Design Flaws in Military Weapon Platforms Harm National Security

Amphibious Assault Vehicles storm Red Beach during exercises at Camp Pendleton, Calif., on June 2, 2010. Lenny Ignelzi/AP Photo

Commentary

In recent military news, the rollout of the U.S. Marine Corps’ Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) has run up against design and operational challenges. The ACV is meant to replace the well-used Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV), a less complex weapons platform in service since 1972.

The ACV has been tested since 2019 at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, as well as at the Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, both in Southern California. It is heavier but more blast resistant and faster than the AAV.

To date, over 100 ACVs have been purchased from BAE Systems, the manufacturer of the vehicle. Unlike the AAV, the ACV has eight tires (four on each side) instead of tracks like those used on battle tanks. The new expeditionary ACV can be used to transport Marines from ships to the shore, and they maneuver effectively on land as a heavily armored combat vehicle.

Each unit weighs thirty-five tons and costs approximately $6 million. In the coming years, the Marine Corps hopes to add over 600 ACVs into the fleet. Most units could be the training workhorses for battalions at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina and Camp Pendleton. The ACV can be deployed in joint operations with the Navy, not only in training exercises, but in future expeditionary conflicts in volatile environments such as the Indo-Pacific.

Although the ACV can handle fairly calm open seas, it encounters problems when it reaches the surf that begins to break near the coastline. In four separate instances, ACV’s have tipped over in the shallower water as they turned sideways, reported the Orange County Register. Remarkably, there were no injuries in these cases.

The modernized combat vehicle is more complex to maintain and operate than its predecessor, so Marine officers at Camp Pendleton believe that experience on an ACV simulator will help Marines get a feel for its nuances in a variety of conditions. The Marine Corps Warfighting Lab suggests the use of drones as additional safety measures to communicate with ACV operators regarding weather and water conditions, according to Breaking Defense.

Lengthier training on any military piece of hardware can help curtail accidents and casualties, but it’s also critical that the bugs are worked out of the system through further testing.

In a recent U.S. Senate Committee briefing, Marine Corps Commandant General David Berger addressed the vehicle’s challenges. He noted, “These events were, in large part, the product of training shortfalls. We are actively working with BAE Systems to rectify all mechanical concerns and are enhancing the training regimen for our vehicle operators on this new and more sophisticated amphibious vehicle,” reported the Orange County Register.

While it is impossible to attain complete safety in all training evolutions and live fire exercises, it doesn’t hurt to work toward a high standard zero defect goal. The incidents with the ACV are indicative of a larger problem with Pentagon contracts, design outsourcing, and procurement processes. In the past, a number of weapon systems have encountered cost overruns, delays, and design flaws. Aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, armored vehicles, littoral combat ships, and submarines have all been the victims of bureaucratic obstacles.

A strong national security infrastructure is an essential element in projecting peace through strength, but it’s equally crucial to spend taxpayer dollars effectively. On far too many occasions, weapons programs or systems were drawn up and units were produced, only to find out that they didn’t work properly or were complete duds.

Some officers out in the field as well as at the Pentagon have suggested that prior to proposing a new platform, civilian and military engineering experts must fully vet a contemporary design. This could help to bridge the gap between aspirational visions and the actual capability of a new system.

Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday, mentioned this last month in an interview with Norah O’Donnell on “Sixty Minutes.” Following a rigorous vetting scenario, a new program could be unveiled with close inspections and supervision throughout the process. Innovative designs could also utilize strong features of prior systems that could be adapted to modernized plans.

Reliable equipment and maintenance, repetitive training, field experience, and calculated risks, all add up to a capable armed fighting force ready to deter emerging threats and respond to disasters worldwide.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.