Find a Security Clearance Job!

Military


Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV)

The Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV) was to be used in point, route and area clearance of mines and Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). The primary function of the MMPV was to provide a mobile protective vehicle platform from which Soldiers and their equipment could conduct explosive hazard identification and neutralization missions. The MMPV system was a blast protected vehicle platform that would operate in explosive hazardous environments. It would be used by Army Combat Engineer Companies in route and area clearance operations, and Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) Companies in EOD support operations.

The MMPV system was a blast protected vehicle platform that would operate in explosive hazardous environments. Later, it was integrated into the concept of Future Engineer Force (FEF) Clearance companies, supporting them in route and area clearance operations, Explosive Hazards Teams in explosive hazards reconnaissance operations and Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) companies in EOD support operations. The MMPV would be required to provide operator and crew survivability against threats such as ballistics, AT mine blasts and IED blasts. Furthermore, the MMPV engine and suspension would be able to handle payload weight of 9000 pounds at speeds up to 62 miles/hour on improved (paved) roads. The MMPVs would also be transportable by rail, sealift, highway (carried on the M870 trailer) and air (in the C-5, C-17 and C-130) without requiring disassembly.

In 2004 the US Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) Acquisition Center-Washington (CAC-W) on behalf of the Program Manager, Close Combat Systems, Countermine Division, solicited informational white papers for procurement of 200 Medium Mine Protected Vehicles (MMPV) used in point, route and area clearance of mines and Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). The vehicles were to used primarily to safely transport Soldiers and equipment while in deliberate search of hazardous explosive materials and supervision of those operations that render the hazards safe. The proposed solution was intended for use in existing and future Engineer and Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) force structures for point, route, and area clearance operations.

The medium mine protected vehicle was required to be transportable by a C-130 aircraft. The MMPV would also be capable of transporting 8-10 Soldiers and could be modified to carry 4-6 Soldiers and an EOD robot. The MMPV would be capable of operating both on-road and off-road and in all types of weather conditions and terrain. The proposed MMPV was required to be capable of withstanding a mine blast of 15 pounds along the centerline without injuring the crew. The MMPV would also be capable of withstanding a mine blast of 15 pounds under any wheel without injuring the crew. The MMPV was to be designed to be repairable after a mine blast. The MMPV would provide ballistic protection against 7.62x51mm ball ammunition. It was desired that the MMPV provide ballistic protection against 7.62x51mm armor piercing (AP) ammunition. The MMPV would also be upgradeable to provide NBC protection.

The white papers were to include production schedule capabilities and a rough order magnitude (ROM) cost estimate for 200 vehicles. Separate ROM cost estimates were to be submitted for ballistic protection from 7.62x51mm ball ammunition and for 7.62x51mm AP ammunition.

The US Army Tank Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center (TARDEC), on behalf of the Product Manager, Bridging-Countermine Division, solicited in late 2005 informational white papers for procurement of Medium Mine Protected Vehicles. The Request for Information (RFI) was issued to identify the availability of candidate systems capable of meeting specific requirements and assess production capabilities, logistical supportability, and post production support for products. The objective of the request was to primarily survey and focus on non-developmental vehicle solutions that would meet the Army's requirements. These requirements included:

  • 100 percent of communication interfaces; services; policy enforcement controls; and data correctness available. SINGCARS (2) and FBCB2 included as part of baseline configuration
  • Transportable by rail, sealift, highway, air (C-5, C-17, C-130) without disassembly
  • Operator and crew survive against (Provide protection level and standoff range):
    • AT Mine Blast
    • Ballistic Protection
    • RPG Protection
    • IED Protection
  • Engine and suspension had to be able to handle payload weight of 9000 pounds at speeds up to 62 miles/hour on improved (paved) roads
  • Operated by 1 Soldier with ability to transport 6 additional Soldiers. The EOD variant would have 1 operator with ability to transport 3 additional Soldiers and 2 robots
  • Designed for quick repair (less than 8 hours repair time after blast) in the field after a mine blast
  • Initial maintenance provided through CLS. Battle damage repair kits and detailed manuals need to be provided. Manuals needed to go through full VAL/VERA
  • Equipped with a 15000 pound vehicle winch on the front of the vehicle
  • Transversal 360-degree ring mount for crew served weapon that was removable
  • Tactical lighting system inside and outside of vehicle with blackout capabilities
  • Storage space capability (392 cubic feet and 6000 pounds) with lockable compartments
  • Free space of 25"x36"x52" free of obstruction with 4 tie down points and a doorway at least 25 inches wide
  • 4 power outlets 110 VAC and 4 each 12 VDC
  • Vehicle must have run flat tires and 1 spare tire with lifting system to change tire
  • Vehicle must have available space claims for add-on electronic systems
  • Upgradeable to provide NBC protection and operate in MOPP 4 conditions
  • Equipped with an interior climatic control system to provide heating and cooling / Capable of operating in hot and basic MIL-standard climatic conditions
  • Provide external air source capable of providing compressed air with sufficient pressure and volume
  • Ignition/Starter switch should be pushbutton vice keyed
  • System must survive the INWE of High-Altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP)
  • Have ability to provide removable ramp and computer workstation terminal

PM Bridging did not intend to award a contract on the basis of the RFI or otherwise pay for information solicited therein. The US government requested unlimited rights to the data provided. However, the Army recognized that proprietary data might be included with the information provided. If this was the case, proprietary data had to be clearly marked as such and separated from the unrestricted information as an addendum. Proprietary information would be protected. All responses to the request for information were to be submitted by close of business on 20 January 2006.

The US Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) on behalf of the Product Manager Bridging, Countermine Division announced on 4 January 2006 that it was seeking informational white papers for the procurement of a Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV) for the US Army. The purpose of this announcement was to investigate if there are available sources to produce and field an MMPV. The technical requirements were subject to change. A Request For Information (RFI) and questionnaire were provided as a general guideline and did not, in any way, mandate or impose requirements. PM Bridging did not intend to award a contract on the basis of this RFI or otherwise pay for information solicited.

In January 2008, BAE announced that it had been selected by the US Army to be the sole producer of a new Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV), and had been awarded an initial $20 million delivery order under the $2.288 billion MMPV program. The MMPV contract envisioned production of up to 2,500 vehicles for use by US Army Engineers and Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams through 2015. The new MMPVs would be based on the RG-33L vehicle originally developed for the MRAP program. The MMPV vehicles were referred to as Panthers to differentiate them from other RG-33 types, and included engineering and explosive ordnance disposal specific subvariants.




NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list