A Puff Piece on The Future Combat System-Manned Ground Vehicle

I think that Iraq has changed the way that the US Army looks at conflict. It's obvious now that most of the obstacles that the US military will face are those in a counter-insurgency or similar non-conventional warfare.

That being the case, it is not surprising that the Army's largest program, the Future Combat System (FCS), and in particular the Manned Ground Vehicle (FCS-MGV) is being redesigned.

That being said, the article I linked to is far more optimistic than I think is justified.

My background: I worked for three years on the Recovery and Maintenance Vehicle (FRMV), basically an armored wrecker, variant of the FCS-MGV.

As to the changes, the first is having, "the suspension and seats inside the 27-ton MGV will be suspended from the ceiling, not bolted to the floor". I'm dubious of this.

As anyone who has tried to get out of a hammock knows, it's not easy. It's less easy when one is in full battle gear (one variant, the ICV will carry 9 troops in addition to crew), and I think that the whole "getting hung up on the straps" is highly problematic.

Additionally, there may be issues of motion sickness, but I don't have the background to evaluate that.

The article also goes on at great length about how the modular armor will allow upgrades as technology develops. This is absolutely true, but this is not a new development. It was always a required part of allowing the vehicle to achieve C-130 mobility.

The active protection system does qualify as a significant improvement in survivability against some threats, long range ATGWs, long rod penetrators, and short range RPGs.

It's cannot to provide protection against IEDs, and it's unlikely to be able to effect explosively formed penetrators, as the reaction time is too slow. Additionally, the system relies on radars, which means that the vehicle will be an emitter on the field, which can compromise signature reduction.

The purchase of the Israeli Trophy APS should give some good indications of the actual battlefield utility of such systems.

My guess is that the systems, APS, modular armor, and (perhaps) seats are far more likely to find their way into legacy systems than it is for the FCS-MGV to see service, with the possible exception of the NLOS-C howitzer system.