Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle
In 2014, the U.S. Army selected BAE Systems' proposal of a turretless variant of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle to replace over 2,800 M113s in service.
[6] In March 2023, the U.S. Army delivered the first AMPVs to the 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Georgia.
In the Iraq War, urban warfare tactics still defeated the M113, leading it to be almost entirely replaced in active service by Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAP).
In April 2013, the Congressional Budget Office said the AMPV would be a better buy because analysts have asserted that the vehicles the GCV is slated to replace should not be first.
[10][11] In order to keep development costs down, the Army is requiring the vehicle be a commercial off-the-shelf design that can be incrementally improved.
If the AMPV can incorporate newer satellite communications as they are developed, they could be linked to other ground vehicles that would normally require a complete subsystems overhaul for new gear after a certain number of years.
[3] In October 2013, the Army released a new draft RFP, delaying the start of the program by one year and raising the development costs by several hundred million dollars.
Despite sequestration budget cuts, the program is maintaining its previously stated goal of 2,907 vehicles at $1.8 million each, built over 13 years.
39 Bradley vehicles of versions previous to the current M2A3/M3A3 configurations and 39 M113s not including the M113 AMEV can be exchanged by the government to the contractor for credit.
[16] In February 2014, General Dynamics filed a protest with the Army Materiel Command on grounds that the AMPV requirements had been written to favor a chassis based on the BAE Systems Bradley Fighting Vehicle, making it more difficult for their Stryker designs or other foreign designs to compete in the program.
Regarding OEVs, the Army Materiel Command clarified that they may not specifically be used for conversion but could still be exchanged for foreign sales or be scrapped, which would be less cost-effective.
[18][19] In April 2014, General Dynamics released a statement saying they wouldn't file a protest with the GAO, but would still be engaged in talks with Congress and the Department of Defense.
The company may believe it has a better chance of gaining support through Congress, which favors a strategy of buying a mix of both Stryker and Bradley vehicles, and would be less likely to act if the dispute was brought to the GAO to avoid affecting the outcome of the protest.
[20] General Dynamics also favors the mixed Bradley/Stryker AMPV acquisition idea, saying a combination fleet would match missions with Bradley and Double V-hull (DVH) Stryker strengths to quickly provide enhanced survivability and lower logistics costs.
[21] In May 2014, the House Armed Services Committee Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee passed its markup of the FY 2015 budget.
[22] Although a split buy may be considered, with lower-mobility vehicles serving in rear-echelon units outside of armored brigades, the Army is unlikely to procure a mix of tracked and wheeled armored vehicles within an ABCT itself due to risk of mobility differences hindering cross-country maneuvering and mechanical differences increasing maintenance demands.
Their submission was based on the Bradley and Paladin Integrated Management designs to meet the force protection and all-terrain mobility requirements with maximum commonality within the family of vehicles.
The BAE AMPV team includes: DRS Technologies for power management, distribution, and integration; Northrop Grumman for Mission Command Mission Equipment Package design and integration; Air Methods Corporation for medical evacuation and treatment subsystems; and the Red River Army Depot for vehicle teardown and component remanufacture.
This could potentially cost an additional $95 million, delay the program at least two years, and would take money away from Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker modernization efforts.
[26] In December 2014, BAE Systems was awarded a $383 million contract to begin the Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development (EMD) phase of the AMPV program.
It contains the option to begin Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) immediately following the EMD's conclusion to produce an additional 289 vehicles for the total contract value of $1.2 billion.
They will support the M1 Abrams and M2/M3 Bradley to resupply the formation, conduct battle command functions, deliver organic indirect fires, provide logistics support and medical treatment, and perform medical and casualty evacuation to function as an integral part of the ABCT formation.
[34][35] An internal BAE project in collaboration with the US Army to develop an engineer vehicle to replace M113's in that role at Echelons Above Brigade (EAB).
