![]() |
||
Director, Operational Test & Evaluation |
||
FY97 Annual Report |
FY97 Annual Report
COMMAND AND CONTROL VEHICLE (C2V)
| Army ACAT II Program 16 Systems Total Program Cost (TY$) $13.6M Average unit cost (TY$) $806K Full Rate Production 1QFY00 Prime Contractor United Defense, LP | |
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION 2010
The C2V is a tracked, armored vehicle designed to provide an automated tactical command post for mobile armored operations. At the Corps and division, the C2V will be the tactical command post (TAC), while at the brigade and battalion, it will be the tactical operations center (TOC).
The C2V will replace the current tracked command post, the M577A2. Mounted on a modified M993 Multiple Rocket Launcher System (MLRS) chassis, it will be powered by the same 600 horsepower drive train currently used in the Bradley. The C2V is intended to be survivable against nuclear, biological, and chemical threats, and electromagnetic environmental effects. It has a requirement for protection against 7.62mm ball ammunition at 200 meters, and against a 155mm high explosive artillery burst at 30 meters.
The C2V platform is designed to provide information superiority directly supporting the dominant manuever force.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The C2V program is under oversight for both Operational Test and Evaluation and Live Fire Test and Evaluation. Its requirements have been published by the Army's combat developer, the Training and Doctrine Command. The C2V program has two materiel developers. The Program Executive Officer (PEO) Command, Control and Communications Systems (C3S), (responsible for the hardware and software for the computer workstations inside the vehicle), and the PEO, Armored Systems Modernization is responsible for the vehicle itself, including the local area network wiring inside.
In March 1993, the C2V program reached the Milestone I decision point. It reached the Milestone II decision point in December 1993.
From July through August 1995, the Army's Operational Test and Evaluation Command (OPTEC) conducted a phased Limited Users Test (LUT) on the C2V. This was the first operational test of the vehicle.
In July 1996, OSD approved the Live Fire Strategy in the TEMP, but specified that the Army should consider the inclusion of an explosively formed penetrator shot. The test was completed in early 1996, and it identified one area needing redesigned ballistic protection. The Army System Acquisition Review Council (ASARC) made a Low Rate Initial Production decision in September 1996 based on the results of the LUT.
The C2V participated in the Army's Task Force XXI Advanced Warfighting Experiment (AWE) in March 1997, with five vehicles used in the Brigade TAC and one maneuver battalion TOC.
The Milestone III decision is scheduled for July 1999, after an Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E).
TEST & EVALUATION ACTIVITY
There was no operational test activity conducted with the C2V in 1997. Five vehicles participated in the TF XXI AWE, as mentioned above. One was the brigade TAC, while the other four were in the mechanized infantry battalion TOC. The next scheduled test event for the C2V program is the Initial Operational Tests and Evaluation (IOT&E) scheduled for 1998. This test will be focused on the effectiveness and suitability of the C2V system to provide integrated command and control operations from corps to battalion in mounted combat. A total of 12 C2Vs will be tested during the IOT&E.
TEST & EVALUATION ASSESSMENT
There was no formal evaluation of the C2V associated with the TF XXI AWE, since it was an experiment, and not an operational test. Feedback from the Army indicates that the C2V was employed in a similar manner to its predecessor, the M577A2, during the AWE, rather than employed on the move i.e. it was simply used as a shelter with a tent extension, and did not demonstrate any of its unique capabilities.
The vulnerability of the C2V will not be further assessed until the completion of a full-up system test to be conducted in mid-1998. In that test also, the Army plans to assess the mobility of the C2V with regard as to whether command, control, and communications will be conducted actually on the move or conducted when it is stopped.
We still have great concern as to what communications-electronics will be installed, operated, and maintained in the vehicle and what soldiers will operate the vehicle and its equipment. While the Army has designed a vehicle with enough installation equipment to accommodate most communications-electronics configurations, again we remain concerned that a specific configuration be identified and integrated into to vehicle to support highly mobile combat operations.
NEWSLETTER
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|