LAV 6.0

[IKnowNothing]

I'm not the biggest fan of the LAV and I wish GDLS in London could diversify into a tracked vehicle

99% GDLS and Liberal party. The SA deal was looking bad politically the deal could go south. SA had already pulled some of the order. The Liberals had made a deal with CAW/Unifor Gerry Diaz for votes. London is important. GDLS comes in you need to keep the plant open. Here's a deal.

CAF we need new vehicles. Commonality with the current LAV6 is good. So deal!

I got thinking about this.

Identification began on June 2017. Options Analysis Jan 2019. Contract award Sept 2019. 26-27 total months to award a contract to replace 2 fleets and deliver 8 variants/ capabilities in two different hull configurations- with a novel design. 2.5B for 360 vehicles.

We sit now approaching 26 months from the start of the war. A pity the same leverage could not have been applied to sole source some capability gap filling on the more lethal end with OTS designs.

 

[ueo]

I got thinking about this.

Identification began on June 2017. Options Analysis Jan 2019. Contract award Sept 2019. 26-27 total months to award a contract to replace 2 fleets and deliver 8 variants/ capabilities in two different hull configurations- with a novel design. 2.5B for 360 vehicles.

We sit now approaching 26 months from the start of the war. A pity the same leverage could not have been applied to sole source some capability gap filling on the more lethal end with OTS designs.

Seem to remember a proposal, whether entered or not in the late 70;s. that GD take a Grizzly hull and make it tracked. Submitted after mobility trials in Norway sorta suggested tracks were more reliable. Never heard of it again.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Until GDLS in London starts building tracked vehicles. The Army will not get any .
Unless the various ridings in the area consistently vote for the opposition party. And then it's anyone's guess.

 

[suffolkowner]

Until GDLS in London starts building tracked vehicles. The Army will not get any .
Unless the various ridings in the area consistently vote for the opposition party. And then it's anyone's guess.

so they need to vote Liberal?

 

[GK .Dundas]

so they need to vote Liberal?

Sorry that was incredibly badly written.
What I meant that unless it's built by the London plant it most likely will not be purchased for the Army.
So until they produce a tracked vehicle. And as long as the Government party considers those area ridings important to retaining their position.
I honestly don't see a future for many tracked vehicles in the Canadian Army.

 

[suffolkowner]

Sorry that was incredibly badly written.
What I meant that unless it's built by the London plant it most likely will not be purchased for the Army.
So until they produce a tracked vehicle. And as long as the Government party considers those area ridings important to retaining their position.
I honestly don't see a future for many tracked vehicles in the Canadian Army.

And thats kinda why i hold out for a tracked LAV. Got to use the pork barreling in our favour

 

[KevinB]

And thats kinda why i hold out for a tracked LAV. Got to use the pork barreling in our favour

The basic chassis of the LAV doesn’t lead itself to being a practical platform for a tracked vehicle.

If you want a tracked vehicle - get a properly designed one - don’t try to half ass it for a believe of commonality between the Wheeled platform and tracked.

 

[FJAG]

so they need to vote Liberal?

London has three ridings one of which consistently votes NDP and two vote Liberal. London is surrounded by a sea of Blue.

 

[FJAG]

If you want a tracked vehicle - get a properly designed one - don’t try to half ass it for a believe of commonality between the Wheeled platform and tracked.

That's why I'd take Ajax with a variety MOOG RIwP turret systems. Easy-peasy. London could handle that. For compatibility with the LAVs you could retrofit quite a few LAVs with the same turrets to provide the AD and ATGM capability they lack now.

 

[childs56]

I would like to see the LAV 6 in the tracked variant they did with the Stryker TR.
The protection level if the LAV6 is pretty decent, if you added an armor package similar to the Bradley I wonder how well it would compare.

 

[ringo]

They need a tracked vehicle to pull LAV's out of the mud.

 

[suffolkowner]

London has three ridings one of which consistently votes NDP and two vote Liberal. London is surrounded by a sea of Blue.

looks like the two liberal ridings are predicted to go blue while the NDP holds

That's why I'd take Ajax with a variety MOOG RIwP turret systems. Easy-peasy. London could handle that. For compatibility with the LAVs you could retrofit quite a few LAVs with the same turrets to provide the AD and ATGM capability they lack now.

Like I said before they will need something to do after ACSV

 

[Underway]

looks like the two liberal ridings are predicted to go blue while the NDP holds

Like I said before they will need something to do after ACSV

ACSV has been extended as we keep giving them to Ukraine. But agreed.

Luckly there are new options opening up. Need more ACSV for ECM, hulls for the inevitable drone operations, direct fire support platoon folks, SHORAD platforms...

 

[dapaterson]

ACSV is a dead end platform without expandability due to weight limits.

 

[Underway]

ACSV is a dead end platform without expandability due to weight limits.

My understanding was that ACSV is a catch all name for a bunch of non-standard LAV 6's.

They just lego the crap outta that thing to put in what they want on the chasis. No need to expand it. Probably lose weight with some of those options.

 

[Maxman1]

How about a mortar carrier.

 

[McG]

My understanding was that ACSV is a catch all name for a bunch of non-standard LAV 6's.

ACSV is the name of a project that sole-sourced procurement to an evolution of the LAV 6 FoV. Arguably the ACSV is a mix of LAV 6.2 and LAV 6.3.

 

[suffolkowner]

ACSV is a dead end platform without expandability due to weight limits.

this is for all LAV6 variants due to reaching the end of its growth potential due to weight limits of 28000kg+/-?

the LAV 700 goes up to 32000kg +/-

Boxer is 38000kg+/-

so if we need more room for weight growth do we switch to a LAV700 or redesign the LAV more like a Bocer

didnt they swap some Piranha suspension elements in for the LAV700

 

[McG]

this is for all LAV6 variants due to reaching the end of its growth potential due to weight limits of 28000kg+/-?

Yes. The LAV 6 FoV is at (beyond for some variants) the limits of the platform’s capability.

so if we need more room for weight growth do we switch to a LAV700 or redesign the LAV more like a Boxer

That is industry’s problem to answer. CAF needs to define the requirement - the what, not the how.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We need to change the LAV designation to MWAV (Medium Wheeled Armoured Vehicle) There is nothing "light" about them.

Time to look at tracked vehicles if we plan to play in this weight class