Readers forum.

Fuel Alternatives Not Likely

The article "Slimmer Brigade Still Is Not Trim Enough" (Inside Track, December 2000, P. 6) contains specific comments regarding the Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command study of the use of advanced fuels and lubricants to lighten the logistical load. These are, in my opinion, certainly not new and innovative.

In reality, the Army has been using synthetic lubricants (i.e., synthetic engine oil) since 1970, for the arctic environment and since 1980, with the introduction of the Abrams main battle tank, which required the synthetic-based aircraft-turbine engine oil.

The use of synthetic-based engine oils across the board for all Army vehicles and equipment has been debated and reviewed for the past several decades.

The one big obstacle has been their cost effectiveness, considering the typical operational environments of Army materiel (e.g., low mileage, intermittent use, long intervals of idling, etc.) that do not justify the additional cost for these synthetic lubricants.

The comments regarding fuel additives, and possibly the other technologies such as new refinery processes, being ready by 2004 also is questioned from two perspectives.

First, the probability of developing an additive fix that would significantly increase fuel economy and enhance fuel energy within the next three years is seriously questioned. Consider the developmental lead time needed for such an initiative, let alone the field validation for the differing types of engine systems that power the Army ground fleet.

Second, it also assumes that one can develop such an additive that will become transparent to the existing fuel supply and distribution systems and not require any changes to the materials (e.g., hoses, pumps, collapsible tanks, etc.) or the fuel delivery systems of the individual engines involved.

Maurice E. LePera

WOODBRIDGE, VA.

The Real Value of the AAAV 

The arrival of the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) will mean more to the Marine Corps than simply the acquisition of a faster amphibious tractor. ("Marines Testing Prototypes of New Amphibious Vehicles," December 2000, p. 37)

The delivery of the AAAV to the fleet will complete the Corps' "amphibious triad" composed of the three systems that Harold Kennedy named in his story. They are the Landing Craft, Air Cushioned, the MV-22 Osprey and the AAAV. Together, they represent more than just useful weapons. Each leg of the triad works with the other two synergistically for maximum power, flexibility and survivability during amphibious and expeditionary operations.

Combined, they enable the Marine Corps to conduct operations from the horizon to points well inland, obviating the need to stop at the water's edge to build up combat power, as in the "Saving Private Ryan" scenario. This will reduce, if not eliminate, one of the most vulnerable stages of amphibious operations and dramatically increase the chance of success. The AAAV's greater speed, range and firepower are nice, but it's the big picture that really counts.

Phillip Thompson

ARLINGTON, VA.