• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Saudis sending Canadian-made LAVs to combat Yemeni Rebels

MCG said:
I recommend cancelation of the contract be met with immediate industrial compensation in the form of a new contract to provide the CAF with:

Let's play with the numbers here.

a complete LAV 6 based bison replacement
My (old) numbers suggest 195.

a LAV 6 replacement TLAV & MTVL for platforms in Arty, Engr and Svc Bn use
294.

LAV 6 TOW
Probably need about 60.

LAV 6 mortar carrier
Probably about 45.

LAV 6 vehicles to sp a fourth rifle coy in every mech Bn
90.

a complete LAV 6 Op Stock fleet of a size suitable to support the new defence policy
Let's say 100 for a BG+.

a complete LAV 6 fleet to support BLUEFOR & REDFOR on CMTC exercises (yes, this failed the last time we tried but because it was done at the expense of the field force while the Afghan mission was simultaneously being resourced at the expense of the field force)
Let's say 100 for a BG vs a Cbt Tm.

LAV 6 EOD and search vehicles (to replace the cougars)
30.

a small pool of LAV 6 recce & Engr Sect Carriers to enable CFSME to train at the Tp + or Sqn - level (I understand other Gagetown schools already have resources to do this, but provide top-up as needed)
Let's say 10.

a fleet of observer/trainer LAV 6 for level 4/5 range safety staff and to conduct driver training at Div and branch training centres (picture the Leopard 1 driver training platform)
Let's say 15 per TC - so 60.

maybe something for the PRes to be held at the Div training centres and used at summer concentrations
Let's say 0 for now.  The TAPV can provide this.

So, this adds up to 984 new LAVs, or roughly 1.5 x the current holdings.  That's a pretty ambitious buy.
 
MCG said:
Last time that I toured the plant, they were quite boastful of their ability to produce multiple different variants and generations of LAV without need to stop and retool, so this should not be a problem.  But, I would still be interested in a supporting reference for there being a "LAV 7"

http://www.janes.com/article/71612/export-lav-700-enters-production
 
Infanteer said:
So, this adds up to 984 new LAVs, or roughly 1.5 x the current holdings.  That's a pretty ambitious buy.

I'd say add to that about two dozen LAV 6 MMEV's for AD. As well we would need a LAV 6 recovery platform, cause right now the only thing that can recover a LAV is an ARV. so thats another maybe 4 per battalion? so 36?

We could pull off such a massive buy, and GD could probably deliver rather quickly.
 
The Bison and MTVL families include fitters, MRTs, and recovery variants.  So some of that requirement is covered in the numbers pulled from my list already.

I don't think I would resurrect the MMEV, but maybe an air defence vehicle if the systems integration work is done.
 
MCG said:
The Bison and MTVL families include fitters, MRTs, and recovery variants.  So some of that requirement is covered in the numbers pulled from my list already.

I don't think I would resurrect the MMEV, but maybe an air defence vehicle if the systems integration work is done.

Is ADATS a good candidate for this? Or is it too short range as a reliable AS weapon?
 
gryphonv said:
Is ADATS a good candidate for this? Or is it too short range as a reliable AS weapon?

The ADATS missile is probably overkill for the kind of AD threat we are most worried about: Russian/Iranian/Whoever UAV. You'd probably want a mixed gun/missile system like the one of the old USMC LAV-AD.
 
ADATS is dead. There are no more missiles. No one makes them any more.

Better to go with some sort of modern gun/missile combo, netted to a sensor.
 
Guys lets be real, the government isn't killing any deal.  The review is announced and will never actually happen.
 
Humphrey Bogart said:
Guys lets be real, the government isn't killing any deal.  The review is announced and will never actually happen.

It might very well happen - it will just end with the continuation of the deal.
 
I wonder now if we should ban the sale of CC. Horrible things have happened because someone misused it.

When are we going to stop this perpetual whining because some nervous nelly has a hair up their ass.
 
George Wallace said:
http://www.janes.com/article/71612/export-lav-700-enters-production

Ou, I get a little... excited... seeing that there are no side-bins to be ripped off every time I need to blaze a trail through the woods.
 
ballz said:
Ou, I get a little... excited... seeing that there are no side-bins to be ripped off every time I need to blaze a trail through the woods.

My source mentioned that these have a lot of "chrome and plastic" on them.  I highly doubt they would last long in our troops hands.  [;)
 
Not to mention the GoC isn't in a position to buy a ton of new vehicles to make up for production losses if the deal with KSA was shit canned.  They can't even afford to buy what they need to replace anticipated equipment like ships and fighters.  If they make any noise it will be like a fart, all smell with no substance.
 
The idea of purchasing new LAVs for ourselves to make up for a potentially killed deal with the KSA is interesting to say the least. One other way to figure out how many LAV 6.0 hulls to build might simply be to count up the various micro fleets of TLAVs, Bisons, Coyotes, etc that we have. Over the years I have seen various figures suggesting we should have purchased @ 1000 LAV's to replace the various vehicle fleets we had (the highest figure I recall was @ 1400), so the figure Infanteer came up with is in the ballpark when added to the existing fleet of @ 400 or so.

Given that the government has committed to increasing military spending by 70% in order to get closer to the 2% GDP spending we are committed to through NATO, the idea that we "can't afford" it seems a bit ludicrous. Indeed, once you take the logistical streamlining by having only one fleet family as the basis of the fleet of vehicles then you should come out slightly ahead in terms of O&M, not to mention lower unit costs by building them assembly line fashion and getting economies of scale.

Sadly this is just a fantastical vision given the extreme difficulty we have getting boots and other very simple. low tech equipment to the troops.
 
Ah, just because it makes sense to streamline vehicles AND save money...

Even though we're supposed to be increasing the budget, I'll believe it (all the ship's and aircraft we really need) when I see it.  If my part of the procurement pie area is any indication, money is still tight.
 
Humphrey Bogart said:
Guys lets be real, the government isn't killing any deal.  The review is announced and will never actually happen. come up with the conclusion desired by The Bosses.
FTFY  ;D
 
jollyjacktar said:
Ah, just because it makes sense to streamline vehicles AND save money...

If the LAV 6 became the basis for almost all non heavy armour combat vehicles in our innovatory in one way or another, the saving from the streamlined logistics chain, and maintenance/spare parts would be significant I believe.
 
jollyjacktar said:
Ah, just because it makes sense to streamline vehicles AND save money...

Hey now, you know the motto of the GOC and DND - "If it makes sense, do the exact opposite (after a lengthy Royal Commission or expensive feasibility project says to do the sensible thing)."

Now, I might pay attention to the headline if it read something along the line of "Canadian Armed Forces personnel observing (or helping) Saudi Forces combat test new armoured vehicles...are they safe for Canadians?" or words to that effect.  Otherwise, it sounds like someone is trying to make this into a "Soldiers.  In the desert.  With guns." sort of thing, at least to me.  We sold them the stuff with the expectation that they might be used in anger - I'm pretty sure it wasn't one of those things like when PET Sr. sold a CANDU reactor to another country under the condition of it not being used for nuclear weapons research (which I doubt he sent anyone to verify).

:2c: for what it's worth.

MM
 
medicineman said:
........  We sold them the stuff with the expectation that they might be used in anger - .

Apparently, the ones sold with all the chrome are mainly intended for military parades.  >:D
 
Back
Top