Future howitzer is not 'son of Crusader': Army's non-line of sight 'demonstrator' to be fired this fall at Yuma Proving Ground.

The U.S. Army's future cannon artillery vehicles likely will employ many of the same technologies originally designed for the Crusader--a high-tech howitzer that was terminated last year, because it was deemed too heavy and unwieldy to be useful in today's battles.

The 42-ton Crusader was to supplant the aging Paladin, a 32-ton cannon-artillery platform. In the absence of Crusader, the Army will keep the Paladin in operation for at least another decade, until it completes the development of a smaller self-propelled howitzer that will be part of a family of next-generation vehicles known as the Future Combat Systems. If FCS works as planned, it will be a network of as many as 18 types of light combat vehicles (each about 16 tons), including direct-fire and non-line of sight platforms, ground robots and pilotless aircraft. The first FCS units could be in the field by 2008 or 2010, according to the Army's current schedule.

The Army views the FCS as the foundation of its "Objective Force,"

If Crusader had been much lighter, it could have been the "first vehicle of the Objective Force," said Army Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes, head of the Training and Doctrine Command. Specifically, the "network capability" in Crusader was similar to what the Army wants for FCS, Byrnes said. The Army stuck with Crusader for many years, despite the weight problems, partly because it believed that the "fully networked cockpit design and robotics" technologies designed for Crusader--in addition to its rapid-fire and extended-range capabilities--were needed in the force of the future, he explained.

The indirect-fire vehicle that will replace Crusader and is expected to be part of the FCS is called the NLOS (non-line of sight) cannon.

Byrnes predicted that, with the NLOS cannon, "we'll see a capability similar to Crusader, but lighter." The FCS, additionally, will have a 120 mm mortar, called NLOS-M, and an NLOS rocket launcher also known as "Netfires."

The same company that designed and developed the Crusader, United Defense LP, now is working on the NLOS cannon. A full-scale prototype, which UDLP terms "a demonstrator," will be tested in August and could begin firing live rounds this fall, said the company's program manager, James Unterseher.

This vehicle may incorporate some of the technologies used in Crusader, he told National Defense. "But please don't call this the 'son of Crusader.'"

"This vehicle is very different," especially in the way it moves, said Unterseher. The demonstrator weighs 20 tons and has a 39-caliber gun tube. "It has leveraged many of the technologies from Crusader," particularly in the area of robotics, ammunition handling, projectile tracking, electronics and crew compartment design, he said. The gun will hit targets as far away as 30 kin, he said. By comparison, Crusader's range was 40 km. Each vehicle will carry 30 155 mm rounds.

The projectile tracking system consists of a radar sensor that follows the bullet and sees where it hit, so the crew can determine whether the right target was struck. "We can compare the achieved trajectory with the desired trajectory and make adjustments for subsequent rounds," said Ted Poucher, a UDLP engineer.

Unterseher stressed that the prototype is not yet officially in the FCS program. The Army funded the project under a "concept technology demonstration" contract awarded after Crusader was terminated.

The Army and the FCS prime contractor--the Boeing Co.--have yet to make final decisions on vehicle sizes and weapon calibers. For the NLOS cannon, said Unterseher, "our recommendation was for a 155 mm."

The weight could range from 18 to 20 tons, depending on the armor and the ammunition on board.

It is not yet known how many NLOS vehicles the Army will buy. With Crusader, the plan was to buy more than 1,000. The order had been whittled down to 400 by the time the program was cancelled. For the NLOS cannon, the number could reach 700, depending on how many brigades get equipped with FCS vehicles.

The UDLP demonstrator is powered by a hybrid-electric engine. The tracked FCS prototype has a hybrid-diesel engine. The company also built a wheeled prototype with a hybrid-turbine engine. In a hybrid system, the engine runs a generator, which produces electricity. The electricity is sent to each of the 250 hp electric drives on the sprockets. The energy can be stored in lithium-ion batteries, which would allow the vehicle to operate silently, on battery power only.

The live-fire drills scheduled for this fall will take place at the same site where Crusader was tested--the Army's Yuma Proving Ground, in Arizona.

Poucher said one of the most challenging engineering hurdles in this vehicle is accommodating a 155 mm gun in a small platform, without exposing the crew to excessive recoil.

The engineering model has spades in the back--which brace against the ground--to help absorb the recoil shock.

The ammunition handling system--adapted from Crusader and from the Navy's 155 mm Advanced Gun System--takes the manual labor out of the process of loading bullets, Poucher said. The same shuttle handles both propellant and projectiles. "All the crew does is press a button."

Regardless of which vehicle is selected as the NLOS cannon, the Army will not achieve significant improvements in artillery firepower unless it can successfully field a long-range "smart" projectile, said Col. Nathaniel Sledge, program manager for Army combat ammunition. Sledge oversees the development of Excalibur, a GPS-guided artillery round. If Excalibur fails, the U.S. Army eventually will be outgunned by other nations, Sledge said at a Defense News conference on precision warfare. The United States has 39-caliber guns, while many other countries have gone to 52-caliber guns. "They can outrange us," said Sledge. Excalibur would help offset that disadvantage, if the technology works as advertised. The desired range is 30-35 km. Now, the "number-one challenge" for Excalibur is surviving a gun launch at 15,000 g's, he said. The electronics package (an inertial measurement unit combined with a GPS receiver) needs to be "hardened" further, said Sledge. The next major test for Excalibur will be a live firing f rom the new Army-Marine Corps lightweight 155 mm towed howitzer, scheduled for fiscal year 2006. The projectile also would have to be compatible with the FCS NLOS cannon.

RELATED ARTICLE: Army 'Transformation' Plans Could Be Revisited After War

Observations from the conflict in Iraq could reopen the debate on whether the Army's plans for "transformation" are heading in the right direction, said a U.S. congressman.

The pivotal role that heavy armored vehicles played in the war possibly means that "we have to seriously look at whether our heavy units are going to be adequate for the kind of battles like the one we are doing in Iraq," said Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Penn., chairman of the subcommittee on tactical air and land forces.

"I don't know that we need to restart the Abrams," Weldon told National Defense. The Abrams main battle tank production line was dosed in 1992, in the expectation that after the Cold War, the Army no longer needed to buy new tanks and could keep the existing ones running until a replacement was developed.

What emerged as the next generation was the Future Combat System--an overarching effort to field by 2010 a family of up to 18 types of lightweight combat vehicles and robotic platforms, all linked under a common command-and-control network The project is the cornerstone of the so-called transformation of the Army into a lighter and more mobile force.

"Gen. Shinseki's [the Army chief of staff] plan for transformation is solid," but the experience in Iraq should be taken into account Weldon said. "I want to hear from the war fighters when the conflict is over on whether or not they need to rethink the whole future of where we are going in terms of transformation," Weldon said. "Ifs a question that is going to be opened after this war."

"The FCS is exciting," but the potential cost is worrisome, he said. The Army budgeted $13.5 billion for the project over the next five years.

FCS proponents received bad news in March when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld appointed an independent review panel to study the program.

Rumsfeld asked former Air Force chief of staff, retired Gen. Larry Welch, to lead a group of experts in an evaluation of FCS. The timing of the appointment--only 60 days before the FCS program was scheduled to proceed into its next phase of development--is suspicious, sources said. Speculation also is rampant about Rumsfeld's decision to probe the merits of the Future Combat Systems only three months before the retirement of Gen. Eric K Shinseki, who conceived the FCS concept.

A number of retired Army officers who did not want to be quoted by name said that at first sight it appears that the review panel may be a retaliatory move against Shinseki, who had irked administration officials when he told Congress that "hundreds of thousands" of troops would be needed in Iraq to help stabilize the country after a US-led campaign to oust Saddam Hussein.

Having a retired Air Force general in charge of reviewing the program is a source of great constemation among FCS advocates, particularly a cadre of lawmakers and staffers who have supported the transformation efforts not only with rhetoric, but also with hundreds of millions of dollars.

A senior staff member of the defense appropriations subcommittee described the situation as "scary."

In the appropriations committee, he said, "there is great concern about the Welch report" Further, he added, "the Welch panel scares us," because it is being read as a sign that the FCS may be on shaky ground, and that the Army's transformation may be slowed down as a result.

"We took the trip to transformation," the staffer told a senior Army official recently. "We are still with you," he said. "However, I don't think what's going on is a good thing for transformation."

Nevertheless, the staffer stressed, the members of the appropriations committee are "in a partnership with the Army on transformation."

One senior Army official closely involved in the FCS program said the review panel announcement was a shock to him. But the silver lining in all this, he said, is that Welch "is the right guy to do it."

Welch led a review of the troubled Army Comanche helicopter program, so he is more knowledgeable about ground-combat issues than many may suspect As the panel moves forward with the review, said the Army official, "We are going to do everything we can to provide the information [Welch] wants."

He said the Army remains hopeful that the study won't hold up the FCS Defense Acquisition Board review, scheduled for May 13. The DAB is a prerequisite for FCS to move into the next phase, called system design and development

Sandra I. Erwin