Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV)
Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV)
The Marine Corps planned to replace the Amphibious Assault Vehicle-7A1 (AAV7A1) with 1,013 Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAAV) for $6.7 billion, including a $456-million increase due to a 2-year procurement delay. With a water speed of 23 to 29 miles per hour, the new vehicle could be launched from amphibious ships 25 miles or more offshore and reach shore far more quickly than its predecessors. The improved mobility would reduce the risk to Navy ships from missiles, aircraft, boats, and mines. Until the new vehicle is fielded, planned for 2008, the Marine Corps anticipated spending more to maintain the current vehicle. The Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) was officially renamed the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) sometime in late 2003.
The Marine Corps was developing the AAAV to replace the AAV7A1 as its primary combat vehicle for transporting troops on land and from ship to shore. The AAAV had to satisfy many operational requirements, which would provide increased capabilities compared to the AAV7A1 and improve the ship-to-shore movement, thus allowing the Marine Corps and the Navy to more effectively implement OMFTS.
The AAAV was planned to be capable of transporting 18 Marines and a crew of three over water at speeds of 29 miles an hour. The design used a planing hull propelled by two water jets. On land, AAAV was expected to achieve speeds of 45 miles an hour, with cross-country mobility equal to that of an M1 Abrams tank.
In addition to its high land speed, the revised EFV had sufficient ballistic protection to defeat rounds up to 14.5mm or fragments from 155mm artillery shells. It also had improved mine-blast protection and a nuclear, chemical and biological (NBC) defense system. This combination of features alone would provide enhanced survivability.
A smooth transition from water to cross-country movement had always been a difficult and dangerous task for amphibious vehicles. The General Dynamics AAAV design solved the problem by arranging the automatic transfer of power from the high-speed water jets to the vehicle tracks.
Using the same vehicle design, General Dynamics would also deliver a command and control AAAV variant to the Marines. This mobile command post would provide access to information from satellite and computer-based intelligence sources, as well as from ships, aircraft and other vehicles, while controlling operations at sea or on land. The revised EFV followed the same two platform configuration. The personnel variant, referred to as EFV(P), would be armed with a 30 mm cannon and a 7.62 mm machinegun and was intended to transport 17 combat-equipped Marines (one less than initially planned for the AAAV) and a three-man crew. The a command and control variant, referred to as EFV(C) would transport a commander and staff.
The AAAV was the U.S. Marine Corps only acquisition category (ACAT) I acquisition program. The Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) represented the signature mission of the USMC. A truly amphibious vehicle that would replace the USMC's aging current system and provide the capability to maneuver a combat loaded with a Marine rifle squad, at 20-25 knots in the water and maneuver cross country with agility and mobility equal or greater than that of the M1 Main Battle Tank (MBT). The AAAV was expected to virtually revolutionize every facet of USMC combat operations. It was potentially one of the most capable all-around weapon systems in the world. The technology to meet these requirements had been demonstrated, and the plan to procure the system represented the most operationally effective solution for meeting USMC requirements.
In 1997, nearly the entire Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) team, over one hundred and fifty members, including the prime contractor staff and critical subcontractor personnel, Government and contractor secretaries, engineers, logisticians, computer programmers, and financial managers were given an unprecedented fleet and field exposure to the amphibious operational environment for the sole purpose of improving system design for support, readiness, and durability. The entire team was transported by bus to Norfolk, Virginia and taken on a two day amphibious exercise specifically designed to expose them to the systems' intended operating environment. Everyone rode and most drove amphibious vehicles on land and in the water side-by-side with the Marines of Delta Company, 2nd Amphibious Assault Battalion. The entire group of Government and private industry team members were housed aboard the Amphibious Assault Ships USS Tortuga and USS Oak Hill in troop living spaces for the exercise. The experience resulted in a significant improvement of the team's understanding of operational suitability, support and readiness that is now reflected in improvements in the AAAV design.
The AAAV was intended to allow the Navy and Marine Corps to seamlessly link maneuver in ships and maneuver ashore enabling Operational Maneuver From The Sea (OMFTS). The AAAV would be the principal means of armored protected land and water mobility and direct fire support for Marine infantry during combat operations. Based on this unique mission profile, the AAAV required the leverage of state of the art advances in water propulsion, land mobility, lethality and survivability. Lightweight components and structures that were cost and operationally effective and supportable together with a significantly more powerful engine were the primary technical challenges for the AAAV. There were 1,322 USMC Assault Amphibious Vehicles (AAV7A1 ) planned to be replaced by 1,013 AAAVs beginning sometime between 2005 and 2010.
The Marine Corps had issued a requirement to procure 1,013 AAAVs. Prior to December 1994, the cost to develop and procure AAAVs was estimated at $7.2 billion (then-year dollars). Due to budget constraints, DoD reduced AAAV funding in the FYDP by $189 million in December 1994. As a result, the Marine Corps extended the demonstration and validation phase 22 months and delayed procurement by 2 years, which increased the program's cost by $456 million, to $7.6 billion. As a result, low-rate initial production was delayed from FY03 to FY05. Initial operational capability was delayed from FY06 to FY08. Full operational capability, fielding all required AAAVs to the active assault amphibian battalions and the maritime prepositioning squadrons, was delayed from FY12 to FY14.
