General Dynamics Land Systems extended contract for GCV Ground Combat Vehicle program 0105131

a
 

Defence & Security News - United States

 
 
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 11:20 AM
 
General Dynamics Land Systems extended contract for GCV Ground Combat Vehicle program.
General Dynamics Land Systems and the local business unit of BAE Systems Inc., both in Sterling Heights, have received nearly $340 million combined to extend their early development contracts on the military Ground Combat Vehicle program by six months.
     
General Dynamics Land Systems and the local business unit of BAE Systems Inc., both in Sterling Heights, have received nearly $340 million combined to extend their early development contracts on the military Ground Combat Vehicle program by six months.
BAE Systems’ hybrid GCV gives the Army the power to more affordably support new technology enhancements far into the future.
     
The U.S. Army Contracting Command at the Tacom Life Cycle Management Command in Warren this week awarded up to $180.5 million to GDLS and $159.4 million to rival BAE for the infantry fighting vehicle, which is under development to replace much of the military's aging fleet of Bradley armored vehicles.

The new awards use federal research, development, testing and evaluation budget funds allocated to the Army this fiscal year, but actually extend the life of the vehicle contracts from December 2013 to June 2014 -- around the time the U.S. Department of Defense expects a decision on the second phase of engineering, manufacturing and development on the Ground Combat Vehicle.

In 2011, General Dynamics and BAE each received two-year technology-development contracts, valued at $439.7 million and $449.9 million, respectively, for the program.

The Army expects to order 1,748 vehicles for more than 20 military brigades at a cost of more than $28 billion sometime after a finalized vehicle enters production, starting in 2019.

The funding decision follows a report this month by the Congressional Budget Office that suggests the Ground Combat Vehicle might be less valuable for the Army than other possible options to replace the Bradley. Contractors took issue with that report for using an outdated and speculative version of the finished vehicle for comparison purposes.