U.S. Would Save $14 Billion Buying German Combat Vehicle

[Purveyor]

By Tony Capaccio and Nick Taborek - Apr 2, 2013
The U.S. Army would save $14 billion and get a better combat vehicle by choosing a German-made transport over versions being developed by BAE Systems Plc (BA/) and General Dynamics Corp. (GD), the Congressional Budget Office said.

Buying the German-made Puma was one of several options outlined in a report yesterday as improvements over the Army’s current plan for a tank-like Ground Combat Vehicle intended to replace the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.

“Although none of those alternatives would meet all of the Army’s goals” for the Ground Combat Vehicle, “all are likely to be less costly and less risky in terms of unanticipated cost increases and schedule delays,” the nonpartisan CBO said.

The Puma, made by a joint venture of Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH based in Munich and Rheinmetall AG (RHM) based in Dusseldorf, “is slightly more capable” than the Ground Combat Vehicle and might also be purchased “at only half the cost,” according to the report. It can accommodate six passengers, not the nine- member squad the Army considers a key capability, according to the CBO.

BAE, based in London, and General Dynamics, based in Falls Church, Virginia, are competing to produce the replacement for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Previous plans called for both companies to continue development work beyond 2014, after which one probably would have been selected for the production phase.

MORE...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-03/u-s-would-save-14-billion-buying-german-combat-vehicle.html

[Aristus]

1. I hope this won't be too controversial, because I think it's an excellent idea.

Rheinmetall AG manufactures the gun we field on our M1A1 and A2 Abrams tanks. (A superior gun; I know from first-hand experience).

So the Puma is undoubtedly of excellent manufacture.

Also, by buying it "off the shelf", we can avoid the usual meddling the Pentagon does in the design stage of any new major weapon system; they hang all kinds of bells and whistles on it, trying to get it to do things it was not originally intended to do. And you end up with an overpriced Frankenstein's monster of a vehicle like the Bradley. I'm sure the Bradley has its adherents, but I thought that as a ground combat vehicle, it sucked.

The Germans have a proven record of building matchless armored vehicles. Let's get ourselves some, and save some money in the process.

[NV Whino]

2. But, but but...

That would be outsourcing! And which congress critter would benefit from that?

[Gregorian]

3. 1,748 vehicles with 1,500 horsepower. What about carbon emissions? What about NO vehicles.

Are we really that scared that humans versus humans is this serious?

What a scam.

[Peter cotton]

4. Er, having an army without vehicles would put our army at a wee disadvantage in future conflicts.

This isn't the 19th Century,

[Gregorian]

5. That was sort of my point.

Fuck the military. I don't buy the hype. But this probably goes over most people's heads as crazy talk. It's more sane than the alternative.