link to page 1 link to page 2



Updated May 18, 2022
The Army’s Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) System
What Is the Mobile Protected Firepower MTA Rapid Prototyping contracts required delivery of 12
(MPF) System?
pre-production vehicles (from each vendor) for
The Army’s MPF system is intended to address an
developmental and operational testing, and a Soldier
operational shortfall:
Vehicle Assessment (SVA).
Currently the Army’s Infantry Brigade Combat
Reportedly, BAE delivered its prototypes (Figure 1) to the
Teams (IBCT) do not have a combat vehicle
Army in March 2021 after production difficulties and
assigned that is capable of providing mobile,
supplier issues related to COVID-19. Reportedly, GDLS
protected, direct, offensive fire capability.... The
was able to deliver all of its prototypes (Figure 2) in
MPF solution is an integration of existing mature
December 2020. The SVA reportedly began in January
technologies
and
components
that
avoids
2021 at Fort Bragg, NC—without the BAE prototypes—
development which would lengthen the program
with testing running through June 2021. While BAE was
schedule.
unable to provide prototypes at the beginning of testing,
prototypes were eventually provided to the Army for
Operationally, the Army wants the MPF to be able to
testing. During the assessment, soldiers evaluated GDLS
Neutralize enemy prepared positions and bunkers
and BAE MPF prototypes in a variety of operational
and defeat heavy machine guns and armored
scenarios.
vehicle threats during offensive operations or when
conducting defensive operations against attacking
According to May 10, 2022, Army testimony to the Senate
enemies.
Armed Services Subcommittee on Airland, the MPF is to
begin low-rate production in 2022, with the first fielding of
In terms of the Army’s overall procurement plans for MPF,
MPF vehicles planned for FY2025.
The Army Acquisition Objective (AAO) for MPF
Figure 1. BAE MPF Prototype
is 504 vehicles, with 14 MPFs per IBCT. The
targeted fielding for the First Unit Equipped (FUE)
is Fiscal Year (FY) 2025.
MPF Acquisition Strategy
In November 2017, the Army issued a Request for Proposal
(RFP) for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development
(EMD) phase and, in order to maximize competition,
planned to award up to two Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA)
contracts for the EMD phase in early FY2019.
Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA) according to the Defense
Acquisition University, is a rapid acquisition approach that
focuses on delivering capability in a period of 2 to 5 years. The

Source: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/article/bae-systems-
authority to use MTA was granted by Congress in Section 804
awarded-development-contract-for-mobile-protected-firepower,
of the FY2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
accessed June 14, 2021.
(P.L. 114-92). Programs using MTA are not subject to the Joint
Capabilities Integration Development System (JCIDS) and
provisions of DOD Directive 5000.01 “Defense Acquisition
System.” MTA consists of utilizing two acquisition pathways:
(1) Rapid Prototyping, which is to streamline the testing and
development of prototypes, and (2) Rapid Fielding, which is to
upgrade existing systems with already proven technologies.
On December 17, 2018, the Army awarded two Section 804
Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA) Rapid Prototyping
contracts for MPF. The two companies awarded contracts
were General Dynamic Land Systems (GDLS), Inc.
(Sterling Heights, MI) and BAE Systems Land and
Armaments, LP (Sterling Heights, MI). Each MTA Rapid
Prototyping contract was not to exceed $376 million. The
https://crsreports.congress.gov

The Army’s Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) System
Figure 2. GDLS MPF Prototype
would then be allocated to IBCTs. In terms of personnel,
each MPF company requires 64 armor crewmen and 24
armor maintenance soldiers to maintain MPF systems.
Given current recruiting challenges, the Army might have
difficulties in meeting the demand for MPF crew and
maintenance soldiers for new units. Another concern is a
limited quantity of on hand, serviceable 105 mm
ammunition for MPF training and operational use. As such,
there could be a requirement to procure additional 105 mm
ammunition and there might also be industrial base-
associated ammunition production challenges as well.
There are additional concerns about suitable storage and
maintenance facilities and training ranges for MPF units
Source: https://www.gdls.com/news/news-interior.html, accessed
assigned to infantry posts that are not structured to
June 14, 2021.
accommodate armored fighting vehicles. Additionally,

there might be environmental concerns about stationing
Budgetary Information
MPF units at bases in Hawaii and Alaska, for example. One
potential solution might be to station MPF units at bases
Table 1. FY2023 MPF Budget Request
better suited to support armor units, but the Army
Total
reportedly would like to keep MPF units within at least a
Total Request
Request
six-hour drive from the division they are assigned to.
Funding Category
($M)
(Qty)
Another issue is that there might be additional challenges in
Procurement
$357
28
creating MPF units in the Army National Guard (ARNG).
Given these MPF unit-related considerations, Congress
Source: Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and
might also monitor the Army’s progress in addressing the
Comptrol er), FY2023 President’s Budget Highlights, April 2022, p. 26
aforementioned challenges in creating new MPF units.
and p. 30.
Notes: $M = U.S. Dollars in Mil ions; Qty = FY2023 Procurement

Quantities.
Potential Issue for Congress
Andrew Feickert, Specialist in Military Ground Forces
IF11859
Creating MPF Battalions
Reportedly, the Army is planning to create a MPF battalion
at division level. From this battalion, MPF companies


https://crsreports.congress.gov
The Army’s Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) System


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11859 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED