BAE Systems in the US has secured a contract modification worth $184 million to produce an additional 48 Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles (AMPVs) for the U.S. Army, according to a press release.

This new order follows the existing full-rate production contract for the AMPV, which is designed to replace the U.S. Army’s aging M113 vehicles, bringing significant upgrades in mobility, survivability, and interoperability to Armored Brigade Combat Teams.

The AMPV family of vehicles is built in five variants: General Purpose, Mortar Carrier, Medical Evacuation, Medical Treatment, and Mission Command.

These vehicles provide essential on-board power and advanced capabilities that modernise the Army’s combat fleet. Bill Sheehy, AMPV programme director for BAE Systems, highlighted the importance of the vehicles, stating in the press release: “Soldiers deserve advanced capabilities like the AMPV that have been successfully tested to accomplish the many mission roles they will serve in the formation.”

In addition to ongoing production, BAE Systems is nearing completion of a large-scale expansion at its York, Pennsylvania facility, which includes the AMPV production line.

The company’s industrial network spans multiple locations across the U.S., including facilities in Aiken, South Carolina; Anniston, Alabama; Phoenix, Arizona; Sterling Heights, Michigan; and York, Pennsylvania. This expansion, along with advanced engineering work, will provide BAE with the capacity and technology to meet increased production demands for both the U.S. Army and potential international customers.

Sheehy further expressed the company’s commitment to supporting the U.S. Army and its supply chain, saying: “We value our continued partnerships with the Army and our suppliers who work alongside us to ensure we keep producing these critical combat vehicles at higher, sustainable volumes.”

The AMPV’s full-rate production phase marks a significant step forward for the U.S. Army as it continues to modernise its combat capabilities, ensuring that Armored Brigade Combat Teams are equipped with the latest in mobility, power, and protection on the battlefield.

Tom Dunlop
Tom Dunlop
Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

43 COMMENTS

  1. Another Bae order from the U.S. for armour. Wish we had a company like this. They could have provided us with something similar…😇

        • We could also buy k9 off the shelf but for some inane reason we’re getting shafted with boxer rch which we’re unlikely to get for over three years in the meantime we have 14 second hand archers from a cancelled norwegian order to act as our 155mm guns well Whoopi do

          • Boxer RCH-155 SPG is a Sunak decision. He just would not wait for the army to competitively evaluate all contenders.
            I think it will take very much more than 3 years before we see it fielded in quantity.

            To think we had 179 x excellent tracked 155mm guns at the start of the post-Cold War era.

          • To be fair to Rishi, the Boxer was generated by UK and Germany about 30 years ago. And as is usual millions were spent at GKND on trials and prototypes..one of the biggest trials being Kraus Maffi and it’s dumb adherence to thinking of it as a truck. Hence Crash testing? Yes, let’s drive a heavy armoured vehicle into a concrete mass, and check the deceleration
            Spoiler, no crumple zones or airbags on Boxer.
            Anyway once it was ready..MOD noticed it was big..too big to go into the sheds at ITDU
            So they cancelled it, and like TSR2, all the jigs, parts and drawings were dumped…onto Germany. So, while it’s outdated now, at least our guys went into IRAQ in Snatch. And now their children, May get Boxer

          • Phil,
            David Lee and I were talking about the RCH-155 specifically. I was critical that Sunak did not permit the army to evaluate the 4 or more contenders for the Mobile Fires programme (AS-90 replacement) as they had planned to do, but circumvented that to make a political deal with the German Chancellor.

            The main Boxer story is a very different one and does not involve Rishi Sunak at all, as you say. There were reasons other than its inability to fit into a hangar in Warminster, for the cancellation of the UKs first involvement (1996-2003) with the Boxer programme.

            I think it was a combination of the emerging solution clearly not being C-130 transportable (an original Requirement for British MRAV) together with frustration at multi-national working (the Germans seeming to having assumed a lead role and leaving France, the UK and the Netherlands in their shadow) – leading to a desire to have a national solution that would fit into the FRES framework.

          • I was involved in MRAV at the beginning as Trials Engineer at Telford.
            The Germans did indeed make it uncomfortable,for France because they clearly weren’t in it other than to spy out the land, Netherlands were a little miffed that AVL were clearly NOT going to sell Warrior2000 to anybody..least of all them
            and Germany generated a constant stream of bad engineering edicts.
            The shed remark was made at ITDU by one of the DES men, who.. clearly along for the biscuits.. complained that the old stables there would never be big enough.
            It caused uncomfortable looks from many… But the airportable bit was always a red herring.. very few vehicles with any level of protection can be be C130d,even Saxon patrol couldn’t fit.
            Thanks for your information,

          • There was also the fact that in 2003 the British Army was launching into Iraq and Afghan conflicts and spending on mechanised warfare was going into it’s Sandbox COIN hiatus.

          • You could, but honestly, if we’re just getting 14 Archers, it’s probably not worth it for such a small orphan fleet that will need it’s own spares pipeline.

          • Yes, that makes sense. Did someone here talk of a second batch of 10-14 units or is the first 14 it?

          • Make do is the watchword of the army I think, probably always has been. Given the RCH is underway with 100 plus ordered we are going to go with it . I don’t have a problem with it as an SPH. It seems to fit the bill very well.

          • AFAIK, we hadn’t ordered any as of mid-May 2024. No numbers have been stated. Statements have been made by MoD only about joint UK-Germany further development, and intention to purchase.

          • Likewise, though I’m pretty sure the figure of 100 plus under an army web site? The number seems about right.

          • I’d say 100 plus is the aspiration for number of units, rather than confirmed number ordered. I’ve also heard that figure be bandied about.

          • Sadly, 100 is not going to happen for £3.7 miilion. Even allowing for free land and no DC or QS costs it only allows £37K per unit. New build cost for something very modest is going to come in at a minimum of £100K. A small grant toward a much better financed project, maybe, but over all still a tiny ammount of money.

          • Yes that’s fine if we already had some but there’s going to be a long wait before we have any and just 14 155mm guns isn’t make do its scraping the barrel

          • Its not scrapping the barrel its collecting the drips of the scrapes. Shades of the 1920’s or worse.

          • Like the pun.😀but you’re right of course. We have a current artillery set up that is very sad, and that’s being polite. Can we get anything quicker that fits the bill. I don’t know.

          • We could have bought k9 off the shelf proving popular with other nato countries and our 155 fleet will be even smaller next month

          • We could have both? Fifty K9 for say two regiments now which would fit in well with the JEF, moving on to the RCH for the planned hundred.

          • The Koreans were going to build k9 here in the UK and provide spares support but sunak kicked it into the long grass and rch is years away we’re not in a good position with our 155 capability

          • The K9 Huntsman is also being built under licence along with the Redback IFV here in Aus and I believe the K9 is in the final mix for US trials.

          • Huntsman looks a good bit of kit I read this morning k9 is going to be trialled in the states along side archer and others mean while here in the uk we’ll be unshipping victorys cannon for land use

          • The army has been in flux since 1918 when we had the best ( along with the French) artillery in the world.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here