posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by PCola77:
That seems unreasonable. A cougar doesn't really cost $700million, right?

---

Posts: 6379 | From: PA | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by PCola77:
That seems unreasonable. A cougar doesn't really cost $700million, right?

---

Posts: 2554 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Minute 11:00 or so:

From General Brogan's Remarks: Another area where close cooperation with the army is benefiting our war fighters is the acquisition and fielding of MRAPs. These vehicles provide the best available protection for our war fighters against IED. These vehicles are designed with a vshaped hull to protect the occupants from all three primary kill mechanisms of mines and IED: Fragmentations, blast pressure and acceleration..

The marine corps has already fielded several variants of MRAPS. The first of which was at that time known as the Cougar Hardened Engineer Vehicle. Since the start of operation Iraqi Freedom, we fielded 27 cougars in support of EOD teams and combat engineers . We have also fielded an initial procurement of 122 Joint Explosive Ordinance Rapid Response Vehicles, or JERRV, in support of joint eod teams in throughout the theatre. We are on track to complete fielding of a follow on for 79 JERRV vehicles. Last month I awarded a sole source contract for 200 addl vehicles to a company that is already in production. That is a bridge to get us into full and open competition so that we can expand our production base and more rapidly get this vehicles in to the hands of our war fighters this effort will procure and field up to an additional 4060 for our nation’s joint forces."

From around minute 20:00

REPRESENTIVE DAVIS:
"I understand that the current requirement for the MRAP is 1022 with 538 cat 1, 420 cat 2 64 cat 3. With the approx. 4000 new marines supposed to be deployed to Iraq do you anticipate a need in an increase in these vehicles and if so, will the required funding will be taken from the FY07 bridge appropriation, and before you answer, I also understand that the contractor has had a problem meeting the schedule for these vehicles in the past are you confident that the mistakes will not be repeated."

BROGAN: "Ma’am there is additional requirement for vehicles that is making its way through the Marine Corps combat development command. I expect that will take into account the plus up forces that will likely be sent to theatre. As you indicated there were some initial problems with that prime contractor when we started up. My experience in acquisition is that that is not that unusual for a new start production line. They now are actually producing ahead of schedule and so I am confident that they’ll be able to continue to produce vehicles. As I mentioned we’re conducting a full and open competition to seek additional sources for the categories of vehicles that you mentioned Category 1 & 2. And because the quantities of Category 3 vehicles, the Buffalo, the heaviest, largest of these vehicles can be met by our current contractor, we have not competed any of those. But the large quantity of category 1 & 2 are being competed.

I must temper my comments because we are in the midst of source selection right now with that. We did have a large number of potential offers. I met with the secretary this morning and I now have approval to go forward and hold discussions with those offers and I expect to be on contract with a large number before the end of this month. Our strategy will be to produce two vehicles with each vendor. We’ll take those vehicles to Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland and conduct two separate tests. The first will be a survivability test where we blow up the vehicle. The second will be a limited user evaluation to ensure that the handling characteristics, maneuverability, things like that meet the requirements of our marines and the other joint forces. Given that the offers meet those hurdles, then we have the ability to award follow-on production contracts so that they can ramp up and begin producing these vehicles."

Around minute 24:00

Question: When you set your requirement….will the targeted requirement that you are talking about be enough vehicles so that every marine who is traveling the roads of Iraq or Afganistan is in the best possible vehicle?

BROGAN: My sense is sir, that our requirements have evolved over time….As I indicated in my oral statement, the first MRAP vehicles the Jerrvs and the cougars we procured were primarily for EOD and combat engineers. Clearly as the sophistication of the threat is increased, it’s apparent that we need these kinds of vehicles for all the forces that are involved in operations outside of the operating basis. And so, that was the genesis of the 1022 requirement, that Congresswoman Davis mentioned. I also indicated that MCDN (not sure of this acronym) is now looking at a larger number that is making its way through the process, it’s not yet been delivered to me to go procure it. I believe that as MCDN does its validation of this increased requirement they will take into account the addl 4000 marines that will be fielded into theatre and that will be calculated into the new requirement. So did we have it 100% right the first time, no sir, uh, I believe we used the best numbers we had available and then as the need for them increased, the warfighter came back through the urgent (intelligible) process and the JUONs, Joint Universal Operations Needs process and sought these additional vehicles.

QUESTION: Last week in the classified brief, you gave me the target number of vehicles and your target date of delivery, to what extent can you inform this committee of those number of vehicles, in my mind’s eye, I have trouble believing that that number should be classified. I would think that the moms and dads, the loved ones of the marines would like to know that you have a substantial number in mind, that you have what I think is a very realistic and also a very aggressive target date in mind.

BROGAN: Sir, I believe there are probably two parts to that question. The first is the requirement that’s currently been levied on me to procure is 4,060 vehicles. That includes the 1022 for the Marine corps as well as vehicles for the United States Army and the United States Navy that’s serving alongside us. For the Navy principaly they are for EOD Teams and SeeBees and for the army they’ll be used as their force commanders see best. The additional number is changing almost daily, sir.

QUESTION: How bout your target delivery date to get them in the Marine Corps hands, and you explained to me that there is additional work that is done by the Marine Corps before they’re sent to theatre. What is your target date to get those vehicles in your posession, and what’s your target date to have them fielded in the theatre.

BROGAN: Yes, Sir, and I’m not, as I indicated, I’m not buying just for the Marine Corps, so that 4,060 vehicles, I’ve set a stretch goal for my team of the end of this year, 31 December to have those vehicles delivered to the U.S. Government. It takes me approximately 60 days from that point to incorporate the jammers, the radios, the blueforce tracker and as we start delivering these vehicles in quantity surface ship them into theatre. Right now with the small quantities that we are dealing with, we’ve been flying them into theatre as soon as they’re prepared. As these quantities increase, I expect we’ll probably have to move to sea transportation in order to get the vehicles over there. So I expect from the time I get them into my hands, we’ll do the integration of the government furnished equipment and transport them into theatre, an additional 60 days. So my stretch goal, as I indicated to you last week, sir, is to have those 4,060 vehicles by the end of this year

Around minute 31:43

General Brogan: Sir, I have in hand monies from the Marine Corps for the first 805 vehicles. The delta between the 805 and the 1022 is included in our FY07 full supplemental request. I have a portion of the Navy’s money and I have not yet received any money from the Army. We are working…the Secretary of the Navy is working with the Secretary of the Army to get those funds. They will probably have to come to you all with a reprogramming action to move money out of an existing line. I believe they intended to fund it in their 07 full request, but I’m not certain of that.


Around minute 34:21

ADMIRAL Sestak FROM PA: The uparmored hummer upgrade is good for 12 pound mine blasts?

General Alles “I’d have to check the number, to be honest, sir.

SESTAK: Is the MRAP good for at least more than that?

General BROGAN: It is, sir.
ADMIRAL SESTAK: Do you know what it is up to?
GENERAL BROGAN: I do, but I’d rather not say in open hearing.
SESTAK: Is it going to take care of this increasing growth of what the mine blasts do?

BROGAN: If your question sir, is “Is there a mine that can overcome an MRAP?” Yes there is. But, the V-shaped hull does a great deal for us to disperse that blast, as well as these vehicles are much higher above the ground. As you know, in an explosion, space is your friend because it allows that wave to expand before it makes contact with the vehicle. I’d rather not in open session discuss specifics of what those vehicles are designed to protect against.

From minute 42:04

Colonel Wilson From SC: I’m particularly interested in the Cougar and the Buffalo and I’ve had the privilege of having visited the manufacturing sites of these particular vehicles…I’d like for you to review, what has been the record of these two particular vehicles, and I know you’ve touched on it a minute ago I’d like to hear it again, the unique v-shape and how that has such a positive impact.

BROGAN: Yes, sir. The V-shaped hull is designed to force the blast off to the side away from the spaces of the vehicle and the fact that the vehicle sits up high provides space so that that blast can form and get larger and not have as much impact on the hull of the vehicle. The two vehicles that you mentioned, the Cougar and the Buffalo are both serving very well in the theatre right now. We have not had a single Marine fatality in either one of those vehicles. Against the blast, shrapnel, the effects of both IED’s and Mines, they’re doing a tremendous job, so that’s why we have the imperative to rapidly get these vehicles into theatre.

GEN ALLES: I would just remark, sir, that these V-shaped vehicles, which goes beyond just the Cougar and Buffalo, account for 14% of our attacks but only 3% of our casualties, so they are a very mine-resistant, hence the move towards them.

.
Minute 48:10
BROGAN: It’s then incumbent upon me and my staff to deliver as rapidly as possible these MRAP vehicles as they come off the production line.

Minute 54:00
BROGAN: (in response to a question about what they would like most to have) I think perhaps, m’aam, for that technology that we have in our hands right now, getting the MRAP’s into theatre as rapidly as possible will save lives.

QUESTION FROM ABERCROMBIE: When you used the number 4,060 was that the total number of vehicles…..is that the total number that you are shooting for in the next year.

BROGAN: The 4060 is the total number of MRAP vehicles that I intend to procure this year. That I have authority to procure right now.

ABERCROMBIE: What’s that in relation to the Cougar vehicles, the rapid response vehicles.

BROGAN: Those are examples of a Category II MRAP.

ABERCROMBIE: Does the 4,000 include those kinds of vehicles.

BROGAN: Yes.

ABERCROMBIE: (asks about MTV’s)

BROGAN: MTV is not part of the 4,060. We have met the acquisition objectives for those vehicles
---------------------
(sorry forgot to write where this is) BROGAN: The beauty is once we have that production base established then we can keep it running and continue to turn out these vehicles and meet the requirements.

---

Posts: 3387 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged |