Preliminary Observations

JLTV-Mounted Q-50 Innovation Efforts

By CPT Tyris Foster, 1LT Brian Welch, 1LT Joel Mendoza-Lozano, SFC Luis Benitez, and SGT Jedidiah Gray

Article published on: May 27, 2026 in the Field Artillery 2026 Edition

Read Time: < 5 mins

This article intends to provide preliminary observations on lessons learned during Headquarters & Headquarters Battery (Hellraiser Battery), Field Artillery Squadron, 2d Cavalry Regiment innovation efforts utilizing a M1279A1 Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) as an AN/TPQ-50 Radar System (Q-50) prime mover. This observation period focused on advantages and disadvantages of the JLTV relative to the M1152A1 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), which currently mounts the Q-50, within the scope of target acquisition capabilities, crew survivability, fuel efficiency, mobility and maintenance processes.

Hellraiser Battery began requirements-based innovation efforts to identify a platform with shorter supply-chain lead times, improved survivability, and increased mobility. Upon initiating the project, we were seeing an average lead time of 261 days for ballistic windshields, engine components, and emergency brakes along with other parts which deadline the HMMWV Prime Mover.

Preparation

We began our innovation effort by initiating coordination and receiving approval to execute from CECOM Sensor LARs (Q-50), OSHKOSH representatives (JLTV) and TACOM LARs (Army Material Command). The primary restriction echoed by all three entities was that we were forbidden from directly drilling into both the JLTV and Q-50. To physically mount our Q-50 onto the bed of a JLTV, we fabricated a replica of the Q-50 mount utilizing Maintenance Activity Vilseck assistance. The fabricated mount was made with precise measurements that placed mounting points that correlated with pre-existing mounting points on the JLTV.

Safety

The final pre-requisite prior to conducting hands-on testing of our JLTV-mounted Q-50 was reception of approval by the 2d Cavalry Regiment Safety Office for both garrison and training area use. Our approach was three-tiered:

1. Vehicle Phase: The 2d Cavalry Regiment Safety Office inspected the security of our fabricated mount to confirm that the radar would not present hazards if transported.
2. Motorpool Phase: We were approved to move the JLTV to motorpools within the cantonment area to track live-fire rounds. This phase allowed us to physically move the vehicle within a controlled environment.
3. Training Area Phase: We tracked live-fire rounds with the JLTV across radar sites in various terrain conditions within the Grafenwoehr Training Area (GTA).

Observations

Training-area phase resulted in positive feedback surrounding the JLTV’s communications capabilities relative to Q-50 communication requirements, enhanced survivability across a wide range of survivability evaluation criteria, an increased ability to conduct sustained operations due to fuel consumption and power generation, and an ability to emplace in significantly more types of terrain relative to the HMMWV. We observed a decrease in performance in emplacement and displacement times and still require more data points to determine the factors resulting in our observed improvement in Target Location Error (TLE) capabilities.

Communications Improvements: The JLTV is a significantly larger vehicle than the HMMWV, and our preliminary observations indicated that the additional cab space enables the vehicle crew to mount both a MILTOPE system and a JBC-P. The ability to mount a JBC-P—a capability that was not present with the HMMWV—provides the capability to not only execute standard Q-50 missions via MILTOPE but also enables greater redundancy in fire-mission processing across Primary, Alternate, Contingency, and Emergency (PACE). The presence of a JBC-P within the JLTV has also proven to provide greater situational awareness across our organization.

Terrain Considerations: The JLTV is approximately 9.5 feet in height from ground to the top of the Q-50 radar—compared to the HMMWV’s 8 feet—and is designed with a self-leveling capability that is not organic to the HMMWV. These two characteristics of the JLTV indicated an ability to emplace in every type of terrain tested with no immediate limitations observed. Our primary observation is that the JLTV-mounted Q-50 can emplace in more locations due to reduced masking concerns.

Survivability/Protection: Manufacturer data and Department of War (DoW) testing provides data to support that the JLTV offers enhanced small-arms and CBRN survivability due to improved armor and a CBRN-protected cab. We do not currently have data to determine JLTV vs. HMMWV survivability against rocket, mortar, and tube artillery. We observed that continued testing needs to be conducted to develop methods to route Q-50 cabling from the radar through the JLTV armor and to the JLTV cab without altering the CBRN protection afforded by the vehicle.

Sustained Operations: The JLTV provides an increased amperage (AMP) output, better fuel efficiency, a larger fuel tank, increased cargo payload and a significantly larger gross weight relative to the HMMWV. We observed that the increased AMP output and fuel efficiency enabled the JLTV-mounted Q-50 to sustain operations without fuel resupply for approximately three hours longer than the HMMWV. Continued experimentation is required to determine how much longer the JLTV can self-sustain under various weather and terrain conditions relative to the HMMWV.

Class IX (CLIX) Repair Part Availability: During the observation period, the JLTV was under warranty with OSHKOSH, and repair parts were arriving much faster than with the HMMWV. At the time of this writing, the JLTV is no longer under OSHKOSH contract or warranty. We have observed a significant increase in long-lead time JLTV parts and a degradation in repair part quality. Current long-lead time parts include doors, tensioner-pulley-systems for engines, and battery terminals, which all average approximately 90 days from part order to part reception.

Emplacement/Displacement Times: We observed a slower emplacement and displacement time on the JLTV relative to the HMMWV due to the vehicle’s requirement to level itself on sloped terrain upon occupation of a radar-position area. While the data we collected indicates a 38-second slower emplacement, we believe additional data collection, focused training and crew drills can reduce these times.

TLE Data: Preliminary observations by radar operators experimenting on the JLTV-mounted Q-50 show a decreased TLE relative to the HMMWV mounted Q-50. The data we have collected shows an average TLE of 150 mils for the HMMWV and 110 mils for the JLTV. Continued data collection and analysis are required to isolate variables and determine the factors and effects contributing to our observed improvement in TLE.

Recommendations

We propose that organizations across the U.S. Army attempt to experiment at their level, providing data points and further informing the Fires Center of Excellence on the risks and rewards of transitioning to this system. At the battalion level, we believe there is significant value in units focusing on determining averages in TLE and execution of crew drill training to validate our emplacement and displacement observations. Sustained operations testing across various climates and terrain is recommended to gather initial data points on JLTV performance capabilities relative to specific operational environments.