History
The following companies and partnerships bid for the JLTV contract:
- Boeing, Textron and Millenworks
- General Dynamics and AM General (as 'General Tactical Vehicles')
- Force Protection Inc and DRS Technologies (officially rejected on August 14, 2008).
- BAE Systems and Navistar
- Northrop Grumman, Oshkosh Truck and Plasan
- Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems Land & Armaments Global Tactical Systems, Alcoa Defense and JWF Industries.
- Blackwater and Raytheon
On 29 October 2008, the Pentagon narrowed the field of vendors to the Lockheed Martin, General Tactical Vehicles and BAE Systems/Navistar teams to compete for the final version and contract for the JLTV. Each team received contracts worth between $35.9 million and $45 million to begin the second phase of the program, which could ultimately be worth $20 billion or more. On 17 February 2009, the Government Accounting Office denied the protests.
Australia signed an agreement in February 2009 to fund nine of the first 30 JLTV prototypes. However, they were rejected in December 2011 in favor of the Thales Hawkei. India became interested in the program in 2009.
As part of a cost-cutting measure, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform suggested canceling the JLTV. Despite this, the program moved forward. On 24 January 2012, the Humvee Recap program was cancelled for funding to be moved to the JLTV.
As of 28 March 2012, there are 6 proposals for the JLTV contract:
- BAE Systems Valanx
- General Tactical Vehicles JLTV Eagle
- Lockheed Martin JLTV
- Navistar Saratoga
- Oshkosh L-ATV
- AM General BRV-O
Read more about this topic: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
Famous quotes containing the word history:
“We aspire to be something more than stupid and timid chattels, pretending to read history and our Bibles, but desecrating every house and every day we breathe in.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“The history of mankind interests us only as it exhibits a steady gain of truth and right, in the incessant conflict which it records between the material and the moral nature.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“To summarize the contentions of this paper then. Firstly, the phrase ‘the meaning of a word’ is a spurious phrase. Secondly and consequently, a re-examination is needed of phrases like the two which I discuss, ‘being a part of the meaning of’ and ‘having the same meaning.’ On these matters, dogmatists require prodding: although history indeed suggests that it may sometimes be better to let sleeping dogmatists lie.”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)