Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG) in, Warrenville, IL has now won over $3.5 billion in contracts to date under the MRAP program. The Category I MRUV vehicle’s role is similar to a Hummer’s, albeit with more carrying capacity and much more protection. That has become a staple for IMG’s entry, recently dubbed the “MaxxPro” by its manufacturer. Their collaboration with an Israeli firm who provides up-armored vehicles for the Marines appears to have overcome lukewarm initial interest, and is being ordered in quantity; but even successful survivors of Aberdeen’s tests may not offer enough protection against the class of land mines now seeing wider use in Iraq. Nevertheless, the MRAP program has become a production race – and Navistar is doing very well under those competitive terms; a July 2007 order vaulted them into 1st place for number of MRAP vehicles ordered, and they have kept that position since.

That big July 2007 order came hot on the heels of US Secretary of Defense Gates’ request to Congress for an extra $1.2 billion in FY 2007 to fund an additional 2,650 MRAP vehicles, on the grounds that manufacturers appear to be ramping up production faster than previously forecast. Meanwhile, key inputs such as steel and tires which might otherwise have become production bottlenecks are being expedited under a DX rating that gives the MRAP program priority over almost all other military programs. Sen. Biden [D-DE], who often heard responses re: lack of industrial capacity when he began asking why more MRAP vehicles weren’t in theater, is probably feeling almost as happy as Navistar’s Board now that his “put the money together, issue the contracts, and let’s find out” speech [MS Word], embodied in Amendment #739 to the FY 2007 military budget, has become the US military’s go-forward plan.

The latest items include a $250+ million contract for engineering modifications to add armor…

• MaxxPro: A Collaborative Success (i.e. Continue reading…)
• MaxxPro Contracts [updated]
• MPV or APC to Face EFPs? (June 2007)
• Additional Readings & Sources

MaxxPro: A Collaborative Success

In 2005, military manufacturers began to plan for the end of the US military’s Hummer orders, and the associated battle to replace it with a new vehicle. By this time, land mines had already been the #1 killer in Iraq for some time now, and a few manufacturers were also looking to break into the American market with solutions to this problem. The technology was not new; indeed, it had been in use for over 40 years. The US military had been very slow to adopt it, however, aside from some limited orders the 101st Airborne had placed for South African RG-31 vehicles, limited purchases of Force Protection’s Cougar and Buffalo vehicles for Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams, and M1117 Guardian ASV armored cars for US military police units. The ASVs were produced in New Orleans, however, and Hurricane Katrina had interrupted production just as it was ramping up.

As realization began to dawn in 2006 that the Hummers and their blast-catching flat bottoms needed a supplement in theater, the US Army and Marines began taking a closer look at mine-resistant vehicles on the market, and key manufacturers began maneuvering for position. The new Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected (MRAP) program would include a smaller Category I MRUV patrol vehicles that seated at least 6 people in total, while Category II JERRV vehicles would seat at least 10 and hold bomb-disposal robots and other useful gear.

Force Protection, whose v-hulled Cougar vehicles had catalyzed this realization by their performance in Iraq, offered their Cougars for MRAP CAT I/II. Textron offered the lighter M1117 Guardian armored car, while BAE Systems was busy developing their RG-33 family, an update of their proven RG-31s that incorporated new technologies and lessons learned. Protected Vehicles, Inc. (PVI) would submit the Golan, designed in partnership with RAFAEL and the Israeli military. Armor Holdings, who supplied the US military’s FMTV medium trucks and up-armoring for its Hummers, was reportedly working on an up-armored design based on the FMTV.

Lacking ready designs or American plants, others chose partnerships as their path to market. General Dynamics partnered with BAE OMC of South Africa and the Canadian government to offer the RG-31, then signed another deal with Force Protection to share production of Cougar vehicles. Truck maker Oshkosh entered the fray with a pair of Partnerships, signing a deal with PVI for their new Alpha MRUV vehicle, and Thales Australia for the larger Bushmaster vehicle that was already serving with Australian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. German firm KMW’s Dingo had also demonstrated front-line performance with German forces in Afghanistan, but their partner Textron elected to offer their own M1117 instead. KMW was eliminated before the competition even had started.

In contrast to these competitors, Navistar subsidiary International Military and Government LLC (IMG) chose a different partnership route. They didn’t have expertise in armored vehicles, but they did know trucks. They chose Israeli firm Plasan Sasa as their partner, with the aim of developing an armored MRAP-candidate vehicle based around IMG’s WorkStar 7000 truck chassis. Plasan Sasa had been designing and manufacturing up-armoring kits for the Marine Corps’ MTVR trucks for several years, which gave them a solid relationship with the US Marines. The Kibbutz Sasa firm had also developed its own light protected vehicle called the Caracal, which has been examined by the US Marines for a different role. Navistar decided that it had found its partner.

Unlike the HMMWV’s frame, IMG’s heavy-duty truck chassis would have the load capacity required to handle the weight of additional armor et. al. – without wearing out early. The final design positions a v-shaped crew compartment on top of that chassis, allowing maximum production commonality while using the compartment’s armoring and shape to channel blasts around the crew area. Extensive use of components from IMG’s trucks, including predictive maintenance features, would ensure that their entry was both producible in large numbers and maintainable in the field.

Navistar is used to substantial production numbers, and has a field maintenance network on the front lines. In addition to to being one of North America’s largest producers of civilian commercial trucks and mid-range diesel engines (161,000 vehicles in 2006), it is producing and supporting 2,781 vehicles for the Afghan National Army, and claims 9 additional contracts with the U.S. government for more than 1,000 units each. These contracts encompass include service trucks and buses that have been used in the Iraq reconstruction effort. Production facilities include Garland, TX; Springfield, OH; West Point, MS; Melrose Park, IL (diesel engines); and Tulsa, OK (buses).

In return for this positioning, Navistar’s IMG received a test vehicle production contract for their vehicle – and nothing more. IMG/Plasan Sasa’s MPV was not featured among the early-stage orders [1st set | 2nd set] from the US military for low-risk designs, which went to rivals Force Protection (Cougar), BAE (RG-33, RG-33L), General Dynamics (RG-31), Oshkosh/PVI (Alpha CAT I), and PVI (Golan CAT II).

Why?

One logical conclusion is doubts about its performance. The biggest downside to capsule-mounting a blast-resistant hull on top of a frame is the danger that a mine blast will separate the capsule from the frame, or (more likely) destroy the chassis and immobilize the vehicle in an ambush zone. Moving a v-shaped blast pan beneath the chassis reduces that danger, but that solution creates issues with ground clearance; and – since it offers less of a gap from the blast – with crew survivability.

What changed? Two things.

One was the Biden Amendment in the Senate, which accelerated funding for MRAP even as the desired number of vehicles for the FY 2007-2008 program rose again from 4,100 to 7,774 vehicles. At that volume, existing vehicle manufacturers would be very hard-pressed to deliver the required quantity in time. Which in turn lent a higher value to producibility, as long as the vehicles offered substantially better protection than a Hummer. Especially with the US Army reportedly looking for 17,000 blast-resistant vehicles of its own by 2010.

The second thing that happened was the testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, which appears to have quieted doubts concerning IMG/Plasan Sasa’s design. Navistar received just the 2nd post-testing order to emerge from Marine Corps Systems Command, behind Force Protection’s early 1,000 vehicle order in April 2007. A May 31, 2007 report from Defense News claims that Navistar officials heard about their win from the offices of minority leader Sen. Trent Lott [R-MS] and Rep. Roger Wicker [R-MS], and Navistar spokesman Roy Wiley added at the time that “We did extremely well during the tests [at Aberdeen], and we are extremely pleased.”

In contrast, Navistar’s trucking competitor Oshkosh failed with both of its purpose-designed vehicles. The firm received 100 advance low-risk orders for its Alpha vehicle, which then failed testing and was removed from the competition. Despite its successful service on the front lines, the v-hulled Australian Bushmaster design never saw a single production order during the MRAP program. It would join Textron’s M1117 on the sidelines.

Navistar is extremely close-mouthed about the exact protection approaches they use, even at a general level. What DID can say is that recent years have begun to see solutions to the weaknesses of capsule-mounted vehicles. German armored vehicle maker Krauss-Maffei Wegman’s Dingo 2 uses an innovative approach, which is a v-hulled capsule and a blast pan underneath the chassis that is more of a shallow bowl shape than a “v”. The difference is that this blast pan is made of composites designed to flex with a blast and absorb energy, then return to shape. Their approach was regarded with some skepticism, but proved itself in an October 2005 incident in which a Bundeswehr Dingo 1 survived a 6-7kg/15-pound land mine explosion in Afghanistan with no injuries to its crew. Unfortunately for KMW, however, its American licensee Textron elected to submit a variant of its M1117 Guardian ASV instead. That proved to be a questionable decision; Textron was subsequently removed from the MRAP program, after their vehicles failed Aberdeen’s brutal testing.

Plasan Sasa does make composite armors for vehicles, and its Caracal appears to use some form of light belly armor as part of its survivability package. A Dingo-like approach is possible for the MaxxPro MPV, but without inside information it is difficult to say.

MaxxPro Contracts

Unless otherwise specified, all contracts are issued to International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, IL. The Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, VA buys MRAP vehicles on behalf of requests from the US Army (10,000), USMC (3,700), Air Force (697), Navy (544), SOCOM (333), and production verification testing (100). The USMC may be reducing its requirements, but this has yet to be approved by the Pentagon’s JROC or by Congress. At the same time, the Army may be raising theirs. Based on awarded contracts, MaxxPro’s price per vehicle is around $520,000 – $550,000.

Orders continue to be placed under the original MRAP vehicle solicitation, until production verification of vehicles presented for testing in response to the MRAP II solicitation is completed.

April 16/08: A $261.3 million for firm-fixed-priced contract modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for engineering change proposals to upgrade its MRAP low rate initial production vehicles. The government will procure several engineering changes to provide additional armor protection to increase the survivability of the MRAP Category I (CAT I) vehicles. The order also includes ambulance kits for the vehicles.

Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in November 2008. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.

March 14/08: A $405.9 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order (M67854-07-D-5032, #0007) for 743 Category I vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete November 2008. To date, they have received 5,214 orders under the MRAP program (5,198 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), 36.9% of the vehicles ordered.

N.B. Amount corrected by DefenseLINK on March 18/08.

Jan 19/08: The NY Times reports that “a gunner was killed and three crew members were wounded” on this day in an IED land mine attack. The soldiers were riding in a MaxxPro MRAP. Read “Hopes for NY Times Reporting Questioned After MRAP Story” for more details.

Jan 10/08: Israeli firm Plasan Sasa announces a $200+ million order to supply Navistar’s International Military and Government, LLC with armoring systems for an additional 1,500 armored MRAP blast-resistant vehicles, to be delivered by the end of July 2008. The Plasan Sasa release says that this armor contract continues and builds on the US military’s June 2007 order for 1,200 MaxxPro vehicles, and notes their investment in US manufacturing facilities. DID coverage.

Dec 18/07: IMG had submitted a variant of its MaxxPro for the MRAP-II competition. It aims to field vehicles that can protect against EFP land mines, which are more akin to instant tank shells being fired into your vehicle than they are to a conventional explosion. After initial tests, however, only 2 vendors received contracts for additional testing at Aberdeen: BAE Systems (RG-33) and the team of Ideal Innovations, Ceradyne, and Oshkosh (The Bull).

Dec 18/07: A $1.18 billion firm-fixed-priced delivery order under a previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032, #0006) to purchase an additional 1,500 MaxxPro CAT-I MRAP Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) vehicles. This order also includes sustainment items needed to support the vehicles in theater, as well as several Engineering Change Proposals to increase the vehicles’ capabilities. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete by the end of July 2008. This contract was competitively procured. Navistar release.

As this accompanying DoD release notes, the Marine Corps issued a number of MRAP orders on this day. Navistar’s IMG remains on top, and even widened its lead slightly. To date, they have received 4,471 orders under the MRAP program (4,455 CAT-I, 16 CAT-2), for 37.6% of 11,862 vehicles ordered.

Dec 7/07: The Rakkasans of the 3rd BCT, 101st Airborne Division in Iraq received 18 MaxxPro CATR-I vehicles. Sgt. Rian Terry, a welder in Co. B, 626th BSB, from Clarksville, TN:

“I like it. It feels safe with all the additional armor. It’s much roomier and easier to access equipment, especially with all your gear on.”

Pfc. Cedric Miller, a grenadier in Co. A, 1-187th Inf., from Blakely, GA, was more direct: “It’s an all-around good truck. We need more.”

American units preparing to receive MRAP vehicles send their maintenance Soldiers attend a 5-day, 40-hour course. During the course, drivers and vehicle commanders participate in both day and night, on- and off-road driving exercises, and obstacle course-like exercises where they maneuver through jersey barriers. Soldiers who complete the 40-hour training are operationally familiar with the equipment. It is up to the unit to make them tactically familiar.

Meanwhile, each battalion is assigned a field support representative and a team of mechanics to continue training the Soldiers. Having civilian representatives and mechanics at the battalion level gives the Soldiers subject-matter experts who are available during maintenance, but will allow the Soldiers to do the hands-on work. US Army

Dec 7/07: A $152 million firm-fixed-priced modification under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Maxxpro “sustainment items” (spares) under the MRAP program. Work will be performed in WestPoint, MS and is expected to be complete in February 2008.

Nov 28/07: A $24 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for procure field service representatives to provide support for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater. Work will be performed in Iraq, and work is expected to be completed November 2008. Note our Aug 14/07 entry – this work will be done by Dyncorp.

Oct 30/07:$68.8 million for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicle sustainment items. The Government shall purchase MRAP University requirements including field service representative-instructors, instructional material, course outlines, and special tooling, and additional sustainment items. Work will be performed at Red River Army Depot in Texarkana, TX, and is expected to be complete by the end of October 2008.

Oct 18/07: $509.2 million for firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0005 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,000 MaxxPro MRAP CAT I Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete April 2008. This contract was competitively procured.

Navistar remains in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 2,971 vehicles (2,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 33.8% of the 8,746 MRAP CAT I/II vehicles ordered so far. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 30.9%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 26.3%.

Sept 21/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received $7.2 million firm-fixed-priced modification to delivery order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for field service representatives (FSRs) to serve in theater. The FSRs will provide support for MRAP Category I MaxxPro vehicles in Iraq. Work will be performed in Camp Liberty, Iraq, and is expected to be complete in September 2008.

Sept 13/07: International Military and Government LLC in Warrenville, Ill. received a $71.5 million firm-fixed-priced modification to Delivery Order #0002 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for sustainment items and data requirements for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles in theater.

The US government is buying 1-Year Forward Deployment Blocks, 1-Year Maintenance Work Blocks, training, training materials, and several contract data requirement lists for International’s MaxxPro MRAP CAT I vehicles. Work will be performed in West Point, Miss., and the deliveries are expected to be complete in October 2007.

Aug 14/07: DynCorp International LLC announces that they have been selected by International Military and Government LLC to provide field-service support and training for its MRAP vehicles. This effectively makes them Navistar’s in-theater support network.

July 20/07: $413.9 million for firm-fixed-priced, delivery order #0004 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032), covering an additional 755 Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) patrol vehicles. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and is expected to be complete by February 2008. Navistar release.

This contract places Navistar in the lead for MRAP orders to date, with 1,971 vehicles (1,955 CAT-I, 16 CAT-II) contracted to date, or 34.8% of the 5,621 vehicles ordered so far under the 7,774 vehicle MRAP program. Force Protection is currently in 2nd place with 31.7%, and BAE/Armor Holdings come in 3rd with 30.3%

June 18/07: An $8.5 million firm-fixed-priced delivery order #0003 under previously awarded contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for an additional 16 of the larger Category II MRAP JERRV squad vehicles. Note that this works out to about $530,000 per vehicle. Work will be performed in WestPoint, Miss., and work is expected to be complete by February 2008. The DoD release adds, mysteriously, that “Contract funds in the amount of $9,547,248 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.”

May 31/07: A $623.1 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (M67854-07-D-5032) for 1,200 additional Category I (CAT I) Mine Resistance Ambush Protected (MRAP) Low Rate Initial Production vehicles. Work on the MaxxPro MPV contract will be performed in West Point, MS, and is expected to be complete by February 2008. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Which leads us to the next question… will existing MRAP vehicles be enough? They may not, and ironically, International may have declined to submit an offering of its own that could have survived in the new environment.

MPV or APC to Face EFPs? (June 2007)

A May 31/07 USA Today article titled “MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon” explains the dilemma:

“The military plans to spend as much as $25 billion for up to 22,000 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles by 2009. Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared that buying the new vehicles should be the Pentagon’s top procurement priority.

But the armor on those vehicles cannot stop the newest bomb to emerge, known as an explosively formed penetrator (EFP).”

An EFP is just another type of land mine, where the explosives are arranged to shape a metal disk into a kind of instant high-caliber tank round as they detonate, launching it at nearby objects. This is not a new approach; the USA’s Sensor-Fuzed Weapon, a.k.a. “cans of whup-ass,” uses this exact approach but is dropped from an airplane so it can attack through the top, where armor is usually weakest. An EFP’s mode of operation when used as a land mine is a ballistic side attack rather than a conventional land mine’s explosion, which means a v-hull won’t necessarily offer much protection.

These weapons have also been among the land mines causing problems for heavier Stryker/LAV-III wheeled armored personnel carriers in Diyala Province. The Strykers lack the level of underbelly protection found in MRAP vehicles, and their “steel cage” armor designed to defeat¹ the shaped-charge warheads on anti-tank rockets will not stop large-caliber shells – or a reasonable imitation created by an EFP land-mine.

Iran has been heavily involved in shipping these weapons into Iraq for some time now, and training both Shi’ites and Sunnis to make them. A January 13, 2007 document from the USMC says that as the USA fields vehicles with MRAP-class protection against buried mines, Iraqi insurgents’ use of EFPs “can be expected to increase significantly.”

While the US has been testing new armor compositions designed to break up EFP slugs, there is a commonly-available solution on the market. It’s called “reactive armor,” and already equips American Bradley fighting vehicles, M1 tanks, and other armored platforms.

In a sense, it’s the reverse of the EFP concept – instead of using an explosion to create a killing weapon, it reacts with an outward explosion when hit. This either blows the rocket/ tank round/ or EFP projectile completely off-course, or tips it into an easily-absorbed ‘slap hit’ rather than the precise, focused strike required to penetrate steel.

The armor is manufactured in a cooperative venture between Israel’s RAFAEL and General Dynamics, and already has a strong production base. The only counter to it would be a anti-tank missiles that use a dual-warhead charge, like Russia’s AT-13 Metis or AT-14 Kornet. Some of these weapons even have remote-firing capability. That kind of equipment can only come from a state sponsor, however – a fact that sharply ups the ante on its use as a definitive act of war in theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan.

There is already an MRAP contender designed from the outset to use this kind of armor to its maximum effectiveness. Protected Vehicles Inc. MRAP CAT II Golan vehicle was designed in conjunction with RAFAEL and the Israeli MoD’s Merkava tank project office. Unsurprisingly, it was also designed from the outset to carry reactive armor as an option, without changing its outward appearance. The result of this design feature is that the enemy can’t tell if reactive armor is present or not, and must therefore assume “yes” for all vehicles of its type.

The US military ordered 60 Golan vehicles for immediate deployment to the front lines back in March 2007, in addition to its order for test vehicles. DID’s coverage of the v-hulled Golan explains its construction and some of its other innovative features in greater depth.

The interesting thing is, IMG had its own vehicle designed from the outset to use reactive armor. The “International APC” was a definite CAT II sized vehicle at 30,000 pounds curb weight. Based on an International MV-7000 heavy truck cab, the APC promised a vehicle equipped with explosive reactive armor from the get-go.

For whatever reason, IMG chose not to enter this vehicle in the MRAP competition. Their APC could never have won a CAT I MRUV order, of course, as the MaxxPro just did. What it might have offered is an additional purchase option for the US military, when EFP land mines begin taking their toll on MRAP vehicles fielded in theater.

As it is, DID predicts that a number of MRAP vehicle manufacturers are about to start showing much more interest in reactive armor solutions for their vehicles. It’s always more difficult to integrate later, of course, rather than as a design-in option. Still, it’s immediately available – and better than nothing.

Footnotes

¹ A shaped charge ‘squishes’ and detonates when it hits, focusing the blast into a cone with a point that’s like a plasma torch with a wallop behind it. The immense focused energy converges right on the armor, cutting through the steel and/or blowing chunks off the back in a spray of molten metal of fragments, killing the occupants and/or damaging machinery.

Cage armor can prevent some types of warheads from detonating, especially those with a piezo-electric ‘crush’ fuzes. Those of you thinking that metal screens are not 100% certain to prevent warhead detonation, depending on the angle at which the piezo-electric crush fuze hit, are correct. In general, one can expect cage armor of any sort to turn only about 50-60% of rounds into duds.

The other option “cage armor” provides is to start that process away from the armor, so the shaped charge cone’s focal point is moved out in front of the armor it’s designed to penetrate. Instead of a precisely focused cutting/blasting point, you get an less focused blast. Depending on how big the warhead is, how far away the detonation is, and how strong the vehicle’s armor protection is, its occupants may or may not be saved.

Additional Readings & Sources

• See all MRAP-related DID coverage

• Plasan Sasa (June 3/07) – Plasan Sasa Will Supply International Military and Government, LLC with Critical MRAP Vehicle Protection for the US Marines [PDF format]

• Navistar (May 31/07) – U.S. Marine Corps Awards $623 Million Contract for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles to International Military and Governemnt, LLC

• Reuters (June 21/07) – U.S. Gen.: Iranian Weapons Still Flowing into Iraq. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch: “What I try to do is stick to the facts. And I know that inside of my battle space, there are munitions clearly marked with Iranian markings, and I am losing many of my soldiers to EFPs…. It is clear that the EFP technology and munitions is coming from Iran. We have to stop that.”

• USA Today (May 31/07) – MRAPs can’t stop newest weapon

• DID (Oct 6/06) – Dispatches from Afghanistan: Armored vs. Blast Resistant

• DID (July 21/06) – GD-RAFAEL’s Reactive Armor Equips US Military (updated)