vehicle for MRAP II, apparently in anticipation of the need for a faster and lighter version of a mine-protected vehicle.

The armed services played wait-and-see while accelerating the JLTV program intended to replace the Humvee.

And I've taken a few stabs at guessing to what degree the Cheetah is supposed to fit the JLTV requirements. A recent story in the Charleston City Paper provides a quotation from a company official that sheds some light on the issue.

The big money is rightly moving past the MRAP industry to the next big thing. The military has commissioned specs for streamlined light, well-protected vehicles known as JLTVs, that are expected to be the next generation Humvees. But those won't be ready until 2014 or 2015, Moody said, potentially opening a window for a transition vehicle Force Protection calls the Cheetah — a faster, lighter Cougar.

"The development of the Cheetah gives us an excellent start on developing a vehicle for the JLTV," he said. "There is no doubt that this program is going to see an intense level of competition. The potential size of the JLTV program is in the tens of billions of dollars."

*****

March update on Force Protection

Via The Roxboro Courier-Times:

Despite an onslaught of seemingly negative publicity, Force Protection Communications Director Tommy Pruitt insisted Tuesday from his office in Ladson, S.C. that the company has no plans to abandon its Person County facility at the intersection of Boston Road and Halifax Road. The building formerly housed Collins & Aikman.

Person County Economic Development Director Glenn Newsome also said Tuesday that plans were still on go for the Roxboro Force Protection facility.

“The company has affirmed on several occasions that they plan to continue the project here,” Newsome said. “It flies in the face of common sense and good logic to suggest otherwise.”

Newsome was likely referring to the vast renovations and upgrades that have been ongoing at the facility since late last year, but the company has yet to begin production of its Cheetah-brand armored vehicle here, as it had originally projected.

Interesting information, but one tip for the reporter in this case. The publicity was not "seemingly" negative. It was just plain negative.

Force Protection faces a tough sell for its products, bottom line.

The Cheetah figures as perhaps Force Protection's best shot at making another large sale (as in hundreds of vehicles)--I should imagine that foreign governments might show an interest in it even if the U.S. military seems intent on waiting for the JLTV program to kick in. As a result I'm not surprised to see FPI keep on with its Roxboro facility.

I note that FPI has not yet gone into production with the Cheetah, belying earlier reports of the company's intent to do just that.

*****

Army revises MRAP demand upward

Asked why the Army had requested more MRAP vehicles, not fewer, Morrell said the Army has taken "more time than most given its size and given the burdens it is now dealing with" to determine its immediate and long-term needs for the vehicles.

"They still have not pegged the exact number, but as it is, they have revised it upwards and we are shooting for 12,000 as the Army number, that could still change based on what the commanders are telling us," Morrell said.
(Stars and Stripes)

Overall, somewhat surprising. I'd have expected the Army to follow the lead of the Marines and stick with Humvees until the JLTV program kicks in. Or perhaps even go with Force Protection Cheetah to bridge the transition from MRAP to JLTV, since the Cheetah's lighter weight and smaller size allow it to more fully occupy the function of the Humvee.

Does the decision offer a hint regarding military contingency plans? In other words, does the Army expect to possibly employ MRAPs as a needed resource in a active conflict?

*****

Force Protection Cheetah as JLTV?

Somebody uploaded a comparison video of sorts to YouTube. It features some footage of a Force Protection Cheetah outfitted with a machine gun firing at a target, followed by a clip from the recently released promo video for the BAE/Navistar JLTV prototype.

And, as you've see if you watched the video, it adds editorial content by making fun of the BAE/Navistar prototype. The content of the criticism is that the ground clearance of the Cheetah is higher and saves lives as a result.

My first thought when I saw the BAE/Navistar prototype was that it superficially resembled the Cheetah, with the biggest cosmetic difference being the slope of the hood. I backed up the video and, honestly, I don't see much difference in ground clearance with respect to my estimation of the bottom of the (V-shaped) crew compartment--both in the neighborhood of the axle. Could there be an issue with the added storage structures? Sure, but that type of thing should come out during blast testing.

I've found it interesting that the Internet features fans of Force Protection who show this kind of enthusiasm. Employees? Investors holding devalued stock? Whatever it is, I don't see a compelling case in this video. The ground clearance looks comparable; the BAE/Navistar prototype looks more like the Cheetah than any other armored vehicle I've seen.

*****

Force Protection's making Cheetahs

Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Force Protection Inc., the largest supplier of blast-resistant trucks to the U.S. Marine Corps, plans to limit production of its new Cheetah vehicle because the model has yet to win a contract.

Force Protection plans to start production this quarter at a new plant that will reach monthly capacity of 200 Cheetahs by year end, Michael Aldrich, vice president for government relations, said in an interview today. That's a ``much longer ramp-up'' than originally planned, he said.

(Bloomberg)

Gutsy move by Force Protection. The story includes a number of interviews that compare the company's strategy to the "Field of Dreams" or the way Detroit builds cars. Make the car and worry about selling it later.

Is the Cheetah good enough right now to forestall competition and get Force Protection's foot in the door on the coveted JLTV program?

Force Protection obviously hopes so, but judging from the last two big rounds of MRAP orders the military likes what its getting from BAE Systems (the RG-33 and the Caiman) as well as Navistar (the MaxxPro).

The military's interest in the (Ceradyne) Bull may represent the military's intention to use that vehicle for specialized purposes.

The Cheetah may represent Force Protection's last-ditch effort to make itself a major player in military vehicle production over the long haul.

*****

Looking closer at Marine MRAP cutback

A tiny bit more information regarding the Marines' cutback on MRAP orders:

Conway said cutting the Marines' MRAP order may speed up purchase of the vehicles for the Army.

The Marines still have a use for the smallest variant of the vehicle as an engineer combat vehicle, even in an expeditionary environment, Conway said. The service has tried for 20 years to develop an engineer combat vehicle, he noted. The MRAP could fill that bill with 360-degree protection and its V-shaped hull, which directs shrapnel away from riders.

(Military.com)

The first paragraph: Speed up purchase of the vehicles for the Army? The Army is likely to get MRAPs in the field more quickly, but ordering more of them seems like an open question subject to considerable doubt.

The second paragraph: The Marines may have a use for the "smallest variant" of the vehicle. That could mean the Cat I generally or it could mean the Armor Holdings (BAE Systems) Caiman particularly. The Cat I Caiman, from what I can tell, is the smallest of the MRAPs that have been delivered. Force Protection's Cheetah (or PVI's Protector) might also qualify for Marine service, as both are purported to have MRAP-type protections built into a smaller and faster vehicle.

That's as good an excuse as any to finally post a Cheetah pic.

clipped from www.army-technology.com

Go here and you can see a short promotional video at the Force Protection Web site.

Speaking of the Force Protection Web site, the images there reflect some subtle exterior changes to the Cheetah. Note the broader grille opening, and some changes to both the front and rear fenders. Not to mention the considerably different bumper.

clipped from www.forceprotection.net

*****

Marines to revise MRAP demand sharply down

ARLINGTON, Va. — The Marine Corps has decided it needs far fewer Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles than it originally thought it would, Corps officials said.

Known as MRAPs, the vehicles have V-shaped hulls meant to deflect blasts from underneath and have proven to withstand roadside bomb blasts much better than up-armored Humvees.

The Corps initially asked for 3,700 MRAPs, but it now says it only needs 2,300 of the vehicles, Marine spokesman Maj. Jay Delarosa said in an e-mail Friday.
(Stars and Stripes)

Whoops.

This is a big hit for MRAP manufacturers. News is coming out already about Force Protection's shares dropping, and the news isn't really any better for companies like Ceradyne and Navistar that put considerable dollars into designing and preparing for the production of MRAPs.

It looks like the MRAP craze was a blip in history--an expensive blip that will end up providing quite a bit of useful information for the building of future military vehicles, but produced vehicles that may turn obsolete in just a few short years.

Those who argued that MRAPs were ill-suited to the counterinsurgency tactics of the surge will find something to bolster their view, but the willingness of the United States to produce MRAPs probably helped discourage the insurgency even if their widespread use ultimately wasn't needed to ensure victory.

As for David DeCamp's report on MRAPs that I critiqued months ago, it looks like the insurgents have run into a shortage of machine shops or something.

Instead of demonstrating America's war fighting prowess, the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle - MRAP in military parlance - illustrates how even a wealthy industrial power can struggle to wage war against a nimble and unconventional enemy.

America relies on a slow defense bureaucracy, politicians to approve spending and commercial industry to build the better MRAP. Insurgents get their hands on an explosive, go to a machine shop for changes, and trigger it with a common cell phone.

(St. Petersburg Times)

Or maybe they can't afford cell phone service?

Reducing EFP usage would thus be more complicated than simply exerting tighter border controls. Factories would have to be located, and killing or capturing enemy combatants who possess the knowledge to make the devices would certainly contribute.

Bottom line: There's no reason to despair that the insurgents can't be beaten, nor to fear that they will keep the upper hand in battlefield tactics.
(sublime bloviations)

As noted, MRAPs will probably have a very limited use in the military as the situation in Iraq continues to cool. The heavier vehicles may get modified for special functions such as mine clearing. The lightest vehicles, the Caiman 4x4s, may have a ghost of a chance of future tactical deployment--they have a reputation for reasonably good off-road performance.

The stage is set for the JLTV program to produce a mobile and protected replacement for the Humvee. Ceradyne's Bull will draw few orders if any; the whole MRAP II solicitation will likely turn into a mere modification of MRAP I, with no long term future for the program.

All is not lost for Force Protection. The Cheetah was intended from the start to replace the Humvee. It just remains to be seen who produces the best vehicle with the best support infrastructure.

*****

JLTVs, CTVs at the 2007 Modern Day Marine expo

The USMC is expected to publish the JLTV request for proposal (RFP) at the beginning of the coming year, and select manufacturers for the new family of vehicles by the end of March 2008. Initial operational capability originally scheduled for 2010 was recently pushed back to 2012, as the services are focused on the acquisition of heavier and more urgently needed MRAP in the near term. However, all officials are stating that JLTV and MRAP are two different vehicles, providing for different missions. While MRAP is addressing more urgent gaps in force protection, JLTV is fulfilling current and future requirements for all-terrain tactical mobility, maneuverability, sustainability as well as air transportation and strategic mobility (including sealift).
(Defense Update)

There's plenty more to read as well as a number of photos of thus-far poorly publicized military vehicles.

Another page dealing with the same event (Modern Day Marine) featured brief reviews of PVIs "Protector" and Force Protection's "Cheetah." Functional testing should rightly determine which vehicle is better--one trade-off from the listed specs caught my eye: The Cheetah has a longer cruising range (by 200 miles) while the Protector is listed as slightly faster (70 mph versus 65 mph).

*****

Lockheed Martin JLTV video

Lockheed Martin's JLTV really does look like a Humvee on steroids, a term lately employed to describe the Cougar MRAP.

Comparing this video to one of the Force Protection Cheetah, the latter looks faster and more maneuverable. I'm sure the armed forces have more concerns other than those, but speed is certainly one of the key factors to take into consideration when contemplating a replacement for the Humvee.

I'm not that impressed by the soundtrack music they chose, either. But at least you can't complain that the driver is sitting over the wheel well.


*****

Navistar and BAE team up to get in the JLTV game (Updated x2)

Force Protection has its Cheetah. PVI has its Protector. Lockheed Martin has this (see image at the bottom).

Each vehicle (see update below) is a JLTV, the class of vehicles the Pentagon hopes to use as a replacement for the Humvee. The Pentagon wants something lighter, smaller, and faster than the current crop of MRAPs (with the possible exception of the Cheetah, which may qualify in both classes).

Now Navistar, which won big in the MRAP sweepstakes with its MaxxPro vehicle, has agreed to work with powerful BAE to produce an entry in the JLTV competition.
Navistar International Corp. said Tuesday afternoon that the Warrenville truck and engine maker has teamed up with BAE Systems PLC to produce a platform for the Pentagon's planned Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program.

The Navistar/BAE venture "will also be investigating other global opportunities" with militaries around the world, Navistar said.
(Chicago Tribune)

The Pentagon delayed the JLTV program to focus on getting MRAP vehicles to areas where they're needed.

Though Force Protection seems to have an advantage with a viable design at the early stage, the Navistar/BAE partnership should produce a formidable entry.


Update:
Jeffrey Colburn made the comment that the internal link to the Lockheed Martin design is not a JLTV but the FTTS (Future Tactical Truck System).

Unfortunately, Colburn's URLs didn't seem to work so it was hard to verify his claim.

In early February, Lockheed Martin was awarded a $9 million contract to build a technology demonstration vehicle for the second phase of the U.S. Army’s Future Tactical Truck Systems (FTTS) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD). The FTTS ACTD will help refine the requirements for the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.
(LockheedMartin.com)

If that doesn't make the FTTS a prototype of sorts for the JLTV then the hairs are split a bit too fine for novices such as me.

Update 2:
Jeffrey Colburn was correct to draw a hard distinction between the FTTS and the JLTV by Lockheed Martin. While the FTTS may have been used to road-test some of the features of the later vehicle, the physical designs bear little resemblance to one another.

If the image doesn't appear, just hit the hotlink at the top to get to the source page.

clipped from www.tribune-democrat.com

Lockheed Martin JLTV prototype

*****

Force Protection pushing ahead with plant for Cheetah MRAP

Busher said the company plans to have the first phase of plant upfitting completed by Oct. 8 and that the first vehicle assembly should take place during the fourth quarter of this year. The company is currently interviewing for assemblers, he said.

By mid-2008, Busher said, the company hopes to have its first Cheetah complete and ready to ship from the Roxboro plant.

The Cheetah is designed specifically for reconnaissance, forward command and control, and urban operations, and combines state-of-the-art ballistic and blast protection with the mobility of a light-armored vehicle. Its speed and road handling make it ideal for homeland security missions, Busher said.

(Roxboro-Courier.com)

The story has Busher going on to say that the Cheetah is the likely successor to the Humvee. Lockheed Martin is reportedly preparing a competing design, and Force Protection's local competitor (also headquartered in South Carolina) Protected Vehicles Inc. has also designed a vehicle intended to replace the Humvee.

clipped from www.weeklystandard.com

The Lockheed Martin design.


*****

Cougar, Badger ... what's the difference?

April 15, 2007: The Iraqi army has received its first batch of 40 Badger Armored Vehicles. There is some confusion over what the Badger is. It's basically a variant of the popular Cougar armored truck, widely used by bomb disposal teams. The Iraq army is buying 378 Badger armored trucks. Originally called the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicles (ILAV), the Badgers will cost about $432,000 each. The ILAV is based on the four wheel Cougar, which can carry ten passengers. If the Badger proves popular, the contract makes provision for a total of 1,050 vehicles to be delivered by 2009.
(strategypage)

So add the Badger to Force Protection's Cougar-type lineup, next to the UK's Mastiff version.

clipped from www.blackanthem.com

An Iraqi soldier climbs into a Badger for the drive to Baghdad from Taji Army Base in support of Operation Fardh Al-Qanoon March 31. A total of 398 Badgers are to be delivered this year as part of Iraqi military's modernization program. (Photo by U.S. Navy MC2 Elisandro Diaz)

From the same Strategy Page story:

But with as many as 20,000 MRAPs on hand, keeping them in storage may not be an option. As a result, the U.S. Department of Defense has halted work on designing the hummer replacement (the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle or JLTV).

The JLTV, I believe, is the class of vehicle including Force Protection's Cheetah and Protected Vehicles' Protector (not to exhaust the list; I just don't know what other companies are offering, though I know that Lockheed is working on something). Given that both vehicles are designed to resist IEDs while permitting the type of speech and mobility the military had with the Hummer, I find this decision difficult to fathom. The JLTVs have largely been developed already, from what I can tell.

*****

USA Today: Army wants more MRAPS

WASHINGTON — The Army has decided to ask for 10,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected armored vehicles to counter the threat of makeshift bombs in Iraq, according to one of the program's top congressional supporters.

The new request is nearly four times the 2,700 vehicles, known as MRAPs, that the Army had sought. That's still not enough, said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who was briefed on the change by the Defense Department. Biden cited a request this year for 17,770 of the vehicles for the Army by Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the No. 2 military commander in Iraq.

"Until every soldier and Marine has the best protection we can give them, we must keep pushing," Biden said.
(USA Today)

Credit to Democrat senator Joe Biden for advocating for the troops. Biden might be the most serious Senate Democrat on defense issues now that Joe Lieberman is an independent.

The news is good for at least one manufacturer of MRAPs. Ceradyne is in a good position to push its "Bull" MRAP, but the winners in MRAP I can point to past success to bolster their chances of scoring some fat contracts on this one.

One caveat, however. These MRAPs do not replace Humvees in the tactical sense. It seems that vehicles like Force Protection's Cheetah or Protected Vehicles' Protector will be needed to provide the kind of mobility that Donald Rumsfeld hoped to make a hallmark of the US armed forces. Whatever you think of his handling of post-Saddam Iraq operations, his vision of the application of U.S. military might represents an important transformation.

*****

Upgrading MRAPs: BAE models get "blast-attenuating" seats

CHANDLER, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--ArmorWorks, a leading provider of advanced survivability products, today announced the receipt of an initial $5 million order from BAE Systems for blast attenuating seats to be installed in BAE’s Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles. The seats incorporate ArmorWorks’ ShockRide® energy attenuating seating system which the company introduced to the defense community in February 2007. This order provides for ArmorWorks’ lifesaving seating system to be installed in more than 400 MRAP vehicles to be used by the US Army and US Marines Corps
(Businesswire.com)

Five million dollars, eh? I'll assume at that price they've been tested and found effective.

Defensenews.com reports on a $1.4 billion deal for automated gun turrets. Note that Force Protection's Cheetah was used in testing.

CROWS units, which are already on a number of U.S. vehicles, can be fitted on the M1 Abrams tank, Humvee, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and MRAP such as the RG-31 Mine Protected vehicle. The system can fire the .50-caliber M2 machine gun, Mk 19 grenade launcher and the M240/M249 machine gun.

Kongsberg will make parts for the Army’s CROWS at a plant in Pennsylvania. The company conducted live-fire training operations using Force Protection’s new 7-ton Cheetah vehicle in South Carolina last month.
(Defensenews.com)