asking for a detailed design, or even a rough concept for a
specific vehicle. Instead, General Dynamics OMFV director Ray Kiernan told me in an interview, the Army wants companies to come up with a flexible
approach that explores a wide range of possibilities – the state of the art and the art of the possible in armored vehicle design.
Those studies, in turn, will help the Army turn its current broad “characteristics” into specific performance requirements. Once the Army has specific requirements, then the competing companies can produce specific designs to meet them.
But right now, the Army wants to consider the full range of options, from a souped-up Bradley carrying five or six infantry passengers, to a massive machine carrying 30 infantry, to a mini-tank carrying just one. “You could have solutions across that whole spectrum,” Kiernan told me. “What we believe General Dynamics’ role to [be] is to apply our tools to help the Army understand where the optimal so
SHARE ON
Do you have to accommodate an employee when their disability
prevents them from wearing the proper safety gear?
The 4th Circuit ruled no in a recent lawsuit. Here’s a
breakdown.
Fired for disability?
Shelia Holmes worked as a shelter fabricator for General Dynamics
Missions Systems in Virginia. Because she operated heavy machinery, Holmes was
required to wear steel-toed boots for her safety.
But Holmes had a medical condition for which she had to wear
flexible footwear – a direct conflict with her job’s safety requirements.
For two years, the company worked with her to find an ADA accommodation that would work, even exploring the idea of getting her custom-made shoes. When Holmes rejected this accommodation, the company considered exempting her from this safety requirement, but ultimately decided it couldn’t. Holmes was then let go.