Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle - RG-31, LAV Coyote, and (partial) G-Wagon Replacement

[a_majoor]

The problem that I see after re reading post #1 several times is the requirements are for two separate classes of vehicles, hence the weird compromises.

The only way I can see to fulfill the various requirements, be somewhat affordable and "made in Canada" would be to go to one of the various LAV proposals which resembled a "pick up truck", allowing the vehicle to fulfill the logistics and troop lift functions, and provides a space to fit "pods" for the recce function. A sensor suite and spaces for some dismounts inside the pod would be good.

As for the front half, I would suggest it be built "full width" like the front part of the YPR-765. This would provide room for the crew with the turret or RWS to be in the forward 1/3 of the vehicle as some posters desire.

 

[Infanteer]

A LAV truck?  Seems neat - the Aussies did it with the Bushmaster, which still remains my favorite....

 

[McG]

Compliment the G-wagon?WTF.

That means it will replace the G-Wagon in pretty much every theatre of Ops with an enemy threat, but we will not buy enough to completely replace the G-Wagon. The Army will not buy an armoured vehicle for the PRes, so the G-Wagon will remain there.  The G-Wagon will also still be used on domestic operations & perhaps some of the most permissive international operations (maybe Haiti, certainly not Afghanistan or Sudan).

... and finally, because we probably won't buy enough, the G-Wagon may regularly be used as a TAPV training substitute for the regular force.

 

[X-mo-1979]

That means it will replace the G-Wagon in pretty much every theatre of Ops with an enemy threat, but we will not buy enough to completely replace the G-Wagon. The Army will not buy an armoured vehicle for the PRes, so the G-Wagon will remain there.  The G-Wagon will also still be used on domestic operations & perhaps some of the most permissive international operations (maybe Haiti, certainly not Afghanistan or Sudan).

... and finally, because we probably won't buy enough, the G-Wagon may regularly be used as a TAPV training substitute for the regular force.

Thanks!Kinda what I figured.
I am not impressed with that vehicle at all.Nor is many people I have been talking to.

What ever happened to consulting the people who are going to be using the equipment on the battlefield?

That means it will replace the G-Wagon in pretty much every theatre of Ops with an enemy threat,

So this is not the coyote replacement?I'm a little confused.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Updating the necrothread with this from MERX - sorting out who should even be able to bid (highlights mine):

.... REQUIREMENTS

The Department of National DEFENCE (DND) has a requirement for a fleet of Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicles, with an estimated initial purchase of 500 and an option for up to 100 additional vehicles.  DND also has a requirement for logistics support for the life expectancy of the TAPV, estimated at 25 years.

The TAPV is a wheeled combat vehicle that will fulfill a wide variety of roles on the battlefield. Canada requires one platform, comprised of two variants: the General Utility variant and the Reconnaissance variant. It will have a high degree of tactical mobility and provide a very high degree of survivability to its crew.

PROCUREMENT MILESTONES

The estimated procurement milestones are as follows:

Request for Proposal (RFP) Release        Fall 2010
TAPV Acquisition Contract Award        Fall 2011
TAPV Support Contract Award            Fall 2011
Initial Operating Capability            2013
Completion of TAPV Deliveries            2015

PURPOSE OF SOIQ

The purpose of this SOIQ is to qualify vehicles as well as their Original Equipment Manufacturers through a formal evaluation of selected mandatory technical requirements. Canada encourages a supplier pre-qualification process when complex procurements will likely result in high proposal preparation costs to industry. By using a pre-qualification phase to initiate the procurement process, respondents evaluated as not having sufficient technical capabilities to carry out the project are informed before they undertake the effort and expense of preparing a response to a complete RFP ....

.zip file of Selected Vehicle System Requirements Annex attached, exclusive to Milnet.ca.

 

[rikomili]

Hello everybody,

I've heard that the Canadian Army wanted to acquire tactical armored patrol vehicles to replace its LAV-II Coyote

and RG 31.

Does anybody know which vehicles are involved in the competition (I guess 4 wheeled vehicles like the M-ATV are) ?

Thanks in advance!

 

[ArmyRick]

Do a search! This has been discussed to death.

 

[rikomili]

Sorry sorry,
I know who the main competitors are (ASV 1117, Bushmaster, Dingo 2, RG31 MK6, M-ATV...), but i was wondering whether there were an official list or something like that.

Anyway i'll search by myself if it's not the place to ask that!

 

[George Wallace]

Try looking in this site:  MERX

 

[Matt_Fisher]

TAPV dedicated thread
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/87547.0.html

Mods, maybe this topic should be locked, or merged into the thread above.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Looks like the TAPV is likely to be armed with a CASW equipped remote weapon station:
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/default.aspx

Delays in the CASW procurement are likely to in turn delay acquisition of TAPV until it can be announced what the winning CASW submission is so that the TAPV bidders can develop an RWS to work with it.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

I heard that as well, Matt.

The TAPV will be equipped with a RWS mounting a 40mm AGL.

Just what a recce vehicle needs..... :

 

[Matt_Fisher]

I heard that as well, Matt.

The TAPV will be equipped with a RWS mounting a 40mm AGL.

Just what a recce vehicle needs..... :

I am wondering whether or not the Armoured Corps is strategically trying to f*ck themselves time and time again in terms of vehicle procurement;

Rewind several years ago when they essentially sold out on the concept of MBTs in favour of the MGS, which turns out to be extremely short sighted.  Had we not gotten involved in a shooting war to validate the usefulness of a tracked, heavily armoured, direct fire support vehicle (aka Main Battle Tank), we'd have retired our tank capability.

Now currently, we're looking at getting rid of an 8x8 armoured platform that is capable of tactical cross country movement (albeit not as good as a tracked platform) with a 25mm 2 man turret which allows for decent crew commander situational awareness and weapon system lethality.
The vehicle we're looking at replacing it with will likely have significantly poorer tactical cross country mobility, not be sufficiently armed to counter enemy armour threats, and lack the situational awareness capability that a dedicated turret provides.

Interestingly, DRDC Valcartier recently published the findings of a study whereby they compared the 25mm GDLS Delco turret against the Nanuk RWS as well as a remote turret concept, and the Delco turret came out on top in all areas studied.

I'm not against TAPV as an RG-31 replacement, but as a Coyote replacement it seems to be pretty underwhelming in all areas except IED/EFP IED/AT Mine protection levels.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

I couldn't agree more.  Situational awareness is critical in a recce vehicle. Unless, of course, we are going to buy another surveillance vehicle instead of a recce vehicle....

I wonder who in the Corps came up with that idea?

 

[Matt_Fisher]

I wonder who in the Corps came up with that idea?

I have a sneaky suspicion that the Armoured Corps will try and sequester a small number (squadron's worth) of CCVs for a 'heavy' Recce element in an armoured battlegroup the case Canada finds itself in a shooting war with a heavily armed/armoured adversary where higher levels of protection, mobility, and firepower than what the TAPV affords are deemed necessary.

Whilst nothing is on the books officially about this, we've seen this sort of shift of vehicles from who they are initially procured for to someone else, i.e. Bison APC initially purchased for militia infantry units, then snatched up by the reg force as a utility APC.

 

[The Bread Guy]

This, from MERX, in response to a question asking for a clarification on the timeline:

..... Q) Can you clarify the period for the draft RFP release? Can you specify the period of the RFP closing date?

A) We anticipate that the draft RFP will be released during Summer 2010.  We anticipate that the formal RFP will be released during Fall 2010. The period of time for which the formal RFP will remain open remains to be determined ....

Latest bid package update attached.

 

[The Bread Guy]

New solicitation deadline, according to one of the recent amendments (attached):  2 Jun 10 (instead of 26 May 10).

 

[MarkOttawa]

Torch post:

Canadian military procurement madness: The TAPV?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/05/canadian-military-procurement-madness.html

Spend more to assemble it here instead of buying from the original equipment manufacturer....

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Recon 3690]

can anybody say Ferret or maybe just a M38A1 with a C5 GPMG & a Carl G?
what are these mental midgets thinking? a recce vehicle needs tracks, stealth, speed, a self defence weapons system and the ability to find the enemy. I am not sure of the necessity of dismounts?
It looks like they are more interested in a heavily armoured staff car for the brass to ride around in than a proper recce vehicle, there is a reason the British are still using the Scimitar for recce it has tracks, a low silhouette, its fast, and has a 30mm punch in a package not a lot bigger than a G-Wagon. So just what are we getting for our tax dollars?

 

[Recon 3690]

It seems used, up armoured Marders with the rear compartment converted for the electronics suite would be a better choice, not the best but better