The US Army has awarded BAE Systems two contract modifications worth up to $575 million for the low-rate initial production of the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV).

“Moving into this phase of the AMPV program is exciting because it brings soldiers one step closer to deploying this critical capability for completing their missions and coming home safely,” said Bill Sheehy, AMPV program director for BAE Systems’ combat vehicles business.
“We have been preparing for this moment and are ready to take this program to the next stage.”
Previously awarded funding to support production planning, combined with the $128 million January award allowed BAE Systems to start production. A second award in February for $447 million brings the total LRIP funding so far to $873 million.
These contracts come following the Engineering, Manufacturing and Development phase and a Milestone C decision. Under the earlier EMD award, the company produced and delivered prototype vehicles to the Army for test and evaluation purposes.
The initial award in 2014 also provided options to begin the LRIP phase prior to the completion of the EMD phase, at which time the company would produce up to approximately 460 additional vehicles for a cumulative contract value of up to $1.2 billion.

19
Leave a Reply

avatar
8 Comment threads
11 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
Andrew SmithPeteLee1Ian2Geoffrey Roach Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Lee1
Guest
Lee1

This is effectively a US company so yes and most of the profits will likely stay in the US too.

David Steeper
Guest

The only thing british about BaE nowadays is their name. There are no more UK defence companies for them to asset strip so they’ve moved to the US.

Geoffrey Roach
Guest
Geoffrey Roach

Perhaps you would be happier if the deal had gone to the French,Germans,Italians, Kilngons et al……. any business person with half a brain would tell you that if your margins are right the mote trade you do the more trade you attract in your town county, country whatever. Bae is no different worldwide

Geoffrey Roach
Guest
Geoffrey Roach

Two available, low miles..about 265 light years each .ex Star Fleet rental. One in Klingon yuk camouflage, one in white. Contact Scotty’s Bar, Javea, Spain for test drive.

P.S The bar does exist…well did!

Spyinthesky
Guest
Spyinthesky

Let’s be honest last month’s ‘joint venture’ so called investment in vehical building was the start of their getting out of UK vehical building altogether, from now on we will be effectively buying at least mostly German or American even if they will be built or modified here and presented as British technology with a fancy name. Sad as it is to say it there wasn’t really anywhere to go for Bae here they were not given much business or much hope of business to sustain an independent business, hell even their Scandinavian branch lost out on potential UK which… Read more »

BlueFuzz
Guest
BlueFuzz

$1.2 billon for 460+ vehicles produced by a British company in the USA. Compared to the £4.5 billion (note £, not $) the UK is paying for 589 Ajax produced by an American company in Britain. Suggests to me that the British Govt is getting ripped off again.

Lee1
Guest
Lee1

It is not a British Company… It over all parent is a British Company but the people building these vehicles are an US Subsidiary that keeps most of the money in the US. Also these vehicles are not like Ajax. The Ajax has a much larger main gun and is a much larger vehicle at over 10t heavier than the AMPV. The Ajax is a armoured fighting vehicle the AMPV is a personnel carrier which I think is effectively a Bradley without a turret so there is very little R&D costs.

BlueFuzz
Guest
BlueFuzz

I’m not arguing that the AMPV is as good as Ajax, but for around 4 times the price of AMPV per unit, I don’t think that Ajax is value for money.
Lee1 – following your logic General Dynamics in South Wales (builders of Ajax) and JLR (the car maker) would be British companies. They are not – they are American and Indian respectively. BAe Systems is British. That said, I could accept a the argument that they are all multinationals. Just like Boeing, Airbus, etc

Spyinthesky
Guest
Spyinthesky

Hang on Being foreign owned and being a foreign company is not one and the same otherwise Arm and Boston Dynamics would be Japanese companies and parts of the American film/TV Industry French. It’s a lot more complex and varied than that. In this case being defence the US Govt places a lot of restrictions on foreign ownership especially on I tells goal property so Bae in the US for the most part operates as an independent entity but you can’t use that as a guide to every other foreign owned entity. Does Dairy Crest immediately now become a Canadian… Read more »

Lee1
Guest
Lee1

Not at all. There are no restrictions on JLR so their profits will flow to India. BaE systems companies in the US are US companies in all but name. Their profits are pretty much locked in the US.

Pete
Guest
Pete

Im reminded of old court case where Sharp (of Japan ) building Japanese designed calcukators in Guam (a US dependancy) managed to stop Texas Instruments from flooding the US market with ‘cheap foreign imports’ because they were ssembled in.. I think… the Phillipines). Made me smile at the time. ?

Andrew Smith
Guest
Andrew Smith

It’s a replacement for the hummve. Though bigger
It’s not an AFV

Sleepy
Guest

Comparing the cost of an AMPV with the Ajax is a little unfair, the AMPV is basically a M113 replacement so no turret, no 30mm gun etc and all the costs that go with it.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest

The British Army has been needing a replacement for its FV432’s for decades!

The ABSV programme has disappeared again.

This sort of thing I believe?

Mr Bell
Guest

The US army can get away with ordering hundreds of these vehicles as they can defend them from attack whilst they ferry troops about. The US army is betting the most they will face is RPGs, machine guns and small arms fire, perhaps with some IED exposure. I think the days of APCs roaming the battlefield are over. They can easily be targeted by manportable ATGMs. Drones, UAVs, main battle tanks and Infantry fighting vehicles not to mention attack helicopters. I think in a hot war peer Vs peer these would prove a death trap whereas I think and hope… Read more »

Elliott
Guest
Elliott

This is and always was meant to be a rear area vehicle. Meant to allow the non front line components of Mechanized Infantry and Armored units to keep up with tanks and IFVs not engage on the front line.
Tasks and variants are:
General Purpose
Medical Evacuation Vehicle
Medical Treatment Vehicle
Mortar Carrier
Mobile Command Vehicle
Note all second tier but vital tasks if a pitched fight between Armored forces is occurring.

Mark L
Guest
Mark L

They will be built in York – but the one in Pennsylvania not the one in Yorkshire.

Ian2
Guest
Ian2

The M777 howitzer was once British designed and made by Vickers. Now made entirely in America instead of Barrow.
The Americans say who it’s exported to not us because they call the shots. If you read US army and Marines raving about it’s capabilities they have no idea of it’s British heritage and think it is totally American. The biggest scandal for years is how Bae buying Vickers wasn’t referred to the Monopolies commission. I think the MOD hates Bae now.

Andrew Smith
Guest
Andrew Smith