US Army cancels current Bradley replacement program...

[Slater]

Heck, just buy the German Puma or British Ajax off-the-shelf. At least they seem to know how to run a reasonably successful program:

“Today the U.S. Army will cancel the current solicitation for the Section 804 Middle Tier acquisition rapid prototyping phase of the [optionally manned fighting vehicle]. Based on feedback and proposals received from industry, we have determined it is necessary to revisit the requirements, acquisition strategy and schedule moving forward,” said Bruce Jette, the Army’s acquisition chief."

https://www.defensenews.com/land/202...typing-effort/

[mack7.62]

Hell have SIG build them one they are winning everything else.

[Grand58742]

Seems like even more money wasted by the Pentagon when viable alternatives are right there.

[BoringGuy45]

Seems like even more money wasted by the Pentagon when viable alternatives are right there.

I think that's the point. I'm pretty sure that most of these "competitions" are nothing more than getting rid of surplus to avoid budget cuts.

[Slater]

"Some major failed programs in the past, Jette noted, were canceled after spending large amounts of money and still moving along even though problems were identified as the service proceeded. Crusader cost about $2 billion, Comanche about $6.9 billion and Future Combat Systems about $19 billion, Jette said."

The Army's certainly not alone in the "failed programs" category, but it's procurement history hasn't been encouraging. Even multiple attempts to replace the OH-58 Kiowa have flopped. I'm far from an aviation expert, but I would think that a scout helicopter wouldn't be stretching the boundaries of technology to any great extent.

[Grand58742]

"Some major failed programs in the past, Jette noted, were canceled after spending large amounts of money and still moving along even though problems were identified as the service proceeded. Crusader cost about $2 billion, Comanche about $6.9 billion and Future Combat Systems about $19 billion, Jette said."

The Army's certainly not alone in the "failed programs" category, but it's procurement history hasn't been encouraging. Even multiple attempts to replace the OH-58 Kiowa have flopped. I'm far from an aviation expert, but I would think that a scout helicopter wouldn't be stretching the boundaries of technology to any great extent.

I wasn't limiting that to the Army, FYI. All services are guilty of wasting a metric butt-ton of money on projects that don't go anywhere.

However, when it comes to stupidity and utter waste, I think the ACU still stands head and shoulders above everything since it was so public a failure.

[Slater]

I would agree that the ACU was a flop. I would also include the Air Force's embarrassing "tiger stripe"ish ABU and the Navy's "blueberry ripple" camo patterns. The Marines seem to have gotten it right from the beginning.

[Grand58742]

Agree 1,000,000% on the absurdity of the other services trying to outdo each other. Especially the USAF with the "92% of the USAF doesn't need a camouflage pattern" nonsense they came up with.

I've always been of the mind that when you need camouflaging, you tend to need it pretty badly. And that isn't the time to say "well, we messed that one up..."

ETA: Also agree the USMC got it right by going with two patterns.

[Alpha-17]

However, when it comes to stupidity and utter waste, I think the ACU still stands head and shoulders above everything since it was so public a failure.

You're probably right here, for a number of reasons. For one, anyone that ever looked at the UCP pattern could have guessed it wasn't the best camo pattern. The widespread issuance for UCP gear also hurt it; if it was all in CB or OD, it may have been ignored, but when every piece of kit is being issued in a glow in the dark pattern, it gets pretty obvious, fast, even to people who only occasionally see military photos.

Later, when the details of the trials program came out, and it was found that the basis for UCP scored dead last in the tests, and was still chosen, for no apparent reason, the sheer level of waste and stupidity involved in the program becomes mindboggling.

[Grand58742]

You're probably right here, for a number of reasons. For one, anyone that ever looked at the UCP pattern could have guessed it wasn't the best camo pattern. The widespread issuance for UCP gear also hurt it; if it was all in CB or OD, it may have been ignored, but when every piece of kit is being issued in a glow in the dark pattern, it gets pretty obvious, fast, even to people who only occasionally see military photos.

Later, when the details of the trials program came out, and it was found that the basis for UCP scored dead last in the tests, and was still chosen, for no apparent reason, the sheer level of waste and stupidity involved in the program becomes mindboggling.

If memory serves, Crye Precision was asking for a royalty for each time their Multicam pattern was used. Which would have ended up being all sorts of financially awesome for them.

There were good alternate patterns out there (Hyperstealth or Roggenwolf for example) other than Multicam that came along during that time and in the aftermath, but the Army/USAF/USN decided to pass them over.

Regardless, the USMC had the right idea in the woodland vs desert battle with two uniforms and solid tone gear.