Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Japan 2011 Earthquake: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Response [March 22, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "With almost 40,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan, the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami is unique in that U.S. forces and associated resources were located in close proximity to deal with the crisis. All Services--Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force--are present in Japan in various capacities. In addition, U.S. forces train regularly with their Japanese Self Defense Force (SDF) counterparts, including many humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercises. With over 100,000 SDF troops called up to respond to the disaster, U.S. forces were able to coordinate their efforts almost immediately to provide support for the Japanese responders. Within 8 days of the earthquake, the SDF had deployed 106,200 personnel; 200 rotary aircraft and 322 fixed-wings; and 60 ships. Nearly all of the Maritime SDF ships have been transferred to the affected area, and forces from the southernmost to the farthest north territories have been mobilized. As of March 19, the SDF had rescued 19,300 people and provided supplies on an ongoing basis to 300,00 [sic] displaced people, in addition to supporting activities at the troubled nuclear reactors."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew; Chanlett-Avery, Emma

  2011-03-22
• Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress [March 10, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) is being developed by the Army and the Marine Corps as a successor to the 11 different versions of the High Mobility, Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) that have been in service since 1985. On October 28, 2008, three awards were made for the JLTV Technology Development (TD) Phase, which is scheduled to conclude in the June 2011 timeframe to three industry teams: (1) BAE Systems, (2) the team of Lockheed Martin and General Tactical Vehicle, and (3) AM General and General Dynamics Land Systems. Once testing is completed and technology requirements established, a full and open competition was expected to be conducted in the late summer, 2011 for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase and the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2011-03-10
• Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress [Updated August 3, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "The Future Combat System (FCS) was a multiyear, multibillion dollar program at the heart of the Army's transformation efforts. It was to be the Army's major research, development, and acquisition program consisting of 14 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications and information network. FCS was intended to replace current systems such as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high-risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved and the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS-equipped units could function as intended. [...] Plans for transition from the FCS program to a new program where the Army intends to modernize all BCTs with remaining FCS technologies will likely be of critical congressional interest. The development of a new Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) to [replace] the cancelled MGVs could also be subject to congressional debate and oversight. This report will be superseded by a report on the Army's BCT Modernization Strategy when sufficient details are available."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2009-08-03
• Special Operations Forces (SOF) and CIA Paramilitary Operations: Issues for Congress [August 3, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The 9/11 Commission Report recommended that responsibility for directing and executing paramilitary operations should be shifted from the CIA to the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). The President directed the Secretary of Defense and Director of Central Intelligence to review this recommendation and present their advice by mid-February 2005, but ultimately, they did not recommend a transfer of paramilitary responsibilities. This Report will briefly describe special operations conducted by DOD and paramilitary operations conducted by the CIA and discuss the background of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. For additional information see CRS Report RS21048, U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF): Background and Issues for Congress, by Andrew Feickert."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Best, Richard A.; Feickert, Andrew

  2009-08-03
• Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress [Updated March 13, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This CRS report provides an update on The Future Combat System [FCS], which is the U.S. Army's multiyear, multibillion dollar program. This program is the main target of the Army's transformation efforts. "It is the Army's major research, development, and acquisition program consisting of 14 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications and information network. FCS is intended to replace such current systems as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high-risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved and the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS-equipped units can function as intended. The FCS program exists in a dynamic national security environment which could significantly influence the program's outcome. The Administration has committed the United States to 'the Long War,' a struggle that could last for decades as the United States and its allies attempt to locate and destroy terrorist networks worldwide. Some question if FCS, envisioned and designed prior to September 11, 2001 to combat conventional land forces, is relevant in this 'Long War' where counterinsurgency and stabilization operations feature prominently. The FCS program has achieved a number of programmatic milestones and is transitioning from a purely conceptual program to one where prototypes of many of the 14 FCS systems are under development. With a variety of estimates on the total cost of the FCS program, questions have been raised about FCS affordability, and the Army cites anticipated budgetary constraints for the recent restructuring of the program from 18 to 14 systems."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2009-03-13
• Homeland Security: Protecting Airliners from Terrorist Missiles [Updated February 15, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Recent events have focused attention on the threat that terrorists with shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), referred to as Man-Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS), pose to commercial airliners. Most believe that no single solution exists to effectively mitigate this threat. Instead, a menu of options may be considered, including installing infrared (IR) countermeasures on aircraft; modifying flight operations and air traffic control procedures; improving airport and regional security; and strengthening missile non-proliferation efforts. Equipping aircraft with missile countermeasure systems can protect the aircraft even when operating in areas where ground-based security measures are unavailable or infeasible to implement. However, this option has a relatively high cost, between $1 million and $3 million per aircraft, and the time needed for implementation does not allow for immediate response to the existing terrorist threat. Procedural improvements such as specific flight crew training, altering air traffic procedures to minimize exposure to the threat, and improved security near airports may be less costly than countermeasures and could more immediately help deter domestic terrorist attacks. However, these techniques by themselves cannot completely mitigate the risk of domestic attacks and would not protect U.S. airliners flying to and from foreign airports."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bolkcom, Christopher C.; Feickert, Andrew

  2005-02-15
• Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress [April 28, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Future Combat System (FCS) is the U.S. Armys multiyear, multi-billion dollar program at the heart of the Armys transformation efforts. It is to be the Armys major research, development, and acquisition program to consist of 18 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications network. FCS is intended to replace such current systems as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle with advanced, networked combat systems. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high-risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved as well as the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS-equipped units can function as intended."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2005-04-28
• Homeland Security: Protecting Airliners from Terrorist Missiles [Updated November 3, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Recent events have focused attention on the threat that terrorists with shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) pose to commercial airliners. Most believe that no single solution exists to effectively mitigate this threat. Instead, a menu of options may be considered, including installing infrared (IR) countermeasures on aircraft; modifying flight operations and air traffic control procedures; improving airport and regional security; and strengthening missile non-proliferation efforts. Equipping aircraft with missile countermeasure systems can protect the aircraft even when operating in areas where ground-based security measures are unavailable or infeasible to implement. However, this option has a relatively high cost, between $1 million and $3 million per aircraft, and the time needed for implementation does not allow for immediate response to the existing terrorist threat. Procedural improvements such as specific flight crew training, altering air traffic procedures to minimize exposure to the threat, and improved security near airports may be less costly than countermeasures and could more immediately help deter domestic terrorist attacks. However, these techniques by themselves cannot completely mitigate the risk of domestic attacks and would not protect U.S. airliners flying to and from foreign airports."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bolkcom, Christopher C.; Feickert, Andrew; Elias, Bartholomew

  2003-11-03
• Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Foreign Countries [Updated March 5, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report provides a current inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles throughout the world and discusses implications for U.S. national security policy. Ballistic and cruise missile development and proliferation continue to pose a threat to United States national security interests both at home and abroad. While approximately 16 countries currently produce ballistic missiles, they have been widely proliferated to many countries- some of whom are viewed as potential adversaries of the United States. Nineteen countries produce cruise missiles which are also widely proliferated and many analysts consider cruise missile proliferation to be of more concern than that of ballistic missile proliferation, primarily due to their low threshold of use, availability and affordability, and accuracy."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2004-03-05
• Disarming Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction [April 22, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On December 19, 2003, Libya announced it would dismantle its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs and open the country to immediate and comprehensive verification inspections. According to the Bush Administration, Libya pledged to: Eliminate all elements of its chemical and nuclear weapons programs; Declare all nuclear activities to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Eliminate ballistic missiles beyond a 300-kilometer (km) range with a payload of 500 kilograms (kgs); Accept international inspections to ensure Libya's complete adherence to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), and sign the Additional Protocol; Eliminate all chemical weapons stocks and munitions and accede to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC); and Allow immediate inspections and monitoring to verify all of these actions. Since December 2003, Libya has also agreed to abide by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) guidelines, and signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. U.S., British, and international officials have inspected and removed or destroyed key components of those programs, and Libya has provided valuable information, particularly about foreign suppliers. Libya's WMD disarmament is a critical step towards reintegration into the world community, and a necessary but probably not sufficient prerequisite for lifting U.S. sanctions."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Squassoni, Sharon A.; Feickert, Andrew

  2004-04-22
• Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Selected Foreign Countries [Updated July 26, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report provides a current summary of ballistic and cruise missile activity in selected countries and discusses implications for U.S. national security policy. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency's Weapons of Mass Destruction Terms of Reference Handbook defines a ballistic missile as 'a missile that is guided during powered flight and unguided during free flight when the trajectory that it follows is subject only to the external influences of gravity and atmospheric drag' and a cruise missile as 'a long-range, low-flying guided missile that can be launched from air, sea, and land.' Ballistic and cruise missile development and proliferation continue to pose a threat to U.S. national security interests both at home and abroad. Approximately 35 countries currently possess operational ballistic missiles of various ranges and approximately 25 countries have operational cruise missiles with a range greater than 150 km (90 miles). Some analysts consider cruise missile proliferation to be of more concern than that of ballistic missile proliferation, primarily due to their low threshold of use, availability, affordability, and accuracy. This report will be updated annually."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2005-07-26
• Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) and the Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Issues for Congress [November 17, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "The Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) is a Department of Defense (DOD) program that would play a significant role in the U.S Army's proposed Future Combat System (FCS) program. (For a more detailed description of the FCS program see CRS Report RL32888, The Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress, by Andrew Feickert.) JTRS, envisioned as a family of software programmable radios, has been described as the 'backbone' of the FCS and is intended to link the 18 manned and unmanned systems that would constitute FCS. Two JTRS sub-programs managed by the Army - Cluster One and Cluster Five - have experienced developmental difficulties, delays, and cost overruns which calls into question their viability."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2005-11-17
• Cruise Missile Proliferation [Updated July 28, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "About 75 countries currently possess cruise missiles. Many experts predict that anti-ship and land attack cruise missile proliferation will increase in terms of both scope and technological sophistication. This report will be updated as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2005-07-28
• Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress [Updated May 5, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "The Future Combat System (FCS) is the U.S. Army's multiyear, multibillion dollar program at the heart of the Army's transformation efforts. It is to be the Army's major research, development, and acquisition program consisting of 18 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications and information network. FCS is intended to replace such current systems as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle with advanced, networked combat systems. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high- risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved as well as the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS equipped units can function as intended. The FCS program exists in a dynamic national security environment which could significantly influence the program's outcome. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and potential defense budget cuts could play a role in shaping the FCS program. The revised FCS program timeline- including four 'Spin-Outs' whereby equipment is to be tested first by a FCS evaluation brigade and then introduced into the current force- has extended the program's timeline by four years and has added additional funding requirements, but it has also served to reduce some of the risk associated with this admittedly high-risk venture."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2006-05-05
• Japan 2011 Earthquake: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Response [June 2, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "On March 11, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake jolted a wide swath of Honshu, Japan's largest island. The quake, with an epicenter located about 230 miles northeast of Tokyo, generated a tsunami that pounded Honshu's northeastern coast, causing widespread destruction in Miyagi, Iwate, Ibaraki, and Fukushima prefectures. As of May 23, over 15,188 deaths had been confirmed, with 8,742 missing and likely to be included in the final death toll. It appears that the tsunami, rather than the earthquake, caused nearly all the deaths. Entire towns were washed away; over 432,047 homes and 27,019 other buildings, as well as 3,700 roads were damaged or destroyed. With almost 40,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan, the situation was unique in that U.S. forces and associated resources were located in close proximity to deal with the crisis. All services-- Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force--are present in Japan in various capacities. In addition, U.S. forces train regularly with their Japanese Self Defense Force (SDF) counterparts, including many humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercises."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew; Chanlett-Avery, Emma

  2011-06-02
• Iraq: Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Capable Missiles and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) [Updated March 25, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report addresses Iraq's missile and UAV programs and their employment of missiles against Coalition forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom. The UN supervised the destruction of a number of Al Samoud 2 missiles, but some of these missiles may be deployed with Iraqi forces. Intelligence sources estimate that Iraq has illegally retained up to 20 Al Hussein SCUD variant missiles and has fired a number of Ababil-100 missiles at coalition targets. Iraq has also been accused of modifying L-29 Czech jet trainers to be used as UAVs to disseminate chemical or biological agents. This report will be updated as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2003-03-25
• Missile Proliferation and the Strategic Balance in South Asia [October 17, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This report analyzes the policy implications of missile proliferation in South Asia, providing information on India's and Pakistan's missile programs and their role in regional security. India and Pakistan have fought three wars since 1947 and have significant unsettled territorial disputes. Concerns on region security became acute after May 1998, when both India and Pakistan tested nuclear explosive devices. Since that time, both countries have continued testing nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, and both have established command and control authorities to oversee their nuclear arsenals. Although the status of weaponization is unclear, a slow-speed arms race appears to be underway on the Asian Subcontinent, and the proliferation of missile capabilities in South Asia has been identified as a potentially major threat to regional stability and to key U.S. foreign policy goals. During the 1990s, U.S. security policy toward South Asia focused on preventing weapons proliferation, but the Bush Administration shifted to a more "pragmatic" approach emphasizing "restraint" in this area. For perhaps the first period in history the United States currently enjoys simultaneously positive relations with both countries. The strategic capabilities of India and Pakistan could provide a ready catalyst for transforming disputes or terrorist incidents into potentially cataclysmic confrontations. Both countries also are pursuing the development or acquisition of missile defense systems. Key issues for Congress addressed in this report are the extent to which missile proliferation in South Asia enhances or upsets regional stability and the role of U.S. policy in promoting such stability, as well as in tension reduction and nonproliferation.

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew; Kronstadt, K. Alan

  2003-10-17
• Homeland Security: Protecting Airliners from Terrorist Missiles [Updated October 22, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Recent events have focused attention on the threat that terrorists with shoulder fired surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), referred to as Man-Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS), pose to commercial airliners. Most believe that no single solution exists to effectively mitigate this threat. Instead, a menu of options may be considered, including installing infrared (IR) countermeasures on aircraft; modifying flight operations and air traffic control procedures; improving airport and regional security; and strengthening missile non-proliferation efforts. Equipping aircraft with missile countermeasure systems can protect the aircraft even when operating in areas where ground-based security measures are unavailable or infeasible to implement. However, this option has a relatively high cost, between $1 million and $3 million per aircraft, and the time needed for implementation does not allow for immediate response to the existing terrorist threat. Procedural improvements such as specific flight crew training, altering air traffic procedures to minimize exposure to the threat, and improved security near airports may be less costly than countermeasures and could more immediately help deter domestic terrorist attacks. However, these techniques by themselves cannot completely mitigate the risk of domestic attacks and would not protect U.S. airliners flying to and from foreign airports. This report will be updated as needed. This report will be updated as needed."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Bolkcom, Christopher C.; Feickert, Andrew; Elias, Bartholomew

  2004-10-22
• Special Operations Forces (SOF) and CIA Paramilitary Operations: Issues for Congress [Updated December 6, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The 9/11 Commission Report recommended that responsibility for directing and executing paramilitary operations should be shifted from the CIA to the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). The President directed the Secretary of Defense and Director of Central Intelligence to review this recommendation and present their advice by mid-February 2005, but ultimately, they did not recommend a transfer of paramilitary responsibilities. This Report will briefly describe special operations conducted by DOD and paramilitary operations conducted by the CIA and discuss the background of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew; Best, Richard A.

  2006-12-06
• Iran's Ballistic Missile Capabilities [Updated August 23, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Iran's extensive inventory of ballistic missiles is considered by some as its primary means to deliver weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to a variety of potential targets in the region. Recent missile tests and reports that Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons have helped to increase regional tensions. This report will be updated as events warrant. Additional information is provided in CRS Report RL30427, Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Foreign Countries, CRS Report RL30551, Iran: Arms and Weapons of Mass Destruction Suppliers, and CRS Report RL30699, Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons and Missiles: Status and Trends." This report fully characterizes and details the varied elements of Iran's ballistic missile program, as well as tracking the continuing trends of their ongoing pursuits of such an arsenal.

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2004-08-23
• Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress [July 18, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) is being developed by the Army and the Marine Corps as a successor to the 11 different versions of the High Mobility, Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) that have been in service since 1985. On October 28, 2008, three awards were made for the JLTV Technology Development (TD) Phase, which is scheduled to conclude in the June 2011 timeframe to three industry teams: (1) BAE Systems, (2) the team of Lockheed Martin and General Tactical Vehicle, and (3) AM General and General Dynamics Land Systems. Once testing is completed and technology requirements established, a full and open competition was expected to be conducted in the late summer, 2011 for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase and the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months. […] The House Armed Services Committee has recommended decreased funding levels--$147.1 million for the Army and $46.8 million for the Marine Corps. The House Appropriations also recommended cutting Army and Marine Corps JLTV funding by $25 million for each service and using these funds for HMMWV survivability initiatives. Concerns have been expressed that DOD's Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected (MRAP) All - Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV) effort will clash with the JLTV. There are also concerns about overall JLTV program affordability and the Marine's concerns with its weight and transportability. The Army's decision to change JLTV survivability requirements has resulted in the delay of awarding EMD contracts and the doubling of the EMD phase to 48 months which could increase the program's overall cost."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2011-07-18
• Army's Future Combat System (FCS): Background and Issues for Congress [Updated March 5, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Future Combat System (FCS) is the U.S. Army's multiyear, multibillion dollar program at the heart of the Army's transformation efforts. It is the Army's major research, development, and acquisition program consisting of 14 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications and information network. FCS is intended to replace such current systems as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high-risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved and the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS-equipped units can function as intended. The FCS program exists in a dynamic national security environment which could significantly influence the program's outcome. The Administration has committed the United States to 'the Long War,' a struggle that could last for decades as the United States and its allies attempt to locate and destroy terrorist networks worldwide. Some question if FCS, envisioned and designed prior to September 11, 2001 to combat conventional land forces, is relevant in this 'Long War.' The FCS program has achieved a number of programmatic milestones and is transitioning from a purely conceptual program to one where prototypes of many of the 14 FCS systems are under development. With a variety of estimates on the total cost of the FCS program, questions have been raised about FCS affordability, and the Army cites anticipated budgetary constraints for the recent restructuring of the program from 18 to 14 systems."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2008-03-05
• U.S. Army and Marine Corps Equipment Requirements: Background and Issues for Congress [December 20, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The United States Army and Marine Corps have been at war -- first in Afghanistan and then Iraq -- since November 2001. According to the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Peter Schoomaker, 'for the last five years, a period longer than World War II, the Army has had as many as 18 to 20 brigade combat teams deployed on a rotational basis in combat conditions.' In a similar manner, the Marine Corps has deployed its forces and equipment in what has been described as 'the harsh operating environments of Iraq and Afghanistan' where the heat, sand, and dust as well as operational rates 'well in excess of peacetime rates' has taken a heavy toll on the Army's and Marine's equipment, which, in some cases,was more than 20 years old when the conflicts first began."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2006-12-20
• Army's Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress [May 30, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In April 2009, then-Secretary of Defense Gates announced he intended to significantly restructure the Army's Future Combat System (FCS) program. The FCS was a multiyear, multibillion dollar program that had been underway since 2000 and was at the heart of the Army's transformation efforts. In lieu of the cancelled FCS manned ground vehicle (MGV), the Army was directed to develop a ground combat vehicle (GCV) that would be relevant across the entire spectrum of Army operations and would incorporate combat lessons learned from Iraq and Afghanistan The Army reissued a request for proposal (RFP) for the GCV on November 30, 2010 and planned to begin fielding the GCV by 2015-2017. On August 17, 2011, the GCV program was approved to enter the Technology Development Phase of the acquisition process and a day later, the Army awarded two technology development contracts: $439.7 million to the General Dynamics-led team and a second contract for $449.9 million to the BAE Systems-Northrop Grumman team. The technology development phase is expected to last 24 months. […] Potential issues for Congress include the role and need for the GCV in a downsized Army that will likely have fewer heavy brigade combat teams (HBCTs). The Administration's announcement of a strategic shift to the Asia-Pacific region presents questions as to the necessity for HBCTs and, by association, the GCV. GCV affordability also remains a key consideration for Congress. The Army contends that the average unit production cost for the GCV will be between $9 million and $10.5 million and the average unit production cost (including spare parts) will be between $11 million and $13 million. The Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) estimates that the average unit production cost will be in the $16 million to $17 million range. If the CAPE's cost estimate proves to be accurate, the Army would need an additional $7.2 billion to acquire 1,800 GCVs. This report will be updated."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2012-05-30
• Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress [August 27, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) is being developed by the Army and the Marine Corps as a successor to the High Mobility, Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) that have been in service since 1985. On October 28, 2008, three awards were made for the JLTV Technology Development (TD) Phase to three industry teams: (1) BAE Systems, (2) the team of Lockheed Martin and General Tactical Vehicle, and (3) AM General and General Dynamics Land Systems. Once testing was completed and technology requirements established, a full and open competition was expected to be conducted in the late summer of 2011 for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase; the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months. In February 2011, it was announced that the award of the EMD contract would be delayed until January or February 2012 because the Army changed requirements for the JLTV. DOD had planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months, but instead proposed a 48-month-long EMD. There will be two JLTV variants--a Combat Tactical Vehicle (CTV) that can transport four passengers and carry 3,500 pounds and a Combat Support Vehicle (CSV) that can transport two passengers and carry 5,100 pounds. […] Potential issues for Congress include clarification of foreign participation in the JLTV program, given Australia's apparent non-participation, and how the Army's upcoming study to revise overall tactical wheeled vehicle requirements might affect the JLTV program. This report will be updated."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2012-08-27
• Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress [October 17, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) is being developed by the Army and the Marine Corps as a successor to the 11 different versions of the High Mobility, Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) that have been in service since 1985. On October 28, 2008, three awards were made for the JLTV Technology Development (TD) Phase, which is scheduled to conclude in the June 2011 timeframe to three industry teams: (1) BAE Systems, (2) the team of Lockheed Martin and General Tactical Vehicle, and (3) AM General and General Dynamics Land Systems. Once testing was completed and technology requirements established, a full and open competition was expected to be conducted in the late summer, 2011 for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase and the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months. […] Another concern is even though the Army and Marines have dropped some requirements to lower per-vehicle costs, that requirement might be added in the future, driving up the program cost. The Army and Marines have both noted that, despite emphasis on recapitalizing HMMWVs and MRAPs [Mine Resistant Ambush Protected] in lieu of developing JLTVs, there are limitations concerning the degree to which these vehicles can be upgraded and still be operationally effective. Another possible issue for consideration is the new lower JLTV per-vehicle cost target might be close to that of recapitalized HMMWVs, bringing into question if it is better and more cost effective to procure 'new' JLTVs versus 'old' recapitalized HMMWVs[.]"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2011-10-17
• Cluster Munitions: Background and Issues for Congress [October 5, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Cluster munitions are air-dropped or ground-launched weapons that release a number of smaller submunitions intended to kill enemy personnel or destroy vehicles. Cluster munitions were developed in World War II and are part of many nations' weapons stockpiles. Cluster munitions have been used frequently in combat, including the early phases of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cluster munitions have been highly criticized internationally for causing a significant number of civilian deaths, and efforts have been undertaken to ban and regulate their use. The Department of Defense (DOD) continues to view cluster munitions as a military necessity but has instituted a policy to reduce the failure rate of cluster munitions to 1% or less by 2018. There are two major international initiatives to address cluster munitions: the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) and negotiations under the U.N. Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). The Obama Administration has reiterated U.S. opposition to the CCM, which entered into force August 1, 2010, but is participating in negotiations regarding cluster munitions under the CCW."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew; Kerr, Paul K.

  2011-10-05
• Army Drawdown and Restructuring: Background and Issues for Congress [January 3, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 26, 2012, senior DOD [Department of Defense] leadership unveiled a new defense strategy based on a review of potential future security challenges, current defense strategy, and budgetary constraints. This new strategy envisions a smaller, leaner Army that is agile, flexible, rapidly deployable, and technologically advanced. This strategy will rebalance the Army's global posture and presence, emphasizing where potential problems are likely to arise, such as the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East. As part of the Administration's proposal, two armored brigade combat teams (ABCTs) in Europe will be eliminated out of a total of eight BCTs that will be cut from Active Army force structure. The Army has stated that it may cut more than eight BCTs from the Army's current 44 Active BCTs. Army endstrength will go from 570,000 in 2010 to 490,000 during the Future Year Defense Plan (FYDP) period. As part of this reduction, the Army would no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, protracted stability operations but would continue to be a full-spectrum force capable of addressing a wide range of national security challenges. The Army National Guard and Army Reserves were not targeted for significant cuts. Army leadership stated the impending decrease in Active Duty Army force structure would place an even greater reliance on the National Guard and Reserves."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2013-01-03
• Army's Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress [January 2, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In April 2009, then-Secretary of Defense Gates announced he intended to significantly restructure the Army's Future Combat System (FCS) program. The FCS was a multiyear, multibillion dollar program that had been underway since 2000 and was at the heart of the Army's transformation efforts. In lieu of the cancelled FCS manned ground vehicle (MGV), the Army was directed to develop a ground combat vehicle (GCV) that would be relevant across the entire spectrum of Army operations and would incorporate combat lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army reissued a request for proposal (RFP) for the GCV on November 30, 2010 and plans to begin fielding the GCV by 2015-2017."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McCarthy, James E.; Feickert, Andrew

  2013-01-02
• Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV): Background and Issues for Congress [January 2, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) is being developed by the Army and the Marine Corps as a successor to the High Mobility, Multi-Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) that has been in service since 1985. On October 28, 2008, awards were made for the JLTV Technology Development (TD) Phase to three industry teams: (1) BAE Systems, (2) the team of Lockheed Martin and General Tactical Vehicle, and (3) AM General and General Dynamics Land Systems. Once testing was completed and technology requirements established, a full and open competition was expected to be conducted in the late summer of 2011 for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) Phase; the Department of Defense (DOD) planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months. […] Potential issues for Congress include clarification of foreign participation in the JLTV program, given Australia's apparent non-participation, and how the Army's upcoming study to revise overall tactical wheeled vehicle requirements might affect the JLTV program. Reported possible JLTV budget shortfalls starting in FY2015 might also be of congressional concern. This report will be updated."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Feickert, Andrew

  2013-01-02