Mobile mortar system for Osprey delayed
By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer
Investigation slated into cost overruns, production difficulties | ∞
A mobile mortar weapon system that was supposed to be ready for deployment with the new V-22 Osprey aircraft is now the subject of a formal investigation into cost overruns and production delays, a Marine Corps spokesman said Thursday.
Known as the "expeditionary fire support system" or EFSS, the 120mm mortar system has been plagued by development issues and escalating costs that have pushed its scheduled production from 2006 until this spring at the earliest.
The system is designed to be carried aloft in the Osprey; in fact, the mobile weapon has been designed specifically to fit inside the controversial tilt-rotor aircraft.
The delay and swelling costs are the latest in a string of such problems for the Marine Corps, which wanted the mortar unit ready to go when the first Ospreys were sent to Iraq late last year.
Cost rises
On Dec. 21, the Government Accountability Office issued a report finding the cost of the mortar system had ballooned by $15.5 million and had run into numerous problems preventing its production.
Had met its original deadline, the system would have been available for Camp Pendleton troops now deploying to Iraq's Anbar province where they will serve for the rest of the year.
The accountability office report, requested by U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, identified safety issues such as potential injury to crew members and general reliability problems with the system.
The Defense Department's inspector general is now investigating the program, said Bill Johnson-Miles, a spokesman for the Marine Corps Systems Command in Quantico, Va.
Johnson-Miles declined to discuss the accountability office report or the program in detail, citing the probe.
"It is inappropriate for Marine Corps Systems Command to respond to queries or grant interviews," Johnson-Miles said Thursday in an e-mail response to the North County Times. "It is also against DOD (Department of Defense) policy to discuss matters under investigation prior to the requesting official or government agency receiving a formal report."
Planned since 1999
The mortar system is intended to be a rapid-deployment system that Marines can move quickly to trouble spots.
It was begun in 1999 when the Marine Corps said it needed a weapon system that could be carried inside the Osprey to support ground assault operations.
Six prototypes were produced in 2005 and some testing took place last summer. Tests in cold weather slated for last February were not conducted, and the accountability office said in its report that those tests could be delayed again because of a problem with the propellant section for the mortar's ammunition.
The system requires two of the hybrid helicopter-airplane Ospreys in order to be moved -- one to transport the unarmored vehicle and mortars and one to carry a second unarmored vehicle and ammunition trailer.
In the Marine Corps' planning, a third Osprey would ferry troops to support the mortar team.
Other problems
The expeditionary fire support system is the latest Marine Corps project to face delays and cost overruns, joining the Osprey and a new sea and land troop carrier.
Operating issues that led to a series of crashes that took the lives of 23 Marines, including 15 from local bases, delayed the Osprey by several years.
The aircraft, which takes off and lands like a helicopter and flies like an airplane at a speed of 400 mph, grew in price from $40 million each to more than $70 million.
The first Ospreys to see active duty were sent to Iraq and just recently began flying combat operations, according to Marine Corps officials.
The Marine Corps also has faced numerous problems in development of the expeditionary fighting vehicle, a tanklike behemoth that can speed over water at up to 25 knots and overland at up to 45 mph.
The General Dynamics-built rig, operated by a crew of three and able to carry a fully equipped 17-man rifle squad, is supposed to replace the service's aging, 35-year-old amphibious assault vehicle, providing more protection to the troops and extending its sea range.
Developmental issues have delayed its full-scale production, pushing the due date for the first delivery to Marines in the field from 2007 to 2011. The service also has scaled back its original purchase plan of more than 1,013 vehicles to 573.
'Tremendous pressure'
Phil Coyle, a senior adviser for the Center for Defense Information and former assistant secretary of defense and director of testing and development at the Pentagon from 1994 to 2001, said the Marine Corps may be overmatched by the complex process of acquiring new weapon systems.
"It takes real insight, especially with as many different kinds of systems as the Marines are trying to buy today," Coyle said during a telephone interview Thursday. "I know that the operational testing and evaluation people are under tremendous pressure to do more with less as a result of civilian cutbacks."
The mortar system for the Osprey is an example, Coyle said, of a weapon that probably wouldn't have been needed if that controversial aircraft had been scrapped. Coyle is a longtime critic of the Osprey, one of many inside including Vice President Dick Cheney, who also opposed its development in the 1990s when he was serving in the Defense Department.
"If they hadn't become so involved with the Osprey, they probably never would have needed it," he said. "The problem is the other Marine vehicles wouldn't fit inside the Osprey."
The Marines also appeared to rush development of the mortar system, he said.
"Clearly, they should have, and could have, identified during developmental testing the problems now surfacing."
Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Mike G. wrote on Jan 5, 2008 4:57 AM:Since when does the DOD IG look into cost over-runs theres more to this story.
Skip wrote on Jan 5, 2008 7:14 AM:The picture of that jeep and motar looks like it came right out of World War 2. It is no wonder they cannot do anything with this obsolete aircraft. (developed in the early 80's)
Grump wrote on Jan 5, 2008 7:51 AM:Skip just becuase something looks like it came from WWII doesn't mean that is is no good. The WWII Jeep design has been well proven and is simplicity at its best. I agree with you on the Ospray, you couldn't pay me to fly in one of those things.
What? wrote on Jan 5, 2008 8:03 AM:It sure does look like a WWII jeep. I wouldn't call the Osprey obsollete. I do think they need to design a new one that could haul a Styker. The reason the enemy has to highjack planes to attack us is because there isn't two armies in the world that could take us. Why? Because we spend the money to build the the systems. The only problem with the Osprey is the fact that we started it about a decade befor we had the tech to make it work. If you don't push the limits you stuff is obsolete befor it is done.
Roberts wrote on Jan 5, 2008 8:31 AM:If this is the best our defence industry can come up with were in deep trouble. I have just reviewed the GAO report scarry speed requirement 5mph off road. The only government asset I know of with a speed requirement of 5 mph is the NASA Space Shuttle Mobility Tractor that transports the space shuttle to the launch pad.
Cost- 296,000,000 with an additional 15,000,000 for further testing and development.
Armor- congress funded an armor development program for this tin can.
Added improved road speed of 35mph as part of the 15,000,000.
Can hardly go 5mph off road without posing a threat to our own Marines, yet they threw in a couple million to go 35mph on a paved road.
I NEED A DRINK
Fred H wrote on Jan 5, 2008 10:12 AM:Indeed! Take the flame thrower from WWII. It was designed to flush out the enemy hiding in caves. Where is Osama Bin Laden supposed to be? IN A CAVE, DUH! ~so...since the flame thrower is no longer used, and it is from WWII, it is deemed obsolete? Our country is in BIG trouble. Errr, YOUR country. I did my part.
ToSkip wrote on Jan 5, 2008 10:39 AM:Obsolete aircraft because of 80's technology? Guess the F-16 is obsolete since production started in 1976 (60's/70's technology). Oh and all those Marine Hueys- production started in the 50's. Let's not forget the C-17 our premier transport flown by the airforce -McDonnell Douglas won the contract to build its proposed aircraft, by then designated the C-17A Globemaster III, on August 28, 1981. B-52 -The USAF has had B-52s in active service since 1955. Yep, that 80's technology is so obsolete.
Mortar that works wrote on Jan 5, 2008 11:01 AM:80mm in he bed of a 1948 or later Jeep. That's the matter with tech that works, we know works, and for which you can find parts anywhere in the world?
My 1989 Wrangler just completed the Baja 1000, and it went a lot faster than 5MPH on the course.
JIMMY wrote on Jan 5, 2008 12:20 PM:GOOGLE- AMERICAN GROWLER NEWS- THE SAME VEHICLE IN A USA TODAY ARTICLE STATES THE SAME VEHICLE SELLS COMMERCIALY FOR APROX $ 14000.00 NOW BEING SOLD FOR APROX $ 125,000.00 TO THE USMC. I HAVE A 20 YEAR OLD FORD BRONCO I CAN LET GO FOR AROUND $ 85,OOO WHOS THE CONTRACTING OFFICER
nema wrote on Jan 5, 2008 12:23 PM:
they're trying to sell us another pig in a poke here. I can't wait until we get a new pres - one who'll end the pork barrel politics.
WW1 vet.... wrote on Jan 5, 2008 2:29 PM:Back in my day we didn't count on air support because there wasn't any. While Zeke, Clem and I slugged it out with the huns in the trenches, those flyboys were drinking their fancy wine and putting pomade in their hair. That's the problem with the military these days, too much reliance on air power. I think we need some more old timey values in our armed services.
Karl wrote on Jan 5, 2008 3:50 PM:nema, if you think a new President, Democrat or Republican will end pork barrel politics you are very naive. By the way, regardless of your political leanings, the office of the Presidency deserves the respect to be capitalized and certainly not abreviated IMHO.
Mike wrote on Jan 5, 2008 4:59 PM:People are catching on. This whole program was a scam from the begining. All the pork comes from within the Corps though.
Modern systems with highly capable vehicles and common, proven mortars were overlooked.
JIMMY wrote on Jan 5, 2008 7:02 PM:Reading up on some of the published articles. Owner of American Growler is a retired Marine Col. Good ole boy network is alive and well,regardless of how absurd or dangerous the solution is.
Jack M wrote on Jan 5, 2008 7:32 PM:" complex process of acquiring new weapon systems" The article states they have deen working on this concept since 1999.
Two vietnam era jeeps and a french mortar thats been around for 30 years.
whos kidding who
Skip wrote on Jan 5, 2008 8:02 PM:They did not even have the internet in the 80's, and my phone still had a dial. Yes I consider it obsolete. I also had a Commercial pilot's license before I joined the military, and knowing what I know about aircraft and military life in general, there is no way you would ever get into one of those aircraft. I am not knocking anything from World War 2 as my hobby is studying it.
KISS, unless your buddy/future employer is the contractor wrote on Jan 5, 2008 8:13 PM:The growler is a reincarnation of the mutt, which was junked because of its tendency to roll over. The reason for its choice is that, like everything else about it, the Osprey is the victim of the "Pentagon wars" mission creep. It's only large enough to carry troops, and it can't sling-load, so they are trying to shoehorn the indirect fire system into something that won't work.
The Army has Chinooks that accomplish this same mission, and have been doing so effectively since Vietnam. maybe the Marines should look into the larger Chinook. With a sling-loaded 105 and the Marines inside, it gets the steel downrange, and works very well.
Skip wrote on Jan 5, 2008 10:07 PM:As Marines get closer to begin operating the V-22 Osprey, they are finding that making weapons systems small enough to fit in the aircraft’s undersize cabin can be a formidable challenge. One reason for the limited space is that the tilt-rotor Osprey—which takes off and lands vertically but flies at much higher speeds than conventional helicopters—was designed in the early 1980s to transport troops, not vehicles. The Osprey’s primary reason for being was to replace the CH-46 helicopter, so it was “optimized to carry people, rather than cargo.
nema wrote on Jan 6, 2008 12:27 PM:Karl - aka rote: u obviously haven't heard of Ron Paul yet..
MVet wrote on Jan 6, 2008 5:24 PM:Call it for what it is. A Jeep and a howitzer.
M8 75mm Pack Howitzer wrote on Jan 6, 2008 5:25 PM:Pack artillery is designed to be easily disassembled and carried, and has been used by the US Army since the 1930’s. In 1927 the US Army adopted the M1 75mm Pack Howitzer, which during the 1930’s was modified to be carried by airborne units in gliders. Redesignated 75mm Pack Howitzer M8 (airborne), it was an efficient and reliable weapon used by non-airborne units with a jeep as the prime mover. Ammunition used by the M8 Pack Howitzer included an anti-tank round.
Advertisement