Land Warfare - Overlander: Testing times for trucks | ADM Oct 08
To the untrained eye, Land 121 Overlander looks like a fairly straightforward project: replace the old trucks with new better trucks. But this fails to take into account the complexities of choosing transport for the next generation of soldiers. Not all is well with Phase 3: there will be a requirement to revise parts of Phase 3 in light of the recent testing and changes to scope.
Katherine Ziesing
Overlander is the ADF’s largest land-based project. At just over $4.6 billion it seeks to replace over 7,000 vehicles and 4,000 trailers.
The ADF is looking for three categories of vehicle: a family of medium and heavy trucks to replace its current fleet of Unimogs, Macks and heavy haulers; a family of light and lightweight vehicles to replace its Land Rover Perenties; and trailers in a range of sizes and shapes (but probably not colours).
Former Defence Minister Dr Brendan Nelson made the long-awaited announcement in Brisbane 5 October 2007 that the ADF will acquire approximately 3,600 Light/Lightweight, medium and heavy trucks and about 3,000 trailers under Project Land 121 (Overlander) Phase 3.
The exact numbers and configurations of the vehicles remain subject to contract negotiations.
For the Light/Lightweight utility vehicles a contract is just about to be signed with Mercedes Benz Australia Pacific for 1,100 unarmoured G-Wagen 4x4 and 6x6 variants.
Mercedes will also sign a 15-year support contract, with an option for a further 15 years.
Brisbane-based Haulmark will provide trailers across 13 different variants ranging from 750 kg to 70 tonne payload.
For the medium and heavy trucks BAE Systems was announced as the preferred supplier but this now seems to be in doubt.
Defence’s stated preference for military-off-the-shelf vehicles has been contrasted by some in industry with the copious and detailed specifications issued to describe not just the capability desired, but specifically how that capability is to be achieved.
To them, there is an apparent contradiction between procurement policy and practice or, put simply, ‘why all the specs on what is supposed to be a MOTS acquisition?’
The strategic guidance from the 2000 Defence White Paper still applies: the ADF wants to be able to deploy a brigade group and a battalion group simultaneously on separate operations, and so have sufficient SEK-equipped (or Survivability Enhancement Kit capable) B Vehicles for each force, head of Project Overlander, Brigadier David O’Brien told ADM in 2006.
Timeline
At the time of the Requests for Tender release in December 2005, the first deliveries of vehicles and trailers under Project Overlander were scheduled for December 2009.
However, in response to industry feedback during the tender process, the current Land 121 Phase 3 schedule is:
* offer definition & refinement process to commence after second pass approval and continue through to mid-2008;
* contract initiation and signature by third quarter 2008; and
* capability rollout - 2011.
Phases 4 and 5 of Project Overlander are slated for funding approval in 2010 and 2011, respectively, Brigadier O’Brien said last year when the decision was announced.
He then told ADM Phase 4 will see the acquisition of a further 1,200 armoured light vehicles in the one and two-tonne payload class, worth an estimated $1.2 billion, while Phase 5 will see the acquisition of about 2,000 unprotected, modified commercial off the shelf trucks and utility vehicles worth around $300 million dollars; these will be used for training and low-risk logistics tasks, he said.
“Defence is considering a number of options to satisfy the Land 121 Phase 4 requirement.
"In addition to an option to participate in the US JLTV program, other options may include open solicitation for a current generation market available vehicle, or a developmental next generation vehicle.
“Government consideration of the Phase 4 First Pass Business Case is expected to occur over the coming months,” said O’Brien.
But the chances of Australia joining the JLTV program in the US sooner rather than later for Phase 4 are very high, confirmed a senior defence source to ADM.
Protection
“Protection is a key aspect of Overlander,” O’Brien told ADM.
While the G-Wagen 4x4 and 6x6 vehicles will be only lightly protected, many of the 5-, 10- and 16-tonne payload trucks and semi-trailers will have armoured cabs or be capable of carrying Survivability Enhancement Kits (SEK) to protect their crews and occupants in high-threat environments.
As part of the pre-contract Offer Definition and Refinement activities, the DMO Program Office conducted a Demonstration and Compliance Testing (DCT) Program at Monegeetta in Victoria from mid-February to mid-May 2008.
This was performed on a number of vehicles from the preferred tenderer in each category: Mercedes Benz Australia Pacific for Lightweight/Light Vehicles and BAE Systems for Medium/Heavy vehicles.
Reliability testing is currently continuing on two Mercedes-Benz 6x6 vehicles.
“The purpose of the DCT Program was to provide a level of confidence in the Preferred Tenderers’ ability to meet claimed performance and specified operational requirements, quantify known technical risks and identify issues for discussion and clarification during contract negotiations. It was not intended for, or used as, a ‘pass-fail’ test program,” explains O’Brien.
Characteristics tested included:
* Mobility, using differing roads and terrain for 1800 km, addressing aspects such as:
• vehicle range
• ride quality
• cabin noise
• gradient (slope) capability
• speed
* Fitment of armour kits
* Water fording
* Obstacle transit
* Self recovery (winching)
* Confirmation of claimed dimensions and masses
* Lighting compatibility with night vision goggles
* Air-conditioning performance (an important element for troops given current and likely future theatres of operation).
“There was a view a couple of years ago that we didn’t need to test these vehicles at all because they’re off-the-shelf and it would save the time and money; but it was something we had to do.
"To use an analogy, if you buy a car you’re going to take it for a test drive before you sign a deal.
"So we got both the lightweight/light vehicles and the medium/heavy vehicles and ran them around Monegeetta.
"It provided a very good insight into the capability and the technical risks associated with the vehicles.
"It was good activity that went very well,” explains O’Brien.
“Apart from assessment of fitment and removal of armour kits, no armour performance tests were conducted,” he adds.
Changes
There has been much speculation about the re-scoping of the project to include new modules and increased levels of protection given the threat environment faced by troops in the Middle East.
But one of the main reasons behind a possible revising of the tender is an emerging probity issue, according to a senior defence source.
When the Request for Tenders (RFTs) for Phase 3A of Overlander were released in December 2005, they were intended to meet the requirements of Army’s Townsville elements, involving about $800-$900 million of the $3 billion project.
Phase 3 B was intended as a follow-on phase to equip the rest of Army and Air Force. 3A had a year of decision of 2006/2007 and 3B had a separate, later, year of decision.
At first pass the Government gave approval for DMO to go out to tender under the Kinnaird process; although this RFT was for Phase 3A, Defence wanted to capture the economies of scale available from ordering the Phase 3B vehicles at the same time thus getting a better idea of the overall affordability for both phases in one hit.
However, at second pass approval, government actually (and unexpectedly) endorsed 3A and 3B.
The trouble is, the additional requirements that were planned for 3B weren’t actually included in the Phase 3A tender.
So after second pass, specific 3B elements now came into the mix which included heavy modules such as heavy fuel modules and heavy water modules.
The big change to Phase 3 since 2005 has been the level of protection required for every vehicle class.
“You can protect a medium/heavy vehicle without a lot of problem because they’re a bigger truck, they can carry the armour.
"But a light truck you can’t.
"The laws of physics say that you can’t provide the required level of protection on a light vehicle and still keep it as a light vehicle,” explains a senior Defence source.
"This trade off between protection and mobility has been at the core of the problem for the project office: getting the balance between two opposing elements.
“With a new protection requirement for the light vehicles, there were three aspects of the protected light vehicle requirement that needed to be considered.
"The first was you need to protect the crew, but if you don’t need to worry about the module or the stores on the back, then against this requirement, buy more medium weight trucks instead: use a bigger truck to get the protection level needed.
"So the light vehicle requirement to protect the people up-front moved across from the light segment to the medium/heavy segment resulting in an extra 300 or so medium weight vehicles.
“For example, a unit that currently has an entitlement to a light vehicle and maintenance module has a Land Rover 6x6.
"In future if the unit was to deploy on high threat operations they would have a medium weight truck with an armoured solution up-front and a maintenance module on the back.
“The second aspect of the light vehicle protection requirement was to protect the people up the front and to protect the people in the back.
"For example, a personnel cargo requirement or an ambulance.
"This requirement to protect the crew and the people down the back is to be met by Bushmaster,” ADM’s senior defence source said.
Overlander will see an additional 290 Bushmasters acquired, as announced in August 2007.
The delivery of these vehicles will commence in mid-2009 and is scheduled to be completed by mid-2012.
The through life support contract has been operating since March 2006.
The ADF will end up running about 700 Bushmasters in its different variants including"
* troop vehicles
* command vehicles
* assault pioneer vehicles
* mortar vehicles
* direct fire weapons vehicles
* ambulance vehicles
The third aspect was to provide a protected light command and liaison vehicle.
This requirement was not included under Phase 3 and will be the subject of the new Phase 4.
Medium/Heavy Segment
The approval of Phase 3A and 3B at second pass and the need for increased light vehicle protection has resuled in many new modules and possibly a new medium weight vehicle with armoured protection to carry the new light modules.
Due to these additional requirements and the Demonstration and Compliance Testing highlighting greater than anticipated risks with the BAE Systems trucks, the project office has decided for reasons of fairness and probity to revise the medium/heavy part of Phase 3 and to invite the other tenders back into the process.
The contenders will most likely be Oshkosh, MAN, Mack Trucks, Daimler Chrysler and BAE Systems from the list of nine contenders originally identified.
The project office is in talks with the various players about the tender refresh and what would be asked of them this time around in terms of price and capability.
The revised tender is likely to make an appearance around November, at this stage.
Given the feedback from industry about the level of specifics from the project office, the refreshed tender, while still exhaustive, may not have the minute detailing requested by the first round (much to the relief of industry).
But keep in mind, no contract had been signed with BAE Systems for FMTV.
The vehicles were being tested before any detailed contract negotiations had begun.
This is the Kinnaird process at work, de-risking the platform before contract signature.
But this delay has implications for the in-service date of the medium/heavy truck fleet.
The Effective Date for contract signature is now likely to be mid-2010 with the first delivery of medium/heavy trucks in 2012.
The flag for these issues was formally raised in June this year with government so the move to open up the field again should not come as a surprise, explains ADM’s senior defence source.
Yet the trailers, light/lightweight and light vehicles are on track in terms of testing and contract negotiations.
The testing and de-risking process did not throw up any flags on these elements of Overlander Phase 3.
Contracts are under negotiation and look to be signed sooner rather than later, with the Land Warfare Conference as good a place as any to conduct a light/lightweight and light vehicle contract signing.
Governance
Parliament’s joint standing committee on foreign affairs, defence and trade reviewed Defence’s annual report at the end of August and Project Overlander was on their radar.
Defence Materiel Organisation Chief Dr Steve Gumley was questioned about the progress and likely future of the project.
“The Chief of Army (Lieutenant General Peter Leahy, now retired) put up a very cogent argument to protect our troops,” Dr Gumley said.
“We then looked at the documentation supplied in the tender package to see what could be achieved.
"We did a paper-based selection.
“In hindsight the mistake we made and I admit we made a mistake, we should have done full tests and evaluation before we announced the preferred suppliers.
“Full tests and evaluation would be conducted the second time round,” Dr Gumley said.
It has been estimated that the cost of the retendering for the medium/heavy trucks will be about $15-20 million.
In the long run
Australia’s Army is busier that it has been for many years, and the pressure is certainly on to get a good result from this project.
That means getting Australian soldiers access to modern, well protected field vehicles as soon as possible while getting value for the taxpayers’ money.
A delay due to revising the tender will be unbearable for many.
But there is a ray of light in that the trailers, light lightweight and light vehicles are tracking on schedule.
A delay of a year or two for a medium/heavy capability that will be in service for 20-30 years may not such a big price to pay to get it right up front.