by Tom Clancy
If the Falklands experience was bad, everyone who dealt with such matters knew that the future was going to be worse. They knew that within a few years, you would need to stand away from an enemy shore and deliver your forces from a long distance if your large amphibious forces were to survive. Thus, the Marines and Navy began to develop new ships and delivery systems that would allow a greater standoff from the shoreline during amphibious operations. The Marines' part in this revolution in amphibious warfare doctrine is centered around three systems. The first of these was the LCAC, which allowed the amphibs to stand over 50 nm/91 km from the shoreline. Following the LCAC will be the MV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor transport aircraft, which is designed to replace the CH-46E Sea Knight. With greater speed, range, and payload (by roughly 300%) than the Sea Knight, it allows a ship like the Wasp (LHD-1) to stand over 200 nm/366 km offshore and still put its cargo ashore in about an hour. The final system designed to exploit standoff from the beach will be the AAAV.
The AAAV is designed to move at speeds over 25 kn/45 kph, so that the ship that launches it can stand over the visual horizon from the beach. And that's very good. But more important, the AAAV is going to be the finest armored IFV ever built, better even than the Army's M2/3 Bradley fighting vehicle. This is a tall claim for a system that has just had its prime contractor (General Dynamics, Land Systems) selected, but you have to understand the Marine Corps' approach to a design problem like this one to appreciate why. To repeat something I've said before: The technology base of the Marines is very narrow and specifically tailored to the missions of the Corps. Well, the technology elements of the AAAV fall into just that category, which means that the Corps has invested much of its hard-fought research and development (R&D) budget in the AAAV effort. Now, you might ask what it takes to give a high-performance IFV the characteristics of a high-speed powerboat. Well, the following is a list of some of the systems that had to be developed to make the AAAV possible:* High-Speed Hull--Over a series of fifteen years, a series of high-speed-planing-hull designs has been developed to test the feasibility of the AAAV concept. Through the use of three subscale test models (built by AAI Corporation), a basic design utilizing a retractable bow flap, which acts like a surfboard, has been settled upon as the basis for the AAAV design. Called "Skimming Bricks," they are providing a solid database of experience with which to develop the AAAV hull.
* Dual Mode Propulsion System--The AAAV will be equipped with an incredible 2,600-hp MTU/Detroit Diesel turbocharged diesel engine. Sealed as a self-contained power unit, it will last up to nine years, and only require an oil change every two years! Working through an automatic transmission, it will drive a pair of powerful 23-in./60-cm-diameter water jets, which will drive it through the water at speed approaching 43 mph/70.5 kph in calm seastates. The propulsion system is so powerful that the twin sets of impeller blades will puree a four-inch-by-four-inch log without a blink. Once it approaches to within a few hundred yards/meters of the beach, the track system will take over, still pushing the AAAV through the surf at around 8 mph/13 kph. Once on dry land, the AAAV will have better mobility than an M 1 Abrams tank, while only using about 800 hp from the engine.
* Retractable Track System--If the AAAV is to obtain high speeds through the water, the track system must be shrouded from the water flow under the vehicle. To this end, the AAAV's track system retracts into the vehicle, and is dropped when it approaches the beach. All of this takes place in just under twenty seconds. Once on dry land, it utilizes the same kind of hydropneumatic suspension system as the M1, which will give it excellent mobility.
* Armor Protection System--The armor-protection system of the AAAV will likely take advantage of the advanced composite armor development being done by United Defense. This will allow the relatively large (27 ft/8.2 m long, 12 ft/3.7 m wide, and 10 ft/3 m tall) AAAV to weigh in at only thirty to thirty-six tons, yet still have better protection than the M2/3A3 variant of the Bradley IFV. In addition, there appears to be some effort to reduce the acoustic, infrared, visual, and possibly even radar signatures of the AAAV.
* Vehicle Electronics System--Like the M1A2 Abrams and M2/3A3 Bradley, the AAAV will be equipped to operate on the planned digital battlefield of the 21st century. This will include second-generation FLIR viewer systems for the driver and gunner/commander. In addition, the AAAV will be equipped with the same kind of vehicle electronics as the M1A2 and MZ/3A3, including a digital data bus with onboard diagnostics, GPS tied to a moving map display, a combat identification system to avoid fratricide, and a digital data link fed through three of the new SINCGARS jam-resistant radios. All of this will be controlled by a vehicle software package that will be composed of between 300,000 and 500,000 lines of Ada code, over a Mil. STD-1553 data bus. The driver will even control the throttle, steering, and brakes through a computer, what the Marines call a "drive-by-wire" system!
* Armament Package - While this particular item is still being decided upon, current planning has the AAAV equipped with an M242 25mm Bushmaster cannon and a 7.62mm machine gun, like those on the M2/3 Bradley and the LAV-25. There had been plans to perhaps arm the new amtrac with a special 35mm cannon firing time-fused ammunition, but this will probably not happen. But it may carry a twin launcher for the new fire-and-forget Javelin anti-armor missile, if all goes well. All of the AAAV's armament will be usable both in the water and on dry land, and is designed to provide it with the firepower to survive and overmatch other armored vehicles on the battlefield.
* Payload/Range--Each AAAV will be capable of transporting a thirteen-man rifle squad and a heavy weapons team--about eighteen personnel plus the three-man crew. Given this load, the AAAV will be capable of swimming up to 65 nm/120 km, or traveling up to 300 mi/483 km on dry land. A normal mission configuration would have the vehicle swimming in from about 25 nm/46 km offshore, moving about 100 mi/161 km to and from the objective, and then swimming back to the mother ship. The minimum high water speed will be 25 mph/40.2 kph, and maximum 43 mph/69.2 km. All of this in seas up to 10 ft/3 m. In the event an AAAV is overturned, it is capable of righting itself automatically in up to Seastate 5.
* Production Variants--Current USMC plans call for a total of 1,013 AAAVs to be produced by 2012, the planned termination date of the contract. Of these, there will be 948 transport versions, and 75 configured as mobile command posts. Planned IOC will be in 2006, and the 1,013 AAAVs will replace a force of 1,323 LVTP-7/AAV-7 amtracs. There will not be a recovery version, since it is planned that other chassis (the M88 carried for the M1A1s) can do double duty for this job. Unit cost has yet to be fixed, but will likely be between $2 and $4 million a copy (comparable to the cost of a new M1A2 MBT). Hard work is being done to drive this cost down.
It is likely that the AAAV will be the last armored vehicle procured by the Marine Corps in the foreseeable future. It therefore must be able to survive and dominate its chosen battlespace for most of the first half of the 21st century. It is an ambitious program, though all of the technologies are well proven and understood by all of those involved.
Transportation
While Marine units are anything but "heavy" where vehicles are concerned, they still require their share of trucks and other transportation assets to keep themselves supplied and mobile. For this reason, the Corps has carefully selected a few varieties of transport vehicles to support their expeditionary units, and is generally quite happy with them. A proper complement of transport vehicles is vital for a unit like a MEU (SOC), since there is only so much room aboard its amphibious ships to stow its gear. In fact, while you will find about thirty armored vehicles in such a unit, it will have over one hundred trucks of different types, including those mounting machine guns, mortars, and missiles. Here are the most important of these:
AM General M998 High-Mobility Medium Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV)
The vast majority of vehicles in the Army and Marine Corps today derive from the classic M998 High-Mobility Medium Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). Like the Army, the Corps has
embraced the "Hummer," and it has performed nobly in a vast variety of tasks. Produced for over a decade by AM General of South Bend, Indiana, the HMMWV is used for everything from ambulance duty to air defense. Powered by a diesel V-8 engine, it is practically indestructible and can climb anything that a member of any military force in the world might want to take and hold. Today, the Marine Corps' buy of Hummers is pretty much complete, though there will probably be additional buys in the 21st Century as older models wear out. As it is, the M998s that the Marines use are being heavily used, and will probably require a mid-life service life-extension program (SLEP) sometime in the next ten years or so. In the short term, if a Marine offers you a ride, expect it to be in an HMMWV
M923 5-Ton Truck
No implement of war seems less glamorous than the 5-ton truck, but none is more vital, or causes more sleepless nights for the commander. During World War II, the rapid advance of General Eisenhower's armored spearheads was only made possible by a stream of rugged, reliable GM 4X6 trucks. Today's 5-ton trucks are very similar to that 1940s-era design, except that diesel engines replace the old gasoline models. Unfortunately, today's 5-ton trucks are also very old. To put it simply, the Marines' truck fleet is worn out and undersized. With 8,300 vehicles in inventory, you might think there are plenty of trucks to go around, but large numbers of them are tied up on maritime prepositioning ships, in depots, and in support of fixed bases in the rear.
A Marine Logistics Vehicle System (LVS) transporter truck on maneuvers in Norway in 1994.
OFFICIAL U.S. NAVY PHOTO
The term "5-ton" describes the nominal cargo capacity, not the empty weight of the vehicle, which is 21,600 1b/9,800 kg. The 5-ton is 25.6 ft/7.8 m long and 8.1 ft/2.5 m wide, and has three axles. The two rear axles are powered and have twin tires on each side, which are tied to a five-speed automatic transmission. The engine is a six-cylinder in-line, liquid-cooled diesel of 250 hp, and the fuel tanks hold 81 gal/306 L, sufficient to take the truck 350 mi/560 km down the highway. The 24-volt electrical system is sufficient to power a radio when one is fitted, and many are also equipped with SLGR GPS receivers. Engineer units are equipped with dump truck and wrecker models, which are subject to particularly severe wear and tear. A major rebuild and SLEP are currently under way to keep the Corps' truck fleet rolling into the 21st century.
Logistics Vehicle System (LVS)
In the category of cross-country heavy military trucks, the Oshkosh Corporation of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, despite stingy and uncertain budgets and extremely stringent requirements, has engineered a line of world-class vehicles. For the Corps, Oshkosh has adapted the Army's HEMTT family of ten-ton 8x8 trucks to produce a transporter good enough for Marines. Known as the Logistics Vehicle System (LVS), it provides the heavy lift capability for expeditionary Marine units. The LVS consists of two units, a standard Mk 48 Front Power Unit (FPU), and a variety of specialized trailers or Rear Power Units (RPUs). The FPU can be attached to any RPU through an articulation joint to produce a flexible 8x8 vehicle. The FPU has a 445-hp liquid-cooled, turbocharged diesel engine. The spacious and fully enclosed cab seats two drivers and provides exceptional visibility. The FPU is 8 ft/2.4 m wide and 8.5 ft/2.6 m high at the roofline, and weighs 12.65 tons/11,470 kg unloaded.
A pair of Marine AV-8B Harrier II Plus's from VMA-542 at MCAS Cherry Point, N.C., on a training mission over the Atlantic. These aircraft are equipped with APG-65 radars so that they can employ the AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile.
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS
The LVS is equipped with a four-speed automatic transmission, and the vehicle can ford water up to 5 ft/1.53 m deep without special preparations. The fuel tanks hold 150 gal/568 L, providing a nominal range of 450 mi/725 km. The RPUs include cargo trailer, wrecker, crane, and ribbon-bridge variants. The LVS family of vehicles are a critical link in the supply chain that moves bulk fuel, ammunition, and supplies from the beachhead or landing area to the forward combat elements of the landing force. The Marine Corps operates 1,584 of these useful transports, assigned to special combat service support motor transport units. A deployed MEU (SOC) would normally have at least two of these trucks, assigned as diesel fuel carriers.
Marine Corps Aviation
Marine aviation has always had two goals. The first is to support Marines on the ground, and the second is to remain expeditionary, which is another word for mobile and deployable. Today, the Corps deploys one of the most unusual and focused air forces in the world. Its aircraft have been specially selected to support the Marine mission, and this has put the Marines frequently at odds with the leadership of both the nation and the other services. In these conflicts, the Marines have usually won out in the end. In the 1970s, the Administration of President Jimmy Carter killed--several times in fact--the AV-8B Harrier II and CH-53E Super Stallion programs, claiming that they were not necessary or useful. Luckily, the Corps has an awesome Congressional lobby, and was able to sustain the programs until the coming of the 1980s and President Ronald W. Reagan. Today the Marines are winning another battle with the MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor medium transport aircraft, which then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney actually canceled back in 1989. No matter how you look at it, when Marines see something they really want, they will do what is necessary to get it.
McDonnell Douglas/British Aerospace AV-8B Harrier II
Harriers are a species of marsh hawk native to the British Isles that preys on rodents and small reptiles. Not a bad description of the tactical role of this unique British-designed and internationally built aircraft that is now in service with the U.S. Marine Corps. In the 1950s, Sir Sidney Camm of the Hawker Aircraft Company (already a well-respected British aircraft designer) began sketching ideas for a jet plane capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL). The British Government, believing that guided missiles would soon make the manned fighter aircraft obsolete, showed little interest; but the company invested its own funds to build a prototype, the P.1127, which made its first flight on November 19th, 1960, after a series of tethered hovering tests.
Over the years, designers and engineers have proposed many bizarre solutions to the VTOL problem, but the P.1127 used one of the oddest solutions yet, and it proved to be a winner. The key is the Pegasus engine (designed by Dr. Stanley Hooker of the Bristol-Siddeley Engine Company), a turbofan without a tailpipe. The jet exhaust is vented through an array of four nozzles that swivel through an angle of more than 90deg. The concept is called "vectored thrust." Point the nozzles straight down, and the plane goes straight up. Point the nozzles aft and the plane zooms off into level flight. To land, reverse the sequence. Sir Sidney observed that, kinetically speaking, it was easier to stop and then land than to land and then try to stop. He was right. Tactically, a VTOL aircraft does not require a ten-thousand foot concrete runway; it can operate from a parking lot, a clearing in the woods, or even a tennis court (if you take down the net). During the Cold War on NATO's Central Front, a Soviet surprise attack might have knocked out most of the concrete runways on Day One, but a force of VTOL fighters, well dispersed and hidden, could have carried on the fight, waging a kind of aerial guerrilla warfare.
The test successes of the P.1127 led to an order in the early 1960s from the Ministry of Aviation for an evaluation unit of nine improved aircraft, under the type designation Kestrel FGA.1 (Fighter, Ground Attack). Pilots from the Royal Air Force (RAF), the U.S. Navy and Air Force (six were shipped to the Navy's flight test center at Patuxent River, Maryland, for evaluation), and the new West German Luftwaffe were invited to test-fly the Kestrel. In February 1965, the RAF ordered the first pre-production batch of VTOL fighters, under the name Harrier, and on August 31st, 1965, the new aircraft made its first flight. (Hawker Siddeley was eventually merged into British Aerospace, while Rolls-Royce took over Pegasus engine production.)
For U.S. naval aviators, wedded to their big deck aircraft carriers, the poky little Harrier (no radar, no afterburner, and look at that cramped cockpit!) was unimpress
ive in comparison with their mighty new supersonic McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs. But for USMC pilots, traditionally committed to delivering close air support that flies really, really close, it was love at first sight. There is a legendary story of how two Marine officers quietly went to the 1969 Paris Air Show (with the backing of the Corps leadership), walked up to the British Aerospace chalet, and told the British representative, "We're here to fly the Harrier!" The rest is history. With the enthusiastic support of the Commandant, the Marines used their considerable political clout to win budget approval for the purchase of a dozen Harriers, modified to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, and designated AV-8A. By 1977, the force had grown to a total of 110 Harriers, including eight TAV-8A two-seat trainers, equipping four attack squadrons of Marine Air Group (MAG) 32 based at Cherry Point, North Carolina (VMA-223, VMA-231, VMA-542, and VMAT-203). In 1972, the first Harrier detachment went to sea, aboard the USS Guam (LPH-7), and proved highly effective. Unfortunately, by 1985, one trainer and 52 single-seaters had been lost in accidents. Like so many early jet designs, the early Harriers were harshly unforgiving of pilot error, especially during the critical transition between vertical and horizontal flight.
