One of the mounted forces’ most critical deficiencies in the post–cold–war era is the inability to rapidly deploy forces for worldwide contingency missions. Current mounted forces are capable but take too long to be deployed, have a large logistics tail, and are ill–suited to the third world infrastructure. Current combat vehicles rely on traditional materials for construction, communications, training, passive armor protection against munitions, and conventional mobility.

A lighter "heavy" force is required that can deploy overseas in less time, with fewer ships, and reduced CSS requirements and yet be equally lethal, survivable, and cost effective. Materiel, smart weapon, and survivability advances can lead to a fully air deployable armored assault force or a more deployable heavy assault force requiring 50 percent or less of current logistics assets. Advanced ground vehicle technologies will enable selected future systems to be air deployable; this is not possible with current systems.

Ground vehicle platforms require targeting, location, and acquisition systems capable of rapid detection, recognition, identification, handoff, or engagement of both ground and aerial targets beyond the threat’s detection range. Systems must perform effectively day or night in adverse weather, in cluttered background environments, and in the presence of countermeasures that include jamming, screening, and the use of low observable and active defense systems. Ground vehicle platforms must possess the capability to execute at an improved maneuver tempo as a result of digitizing the battlefield.

Through the integrated concept team (ICT) process, the user now has greater influence over S&T planning. The ICTs at the U.S. Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, and the U.S. Army Infantry Center, Fort Benning, have refocused near–term S&T towards the future scout and cavalry system (FSCS) and Abrams tank modernization. Far–term S&T will be focused toward the next generation "tank" and infantry vehicle. Detailed ICT ground vehicle activities are described in Section III–G.

Systems integration/virtual prototyping of future vehicles uses M&S and system–level advanced technology demonstrators to (1) develop preliminary concepts, (2) optimize design, (3) maximize ground vehicle force effectiveness, and (4) drive technology goals. STOs IV.S.05, Virtual Prototyping Integrated Infrastructure, and IV.S.09, Combat Vehicle Concepts and Analysis, support ground vehicle virtual prototyping. Future vehicle concepts and designs are the realization of the Army and Marine Corps users’ requirements and the opportunities harvested from the results of previous technology subsystem development programs.

The goal is to demonstrate the feasibility and potential of lighter, more lethal, and survivable ground combat vehicles. Four types of modeling and simulation will be employed: engineering models, constructive simulation, distributed simulation, and virtual–reality prototyping. The analyses conducted will span the entire vehicle combat spectrum and will be performed physically, analytically, and interactively using simulation methodologies. Virtual concepts and designs will mirror technology and can be readily evaluated for mobility, agility, survivability, lethality, and transportability, forming the basis for validation, verification, and accreditation. Tradeoff studies performed under STO IV.S.09 will be used to determine optimal technology mix. Working closely with the user, we will change those virtual systems to real–world 6.3 ATDs that will yield maximum payoff. System–level ATDs planned in the FY98–13 time frame include:

By 1999, demonstrate a virtual prototyping infrastructure that will reduce system–level development time and cost by 50 percent. By 2000, complete validation of the virtual prototyping process.

The major challenge is to provide the user with systems that can attain an effective balance between increased fighting capability, enhanced survivability, and improved deployability, while meeting or exceeding operational effectiveness, cost, manufacturing, and reliability/maintainability goals.

Through the use of composite, titanium–based, and other lightweight materials, technologies are being developed that will make future combat vehicles more lightweight and deployable (33 percent lighter in the structure and armor combined), versatile (multiple combat and support roles), and survivable (better ballistic protection and reduced signature). These technologies will be developed for combat vehicles to optimize and exploit the structural integrity, durability, ballistic resistance, repairability, and signature characteristics of a vehicle chassis and turret fabricated primarily from composite or titanium–based materials. Current vehicle chassis efforts center on the development of vehicles composed of advanced lightweight materials to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach. STO III.G.1 supports development of a 22–ton composite armored vehicle.

By 1998, demonstrate a 22–ton tracked vehicle with 33 percent reduced structural/armor weight. By 1999, simulation tools for composite material design and fabrication will be developed and validated. By 2004, demonstrate minimum weight structural designs with structural efficiencies exceeding 80 percent for a 40–ton combat vehicle (FCS).

Use of composite materials or titanium as the primary structure in the combat vehicle chassis is new. Composite issues include durability, producibility, and repairability. Titanium has yet to be used on combat vehicles because of cost. Through an IPPD approach, all issues relating to the successful fielding of a combat vehicle, including cost, are addressed.

This technology effort’s objectives are to provide an integrated survivability solution that will protect ground combat vehicles from a proliferation of advanced threats. With ever–changing threats and missions, the integrated survivability approach allows for flexibility in meeting mission needs. Detection avoidance, hit avoidance, and kill avoidance technologies will be developed and integrated to enhance overall vehicle survivability.

Detection avoidance technologies include signature management and visual perception. Signature management efforts are focused on exploring vehicle signatures in the visual, thermal, radar, acoustic, and seismic areas and in various atmospheric conditions. Visual signature analysis will be enhanced through the use of visual models and laboratory experimentation of visual perception.

Hit avoidance technologies protect ground vehicles through the use of sensors and countermeasures. The sensors detect incoming threats and the countermeasures confuse or physically disrupt incoming threats. The Army is developing electronic countermeasure and sensing technologies to defeat current and future smart munitions. By 2002, identify best countermeasure technology against all antiarmor threats. By 2005, demonstrate active protection against tube–launched kinetic energy (KE) and chemical energy (CE), large top attack, threats.

Kill avoidance technologies include the development of armor, laser protection work, and the exploration of non–ozone depleting substances to use for fire suppression. Armor plays a synergistic role with detection and hit avoidance on the modern battlefield. It provides the last line of defense. By 2000, demonstrate armors for medium caliber KE threats with 50 percent improved space efficiency over the 1999 state of the art while remaining compatible with the FCS structure. By 2003, demonstrate FCS armors with 25 percent frontal, 15 percent flank, and 30 percent top protection improvements over 1999 state–of–the–art technologies. Laser protection technologies are being developed to prevent blinding and eye damage of vehicle crews due to the use of lasers on the battlefield. Laser protection for all unity vision devices (STO IV.S.07) will provide eye safety against enemy agile wavelength laser threats. The work in this area is twofold. First, nonlinear optical materials developed commercially and at other DoD agencies will be characterized. Second, work to design and integrate a retrofittable optical surveillance system is being performed. Finally, in the area of advanced protection technologies, is the exploration of nonozone depleting substances for fire suppression use. Work in this area will focus on demonstrating environmentally and toxicological acceptable replacements for Halon 1301 in fire suppression systems in crew occupied compartments of ground combat vehicles.

None of the aforementioned technologies alone can ensure survivability and mission flexibility. The integrated survivability approach ensures the proper mix of these technologies so that survivability and mission flexibility may be achieved.

Cost of the currently identified technologies are prohibitive for application to all vehicles. Many of these technologies have significant weight, volume, electrical power, and thermal loading requirements. Insertion of these technologies into fielded systems can be costly and time consuming.

The mobility technology effort focuses on the "move" function of tracked and wheeled land combat vehicles. Mobility components for ground vehicles include the suspension, track, wheels, engine, and transmission (conventional and electric drive).

While contributing to both the survivability and lethality of combat vehicles, mobility technology plans call for doubling the cross–country speed of combat vehicles. Military vehicle cross–country speed is usually limited by the driver’s ability to tolerate the vibration energy transmitted through the suspension. Electronic controls have made it possible to actively control both the spring and damping rates of "active" suspension systems, reducing structural vibration and shock. By 2001, semiactive suspension and band track technologies applicable to the tracked fleet will be demonstrated. By 2005, a 40 percent increase of cross country speed of a 40–50–ton combat vehicle will be demonstrated.

Hybrid electric technologies are being pursued as means to enhance mobility. Substantial reduction in fuel consumption can potentially be achieved through advanced engine control, stored energy capabilities, and energy regeneration. In coordination with other government agencies, including DARPA, Navy, and the Army, several electric drive technology developments are being leveraged for Army combat vehicle application. In particular the DARPA/Army joint program combat hybrid power system will demonstrate in a system integration laboratory an integrated combat power system in the year 2000.

While most vehicles, except the tank and its derivatives, use commercial diesel engines, they operate at or above their commercial power ratings. Even though their power density is relatively high, an engine that is sufficiently compact for an FCS is not commercially available and must be developed. Early activities will focus on determining the concepts and advancing the technologies required to allow the advanced engine to be developed. It is projected that by 2013 a complete propulsion system will be developed that has a power density of 8–sprocket horsepower per cubic foot (versus 3.3 for the M1 Abrams).

For a 40–50–ton electric drive combat vehicle, major challenges include the need to operate the power electronics at elevated temperatures without overheating. A high power density low–heat rejection engine will also be a challenge.

For advanced track systems, the major challenge is to develop light weight track while maintaining track durability. Rubber band track must be developed to move beyond lightweight applications into the medium–to–heavyweight vehicles.

The goal of this subarea is to develop a standardized framework within which to seamlessly integrate vehicle electronic subsystems with advanced soldier–machine interfaces. This will enable current and future ground vehicles with a reduced crew to maintain superior combat effectiveness on the digital battlefield, while reducing crew workload. By 2000, demonstrate 25 percent crew efficiency improvement for a three–man crew. By 2008, demonstrate 50 percent crew efficiency improvement for a two–man crew.

The intravehicular electronics suite will provide the necessary integration flexibility to support the wide–ranging battlefield digitization functionality over the next decade. It is the first step toward creating a general purpose electronic platform for multipurpose sensors and sensor fusion.

The flexibility inherent in this system allows for cost–effective improvements in performance and capability. This improvement can be incremental or continuous, adding or upgrading the processors, memory, or software functionality necessary to keep pace with the demands of the battlefield. Reliance on commercial, open standards for this electronics suite, coupled with the ability to continuously improve the system, will delay obsolescence of the system. The Army will be able to use state–of–the–art hardware at any time from multiple sources with minimal risk or development. By 2000, demonstrate a 30 percent reduction in cost per line of source code. By 2002, demonstrate a ten–fold improvement in electronics system performance.

Specific technical challenges include:

The roadmap of technology objectives for Ground Vehicles is shown in Table IV–38.

The influence of this technology area on TRADOC FOCs is summarized in Table IV–39.