The M1128 mobile gun system (MGS) is an eight-wheeled assault gun of the Stryker family, mounting a 105 mm tank gun , based on the Canadian LAV III light-armored vehicle manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems for the U.S. Army .
99-538: The MGS program emerged after the 1996 cancelation of the Army's M8 armored gun system , the service's planned replacement for the M551 Sheridan light tank . The MGS was procured in limited numbers. It has been retired since the end of 2022 due to design and operational deficiencies. By 1992, the armored gun system (AGS) emerged as a top priority procurement program for the Army. The Army requested proposals for
198-777: A hypervelocity missile as its major tank-killing system, the Assault Gun received little support from the Armor School , which was invested in the M1 Abrams tank procurement process, or from the Missile Command , which was developing the Fiber Optic Guided Missile and resisted moving into the hypervelocity missile domain. In 1980, the U.S. Army Infantry School 's Mobile Protected Gun project analyzed anti-armor weapons systems, concluding that
297-480: A jammer . As of 2019, BAE was working on adding medium-wave infrared sensors and a slew-to-cue system that points the turret in the direction of the incoming missile. The latter would allow the crew to more quickly identify and engage the perpetrators. M1132 engineer squad vehicle The M1132 engineer squad vehicle (ESV) is the combat engineering variant of the Stryker wheeled armored fighting vehicle. It
396-518: A $ 326.5 million contract for the production of 62 MGS. In February 2008, the Pentagon approved full-rate production of the MGS after a Defense Acquisition Review. The Army chose to defer full-rate production while it waited to validate fixes made to the MGS. The Army deferred full-rate production in 2010. In 2010, GDLS began incorporating explosive reactive armor on MGS production units. In late 2013,
495-614: A 20-ton air-droppable light tank to replace the M551 Sheridan . The Army sought 300 AGS systems to go to the 82nd Airborne Division and the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment . Four competitive bids emerged. In June 1992, the Army selected the FMC Close Combat Vehicle, Light proposal. This was later type-classified as the M8 armored gun system . In 1996, the Army canceled the AGS due to the service's budgetary constraints. Following
594-419: A 90mm gun. Two other competing contractors submitted bids for infantry carriers, but declined to submit offers for the MGS requirement. Unlike the infantry carrier variant, MGS prototypes were not evaluated on the Army's proving grounds. This resulted in protests from lawmakers and industry officials. The service maintained that bid samples would be unnecessary and complicate the competition. In September 2000,
693-496: A BCT. A four-vehicle MGS platoon operates organic to a Stryker infantry company, with one MGS in support of a Stryker infantry platoon. [REDACTED] Media related to Stryker Mobile Gun System at Wikimedia Commons M8 armored gun system The M8 armored gun system ( AGS ), sometimes known as the Buford , is an American light tank that was intended to replace the M551 Sheridan and TOW missile -armed Humvees in
792-471: A letter urging Perry to continue the program. The letter touted the program's "tremendous success" in meeting the program's objectives, and noted that the vehicle was "well within budget and on schedule." The House appropriations national security subcommittee requested that the DoD pause the cancelation of the AGS pending a Congressional review. The subcommittee said that the AGS had met its milestones and "would be
891-492: A lighter, more transportable force. He called for mid-weight brigades that would strike a balance between heavy armor and infantry. The Army subsequently launched the Interim Armored Vehicle acquisition program. One of the required vehicles was the MGS. According to Shinseki, the MGS's mission differed greatly from the AGS. the AGS was also intended to be used in the anti-armor role, whereas primary targets for
990-450: A low of $ 92 million ($ 200 million in 2023) for Hägglunds. The procurement program was valued at $ 800 million. FMC began developing the CCVL as a private venture in 1983. The vehicle was designed from the outset to meet the Army's as-yet unfunded AGS requirement. FMC built two mock-ups. The first was a front-engine model utilizing a 330 hp (250 kW) diesel engine. The second was
1089-484: A platform performance demonstration from December 1999 to January 2000. One of these systems was equipped with improved forward-looking infrared . By then, the AGS had reached an advanced level of technological maturity, and thus UDLP said it could field its design almost two years earlier than the General Motors' LAV III proposal. The AGS lost out to the General Motors proposal, which was type classified as
SECTION 10
#17327832629641188-802: A proposed All Purpose Fire Support Platoon, the task force shortlisted four candidate vehicles for an Armored Support Platform. These were the FMC Corporation CCVL, the Cadillac Gage Stingray , the General Motors LAV-105, and the Teledyne AGS . The task force recommended the latter. In August 1987, the Office of the Secretary of Defense approved the AGS program initiative for 600 vehicles—166 for
1287-706: A rear-engine model with a 552 hp (412 kW) diesel engine and featuring more armor. In 1984, FMC validated the feasibility of pairing the 105 mm gun with a light chassis by test firing a 105 mm gun mounted on an M548 . The first prototype CCVL was completed in August 1985 and debuted at the meeting of the Association of the United States Army in October. The CCVL was demonstrated at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, in 1987. FMC subsequently ended
1386-617: A requirement was written into FMC's contract. FMC made several weight-saving changes to the design, particularly the pallets, in order to meet the C-130's weight limit. In a December 1993 report, the Defense Department Inspector General (IG) cautioned that the AGS would be too heavy for low-velocity airdrop (LVAD). The IG recommended canceling 58 systems meant for the XVIII Airborne Corps if
1485-564: A review of the requirements. The Army updated its RfP later that year, with submissions due in December. The final RfP specified two configurations of the AGS: One intended for airborne forces, and another intended for other rapid deployment light forces. FMC Corporation submitted the CCVL to meet the AGS requirement. Three other teams submitted proposals: Three of the vehicles proposed had autoloaders, while Hägglunds did not. Although
1584-527: A stop-work order to United Defense in February 1996. In May, the Army Vice Chief of Staff formally announced the cancelation of the AGS. The service estimated killing the program would save the Army $ 1 billion. The service sought to reallocate unspent FY1996 funds from the AGS program on military pay, construction and modernization programs. In order to help offset the loss of capability caused by
1683-518: A strong candidate for increased funding." The Army belatedly sought to win Congressional and DoD support for its decision to cancel the tank. Securing the blessings of the Office of the Secretary of Defense would ensure that the service would not have to forfeit unspent FY1996 funds from the AGS program. The DoD, at least at first, affirmed its support for the program and called it "premature" for any service branch to draw any conclusions about
1782-514: A variant of the Griffin light tank . As of May 2016, 3 mobile gun systems had been written off during combat operations out of 142 produced. In May 2021, the Army announced they would divest all mobile gun systems by the end of 2022. The decision was made following an analysis that found its autoloader had become expensive to maintain and that the M1128 had not been upgraded with a double V-hull. It
1881-419: Is a mine-clearance blade , it is most often towing a wheeled trailer loaded with additional equipment. The vehicle is capable of clearing mines on paved surfaces and some rubble clearance. Other mobility tasks can be completed by the mounted engineer squad with the tools on the vehicle and trailer. About twenty M1132 engineer squad vehicle were donated to Ukraine along with ninety M1126 Stryker vehicles due to
1980-572: Is an 7.62 mm caliber M240 machine gun . The commander's weapon is a M2 Browning 12.7 mm machine gun or a 40 mm Mk 19 grenade launcher can be mounted. Because the vehicle was originally designed without air conditioning (A/C), crews were given cooling vests that circulate cooled water from outside the vehicle to the garment. Vehicle computers still overheated regularly. All MGS Stryker platforms have since been upgraded with A/C units. The large weapon station and relatively smaller hatch can make emergency exits difficult. The main cannon
2079-537: Is issued to combat engineer squads in the US Army Stryker brigade combat teams. Models with the double V-hull upgrade are known as the M1257 ESVV . Its purpose is to transport and support combat engineers on the battlefield; the vehicle includes obstacle clearing and lane marking systems as well as mine detection devices. The engineer vehicle is based on the infantry carrier. Its most distinctive feature
SECTION 20
#17327832629642178-403: Is primarily outfitted to support infantry combat operations. While it could take on some of the roles of a tank, it is not primarily intended or designed to engage in combat with main battle tanks . The MGS can store 18 rounds of main gun ammunition: 8 in the autoloader's carousel and 10 in a replenisher located at the rear of the vehicle. It has a rate of fire of ten rounds per minute. The MGS
2277-483: Is separate from the crew compartment. A gun stoppage during combat can be cleared only by exiting the vehicle. M1128 suffered of lack of reliability, excessive dead space, gun size, and gun control issues, taking its development to a limited production in 2010 with 142 units in service. As originally projected the U.S. Army allocated nine mobile gun systems (3 per infantry company) to a battalion , making for 27 mobile gun systems per " Stryker brigade" in 2013, but later
2376-569: The 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment (2nd ACR). In November 1990, Congressional appropriators sought for the Army to utilize the Marine Corps's developmental LAV-105 for the AGS role or "show clear and convincing evidence that the LAV-105 is unable to fulfill the requirement". The Army agreed. In 1991, the Senate and House Armed Services Committees joined in directing the Army to integrate
2475-679: The 2nd Cavalry Regiment . In October 1999, Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki laid out his vision for a lighter, more transportable force. The Army began the Interim Armored Vehicle (IAV) program to implement Shinseki's concept. United Defense LP (UDLP) proposed the AGS, as well as a version of the Mobile Tactical Vehicle Light , for the Mobile Gun System variant of the IAV in 2000. United Defense provided three AGSs oufitted with levels I, II and III armor for
2574-646: The 3rd Infantry Division which were to be attached to the 82nd. A Milestone I/II review was completed in May 1992. The engineering and manufacturing development contract was awarded to FMC in June 1992 for a ballistic structure, six test vehicles, and technical data. A critical design review was completed in September 1993. Six pre-production prototypes underwent technical testing in FY94–95. Early User Test and Experimentation
2673-576: The 82nd Airborne Division and 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment (2nd ACR) of the U.S. Army respectively. The M8 AGS began as a private venture of FMC Corporation , called the close combat vehicle light ( CCVL ), in 1983. The Army began the armored gun system program to develop a mobile gun platform that could be airdropped . By 1992, the AGS was one of the Army's top priority acquisition programs. The service selected FMC's CCVL over proposals from three other teams. The service sought to purchase 237 AGS systems to begin fielding in 1997. Key characteristics of
2772-636: The EFOGM missile and considered more widely fielding the Javelin missile. Funding for EFOGM was deleted in 1998. The Army also considered the MGM-166 LOSAT missile, now mounted on a Humvee rather than the originally planned AGS, as another platform offering similar capabilities for the 82nd Airborne. However, this program was canceled in FY2005. According to Reimer, the lack of a C-130-deliverable tank
2871-669: The General Motors –General Dynamics' LAV III , which was type classified as the Stryker M1128 mobile gun system . BAE Systems offered the AGS system for the Army's XM1302 Mobile Protected Firepower requirement, but lost to the General Dynamics Griffin II —later type classified as the M10 Booker —in 2022. The U.S. Army recognized the poor performance of the M551 Sheridan light tank in
2970-507: The Russian invasion of Ukraine . They were deployed to the frontline in August 2023 to take part in the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive as part of the 82nd Air Assault Brigade . According to Oryx blog , as of 6 January 2024, 5 M1132s were confirmed destroyed by photos and videos out of 20 supplied by the U.S. This article incorporates work from https://web.archive.org/web/20080516205906/http://www.sbct.army.mil/product_esv.html , which
3069-618: The Stryker M1128 mobile gun system . UDLP protested the award, alleging that the Army disregarded its own timeline requirements and that the requirements were unfairly biased for wheeled vehicles. The General Accounting Office denied UDLP's protest in April 2001. In March 2004, at the 82nd Airborne Division's request, the Army approved the transfer of four production vehicles from United Defense's facility in Pennsylvania to Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The vehicles were intended to bolster
M1128 mobile gun system - Misplaced Pages Continue
3168-677: The Vietnam War and began the process of retiring the vehicle in 1977. A small number were retained in active service by the 82nd Airborne Division and the National Guard . The Army designated the M3 Bradley armored reconnaissance vehicle to partially fill the Sheridan's role. In the 1980s, the Army began looking for a more capable replacement for the Sheridan. During this time, a string of Army projects to update or replace
3267-552: The turret and Watervliet Arsenal EX35 gun of the LAV-105 with an AGS chassis. A joint program was balked at by both services, who believed the two platforms were mismatched. Subsequently, the Marine Corps demurred and requested no further funding for the LAV-105. In any event, the proposed chimera was nixed by the Senate Appropriations Committee later that year. The Army issued a draft request for proposals (RfP) in May 1991. The Army published
3366-510: The 82nd Airborne. In May 1995, the Army National Guard expressed interest in procuring the AGS for the 38th Infantry Division , 35th Infantry Division and 34th Infantry Division to help bridge the looming capability gap should the 2nd ACR be eliminated. This proposal was rejected by the service. Army Chief of Staff Gordon R. Sullivan , the AGS's most influential advocate at the Pentagon, retired in June 1995. In October 1995,
3465-451: The 82nd's 1st Squadron, 17th Cavalry, which was in need of greater firepower for an upcoming deployment to the recent war in Iraq . However, in June 2004, this plan was put on hold while the Army determined whether the Mobile Gun System (MGS) could meet the 82nd's requirements. An air-drop test of a Stryker weighted to simulate the load of the MGS was conducted in August. Around the same time,
3564-457: The 82nd's requirements. In August, the Army conducted an air-drop test of a Stryker M1132 engineer squad vehicle weighted to simulate the load of the MGS. Around the same time, the Army identified issues with the air-dropability of the MGS, among the heavier of the Stryker family. Still more pervasive problems persisted with the autoloader. In January 2005, the Army said it had ruled out fielding
3663-407: The 9th Infantry Division (Motorized), 54 for the 82d Airborne Division, 217 for reserve component Tow Light Anti-tank Battalions (TLAT) and 163 for war reserves and floats. A joint Army–Marine Corps program was mooted. The ROC was approved for the second time in September. In December, the AGS program was dropped as the $ 800 million ($ 2.15 billion in 2023) plan was considered unaffordable. Around
3762-450: The AGS off-the-shelf . In August, SASC directed the Army to halt work on Armored Systems Modernization until it could conduct a competition for an AGS. The AGS program had gained political favor by this point due in part to the back-to-back successful employment of the Sheridan in two overseas operations. In December 1989, Sheridans of the 3/73 Armor, 82d Airborne Division, were airdropped into Panama as part of Operation Just Cause . This
3861-444: The AGS are its light weight (17.8 short tons (16.1 t) in its low-velocity airdrop configuration), field-installable modular armor , M35 105 mm caliber soft recoil rifled gun, 21-round magazined autoloader , and slide-out powerpack. Though it had authorized the start of production of the type classified M8 a year earlier, the Army canceled the AGS program in 1996 due to the service's budgetary constraints. The Sheridan
3960-627: The AGS for funding. Wickham and Thurman, backed by TRADOC, chose the Abrams, and did not advocate for the program in Congress. Senate appropriators declined the Army's request for AGS funds for FY 1986. The program office was disestablished, and the ROC retracted. In May 1986, the AGS program was re-organized under the Armored Family of Vehicles Task Force (AFVTV). During one concept study for
4059-530: The AGS in January 1996. In an email explaining the cancelation to officers, Reimer said the AGS was a "well run program" and that the Army had "no major complaints with the way that program was being administered." Reimer said that despite this, the Army had a funding shortfall in both the near and long term. Canceling the AGS would allow the service to alleviate a deficit in the military personnel account. It would also free up funds for other modernization efforts in
M1128 mobile gun system - Misplaced Pages Continue
4158-408: The AGS to Turkey, which had a requirement for 200 systems. This bid was said to be a longshot as Turkey's requirement was for a main battle tank in the 50–60 short tons (45–54 t) range. In 2015, the U.S. Army articulated a requirement for a Mobile Protected Firepower system to replace the Mobile Gun System. In 2017, the Army formalized its requirements with a request for proposals. The MPF
4257-413: The AGS, saying the system lacked a sufficient inventory of spare parts that would be required to maintain the vehicle. The Army doubled down on its support for the MGS, which it said it could begin fielding in summer 2006. In October 2004, the Pentagon approved limited low-rate production of the MGS after a Defense Acquisition Board review. In December 2004, the Army awarded GDLS a $ 206 million contract for
4356-513: The AGS, saying the system lacked spare parts that would be required to maintain the vehicle for any significant length of time. The Army also doubled down on its commitment to fielding the MGS, which it said it could begin fielding in summer 2006. was interested in acquiring as many as 700 of the system, which would be produced domestically. That year the U.S. State Department authorized the sale of just as many to Taiwan and United Defense agreed to co-production with Hwa Fong Industries conditional on
4455-430: The AGS. The CCVL had two 16-barrel Tracor MBA Advanced Smoke Launcher System smoke grenade launchers mounted on either side of the turret. This fired L8 visual or M76 infrared obscurants. The AGS had two 8-barrel smoke grenade launchers which could fire a variety of obscurants. The MPF variant has two 8-barrel M257 model firing M19 smoke grenades . The CCVL was protected from 30 mm kinetic-energy rounds over
4554-689: The Army type classified the XM8 as the M8 armored gun system. It approved an initial production run of 26 vehicles, with an option for 42 more scheduled to begin in FY1997. A full production decision was scheduled for March 1997. Fielding to the 3/73 Armor would begin in 1999. All three squadrons of the 2nd ACR were to be fielded subsequently. The end of the Cold War had precipitated a fall-off in U.S. military spending. The President's FY1996 budget request allotted
4653-409: The Army and USMC went their separate ways the following year. The Army and Marine Corps were at the same time also involved in the joint LAV program. At the time, the Army planned to acquire 175 LAV-25s to fully equip the 9th Infantry Division. These interim MPGS's would be armed with a 25 mm cannon with seating for the passengers replaced with ammunition racks. The Army developed a version of
4752-431: The Army could not demonstrate LVAD from a C-130. The Pentagon concurred that no production could begin until the Army met this requirement. The IG's concerns were put to rest in October 1994, when the service successfully airdropped an AGS from a C-130 at an altitude of 1,300 ft (400 m). Citing cuts in the service's procurement budget, in 1993, the Army reduced its planned AGS order from 300 to 233. By November
4851-443: The Army cut the number per brigade to 10. As of May 2017, a Stryker brigade combat team is equipped with three platoons of MGS Strykers and three platoons of ATGM Strykers in its weapons troop. The Army purchased 142 mobile gun systems in total. Three were lost in combat. The Army planned to authorize 32 mobile gun systems to a Stryker Brigade Combat Team (BCT). However due to the low numbers produced, only nine were allocated to
4950-469: The Army did not require that proposals be tracked or wheeled, all four proposals were tracked. In June 1992, the Army selected the FMC proposal. FMC Ground Systems Division was awarded a $ 27.7 million ($ 60.1 million in 2023) contract to begin phase 1 work, including the production of six test units. The bids for this phase ranged from a high of $ 189 million ($ 410 million in 2023) for GDLS–Teledyne and
5049-484: The Army had successfully overhauled the program. By reclassifying the preproduction prototypes as production models, the Army was able to cut two years off the time until full-scale production. The Army had by then settled on an acquisition target of 237 vehicles. Of these, 123 would go to the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, 58 to the 82nd Airborne Division, and 56 to reserves and training bases. The last 169 AGS systems, to be produced from 1998 to 2002, were to be built without
SECTION 50
#17327832629645148-451: The Army identified issues with the airworthiness of the MGS, among the heavier of the Stryker family. Still more pervasive problems persisted with the autoloader. While this decision was on hold, Congressman Robin Hayes expressed frustration that the AGS had not been fielded, and called on the DoD to act swiftly to resolve the delay. In January 2005, the Army said it had ruled out fielding
5247-503: The Army selected the Griffin as the winner of the MPF competition. The GDLS Griffin was later type classified as the M10 Booker . The AGS operational requirements were identified early in the process. In order, they were: deployability, lethality, survivability, and sustainability. The basic hull of the AGS is made of welded 5083 aluminum alloy , with a modular armor system that allows
5346-710: The Army should equip its new light infantry divisions with TOW -armed Humvees and an unspecified 6×6 lightly armored vehicle armed with a 25 mm caliber gun. This led the Secretary of Defense to direct the Army to use the LAV-25 for this purpose. In 1981, the Army joined the Marine Corps 's (USMC) Mobile Protected Weapon System program, which then became known as the Mobile Protected Gun System (MPGS). However due to differing requirements,
5445-403: The Army told bidders it was considering plans to increase by 200 the number of MGS units purchased. Though the service did not say why it was interested in more MGS units, however Defense Daily speculated that the Army could equip light divisions with the MGS. In November 2000, GM–GDLS won the contract for both the infantry carrier and MGS. The MGS was later type classified as the M1128. GM–GDLS
5544-538: The Army was surveying options for acquiring about 70 tanks to replace the Sheridan. The Army formalized the AGS program in April 1990 with the validation of a new ROC. An AGS "rodeo" was held in July 1990 at Fort Bragg , North Carolina, with representative systems submitted from prospective contractors. In July 1990, the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) required that the Army procure
5643-401: The Army's requirement, this is accomplished with ventilated face pieces. NBC-sealing of the turret is not possible in any event as the vehicle is exposed to outside air when spent shell cases are ejected and when the main gun is fired in maximum depression. NBC protection is provided by filtered air through tubing to M25/ M42 masks . The Army omitted a requirement for radiation hardening from
5742-659: The Canadian armoured combat vehicle requirement. In partnership with General Motors , General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS)–Canada integrated its low profile turret (LPT) onto a LAV III in January 1999. The turret was an updated version of the one used on the GD– Teledyne Expeditionary Tank , which was entered into the Armored Gun System competition in the 1980s. In October 1999, U.S. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki laid out his vision for
5841-507: The Department of Defense (DoD) the lowest procurement budget level since 1950. The AGS was one of several systems that did not fare well in an Army review of anti-armor weapons then under development. Responding to budget cuts anticipated in the period FY98–03, in 1996 the Army adopted a new policy: Instead of distributing small cuts throughout many projects, entire programs would be canceled. Army Chief of Staff Dennis Reimer canceled
5940-650: The LAV to serve as the MPGS in the 9th Infantry Division in the interim. 75 mm, 90 mm and 105 mm guns were studied, with the Marine Corps initially leaning towards the 75 mm gun. Plans solidified around the 25 mm Bushmaster when it was realized the services needed an interim solution. Like the Marine version, this was armed with the 25 mm gun, but included additional ammunition stowage in lieu of passengers. The Army planned to replace this LAV beginning in
6039-695: The MBTs with 66 mobile gun systems. However in 2007, the Canadian Army reversed itself and decided instead to procure Leopard 2 . The Stryker mobile gun system saw service in the Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan . The MGS has integral all-around armor protection against 14.5×114mm AP rounds. The MGS commander and gunner are located in the turret basket, which provides the crew some separation from
SECTION 60
#17327832629646138-415: The MGS included bunkers, buildings, weapon positions and troops. A team of GM Defense of Canada and GDLS submitted a variant of the LPT assault gun to meet the MGS requirement. General Dynamics was responsible for most of the MGS. United Defense LP proposed an M8 armored gun system (AGS) and two variants of the mobile tactical vehicle light (MTVL), one with the AGS turret and 105mm gun, and another with
6237-455: The RfP in August incorporating changes as a result of feedback from industry and Congress, the latter of which had directed the Army to require the EX35 gun. Army Acquisition Executive Stephen K. Conver became concerned that the AGS program was becoming laden with unnecessary requirements that would increase costs and development time, as well as limit the number of interested contractors. In view of this, in October 1991, Conver's office conducted
6336-498: The Sheridan were begun, but all ended without the Army committing to buy. Some of its efforts around this time could be described as hopelessly intermingled. In 1979, Army Chief of Staff General Edward C. Meyer initiated a transformation of the 9th Infantry Division that would see the light infantry division assume many of the characteristics of the heavy division through an infusion of high or emerging technology. The so-called "High Technology Light Division" (HTLD) would require
6435-403: The U.S. Army began seeking to reintroduce an airdroppable mobile airborne protected firepower platform to provide fire support for air assault forces, a capability that had been absent since the retirement of the Sheridan in 1997. General Dynamics initially considered modifying the wheeled Stryker MGS to meet the Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) program requirement, but the company instead entered
6534-434: The ammunition in the event of an explosion. According to a Government Accounting Office report released in May 2001, the Army had expressed doubt that this arrangement would provide "any protection from secondary explosions and fires from the main gun ammunition." The MGS's low profile turret has a small silhouette, is stabilized and mounts a 105mm M68A1E4 rifled cannon with a fume extractor and an autoloader . The vehicle
6633-400: The cancelation of the AGS, the Army increased its requested funding for M1A2 Abrams and M2A3 Bradley upgrades, and accelerated the development of the Javelin missile . The Army considered a variety of plans to "heavy up" the 2nd ACR. The service added heavy armor to the 2nd ACR and requested funding to purchase Apache helicopters . In the 82nd Airborne, the Army also planned to introduce
6732-442: The end of the Cold War some theorists believed that the existing suite of U.S. armored vehicles, designed largely to fight Soviet mechanized forces in Europe, were not well suited to the lower-intensity missions U.S. military would be tasked with. This led to the development of a new armored fighting vehicle designed for lower-intensity combat, rather than large-scale battle. The General Dynamics mobile gun system originated from
6831-463: The far term. Many officials felt blindsided by the Army's decision to kill the AGS. The Army's decision to cancel the AGS went without a formal announcement but was soon leaked to the press. This displeased some lawmakers including Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Strom Thurmond , who privately expressed irritation to Defense Secretary William J. Perry about having learned of the cancelation through media reports. Ten Representatives signed
6930-472: The frontal arc. The United Defense Mobile Gun System variant included 7.62 mm integral armor protection over most of the vehicle, and 14.5 mm AP protection over the frontal 60-degree arc. BAE equipped the Mobile Protected Firepower variant of the AGS with underbody blast protection from roadside bombs . The MPF variant integrated a BAE's Raven soft kill active protection system. This comprised wide-angle view long-wave infrared cameras, radar , and
7029-663: The hull caused blast overpressures to develop. A solution was found where the "pepper pot" could be covered by a sheet of metal. The MGS's 105 mm cannon can fire four types of ammunition: the M900 kinetic energy penetrator to destroy armored vehicles; the M456A2 high-explosive anti-tank round to destroy thin-skinned vehicles and provide anti-personnel fragmentation; the M393A3 high-explosive squash head plastic round to destroy bunkers, machine gun and sniper positions, and create openings in walls for infantry to access; and M1040 canister shot for use against dismounted infantry in open terrain. In 2001, Rheinmetall announced that it
7128-508: The late 1980s with the "far-term" MPGS armed with a 75 mm gun. The Army's commitment to the program wavered somewhat, which caused Congress to withhold money for the LAV. The Army withdrew from the LAV program in December 1983. One solution favored by the Infantry School was to modernize the Sheridan. The chassis of the Sheridan was considered to be in good working order even if its problematic 152 mm caliber gun/launcher
7227-457: The marketing of the vehicle and disassembled the prototype. A prototype participated in an AGS "rodeo" with other prospective contractors held in July 1990 at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. This was the only submitted vehicle that was considered complete. The Army required the AGS to be airdroppable from a tactical airlifter. C-130 airdrop was a desired capability, but not a required one. FMC claimed it could achieve C-130 airdroppability and so such
7326-424: The outyear funding environment. However, in February the DoD's Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) endorsed the Army's decision. Despite JROC's recommendation, Perry withheld his support for canceling the AGS until he could personally meet with key congressmen. Perry's office said it would review the Army's plans for the $ 1 billion originally earmarked for the AGS before making a decision. The Army issued
7425-490: The procurement of a Mobile Protected Gun, later called the Assault Gun System (AGS), and a Fast Attack Vehicle . The notional Mobile Protected Gun was to be armed with a kinetic gun, or possibly a missile, capable of defeating enemy armor. The lack of a production-ready assault gun was one of the key problems in the development of the division. Originally conceived to be a wheeled light armored vehicle armed with
7524-418: The production of 95 Strykers, including the first 14 limited production MGS systems. During limited production, 14 vehicles were produced. During this time, General Dynamics implemented fixes to the ammunition handling system to improve reliability. In November 2004, the Pentagon approved an Army request to move the vehicle into low-rate production, for a total of 72 vehicles. In August 2008, the Army awarded GDLS
7623-484: The program's relatively low price tag. In November 1990, the Defense Acquisition Board authorized the Army to proceed with the development of the AGS. The Army believed that replacing the Sheridan with an off-the-shelf AGS would be less expensive and provide more capabilities than an upgraded Sheridan. It was expected to replace the Sheridan in the 3/73rd Armor and TOW missile-armed Humvees in
7722-492: The project morphed into the Armored/Assault Gun System. In 1983, the Army established the AGS program, sometimes called XM4 . In 1985, Army Vice Chief of Staff General Maxwell R. Thurman approved an amended requirement operational capability (ROC) for the AGS. Thurman's recommendation that the Army purchase 500 AGS systems went to Army Chief of Staff John A. Wickham Jr. . The Abrams competed with
7821-507: The prototype vehicles to the Army in December 2020, although the last of these were delivered behind schedule after testing had begun. The Army's evaluation of BAE and General Dynamics prototypes at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, continued through August. In February 2022, BAE was eliminated from the competition due to noncompliance issues, leaving the General Dynamics Griffin as the only remaining MPF entry. In June 2022,
7920-459: The roof and a bulkhead separating the ammunition from the crew. The ammunition compartments in the hull are also protected by blowout panels. Explosion/ fire suppression is provided by a Santa Barbara Dual Spectrum system. Halon fire-suppression protects the crew compartment while a powder system is installed in the engine compartment. Unlike the CCVL, the AGS crew is equipped with Nuclear Biological Chemical (NBC) overpressure system . Per
8019-742: The same time, the Army Chief of Staff Carl E. Vuono issued a "promissory note" to replace the Sheridan by FY1995. In September 1989, the Armored Gun System Project Manager office was reestablished at the United States Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command and a marketing survey was distributed to industry. In March 1990, Vuono told the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee that
8118-414: The schedule slippage before awarding the contract, and unfairly disregarded this in their decision making. GDLS delivered the first of eight pre-production mobile gun systems in July 2002. In March 2004, the Army approved the transfer of four AGS production vehicles to the 82nd Airborne Division to be used in Iraq. In June 2004, this plan was put on hold while the Army determined whether the MGS could meet
8217-504: The selection of the vehicle by Taiwan. United Defense manufactured a demonstrator vehicle for Taiwan which it shipped to Taiwan c. 1996 . United Defense presented a version of the AGS without the autoloader. This was a cost-saving measure to allay Taiwan's concerns about the cost of the system. Many other countries expressed interest in the AGS. By 1998 these were: Canada, Germany (for 50 systems), Malaysia and Singapore . In 1996 FMC-Nurol and United Defense teamed to market
8316-503: The vehicle to be equipped according to requirements. Aluminum was chosen instead of steel in order to reduce the weight of the vehicle. The weight limit for the vehicle was driven by the requirement that it be capable of LVAD. Subcontractors as of 1996 consisted of Chrysler Corporation (Pentastar), Computing Devices Canada , Detroit Diesel , General Electric Company , General Motors Corporation ( Hughes Electronics ), Textron Inc.: (Cadillac Gage) and Watervliet Arsenal. The CCVL hull
8415-656: The weight-saving modifications of those destined for the 82nd, which was the only unit that required an airdroppable AGS system. The AGS's budget was zeroed and the production schedule slipped by one year in Congress's FY1995 budget due to program cost growth. Six prototypes were built under the designation XM8. The first of these was rolled out at the United Defense (created by a merger of FMC and BMY ) facility in San Jose, California, in April 1994, and arrived at Fort Knox , Kentucky, in April 1995. The last of these
8514-409: Was all-welded aluminum with bolt-on steel composite armor . Appliqué armor could also be installed by the user. This may have been Modular Expandable Armor System from IBD Deisenroth Engineering . The AGS was designed with three modular armor levels: As of 2003 United Defense was evaluating combining level I and II armors. The crew is protected from ammunition explosion by blowout panels on
8613-616: Was completed in June 1995 and was highlighted by a successful LVAD of a prototype AGS. Live fire testing and initial operational test and evaluation were scheduled to be conducted in FY96. A full-rate production decision was scheduled for March 1997 (Milestone III). In 1998, the Senate Armed Services Committee proposed using the M8 AGS as a surrogate vehicle to evaluate "strike force experimentation activities" in
8712-486: Was defined as an air-transportable light tank to assist infantry brigades in forced entry operations. The Army sought to buy 504 MPF systems. Requirements called for a tracked vehicle armed with a 105 mm or 120 mm caliber cannon, which would not need to be air-droppable. BAE Systems (which bought United Defense in 2005) entered a modernized AGS into the MPF competition. In 2018, the Army selected bids from GDLS and BAE to build 12 prototypes each. BAE began delivering
8811-414: Was delivered in May. United Defense provided five XM8 AGS systems to the service's Operational Test Command , which put the vehicle through five months of testing at Fort Pickett , Virginia. Another prototype underwent survivability testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground , Maryland. In 1995, the Army explored inactivating the 2nd ACR, which would reduce the Army's buy to just the 80 AGS systems destined for
8910-617: Was forced to suspend work on the IAV while the Government Accounting Office evaluated UDLP's protest of the award. GAO denied the protest in April 2001. Soon after the contract was awarded, the MGS IOC date slipped two years from December 2001 to November 2003. The Army allowed GM–GDLS to substitute the Stryker ATGM variant for the MGS in the interim. In its protest, UDLP alleged that the Army had known about
9009-495: Was made somewhat more acceptable by the introduction of an increasing number of larger C-17's. The 3/73rd Armor was inactivated over the following two years. The last Sheridans in service were vismod Sheridans used for opposing force training. These too were retired in 2004. Maintaining the Sheridan was not thought to be practical. In place of the Sheridan in the 82nd Airborne, the Army stood up an Immediate Ready Company of Bradley Fighting Vehicles and M1A1 Abrams tanks from
9108-410: Was more efficient to eliminate the platform and focus on firepower improvements such as equipping Strykers with 30 mm cannons ( M1296 Dragoon ) and CROWS-J mounts, providing better distributed lethality capabilities that will not be lost from removing the MGS. Canada had liquidated about half of its fleet of Leopard 1 main battle tanks in the early 2000s. The Canadian Army planned to replace
9207-453: Was not worth pursuing. The U.S. Army determined that it needed a more immediate solution for the AGS requirement. In 1985, the Army approved a U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) recommendation to field the TOW missile-armed Humvee in the interim. The TOW-armed Humvee proved to be an inadequate substitute for the AGS in the 9th Infantry Division as it could not fire on the move and
9306-482: Was not. Both the Marine Corps and Army explored re-gunning the Sheridan with a conventional gun. In 1983, the Navy Surface Weapons Center mounted a 105 mm cannon to a Sheridan. One Army plan also envisioned re-gunning 120 Sheridans with 105 mm or 120 mm cannons, but this project was canceled in 1985. In the end the Army determined upgrading the Sheridan to meet the AGS requirement
9405-404: Was originally developed for the Canadian Army, which did not have a requirement for transporting the vehicle via C-130. The U.S. Army did have this requirement, and so a design change was required to lower the MGS's height so that the vehicle could fit inside the aircraft. The turret was lowered within the hull. This change caused problems of its own. The reduced distance between the muzzle brake and
9504-429: Was retired without a true successor. The AGS never saw service, though the 82nd Airborne sought to press the preproduction units into service in Iraq. The AGS was unsuccessfully marketed for export and was reincarnated for several subsequent U.S. Army assault gun /light tank programs. United Defense LP proposed the AGS as the Mobile Gun System (MGS) variant of the Interim Armored Vehicle program in 2000, but lost out to
9603-616: Was seeking to incorporate its 105 mm smoothbore low recoil gun on the MGS around 2004. The Army had not articulated such a requirement. By 2000, the Army found its existing ammunition stockpile of 105 mm rounds to be in poor condition, with more than half determined to be either unusable or obsolete. The Army solicited industry to produce new ammunition to replenish the stockpile. L3 Communications completed low rate production of M393 high-explosive plastic HEP-T and M467 training rounds in 2004. 10,000 combat and 18,400 training rounds were ultimately produced by L3. The coaxial weapon
9702-461: Was the first successful employment of light armor in combat. In August 1990, Sheridans were airdropped into Saudi Arabia as the spearhead of the buildup of Operation Desert Shield. In October 1990, HASC deferred the Block III main battle tank and directed the Army to make the AGS its top priority modernization program. After having earlier tried to kill the tank, appropriators grew to appreciate
9801-484: Was too lightly armored. By 1983 the Armor School had come to support an Assault Gun. Instead of wheeled, it would be a tracked, lightweight, highly agile kinetic energy gun capable of killing enemy tanks and shielded by sufficient armor to protection the crew from artillery and small caliber weapons. The system had to be light enough to fly in a C-130 aircraft. After the Army and Marine Corps parted ways on MPGS,
#963036