As Marines get closer to begin operating the V-22 Osprey, they
are finding that making weapons systems small enough to fit in the
aircraft’s undersize cabin can be a formidable challenge.
A case in point is the so-called “expeditionary fire support
system,” which is intended to let Marine units fly V-22s deep
into hostile territory and engage in combat autonomously, without
the backing of rear echelons.
The expeditionary fire support system, or EFSS, is the third leg
of a triad of weapons that the Marine Corps considers essential
to its new doctrine, known as “ship to objective maneuver.”
According to this thinking, Marines would deploy from a ship and,
rather than assault the beach, they would fly aboard V-22s or CH-53
heavy-lift helicopters all the way from the ship deck to the combat
zone inland, bypassing coastal defenses that the enemy may have
positioned.
The other two systems that make up the triad are a mobile rocket
launcher that can reach targets beyond 45 kilometers, and a 155
mm howitzer that covers an area of 10 to 30 kilometers. The EFSS,
which consists of a 120 mm mortar and a light truck that tows the
mortar and the ammunition, would support the close-in area from
0 to 20 kilometers.
The Marine Corps has been working on EFSS concepts in one form
or another for nearly a decade. Invariably, the sticking point has
been the relatively small size of the V-22 cargo compartment, which
is five feet wide, five feet tall and nearly 17 feet in length.
One reason for the limited space is that the tilt-rotor Osprey—which
takes off and lands vertically but flies at much higher speeds than
conventional helicopters—was designed in the early 1980s to
transport troops, not vehicles, noted Robert Work, a retired Marine
officer and military analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary
Assessments. The Osprey’s primary reason for being was to
replace the CH-46 helicopter, so it was “optimized to carry
people, rather than cargo.”
The V-22 cabin is slightly larger than a CH-46’s. The narrow
floor is a significant limitation in trying to fit a vehicle, Work
said in an interview. “When you lay a requirement to go inside
this, the vehicle by necessity has to be small and narrow.”
A Humvee, for example, is seven feet wide.
Making the EFSS small enough to fit inside the V-22 could be described
as a “monumental physics problem,” according to Jason
Burkett, a program manager at General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical
Systems. The company became the EFSS prime contractor in 2004, after
it beat two other competitors: Lockheed Martin and United Defense.
The V-22 cabin comes with many constraints, Burkett explained in
a presentation to an industry conference. Not only is the space
limited, but whatever cargo is loaded in the aircraft must leave
enough room for at least three passengers and for crews to enter
and exit unencumbered. Without any cargo, the Osprey can hold 24
passengers.
The Marines specified that the EFSS — including the mortar,
the prime mover, a load of ammunition and a small crew — must
be able to travel 110 nautical miles in the V-22. The weight of
any vehicle to be flown on a V-22 cannot exceed 2,450 pounds per
axle. By comparison, a Humvee weighs 4,500 pounds in the front axle
and 6,500 pounds in the rear axle.
The mortar is a 120 mm rifled towed weapon that currently is used
by several NATO countries and Japan’s military forces. It
was chosen for its precise targeting, but, at 76 inches, it is too
wide for the V-22, and requires design modifications. To tow the
mortar, the Marines had envisioned buying a commercial off-road
vehicle, but none was available that met the technical specs. The
truck selected, the American Growler, is sold commercially, but
will require substantial reengineering and upgraded components before
it can be deemed suitable for military use. The Marines also intend
to place a machine gun operator in the back of the truck, so the
vehicle will need a gunner station to support the shooter when he
is firing the weapon.
The American Growler is an updated version of the M151 Jeep that
the U.S. military retired in the early 1980s. It is narrow enough
to fit in the V-22, but needs to be more stable, Work said. “Narrow
vehicles cause rollover problems.” For that reason, the Growler
is being redesigned with a “lower center of gravity,”
said Work. “Any time you have a small vehicle that is relatively
narrow you are going to have potential mobility problems.”
Marine Corps spokesman Capt. Jeffrey Landis said it is misleading
to portray the Growler as a rebuilt Jeep. “While the vehicle
bears a similarity in appearance to a Jeep, none of the critical
systems are ‘old Jeep parts,’” Landis said in
written responses to questions. “The engine, transmission,
differentials, drive line, electrical and cooling systems, suspension,
brakes and all other critical components are current technology
parts from some of the top manufacturers in these areas.”
Responding to concerns about sending Marines to fight in an unprotected
vehicle, the Marine Corps Systems Command recently posted a solicitation
for industry proposals for armoring the Growler.
Among the technologies being evaluated is a blast-mitigating seat
developed by the Office of Naval Research, Landis said. It would
offer some protection against explosions under the vehicle. “This
seat will also enclose portions of the occupant’s lower body
and torso and we are investigating ways to use it to provide fragmentation
protection.”
Other options may include spray-on armor coatings for floorboards
and other areas, an underbody skid plate that will resist penetration,
ballistic windshield glass, and a variety of composite materials
that can be applied as part of an armoring kit, Landis said. “The
final solution will probably include a mix of permanently installed
features that do not limit transportability or mobility and add-on
kits that can be applied when needed.” Because the Growler
has no doors, an add-on armor kit would be the only way to protect
the occupants.
Jim Mills, an industry expert who helped manage the armored Humvee
program, said it would be quite difficult to protect a small vehicle
such as the Growler from landmine blasts. “You can provide
fragment protection but a mine blast would toss the vehicle in the
air … You could install Kevlar in the underbody for fragment
protection, panels behind the seats.” Armoring the cab, he
noted, would add too much weight and compromise its transportability.
The performance of the EFSS will be assessed by the Defense Department’s
office of operational test and evaluation in September 2006. Before
that, the Marine Corps will run its own drills at the Nevada Automotive
Test Center. “Over the next 10 months, the vehicle will be
extensively tested in all appropriate areas, to include safety and
stability,” said Landis.
If the system passes the required evaluations, the Marine Corps
could buy up to 60 mortars and 450 Growlers, at a cost of nearly
$300 million, during the next six years. That amount does not cover
the cost of the ammunition. Congress is expected to add anywhere
between $5 million and $13 million to the EFSS program in fiscal
year 2006 to fund modifications to the rifled mortar rounds, which
currently are produced in France and are not qualified to be carried
on U.S. Navy ships.
The rifled 120 mm mortar, Landis said, can fire U.S. Army or any
NATO-standard smoothbore 120 mm ammunition. But the Marine Corps
has directed General Dynamics to produce the rifled mortar rounds
at the Army-owned ammunition plant in Iowa. “General Dynamics
has been licensed by [mortar manufacturer] TDA to produce the 120
mm rifled ammunition in the United States, and is in the process
of establishing that production capability,” said Landis.
“The 120 mm rifled solution was selected because it offers
significant improvements in range, accuracy and lethality over 120
mm smoothbore mortars. … Rifled rounds are spin-stabilized
and much more accurate.”
Making the Growler compliant with the Marine Corps specifications
will require significant changes to the commercial version of the
vehicle. Each truck is expected to cost about $100,000, which, critics
argue, puts it in the price range of an armored Humvee. A commercial
Growler truck, by comparison, retails for $12,000.
Systems such as the EFSS raise questions about why the Marine Corps
is having to pay a premium price to design weapons systems around
the “limitations” of the V-22, said Bill Cowan, a retired
Marine and military analyst.
“To me, we [the Corps] bought into the V-22 without clearly
looking at its limitations,” Cowan said in an interview.
More broadly, he questions the wisdom of delivering fire-support
systems aboard the $70 million-a-piece aircraft. The Marine Corps
expects to buy more than 300 Ospreys over the next two decades.
During the Vietnam War, Cowan recalled, “I was at Khe Sanh
in the opening days when Marine helicopters wouldn’t fly medevacs
because of the risk of losing CH-46s. A pilot there told me ‘they’re
too expensive to put into that kind of risk; we can’t afford
to lose them’ … Why should we expect anything different
with the V-22?”
The EFSS, Cowan said, is an example of a system that is being built
only to fit the V-22 mission while it would make more sense to build
the transportation assets to meet the firepower needs.
The 120 mm mortar is a good idea, Cowan says. But the limited payload
of the V-22 will restrict how many rounds Marines can bring to the
fight. The trailer that the Growler would tow holds a pallet of
24 mortar rounds.
“Ground forces inserted far from the amphibious ships are
at risk until they’ve got adequate fire support.” Cowan
said. “While they’re waiting around for V-22s to make
a couple of runs to get the Growler, the 120 mm mortar and the ammo
onto the battlefield, they are exposed to an enemy who already knows
the terrain and quite possibly controls it.”
Work argues that while the EFSS is probably the only system that
can meet the strict transportability requirements of the V-22, “there
is a lot of debate within the Marine Corps on whether or not this
system is the right system.”
One school of thought is that the Marine Corps should have opted
for a 105 mm howitzer like the one used by U.S. Army airborne troops.
But that weapon most certainly would be too large to fit inside
a V-22. The Osprey can carry a howitzer externally with a sling,
but that limits its top speed to 110 knots, compared to 270 knots
when the load is carried internally. By comparison, an Army CH-47
Chinook helicopter cabin can accommodate a Humvee together with
a 105 mm howitzer and a gun crew.
Even though Marine officials say their analysis justifies the EFSS,
“still, it all really boils down to internal transportability
on the V-22,” Work said. “That is driving everything
about this system. It has to be small enough, has to have a prime
mover.”
Marines view the EFSS as a means to achieve a long-standing goal
of improving their mobility by air. “Since the helicopter
was created, there has been a desire for deep aerial maneuver by
helicopters … taking armored vehicles so you can have tactical
mobility at the other end,” said Work.
The proliferation of air-defense weapons and shoulder-fired missiles
could put a damper on these concepts, however, Work said. “When
the V-22 comes in, the Marines will try to figure out what is the
best use of that system, and the jury is still out.”