Military Transformation
Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles Is Well Under Way, but Expectations for Their Transportability by C-130 Aircraft Need to Be Clarified
Gao ID: GAO-04-925 August 12, 2004
In its transformation to a more responsive and mobile force, the Army plans to form 6 Stryker Brigade Combat teams equipped with a new family of armored vehicles known as Strykers. The Stryker--which provides transport for troops, weapons, and command and control--was required by the Army to weigh no more than 38,000 pounds and be transportable in theater by C-130 cargo aircraft arriving ready for immediate combat operations. The Army plans to equip its future force with a new generation of vehicles--Future Combat Systems--to also be transportable by C-130s. GAO was asked to assess (1) the current status of Stryker vehicle acquisition, including the most current Stryker vehicle program and operating cost estimates; (2) the status and results of Stryker vehicle tests; and (3) the ability of C-130 aircraft to transport Stryker vehicles within a theater of operations. This report also addresses the transportability of the Army's Future Combat Systems on C-130 aircraft.
The acquisition of the Stryker vehicles is about two-thirds complete; with about 1,200 of 8 production vehicle configurations ordered and 800 delivered to units. In addition, limited quantities of two developmental vehicles--the Mobile Gun System and the Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Reconnaissance vehicle prototypes--have also been ordered for testing. Stryker program costs have increased about 22 percent from the November 2000 estimate of $7.1 billion to the December 2003 estimate of $8.7 billion. Total program costs include acquisition costs--procurement, research, development, and test and evaluation--as well as military construction costs related to Strykers. The Army does not yet have reliable estimates of the Stryker's operating costs because of limited peacetime use to develop data. As of June 2004, testing of the eight production Strykers was mostly complete, with the vehicles meeting Army operational requirements with limitations. However, development and testing schedules of the two developmental Strykers have been delayed, resulting in an over 1-year delay in meeting the vehicles' production milestones and fielding dates. While the Army has demonstrated the required transportability of Strykers by C-130 aircraft in training exercises, in an operational environment, the Stryker's average weight of 38,000 pounds--along with other factors such as added equipment weight and less than ideal flight conditions--significantly limits the C-130's flight range and reduces the size force that could be deployed. These factors also limit the ability of Strykers to conduct combat operations immediately upon arrival as required. With the similar maximum weight envisioned for Future Combat System vehicles intended for the Army's future force, the planned C-130 transport of those vehicles would present similar challenges.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:
Team:
Phone:
GAO-04-925, Military Transformation: Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles Is Well Under Way, but Expectations for Their Transportability by C-130 Aircraft Need to Be Clarified
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-925
entitled 'Military Transformation: Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles
Is Well Under Way, but Expectations for Their Transportability by C-130
Aircraft Need to Be Clarified' which was released on August 12, 2004.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
August 2004:
MILITARY TRANSFORMATION:
Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles Is Well Under Way, but Expectations
for Their Transportability by C-130 Aircraft Need to Be Clarified:
GAO-04-925:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-925, a report to congressional requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
In its transformation to a more responsive and mobile force, the Army
plans to form 6 Stryker Brigade Combat teams equipped with a new family
of armored vehicles known as Strykers. The Stryker”which provides
transport for troops, weapons, and command and control”was required by
the Army to weigh no more than 38,000 pounds and be transportable in
theater by C-130 cargo aircraft arriving ready for immediate combat
operations. The Army plans to equip its future force with a new
generation of vehicles”Future Combat Systems”to also be transportable
by C-130s.
GAO was asked to assess (1) the current status of Stryker vehicle
acquisition, including the most current Stryker vehicle program and
operating cost estimates; (2) the status and results of Stryker vehicle
tests; and (3) the ability of C-130 aircraft to transport Stryker
vehicles within a theater of operations. This report also addresses the
transportability of the Army‘s Future Combat Systems on C-130 aircraft.
What GAO Found:
The acquisition of the Stryker vehicles is about two-thirds complete;
with about 1,200 of 8 production vehicle configurations ordered and 800
delivered to units. In addition, limited quantities of two
developmental vehicles”the Mobile Gun System and the Nuclear,
Biological, and Chemical Reconnaissance vehicle prototypes”have also
been ordered for testing. Stryker program costs have increased about 22
percent from the November 2000 estimate of $7.1 billion to the December
2003 estimate of $8.7 billion. Total program costs include acquisition
costs”procurement, research, development, and test and evaluation”as
well as military construction costs related to Strykers. The Army does
not yet have reliable estimates of the Stryker‘s operating costs
because of limited peacetime use to develop data.
As of June 2004, testing of the eight production Strykers was mostly
complete, with the vehicles meeting Army operational requirements with
limitations. However, development and testing schedules of the two
developmental Strykers have been delayed, resulting in an over 1-year
delay in meeting the vehicles‘ production milestones and fielding
dates.
While the Army has demonstrated the required transportability of
Strykers by C-130 aircraft in training exercises, in an operational
environment, the Stryker‘s average weight of 38,000 pounds”along with
other factors such as added equipment weight and less than ideal flight
conditions”significantly limits the C-130‘s flight range and reduces
the size force that could be deployed. These factors also limit the
ability of Strykers to conduct combat operations immediately upon
arrival as required. With the similar maximum weight envisioned for
Future Combat System vehicles intended for the Army‘s future force, the
planned C-130 transport of those vehicles would present similar
challenges.
Cargo Payload and Range of an Armored C-130H Aircraft in Nearly Ideal
Flight Conditions:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that the Department of Defense (DOD) provide to Congress
clarification of expected capabilities and limitations of C-130
transport for Stryker vehicles and Future Combat System vehicles; and
options for alternative transport. DOD partially concurred with our
recommendations.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-925.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact William M. Solis at
(202) 512-8365 or solisw@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Acquisition of Stryker Production Vehicles Is about Two-thirds
Complete, Though Overall Program Costs Have Increased, and Operational
Cost Estimates Are Not Yet Reliable:
Tested Production Vehicles Generally Met Requirements, but Testing and
Acquisition Schedules for Developmental Vehicles Have Been Delayed:
Army Demonstrated Required Stryker C-130 Transportability, but Contrary
to Congressional Expectations, Operational Limits Significantly
Challenge Routine C-130 Transport:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Scope and Methodology:
Appendix: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Related GAO Products:
Tables:
Table 1: Stryker Vehicle Descriptions:
Table 2: Stryker Vehicle Acquisition Status As of April 2004:
Table 3: Increases in Stryker Vehicle Program's Costs:
Table 4: Operating Cost Estimates per Vehicle:
Table 5: Selected Performance Capabilities and Limitations from Stryker
Evaluation Report:
Table 6: Stryker Production Vehicle and Total Load Weights at the
National Training Center in April 2003:
Table 7: Analysis of C-130 Range from Selected Airfields in the Middle
East and Afghanistan When Carrying Cargo Weighing 38,000 Pounds:
Figures:
Figure 1: The Infantry Carrier Vehicle Is One of Eight Production
Configurations:
Figure 2: The Mobile Gun System Is One of Two Developmental
Configurations:
Figure 3: The Nuclear Biological Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle Is One
of Two Developmental Configurations:
Figure 4: Stryker Vehicle Exiting a C-130 Aircraft at the National
Training Center:
Figure 5: Cargo Payload and Range of an Armored C-130H Aircraft in
Nearly Ideal Flight Conditions:
Figure 6: Stryker Vehicle with Slat Armor in Iraq:
Abbreviations:
DOD: Department of Defense:
NBC: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical:
OSD: Office of the Secretary of Defense:
RTD&E: Research, Development, Test, And Evaluation:
SAR: Selected Acquisition Report:
DOT&E: Director, Operational Test and Evaluation:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
August 12, 2004:
The Honorable Duncan Hunter:
Chairman, Committee On Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Jim Saxton:
Chairman, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats, and
Capabilities:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
The U.S. Army is transforming its force to one expected to be more
strategically responsive, rapidly deployable, and able to effectively
operate in all types of military operations. The first step in the
Army's transformation was to form six Interim, or Stryker, Brigade
Combat teams equipped with a new family of 10 armored vehicle
configurations known as Strykers. Congressional appropriations for the
Stryker vehicle program, in then-year dollars[Footnote 1] totaled $4.5
billion from fiscal years 2000 through 2004. The President's budget
request for fiscal year 2005 included $1.3 billion for the program,
leaving $2.9 billion based on current estimates needed to complete
funding of the $8.7 billion estimated total cost of the
program.[Footnote 2] These program costs include acquisition costs---
procurement, research, development, and test and evaluation--as well as
related military construction costs.
According to the Army's operational requirements,[Footnote 3] Stryker
vehicles are to be transportable by C-130 aircraft within a theater of
operation, arriving ready for combat operations. The capability of C-
130 transport is a key performance requirement for the vehicles and is
central to the Army's rationale for creating Stryker brigades. The C-
130 is a four-engine, high-wing cargo aircraft that the U.S. Air Force
primarily uses as a short-range transporter. The first Stryker brigade
became operational in October 2003, at which time it was deployed to
Iraq. Beginning in 2010, the Army plans to begin the transition to its
future force--the Objective Force--and to equip this force with a new
generation of vehicles known as Future Combat Systems,[Footnote 4]
which are also, according to operational requirements,[Footnote 5] to
be transportable in theater by C-130 air transport.
In your initial request, you asked us to review the Stryker vehicle's
capabilities, performance, costs, and ability to meet operational and
mission requirements. You later asked us to assess the transportability
of Stryker vehicles on C-130 aircraft. We provided your offices our
preliminary observations on these issues in October and November 2003
and April 2004, and this report summarizes and updates the information
provided in those meetings. Our objectives were to determine (1) the
current status of Stryker vehicle acquisition, including the most
current Stryker vehicle program and operating cost estimates; (2) the
status and results of Stryker vehicle tests; and (3) the ability of C-
130 aircraft to transport Stryker vehicles within a theater of
operations. We also address transportability of the Army's Future
Combat Systems on C-130 aircraft.
To conduct our review of Stryker vehicle acquisition status, costs, and
testing results, we interviewed officials and analyzed documents from
the Army's Stryker Program Management Office and Test and Evaluation
Command and reviewed Army and Department of Defense developmental,
operational, and survivability test reports. In our assessment of the
ability of C-130 airlift to transport Stryker vehicles, we reviewed a
study of the C-130 aircraft's range and payload capabilities, and
interviewed U.S. Army, Air Force, and Transportation Command officials.
We determined that the data and documents we reviewed were sufficiently
reliable to answer our objectives. We performed our review from July
2003 through June 2004 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards. A more detailed description of our scope and
methodology is presented later in the report. A list of related GAO
products appears at the end of this report.
Results in Brief:
Acquisition of the Stryker production vehicles[Footnote 6] is about
two-thirds complete, but overall program costs are higher than earlier
estimates and vehicle operating cost estimates are not yet reliable.
The Army has ordered more than 1,200--or 68 percent--of the 8 Stryker
production vehicle configurations it plans to buy, along with limited
quantities of the two developmental vehicle prototypes for testing. Of
the production vehicles, 800 have been delivered to Stryker brigades.
Estimated total costs for the Stryker vehicle program increased about
22 percent, from the original November 2000 estimate, in then-year
dollars, of $7.1 billion to the December 2003 estimate of $8.7 billion.
The average acquisition cost per vehicle increased from $3.34 million
to $4.13 million during the same time period. The largest increase in
the Stryker program's cost estimate resulted from the cost of military
construction, such as the cost of upgrading vehicle maintenance
facilities for Strykers. However with the deployment of the first
Stryker Brigade to Iraq, the Army did not have reliable estimates of
Stryker vehicle operating costs because it does not yet have sufficient
operational experience with the vehicles in peacetime.
As of June 2004, the testing of the eight Stryker production vehicles
is mostly complete with the vehicles meeting operational requirements
with certain limitations, but the testing and acquisition schedules of
the two developmental Strykers--the Mobile Gun System and Nuclear,
Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Reconnaissance vehicles--have been
delayed. The Stryker vehicle system evaluations by the Army and the
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) determined that the production
vehicles met operational requirements with some limitations and,
overall, support the key operational capabilities and effectiveness of
the Stryker Brigade Combat Team. Delays in development and testing of
the Mobile Gun System and NBC Reconnaissance vehicles will result in
about a 1-to 2-year delay in meeting originally planned production
decision milestones and fielding dates.
Although the Army has demonstrated the required transportability of
Strykers by C-130s during training events, the C-130 has a limited
capability to transport the Stryker vehicle in an operational
environment except under favorable conditions. Because of the Strykers'
average 38,000-pound weight, using C-130 aircraft to transport Strykers
in an operational environment would limit flight range, the size force
that could be deployed, and the ability to conduct operations
immediately upon arrival--a key operational requirement for Stryker
vehicles. Additional weight, such as from mission equipment or armor
and less than ideal environmental conditions, poses significant
challenges. For example, according to a study of C-130 transport of
Army vehicles by the Military Traffic Management Command,
Transportation Engineering Agency, an armored C-130H[Footnote 7]
aircraft taking off in ideal conditions such as moderate air
temperature could transport 38,000 pounds for a maximum range of 860
miles. Adding just 2,000 pounds onboard the aircraft for associated
cargo such as mission equipment or ammunition reduces the C-130
aircraft's takeoff-to-landing range to only 500 miles. Furthermore, a
C-130 with a 38,000-pound Stryker vehicle on board would not be able to
take off at all from locations in higher elevations, such as
Afghanistan, during daytime in the summer. Because of these
constraints, equipment and supplies for the Strykers might need to be
moved on separate aircraft, increasing the numbers of aircraft or
sorties[Footnote 8] needed to deploy a Stryker force, deployment time,
and the time it would take after arrival to begin operations. In
addition, if fitted with additional armor for increased protection
against weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades, a Stryker vehicle
would be unable to fit inside a C-130, and with added weight of the
armor, the aircraft would be too heavy to take off. At the envisioned
38,000-pound maximum weight of the Future Combat System vehicles, the
planned C-130 transport of those vehicles for the Army's Future
Objective Force would present the same challenges.
Given the challenges of C-130 transport of Stryker vehicles, the Army's
operational requirements and congressional expectations for such
transport, we are recommending that the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretaries of the Army and the Air Force,
clarify for Congress (1) the expected deployment capabilities of
Stryker brigades and Stryker vehicles via C-130 aircraft within a
theater of operations and the types of operational missions using C-130
transport of Stryker vehicles that would be achievable; (2) potential
operational capability limitations of Stryker brigades given the limits
of C-130 transport; and (3) options for, and availability of,
alternative modes of transportation for transporting Stryker brigades
within an operational theater. We are also recommending that the
department include similar clarification for C-130 transport of Future
Combat System vehicles.
In commenting on a draft of this report, the Department of Defense
(DOD) partially concurred with our recommendations. DOD's comments are
in the appendix and our evaluation of its comments is on page 29.
Background:
The Stryker family of vehicles consists of 10 eight-wheeled armored
vehicles mounted on a common chassis that provide transport for troops,
weapons, and command and control. Stryker vehicles weigh on average
about 19 tons--or 38,000 pounds, substantially less than the M1A1
Abrams tanks (68 tons) and the Bradley Fighting vehicle (33 tons), the
primary combat platforms of the Army's heavier armored units. The C-130
cargo aircraft is capable of tactical, or in-theater, transport of one
Stryker vehicle; the Army's Abrams tank and Bradley Fighting vehicle
exceed the C-130 aircraft's size and weight limits.
The Army's original operational requirements for Stryker
vehicles[Footnote 9] included (1) the capability of entering, being
transportable in, and exiting a C-130 aircraft; (2) the vehicle's
combat capable deployment weight[Footnote 10] must not exceed 38,000
pounds to allow C-130 transport of 1,000 miles; and (3) the Stryker
vehicles must be capable of immediate combat operations after
unloading.[Footnote 11] The Army's most current operational
requirements for Stryker vehicles required the same vehicle weight and
C-130 transport capabilities without reference to C-130 transport of
1,000 miles. The Army has similar operational requirements for its
Future Combat Systems' vehicles. The Army's April 2003 Operational
Requirements document for the Future Combat Systems requires the
vehicles' essential combat configuration to be no greater than 38,000
pounds and have a size suitable for C-130 aircraft transport. A
memorandum of agreement between the Air Force and the Army issued in
2003,[Footnote 12] set procedures allowing C-130 transport of 38,000-
pound Stryker vehicles aboard Air Force aircraft, but required that the
combined weight of the vehicles, other cargo, and passengers shall not
exceed C-130 operational capabilities, which vary based on mission
requirements, weather, airfield conditions, among other factors.
Eight of the 10 vehicle configurations are being acquired production
ready--meaning they require little engineering design and development
work prior to production. Two of the 10 vehicle configurations, the
Mobile Gun System and the NBC Reconnaissance vehicle, are developmental
vehicle variants--meaning that a substantial amount of design,
development, and testing is needed before they can go into production.
Table 1 provides descriptions of the ten Stryker vehicles. Three of the
vehicles are shown in figures 1 to 3.
Table 1: Stryker Vehicle Descriptions:
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Anti-Tank Guided Missile
vehicle;
Description: Provides the brigade's primary tank-killing system. It
reinforces the brigade reconnaissance squadron and provides long-range
direct fires.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Commander's vehicle;
Description: Provides the brigade with the means to receive information
and data, analyze, prepare and transmit data; and control the forces/
functions carrying out combat missions.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Engineer Squad vehicle;
Description: Provides maneuver/mobility support capabilities, which
include obstacle clearing, in-stride breaching of surface mines,
proofing of subsurface mines, and smoke generation for local
protection.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Fire Support vehicle;
Description: Provides automated enhanced surveillance, target
acquisition, target identification, target tracking, target
designation, position location, and communications functionality.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Infantry Carrier vehicle;
Description: Provides protected transport and supporting fires for the
infantry squad during dismounted assault. It carries an infantry squad
with individual equipment.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Medical Evaluation vehicle;
Description: The battalion aid station for brigade units, providing
treatment for serious injury and advanced trauma cases.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Mortar Carrier;
Description: Provides infantry units with screening obscurants,
suppressive forces and on-call supporting fires. 120mm and 81mm
variants provide responsive, accurate and lethal indirect fire support
to the dismounted infantry assault.
Vehicle configuration: Production vehicles: Reconnaissance vehicle;
Description: Provides force situational awareness, gathering and
transmitting real time intelligence while moving throughout the
battlefield in close, complex, and urban terrain.
Vehicle configuration: Developmental vehicles: Mobile Gun System;
Description: Supports dismounted infantry and engages the enemy in
close combat to clear opposition and permit rapid movement, allowing
the force to maintain the initiative, occupy and/or secure key
objectives, and defeat strong points.
Vehicle configuration: Developmental vehicles: Nuclear, Biological, and
Chemical (NBC) Reconnaissance vehicle;
Description: Provides on-the-move and remote near-real-time nuclear,
biological, and chemical detection and surveillance.
Source: U.S. Army.
[End of table]
Figure 1: The Infantry Carrier Vehicle Is One of Eight Production
Configurations:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure 2: The Mobile Gun System Is One of Two Developmental
Configurations:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure 3: The Nuclear Biological Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle Is One
of Two Developmental Configurations:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
The Army selected one light infantry brigade and one mechanized
infantry brigade at Fort Lewis, Washington, to become the first two of
six planned Stryker brigades. The first of these brigades, the 3rd
Brigade, Second Infantry Division, became operational in October 2003,
at which time the Brigade was deployed to Iraq. The second of the two
Fort Lewis brigades became operational in May 2004, and plans are for
it to deploy to Iraq in late 2004. The Army plans to form four more
Stryker brigades from 2005 through 2008. The planned locations of the
next four brigades are Fort Wainwright/Fort Richardson, Alaska; Fort
Polk, Louisiana; Schofield Barracks, Hawaii; and a brigade of the
Pennsylvania Army National Guard.
Acquisition of Stryker Production Vehicles Is about Two-thirds
Complete, Though Overall Program Costs Have Increased, and Operational
Cost Estimates Are Not Yet Reliable:
Acquisition of the eight Stryker production vehicle configurations is
about two-thirds complete with about 68 percent of the over 1,800-
planned production vehicles ordered, and a low rate of production for
the two developmental Strykers is scheduled for September 2004.
Estimated program costs have increased because of, among other reasons,
increases in the Army's estimate for related military construction,
such as for the cost of building new Stryker vehicle maintenance
facilities. However, the Army does not yet have reliable estimates for
the Stryker's operating costs, such as for vehicle maintenance, because
of limited peacetime operational experience with the vehicles.
About Two-thirds of Stryker Production Vehicle Acquisition Completed:
The Army is pursuing three acquisition schedules for the Stryker
production and developmental vehicles. Since the November 2000 Stryker
vehicle contract award,[Footnote 13] the Army has ordered 1,231
production vehicles--about 68 percent--of the 1,814 production vehicles
the Army plans to buy for the six Stryker brigades. Of the 1,231
vehicles ordered, 800 have been delivered to the brigades, including
all of the production vehicles for the first two Stryker brigades. The
Army is currently fielding Stryker production vehicles for the third of
the six planned brigades. The third brigade is to be fielded in Alaska.
Thus far, the Army has bought limited quantities of the developmental
vehicle variants--8 Mobile Gun System and 4 NBC Reconnaissance
vehicles--as prototypes and for use in testing at various test sites
around the country. Of 238 Mobile Gun Systems the Army plans to buy
overall, current plans are to buy 72 initially upon approval for low-
rate initial production scheduled for September 2004. The Army plans
low-rate initial production of 17 NBC Reconnaissance vehicles also in
September 2004. The Mobile Gun System is not scheduled to reach a full
production decision until September 2006 at the earliest, while the NBC
Reconnaissance vehicle is not scheduled to reach its full production
decision until 2007. Table 2 below shows the status of Stryker vehicle
acquisition as of April 2004.
Table 2: Stryker Vehicle Acquisition Status As of April 2004:
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Infantry carrier;
Total planned quantities: 699;
Quantities ordered: 445;
Percent: 64%;
Quantities delivered: 328;
Percent of planned quantities: 47%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Reconnaissance;
Total planned quantities: 393;
Quantities ordered: 290;
Percent: 74%;
Quantities delivered: 140;
Percent of planned quantities: 36%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Mortar carrier;
Total planned quantities: 224;
Quantities ordered: 127;
Percent: 57%;
Quantities delivered: 85;
Percent of planned quantities: 38%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Medical evacuation;
Total planned quantities: 114;
Quantities ordered: 79;
Percent: 69%;
Quantities delivered: 47;
Percent of planned quantities: 41%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Commander's;
Total planned quantities: 112;
Quantities ordered: 80;
Percent: 71%;
Quantities delivered: 41;
Percent of planned quantities: 37%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Fire-Support;
Total planned quantities: 108;
Quantities ordered: 80;
Percent: 74%;
Quantities delivered: 39;
Percent of planned quantities: 36%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Antitank guided
missile;
Total planned quantities: 88;
Quantities ordered: 88;
Percent: 100%;
Quantities delivered: 88;
Percent of planned quantities: 100%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Production vehicles: Engineer squad;
Total planned quantities: 76;
Quantities ordered: 42;
Percent: 55%;
Quantities delivered: 32;
Percent of planned quantities: 42%.
Production vehicle total;
Total planned quantities: 1,814;
Quantities ordered: 1,231;
Percent: 68%;
Quantities delivered: 800;
Percent of planned quantities: 44%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Developmental vehicles: NBC
Reconnaissance;
Total planned quantities: 44;
Quantities ordered: 4;
Percent: 9%;
Quantities delivered: 4;
Percent of planned quantities: 9%.
Vehicle configuration/variant: Developmental vehicles: Mobile Gun
System;
Total planned quantities: 238;
Quantities ordered: 8;
Percent: 3%;
Quantities delivered: 8;
Percent of planned quantities: 3%.
Developmental vehicle total;
Total planned quantities: 282;
Quantities ordered: 12;
Percent: 4%;
Quantities delivered: 12;
Percent of planned quantities: 4%.
Total;
Total planned quantities: 2,096;
Quantities ordered: 1,243;
Percent: 59%;
Quantities delivered: 812;
Percent of planned quantities: 39%.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Army data.
Note: Percentages are rounded.
[End of table]
Stryker Vehicle Program's Costs Have Increased from Earlier Estimates:
The Stryker vehicle program's total costs increased, in then-year
dollars, from the original November 2000 estimate of $7.1 billion to
the December 2003 estimate of $8.7 billion--or about 22
percent.[Footnote 14] The increases occurred primarily due to revised
estimates for the associated cost of military construction, such as
that needed to upgrade maintenance and training facilities for a
Stryker brigade, but were also due to lesser increases in procurement
and research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) costs for the
vehicles--which together grew by about 8 percent from the original
November 2000 estimate.
In then-year dollars, the estimated cost of military construction
accounted for the largest increase in the Stryker program's cost
estimate. In December 2003, the Army increased its estimate for
military construction by about $1.01 billion over the original November
2000 estimate, from $322 million to $1.3 billion. (See table 3.) As in
all major Department of Defense acquisition programs, military
construction costs are included in the program's total costs. According
to the Army, the military construction cost estimate increased because
the December 2003 estimate reflects (1) the identification of all five
sites scheduled to receive Stryker brigades and (2) the total cost of
upgrading or building maintenance and training facilities at these
installations to accommodate a Stryker brigade. When the original
estimate was made, only one site had been identified to receive a
Stryker brigade and that estimate identified just the cost of
maintenance facility upgrades.
Table 3: Increases in Stryker Vehicle Program's Costs:
Then-year dollars in millions:
Cost element: Military construction;
November 2000 (original estimate): $322.2;
December 2003: $1,333.3;
Increase/decrease: $1,011.1.
Cost element: Procurement;
November 2000 (original estimate): $6,290.0;
December 2003: $6,679.8;
Increase/ decrease: $389.8.
Cost element: Research, development, test, & evaluation;
November 2000 (original estimate): $508.0;
December 2003: $645.6;
Increase/decrease: $137.6.
Total cost;
November 2000 (original estimate): $7,120.2;
December 2003: $8,658.7;
Increase/ decrease: $1,538.5.
Total number of vehicles[A];
November 2000 (original estimate): 2131;
December 2003: 2096;
Increase/decrease: (35.0).
Average acquisition cost per vehicle[B];
November 2000 (original estimate): $3.34;
December 2003: $4.13;
Increase/decrease: $0.79.
Source: U.S. Army.
Note: Numbers in parentheses are negative.
[A] Planned vehicle quantities are subject to change because of
modifications to the Stryker Brigade's design.
[B] Total acquisition cost/number of vehicles.
[End of table]
The Stryker vehicle's procurement costs increased by about $390
million. The largest factor in the increase of procurement costs was
the higher than originally estimated costs of procuring add-on reactive
armor,[Footnote 15] including the additional costs to equip six Stryker
brigades with add-on armor, instead of four brigades as originally
planned. Also, the cost of RDT&E increased about $138 million, from
$508 million to $645.6 million. Most of the RDT&E cost increase is
attributable to revised estimates for the cost of test and evaluation,
development, and system engineering for the developmental vehicles. The
average acquisition cost per vehicle increased by about $0.79 million,
from $3.34 million to $4.13 million. The program costs and average
acquisition cost per vehicle estimates reflect a reduction in the
number of Strykers planned from 2,131 to 2,096. (See table 3 above.)
Limited Peacetime Operational Experience Makes Operating Cost Estimates
Unreliable:
The Army does not have reliable estimates of Stryker vehicle operating
costs because, with the first Stryker brigade's deployment to Iraq, it
lacks sufficient peacetime operational experience with the vehicles.
The Army considers 3 years of actual peacetime operational cost data to
be sufficient for reliable estimates.[Footnote 16] Since none of the
production vehicles have 3 years of peacetime operating experience,
reliable operating cost estimates will not be available until 2005 at
the earliest. With the Mobile Gun System and NBC Reconnaissance
vehicles still in development, it will be several years before these
vehicles are fully fielded and sufficient data are available for
reliable estimates of their operating costs.
According to the Army, current Stryker vehicle operating cost
estimates, shown in table 4 below, are engineering estimates based in
part on operating costs for another vehicle in the Army's inventory--
the M-113 armored personnel carrier.[Footnote 17] The estimates assume
peacetime operations.
Table 4: Operating Cost Estimates per Vehicle:
Fiscal year 2004 constant dollars:
Vehicle configuration: Medical Evaluation vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $12.27.
Vehicle configuration: Reconnaissance vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $16.48.
Vehicle configuration: Infantry Carrier vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $17.19.
Vehicle configuration: Fire Support vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $18.78.
Vehicle configuration: Commander's vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $21.33.
Vehicle configuration: Anti-Tank Guided Missile vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $22.05.
Vehicle configuration: Engineer Squad vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $25.66.
Vehicle configuration: Mortar Carrier;
Cost per-mile estimate: $28.96.
Vehicle configuration: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Reconnaissance
vehicle;
Cost per-mile estimate: $35.62.
Vehicle configuration: Mobile Gun System;
Cost per-mile estimate: $69.76.
Source: U.S. Army Stryker Program Office.
Note: Estimates are based, in part, on costs of Army's M-113 armored
personnel carrier.
[End of table]
Vehicle operating costs include the cost for maintenance, repair, and
the cost of consumable and repairable parts. The Army calculates
vehicle cost per mile by tracking vehicle mileage and the actual costs
of consumable or replaceable parts used.[Footnote 18] However, the
short time frame from fielding the first Stryker brigade's production
vehicles--May 2002 through January 2003--and the brigades' deployment
to Iraq in October 2003, limited the amount of time and miles the
vehicles were in peacetime service. Similarly, fielding of Stryker
vehicles for the second brigade was completed in January 2004. While
the Army collected operational cost and mileage data for both brigades,
there were insufficient actual operating costs and miles on the
vehicles to make reliable estimates. Consequently, until the Army can
collect more actual peacetime operating cost data for the production
vehicles, it will not be able to determine actual vehicle operating
costs and make reliable operating cost estimates for these vehicles.
Similarly, reliable operating cost estimates for the Mobile Gun System
and NBC Reconnaissance vehicle will not be available until after 2006
when they are scheduled to begin full production and fielding.
Tested Production Vehicles Generally Met Requirements, but Testing and
Acquisition Schedules for Developmental Vehicles Have Been Delayed:
According to Army and OSD test reports[Footnote 19], the tested Stryker
production vehicles met operational requirements with certain
limitations and, overall, support the key operational capabilities and
force effectiveness of the Stryker Brigade Combat Team. The separate
developmental testing schedules of the Mobile Gun System and NBC
Reconnaissance vehicles have been delayed, resulting in delays in
meeting planned production milestone dates. Delay in the Mobile Gun
System's development was due in part to shortfalls in meeting
performance requirements of the vehicle's ammunition autoloader system.
The NBC Reconnaissance vehicle's development schedule was delayed
pending OSD approval of an updated technology readiness
assessment[Footnote 20] for the vehicle and its nuclear, biological,
and chemical sensor systems.
Following Testing, Army and OSD Indicate Stryker Production Vehicles
Met Operational Requirements, with Limitations:
Following the Army's completion of live-fire tests and evaluation for
seven production vehicles in February 2004 and its ongoing test
evaluation of the eighth, the Army stated that the Stryker production
vehicles met operational requirements, with limitations; and OSD
approved full production.[Footnote 21]
The Army's System Evaluation Report for the Stryker production decision
concluded that overall, the Stryker family of vehicles is effective,
suitable, and survivable, and supports the key operational capabilities
and force effectiveness of the Stryker Brigade Combat Team. The report
concluded that the Stryker production vehicle configurations met
operational requirements with limitations. For example, in the area of
lethality, the report noted that four Stryker vehicle configurations
have a remote weapons station that provides effective protective and
supporting fires for dismounted maneuver. However, limitations of the
remote weapons station's capability to provide accurate and continuous
fires at night and while moving reduce its effectiveness and lethality.
Similarly, while the Stryker vehicles contribute to force protection
and meet survivability requirements, there are inherent and expected
survivability limitations as in any armored vehicle system. Table 5
lists some of the operational requirements of the vehicles and excerpts
of selected performance capabilities and limitations from the Army's
Stryker system evaluation report.
Table 5: Selected Performance Capabilities and Limitations from Stryker
Evaluation Report:
Operational requirement: Lethality;
Overall assessment: The Stryker family of vehicles provides significant
firepower capabilities giving the Striker Combat Brigade Team commander
the ability to shape the battle. Four variants have a remote weapons
station that provides effective protective and supporting fires for
dismounted maneuver;
Examples of limitations: While the remote weapons station provides
effective protective and support fires, its capability to provide
accurate and continuous fires is limited at night and while moving.
Operational requirement: Logistics supportability;
Overall assessment: Stryker vehicles are logistically supportable and
require significantly less petroleum supplies than an equivalent heavy
brigade;
Examples of limitations: An augmentation of personnel is needed to
sustain a brigade's Stryker vehicle maintenance workload.
Operational requirement: Mobility;
Overall assessment: Stryker has good on and off-road mobility. Its off-
road mobility is comparable to other Army wheeled vehicles but less
than tracked vehicles;
Examples of limitations: Fully loaded in temperatures above 100 degrees
Fahrenheit, power train cooling is insufficient, limiting the Stryker's
ability to operate for extended periods in soft soil or sand or to
climb prolonged grades.
Operational requirement: Reliability and maintainability;
Overall assessment: Except Engineer Squad vehicles, Stryker family of
vehicles meets operational reliability requirements;
Examples of limitations: All vehicle configurations experienced a
significant number of unscheduled maintenance actions.
Operational requirement: Survivability;
Overall assessment: Stryker vehicles contribute to force protection and
meet survivability requirements;
Examples of limitations: There are inherent and expected survivability
limitations. Specific ballistic survivability results are classified.
Source: U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command.
[End of table]
The OSD Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, found that six
Stryker production vehicles are operationally effective for employment
in small-scale contingency operations and operationally suitable with
certain limitations.[Footnote 22] OSD found that the Engineer Squad
vehicle is not operationally suitable because of poor reliability.
However, in its March 2004 Stryker acquisition decision, OSD determined
that the operational capabilities provided by the Engineer Squad
vehicle supported its continued production in light of planned fixes,
operational work-arounds, and planned follow-on testing. It also
determined that corrective actions are needed to address survivability
and ballistic vulnerability limitations of the vehicles, such as
ensuring basic armor performance and reducing exposure of Stryker
personnel.
Mobile Gun System Development and Testing Schedule Ongoing but Delayed:
Although developmental testing is ongoing, the development and testing
schedule of the Mobile Gun System has been delayed, resulting in more
than a 1-year delay in meeting planned production decision milestone
dates, with initial limited production to start in September 2004. The
delay in the Mobile Gun System's development was due in part to
shortfalls in meeting performance requirements of the vehicle's
ammunition autoloader system. At the time of our review, the Mobile Gun
System was undergoing additional testing to find a fix for the
autoloader, in preparation for a low-rate production decision. The
Mobile Gun System is scheduled for production qualification testing
through July 2004, production verification testing starting in October
2005, and live-fire test and evaluation starting in November 2005
through September 2006. The Army's earlier Mobile Gun System
acquisition schedule was to complete developmental testing and have a
low-rate initial production decision in 2003 and begin full production
in 2005. Current Army plans are to buy limited quantities of Mobile Gun
System vehicles upon OSD approval of low-rate initial production
planned for September 2004. A full-rate production decision for the
Mobile Gun System is currently scheduled for late in 2006.
The Mobile Gun System has a 105mm cannon with an autoloader for rapidly
loading cannon rounds without outside exposure of its three-person
crew. The principal function of the Mobile Gun System is to provide
rapid and lethal direct fires to protect assaulting infantry. The
Mobile Gun System cannon is designed to defeat bunkers and create
openings in reinforced concrete walls through which infantry can pass
to accomplish their missions. According to the Army's Stryker Program
Management Office, the autoloader system was responsible for 80 percent
of the system aborts during initial Mobile Gun System reliability
testing because of cannon rounds jamming in the system. As of February
2004, the Army was planning additional testing and working with the
autoloader's manufacturer to determine a solution. A functioning
autoloader is needed if the Mobile Gun System is to meet its
operational requirements because manual loading of cannon rounds both
reduces the desired rate of fire and requires brief outside exposure of
crew. In its March 2004 Stryker acquisition decision, OSD required the
Army to provide changes to the Mobile Gun System developmental exit
criteria within 90 days, including the ability to meet cost and system
reliability criteria.
NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle Development Schedule Delayed:
Although its developmental testing is also ongoing, the development
schedule of the NBC Reconnaissance vehicle has also been delayed, and
its production is now scheduled to occur about two years later than
planned. The delay was primarily due to additional time needed to
develop and test the vehicle's nuclear, biological, and chemical sensor
systems. As a result, low-rate initial production, previously scheduled
for December 2003, will not occur until September 2004. A full-rate
production decision, which had previously been scheduled for June 2005,
will not occur until July 2007. In its March 2004 Stryker acquisition
decision, OSD required the Army to provide within 90 days an updated
technology readiness assessment for the NBC Reconnaissance vehicle and
its nuclear, biological, and chemical sensor systems. At that time, OSD
will make a determination as to whether the vehicle is ready for
production.
Army Demonstrated Required Stryker C-130 Transportability, but Contrary
to Congressional Expectations, Operational Limits Significantly
Challenge Routine C-130 Transport:
Although the Army demonstrated during training events that Stryker
vehicles can be transported short distances on C-130 aircraft and
unloaded for immediate combat, the average 38,000 pound weight of
Stryker vehicles, other cargo weight concerns, and less than ideal
environmental conditions present significant challenges in using C-130s
for routine Stryker transport. Similar operational limits would exist
for C-130 transport of the Army's Future Combat Systems because they
are also being designed to weigh about 38,000 pounds.
In addition, much of the mission equipment, ammunition, fuel,
personnel, and armor a Stryker brigade would need to conduct a combat
operation might need to be moved on separate aircraft, increasing the
numbers of aircraft or sorties needed to deploy a Stryker force, adding
to deployment time and the time it would take after arrival to begin
operations. Yet, the Army's weight requirement and C-130 transport
requirements for the vehicles, and information the Army provided to
Congress in budget documents and testimony, created expectations that
Stryker vehicles could be routinely transported by C-130 aircraft
within an operational theater.
Stryker's C-130 Short-Distance Deployability Was Demonstrated in
Operational Evaluations:
In a December 2003 report on the first Stryker Brigade's design
evaluation,[Footnote 23] we reported that the Stryker Brigade
demonstrated the ability to conduct tactical deployments by C-130
aircraft. At the National Training Center in April 2003, we observed
the brigade conduct a tactical movement by moving a Stryker infantry
company with its personnel, supplies, and 21 Stryker vehicles via seven
C-130 aircraft flying 35 sorties from Southern California Logistics
Airfield to a desert airfield on Fort Irwin about 70 miles
away.[Footnote 24] Figure 4 shows a Stryker vehicle being offloaded
from a C-130 at the National Training Center.
Figure 4: Stryker Vehicle Exiting a C-130 Aircraft at the National
Training Center:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
A team from the Department of Defense's (DOD) Office of the Director
for Operational Test and Evaluation and the Army's Test and Evaluation
Command also observed the Stryker vehicle's deployment and recorded the
weight of the vehicles and the total load weight onboard the aircraft.
The average weight for the eight production vehicle configurations was
just less than 38,000 pounds, while the total load weight--including a
3-days' supply of fuel, food, water, and ammunition--averaged more than
39,100 pounds. Table 6 shows the weight of eight-production vehicles
and their total load weight recorded at the time of the April 2003
National Training Center deployment. We noted in our December 2003
report,[Footnote 25] however, that while the tactical deployment of
Stryker vehicles by C-130 aircraft was demonstrated, the Army had yet
to demonstrate under various environmental conditions, such as high
temperature and airfield altitude, just how far Stryker vehicles can be
tactically deployed by C-130 aircraft.
Table 6: Stryker Production Vehicle and Total Load Weights at the
National Training Center in April 2003:
Vehicle configuration[A]: Commander's;
Vehicle weight[B]: 36,660;
Total load weight[C]: 38,130.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Reconnaissance;
Vehicle weight[B]: 37,090;
Total load weight[C]: 38,350.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Fire-Support;
Vehicle weight[B]: 37,220;
Total load weight[C]: 37,850.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Infantry Carrier;
Vehicle weight[B]: 37,630;
Total load weight[C]: 39,940.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Medical Evacuation;
Vehicle weight[B]: 37,930;
Total load weight[C]: 38,570.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Engineer Squad;
Vehicle weight[B]: 38,450;
Total load weight[C]: 39,500.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Mortar Carrier;
Vehicle weight[B]: 38,940;
Total load weight[C]: 39,990.
Vehicle configuration[A]: Antitank Guided Missile;
Vehicle weight[B]: 39,980;
Total load weight[C]: 40,820.
Average weight;
Vehicle weight[B]: 37,988;
Total load weight[C]: 39,144.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[A] The NBC Reconnaissance vehicle and the Mobile Gun System were in
developmental testing and did not participate in this exercise.
[B] Vehicle weight is the weight of each vehicle during a Stryker C-130
deployment that was conducted as part of the Stryker Brigade
Operational Evaluation at the National Training Center in April 2003.
The vehicle weights are not final and may change slightly as the make-
up of their associated equipment packages is finalized.
[C] Total load weight is the weight of each vehicle during the April
2003 deployment with a 3-days' supply of fuel, food, water, ammunition,
and crew. The Anti-Tank Guided Missile's total load weight included a
four-man crew.
[End of table]
Weight Presents Significant Challenges for C-130 Transport of Stryker
Vehicles, Making Requirements and Expectations Difficult to Meet:
The weight of Stryker vehicles presents significant challenges for C-
130 aircraft transport because, as a general rule U.S. Air Force air
mobility planning factors specify an allowable C-130 cargo weight of
about 34,000 pounds for routine flight. With most Stryker vehicles
weighing close to 38,000 pounds on board, the distance--or range--that
a C-130 aircraft could fly is significantly reduced when taking-off in
high air temperatures or from airfields located in higher elevations.
In standard, or nearly ideal, flight conditions--such as day-time, low
head-wind, moderate air temperature, and low elevation--an armored C-
130H with a cargo payload of 38,000 pounds can generally expect to fly
860 miles from takeoff to landing. Furthermore, according to a Military
Traffic Management Command's Transportation Engineering Agency study of
C-130 aircraft transportability of Army vehicles,[Footnote 26] a C-
130's range is significantly reduced with only minimal additional
weight, and ideal conditions rarely exist in combat scenarios. The C-
130 aircraft's range may be further reduced if operational conditions
such as high-speed takeoffs and threat-based route deviations exist
because more fuel would be consumed under these conditions. Even in
ideal flight conditions, adding just 2,000 pounds onboard the aircraft
for associated cargo such as mission equipment, personnel, or
ammunition reduces the C-130 aircraft's takeoff-to-landing range to 500
miles. In addition, the more than 41,000-pound weight of the Mobile Gun
System would limit the C-130 aircraft's range to a maximum distance of
less than 500 miles. Figure 5 shows the affects of cargo weight on an
armored C-130H aircraft's flight range in nearly ideal flight
conditions.
Figure 5: Cargo Payload and Range of an Armored C-130H Aircraft in
Nearly Ideal Flight Conditions:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
The addition of armor to the Strykers would pose additional challenges.
With removable armor added to Strykers, the vehicles will not fit
inside a C-130. To provide interim protection against rocket-propelled
grenades, the Stryker vehicles of the brigade that deployed to Iraq in
October 2003, were fitted with Slat armor weighing about 5,000 pounds
for each vehicle (see fig. 6). By 2005, the Army expects to complete
the development of add-on reactive armor--weighing about 9,000 pounds
per vehicle--for protection against rocket-propelled grenades. With
either type of armor installed, a Stryker vehicle will not fit inside a
C-130 aircraft cargo bay. Regardless, with the added weight of the
armor even in ideal flight conditions, the aircraft would be too heavy
to take off.
Figure 6: Stryker Vehicle with Slat Armor in Iraq:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Furthermore, according to the Army Test and Evaluation Command's
Stryker System Evaluation, in less than favorable flight conditions,
the Air Force considers routine transport of the 38,000-pound cargo
weight of a Stryker vehicle on C-130 aircraft risky, and such flight
may not be permitted under the Air Force's flight operations risk
management requirements if other transport means are available. In two
theaters where U.S. forces are currently operating--the Middle East and
Afghanistan, high temperatures and elevation can reduce C-130 aircraft
range if carrying a 38,000-pound Stryker vehicle. Table 7 shows the
reduced C-130 aircraft transport range due to daytime average summer
temperatures of more than 100 degrees Fahrenheit in Iraq and high
temperatures and elevations in Afghanistan. From two locations in
Afghanistan (Bagram at 4,895 feet elevation and Kabul at 5,871 feet
elevation) during daytime in the summer, a C-130 with a Stryker vehicle
on board would not be able to take off at all. In winter from these
same locations, its flight range would be reduced to 610 miles
departing from Bagram and to 310 miles departing from Kabul. These same
weight concerns would also apply to the Army's Future Combat Systems
vehicles, which according to the Army's operational requirements should
be no larger than 38,000 pounds and be transportable by a C-130.
Table 7: Analysis of C-130 Range from Selected Airfields in the Middle
East and Afghanistan When Carrying Cargo Weighing 38,000 Pounds:
Flight ranges in nautical miles:
Kuwait City, Kuwait;
Flight range (summer): Day: 710;
Flight range (summer): Night: 860;
Flight range (winter): Day: 710;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Tallil Air Base, Iraq;
Flight range (summer): Day: 760;
Flight range (summer): Night: 860;
Flight range (winter): Day: 860;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Baghdad, Int'l, Iraq;
Flight range (summer): Day: 760;
Flight range (summer): Night: 860;
Flight range (winter): Day: 760;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Balad Air Base, Iraq;
Flight range (summer): Day: 760;
Flight range (summer): Night: 860;
Flight range (winter): Day: 760;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Mosul Air Base, Iraq;
Flight range (summer): Day: 660;
Flight range (summer): Night: 860;
Flight range (winter): Day: 860;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Doha, Qatar;
Flight range (summer): Day: 760;
Flight range (summer): Night: 760;
Flight range (winter): Day: 860;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Bagram, Afghanistan[A];
Flight range (summer): Day: 0;
Flight range (summer): Night: 510;
Flight range (winter): Day: 610;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Kabul, Afghanistan[A];
Flight range (summer): Day: 0;
Flight range (summer): Night: 110;
Flight range (winter): Day: 310;
Flight range (winter): Night: 610.
Kandahar, Afghanistan;
Flight range (summer): Day: 360;
Flight range (summer): Night: 760;
Flight range (winter): Day: 760;
Flight range (winter): Night: 860.
Source: U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command, Army Evaluation Center.
[A] Elevation, temperature, and terrain prevent takeoff with cargo
weighing 38,000 pounds.
[End of table]
Additionally, the Mobile Gun System, expected to weigh over 41,000
pounds, is probably too heavy to transport a significant distance via
C-130 aircraft. Furthermore, the C-130 aircraft cannot transport many
of a Stryker brigade's vehicles at all. Stryker vehicles make up a
little more than 300 of the over 1,000 vehicles of a Stryker brigade,
and many of the brigade's support vehicles, such as fuel trucks, are
too large or heavy for C-130 transport.
C-130 Airlift for Stryker Brigades Could Increase Force Deployment Time
and Time Needed to Start Operations upon Arrival--a Key Operational
Requirement and Expectation:
Because a C-130's range is limited by weight and a Stryker's weight
exceeds limits for routine C-130 loading, a tactical movement of
significant distance of a Stryker brigade via C-130 aircraft in less
than ideal conditions could necessitate moving much of the mission
equipment, ammunition, fuel, personnel, and armor on separate aircraft.
Such use of separate aircraft for moving Stryker vehicles and
associated equipment, personnel, and supplies increases the force
closure,[Footnote 27] or deployment, time and might limit the deployed
forces' ability to be capable of immediate combat operations upon
arrival--one of the Army's key operational requirements for the Stryker
vehicles--because aircraft would arrive at different times and
potentially different locations. In combination, a 38,000-pound Stryker
vehicle, and the associated equipment, personnel, or armor that would
have to be transported on separate aircraft are likely to increase the
number of aircraft or sorties that would be needed to deploy a Stryker
force. For example, if a decision were made to use a Stryker's add-on
armor for a tactical mission, at about 9,000 pounds for each vehicle's
armor, it would take at least one additional C-130 aircraft sortie to
transport the armor for about four vehicles. Or, because of potential
limits of the availability of C-130 lift assets, the size of a Stryker
force and number of Stryker vehicles that could be tactically deployed
would have to be reduced.
At the National Training Center in April 2003, we observed, upon
landing, an infantry company unload the vehicles from the C-130
aircraft, reconfigure them for combat missions, and move onward to a
staging area. All Stryker variants except one reconfigured into combat
capable modes within their designated time standard. Once reconfigured,
units of the Stryker brigade also demonstrated the ability to conduct
immediate combat operations. However, this was a short-range movement
with only seven aircraft and did not require fitting armor on the
vehicles. In an operational mission, depending on the size of the
Stryker force deployed, using separate C-130 aircraft for transporting
vehicles and associated people and equipment could significantly
increase force deployment time because of the increased numbers of
aircraft sorties needed. Upon arrival, it would also increase the time
needed to reconfigure and begin operations because the vehicles,
equipment, and personnel on different aircraft might arrive at
different times or at different airfield locations. In addition, if a
decision were made to use add-on armor for a mission, the armor would
need to be installed after arrival, adding an average of about 10 hours
per vehicle in reconfiguration time to install the armor.
The capability of transporting Stryker vehicles on C-130 aircraft,
despite its challenges and limitations, is a major objective of the
Army's transformation to a lighter more responsive force. As such, the
Army's weight and C-130 transport requirements for the vehicles, as
well as information the Army provided to Congress, created expectations
that Stryker vehicles could be routinely transported within an
operational theater by C-130 aircraft. For example, in several
congressional hearings since 2001, senior Army leadership testified
that Stryker vehicles would be capable of transport by C-130
aircraft.[Footnote 28] In addition, annual budget justifications, which
the Army submits to Congress for Stryker vehicle acquisition, highlight
the C-130 transport capability of Stryker-vehicle-equipped Brigade
Combat Teams.
During our review, Army officials acknowledged the significant
challenges and limitations of meeting expectations for transporting
Stryker vehicles--and beyond 2010, the Future Combat Systems--on C-130
aircraft in terms of limited flight range, the size force that could be
deployed, and the challenges of arriving ready for combat. The
officials, however, believe that the capability to transport Stryker
vehicles or the Future Combat Systems' vehicles on C-130 aircraft, even
over short distances, offers the theater combatant commanders an
additional option among other modes of intratheater transportation--
such as C-17 aircraft, sealift, or driving over land--for transporting
Stryker brigades and vehicles in tactical missions. In addition, the
officials believe that the ability to transport elements of a Stryker
brigade as small as a platoon[Footnote 29] with four Stryker vehicles-
-as a part of an operational mission of forces moving by other means,
greatly enhances the combatant commander's war-fighting capabilities.
Conclusions:
In less than 4 years from the November 2000 Stryker vehicle contract
award, the Army is well under way in fielding the eight production
vehicle configurations, and Stryker vehicles are already in use in
military operations in Iraq. However, program costs have increased,
largely because of the cost of military construction related to Stryker
vehicle needs, and delays in developing and testing the two remaining
variants will delay their fielding and use.
Furthermore, although the Army has successfully demonstrated that
Stryker vehicles can be transported on C-130 aircraft during training
events, routine use of the C-130 for airlifting Stryker vehicles, for
other than short-range missions with limited numbers of vehicles, would
be difficult in theaters where U.S. forces are currently operating.
Therefore, the intended capability of Stryker brigades to be
transportable by C-130 aircraft would be markedly reduced. The Army's
operational requirements and information the Army provided to Congress
created expectations that a Stryker vehicle weight of 38,000 pounds--
and a similar weight for Future Combat System vehicles--would allow
routine C-130 transport in tactical operations. Consequently,
congressional decision makers do not have an accurate sense or
realistic expectations of the operational capabilities of Stryker
vehicles and Future Combat Systems.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
We recommend that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air Force, take the
following two actions:
1. Provide to Congress information that:
* clarifies the expected C-130 tactical intratheater deployment
capabilities of Stryker brigades and Stryker vehicles and describes
probable operational missions and scenarios using C-130 transport of
Stryker vehicles that are achievable, including the size of a combat
capable C-130 deployable Stryker force;
* describes operational capability limitations of Stryker brigades
given the limits of C-130 transport; and:
* identifies options for, and the feasibility of, alternative modes of
transportation--such as C-17 aircraft--for transporting Stryker
brigades within an operational theater.
2. Provide the Congress similar clarification concerning the
operational requirements and expected C-130 tactical airlift
capabilities of Future Combat System vehicles, considering the limits
of C-130 aircraft transportability.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In commenting on a draft of this report, the Department of Defense
partially concurred with our recommendations. The department also
provided technical comments, which we incorporated in the report where
appropriate.
DOD concurred that operational requirements for airlift capability for
brigade transport need clarification and stated that the ongoing
Mobility Capabilities Study, scheduled for completion in the spring of
2005, will include an assessment of the intratheater transport of Army
Stryker Brigade Combat Teams and address the recommendations of this
report. In responding to our recommendation to provide information to
Congress concerning C-130 transport of Stryker-equipped brigades, the
department partially concurred and stated that the Army has studied C-
130 transportability in depth. While we agree that the Army has studied
C-130 transportability of Stryker vehicles--including the limitations
that we point out in this report--their comments provide no assurance
that this information will be provided to Congress, and we believe
Congress needs this type of information to have an accurate sense of
the operational capabilities of Stryker brigades. The department also
partially concurred with our recommendation to provide to Congress
similar clarification concerning the operational requirements and
expected C-130 tactical airlift capabilities of Future Combat System
vehicles, considering the limits of C-130 aircraft transportability.
The department noted in its response that the Army is currently
considering many factors, including C-130 tactical airlift capability
limits, as it reviews Future Combat Systems Unit of Action capability
requirements. The department also stated that the Mobility Capabilities
Study would include intratheater transport of Army units of action--the
Army's Future Combat Systems-equipped future force.
Given the ongoing congressional interest in the implications of the
Army's requirements for C-130 transport of Stryker vehicles and Future
Combat System ground vehicles, we agree that the information the
Congress would need, if addressed in the Mobility Capabilities Study
and provided to Congress, would meet the intent of our recommendations.
With the Mobility Capabilities Study not scheduled for completion until
the spring of 2005, we will assess at that time the adequacy of the
study's assessment of intratheater transport of Army Stryker-and Future
Combat System-equipped units. The Senate Armed Services Committee has
directed GAO to monitor DOD's processes used to conduct the Mobility
Capabilities Study, and to report on the adequacy and completeness of
the study to the congressional defense committees no later than 30 days
after the completion of the study.[Footnote 30]
The appendix contains the full text of the department's comments.
Scope and Methodology:
To determine the current status of Stryker vehicle acquisition and the
latest Stryker vehicle program and operating cost estimates, we
analyzed documents on Stryker vehicle acquisition plans, contract
performance requirements, and costs and interviewed officials from the
Army Program Executive Office/Stryker Program Management Office,
Warren, Michigan. To determine Stryker program costs, we reviewed the
DOD approved December 2003 Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) and
interviewed Stryker Program Management Office officials. For our
analysis of Stryker vehicle-operating costs, we reviewed the Army's
mileage cost estimates and the Army's methodology for calculating costs
per mile. We did not verify source information the Army used in its
calculations.
To determine the status and results of Stryker vehicle tests, we
reviewed the results of Stryker vehicle developmental and survivability
testing from the Army Test and Evaluation Command, Alexandria,
Virginia, and the Army Developmental Test Command, Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland. We also reviewed the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation
Command, Army Evaluation Center's Stryker System Evaluation Report and
OSD Director, Operational Test and Evaluation's Operational Test and
Evaluation and Live Fire Test and Evaluation Report for the Stryker
family of vehicles.
To determine the ability of C-130 aircraft to transport Stryker
vehicles within a theater of operations, we reviewed a Military Traffic
Management Command's, Transportation Engineering Agency study of the C-
130 aircraft's range and payload capabilities and interviewed U.S.
Army, Air Force and Transportation Command officials. We notified U.S.
Central Command of our objective to review plans for C-130 aircraft
transport of Stryker vehicles within the command's area of operations,
but Central Command officials determined that this was an Army issue,
rather than a combatant command's issue.
Our review was conducted from July 2003 through June 2004 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.
We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking
Minority Members of other Senate and House committees and subcommittees
that have jurisdiction and oversight responsibilities for DOD. We are
also sending copies to the Secretary of Defense and the Director,
Office of Management and Budget. Copies will also be available at no
charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-8365, or Assistant Director, George Poindexter,
at (202) 512-7213. Major contributors to this report were Kevin
Handley, Frank Smith, and M. Jane Hunt.
Signed by:
William M. Solis, Director:
Defense Capabilities and Management:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Defense:
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE:
ACQUISITION, TECHNOLOGY AND LOGISTICS:
3000 DEFENSE PENTAGON:
WASHINGTON, DC 20301-3000:
AUG 09 2004:
Mr. William M. Solis:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Solis:
This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the GAO draft
report, `MILITARY TRANSFORMATION: Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles
Is Well Underway but Expectations for Their Transportability by C-130
Aircraft Need to Be Clarified,' dated July 13, 2004 (GAO Code 350418/
GAO-04-925).
The report recommends that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air Force,
clarify the operational requirements and expected C-130 tactical
airlift capabilities of Stryker brigades and Future Combat System
vehicles, considering the limits of C-130 aircraft transportability.
The Department concurs that operational requirements for airlift
capability for brigade transport need clarification. We are currently
exploring the transport issues in the ongoing Mobility Capabilities
Study, scheduled for completion in the spring of 2005.
This study includes an assessment of the intra-theater transport of
Army brigade combat teams. This study will address the recommendations
of your report. Detailed comments on the report are enclosed.
Signed for:
Glenn F. Lamartin:
Director:
Defense Systems:
Enclosure: As stated:
GAO DRAFT REPORT - DATED JULY 13, 2004 GAO CODE 350418/GAO-04-925:
"MILITARY TRANSFORMATION: Fielding of Army's Stryker Vehicles Is Well
Underway but Expectations for Their Transportability by C-130 Aircraft
Need to Be Clarified"
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMMENTS TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS:
RECOMMENDATION 1: The GAO recommended that the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Army and the Air Force, provide
to Congress information that:
* Clarifies the expected C-130 tactical intra-theater deployment
capabilities of Stryker brigades and Stryker vehicles, and describes
probable operational missions and scenarios using C-130 transport of
Stryker vehicles that are achievable, including the size of a combat
capable C-130 deployable Stryker force.
* Describes operational capability limitations of Stryker brigades
given the limits of C-130 transport; and:
* Identifies options for, and the feasibility of, alternative modes of
transportation - such as C-17 aircraft-for transporting Stryker
brigades within an operational theater.
RESPONSE: Partially Concur: Stryker-C-130 transportability has been
studied in depth by the Army. Additionally, the Department is currently
exploring the mobility capabilities required to support the National
Military Strategy with an ongoing Mobility Capabilities Study. This
study includes an assessment of the intra-theater transport of Army
brigade combat teams within the context of the Defense Planning
Scenarios and associated Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The existing
Army assessments and the Mobility Capability Study should provide the
clarification needed for this recommendation. The results for the
Mobility Capability Study will be available in spring 2005.
RECOMMENDATION 2: The GAO recommended that the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the
Air Force, provide the Congress similar clarification concerning the
operational requirements and expected C-130 tactical airlift
capabilities of Future Combat System vehicles, considering the limits
of C-130 aircraft transportability.
RESPONSE: Partially concur: The Army is currently considering many
factors; including C-130 tactical airlift capability limits, as they
review Future Combat Systems Unit of Action capability requirements.
The Army analysis is ongoing as is the Department's Mobility
Capabilities Study, which is exploring the mobility capabilities
required to support the National Military Strategy, to include intra-
theater transport of Army units of action within the context of the
Defense Planning Scenarios and associated CONOPS. The Mobility
Capability Study will be available in spring 2005.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
Defense Acquisitions: The Army's Future Combat Systems' Features,
Risks, and Alternatives. GAO-04-635T. Washington, D.C.: April 1, 2004.
Military Transformation: The Army and OSD Met Legislative Requirements
for First Stryker Brigade Design Evaluation, but Issues Remain for
Future Brigades. GAO-04-188. Washington, D.C.: December 12, 2003.
Issues Facing the Army's Future Combat Systems Program. GAO-03-1010R.
Washington, D.C.: August 13, 2003.
Military Transformation: Realistic Deployment Timelines Needed for Army
Stryker Brigades. GAO-03-801. Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2003.
Military Transformation: Army's Evaluation of Stryker and M-113A3
Infantry Carrier vehicles Provided Sufficient Data for Statutorily
Mandated Comparison. GAO-03-671. Washington, D.C.: May 30, 2003.
Army Stryker Brigades: Assessment of External Logistic Support Should
Be Documented for the Congressionally Mandated Review of the Army's
Operational Evaluation Plan. GAO-03-484R. Washington, D.C.: March 28,
2003.
Military Transformation: Army Actions Needed to Enhance Formation of
Future Interim Brigade Combat Teams. GAO-02-442. Washington, D.C.: May
17, 2002.
Military Transformation: Army Has a Comprehensive Plan for Managing Its
Transformation but Faces Major Challenges. GAO-02-96. Washington, D.C.:
November 16, 2001.
Defense Acquisition: Army Transformation Faces Weapons Systems
Challenges. GAO-01-311. Washington, D.C.: May 21, 2001.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Then-year dollar amounts for a particular year reflect the cost
prevailing during that year.
[2] Appropriations included operations and support costs of $121
million through fiscal year 2005 for contractor support and maintenance
of the vehicles. After 2005 and through the life cycle of the vehicles,
operations and support costs are to be included in the Army's
Operations and Maintenance budget account.
[3] Department of Army, Operational Requirements Document For A Family
of Stryker Vehicles, Prepared for Milestone III Decision (Washington,
D.C.: Feb. 19, 2004).
[4] According to the Army, the Objective Force is the force that
achieves the objectives of the Army's transformation. The Army further
states that this future force will capitalize on advances in science
and technology enabling the Army to equip its forces with Future Combat
Systems to include manned and unmanned ground vehicles, air vehicles,
and munitions. These vehicles and systems are expected to be a fraction
of the weight of existing heavy fighting vehicles to improve
transportability.
[5] Department of Army, Operational Requirements Document for the
Future Combat Systems (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 14, 2003).
[6] Eight of 10 Stryker vehicle configurations are considered
production ready because these vehicles have already undergone system
development and engineering. Two of the 10 vehicle configurations are
developmental because design, development, and testing are needed
before they can go into production.
[7] The current C-130 inventory is mostly comprised of various
configurations of the E and H models. C-130 armor protects the aircraft
in hostile areas from weapons such as small arms and rocket-propelled
grenades. The armor adds about 1,600 pounds to the weight of the
aircraft.
[8] In air operations, a sortie is defined as an operational flight by
one aircraft.
[9] Department of Army, Operational Requirements Document For A Family
of Interim Armored Vehicles, Prepared for Milestone II Decision
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 22, 2000).
[10] According to Army contracting officials, combat capable deployment
weight is the weight of Stryker vehicles along with any equipment for
the vehicles, such as communications systems or weapons that allow the
capability to conduct combat operations immediately after unloading
from an aircraft.
[11] The Army's Test and Evaluation Command defined "immediate" to mean
between 15 and 40 minutes upon off-loading from the aircraft, depending
on the vehicle variant.
[12] Memorandum of Agreement between the United States Air Force and
United States Army for Air-Transport of the Stryker, signed by General
Eric K. Shinseki, Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, and General John P.
Jumper, Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force, (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 4,
2003).
[13] On November 16, 2000, the Army awarded a contract for Interim
Armored vehicles, now called Stryker Vehicles, to General Motors
General Dynamics Defense Group L.L.C; a joint venture of General Motors
Defense-Canada and General Dynamics Land Systems. In 2003 General
Dynamics Land Systems bought General Motors Defense-Canada.
[14] This information was included in DOD's Selected Acquisition Report
(SAR) submitted to the Congress for the period ending December 31,
2003. The SAR summarizes the latest estimates of cost, schedule, and
technical status of major defense acquisition programs.
[15] Stryker vehicles are built from ballistic steel and covered with
ceramic armor that can withstand 14.5mm ammunition. For added
protection against rocket-propelled grenades, the vehicles are designed
to carry removable add-on reactive armor. The add-on armor is currently
in development and will not be available until 2005. Strykers currently
deployed to Iraq are fitted with slat armor to protect against rocket-
propelled grenades.
[16] The Army uses peacetime operational cost data, rather than data
collected during operations such as in Iraq, because peacetime data is
more representative of actual long-term operating costs.
[17] The Army used operating costs of the M113 for its Stryker vehicle
operating cost estimates because the M113 is a medium-weight armored
personnel carrier that has been in the Army's inventory for a number of
years. Therefore, the Army had historical peacetime operating costs for
the vehicle.
[18] Operating costs do not include petroleum, oil, and lubricant
costs.
[19] Army Test and Evaluation Command, U.S. Army Evaluation Center,
System Evaluation Report for the Stryker Family of Vehicles, for
Milestone III Decision, (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 2004) and OSD Office of
the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, Operational Test &
Evaluation and Live Fire Test & Evaluation Report on the Stryker Family
of Vehicles, (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 2004).
[20] A technology readiness assessment provides information to DOD
acquisition officials on the maturity of technologies used in or
proposed for a system at the time of acquisition milestones such as
low-rate initial production.
[21] In its March 2004 Stryker Acquisition Decision Memorandum, OSD
delegated to the Army Acquisition Executive a decision on Mortar
Carrier production pending successful assessment of live-fire test
results of the Mortar Carrier (B) mounted vehicle variant. The Mortar
Carrier vehicle has two configurations: the Mortar Carrier (A), which
carries mortars for dismounted use, and the Mortar Carrier (B), which
has an integrated mounted mortar system.
[22] The Mortar Carrier vehicle was not evaluated by the OSD Director,
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), because its live-fire tests
were not completed at the time DOT&E conducted its evaluation.
[23] GAO, Military Transformation: The Army and OSD Met Legislative
Requirements for First Stryker Brigade Design Evaluation, but Issues
Remain for Future Brigades, GAO-04-188 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 12,
2003).
[24] In a later event in May 2003 during the Stryker Brigade
operational evaluation, we also observed a Stryker infantry company--
consisting of 21 Stryker vehicles and 5 other trucks and trailers; 188
soldiers; and 3 days of food, water, ammunition, and fuel to support
the company--travel from the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort
Polk, Louisiana, to a nearby airfield using seven C-130s flying 25
sorties over a distance of about 100 miles. Upon landing at the
airfield, the company moved to a tactical assembly area and onward to
conduct a combat operation.
[25] GAO-04-188.
[26] Military Traffic Management Command, Transportation Engineering
Agency, C-130E/H/J/J-30 Transportability of Army Vehicles (Sept. 11,
2002). The Military Traffic Management Command is a component command
of the U.S. Transportation Command, which manages the Department of
Defense's transportation system. The Military Traffic Management
Command was renamed Surface Deployment and Distribution Command in
January 2004.
[27] Force closure is the process of a unit arriving at a specified
location. It begins when the first element arrives at a designated
location, and ends when the last element arrives.
[28] See, for example, Army Modernization and Transformation In Review
of the Defense Authorization Request for fiscal year 2003: Hearings on
S. 2225 Before the Airland Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services
Committee, 107TH Cong. 15 (2002) (statement of General John M. Keane,
Vice Chief of Staff, United States Army).
[29] A Stryker brigade platoon could consist of about 16 to 44 people,
depending on its organizational mission.
[30] S. Rep No. 108-260 at 126 (2004).
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of
Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director,
NelliganJ@gao.gov
(202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office,
441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548: