Video: Cougar retrofit testing at Aberdeen

The Baltimore Sun featured a nifty story on the Force Protection Cougar. Specifically, the testing of the upgraded Cougar at the Aberdeen Test Center. And they made it available for embed:



Though the embed isn't exactly a technical marvel itself. Click the "story" link above to see the video at its original location.

The upgrade features more armor and the Oshkosh-built independent suspension system.

Test driver Pat Hamilton has logged many miles in the original fixed-axle Cougar and the newer version with the independent suspension. He said both he and his kidneys greatly prefer the latter model.

"It's like a Honda Civic versus a Cadillac ride," he said. "It cushions the ride so much better."

Cougar EFP armor kits slimming down (Updated)

It appears that the earlier report that add-on armor for the Force Protection Cougar was nearly a foot thick was inaccurate (See update below). StrategyPage.com offers a parallel story where the armor thickness is reported as 18 millimeters (almost three quarters of an inch: .709).

The additional side armor for defeating EFPs consists of 18mm plates constructed of several layers of different materials. This material, which costs about $2,000 per square foot, breaks up the EFP molten copper "warhead" that an EFP produces to slice through conventional armor. For the six wheel Cougar, the EFP armor kit weighs 2.5 tons, and costs $152,000.

This account makes more sense. The weight of one square foot of composite armor a foot thick (that is to say, a cube of armor) would have been substantial, to say the least.

Update:

A couple of folks have made comments about this post, making the excellent point that armor 18mm thick would not stop an EFP nor would it match the weight reported for the Force Protection EFP kit. Simply put, my assessment that the 18mm thickness made more sense was not well founded. Despite its bulk, a kit about a foot in thickness makes more sense of the facts presuming the use of low-density materials for diffusal of the EFP projectile. The report of 18mm thickness may well refer only to a high-density layer (like steel).

Armor plating a foot thick for Force Protection Cougars?

Color me skeptical. One inch thick plates would be plenty heavy. Two inch thick plates would really be something. Eleven and three-quarter inches? That has the ring of a mistake, though both The Marine Corps Times and DefenseNews.com are reporting the same thing.

Here's betting that the real number is one and three quarters inches, though it is practically inconceivable that both publications would allow a mistake like that to pass.

You keep using that word ...

Force Protection earns UK "Wolfhound" contract

Force Protection's going to the dogs. That is, Force Protection vehicles are delivered to the Brits and given canine nicknames. First, FPI won the contract to provide the "Mastiff" vehicle to Great Britain. Then the company won a contract to make a Cougar 4x4 called the "Ridgback." Now, they will make another modified version of the Cougar, dubbed the Wolfhound.

Force Protection Inc.’s agility and speed of response to customer requirements is playing a key role in winning new orders for its range of mine resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles.

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Michael Moody, pointed to Force Protection’s selection by the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) as the Preferred Bidder for the Wolfhound Tactical Support Vehicle (Heavy) programme as an example of the way his company is strengthening its capability to respond to urgent operational requirements. “We completed design work and built two prototypes for Wolfhound, which is based on our highly successful Cougar vehicle, in just 90 days. During this time we also carried out blast tests and mobility trials.”
(DefPro.com)

Defence of the Realm has a photo believed to represent the Wolfhound, along with some information about the program.

Force Protection earns modest MRAP order from Canada

Force Protection continues to make good on its goal of garnering vehicle contracts from nations other than the US in order to make up for its trouble securing domestic sales.

Force Protection, Inc. today announced that it has received a modification under contract M67854-07-C-5039 for the delivery of 14 of its Buffalo A2 route-clearance vehicles and 34 of its Cougar vehicles to the Canadian Government. The undefinitized contract modification carries a dollar value not to exceed $49.4 million and includes vehicles, spare parts and field support. The vehicles are scheduled for delivery in 2009.
(MarketWatch)

While the numbers aren't exactly impressive, it's enough to offer hope that FPI can stay in the armored vehicle game. By way of comparison, Blackwater recently cut its armored vehicle programs after losing the key first round of the JLTV competition.

6x6 Cougar is to Mastiff as 4x4 Cougar is to ...

Ridgeback (or "Ridgback" as the official MOD page calls it).

Having arrived in the UK, the Cougar base vehicles will morph into the Ridgback - being upgraded with integrated additional protection, weapons, communications systems and specialist electronic counter-measures equipment - and then join their big brother, the Mastiff, on operations.

With the Ridgback we see the continued British preference for eliminating side windows aft of the driver's portion of the cabin.

While I do not doubt that elimating windows increases protection, I do wonder whether the downside is worth it.

Congress OKs Cougar/Ridgeback sale to Brits

LADSON, S.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Force Protection, Inc. (NASDAQ:FRPT) today announced that Congress has approved two Cougar Foreign Military Sales to the United Kingdom. The first contract for six Cougar Category I Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles and associated services was awarded on April 29. The second contract for 151 Cougar MRAP vehicles and associated services was awarded on May 1. The total value of the contracts for the 157 vehicles, named Ridgebacks by the British, is approximately $94 million. These contracts are not subject to the terms of Force Protection’s joint venture.
(Read more at Business Wire)

The size of this order if comparable to what the Pentagon ordered from Force Protection in Dec. of 2007.

The number of vehicles is about half the December order. The dollar amount is substantially less ($94 million to $380 million) apparently because the 4x4 Cougar is less expensive than the 6x6--not to discount additional explanations.

*****

Force Protection scores with sale to Brits

April 10 (Reuters) - Shares of Force Protection Inc (FRPT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) rose more than 8 percent on Thursday, a day after the armored vehicle maker said the U.S. Defense Department approved the sale of its mine-resistant vehicles worth $125 million to Britain. The British government had requested the sale of 157 mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) Cougar vehicles built by the company for its troops in Iraq and Afghanistan
(Reuters)

The Brits seem quite taken with the Cougar/Mastiff. The shift of the U.S. armed forces to the Caiman, MaxxPro and RG-33 has been a nice coincidence for our allies across the pond, since delivery on their order will likely accelerate as a result.

*****

Agence France-Presse features Caiman photo

For a time, MRAP reporting featured the Force Protection Cougar almost exclusively.

A generous order of Navistar's MaxxPro vehicle helped that model achieve the photographic equivalent of MRAP rock-star status over the past six months or so. The RG-33 has made a respectable showing, though I'd judge it less than the media presence of the Cougar and the MaxxPro.

Still, the most-ignored MRAP vehicle with the largest U.S. order is the Armor Holdings (BAE) Caiman. Photos have been difficult to come by--Prior to today I had not noticed any published by the mainstream media. France's national press, Agence France-Presse (aka AFP) today placed the photo of an array of Caimans next to a story about deploying MRAPs in large numbers to Afghanistan.

It's too much to assume that the picture serves to indicate that the Caiman in particular will end up in Afghanistan. Strange marriages of photo with story from the past illuminate that point effectively enough.

*****

Brits to roll with Force Protection's Cougar?

The four-wheel-drive version of Force Protection’s Cougar protected patrol vehicle has emerged as the leading candidate for a British order covering 150 vehicles.

(...)

Several industry sources said the Cougar had topped a competition with the Rafael Golan, Thales Bushmaster and others. The vehicles have all been contenders in the U.S. Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle program.
(DefenseNews.com)

The ability of the company to produce the vehicle may end up a sticking point, the story goes on to say.

Even with the Marines ordering fewer vehicles, Force Protection may not have the capacity to fill the British need in a timely fashion. That might open the door for a runnerup.

*****

MRAP integration: Adding bells and whistles to the Cougar, MaxxPro and RG-33

Nifty video showing the outfitting facility that puts standard armed forces equipment on board the MRAPs delivered by the various manufacturers.

I spotted the Cougar, the MaxxPro, the RG-33 and the Buffalo. Sharper eyes may pick out stuff I missed.

*****

Early winners in MRAP II (Updated/corrected)

Pentagon officials have awarded three companies with contracts to build Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, a Defense Department official said on Thursday.

The firms are Navistar International, BAE Systems and Force Protection, chosen from a field of at least five vendors, industry sources said.

(Marine Times)

For those keeping track at home, these prompt orders reflect success fom the MaxxPro, RG-30-something and probably the Cougar from Force Protection.

It is worth noting that the lighter MRAP from Armor Holdings, the Caiman, did not compete for MRAP II, no doubt because of its purchase this past summer by BAE systems.

The early results suggest that Mr. Zippy's analysis (the Zipster may be connected directly to Force Protection, the maker of the Cougar) was essentially accurate.

Update:
The DOD Web site makes clear that the new round of orders represents an expansion on existing contracts. That places doubt on my conclusion that these recent orders are associated with the MRAP II program. It seems significant that Navistar will fill 1,000 of the 2,400 vehicle order.


*****

More on the Badger MRAP

In an earlier post I posed the question--without answering it--what is the difference between the Force Protection Cougar and the Badger variant used by Iraq's armed forces?

As it turns out, the Badger version of the Cougar features modifications performed by BAE, maker of the RG-31 and RG-33 MRAPs.

This push for mine-resistant vehicles has resulted in almost as much switching of partners as a square-dance.

Whirl, whirl, twist and twirl
Jump all around like a flyin' squirrel
Now don't you cuss and don't you swear
Just come right out and form a squaaaaaaaare.
(Bugs Bunny)

Britain has the 'Mastiff' Cougar variant. And the Iraqis? While up-armored Hummers are a big upgrade over the Ford commercial pickups some units were using, they knew that they, too, needed a mine-resistant vehicle that could perform patrols in urban areas and along their country's roads.

Their choice featured a familiar vehicle base – but an unfamiliar partnership. While the design is based on Force Protection Inc's v-hulled Cougar that has earned such praise from US Marine Corps and Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams in Iraq, the prime contractor is competitor BAE Systems. The original contract and associated work began at the end of May 2006, and its total value could reach $445.4 million and 1,050 vehicles if all options are exercised. The first ILAVs, aka. 'Badgers' were delivered to Iraq 90 days after contract award, i.e. by the end of August 2006.
(Defense Industry Daily)

The DID page has quite a bit of information about MRAP development. Give 'em a visit.

*****

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.

*****

MRAPS vs. EFPs

Have Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles been trumped by the Explosively-Formed Projective type of improvised explosive device?

David DeCamp, writing for the St. Petersburg Times, suggested as much, and defended his position when challenged

A new story by David Hambling seems to treat the issue more comprehensively and responsibly.

Are Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles the answer to Explosively Formed Penetrators, the armor-piercing bombs that are becoming increasingly common in Iraq?

The vast majority of IEDs cause damage by blast and shrapnel. Vehicles can be hardened to withstand these by a combination of measures such as a curved, strengthened hull which deflects blast rather than absorbing it, and increased ground clearance. But EFPs are different, as they spit out a high-velocity kinetic projectile more like a bullet that can go through steel.

(Danger Room)

Hambling notes that the first generation of "basic" MRAPs (MRAP I) is not designed to deal with EFPs, thus the call for a better MRAP with the MRAP II competition. Hambling's story focuses on the latter competition, and unfortunately doesn't delve into the add-on kits that may give existing MRAPs substantial protection against EFPs.
*****

The same story by Hambling has a footer that notes a story I spotted just a few minutes before reading Hambling's.

Force Protection is suing PVI for filching company secrets.

Force Protection makes the Cougar (Britain's Mastiff) and Buffalo MRAPs. Protected Vehicles manufacturs the Golan and Alpha. The Alpha, a cooperative effort with Oshkosh, received an initial order for 100 vehicles but that order was later canceled. The U.S. has ordered 60 of the Golan under MRAP I, and has reportedly welcomed the Golan to the MRAP II competition.

MRAPs: Cougar tale in USA Today (Updated)

I ran across a very impressive multimedia story about Force Protection's Cougar vehicle. It recounts a IED attack, and includes some interview footage with the team leader.

Here's a teaser. Follow the link for all the bells and whistles.

Marine Gunnery Sgt. Timothy Colomer, 32, was leading an explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) team on a mission last December when his Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, a Cougar, hit a massive IED. Everyone in the vehicle was knocked unconscious by the blast, but all survived. Here is his story:

I was deployed to Iraq in August of '06, my first tour. I had seen Cougars at Quantico before I deployed. I didn't drive them or train on them — the new ones were getting shipped straight out to Iraq. But I'd done my homework, and I knew its capabilities.

(USA Today)

The interview emphasizes how the troops would rather be in Cougars instead of Humvees. The Cougar is quite a bit more expensive than the Humvee, however. An up-armored Humvee costs about $170,000. By comparison, the Pentagon spent $67 million on 125 Cougars ($536,000 per).

clipped from www.usatoday.com

Update: Timothy Colomer wrote to point out that the cost of the Cougar is economical in terms of the human cost. He's correct about that. I mentioned the cost of the Humvee in comparison to the Cougar to provide the information about comparative cost (lacking in the USA Today graphic just above), and to note that the cost of the Cougar makes it unlikely that all U.S. troops will get to ride with that kind of safety. In the near term, at least. The Force Protection Cheetah and the Protected Vehicles Protector are designed more specifically to replace the Humvee. A hat tip to (Sgt?) Colomer for prompting me to make my intent clearer in this entry.