Army defends new squad vehicle after blistering combat review

[Peter1469]

The ISV was criticized for not being a vehicle that can fight in combat. Of course look at it:


I forgot who won the contract by each contractor (America car companies) have civilian version as a pickup. With a combat rated suspension!
The 82nd will get it first. With modern air defenses no airborne mass attack is possible without dropping too far from the target to realistically walk. The ISV can bridge that gap. It can also be useful for any force in an operation other than war.
This program was approved at the highest levels, not sure why the Pentagon is getting a stick up its ass now.
Army defends new squad vehicle after blistering combat review

After a scathing Pentagon report dubbed the US Army’s new Infantry Squad Vehicle “not operationally effective” for combat missions against near-peer threats, the program office responsible is defending the multi-million dollar program, saying that’s not what it’s meant to do in the first place.

“The ISV is not designed to defeat or counter specific threats nor is it intended to operate as a combat fighting platform,” Steve Herrick, product lead for ground mobility vehicles with the Program Executive Office for Combat Support and Combat Service Support, told Breaking Defense in a statement Wednesday. “The primary role of the ISV is as a troop carrier to provide ground mobility to designated Infantry rifles squads reducing their need to cover large areas of terrain on foot.”


Herrick’s statement came several days after the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation published a harsh review of the ISV in its annual report, listing several vehicle shortcomings ahead of the program’s full-rate production decision in May — many related to combat scenarios.

[MMC]

For instance, during the initial operational test and evaluation in August, the Pentagon testers said that the rifle company using ISVs failed to avoid enemy detection, ambushes and engagements during the majority of its missions. The report states the vehicle lacked ballistic armor, that soldiers’ individual weapons weren’t easily accessible in the event of an attack and it was difficult to operate a mounted machine gun while on the move......snip~


Not designed to defeat or counter specific threats eh. Just let the enemy know where you are. Who thought of that dumbass $#@!.

[Peter1469]

For instance, during the initial operational test and evaluation in August, the Pentagon testers said that the rifle company using ISVs failed to avoid enemy detection, ambushes and engagements during the majority of its missions. The report states the vehicle lacked ballistic armor, that soldiers’ individual weapons weren’t easily accessible in the event of an attack and it was difficult to operate a mounted machine gun while on the move......snip~


Not designed to defeat or counter specific threats eh. Just let the enemy know where you are. Who thought of that dumbass $#@!.

They aren't be used in proximity to enemy forces. I think airborne forces could put them to the best use.

[Common]

The ISV was criticized for not being a vehicle that can fight in combat. Of course look at it:


I forgot who won the contract by each contractor (America car companies) have civilian version as a pickup. With a combat rated suspension!
The 82nd will get it first. With modern air defenses no airborne mass attack is possible without dropping too far from the target to realistically walk. The ISV can bridge that gap. It can also be useful for any force in an operation other than war.
This program was approved at the highest levels, not sure why the Pentagon is getting a stick up its ass now.
Army defends new squad vehicle after blistering combat review

No plating no cover, sniper can take out the driver and party over.....wtf are they doing

[Peter1469]

No plating no cover, sniper can take out the driver and party over.....wtf are they doing

I described it above.

[countryboy]

No plating no cover, sniper can take out the driver and party over.....wtf are they doing

Looks like they are spending taxpayer dollars on recreational vehicles. But I'm certainly no military expert. Peter seems to believe they have some utility.

[Cletus]

No plating no cover, sniper can take out the driver and party over.....wtf are they doing

You need to think of it in terms of a modern, high tech Jeep, not as a fighting vehicle.

[Peter1469]

It would be to move light infantry long distance, not into a battle, but close enough to dismount and walk, maybe up to 20 miles.

[Peter1469]

82nd Airborne has them now. Jump much further from the fight. Note, they will still dismount well away from the target and LPC it (leather personnel carrier).

The Army’s Infantry Squad Vehicle has reached first unit equipped status after the service started fielding 59 vehicles to soldiers with the 82nd Airborne Division this week.

The GM Defense-made Infantry Squad Vehicle, which can carry up to nine soldiers and was the center of recent controversy, is the Army’s new tactical troop transport vehicle meant to enhance the mobility of infantry squads.


Steven Herrick, product director for ground mobility vehicles at Program Executive Office for Combat Support & Combat Service Support, told
Breaking Defense in a statement that an additional 59 ISVs are scheduled to be delivered to the 101st Airborne Division in June. The first 59 are going to the 1st brigade of the 82nd Airborne, which previously tested the vehicles in recent years.



The Army plans to buy 2,406 vehicles in all, and budget documents say that includes 165 ISVs for $34 million in fiscal 2023 and 183 in FY24. In an unusual move, the budget documents don’t detail planned purchases for FY25 through FY27. Herrick said those numbers are still under discussion.

In statements to Breaking Defense following the report, Herrick took issue with the testing criteria and defended the efficacy of the ISV stating that it is “not designed to defeat or counter specific threats nor is it intended to operate as a combat fighting platform.”

Hopefully Big Army remembers that and uses them appropriately.