There were big winners in the Pentagon's $100-billion overhaul on Jan. 6. Then there were the Marines. They lost their prized, 40-ton swimming tank, in development since the 1990s. The vertical-landing version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter -- meant to replace the Marine Corps' entire current fighter fleet -- was put on a two-year probation. "Marine Corps: big loser," Politico declared as the budgetary dust settled.
But in the days following the announcement, Gen. James Amos, the Marine commandant, put a surprising spin on the cuts to his branch's biggest programs. To hear Amos describe them, the cuts have freed up funding for the Marines to buy better weapons, faster -- at least as far as ground vehicles go. "The Marine Corps has come out in a pretty good position … even though you’d never know it by reading the newspapers," Amos said.
Under previous plans, the Marine Corps would spend all of its roughly billion-dollar annual vehicle budget for a decade buying just 500 Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles. "Where I come from, that’s not a good budget," Amos said. With the EFV dead, the Marines would have a chance to use the same money for a wider range of new machines, including a reconnaissance vehicle and an amphibious tractor to replace the EFV.
To ensure the Corps gets working amphibious vehicles, fast and on budget, Amos wants to take the same approach the Pentagon took in buying roadside bomb-resistant MRAP trucks during the height of the Iraq war. In a crash program beginning in 2006, the Pentagon issued a basic set of requirements, accelerated testing of candidate vehicles and awarded lots of small, quick production contracts to a wide range of manufacturers. The result: some 20,000 new, life-saving trucks reached the troops between 2007 and 2010, at an average unit cost of just $1 million.
Now, the MRAP program hasn't been perfect. Having so many different manufacturers can make maintenance difficult at times. Some of the MRAP models have turned out to be real duds. For all that, the MRAP has been a huge success -- and it reversed the trend of mounting delays that characterizes most Pentagon programs. “The last time American industry moved from concept to full-rate military production in less than a year was World War II,” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates crowed during a visit to an MRAP factory.
The MRAP program worked, in part, because the Pentagon was flush with wartime cash -- and filled with wartime urgency. Still, the Defense Department was so pleased with the MRAP model of crash production that it decided to apply the same acquisition techniques to a wide range of systems. Army Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the vice chief of staff, promised to "buy fewer things more often," starting with robots and soldier gear. The Air Force slapped high-tech sensors on flight-ready C-12 cargo planes to produce MC-12 spy planes in record time. The Marines installed off-the-shelf missiles on KC-130 tankers, nearly duplicating the Air Force's AC-130 gunships, but faster and at a fraction of the cost.
The Marines can do the same with the new "son of EFV," Amos thinks. "What we did for MRAP should be the model," he said. Expect the Marines to approach a number of manufacturers with basic requirements emphasizing existing technology, pay a premium for swift and rigorous testing and accept trade-offs in vehicle performance -- as long as it does the basic job and doesn't cost too much or take too long.
His faith in the MRAP model is one reason Amos seems optimistic. Another is what didn't happen during the Jan. 6 budget drill. The Marines might have lost a couple programs, but they didn't lose any missions. Prior to January, some observers had expected the Marines to entirely give up the beach-assault mission for which amphibious tractors are optimized.
That didn't happen. The EFV cancellation "does not call into question the Marine’s amphibious assault mission," Gates insisted. The Marines will be ready to storm beaches for decades to come. And if Amos' optimism proves justified, they'll do it in a vehicle that doesn't cost $30 million a pop and take 20 years to develop.
Photo: Marines
See Also:
- Shrinkage: Gates Cuts Army, Marine Corps Size
- Budget Battles: Did Gates “Cut” Defense Cash? [Updated]
- Can Congress Really Stop Gates' Gear Cuts?
- Gates May Cut At Least One Army Brigade from Europe
- Gates Slightly Rolls Back 'Top Secret America'
- Senate May Finally Sink Marines' Swimming Tank
- Marines' Next Swimming Tank May Look Reeeaaally Familiar
