Armoured Vehicle disposition, numbers, variants.

[Underway]

After doing a bunch of internet research I cannot find anything resembling an up to date, complete database, list or post on the current amoured vehicles of the CA.  Its a bit surprising and a bit frustrating.
 
I was wondering if the Army.ca family here could flesh out some of the gaps in the knowledge base online.  I've only posted the LAV to start and see how it goes.  If the thread is successful then we can add more and different vehicles to slowly expand the info.

LAV III

IFV variant - being upgraded to LAV 6.0 standards

TOW Under Armour (TUA) – Do we still have these now that there are no more TOW platoons in existence?  I know there were about 33 converted too LAV RWS but some of the online data suggests that we have 70 odd of these in the stocks.  And if we have them who trains with them and how are they employed??

Infantry Section Carrier (ISC) – Surplus LAV TUA hulls fitted with a Nanuk Remotely Controlled Weapon Station.
- essentially extra TUA LAV's that have been modified,  commonly called the LAV RWS (at least on my tour they were).

LAV LORIT - half way to the LAV 6.0 standard if I understand correctly.  Perhaps is being modified to full LAV 6.0 standard at this time

Observation Post Vehicle (OPV) – Standard LAV III equipped for use by forward observation officer (FOO). JTAC or FAC use these as well??

Command Post Vehicle (CPV) – Standard LAV III equipped for command post duties.

Engineer LAV (ELAV) – LAV III equipped with a dozer blade and other engineering equipment.
-never have seen one, didn't even know they existed

Recce Variant - modified to take a mast (ala Coyote I'm assuming).  Deployed with Armoured Recce elements I'm assuming again?  Why if the TAPV is supposed to fill that gap....

 

[Kirkhill]

One of the better independent sites I have found is this one:

http://tanknutdave.com/the-canadian-lav-iii-8x8-ifv/

Some of the "variants" listed at the very bottom (mortar carriers and SPHs) never advanced past a prototype or were bought by folks like the Saudis.

 

[Underway]

One of the better independent sites I have found is this one:

http://tanknutdave.com/the-canadian-lav-iii-8x8-ifv/

Some of the "variants" listed at the very bottom (mortar carriers and SPHs) never advanced past a prototype or were bought by folks like the Saudis.

Yah, love that site.  The actual "what Canada has" is a bit sketchy.  Not looking for opsec type stuff, more general feel on variants that are being used here in Canada etc...

 

[McG]

There is also this dated reference that site members could update:  http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Land_Forces_Equipment

 

[Underway]

There is also this dated reference that site members could update:  http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Land_Forces_Equipment

Ohhh we have a wiki?  Didn't even now that.  Shiney

 

[Old EO Tech]

Without risking getting into OPSEC level info.  Canada never had LAV IFV, our LAV's were never equipped or employed like say the US uses the M3 Bradley, that would have been more the role of the now cancelled CCV project vehicle.

We do have ISC and CP, including the upgraded LORIT models.  We also have LAV FOO(called an OPV in the LAV6 variants) and E-LAV's for the engineers.

We never had the MMEV on a LAV chasis, that idea died when we got tanks for Afghanistan.

TUA/TOW also died from neglect between the Armour and Infantry Corps during Afghanistan, we still have the TUA turrets and ITAS systems stored in Montreal, but though there has been some discussions about the state of Anti-armour in the CA, no decisions have been made as far as I know.

When the LAVUp project finishes we will have ISC, ICS+, CP, OPV, E-LAV, and LAV-Recce's.  For now no LAV TUA, and even worse for now no LAV6 based MRV's so we have nothing to extract or recover all these very heavy LAV's....

And LORIT's are only getting the turrets upgraded, not the hulls.  Though the engineering details of how they are going to mate a heaver and completely re-engineered FCS equipped turret to a old hull have not be completed as far as I know.

 

[Underway]

ICS+??  Not familiar with that acronym.  If LAVs are not IFV then what exactly are they? They are armoured vehicles that are integrated into the combat power of their section which I though was the defining factor of an IFV.  They have to much protection and combat power to be strictly APCs IMHO.

Without risking getting into OPSEC level info.  Canada never had LAV IFV, our LAV's were never equipped or employed like say the US uses the M3 Bradley, that would have been more the role of the now cancelled CCV project vehicle.

We do have ISC and CP, including the upgraded LORIT models.  We also have LAV FOO(called an OPV in the LAV6 variants) and E-LAV's for the engineers.

We never had the MMEV on a LAV chasis, that idea died when we got tanks for Afghanistan.

TUA/TOW also died from neglect between the Armour and Infantry Corps during Afghanistan, we still have the TUA turrets and ITAS systems stored in Montreal, but though there has been some discussions about the state of Anti-armour in the CA, no decisions have been made as far as I know.

When the LAVUp project finishes we will have ISC, ICS+, CP, OPV, E-LAV, and LAV-Recce's.  For now no LAV TUA, and even worse for now no LAV6 based MRV's so we have nothing to extract or recover all these very heavy LAV's....

And LORIT's are only getting the turrets upgraded, not the hulls.  Though the engineering details of how they are going to mate a heaver and completely re-engineered FCS equipped turret to a old hull have not be completed as far as I know.

Thanks for the details, very interesting especially the part about the recovery vehicles.  What are we using to recover vehicles now then?  ARV's??

 

[McG]

Thanks for the details, very interesting especially the part about the recovery vehicles.  What are we using to recover vehicles now then?  ARV's??

MTVR or Leo ARV do recoveries, but we own nothing that can tow an immobile LAV 6.0.

 

[George Wallace]

..........  If LAVs are not IFV then what exactly are they? They are armoured vehicles that are integrated into the combat power of their section which I though was the defining factor of an IFV.  They have to much protection and combat power to be strictly APCs IMHO.

They are not IFVs.  IFVs permit the Infantry to fight from within the vehicle.  The LAV does not allow them to do that.  The Infantry must dismount to fight. 

It is an APC, just as the BTR X is an APC. 

 

[Old EO Tech]

At most the LAV is a APC that after dismounting it's section can be used to support the attack, much like a mobile large caliber fire base.

 

[63 Delta]

Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe: http://www.osce.org/library/14087

This is how the OSCE defines APC and IFV. Doesnt 100% define the LAV, but to me puts the LAV more as an IFV. For what its worth.

The term “armoured personnel carrier” means an armoured combat vehicle which is designed and equipped to transport a combat infantry squad and which, as a rule, is armed with an integral or organic weapon of less then 20 millimetres calibre.

The term “armoured infantry fighting vehicle” means an armoured combat vehicle which is designed and equipped primarily to transport a combat infantry squad, which normally provides the capability for the troops to deliver fire from inside the vehicle under armoured protection, and which is armed with an integral or organic cannon of at least 20 millimetres calibre and sometimes an antitank missile launcher. Armoured infantry fighting vehicles serve as the principal weapon system of armoured infantry or mechanised infantry or motorised infantry formations and units of ground forces.