Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1983


Research, Development, and Acquisition

At the end of FY 82, Lt. Gen. James H. Merryman, Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and Acquisition (DCS RDA), noted that "because of the successful R&D efforts of the 1970s, the Army was ready to meet the challenge of equipping and modernizing the Total Force, of making the hollow Army a thing of the past." This fiscal year the Army made great progress in modernizing its Active Army units in conjunction with its reserve components by bringing aboard new equipment, upgrading old equipment, improving management procedures, and providing new and improved systems that cover the full spectrum of its missions' needs. Such initiatives required bringing to fruition the Army's research and development efforts of the past decade, and pursuing a materiel acquisition program geared to equipping the force in a timely manner. The Army's research, development, and acquisition effort this fiscal year was designed to assure that it had a technological edge on the battlefield of tomorrow.

Research, development, and acquisition, as described in the 1982 DAHSUM, encompass a complex life cycle of Army materiel ranging from conceptualization through validation, development, and production and deployment. Conceptualization grows out of the study of threat projections, technological forecasts, and determination concerning potential equipment, or materiel systems, including complex weapons, that would be useful to the Army under known and projected circumstances. In the validation phase, the Army verifies preliminary designs and engineering plans; resolves or minimizes identifiable logistical problems; and generally validates the concept for full-scale development. During the development phase, the Army develops, engineers, fabricates, and tests an item then decides whether or not to accept the item and enter it in the inventory. Finally, in the production and deployment phase, the Army trains the operational units in the use of the item, procures the item, and distributes it to the field. It is a long process of applied science, manufacturing, and distribution. The extent to which the Army can undertake all of the above depends on the funds allocated for it in the president's budget.



The Army based its initial approved research, development, test, and evaluation (RDTE) program for FY 83 on the president's budget. As in the previous fiscal year, the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (USDRE) identified certain program elements as being of special interest and thereby placed constraints on the program. For example, the Army had to designate total programs in funding categories 6.1 and 6.2 of USDRE interest to maintain the approved dollar levels for these categories. In addition, the Army was unable to shift funds from twenty-eight specific programs that were of special interest to USDRE, without prior approval from the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (OUSDRE). Some of these programs were Laser Weapons Technology, High to Medium Air Defense, Night Vision Advanced Development, Tactical Surveillance and ECM Systems, Joint Tactical Fusion Program UTFP), Battlefield Data Systems, Joint Tactical Information Distribution System, NAVSTAR Global Positioning System, and the DOD High Energy Laser Test Facility.

Deferrals in the overall RDTE program totaled $494.3 million. This included $55.4 million for total risk assessing cost estimates (TRACE), $164.7 million for New Starts, $252.7 million based on USDRE Format I's, and $21.5 million for other individual programs. Major programs the USDRE withheld included Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Advanced and Systems Technology program; All Source Analysis System (ASAS); Battlefield Data Systems; and numerous other communication systems.

The Department of the Army RDTE appropriation, enacted in late December, was $3.879 billion, a reduction of $624 million in the Army's RDTE request of $4.503 billion. Major congressional reductions included: Technology Base, $35 million; BMD Systems Technology, $351 million; Antitactical missiles, $17 million; Mobile Protected Gun, $27 million; Joint Service Rotary Wing Aircraft Development, $19.8 million; JTFP, $15 million; Productivity Investment (DARCOM RESHAPE); $14.1 million. Programs receiving zero based budgeting from Congress were High Energy Laser Components, $33 million and Advanced Rocket Control System, $27.8 million. Offsetting these amounts were increases of $10 million for VIPER alternatives and $50 million for Manufacturing Methods and Technology. As a result of reprogrammings, the FY 83 RDTE program as of September 1983 amounted to $3.895 billion; obligations as of that date totaled $3.628 billion and disbursements equaled $2.064 billion. These areas were within the DOD acceptable range.


The Army procurement appropriations FY 83 obligation plan amounted to $17.035 billion; $15.413 billion for direct Army procurement and $1.622 billion for reimbursable customer sales. The plan covered all obligations in FY 83 funds appropriated for fiscal years 1981-83. Obligations incurred during the year actually were under the plan by $1.535 billion ($1.095 billion in direct and $.440 billion in reimbursables). Total obligations of $15.500 billion included $14.318 billion in direct Army procurement and $1.182 billion in reimbursable customer sales.

The Army procurement portion of the budget request for FY 83 amounted to $19.192 billion-a $3.142 billion increase over the FY 83 appropriation. The increase would permit higher production rates for several weapon systems, including the AH-64 attack helicopter (Apache), Patriot air defense missile system, Hellfire missile, TOW 2 missile and the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS). Requests for the weapons and tracked combat vehicles (WTCV) appropriation include initiatives to improve combat power, particularly in support of NATO. Funding requests for procurement of ammunition include $2.057 billion for end item rounds and $277 million for ammunition production base support. The funding request for items under the "other procurement" appropriation included $1.148 billion for tactical and support vehicles, $2.781 billion for communications and electronics equipment, and $1.434 billion for other support equipment.

Science and Technology

How to allocate budgeted funds for research and development was a major concern of the Army Science Board (ASB), which advises the Secretary of the Army and Chief of Staff on research and development directions and programs, system acquisition policies and procedures, and other matters that are affected by science and engineering. In February 1983, the ASB established the Committee on Chemical and Biological Sensor Technologies to assess the status of chemical and related sensor technologies and their potential utility to the entire chemical warfare defense program. Consistent with this mission, the committee made a number of information gathering trips this year including visits to the Chemical Research and Development Centers, U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command, U.S. Army Chemical School, U.S. Army Atmospheric Science Laboratory, SRI International, GTE Sylvania, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and the Lincoln Laboratory. Some of the information gathered focused on the research and development efforts explaining the 6.1 to 6.4 materiel development cycle leading to successful initial


operational capability (IOC), and on the need for and problems in detecting and monitoring chemical warfare agents in operational environments. The committee's final report is due on 10 April 1984. Another ASB subgroup studied ways to improve the Army's decontamination and smoke programs and provide the individual soldier balanced protection. The Army started to implement several key recommendations of the committee.

Another group that advises the Army on science and technology is the Advanced Concepts and Technology (ACT) committee, a high-level group of scientists, engineers, and professional Army officers representing the Office of the Deputy Chief. of Staff for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ODCSRDA), ODCSOPS, DARCOM, TRADOC, ODCSPER, and ARI. This committee has responsibility for evaluating unsolicited proposals that possess significant potential to enhance Army effectiveness. During FY 83, ACT funded eighteen different projects conducted by firms under contract signed with the Army's developing commands, for approximately $6.0 million. Areas under investigation included hypergolic combustion, ceramic shield turbine blades, low-cost artillery guidance, soldier data card, a thermal imaging device, near millimeter wave radar, and carbide diesel components.

The Board on Army Science and Technology (BAST) is the third group that advises the Army on science and technology. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Research Council, at the request of the Honorable James R. Ambrose, Under Secretary of the Army, established BAST on 15 February 1982. This year BAST carried out a number of studies in the field of science and technology and planned for several others. The studies undertaken included assessments of chemical warfare (defensive) sensor technologies, the risks associated with either continued storage or disposal of the existing stocks of chemical agents and munitions located at eight sites in CONUS, and the professional environment in Army laboratories, and its effect on scientific and engineering performance. The first two study teams will present their final reports in FY 84. The third study team transmitted its final report, "The Professional Environment in Army Laboratories and Its Effect on Scientific and Engineering Performance," to the Assistant Director of Army Research on 12 August 1983. During FY 83, BAST established panels to write prospectuses for future studies on energetic materials, structural materials, and electronic components.

Several Army research laboratories made progress this year in the field of science and technology. To support engineer troop units, the Coastal Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL)


made a number of improvements this year. It produced a Read Only Memory (ROM) module for the Hewlett Packard programmable calculator and stored, on the ROM, programs designed to enhance the response time and accuracy of military engineers in solving problems in a number of areas. Other improvements included using an engineer model to develop a river-crossing operation simulation; developing and fielding a multi-user pilot test microcomputer to replace the manual system of project scheduling, progress reporting, and accounting; successfully field testing foam flotation prototypes; implementing water conservation, reuse and recycle during the BRIGHT STAR 83 exercises in Egypt, completing evaluating the process energy use at Watervleit Arsenal, New York, and thereby identifying energy conservation opportunities.

The U.S. Army's Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory conducted research in three important areas this year. During November and December 1982, the laboratory tested the influence of the winter environment and smoke obscurants on electrooptical and MM-wave systems at Camp Grayling, Michigan. This year the laboratory also developed a method for testing the mobility of Army vehicle tires on snow and ice, and designed an ice control structure that the Army placed on the Allegheny River near Oil City, Pennsylvania, to control ice jams and floods.

Another Army laboratory active this year was the Army Engineer Topographic Laboratories (ETL), which conducted a wide range of research and development to support combat operations. Notable achievements ranged from a missile guidance component delivered to the Army in the field to innovative research in artificial intelligence and robotics for the Army of the future. Much of ETLs work focused on the emerging requirements for robots to perform in lethal environments and intelligent machines to aid the soldier. ETL also emphasized developing ways to monitor and exploit the airfield environmental tactical advantage. The Corps has termed this program the Airland Battlefield Environment Thrust (ALBE).

The Army engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES) carried out a successful program in the area of military engineering research and development during FY 83. As executive agent for the ALBE WES published a plan to document work efforts for Congress and other agencies. The plan considered all environmental influences on materiel and systems throughout all phases of development. Areas of significant research included the summarizing of site characteristics and measurement techniques for perimeter sensor selection, dust generation potential in arid regions and its effect on helicopters and self-contained


munitions, and minefield deployment and forest effects on laser, infrared, and radar systems used in detecting vehicular targets. Other significant projects WES undertook included vehicle mobility performance specifications for DOD, including evaluations of performance over difficult terrain, developing a sand grid road system to enable vehicles to negotiate sand beaches during over the-shore operations; producing the King's Bay Hydraulic Model to aid the Navy in designing their new TRIDENT class submarine base in Georgia; listing the effects of weapons fire on field fortifications; demonstrating liquid explosives for combat engineering; and providing the Defense Nuclear Agency and the Air Force's Ballistic Missile Office with vital research about silo structures, site locations, and explosive instrumentation for the MX missile.

This year the COE also carried out a successful program in the field of civil works research and development. To address problems relating to the deterioration and repair of Corps-operated dams (536) and lock chambers (260), it initiated a repair, evaluation, maintenance, and rehabilitation (REMR) research program, which operates in three areas: evaluating concrete structures, identifying problems affecting such structures, and proposing to alleviate concrete structural problems. The Corps expects the program to run for six years and cost $35 million. In August 1983, Hurricane Alicia provided the first chance to use the technology developed by the Corps' Hurricane Surge Data Collection Work Unit for the measurement of coastal tide surge under actual hurricane conditions. A field team from WES deployed several portable instrument packages near Galveston, Texas, where Alicia came ashore, and thereby assisted the Committee on Natural Disasters to assess the hurricane's damage. Also in the field of civil works the Corps tested a wide-scan sonar that will provide an accurate and comprehensive evaluation of top surface wear on horizontal hydraulic structures such as aprons, sills, lock chamber floors, and stilling basins where rocks and debris may have caused erosion. WES supported prototype testing of two floating breakwaters that will provide a lower cost alternative to fixed breakwaters, or as a quick means of constructing temporary harbors for logistical purposes.

Ballistic Missile Defense

President Reagan's keen desire to modernize U.S. strategic defense and efforts to define how to implement this modernization continued, in FY 83, to focus attention on the Army's (BMD) research and development effort conducted by the BMD Organization (BMDO). BMDO, a field operating agency of the CSA, was


located in Huntsville, Alabama, with a BMD Program Office in the Washington, D.C., area.

A presidential commission established to review the strategic modernization program and to find an acceptable basing mode for the Air Force MX intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), which the president renamed Peacekeeper, recommended in March 1983 that the U.S. House Peacekeeper in existing Minuteman silos and continue vigorous research and development of BMD. Then, on 23 March, the president reaffirmed his desire for strategic modernization and directed completion of a comprehensive and intensive effort by October 1983 "to define a long-term research and development program to achieve our ultimate goal of eliminating the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles." To conceptualize the program, which would be named the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) by year's end, the Secretary of Defense appointed a Defense Technologies Executive Committee consisting of a Defensive Technologies Study Team subgroup, and a Future Security Strategy Study subgroup. Both looked to the BMDO and its contractors for input and support. Several members from the organization served full time on the panels for these committees, while others briefed the panels on various aspects of the BMD effort.

Guided by the president's strategic initiatives, which were implemented by National Security Decision Directives 69 and 83 and which were taken into account the action of Congress in deleting deployment funding in FY 83, DOD, the Army Secretariat, and BMDO management restructured the BMD program. The restructured program de-emphasized work in support of a potential near-term deployment decision, but maintained a deployment hedge option and increased emphasis on improving technology that could support a full range of missions in the future. Funds, which resulted from the termination of the SENTRY interceptor development effort, along with increased funding of $57 million over that budgeted for FY 82, permitted the Army to expand its efforts in optical tracking, nonnuclear kill (NNK) techniques, exoatmospheric defense, and continued development of selected critical components of SENTRY system hardware and software.

The FY 83 efforts were manifested in two ongoing programs: the BMD Advanced Technology Center's (BMDATC) Advanced Technology Program, and the Ballistic Missile Defense Systems Command's (BMDSCOM) Systems Technology Program. BMDSCOM continued to operate Kwajalein Missile Range in support of the above BMD programs, supported Air Force strategic offensive weapons testing, and collected data in support of the DOD intelligence community.


In the Advanced Technology Program, BMDATC performed research and development on technologies supporting improvement in near-term BMD and preventing technological surprise by an adversary. The center emphasized technology for advanced defensive systems in all operating regimes: boost phase, post-boost phase, the exoatmospheric/high endoatmospheric or midcourse phase, and the endoatmospheric or terminal phase.

The Army more than doubled the program budget for BMDATC's Endoatmospheric NNK program, permitting new initiatives and accomplishments in the areas of warheads, radomes, and controls. It successfully demonstrated destruction of full-scale, threat-type reentry vehicles through two hypersonic sled tests of a full-scale NNK focused warhead. Component tests of control thrusters demonstrated dramatic improvement in throttling capability and fast response times. It also started validation of flyable brass board controls. BMDATC initiated development on a cooled metallic radome concept and development of high density silicon nitride material for radomes. Plans and preparations began for subscale radome testing. A millimeter wave (MMW) instrumentation radar installed at the Kwajalein Missile Range obtained limited reentry vehicle signature data. BMDATC developed a breadboard model of conformal array MMW and made it ready for testing in 1984. BMDATC also initiated and completed preliminary design review of a Small Radar Homing Interceptor Technology flight experiment to demonstrate achievable small miss distance against both fixed and ballistic moving targets. In response to the president's SDI, BMD management began, late in FY 83, to realign the Endoatmospheric NNK program to shift emphasis from low endoatmospheric to high endoatmospheric defense.

In an electromagnetic accelerator program, BMDATC explored the application of electrical energy as an alternative to chemical-reaction powered guns and missiles to provide nonnuclear kinetic energy kill capability for BMD purposes. BMDATC initiated technology analysis and subsystem/component design and development efforts for several concepts and plans for a ground test-bed to validate applicable electromagnetic accelerator technologies. Besides the above, BMDATC continued to develop and extend the technology base for advanced BMD and made progress particularly in the development of distributed data processing technology.

In the Systems Technology Program, BMDSCOM continued research and development of BMD systems options. The restructuring of the BMD program to de-emphasize an early deployment capability provided opportunities to more efficiently integrate and validate maturing technologies into evolving system


concepts that the Army could deploy should it deem a defensive system necessary.

BMDSCOM also continued development of SENTRY related technology other than that for the interceptor. These efforts produced a number of achievements in the development of a state-of-the-art radar, data processing hardware and software, and guidance and control systems and in the definition of deployment and command, control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) requirements for terminal defense application in a layered defense system. The signature measurement radar, at the Kwajalein Missile Range, and a shipborne COBRA JUDY radar collected dedicated target data from mission twenty-two in the Systems Technology Reentry Experiment Program. BMDSCOM completed pitch and yaw engine test on the SENTRY Jet Interaction Control System, as well as initial propulsion test vehicle static firings, including a motor plume test. They also completed the radar antenna design and tested a prototype in a simulated nuclear environment.

BMDSCOM completed phase I of an Airborne Optical Adjunct (AOA) study that it had begun in 1982. The phase I effort identified the utility and need for an AOA system, defined system requirements for an aircraft-mounted optical sensor that the Army could use to augment other sensors in a BMD system in the search and acquisition of threatening missile warheads, established critical development issues, and completed an AOA demonstration program plan. BMDSCOM then modified the plan to incorporate suggestions from Army management, the ASB, and experts from private organizations. In phase II, which began in March 1983, the command used the plan in formulating, specifying, and writing the scope of work and technical requirements for the Request for Proposal.

In another effort to define systems, BMDSCOM determined effective combinations of BMD and passive defense measures for use in the protection of urban industrial and military targets and assessed the impact of the introduction of passive defense measures on BMD requirements. Systems definition also continued on BMD concepts for the 1990s with separate contract efforts relating to Sea Launched BMD, High Value Target defense, and ICBM defense. Another contract, initiated in February 1983, involved incorporating results of previous BMD/90s concepts to update an existing baseline design into a defense system capable of defending a broad set of targets.

BMDSCOM's System Technology Project Office continued to determine and publish threat projections for BMD studies. A special effort involving research of Soviet countermeasures produced a five-year Countermeasure Plan. A Threat-Specific program,


which began in June 1982, provided continuity to consideration of nonconventional BMD concepts, ranked candidate Threat-Specific Systems, and proposed further development of concepts that demonstrate real potential for BMD application. An Attack Working Group, chartered to define realistic attacks on U.S. targets and to identify those which could be defended by various BMD systems, concentrated on Soviet attack capabilities on closely speed basing (CSB) deployments for Peacekeeper, attack laydowns, and scenarios the AOA.

During the year, BMDSCOM initiated a BMD road map project to identify alternatives for the Systems Technology Program and to provide priorities for the alternatives. The effort involved top-level assessment of BMD missions, strategic threat, potential attack scenarios, technology maturity and availability, strategies environment, and political factors such as treaty considerations, public opinion, and allied concerns. BMDSCOM has provided data from this effort to the DOD for use in the Strategic Defense In-depth study. During the last six months of this fiscal year, the command performed studies identifying BMD technology applicable to antitactical missiles in support of an antitactical missile analyses effort being performed by the Army Missile Command.

In October 1982, the U.S. and the Republic of the Marshall Islands completed negotiation for a new Interim Use Agreement regarding present and future use of the Kwajalein Missile Range. The agreement allows for continued operation of the range through FY 85 or until the Compact of Free Association comes into effect ending the trusteeship the U.S. has exercised over Micronesia since 1947. In September 1983, the Republic of the Marshall Islands signed the compact, which both houses of Congress must approve. Throughout the year, the Kwajalein Missile Range provided technical and logistical support of on-site BMD research and development programs and continued operations supporting national strategic offensive and defensive weapons testing. The range participated in eighteen major U.S. launched missions, including that of the first Peacekeeper launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. In addition, the range supported four NASA Space Transportation System flights.


To protect its future, this fiscal year the Army continued to support research and development in such areas as Command, Control, and Surveillance; Combat Support; Munitions; Aviation; Missiles and Air Defense; and Ground Combat Systems.

To improve Command, Control, and Surveillance, the Army participated in the joint Tactical Communications program,


known as TRI-TAC this year. In March 1983, the Army successfully fielded and evaluated the AN/TYC-39 automatic message switch and began integrating it into the European tactical communication system; six months later the first AN/TCC-39 automatic circuit switches was delivered to Fort Hood. Fielding of these major TRI-TAC switches will provide our tactical force with secure, reliable transmission of tactical command and control data, voice and message communications. Also in January 1983, the Army executed the second year of the three-year multiyear contract with Raytheon for digital multiplexers, modems, and cable drivers for use in transmission equipment and cable systems. The Army expects initial deliveries in May 1984. Development continued on the Single Subscriber Terminal (an intelligent terminal used for message preparation and reception) and the Improved Message Facility (a product improvement of existing Army tactical message centers), both of which are scheduled for testing and production decisions during FY 84. Also, at the end of the fiscal year, the Army initiated a study of all battlefield communications systems. This study has the potential for causing major changes in the TRI-TAC program.

Also in the area of communications, this fiscal year the Army continued with the development of the Tactical Satellite Communications (TACSATCOM) program, which is primarily aimed at fulfilling the Army's responsibilities in the Ground Mobile Forces Satellite Communications (GMFSC) program. TACSATCOM's development centered on improving resistance to electronic jamming and overall systems survivability, on completing the engineering for the new antijam control modem, which the Army will install in the new multichannel satellite communications terminals. The Army also completed advanced development of the new Single Channel Objective Tactical Terminal (SCOTT), which provides field commanders from brigade to field army a uniquely survivable command and control capability. Also, this year the Army deployed sixty-nine Special Communication Systems (SCS) satellite terminals to Europe, eight multichannel satellite communications terminals to the Signal Center and school for training, and completed first article tests on the new single channel man-pack satellite terminals that Special Operations Command will use.

Early in FY 83, the Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) began limited testing of radios from two competing contractors, International Telephone & Telegraph (ITT) and Cincinnati Electronics. In December 1982, the Army required the contractors to bid on a fixed delivery schedule for 28,100 radios over a four-year period on both a single year and a multiyear basis. On 29 July 1983, the source selection board


announced that ITT was the winner of the four-year contract. ITT will provide 28,100 radios at a cost of $262 million. The Army was unable to award the contract in FY 83, since the House Appropriations Committee still had to approve the multiyear request. Also, in April 1983, the Army and Air Force agreed to let the Army (PM [Production Manager] SINCGARS) be responsible for the development of a SINCGARS compatible aircraft radio. The 2d Armored Division, Fort Hood, Texas, will be the first troop unit to receive SINCGARS radios.

During late FY 82 and early FY 83 the Army's JTFP developed an evolutionary acquisition strategy for the ASAS program, to include the Air Force and their Enemy Situation Correlation Element (ENSCE). During this fiscal year, the JTFP accelerated the fielding of the system. After the Army approved the ASAS/ ENSCE outline program plan in February 1983 and Congress released FY 83 funds for it, the JTFP contracted with the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, through an existing contract with the NASA, to be the system implementation engineer. Then, the Army completed a draft baseline functional capabilities document and initiated preliminary design work for the system. The JTFP also executed memorandums of understanding for program coordination with tactical simulation (TACSIM), the Technical Control and Analysis Center (TCAC), and elements of the Battlefield Exploitation and Target Acquisition (BETA) project. The evolutionary concept of development will provide six baseline systems (5 ASAS/1 ENSCE) beginning in the mid-1980s, followed by a preplanned product improvement phase leading to the fielding of an ASAS/ENSCE system beginning in the late 1980s. Development of the ASAS/ENSCE system beginning in the late 1980s. Development of the ASAS/ENCSE will exploit lessons learned through feedback from baseline systems and other related field systems.

During FY 83 the Army continued to develop the Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS) (satellite communications ground equipment) for all DOD services and agencies. (The Air Force develops and launches the space system, and the Navy develops systems unique to Navy requirements). The major thrust this year has been continued improvement to the worldwide system, including updating network control and terminal transmission power control, and replacing old equipment. This year the Army fielded the following equipment: ten interconnect units, which allow better interaction with terrestrial systems, four new medium satellite terminals, as well as two Satellite Communications Control Elements (SCCE), which are essential to control the new DSCS III satellite system.


This fiscal year the Army also continued to develop the Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS). The first step in the program, the communications control system, remained in advanced development, while the second step, the design of the Fire Support Terminal and Fire Support System (FST/FSS) and the associated brigade and battalion software, prepared for entrance into advanced development. In anticipation, the program manager issued a request for proposals to industry in May 1983. By the end of the fiscal year, he had received and was evaluating the proposals.

During FY 83 the Mortar Locating Radar-AN/TPQ-36 (Firefinder) program focused on worldwide fielding of the systems, completion of first article testing, and deployment of two systems to Lebanon in support of the Marine peacekeeping force. The Army deployed a total of 27 radars during the fiscal year-7 within CONUS, 15 to USAREUR, 3 to Korea and 2 sent to Lebanon. In July 1983, the Army completed the latest series of first article tests, which measured electrical performance, ruggedness, transportability, susceptability to electromagnetic interference and performance under extreme environmental conditions. Test results demonstrated a significant improvement in system availability and better system performance under conditions of high humidity. In July and August, the Army assembled a Field Artillery Surveillance and Target Acquisition Battery (FASTAB) from two AN/TPQ-36 radars and a select group of operators from the instructor cadre at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, to support the Marine forces deployed in Lebanon. Reports indicate that the systems have performed well and were reliable.

The Artillery Locating Radar-AN/TPQ-37, the other version of the Firefinder program, also received attention this year. The Army provided USAREUR with six systems and Korea with two. In the second quarter of FY 83, the Army completed reliability and environmental testing of artillery locating radars, encorporating numerous improvements. Tests results indicated better system performance in conditions of high humidity and extreme temperatures, but some susceptability to rain, electromagnetic interference and vibration. The Army initiated measures to correct these problems.

The Army's fielding of the TACFIRE continued on schedule this year, with approximately 60 percent of the force presently equipped with TACFIRE. The Army expects to complete fielding of the system in the second quarter of FY 87.

During FY 83, the Army also fully supported continued development of the Position Locating Reporting System (PLRS). In July 1983, following a congressionally approved Army


reprogramming action, the Army and Marine Corps entered into a four-year production contract for PLRS with Hughes Aircraft Company. This contract will result in initial system fieldings for both services in 1986. In preparation for production, the PLRS RDTE program completed a Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) study begun in FY 82. This effort indicated production readiness and corrected RAM deficiencies noted during earlier developmental and operational testing. In addition, the PLRS engineering development system completed refurbishing in September 1983, in preparation for field redeployment in FY 84. Redeployment will provide the Army and Marine Corps with additional electronic warfare and propagation evaluations for doctrine and concept refinement. To support the program, the Army awarded several integrated logistic support development contracts for training aids and devices (TADS), test requirement documents and test program sets (TRD/TIPS), as well as a direct support team vehicle (DSTV) for field maintenance repair.

During FY 83 the Army continued the contract with Singer Librascope for development of a Tactical Display System prototype (large screen plasma displays) and associated software for purposes of experimentation and demonstration. The displays will come in two sizes: a Singer manufactured 43-cm. x 43-cm. model and a Magnavox built 60-cm. x 80-cm. display. Singer developed software for Maneuver Control System (MCS) hardware will drive the displays. The Army expects to receive three models of each size for demonstration during the Command and Control System Program review in FY 84. Subsequently, the program will conclude with limited experimentation, possibly in Europe for VII Corps, using the displays integrated with existing MCS equipment.

Failure to authorize funding for the Ground Laser Locator Designator (GLLD) in FY 83 prevented the Army from executing an option in the FY 82 contract for procurement of units this fiscal year. The Army received the final shipment of prior procurements of the GLLD in December 1982 and the first production units of the Fire Support Team Vehicle (FISTV) laser designator, range finder modification kits in August 1983. During the fiscal year, the Army fielded GLLD units in CONUS, sending them to the 24th Mechanized Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Georgia, in November 1982; the 9th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, Washington, in March 1983; and the 48th Infantry Brigade, Fort Lewis, Washington, in August 1983. The Army's Development and Employment Agency (ADEA) mounted the GLLD on the Fast Attack Vehicle at Fort Lewis, Washington. Tracking data from the GLLD indicated that laser terminal homing munition can track and designate stationary targets out to two


kilometers, with sufficient accuracy to provide a high degree of probability of hit.

During FY 83 the joint Program Committee funded several studies dealing with the development of a joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System, called JOINT STARS for the Air Force and Army. In August 1983, the Test Planning Working Group met to plan for the JOINT STARS test and to review the draft Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). One month later, the JOINT STARS Source Selection Advisory Committee held its first meeting at which they approved screening criteria used to determine potential bidders on JOINT STARS, and a General Officer panel of Army and Air Force users and developers, met for two weeks to review the JOINT STARS requirements. As a result of the recommendations from this panel, the Army and Air Force developed an acquisition strategy that accomplishes the goals of the program in a block or phased approach, starting with a baseline system and proceeding to a full capability system.

As for night vision devices, production continued on Man portable Common Thermal Night Sights (MCTNS), AN/TAS-4 (TOW Night Sight), AN/TAS-5 (Dragon Night Sight), and AN/ TAS-6 (Night Observation Device Long Range). Production of AN/TAS-4A (Improved TOW Night Sight) and closed cycle cooler kits began in the second quarter of FY 83. The Army awarded a contract to Texas Instruments, Inc., for production of AN/TAS-A conversion kits, as part of the procurement of TOW 2 (Improved TOW Weapon System) launcher kits. Fielding of the AN/TAS-4A began in USAREUR as part of the TOW 2 deployment. Production of AN/PVS-5A, second generation night vision goggles, continued in order to maintain a warm production base, while the Army phases third generation devices into production. Engineering development for the third generation night vision goggles, AN/PVS-7, for use by all soldiers, continued, while the Army completed advanced development work on a Driver's Thermal Viewer (a common module based periscope) for drivers of the M 1 tank and M2/M3 combat vehicles. The Army also awarded a contract to Litton Industries for the third generation Aviator's Night Vision Imaging System (ANVIS), AN/AVS-6.

Full scale development of the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) continued in FY 83 with completion of critical design reviews and the major portion of qualification tests. Lockheed Missile and Space Corporation (LMSC), which is the prime contractor, began integrating the Modular Integrated Communications and Navigation System (MICNS). It trained twenty soldiers to operate the system in preparation for early concept testing at Fort Hood, Texas, in FY 84. In preparation for resumption of flight tests that same year, the Army conducted manned aircraft flights.


Advanced development of a forward looking infrared (FLIR) navigational system to enable the RPV to fly at night and under adverse weather conditions also continued. On 6 June 1983, the ASARC approved the consolidation of the launch and recovery assets in the division and provided for small sections in the brigade areas. It also reduced the number of air vehicles to be procured from 995 to 548.

During FY 83, the Army began producing the Improved High Frequency Radio (IHFR) for all Army units that presently use the AN/CRC-106 (1950 technology). The improved radio provides an interim antijamming (AJ) joint capability, Electromagnetic Pulse (detection) (EMP) and selected adaptive features. Depending on favorable funding levels, the Army hopes to provide the basic IHFR to the field by FY 87 and the advanced radio with the AJ/EMP and selected adaptive features by FY 89.

Combat support equipment played an important role in the Army's development activities this year as well. During FY 83, the M712 Copperhead Cannon Launched Guided Projectile demonstrated better than 80 percent reliability in monthly Lot Acceptance Tests at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. This performance surpassed the OSD reliability standard of 80 percent and ensured a better than acceptable kill probability against stationary and moving hard point targets, such as, tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and self-propelled artillery. Hence, the Army reinstated the program, which it had earlier dropped because of rising costs and unproven reliability, and chose to procure 30,946 rounds. Also, the Army submitted, and Congress approved, a FY 83 reprogramming budget of $55.0 million and a FY 84 budget request of $75.0 million to continue production after the FY 82 funded delivery period. By September 1983, the Army had received more than 4,000 of the Copperhead projectiles since production deliveries had begun in October 1981.

On 8 November 1982, the Army awarded a contract for Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) of fifteen M9 armored combat earthmovers (ACE), a highly mobile earthmoving vehicle designed for forward-area combat support, to Pacific Car and Foundry Company (PACCAR) of Renton, Washington. The Army plans to award a five-year multiyear contract in FY 84.

During FY 83 the Army also placed competitive procurements for Ground Emplaced Mine Scattering System (GEMSS) mines and dispensers, which resulted in an expansion of the industrial production base for these items. The Lockheed Corporation won the contract for the third competitive procurement and will produce bodies for the M74 antipersonnel mine and the electronics for the M75 antitank mine. The Army awarded a contract to Quantic Industries for production of safe arming


devices for both mines based on options contained in the FY 82 contract. The Army suspended the FY 83 contract with D & S Corporation for dispensers, due to problems in acquiring chassis. The FY 83 dispenser production requirement will be combined with the FY 84 buy. System testing and improvement continued this year, with six dispensers from the initial procurement passing First Article and Production tests. EMCO, the second producer for M74 AP (antipersonnel) mine triplines, passed First Article tests this fiscal year; as did the Aerojet-General Corporation on their M75 AT (antitank) mine contract. FY 83 also saw completion of the First Lot Acceptance Testing for the M75 mine. Using findings from initial production and follow-on tests and evaluations, the Army continues to upgrade operations and maintenance manuals for the GEMSS Integrated Logistics System (ILS).

In FY 83, the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) program completed development and operational testing of contractor vehicles. Testing of these prototypes from General Motors (GM) Land Systems Division, American (AM) General Corporation, and Teledyne Continental Motors was extensive with results indicating that all vehicles had the potential to satisfy the tri-service requirements. On 22 March 1983, the Army awarded a five-year multiyear production contract to AM General. The HMMWV, a light, highly mobile vehicle employing application kits to satisfy various joint service vehicle roles, was Type Classified Standard Army equipment this fiscal year. Also this year extensive joint logistics analysis, including coordination between all involved government agencies, has resulted in the development of an outstanding test program designed to verify the quality of the production vehicles.

The Army relied on AM General Corporation for part of its tactical truck program as well. FY 83 was the third year of two five-year multiyear contracts for truck production. One was with the AM General Corporation for the 5-ton truck and the other with the Oshkosh Truck Corporation for the 10-ton truck. Deliveries on the 5-ton trucks began only this year, while deliveries of the 10-ton trucks continued from last year in support of the European deployment of Pershing II and GLCMs. Initial deliveries of the 10-ton heavy expanded mobility tactical truck (HEMTT) began in FY 83 in support of the fielding of the MLRS and Patriot systems. This year the Army continued the four-year multiyear contract with General Motors Corporation for more than 53,000 commercial utility and cargo vehicles (CUCV), which complement the HMMWV Delivery of the vehicles began this fiscal year. Other significant accomplishments in the tactical truck program included the publication of the internal wheeled


vehicle master plan and the first tactical wheeled vehicle Army functional review, both in September 1983. Other acquisitions included the awarding of a production contract, on 11 March 1983, to Hagglund Soner of Sweden for the small unit support vehicle (SUSV), and the procurement of numerous trailers.

The Army's development activities progressed in the area of munitions as well. The Army continued procurement tests of the M753 Improved 8-inch Nuclear Projectile. After conducting tests to determine the need for a special electromagnetic radiation (EMR) facility to provide additional shielding during limited life component (LLC) operations, the Army also completed support equipment fielding for all commands, less the reserve components, but initiated a materiel fielding plan (MFP) for the reserve components with the National Guard Bureau, the Army Reserve, Headquarters FORSCOM and the Army Project Manager for Nuclear Munitions (PM-NUC). The Army expects MFP ratification in FY 84.

The Army discontinued the development of the XM785 Improved 155-mm. Nuclear Projectile this fiscal year, due to congressional termination of the program during its deliberations on the FY 84 DOD authorization bill. The Army staff and the PM-NUC began to develop plans for program termination and for readdressing this program with Congress during hearings on the FY 85 budget.

During FY 83, the Army undertook numerous exploratory development activities on binary chemical agents, munitions materials, and prototype weapon design. Studies led to initiatives to find new binary agents or methods of defeating protective ensembles and equipment, significant gains in documenting increased reliability of agents, and investigations for new or improved binary submunitions applicable to the JTACMS chemical warhead. FY 83 also saw the advanced development program for the MLRS suspended as a result of elimination of fiscal year funds by the joint Appropriations Committee. However, the Army was able to prepare for initial flight tests of prototype simulant filled warheads and to do limited work on a fuze system with fiscal year 1982 funds. Engineering support continued this fiscal year to the Navy in the development of the BLU-80/B BIGEYE bomb. Principal efforts consisted of toxic agent and simulant chamber testing on the full scale instrumented bomb and reactor to ascertain the parameters of the binary agent reaction at various temperatures. Army engineers also conducted options studies for facilities to manufacture QL (Ethyl 2-(Dilisopropylamino) ethyl methyl phosphonite [Army symbol]) for the BIGEYE bomb and for a commercial facility to manufacture dichloro (DC) for the M687 155-mm. Projectile.


In the area of aviation, the Army concentrated this fiscal year on development of the AH-64 Apache advanced attack helicopter, the AH-1S Cobra/TOW, the UH-60A Black Hawk, the CH-47 Modernization program (CH-47D), the Advanced Army helicopter improvement program, the C-12 cargo plane, the joint advanced vertical lift aircraft (JVX), and the light helicopter family.

During FY 83, the Army continued production of the AH-64 helicopter by awarding contracts to Hughes Helicopters, Inc., for airframes, Martin Marietta for a target acquisition designation system and pilot night vision sensors (TADS/PNVS), and General Electric for engine service for the attack helicopter. In January 1983, the final assembly line for the helicopter opened at Mesa, Arizona. Here vendors and subcontractors from all over the United States deliver Apache components for final assembly, integration, test, and acceptance. The fielding of the Apache moved forward this fiscal year when TRADOC distributed the draft Materiel Fielding Plan, and the Army awarded Northrop Corporation a contract to test four PNVS surrogate trainers at Fort Rucker, Alabama, enabling pilots to engage in early night vision training in the AH-1 before switching to the AH-64.

On 6 March 1983, HQDA elected not to proceed with the Cobra 2000 program, which would have been a four-bladed variant of the AH-1 S. It based this decision on the age of the Cobra fleet, and projected fielding plans for the AH-64 and light helicopter experimental (LHX) aircraft. In May 1983, HQDA implemented the Cobra Fleet Life Extension (C-FLEX) program designed to keep the Cobra fleet flying safely and reliably until the aircraft were naturally attrited through old age. In addition, eighty-seven of the AH-IG helicopters were to receive TOW missile wiring and mounting points. During the summer of 1983, the Cobra program manager developed a low cost FLIR sensor (C-NITE), which will allow the Cobra crew to acquire and engage targets at night and under smoky conditions, adding significantly to its battlefield capability. The Army National Guard received twenty-three of the forty-four fully modernized Cobras delivered during the year.

As for the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter, the Army completed fielding of the aircraft to USAREUR this fiscal year, and provided the U.S. Customs service with one on loan and two each for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve Cummulative deliveries of the helicopter, as of the end of FY 83, equaled 434, with the Air Force receiving eleven. The Army also completed the development of the External Stores Support System (ESSS), which allows a Black Hawk equipped with ESSS to fly at least 1,355 nautical miles (NM) nonstop and have 1,000 lbs of fuel


remaining upon landing. The Army accomplished production cut-in of the ESSS hard points in June 1983. In August 1983, the U.S. government approved continued acceptance of the Black Hawk at a rate of ten per month through the remainder of the 1982-84 contract period.

This fiscal year the CH-47 Modernization program entered its third year, with the Army contracting for the conversion of fifty-two aircraft into the much improved CH-47D configuration. The Army delivered the first production aircraft to the IOC unit on 28 February 1983, and it expects the aircraft to attain IOC in February 1984. Deliveries have remained on schedule and performance has met or exceeded all design requirements. Also negotiations are underway for the four-year production contract and for a potential five-year multiyear procurement (FY 85FY 89) for 240 airframes.

FY 83 was the second year of Full-Scale Development (FSD) for the Army Helicopter Improvement Program (AHIP) under a fixed-price incentive contract with Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., of Fort Worth, Texas. The objective of this program is to produce an improved scout helicopter capable of day, night, and adverse weather operations through the modification of 578 OH-58A observation helicopters to an OH-58D scout configuration. Besides improvements to the engine, rotor, drive train, cockpit, and avionics, the AHIP scout will feature television, thermal imaging, and laser sensors encapsulated in a Mast Mounted Sight above the helicopter main rotor. The Critical Design Review for AHIP, held in November 1982, was successful and the program proceeded to produce five prototype aircraft and seven functional prototypes of the Mast Mounted Sight. After constructing and testing subsystems and completing Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) certification of the engine, Bell Helicopter began flight testing the AHIP engine, transmission, and rotor systems on one of its own aircraft in March 1983. On 1 September the aircraft company started initial flight testing of a prototype OH-58D helicopter. A pilot flew the basic aircraft configuration, without the Mast Mounted Sight on I and 2 September, and the aircraft with a Mast Mounted Sight on 8 September 1983. Based on an assessment of the test results and reasonable program maturity, including program cost, the Army In-Process Review (IPR) members recommended and received approval to contract for the required AHIP Long Lead Time (LLT) and advanced procurement items. The Army awarded contracts to Bell Helicopter and The Allison Gas Turbine Operations of Indianapolis, Indiana, for the airframe components and engines. The Army also conducted Initial Production Readiness Reviews (IPRR) for the AHIP at Bell Helicopter and five subcontractors during FY 83.


By contrast the JVX Development program suffered a major set back this fiscal year when the Army withdrew from the program. A major reason was the lack of a well-defined special electronic intelligence mission SEMA and the associated mission equipment package for the JVX design specifications, which increased program risks, costs, and affordability. In the early 1990s, the Army plans to conduct operational evaluations of the Marine Corps medium lift version to determine if the JVX is a solution to future medium lift requirements and intends to procure JVX only for those missions that prove to be cost effective.

Another aspect of Army aviation this fiscal year was the continued interest in developing the LHX family. The need for the LHX first surfaced in January 1982 when the Army completed an Aviation Mission Area Analysis. This analysis identified fifty-six deficiencies in the current fleets of OH-58, OH-6, UH-1, and AH-1 helicopters, concluded that these fleets would be unsupportable and nonsurvivable on future battlefields, and recommended that an LHX fleet replace them. The Army Systems Program Review of 24-25 March 1982 agreed. Consequently, in February 1983, the Army Aviation Modernization Plan recognized the LHX as an essential element in the modernization of the Army's light helicopter fleet. Deployment of the LHX will replace eleven existing helicopter models with two LHX models and will significantly reduce supportability costs and correct tactical and logistical deficiencies of the light helicopter fleet. In 1983, the Army initiated studies to determine the optimum LHX configuration, which could be a conventional helicopter, a winged helicopter, a helicopter with coaxial rotors, or a tilt-rotor aircraft. The studies included developer (DARCOM-AVSCOM [Aviation Systems Command]) trade-off determination studies to determine the most viable technical alternatives; user (TRADOC-Army Aviation Center) trade-off analysis to determine system requirements for optimum mission effectiveness; and an independent study by an ASB Ad Hoc Subgroup to assess LHX issues. In 1984 the Army will use the study results to select the LHX configuration and settle related issues.

Missiles and air defense continued to play important roles in the Army's modernization program this fiscal year. For example, the Hellfire Missile System (HMMS), an evolutionary system to accommodate a family of terminal homing seekers placed on a common airframe, remained in production, with the continued development of the minimum smoke motor (designed to reduce the Hellfire motor smoke signature) and the improved missile autopilot. Both of these improvements are scheduled for completion in FY 84. The Army awarded the second year (FY 83) production contract for 3,971 missiles, and issued the request for


a contract proposal for next fiscal year. In June 1983, an Israeli Air Force pilot fired a Hellfire missile from an AH-64 during desert testing in Israel and substantially damaged the target tank, while, in September 1983, a British Army Lynx helicopter fired two missiles, which directly hit the target.

FY 83 funding of the MLRS, which furnishes direct support to front line units, provided for continued design improvements and low rate production, including procurement of 23,640 tactical rockets and 72 Self-Propelled Launcher Loaders (SPLLS). Vought Corporation delivered 2,916 tactical rockets and 47 SPLLS to the government from its Camden, Arkansas production facility, bringing total deliveries of each 3,684 and 54, respectively. During FY 83 the MLRS was Type Classified Standard and the Army made a decision to begin full-scale production. Congressional approval in the FY 83 budget for multiyear procurement of the MLRS paved the way for the award of a five-year multiyear contract to Vought Corporation on 15 September 1983. The MLRS multiyear procurement strategy will result in $209.1 million in savings compared to annual procurement. Fielding of the first MLRS batteries in both CONUS and USAREUR started in FY 83, as well, with the 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas, in March, and with the 8th Infantry Division in Germany in September, respectively. Four participating governments, the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and France, analyzed six international contractor team studies for a Terminal Guidance Warhead (TGW) for the MLRS and selected a horizontally gliding, terminally guided submunition (TGSM) concept with a millimeter wave (MMW) seeker as the best technical approach (BTA). The participating governments incorporated this approach into a multinational request for proposal and released it to industry for their perusal on 15 August 1983. Formal release of the proposal request is planned for early 1984. Negotiation with partners on the memorandum of understanding procurement supplement, which will establish procedures for European production and/or procurement, and third country sales continued. European governments began evaluating proposals from their industries for European production based upon the final technical data they received during the year for the MLRS. Initial indications were that they would contract for European development during 1984. The Army suspended the planned FY 83 advance development of a binary chemical warhead for the MLRS due to the joint Appropriations Committee deleting the requested funding. However, the Army continued limited flight test preparation, previously planned for FY 82, using that year's unexpended funds. It plans to resume advance development in FY 84.


FY 83 was the fourth year of production for the Patriot air defense system, the Army's all-weather, long-range, surface-to-air missile system. This fiscal year the Army awarded a contract for 12 fire units and 287 missiles, making a total of 31 fire units and 710 missiles under contract out of a planned program of 106 fire units and 6,492 missiles. The first Patriot battalion, 1st Battalion 43d Air Defense Artillery, completed its training at Fort Bliss and achieved its initial operational capability in CONUS. The organization will remain at Fort Bliss to train subsequent battalions. Meanwhile, between May and July 1983, the Army conducted the last of four tests directed by the Defense System Acquisition Review Council to demonstrate that the system was ready to field. When the tests revealed shortfalls in hardware reliability, training, and supportability, the Army terminated testing and placed the program on a schedule to allow for corrections and their testing. As a result of this redirection, deployment of the system to Europe slipped at least six months from April to October 1984. In April 1983, the Army terminated the NATO Acquisition Study Effort for the Patriot when the nations involved could not reach a common agreement on acquisition strategy, schedules, and funding. The Netherlands, Greece, and Germany continued initiatives for a bilateral program with the United States. The government of Japan completed a study in January 1983 of Patriot as a replacement for their Nike-Hercules and Basic Hawk systems. The Army expects a Japanese decision to acquire the system in 1984.

In January 1983, a Department of the Army General Officer Review made the decision to support a viable U.S. Roland battalion to the year 2000 and directed the Project Office to review program costs and make reductions where possible. On 20 June 1983, a General Officer Special IPR made the decision to continue fielding the U.S. Roland and directed the Roland Project Office to reduce costs further. Meanwhile, throughout this fiscal year, the Roland Deployment Readiness Verification Test (DRVT) phase I assessed its readiness for deployment. When the early part of the test revealed that the hardware was not mature enough to warrant its deployment, the Army decided to begin correcting the deficiencies in January 1984 and to conduct a DRVT phase 11, confirming correction of these deficiencies and reassessing Roland's readiness for deployment. The first U.S. Roland Operational Demonstration, conducted at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, from 17 to 30 August 1983, resulted in three successful firing missions.

The production of FLIR Night Sights for the Army's short-range air defense missile system, the Chaparral, continued with


the award of a contract for fifteen FLIRs in May 1983 and for twenty-six FLIRs in September 1983. The FLIR will provide the Chaparral gunner with improved night and adverse weather acquisition capability. Initial delivery of FLIRs, contracted for in FY 82, began in August 1983; delivery of the Repair Cycle Floats (RCF) contracted for in FY 81 began delivery in August 1983 as well. Also that month, the Army approved limited production of the towed Chaparral for the 9th Infantry Division, because the self-propelled Chaparral is too heavy in terms of strategic airlift requirements for use with light divisions. The towed system, on the other hand, weighs 12,000 pounds and has a 100 percent system commonality with the self-propelled Chaparral. A single C-141 stretched aircraft can carry four towed systems and one prime mover.

Also for the Chaparral air defense system, this year the Army initiated development of NBC protection modification and the weapon display unit in February 1983, the FLIR counter-countermeasure in May 1983 and continued development of the Rosette Scan Seeker (RSS). The NBC protection modification will provide crew protection for operation in an NBC environment. The weapon display unit will provide the gunner target alerting and cueing information from the Short Range Air Defense Command and Control System. The FLIR counter-countermeasure will provide electrooptical countermeasure hardening for the FLIR. The RSS missile, will provide an improved infrared counter-countermeasure and increased range capability.

As for the Hawk missile system, which provides large area coverage for air bases and facilities in NATOs rear areas, the Army continues to concentrate on increasing Hawk readiness, developing missile improvements, and refining requirements and design concepts for the phase III product improvements. Fielding of phase II product improvements began in August 1983. FMS countries continued to express interest in the procurement of phase I and phase II product improvements as well as Block II software. With the decision to retain Hawk indefinitely, the Army envisions evolutionary changes to Hawk that emphasizes manpower reductions, improve strategic transportability, and increase fire power improvements that will help support U.S. air defense needs through the year 2000.

During the year, engineering development of the Pershing II ballistic missile, the Army's longest range weapon, continued beyond the planned completion date of September 1983. As part of that development, the Army conducted seventeen flight tests to demonstrate the system's long range capability and accuracy, completed qualification tests on all but two items, and conducted captive flight tests of the radar correlator to evaluate the


guidance system's capability over varying target scenery and weather conditions. The Army also conducted an Operational Test of the system at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, between 21 March and 18 May 1983. On 9 May 1983 the ASARC decided to continue with production activities. Also, receiving the latest flight test information, Congress appropriated procurement funds for the Pershing II missile in July 1983. Thus, the Army planned to award a contract for the missile in October 1983. Meanwhile, pending availability of the Pershing II, work continued on Pershing Ia (PIa) modifications to extend the missile's operational life. Successful firings of five missiles on 28 September 1983 demonstrated the operational readiness of the PIa system.

This fiscal year the Army improved the Lance missile system by upgrading its nonnuclear and nuclear warheads. At present, the Army plans no further improvements for the system.

FY 83 also was the fifth year of production for the Basic Stinger missile, the Army's first new manportable air defense system since the late 1960s. On 9 September 1983, the Army awarded a firm fixed price production contract for the procurement of 962 Basic Stinger missiles, for delivery beginning in December 1985. By the end of the fiscal year, the Army had received 4,995 missiles from previously awarded contracts. During the year the Army completed engineering development for the Stinger-Passive Optical Seeker Technique (POST), an improved missile guidance system, and in July, the ASARC decided to initiate the development of a Reprogrammable Microprocessor (RMP) version of the Stinger-POST The RMP will facilitate future change as the threat evolves through an external reprogrammable module rather than by making changes internal to the missile. On 6 September 1983, the Army awarded the Stinger POST initial production contract for forty-four missiles. The contractor is to deliver the first nontactical missiles in September 1986. This fiscal year the U.S. government signed a MOU for coproduction of the missiles with the FRG, the lead nation in a NATO consortium, that also includes Belgium, Greece, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Also during the year, the Army completed FMS cases with Germany, Japan, Italy, Switzerland, and Turkey and initiated many others.

Unlike the Stinger missile, the Dragon missile remained out of production this fiscal year, about 40,000 were on-hand. The Army, however, awarded a contract in May to the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics company to replace defective rocket motor igniters. For $19 million dollars, the company was to rebuild over 20,000 rounds of igniters manufactured with a milled lead styphunate that had deteriorated with age. Firings of selected Dragon missiles manufactured between 1975 and 1978 had demonstrated


the defects. In August 1983, McDonnell Douglas submitted an unsolicited proposal to the Army Missile Command for incorporating an improved warhead on Dragon during the Dragon rebuild program. The Missile Command did not evaluate the proposal, as the Army had no requirement for an improved warhead.

Improvements to the basic TOW system, called TOW-2, will enable this system to defeat anticipated enemy armor threats and also preserve the Army's large investment in its primary infantry heavy assault weapon. Over 300,000 TOW missiles have been produced for the Army, the Marine Corps, and the armed services of forty foreign countries. During FY 83, the second year of TOW-2 production, the Army received the first deliveries of TOW-2 missiles from the 1982 contract. Also, in support of TOW-2 fielding, this fiscal year the Army completed Instructor and Key Personnel Training (I KPT) at Fort Benning, Georgia, initiated new equipment training at Wiesbaden, West Germany, validated and verified maintenance manuals, published technical and supply manuals, and established a Depot Maintenance Plan. With the initial TOW-2 deployment to the Infantry School, Fort Benning, Georgia, in July 1983, the Army accomplished the First Unit Equipped Date (FLIED). These activities culminated in the approval of the Materiel Review Release Board's recommendation for full release of the TOW-2 weapon system in September 1983. The Army Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, manages the overall TOW Improvement program, while the Army Research and Development Command Picatinny Arsenal directs warhead improvements. Hughes Aircraft Company is the prime contractor for TOW improvement, and Texas Instruments, Inc., is the primary subcontractor.

In December 1982, after the Four Star Review, Army Chief of Staff General Meyer, agreed to cancel the Rattler medium antiarmor system for infantry units, because of costs, and in the following month, the Army disbanded the Rattler management office at Missile Command (MICOM). The Army then initiated the advanced antitank weapon system (AAWS) under the Rattler program element (PE) and established funding for it in the FY 85 POM. During the remainder of FY 83, the Army continued to support the AAWS during the formulation of the FY 85 budget.

The Office of the Secretary of Defense renamed the Corps Support Weapon System (CSWS), the Joint Tactical Missile System UTACMS) this fiscal year. OSD established the joint program office at Redstone Arsenal and appointed the program manager in March 1983. Since its establishment, the program office has worked with the CSWS Special Task Force (STF) and the Air Force to define the joint Service Operational


Requirement (JSOR) for the system; complete a force-on-force analysis; conduct a baseline cost estimate for the various development alternatives; and, prepare for a FY 84 ASARC review of the program.

Also in the area of missiles and air defense, this fiscal year the Army moved forward with the Laser Weapon Technology program, a totally new dimension of weaponry. MICOM submitted to the Army Directed Energy Weapons Program Management Plan (PMP), which TRADOC assembled and staffed, estimates of the total resource requirements and development schedules for the laser program. With the prime contractor, the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, MICOM completed the preliminary design for the Roadrunner technology demonstrator, which is designed to show all the functional elements of a laser weapon in the close combat role. MICOM initiated contract and in-house efforts aimed at improving laser efficiency, scaling up its output, and controlling its wavelength selectivity. MICOM determined experimentally the susceptibility of the U.S. common module FLIR to laser damage at the primary wavelength and determined waveforms of interest for potential laser weapons. As a result, MICOM developed analytical models, which allow one to predict laser damage for almost any desired situation. MICOM has disseminated this information to those individuals charged with protecting U.S. weapons employing FLIRs as well as to individuals studying the potential development of U.S. laser weapons systems.

FY 83 was the second year of production of the Sgt. York Division Air Defense (DIVAD) Gun system. This system provides heavy divisions with a modern antiaircraft weapon that can maneuver with front line units and engage sophisticated aircraft. During the year the Army awarded a contract for 96 fire units and associated support equipment, which brought the total to 146 fire units under contract out of a planned program of 618. The first production fire unit came off the assembly line on 1 September 1983. In December 1982, the Army had completed the Contractor Engineering test and from June through August 1983 conducted an Engineering Prototype Unit Test (EPUT). The EPUT demonstrated improvements in armament feed system reliability, fire control system reliability, and increased kill probability against both helicopters and fixed wing aircraft. Additionally, the Army updated the Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis (COEA) using demonstrated performance data. The study will continue through most of FY 84, as will instructor and key personnel training courses that the Army began in FY 83.

The development of ground combat systems received much attention this year. The Army focused on the M 1 Abrams tank,


the M60A3 tank, the M2 and M3 Bradley fighting vehicle systems, the carrier, personnel, full-tracked, armored M113A2 vehicle, howitzer developments, the field artillery ammunition support vehicle, and the 9-mm. hand gun.

In November 1982, the M1 Abrams tank program, in its second year of production, reached its approved production rate of 60 per month: 30 at the Army Tank Plant at Lima, Ohio, and 30 at Detroit, Michigan. After falling behind for most of FY 83, as a result of poor manufacturing quality control at the engine plant, engine production caught up and was ahead of schedule by the end of the fiscal year. By then, tank production stood at 1,366. A major event related to engine quality occurred in FY 83. The Army and the M I engine producer (AVCO-Lycoming) undertook to correct engine problems revealed in the FY 82 durability test. By July 1983, all indications were that they had solved the problems, and testing resumed at Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), Maryland. By the end of the fiscal year, only one engine failure had occurred and prognosis for final success was good.

FY 83 was a year of major economies in tank production as well. General Dynamics Land Systems Division, which had taken over the operation from Chrysler in March 1982, reduced manufacturing manhours per tank by about 40 percent. Tough Army negotiations and contractor efficiencies resulted in significant contract savings, which the Army transferred to FY 84 to buy additional M1 tanks. For example, the Army initiated a three year multiyear contract with Hughes Aircraft Corporation, producer of the Laser Rangefinder and Thermal Imaging System, two high cost major components. This contract will result in major savings over the single year contract method. Additionally, although the Army attempted to introduce competition into engine production by obtaining a second producer for the Aircraft Gas and Turbine (AGT) 1500 turbine engine this fiscal year, FY 84 budget congressional action did not allow this to happen but did direct that the Army conduct a new study of the engine acquisition strategy and submit the study to the Congress during the FY 85 budget hearings.

Fielding in FY 83 continued to be the major success of the M1 program. By the end of the fiscal year the Army had fielded four battalions in CONUS and six in Europe. Also in March 1983, the first National Guard M1 battalion began receiving M1s for training. In REFORGER, September 1983, the 2d Squadron, 11th ACR repeated the outstanding performance of the M1s in REFORGER 1982.

The M1E1 (Ml with 120-mm. gun, NBC overpressure protection system and improved armor) program remained on its tight schedule during FY 83. Developmental test II, which the


Army conducted mainly at APG, Maryland, included firing, automotive, and human factors, as well as desert and arctic testing. The Army has corrected the problems encountered and will field test the M1E1 in operational test II in FY 84.

Production of the M60A3 tank in FY 83 reached 382, 125 were for the Army and 257 for foreign customers. Based on current production contract schedules, the Army expects to receive the final M60A3 vehicles in May 1985.

The conversion of M60AI tanks in the Army's inventory to the M60A3 tank thermal sight (TTS) configuration made good progress during the year. Anniston Army Depot, Alabama, made 357 conversions and the Mainz Army Depot, Federal Republic of Germany, 212. The Army also expects to retrofit all the M60A3 tanks to the TTS configuration no later than October FY 90. During FY 83, it retrofitted 123 M60A3 tanks in USAREUR and 112 in CONUS.

During FY 83, deployment of M60A3s to USAREUR and CONUS continued from both Mainz and Anniston, respectively. June 1983 marked the completion of deployments to USAREUR units, bringing the total number of conversion tanks there to 1,740. All remaining Mainz conversion tanks are going into war reserves. Anniston conversion continued to outfit Forces Command and National Guard round-out units in 1983. Deployments to CONUS are scheduled for completion by FY 87. Total number of conversion tanks issued during the fiscal year reached 483.

Work continued in FY 83 on M60 series tank product improvements, which the Army was developing on the basis of two objectives. The primary objective was to advance tank performance in the areas of firepower, mobility, reliability, availability, maintainability, and deployment. The secondary objective was to ensure commonality or interoperability with the M1 Abrams tank in order to standardize logistics support and increase training efficiency. Hence, the Army took a number of initiatives. It began applying accuracy improvements to the Main Gun; completed testing of hardware developed in the Clean Air program; initiated a hybrid Automatic Fire Suppression System (AFSS) concept; revised the purchase description (PD) of the AFSSs major components and capabilities; initiated an improved 105mm. gun program; completed research and development of the optical improvement to the TTS and programmed funds to procure it in FY 84. In another action this fiscal year, the project manager of the M60 tanks program realized considerable cost savings through a five-year contract awarded to Texas Instruments on 4 March 1983 to buy out TTS. "Should Cost" efforts so far indicate that the Army can expect savings in excess of $340 million.


This fiscal year the Army awarded a procurement contract for 600 Bradley fighting vehicles. Deliveries, during the year, from contracts made in previous fiscal year totaled 569. The Army furnished these vehicles to service schools for development of logistics support and to the 2d Armored Division at Fort Hood, Texas, and the 3d Infantry Division in Germany. The Bradley fighting vehicles completed initial production testing (IPT) at APG, Maryland. The seven Bradley's tested accumulated a total of 30,000 miles and demonstrated a reliability factor of one failure for ever 419 miles, which was greater than the set goal of one every 240 miles.

Hughes Aircraft Company continued to develop the TOW-2 missile subsystem for the Bradley. The TOW will provide increased probability of hit for TOW missiles, greatly increase TOW capability during periods of reduced visibility, and capability against electrooptical countermeasures.

Other subsystems for the Bradley-the 25-mm. gun and the 5.56-mm. Firing Port Weapon (FPW) programs-continued in production. The Army received a total of 785 guns in FY 83, including the 1000th gun, which gave the government complete rights to the technical data package without concern for royalty payments to the contractor. Production of the M231 Firing Port Weapon was completed this fiscal year. The Army received the last of the 18,850 (plus an option for 550 more) FPWs contracted for in FY 82.

Another Army vehicle, the M113A2 armored personnel carrier continued to be the workhorse of the Army's mechanized forces, with over 25,000 vehicles in-service. The Army awarded the FY 83 contract for 643 additional vehicles to help meet increasing requirements, including those for Divison 86, force modernization weapons systems-the Improved TOW Vehicle (ITV)-the Fire Integration Support Team Vehicle (FISTV), and foreign sales.

The ITV is an M113A2 armored personnel carrier modified by the addition of a two-tube launcher head mounted on a hydraulically driven cupola with a 360 degree traverse capability. It provides armor protection for the crew and TOW systems components against small arms and indirect artillery fire. The ITV program continued on schedule, both in the production and deployment of ITV and the application of the TOW modification kit to vehicles for their initial deployment to the CONUS training base. The FY 83 contract award will build 373 ITVs. The TOW-2 modification provides additional capabilities on the battlefield and optimizes the performance of the improved TOW-2 missile. Application of these modification kits to FORSCOM units is scheduled for July 1984.


The Army awarded the first production contract for seventy FISTV modification kits to Emerson Electric. The Army expects the FISTV to provide significant improvements in the use of fire support elements, because the FISTV employs a modified ITV weapon station and "hammerhead" along with a four radio communications capability and laser target designator.

The Army took a number of actions to improve the howitzer system during FY 83. It developed towed artillery requirements for the 10,000-man light division. In the area of self-propelled artillery, the Army focused on modernization of the M 109 155mm. howitzer, in order to maintain it as an effective weapon system through the 1990s. The Army has already initiated the Howitzer Extended Life Program (HELP). Prototype HELP kits, which are designed to improve reliability, maintainability, survivability, and NBC protection, have been procured and are being tested. To bring the M 109 to its maximum cost effective capability, the Army is planning major improvements such as loader assist, a new gun mount and recoil system, which will allow installation of an improved cannon and breech canon similar to the one now installed on the M 198 howitzer, an improved engine, and an onboard microprocessor for firing data computations. Concurrently, the Army is thinking beyond the 1990s, and is planning development of technologies that will enable it to field a replacement system in about the year 2000.

The Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle (FAASV) is an armored ammunition carrier fabricated on an M 109 derivative chassis. It incorporates an X-Y stacker for moving ammunition inside the vehicle, and a conveyor for moving ammunition from the FAASV into the howitzer. The conveyor can also be used for moving ammunition into the FAASV when replenishing stocks. The Army awarded the initial production contract in May 1983 and will equip the first operational unit with FAASV in May 1985. The Army intends to field FAASV in Europe only.

As a result of the February 1982 cancellation of the 9-mm. solicitation and the congressional denial of the FY 83 procurement funds, the Army was involved with restructuring the entire 9-mm. Personal Defense Weapons (PDW) during FY 83. It revised the JSOR to reflect more realistic criteria which a commercial handgun adopted to military use would be able to meet. For example, the Army would measure candidate weapons on a comparability basis with the performance of the M1911A1 pistol. Revision of the Coordinated Test Plan and other associated documents reflected these changes. Revision of the Acquisition Plan reflected the changes in the JSOR and revision of the solicitation changed it from a Request for Proposals (RFP) to a Request for Test Samples (RFTS). These revisions allowed the DOD to begin


to test, evaluate, and select a handgun and prepare to procure the weapon should funds be available in the FY 84 budget. The DOD deleted the additional requirement for a smaller handgun for air crews because of the possibility that the winning PDW might satisfy the requirement.

International Research and Development

The Army conducts its research and development efforts with foreign governments and organizations through the International Office, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ODCSRDA). During FY 83, the International Office, ODCSRDA, was concerned with U.S. Army research and development relationships in Western Europe and in the Middle and Far East. In addition, it supervised the activities of the Primary Standardization Office that had handled American, British, Canadian, and Australian Quadripartite Group (ABCA/QWG) matters and TEAL-a conference held every eighteen months to review the work of the English-speaking armies under the auspices of the U.S. Army Vice Chief of Staff and his ABCA counterparts. International Office activities, however, largely centered on Western Europe and, in particular, NATO. This office consolidated Army position papers for the senior national representatives and Army meetings held in September 1983 in London, and became the Army's point of contact in advancing the Secretary of Defense initiative regarding emerging technologies. The International Office also monitored arrangements for shifting U.S. responsibility for a NATO Army Armaments Group (NAAG) panel from the USACAA to TRADOC. In the Middle East, the International Office served as the ODCSRDA point of contact for assembling lessons learned from the 1982 war in Lebanon. As for the Far East, the office was involved in expediting the two-way military technology flow between the United States and Japan.

TEAL XXIV took place at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New York, over the period 11-15 April 1983. The conference theme was "Coalition Warfare 2000." The Quadripartite Group on combat presented at the meeting a TEAL XXIII directed study on "Lower Intensity Conflict."

Two significant events occurred at the senior national representatives meeting of 13-14 September 1983. One was the U.S. sponsored setting up of a Vulnerability and Lethality Assessment Group for armor and helicopters. The other was the progress made toward realization of a Third Generation Antitank Guided Weapon Information Exchange Memorandum of Understanding. In negotiation since June 1982, this document has


received approval by the National Armaments Directors (NADs) for signature that is expected in March 1984.

In November 1982, the Secretary of Defense advanced a proposal for the sharing of conventional defense technologies for the near-(1985-1990) and long-(1990-2000) term periods with NATO countries. The NADs have responsibility for this program whose beneficiaries would reciprocate with the United States. Between 23-25 August 1983, technical experts met in Brussels to align key emerging technologies from the United States, United Kingdom, France, Federal Republic of Germany, and the Netherlands with high-priority NATO projects to improve or to accelerate specific programs.

Interoperability with Japan involved two developments. One was a ten-day visit to Japan by the Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and Acquisition and the Chief of the International Office to discuss the two-way military technology flow between Japan and the United States and to see industrial plants. The two U.S. Army representatives visited the Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI) and companies making autos, tanks, carbon steel, and electronic products. The other development concerned the fourth meeting of the U.S. Japanese Systems and Technology Forum, which was held in Washington, D.C., 7-8 July 1983. The objective of this forum was to improve technical cooperation between the two countries. The International Office, in cooperation with ODCSRDA divisions, furnished information papers to OUSDRE (IP/T) for the meeting and the Chief of the International Office participated in the discussions.

According to Lt. Gen. Merryman, the Army's R&D efforts in FY 83 supported a meaningful Total Army of Excellence. They helped in forging a very credible equipment posture and improved acquisition management procedures, both of which build superiority. The Army must continue, however, to look for better and more innovative ways to do business. By the end of FY 83, Lt. Gen. Merryman believed it was pointed in the right direction. He was "happy to state that we are making great strides in turning the hollow Army into an Army of excellence."




Go to:

Previous Chapter

Next Chapter

Return to Table of Contents

Search CMH Online
Return to CMH Online
Last updated 9 March 2004