awards incentivized multiple manufacturers to participate in the process. Second, the promise of award to the first successful vehicle or vehicles, with additional incentives for delivery ahead of schedule, led manufacturers to deliver test vehicles quickly and to
modify designs T&E plan but,
based on in doing
feedback. The program manager added speed to the procurement
competition among manufacturers program in later contracts.
The developmental test program was designed and conducted in three phases. Developmental Test C1 (DT-C1) consisted of threshold testing with an approximate ratio of 90% focus on survivability and 10% on automotive (Hansen, 2008, May 30). It also included a limited user test, in which a platoon of Soldiers and a platoon of Marines with operational experience conducted operational tests on the vehicles. Results of both the threshold and the user testing were immediately fed to manufacturers for potential changes that were quickly retested. To be considered a suitable MRAP, each vehicle had
to complete DT-C1 with a green (no deficiencies) rating amber (some minor deficiencies) in automotive and
on survivability and green or
manufacturers that submitted least one class16 that met the
for testing thresholds
during MRAP of DT-C1 and
I, five had a vehicle in at were determined suitable
during user A listing of
tests; all five manufacturers were subsequently DT-C1 activities is shown in Figure 11.
16 Some manufacturers submitted vehicles for more than one category. IMG, for example, submitted
Category 1 and 2 versions of the MaxxPro. Although the Category II version was rated green in survivability, it was found unacceptable in terms of payload. The Category 1 version was rated green in both categories.