XM2001 Crusader

The Crusader was conceived as the Advanced Field Artillery System (AFAS), part of a family of vehicles built around a common chassis in the Armored Systems Modernization program. In October 1992, the Army canceled Armored Systems Modernization due to changing budgetary priorities caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union.{{cite news |last1=Schafer |first1=Susanne M. |title=Army drops contracts for armored vehicles |url=https://www.newspapers.com/image/366666360/?terms=%22Armored%20Systems%20Modernization%22&match=1 |access-date=18 November 2021 |work=Austin American-Statesman |agency=Associated Press|date=9 October 1992}}

In 1994 AFAS was renamed "Crusader."

In 1996, the Crusader's experimental liquid propellant system was replaced by more traditional solid propellant bags. In 1997 the Government Accountability Office advised the Army to consider either upgrading the Paladin or to purchase the German Panzerhaubitze 2000 instead.

The Crusader was intended to replace the M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzer and the M992 Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle (FAASV). It was intended to be an automated gun artillery system to support the Interim Brigade Combat Teams (IBCT) Counterattack Corps and a basis for other vehicle developments.

Key features of the Crusader design included:

• A cooled XM297E2 cannon for sustained high rates of fire
• Automated ammunition handling and loading
• Cockpit with embedded command and control
• Composite armor
• Survivability features to protect the vehicle and crew
• GE/Honeywell LV100-5 gas turbine engine to keep up with other fighting vehicles

The Army required that the Crusader was to share a common engine with the M1 Abrams. The principal driver for this change was to shed weight off the Crusader.{{cite news |last1=Burger |first1=Kim |title=Three Contractors Deliver Proposals for Abrams-Crusader Engine |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43983808 |access-date=7 February 2022 |work=Inside the Army |issue=23 |publisher=Inside Washington Publishers |date=12 June 2000 |volume=12 |pages=12–13|jstor=43983808 }} Caterpillar Inc. proposed a diesel engine, as did a joint venture of General Dynamics and DaimlerChrysler. In September 2000, the Army selected Honeywell's LV 100 turbine engine. The Army was to procure as many as 3600 of these, including 2845 for the Abrams and 846 for the Crusader.{{cite news |last1=Dupont |first1=Daniel G. |title=Tanks Won't Be Converted to Diesel: Honeywell Turbine Engine Picked for Abrams Fleet, Crusader System |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43985032 |access-date=7 February 2022 |work=Inside the Army |issue=38 |publisher=Inside Washington Publishers |date=25 September 2000 |volume=12 |pages=1, 11|jstor=43985032 }}

Using the same chassis, the resupply vehicles (RSVs) would deliver automatic, reciprocal transfer of ammunition, data and fuel to the SPH or another RSV.

• 1QFY95 Approved to commence program definition and risk reduction (PDRR) phase.
• 2QFY98 In-process review completed and manufacture of the PDRR prototype systems begun.
• 3QFY99 Delivery of first RSV prototype.
• 2QFY00 Delivery of first prototype howitzer SPH 1.
• 1QFY02 Successful preliminary design review.
• 1QFY02 More than 4000 rounds fired from SPH 1.
• 2QFY02 Program discontinued.

In October 1999, Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki outlined a future that envisioned transforming heavy brigades into lighter brigades outfitted with wheeled Interim Armored Vehicles, later renamed "Stryker." Shinseki said the priority of a lighter, more mobile army could shift resources from heavier armored vehicle acquisitions.{{cite news |last1=Myers |first1=Steven Lee |title=Army is Restructuringwith Brigades for Rapid Response |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/13/us/army-is-restructuring-with-brigades-for-rapid-response.html |access-date=6 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=13 October 1999}} The following month Shinseki said the vehicles were too heavy: the howitzer and its resupply vehicle would weigh a combined 110 tons, more than could be carried by any of the Air Force's aircraft, including the C-5 Galaxy if flight rules aren't waived. Shinseki spoke with contractor United Defense about bringing down the combined weight of the two vehicles by 20 tons, which United agreed was possible.{{cite news |last1=Graham |first1=Bradley |title=Army's Big Gun Must Lose Some Weight |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1999/11/25/armys-big-gun-must-lose-some-weight/5fa79780-a57b-459e-904a-22ef469fcc54/ |access-date=6 August 2018 |newspaper=The Washington Post|date=25 November 1999}}

In April 2001, a panel convened by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld recommended canceling the Crusader and other defense modernization programs. An official involved called the Crusader "a wonderful system -- for a legacy world."{{cite news |last1=Myers |first1=Steven Lee |title=Pentagon panel recommends scuttling howitzer system |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/23/us/pentagon-panel-urges-scuttling-howitzer-system.html |access-date=6 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=23 April 2002}}

As of 2002, the Army planned to acquire 480 Crusaders at a program cost of $11 billion.{{cite news |author1=Thom Shanker |author2=James Dao |title=Defense Secretary Wants Cuts in Weapons Systems to Pay for New Technologies |newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/16/us/defense-secretary-wants-cuts-in-weapons-systems-to-pay-for-new-technologies.html |access-date=6 August 2018 |date=16 April 2002}}

In February 2002, President George W. Bush allocated $475 million for the Crusader program in the White House's 2003 budget proposal, which also proposed increased Pentagon spending by $48 billion.{{cite news |last1=Dao |first1=James |title=A Nation Challenged: the Military Budget; Bush Sees Big Rise in Military Budget for Next 5 Years |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/02/us/nation-challenged-military-budget-bush-sees-big-rise-military-budget-for-next-5.html |access-date=6 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=2 February 2002}}

In April, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, whose concerns about defense modernization overspending had intensified, met with Pentagon officials including Army Secretary Thomas E. White to discuss defense spending cuts to free funding for more essential modernization programs. The officials discussed cuts to the Crusader, RAH-66 Comanche helicopter, and F-22 Raptor. Some officials questioned whether the howitzer was redundant given the parallel development of a lighter howitzer for the Future Combat Systems modernization effort.

On 9 May, Rumsfeld announced that he would ask Congress to cancel the $11 billion program. Days before, Congress members favorable to the Crusader received talking points from Army officials who sought to save the program. The last-minute lobbying prompted anger from Rumsfeld and an internal Army investigation into its congressional liaison office.{{cite news |last=Shanker |first=Thom |title= National Briefing {{!}} Washington: Army Investigates Lobbying Effort |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/03/us/national-briefing-washington-army-investigates-lobbying-effort.html |access-date=5 August 2018 |work= The New York Times |date=3 May 2002}} The investigation culminated with the resignation of the Army official who had distributed the talking points.{{cite news |last1=Dao |first1=James |title=Army Liaison Who Lobbied Congress For Weapon Resigns |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/11/us/army-liaison-who-lobbied-congress-for-weapon-resigns.html |access-date=14 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=10 May 2002}} After being absolved himself of wrongdoing in the matter, Army Secretary White assured that he supported Rumsfeld's decision and said the Army was analyzing alternatives to the Crusader including the M982 Excalibur 155 mm guided artillery shell.{{cite news |last1=Dao |first1=James |title=Rumsfeld Sets Up Showdown Over Weapon |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/09/us/rumsfeld-sets-up-showdown-over-weapon.html |access-date=5 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=9 May 2002}} The House Appropriations Committee responded, after rejecting a measure that would have sustained the program until the fall, asking the Pentagon to delay plans to cancel the Crusader.{{cite news |last1=Dao |first1=James |title=A Lift for a Weapons System |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/16/us/a-lift-for-a-weapons-system.html |access-date=5 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=16 May 2002}} Later that month President Bush asked Congress to reallocate the Crusader's budget towards other Army developmental weapons including $310 million for Future Combat Systems in the proposed 2003 Pentagon budget.{{cite news |last1=Shanker |first1=Thom |title=President Formally Seeks Halt to Crusader Artillery Program |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/30/us/president-formally-seeks-halt-to-crusader-artillery-program.html |access-date=5 August 2018 |work=The New York Times |date=30 May 2002}}

• {{lwc|2S35 Koalitsiya-SV}}
• {{lwc|K9 Thunder#K9A2|K9A2 Thunder}}
• {{lwc|Type 99 155 mm self-propelled howitzer|Type 99}}

• Armored Systems Modernization, a wide-ranging U.S. Army combat vehicle acquisition program cancelled after the end of the Cold War
• XM1203 non-line-of-sight cannon, a U.S. Army self-propelled howitzer canceled in 2011 that was a part of the Future Combat Systems Manned Ground Vehicles program
• M1299, a U.S. Army replacement for the M109 howitzer cancelled in 2024
• M8 armored gun system, a U.S. Army light tank project cancelled in 1996

{{reflist}}

{{Commons category}}

• [https://web.archive.org/web/20020107091240/http://www.teamcrusader.com/index.html United Defense Crusader marketing page]

Category:Self-propelled howitzers of the United States

Category:Tracked self-propelled howitzers

Category:Abandoned military projects of the United States

Category:155 mm artillery

Category:United Defense