link to page 1 link to page 1




Updated January 17, 2023
The Marine Corps’ Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)
Background
The Marine Corps describes the Amphibious Combat
Figure 2. Amphibious Combat Vehicle Ashore
Vehicle (ACV) as:
... The Corps’ next-generation vehicle designed to
move Marines from ship to shore (Figure 1).
Designed to replace the Corps’ aging Amphibious
Assault Vehicle (AAV), which has been in service
since 1972. The ACV will be the primary means of
tactical mobility for the Marine infantry battalion at
sea and ashore (Figure 2). The ACV will have the

capability to provide organic, direct fire support to
Source: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/multimedia/amphibious-
dismounted infantry in the attack.
combat-vehicle-1-1—acv-1-1-, accessed February 3, 2021.
There are currently four ACV variants planned: (1) a
Current Program Status
Personnel Variant (ACV-P), which can carry three
crewmembers with 13 Marines and two days of combat
In June 2018, the ACV entered Low-Rate Initial Production
equipment and supplies; (2) a Command and Control
(LRIP) with BAE Systems selected for the first 30 vehicles
to be delivered in fall 2019. In November 2020, the ACV
Variant (ACV-C); (3) a Recovery Variant; and (4) a 30-mm
Gun Variant. The Marines intend for the ACV to provide
achieved Initial Operational Capability (IOC). In December
effective land and tactical water mobility (ship-to-shore and
2020, a Full-Rate Production (FRP) decision was reportedly
made by the Marine Corps after having been delayed from
shore-to-shore), precise supporting fires, and high levels of
force protection intended to protect against blasts,
September 2020 due to issues related to Coronavirus
fragmentation, and kinetic energy threats.
Disease 2019. The current planned acquisition objective of
632 ACVs would replace AAVs in Assault Amphibian
The ACV program delivered initial ACV-P variants in
Battalions. The previous acquisition objective of 1,122
November 2020 and delivered initial ACV-C variants in
ACVs was reduced in accordance with Marine Corps Force
Design 2030 modernization efforts (see CRS Insight
FY2022. Plans call for delivery of Improved Lethality 30-
mm Gun Variant ACVs in FY2025 and Recovery Variants
IN11281, New U.S. Marine Corps Force Design Initiatives,
in FY2026.
by Andrew Feickert). Reportedly, ACV production is to
take place at BAE Systems facilities in Virginia, California,
Figure 1. Amphibious Combat Vehicle in
Michigan, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
Ship-to-Shore Mode
Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP) is a programmatic
decision made when manufacturing development is completed
and there is an ability to produce a small-quantity set of
articles. It also establishes an initial production base and sets
the stage for a gradual increase in the production rate to
allow for Ful -Rate Production (FRP) upon completion of
Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E).
Full-Rate Production (FRP) is a decision made that allows
for government contracting for economic production
quantities fol owing stabilization of the system design and
validation of the production process.

Source: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/multimedia/amphibious-
combat-vehicle-11-acv-11, accessed February 3, 2021.
Initial Operational Testing Observations
During Marine Corps initial operational test and evaluation
(IOT&E) conducted from June to September 2020, the
Department of Defense Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation (DOT&E) noted:
 The ACV demonstrated water mobility and the ability to
self-deploy from the beach, cross the surf zone, enter the
ocean, and embark aboard amphibious shipping. The
https://crsreports.congress.gov

The Marine Corps’ Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)
infantry rifle company equipped with the ACV was able
FY2023 ACV Budgetary Information
to deploy from amphibious shipping, maneuver on the
beach, and conduct subsequent offensive and defensive
Table 1. FY2023 Navy Budget Request—ACV
operations ashore.
Total

Total Request
Request
While the ACV demonstrated good operational
Funding Category
($M)
(Qty.)
availability and maintainability during IOT&E, it did
not meet its 69-hour mean time between operational
RDT&E
$94.6

mission failures (MTBOMF) threshold. The
Procurement
$536.7
74
government-furnished Remote Weapons System
Source: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
(RWS)—an internally controlled, exterior-mounted MK
(Comptrol er)/Chief Financial Officer, Program Acquisition Cost by
19 automatic grenade launcher or M2 .50 caliber heavy
Weapon System: United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year
machine gun was the source of the largest number of
2022 Budget Request, April 2022, p. 3-10.
operational mission failures (OMFs).
Notes: RDT&E = Research, Development, Test & Evaluation: $M =

U.S. dollars in mil ions; Qty. = FY2023 procurement quantities.
The ACV accommodated three crew and 13 embarked
infantry. Due to the placement and number of blast
Table 2. FY2023 Navy Authorizations and
mitigating seats, interior space within the ACV is
Appropriations—ACV
limited, making rapid ingress and egress difficult.
Total
 Infantry Marines noted that the troop seats were not
Funding
Authorized Appropriated Request
contoured to fit body armor configurations, leading to
Category
($M)
($M)
(Qty.)
discomfort during long-range ship-to-objective
RDT&E
$94.6
$91.5

missions.
Procurement
$527.1
$527.1
74
Reportedly, the Marines initiated corrective actions after the
Sources: Authorized: P.L. 117-263, H.R. 7776—James M. Inhofe
DOT&E report was published. In September 2021, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, December
Marines suspended amphibious use of the ACV due to
27, 2022, p. 742 and p. 722. Appropriated: Fiscal Year 2023
towing mechanism problems. In November 2021, the
Omnibus Appropriations Bil , H.R. 2617, Division C—Department of
Marines began testing modifications to the towing
Defense Appropriations Act, 2023, December 19, 2022, p. 91J and p.
mechanism in order to resume amphibious operations once
69A.
the problem was rectified. Reportedly, in early 2022 after
fixing the towing mechanism, the Marines began
Considerations for Congress
amphibious operational training with ACVs, including crew
Oversight questions Congress could consider include the
certification and training on a number of new safety-related
following:
procedures.
ACV Amphibious Limitations?
ACV Amphibious Operational Mishaps
As a result of a Marine internal review following two July
Reportedly, on July 19, 2022, two ACVs were involved in
2022 ACV mishaps, it appears the Marines have decided to
accidents while training off the coast of California during
limit ACV amphibious operations when breaker height
high surf conditions. According to the Marines, “One ACV
exceeds four feet. Does this new guidance preclude ACV
tipped onto its side in the surf zone and another became
amphibious operations in surf zone conditions where
disabled during the training. Marines in both ACVs
breaker height exceeds four feet, or are there supplemental
conducted their immediate action drills and safely returned
operational procedures that permit ACV operation in high
to shore.” After the incidents, the Marines suspended ACV
surf zone conditions? If ACV amphibious operations are
amphibious operations while an internal review was
restricted to four feet or less breaker height, how might this
conducted.
affect the conduct of amphibious operations during a
conflict?
ACV Resumes Amphibious Operations
On September 23, 2022, the Marine resumed ACV
Lessons Learned from the Ukraine Conflict
operations in the open ocean. In addition, the Marines
There are a number of military observations emerging from
implemented new rules for surf conditions, noting, “The
the current Ukraine conflict. One observation is Russian
interim maximum surf conditions identified include a
armored vehicles have allegedly proven highly vulnerable
significant breaker height of four feet, which allows the
to anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs). As ACVs are
ACV to operate safely while maintaining a high-state of
intended to “provide organic, direct fire support to
readiness for the ACV community.”
dismounted infantry in the attack,” how vulnerable to
ATGMs are ACVs that are operating ashore supporting
combat operations? Are the Marines considering ACV
survivability modifications based on lessons learned in
Ukraine?
Andrew Feickert, Specialist in Military Ground Forces
IF11755
https://crsreports.congress.gov

The Marine Corps’ Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)


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 | IF11755 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED