IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,187
- Points
- 990
My thoughts are in the "walk before you can run" realm and focusing on getting some realistic quick wins to so that the bigger changes have something to work from.Personally I’m of the opinion that it makes no sense to acquire “training” equipment, and that any equipment should be operational items.
Which I one reason I believe in cascading equipment. If you expect an item has a service life of X years, then it goes to a ‘Category A’ unit for 1/2X then to a ‘Category B’ unit for the remained of the service life.
*ideally it would go for 1/3rd then 1/3rd and then go to WarStock, as well as an overage of 25% equipment acquired for OpStock as well.
I think we can all agree that the LAV 6.0 isn’t the ideal IFV for European fighting.
So you would create a Program for a Heavy Infantry Combat Vehicle -Tracked
600 or so. 400 for a Heavy Bde tasked to Europe, and 200 for OpStock.
*~70/BN plus FOO, Engineer, AD/C-UAS etc vehicles.
.
LUVW replacement is a necessary and funded program that could be/have been used thread the needle with a vehicle that can be operational (albeit not as a frontline AFV) but is also something that the reserves can handle now- high reliability, low maintenance, low training delta- and available now at a low enough cost that we can still afford all the other things needed.
Start your Heavy Infantry Combat Vehicle - Tracked program now, and in the years it takes to decide and start delivery you've had years of formed, equipped, and tasked reserve platoons/troops doing jobs in total force CMBGs