# Navistar awarded 1300 truck contract



## old medic

MacKay announces 1,300 new military trucks
By THE CANADIAN PRESS
numerous links. copy at : http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/canada/2009/01/09/7972316.html

CFB VALCARTIER, Que. — The Canadian Forces has awarded a contract to build 1,300 new trucks to Navstar Defence LLC.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay made the announcement today at the military base in Valcartier, near Quebec City.

The trucks have been outfitted for military purposes and will be used at bases in Canada.

Delivery will begin by this summer and all 1,300 will be ready within 18 months.

The $274 million it will cost to buy the trucks had already been announced.


----------



## retiredgrunt45

I do hope that there of a better design than of that piece of crap we call the LSVW.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Well the vehicles look ok. Navistar Defense


----------



## Dog

Do we know which variant navistar has been contracted to build? Will this be a replacement for the LS or the ML?


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Me thinks it would be for the ML as Sterling is closing down.


----------



## Kirkhill

It appears that you are getting the Navistar 7400 SFA 6x6

I do hope that SFA doesn't stand for what I think it does.



> Department of National Defence
> 
> 
> 
> Jan 09, 2009 11:19 ETGovernment of Canada Provides Forces With Modern Trucks While Benefiting Economy
> QUEBEC CITY, QUEBEC--(Marketwire - Jan. 9, 2009) - The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay, Minister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Gateway, together with the Honourable Josee Verner, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, today announced the contract award for the Canadian Forces' new medium-sized logistic trucks. Under the contract, the Canadian Forces will be receiving 1300 Militarized Commercial Off-the-Shelf (MilCOTS) vehicles.
> 
> "In line with our Canada First Defence Strategy, the Government of Canada continues to deliver on its promise to equip our Forces with the tools they need to do the jobs we ask of them," said Minister MacKay. "These new trucks will be the logistics backbone of the land force, moving people, equipment and supplies efficiently and where they are needed most."
> 
> The MilCOTS vehicles will be used in Canada to support domestic operations. The new fleet of trucks represents an essential investment for the Canadian Forces.
> 
> "It's essential for Canadian soldiers to be provided with quality equipments to perform their duties," said Minister Verner. "These trucks are another example of our government's commitment to provide adequate equipment for the Canadian Forces."
> 
> The $274 Million contract was awarded to Navistar Defence LLC following a competitive procurement process. Canada will take delivery of the first trucks in the summer of 2009, with all the trucks to be delivered within 18 months after the contract award.
> 
> The Industrial and Regional Benefits Policy applies to this contract, which means that Navistar Defence LLC will generate one dollar of economic activity in Canada for every dollar it receives from the contract. The maintenance and repair of the MilCOTS vehicles will be supported commercially through a well-established local dealer network, benefiting Canadian industry and local economies.
> 
> The MilCOTS vehicles are the first element of the Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) project. The MSVS project will provide a replacement for the current medium logistic trucks, which have been in use since the 1980's and are reaching the end of their service life. In addition to the MilCOTS, the MSVS project also seeks to acquire standard military pattern vehicles (designed specifically for use in foreign operations). A request for proposal for this acquisition will be issued in the summer.
> 
> Note to Editors: The commercial model designation for the MilCOTS vehicle is the Navistar 7400 SFA 6x6.
> 
> More information about the Medium Support Vehicle System project is available at www.forces.gc.ca


  Source


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Hmm... seems the 7400 series has a number of recalls already.

2008 International 7400 - (1,172 vehicles affected) - Campaign #07V179000
SUMMARY:
SUSPENSION:REAR:AXLE:NON-POWERED AXLE ASSEMBLY 
DESCRIPTION:
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS, ONE OR BOTH REAR AXLE HOUSINGS MAY CONTAIN THINNER MATERIAL THAN WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL VEHICLE OPERATION. OVER TIME, THIS THINNER MATERIAL MAY RESULT IN A FATIGUE FAILURE OF THE REAR AXLE HOUSING, POSSIBLY IN THE LOCATION OF THE BRAKE FLANGE. 
CONSEQUENCE:
A CRACK IN THE BRAKE FLANGE LOCATION OF THE REAR AXLE HOUSING MAY RESULT IN A WHEEL END LOCKUP OR WHEEL SEPARATION POSSIBLY RESULTING IN PROPERTY DAMAGE, PERSONAL INJURY, OR DEATH. 
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE VEHICLE&apos;S REAR AXLES AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE AXLE HOUSINGS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 18, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT INTERNATIONAL AT 1-800-448-7815. 
NOTES:
INTERNATIONAL RECALL NO. 07505.CUSTOMERS MAY CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION&apos;S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. 

2008 International 7400 - (10,882 vehicles affected) - Campaign #07V314000
SUMMARY:
PARKING BRAKE 
DESCRIPTION:
ON CERTAIN 6X4 OR 6X6 TRUCKS WITH AIR BRAKES OR TRACTORS WITH AIR BRAKES AND EQUIPPED WITH BENDIX SR-7 SPRING BRAKE MODULATING VALVES, THE INTERNAL RUBBER CHECK VALVE MAY LEAK CAUSING A DELAY IN THE APPLICATION OF THE SPRING BRAKES TO PARK THE VEHICLE AFTER THE OPERATOR PULLS THE DASH VALVE BUTTON. 
CONSEQUENCE:
THIS COULD DELAY OR FAILURE IN APPLYING THE PARKING BRAKES WHICH COULD RESULT IN A VEHICLE ROLL AWAY, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH. 
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
INTERNATIONAL IS WORKING WITH BENDIX TO REPAIR THESE VEHICLES (PLEASE SEE 07E-037). BENDIX WILL INSTALL A CHECK VALVE REPAIR KIT FOR THE AFFECTED SR-7 SPRING BRAKE MODULATING VALVE FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON SEPTEMBER 28, 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT BENDIX AT 440-329-9000 AND INTERNATIONAL AT 440-329-9179. 
NOTES:
INTERNATIONAL RECALL NO. 07511.CUSTOMERS MAY ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION&apos;S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. 

2008 International 7400 - (34,993 vehicles affected) - Campaign #08V089000
SUMMARY:
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING 
DESCRIPTION:
INTERNATIONAL IS RECALLING 34,993 MY 2006-2008 SCHOOL AND TRANSIT BUSES AND HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS/TRACTORS MANUFACTURED BETWEEN JUNE 1, 2006 AND JUNE 28, 2007, EQUIPPED WITH INTERNATIONAL DT466 OR DT570 ENGINES. THE BASE PLATE OF THE ENGINE OIL COOLER MAY CRACK ALLOWING PRESSURIZED OIL TO LEAK INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. 
CONSEQUENCE:
THIS CONDITION MAY CAUSE EITHER ENGINE SHUT DOWN WITHOUT WARNING, OR IN EXTREME CASES, POSSIBLE ENGINE FIRE WHICH CAN LEAD TO PROPERTY DAMAGE, PERSONAL INJURY, OR DEATH. 
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
INTERNATIONAL WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND REPAIR THE VEHICLES FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 21, 2008. OWNERS MAY CONTACT INTERNATIONAL AT 800-448-7825. 
NOTES:
INTERNATIONAL RECALL NO. 08502.CUSTOMERS MAY CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION&apos;S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. 

2007 International 7400 - (87 vehicles affected) - Campaign #06V384000
SUMMARY:
SUSPENSION 
DESCRIPTION:
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS EQUIPPED WITH CHALMERS REAR SUSPENSIONS, THE ADJUSTABLE TORQUE ROD END CASTINGS MAY BE BRITTLE. A BRITTLE ROD END CASTING MAY FRACTURE WITHOUT WARNING, CAUSING THE VEHICLES&apos; REAR AXLES TO BECOME MISALIGNED. 
CONSEQUENCE:
THIS MISALIGNMENT CAN CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO LOSE DIRECTIONAL STABILITY AT SPEEDS THAT MAY RESULT IN A VEHICLE CRASH. 
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE VEHICLES TO DETERMINE IF THEY WERE MANUFACTURED WITH A SUSPECT TORQUE ROD END. IF A SUSPECT TORQUE ROD END IS FOUND, THE ENTIRE TORQUE ROD WILL BE REPLACED. THE RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 6, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT INTERNATIONAL AT 1-800-448-7825. 
NOTES:
INTERNATIONAL RECALL NO. 06509.CUSTOMERS CAN ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION+S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV. 


More on link.


----------



## blacktriangle

I can't get the pictures to load for me. Does it look I'd be able to roll one easy enough??


----------



## Nfld Sapper

popnfresh said:
			
		

> I can't get the pictures to load for me. Does it look I'd be able to roll one easy enough??



Not excatly the 7400 but the 7000 series.


----------



## old medic

Their regular production model of this is the   Work Star (WS) 7400 Set Forward Axle (SFA). 

It already exists as a commercial 6x6 chasis.  Common as fire trucks.


----------



## dapaterson

What does this mean for the NavStar plant in Chatham, where 499 are to be let go on 02 Feb, and antoher 199 cuts effective 02 Mar were announced just last Tuesday (http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSN0643962520090106).

That may be the reason a major procurement and expenditure story was buried on a Friday afternoon - announcing a significant contract such as this to a company that just announced large Canadian job cuts is not the kind of PR the Government really wants - note also that the announcement was made in Quebec, vice in the heart of Canada's automotive industry.

It's also interesting to note that the Navistar stock price spiked briefly today when the announcement was made, but has fallen about 8% since then...  See http://finance.google.ca/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:NAV .


----------



## old medic

On the other side of that, Navistar's website says they sold 161000 trucks last year. The Reuters link on the last post says the 
Chatham plant was making 100 trucks a day.   So 1300 trucks is only 13 days work at the one location.


----------



## Gazoo

The truck was spotted in Gagetown in Oct 2006:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51635.0.html


----------



## TN2IC

5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 11 & 18 Manual transmission or an automatic one. Hmm.. If it's for domestic side, I believe the manual will do just fine. 6 gears with do the trick. I know some folks will get lost quickly if there's any more. On bad note the Internationals I drove.. the stick has A LOT of playing in it. Do note that it was a 13 speed 7 ton.

Hopfully they will also score the CAT engine too. God love em!


Regards,
Mr Plow


----------



## FMR

This is a good new , because Navistar Defense made awesome vehicle, who resist against small arms and grenade. For each dollar on the 1300 truck return to Canada, that what Navistar and Peter Mckay as declared today. That mean jobs for Canada and new vehicle, everyone is happy and we got a new truck because right now the old MLVW from 1980 was a model from 1950s, licenced by Bombardier. The MLVW are not only old but seriously a piece of crap, the new vehicle are beautiful and seriously better and can be used for all weather and off-road. But 1300 is not enough, we have 3,000 MLVW ..it is the half of our current fleet, i hope is only the first part of the modernization and the another batch of vehicle coming soon.


----------



## dapaterson

Repeat after me:

"Lowest Cost Compliant."


Or, in this case,

"Only bid."


Old medic:  While the production would be only a rounding error for the production at Chatham, it's still the optics that don't work - fire 700 people then get a multi-million dollar contract.


FMR:  A few observations: This is the MilCOTS portion of the purchase; the SMP trucks are not yet out for contract.  The MilCOTS are not armoured - no small arms and grenade resistance.  And "Jobs for Mexico" would be more like it - Navistar will declare exisiting work as their industrial offsets in Canada, and a maquiladora will add a few more shifts at $2/hr.


----------



## old medic

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Old medic:  While the production would be only a rounding error for the production at Chatham, it's still the optics that don't work - fire 700 people then get a multi-million dollar contract.


Yes.  It's hard to find deeper information right now. My first thought was, Chatham is International trucks, but Navistar Defence is a seperate business unit 
selling an existing product. I suspect Chatham might be getting final kit assembly, but are not really "making" the full truck. Time will tell.


----------



## MarkOttawa

They're actually from Navistar's International division; US Army uses them:
http://www.internationaldelivers.com/site_layout/news/newsdetail.asp?id=968

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Nfld Sapper

News Release
Government of Canada Provides Forces with Modern Trucks while Benefitting Economy
NR - 09.001 - January 9, 2009

QUEBEC– The Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay, Minister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Gateway, together with the Honourable Josée Verner, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, today announced the contract award for the Canadian Forces’ new medium-sized logistic trucks.  Under the contract, the Canadian Forces will be receiving 1300 Militarized Commercial Off-the-Shelf (MilCOTS) vehicles.

“In line with our Canada First Defence Strategy, the Government of Canada continues to deliver on its promise to equip our Forces with the tools they need to do the jobs we ask of them,” said Minister MacKay.  “These new trucks will be the logistics backbone of the land force, moving people, equipment and supplies efficiently and where they are needed most.”  

The MilCOTS vehicles will be used in Canada to support domestic operations.  The new fleet of trucks represents an essential investment for the Canadian Forces.

“It's essential for Canadian soldiers to be provided with quality equipments to perform their duties,” said Minister Verner.  “These trucks are another example of our government's commitment to provide adequate equipment for the Canadian Forces.”

The $274 Million contract was awarded to Navistar Defence LLC following a competitive procurement process.  Canada will take delivery of the first trucks in the summer of 2009, with all the trucks to be delivered within 18 months after the contract award.

The Industrial and Regional Benefits Policy applies to this contract, which means that Navistar Defence LLC will generate one dollar of economic activity in Canada for every dollar it receives from the contract.  The maintenance and repair of the MilCOTS vehicles will be supported commercially through a well-established local dealer network, benefiting Canadian industry and local economies. 

The MilCOTS vehicles are the first element of the Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) project.  The MSVS project will provide a replacement for the current medium logistic trucks, which have been in use since the 1980’s and are reaching the end of their service life.  In addition to the MilCOTS, the MSVS project also seeks to acquire standard military pattern vehicles (designed specifically for use in foreign operations).  A request for proposal for this acquisition will be issued in the summer. 

-30-

Note to Editors: The commercial model designation for the MilCOTS vehicle is the Navistar 7400 SFA 6x6.  More information about the Medium Support Vehicle System project is available at www.forces.gc.ca


----------



## danchapps

Looking forward to the new trucks. Hopefully they don't wind up on the training bases before the first line bases.


----------



## tango22a

Just for the He** of it I wonder how long it will take for these to trickle down to the Reserve elements???

tango22a


----------



## Good2Golf

Mr Plow said:
			
		

> 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 11 & 18 Manual transmission or an automatic one. Hmm.. If it's for domestic side, I believe the manual will do just fine. 6 gears with do the trick. I know some folks will get lost quickly if there's any more. On bad note the Internationals I drove.. the stick has A LOT of playing in it. Do note that it was a 13 speed 7 ton.
> 
> Hopfully they will also score the CAT engine too. God love em!
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Mr Plow



Mr. Plow, do you figure they'd try and squeeze a 3306 in there, or should we go with a 3406 (is it overkill for ho ML's are used today)?

Cheers
G2G


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Repeat after me:
> 
> "Lowest Cost Compliant."
> 
> 
> Or, in this case,
> 
> "Only bid."
> 
> 
> Old medic:  While the production would be only a rounding error for the production at Chatham, it's still the optics that don't work - fire 700 people then get a multi-million dollar contract.
> 
> 
> FMR:  A few observations: This is the MilCOTS portion of the purchase; the SMP trucks are not yet out for contract.  The MilCOTS are not armoured - no small arms and grenade resistance.  And "Jobs for Mexico" would be more like it - Navistar will declare exisiting work as their industrial offsets in Canada, and a maquiladora will add a few more shifts at $2/hr.



If true that Navistar can claim existing planned hours in Chatham as industrial offsets, this is pathetic deal....I would have thought that industrial offsets mandates an incremental increase to constitute an 'offset'.


Matthew.


----------



## danchapps

Does anyone here know the approximate highway speed these trucks can go? The max 80km/h that the ML does is pretty sad when you hit a head wind and are stuck doing 60km/h.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

I believe that these will be able to do 100 km/h no problem.


----------



## danchapps

Good to know, thank you NFLD Sapper.


----------



## geo

FMR said:
			
		

> The MLVW are not only old but seriously a piece of crap,



Ummm - you know this becaue ???
(cause you are only thinking about or trying to get into the FMR)

While the MLVW did not start off with a stellar performance, it has turned out to be a very decent truck.  Soo... what is it about it's performance that you find so offensive - taking into account that it is getting tired after some 28-30 years of good & loyal service.  If you want to talk about the LSVW as a hunk of junk - I'll join you in the gripers corner - but again, I know 1st hand why it is a hunk of junk while you are just parroting away


----------



## GAP

Was this not the same twit that was going on about an F18 replacement fantasy in spite of what experienced personnel told him?


----------



## danchapps

FMR said:
			
		

> The MLVW are not only old but seriously a piece of crap, the new vehicle are beautiful and seriously better and can be used for all weather and off-road.



Ok, I may gripe about the ML because it's slower than the average bear, but considering some of them are older than I am, and they still run strong I'd be giving them more credit if I were you. I very much enjoy driving them, they serve a purpose, they are well used, but growing old.



			
				FMR said:
			
		

> But 1300 is not enough, we have 3,000 MLVW ..it is the half of our current fleet



This part I will agree with you on. However, as stated elsewhere, this is only the MilCOTS portion of the replacement. Maybe, depending on how well they perform the powers that be will get more of them. Also, you have to look at how many ML's were pucrhased in the 80's. How many have been rolled and are scrap? How many are VOR'd for some reason or another? I can't give solid numbers on this, but I do know that there are a lot less now than when we bought them, and we still make due with what we have.


----------



## geo

... at the same time we disposed of the 5 tons, we got the 10 ton HMVW & the VHMVW.
This took some of the load that was being carried by the "new" deuce.

Would be nice to buy more BUT, with the current rolling stock, how many do we really need ???

Also, instead of always doing these huge fleet purchases, buying on a continuing basis will keep the automotive industry working ... or at least that's the theory


----------



## FMR

geo said:
			
		

> Ummm - you know this becaue ???
> (cause you are only thinking about or trying to get into the FMR)
> 
> While the MLVW did not start off with a stellar performance, it has turned out to be a very decent truck.  Soo... what is it about it's performance that you find so offensives - taking into account that it is getting tired after some 28-30 years of good & loyal service.  If you want to talk about the LSVW as a hunk of junk - I'll join you in the gripers corner - but again, I know 1st hand why it is a hunk of junk while you are just parroting away



Well , the vehicle are based from the GMC model 353 , a world war two 2+ ton 6x6 used by civil before the war as a farmers trucks. During world war two (1939-1945) this vehicle was produced with over 800,000 in Canada and USA , that was the much used by allies forces. After the war the same model was converted for military used in 1950 with better performance than the GMC model 353, the M35 (The MLVW used by Canadian Forces). The model was much more powerful for this time (1950) but in 2009 , this vehicle have over 50+ years old and have seriously problem in off-road and don't work as well for 21th century battlefield. This vehicle was only used for temporary canadian CFB Lahr and CFB Baden-Soellingen in Germany and Canada, authorized by Pierre Eliot Trudeau (Liberal Party in 1980). In 2000s 	Art Eggleton (Former Minister of Defence) had announced a modernization fleet in 2001-2002 but was rejected by Jean-Chrétien. In 2006 Gordon O'Connor had announced another time the modernization fleet of the older Canadian MLVW who was only purchase for temporary use, that was accepted by Mr Harper during the speech of "Canada First Defence Strategy"  of a modernization fleet of Land,Air,Martime Forces for entering in the 21th century with the most advanced,powerfull and expensive technology to provide CF with the best equipment in the world. The Canada First Defence Strategy announced in 2006 one of the point was the truck, who really need replacement since over 10 years but like anoither stuff in CF always in the last minute.

The 7000 MV are based on one of the most powerful civil truck right now on the industry and can provide a good protection from Navistar who made the the new HMMWV replaced the MaxxPro who are seriously a better protected vehicle than any another MRAP vehicle on this planet right now. So the 7000 MV can provide a protection of CF personal and provide a capacity for 21th century who the M35 varriant used by CF can't because they're to much older, that was a recommendation by General Rick Hillier in 2005-2006 ,this guy former General want a Canadian Forces with another point of view, during 50 years canada was a peace keeping force without capacity today we're much more powerfull and need to still on this position , like i can see you have 30 years service in CF ?..so you're not from the *General Kill* like me.

*Generation kill *  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y_5vxM8PYM


----------



## geo

> ..so you're not from the General Kill like me ,who don't care about peace.


C'est supposé dire quoi ça ?

Yes - I joined the Reserves in 1970.... during the "October crisis" no less.

I have had the pleasure to operate the 50s pattern of 2 1/2 truck AND the 80s pattern of 2 1/2 truck
BOTH are / were excellent.  The 50s model was used for 30+ years (1953to 1983) while the 80s model has been in use 26 years (1982 to date).  The cut and paste information you have provided does not support your saying the MLVW is a piece of crap... you are wrong.


----------



## FMR

geo said:
			
		

> C'est supposé dire quoi ça ?
> 
> Yes - I joined the Reserves in 1970.... during the "October crisis" no less.
> 
> I have had the pleasure to operate the 50s pattern of 2 1/2 truck AND the 80s pattern of 2 1/2 truck
> BOTH are / were excellent.  The 50s model was used for 30+ years (1953to 1983) while the 80s model has been in use 26 years (1982 to date).  The cut and paste information you have provided does not support your saying the MLVW is a piece of crap... you are wrong.



*Generation kill* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y_5vxM8PYM , la génération "playstation" comme moi entre 16-25ans

Well, the vehicle was good during 1950-1990 , but Afghanistan isn't Quebec during October crisis, my cousin work for the 408  with CU-161 and told me Afghanistan are seriously a off-road region and the truck are many time stuck in the mud like the LAV-III and G-wagon. During wolrd war two this kind of 6x6 wheeled truck was stuck in Belgium 1944-1945 in the Siegfriedstellung in Germany/beligum border line. They were stuck in the mud or can't be used on off-road and the MLVW are based from the same model so i guess they have the same problem but in Afghanistan (this is for why they try to refit the old fleet for newer and better 7000-MV).

I made mistake to called piece of crap , but seriously not a good vehicle in comparison with the new 7000 MV







 here an example of stuck in the mud in Afghanistan..with the LAV-3 but that happened with another wheeled vehicle and the 7000 MV are seriously strong enough to be operational on this kind of situation. 



US Army just buy 10,000 new truck from Navistar Defense they're satisfied on the capacity in Iraq/Afghanistan. 



> The U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command recently awarded Navistar Defense a follow-on contract to provide medium tactical trucks and spare parts to the Afghanistan National Police, Afghan National Army and the Iraqi Ministry of Defense.
> 
> Under the multi-year, $1.283 billion contract, Navistar will supply 7,072 vehicles based on their severe service International 7000 Series truck. The order will include General Troop Transporter, POL (petroleum, oil and lubricant), water tankers, wreckers and hazardous material truck variants. In addition, Navistar will supply all required spare parts necessary to support several years of scheduled maintenance. Approximately half of the 2008 order will be delivered during the first year of the contract, with nearly 1,000 units expected to be delivered in FY 2008 (i.e. before Oct 1/08).
> 
> This award follows a $430 million contract, 2,900 vehicle contract awarded in 2005, bringing the overall total to $1.71 billion and 9,972 trucks. Navistar release. Note that the International 7000 truck chassis is also the basis of the blast-resistant MaxxPro 4×4 patrol vehicle, which is currently the lead vehicle in the USA’s 15,000+ vehicle MRAP (Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected) program.


----------



## aesop081

FMR said:
			
		

> I made mistake to called piece of crap , but seriously not a good vehicle in comparison with the new 7000 MV



Wow, you really get around. Fighters, FWSAR, Quebec gun nut groups, trucks..........you're an all-around genius.

"generation Kill"....give me a break, the only thing you ever delivered violence on is a fly.


----------



## aesop081

FMR said:
			
		

> my cousin work for the 408  with CU-161 and told me Afghanistan



Again, you have no experience yourself so you decide to use something that your suposed cousin told you.........






> here an example of stuck in the mud in Afghanistan..with the LAV-3 but that happened with another wheeled vehicle and the 7000 MV are seriously strong enough to be operational on this kind of situation.



And this is another example of you shooting your mouth off because you dont know what you are talking about. The trucks in the article are for domestic use and not overseas.

Your time here is reaching its terminal end.


----------



## George Wallace

FMR said:
			
		

> *Generation kill* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y_5vxM8PYM , la génération "playstation" comme moi entre 16-25ans
> 
> Well, the vehicle was good during 1950-1990 , but Afghanistan isn't Quebec during October crisis, my cousin work for the 408  with CU-161 and told me Afghanistan are seriously a off-road region and the truck are many time stuck in the mud like the LAV-III and G-wagon. During wolrd war two this kind of 6x6 wheeled truck was stuck in Belgium 1944-1945 in the Siegfriedstellung in Germany/beligum border line. They were stuck in the mud or can't be used on off-road and the MLVW are based from the same model so i guess they have the same problem but in Afghanistan (this is for why they try to refit the old fleet for newer and better 7000-MV).
> 
> I made mistake to called piece of crap , but seriously not a good vehicle in comparison with the new 7000 MV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here an example of stuck in the mud in Afghanistan..with the LAV-3 but that happened with another wheeled vehicle and the 7000 MV are seriously strong enough to be operational on this kind of situation.



You are right out of 'er.  You show us with your postings here, that you really do not have the knowledge to be contributing so much CRAP.

If for a second you think that a "new 7000 MV" will not suffer the same fate in the mud as any of the vehicles you have mentioned above, then I know that you have never driven a real vehicle in your whole life.  Perhaps it is time that you got out of your comfy chair and went outside, took a course on Driving, and then try driving on something other that a paved surface.  It may be an eye-opener for you.  As is, your comments from a friend of a friend, don't hold much credibility here.


----------



## FMR

During cold war , Canada had two CFB in Germany , the Leopard,Iltis,CF-104 and several another equipement was only temporary for NATO forces based in Germany and around europe. The MLVW was only a temporary vehicle same for the Leopard and Iltis but in 1993 , that was all retunred in Canada and had no replacement but in 2000 that was accepted by jean-Chrétien,Paul martin and Stephen Harper to provide better equipment who was all from 1970-1980 during the temporary defence of Germany against Soviet Union.  
I don't know the point to bash me because i said the old vehicle are not good...for example, a old computer don't work as well for modern software , same for the vehicle if they're not good for modern warfare they need replacement this is the life. Don't need 30 years services in CF for know that, this is the same on public service to private or military forces this is always like that since over 2,000 years.


----------



## aesop081

So which one are you ? 

Encino man, captain america, Kasey Kasem, the coward of Kafji ?


----------



## George Wallace

FMR said:
			
		

> During cold war , Canada had two CFB in Germany , the Leopard,Iltis,CF-104 and several another equipement was only temporary for NATO forces based in Germany and around europe. The MLVW was only a temporary vehicle same for the Leopard and Iltis but in 1993 , that was all retunred in Canada and had no replacement but in 2000 that was accepted by jean-Chrétien,Paul martin and Stephen Harper to provide better equipment who was all from 1970-1980 during the temporary defence of Germany against Soviet Union.
> I don't know the point to bash me because i said the old vehicle are not good...for example, a old computer don't work as well for modern software , same for the vehicle if they're not good for modern warfare they need replacement this is the life. Don't need 30 years services in CF for know that, this is the same on public service to private or military forces this is always like that since over 2,000 years.



I have no idea where you are getting your facts from.  Everything above is wrong.  


NOW STOP.


----------



## dangerboy

FMR said:
			
		

> During cold war , Canada had two CFB in Germany , the Leopard,Iltis,CF-104 and several another equipement was only temporary for NATO forces based in Germany and around europe. The MLVW was only a temporary vehicle same for the Leopard and Iltis but in 1993 , that was all retunred in Canada and had no replacement but in 2000 that was accepted by jean-Chrétien,Paul martin and Stephen Harper to provide better equipment who was all from 1970-1980 during the temporary defence of Germany against Soviet Union.



Are you saying that the MLVW and Iltis where only used in Germany before 1993? I am asking to make sure that I understand you correctly.  If you are I suggest that you find a new source to get information as I can remember being trained on and using both those vehicles in Canada in 1989 and it had nothing to do with Germany (as much as I wish it did).


----------



## FMR

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> So which one are you ?
> 
> Encino man, captain america, Kasey Kasem, the coward of Kafji ?



I'm only a son of a huge military family from Bundeswehr and CF , my ancestor was a war hero in 1776-1781 during the battle of Chesapeake and Battle of Yorktown in 1781 the admiral François Joseph Paul de Grasse ,don't need a guy who pilot aircraft for judging me with unknown name. I'm not stupid , a old equipment need replacement for better , that don't need a Einstein brain for know that.


----------



## FMR

dangerboy said:
			
		

> Are you saying that the MLVW and Iltis where only used in Germany before 1993? I am asking to make sure that I understand you correctly.  If you are I suggest that you find a new source to get information as I can remember being trained on and using both those vehicles in Canada in 1989 and it had nothing to do with Germany (as much as I wish it did).



They was previously only used for the NATO forces in Germany (Lahr and Baden-Soellingen) some was based in Canada such Leopard C1 but mainly used in Germany.


----------



## Kirkhill

Seigneur, en effet on a un veritable aristo chez nous. Soyons assez gracieux. Son ligne ca donne de l'expertise.


----------



## George Wallace

FMR said:
			
		

> They was previously only used for the NATO forces in Germany (Lahr and Baden-Soellingen) some was based in Canada such Leopard C1 but mainly used in Germany.



OK      THAT'S IT!     STOP POSTING!


These vehicles were purchased and used Forces wide.  They were not purchased solely for use in Germany.

4 CMBG had other, better, vehicles, that should have also been purchased and put into service Forces wide, but only enough were purchased for the Bde in Europe.  Vehicles like the UNIMOG, which had seen service with the RCAF in France and Germany in the 50's and 60's were used by 4 CMBG in the 80's and 90's.  4 CMBG also had MAN 10 tonne trucks of numerous variants, including Tank transporters.  

So FMR, this is your last warning........You don't have two clues of what you are talking about...



NOW!

STOP POSTING or I will remove all your posts or you from the site.


George

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## aesop081

FMR said:
			
		

> They was previously only used for the NATO forces in Germany



You were proven incorrect one already....give it up.



			
				FMR said:
			
		

> I'm not stupid , a old equipment need replacement for better ,



If that is all you had said, it would have been fine. But we all know what you decided to do.

I pitty the FusMR.......


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Locked...I think we have to do it with all the topics FMR has participated in so we can get rid of the crap.

Milnet.Ca Staff


----------



## old medic

FMR said:
			
		

> (this is for why they try to refit the old fleet for newer and better 7000-MV).



Clearly you don't even understand what is going on in this thread.  These trucks will never leave Canada.
They are not SMP, they are a milcot.

Go read the DND press release again, and quit arguing with people who have actually used the equipment you think your an expert on. 
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Department-Of-National-Defence-936250.html


> The MilCOTS vehicles are the first element of the Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) project. The MSVS project will provide a replacement for the current medium logistic trucks, which have been in use since the 1980's and are reaching the end of their service life. In addition to the MilCOTS, the MSVS project also seeks to acquire standard military pattern vehicles (designed specifically for use in foreign operations). A request for proposal for this acquisition will be issued in the summer.



You have earned yourself a verbal warning. PM to follow.


----------



## GAP

Canada’s C$ 1+ Billion Competitions for Medium Trucks
Article Link

Just before Canada Day 2006, Canada’s minority Conservative Party government outlined a C$ 1.2 billion (USD $1 billion) RFP for new medium-sized logistics trucks and associated equipment. These Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) trucks will become the new backbone of the Canadian Forces’ land transport capabilities, replacing the MLVW trucks (really, US M-35/M-36 designs with some modifications) that are 1950s designs built in the 1980s.

The Bombardier-built MLVWs are reaching the end of their service lives. They also have limited carriage capacity for the extra armor that is crucial for survival in places like Afghanistan. This may explain why the Canadian forces in Afghanistan are relying on their HLVW heavy trucks instead, a set of 10-ton capacity Steyr vehicles related to the smaller US FMTV medium truck family.

Under the new plan, the Canadian Forces will purchase up to 2,300 new medium trucks. What are the requirements? The configurations and numbers? Is this a welcome arrival that fills a critical gap? A mistake that will leave Canada out of step with shifting trends? Or a politically-driven move that falls into the “something, and hence better than nothing” category? Or all 3? DID has answers, as we report on the slow-moving MSVS program’s 3rd Letter of Intent, and first purchase…

If You Could Read My Mind: Medium Truck Requirements 
Go-Go Round: Contracts and Updates [updated] 
Appendix A: It’s Too Late, He Wins – Issues and Analysis (July 1/06) 
If You Could Read My Mind: Medium Truck Requirements


FMTV Load Handling System
(click to view full)A competitive procurement process will select the contractor for the new truck fleet, with requests for proposals being released to industry for all elements of the project. The acquisition contracts will also have economic offsets – for every contract dollar awarded, the contractor will be expected to commit a corresponding dollar in economic activity in Canada.

“The procurement process will be fair, open, transparent and in line with this government’s Federal Accountability Act and Action Plan,” said Minister Fortier. The Department of National Defence will procure 2,300 vehicles, associated components, logistics and training support at a cost of approximately $1.1 billion. It is estimated that 20 years of contracted in-service support will cost an additional $100 million.

According to the DND backgrounder, the project aims to procure approximately: 
More on link


----------



## danchapps

Excellent read GAP, thanks for posting that.


----------



## MarkOttawa

In the end there was only one bidder:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/06/keep-on-truckin.html

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## dapaterson

Call me Cassandra:

From today's Toronto Star:
http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/570638



> *Firm lays off Canadians, sells Ottawa U.S. trucks*
> 
> The Canadian Auto Workers is criticizing the federal government for awarding a $254 million contract to a U.S. company to build trucks for the Canadian Forces at its plant in Texas while it is laying off workers at its plant in Chatham.
> 
> "Somebody has to explain to us why Canadian workers can't build military trucks for the Canadian military," said senior CAW executive Bob Chernecki, referring to a defence department contract to Illinois-based Navistar International Corp. to build 1,300 medium-duty trucks for the Canadian Forces.


----------



## geo

> Somebody has to explain to us why Canadian workers can't build military trucks for the Canadian military," said senior CAW executive Bob Chernecki, referring to a defence department contract to Illinois-based Navistar International Corp. to build 1,300 medium-duty trucks for the Canadian Forces




Somebody has to explain to our union leaders how canadian workers built military LAVs for the American military,"  referring to previous defence department contracts to GM Diesel to build LAV25s for the US Marine Corp and Stryker personnel carriers for the US Army....


----------



## Robbie

I have seen these trucks over here (Afghanistan) with the ANA and they seem to be holding there own here. Those guys load the crap out of then and the truck hauls it all. Even seen a couple survie a blast but yeah I know we aren't buying them because of that. The thing that has inpressed me the most on this truck is the A frame on the front. Every truck they have recived has one. And I have taken a gander at the ANA trucks and looks like we are getting a very good truck A/C, Air seats, raido. And they tell me they have had then up to 110kmh. 401 to Petawawa here I come.

Rob


----------



## old medic

> "It's clearly unacceptable to use Canadian tax dollars to have these vehicles built in the United States," said Lewenza's letter to MacKay.


source: http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/570638

As already pointed out above, that is not a well thought out statement, and raises a serious double standard.

Using the CAW thinking, do we cancel the $274 million 1300 truck contract to Navistar defence because they can only be built in Canada?

That seems to imply we should give up the $4 Billion 2131 vehicle US Army contract in London Ontario. After all, US army vehicles should
be built in the US.

In addition to that,  are the US support contracts.  September 2006 was easy to find using Google.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/a-month-in-the-life-sept-2006-stryker-contracts-02618/



> Sept 29/06: A $5.3 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for OPTEMPO Miles for Pre-Deployment Support of the Stryker Brigade Combat Team. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI (15%), and London, Ontario, Canada (85%), and is expected to be complete by February 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on Sept. 26, 2006 (DAAE07-02-C-B001).
> 
> Sept 29/06: A $27.6 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for “procurement of repair parts in support of the reset effort which involves maintenance and repair of desert damaged vehicles.” We haven’t heard this referred to as RESET work before, though it is an aspect of fleet maintenance. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI (20%), and London, Ontario, Canada (80%), and is expected to be complete by Sept. 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on July 28, 2006 by The Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Warren, MI (DAAE07-02-C-B001).
> 
> Sept 22/06: A delivery order amount of $23.6 million as part of an $89 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Stryker new equipment training and fielding support for the Stryker family of vehicles. Work will be performed in Fort Indiantown Gap, PA (45%), Schofield Barracks, HI (35%), Fort Wainwright, AK (5%), Sterling Heights, MI (5%), and Vilseck, Germany (10%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2007 (DAAE07-00-D-M051).
> 
> Sept 11/06: A $13.1 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for repair of Stryker Vehicles returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom. Work will be performed in Doha, Qatar (80%), Sterling Heights, MI (10%), and London, Canada (10%), and is expected to be complete by June 30, 2007. This was a sole source contract initiated on March 31, 2006 (DAAE07-02-C-B001).
> 
> Sept. 11/06: A $7.3 million modification to a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Repair of Stryker Vehicles Returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI (12%), and London, Canada (88%), and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2006 (DAAE07-02-C-B001).
> 
> Sept 6/06: A delivery order amount of $22.1 million as part of a $4.86 billion cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for 1” slat armor and headlight extension kits for the Stryker vehicle. Work will be performed in Lima, OH and is expected to be complete by June 30, 2007 (DAAE07-00-D-M051).
> 
> Sept 6/06: A delivery order amount of $6.8 million as part of a $4.81 billion cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for the retrofit of remote weapon stations for the Stryker vehicles. Work will be performed in Sterling Heights, MI, and is expected to be complete by Dec. 31, 2006 (DAAE07-00-D-M051).
> 
> Sept 1/06: A delivery order amount of $15.8 million as part of a $4.8 billion firm-fixed-price contract for the air conditioning kits for the Stryker Vehicle. The troops working in Iraq’s 120 degree heat come summertime will really appreciate that one. Work will be performed in Auburn, WA and is expected to be complete by March 31, 2008 (DAAE07-00-D-M051).


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Robbie said:
			
		

> I have seen these trucks over here (Afghanistan) with the ANA and they seem to be holding there own here. Those guys load the crap out of then and the truck hauls it all. Even seen a couple survie a blast but yeah I know we aren't buying them because of that. *The thing that has inpressed me the most on this truck is the A frame on the front*. Every truck they have recived has one. And I have taken a gander at the ANA trucks and looks like we are getting a very good truck A/C, Air seats, raido. And they tell me they have had then up to 110kmh. 401 to Petawawa here I come.
> 
> Rob



Some how I doubt we would be getting the A-Frame as a pic of the MND from the news conference shows the trucks with a brush guard on the front. Something like we had on the old Ford and GMC Dump trucks but it does appear that they will have winchs though.


----------



## Robbie

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Some how I doubt we would be getting the A-Frame as a pic of the MND from the news conference shows the trucks with a brush guard on the front. Something like we had on the old Ford and GMC Dump trucks but it does appear that they will have winchs though.



POOP!!!  

I was trying to get a picture of the "Canadain Truck" or some stats on it but the internet connection over here is so SLOW.  Well thanks for cruching that eye candy for me.. 

Rob


----------



## Spencer100

Where to start....The CAW will say and do anything....will talk out of each side of their mouth in the same sentence.  I have alot of dealing with them....  :crybaby:

Also I think the best outcome here is that International is able to keep the Chatham plant open and keep investing the Windsor R&D center as IRB credits.  If they close the Chatham plant it will never reopen.  But if they keep it on life support it can ramp up then the economy and the Class 8 market improves.  Also Chatham can not build this product.....they could if you want a .5 billion program....

St Thomas (Sterling)  builds a truck close in size but they are closing in a month or two.  This order would keep that plant open extra week.


----------



## HDE

So...

   The CAW proposes we set up, or modify, an assembly line in Canada to turn out 1300 trucks?   I'd love to see the premium Navistar would tack on to the price of those to cover the additional overhead.


----------



## newfin

I was trying to find photos for it as well and couldn't.  So then I thought that I would just try to find the video for it.  Usually some news organization has a camera crew at these announcements but I couldn't find a thing.  If anyone has a link to the MND making this announcement on video, please post it.


----------



## geo

guess the MsM didn't find this item interesting enough to have a film crew present.

Criticizing the Gov't is much more palatable activity.... isn't it ?


----------



## MPSHIELD

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Some how I doubt we would be getting the A-Frame as a pic of the MND from the news conference shows the trucks with a brush guard on the front. Something like we had on the old Ford and GMC Dump trucks but it does appear that they will have winch's though.



This bring up a point that I would like to make. The MSVS MILCOTS seems as though it will be a good addition to meet our needs in Canada. What bugs me though, is that it probably won't have this A frame that is handy to have or a even a winch. 1 in 20 trucks might have a winch. There just never seems to be enough. 

I remember when we LUVW MILCOTS were being talked about and there were photos with radio installations and winches being sent around on the MILCOTS. The ones we received didn't have radios and i haven't seen any LUVW MILCOTS with winches. 

If the trucks are designed to have them, put them on. Even if it was every second one. 

Just a thought.


----------



## geo

If this vehicle is intended to replace the MLVW, then it should have a winch.  Not all of em - but a good number of them.

And WRT this A frame you are refering to... do you mean the Brush guard that protects the grill ?  Cause an "A" frame is usually a towing tool.... as in this


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geo I think he means the towing A-Frame as seen in the US Models.

I could be wrong but the only ones authorized to use the A-Frames are the EME folks.

As seen in Afghanistan


----------



## geo

In Canada, the A frames would be of limited use... and would be subject to some abuse - given that you are supposed to dissengage the axels when towing....  don't think the EME types would be prepared to surrender responsibility over here.

These trucks aren't supposed to be for use in theatre - so the point about the A frames is somewhat moot... unless someone changes his mind & we get desparate for rolling stock.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Now comes the $10,000 question, do we have the right mounts on the stinger of the Wrecker to pick up these beast?

Dissengage the axels or the drive shaft geo?


----------



## geo

uhh... whups... sorry - need to dissengage the driveline / shaft


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Interesting looking at the pic of the truck I don't see any slave lines for the air system  :-\


----------



## George Wallace

geo said:
			
		

> In Canada, the A frames would be of limited use... and would be subject to some abuse - given that you are supposed to dissengage the axels when towing....  don't think the EME types would be prepared to surrender responsibility over here.
> 
> These trucks aren't supposed to be for use in theatre - so the point about the A frames is somewhat moot... unless someone changes his mind & we get desparate for rolling stock.



Give them to the Artillery and bring back the L5.    >


----------



## geo

L5 yes... I do remember the L5 packs with 5 RALC - ramps were hung on either side of the cargo box & the winch cable was run up and over, using an a frame - so as to winch the gun into ithe box... only saw a cable part ONCE - when the gun's trail got hung up on the floor and the winch operator wasn't paying attention... nice groove


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geo said:
			
		

> L5 yes... I do remember the L5 packs with 5 RALC - ramps were hung on either side of the cargo box & the winch cable was run up and over, using an a frame - so as to winch the gun into ithe box... only saw a cable part ONCE - when the gun's trail got hung up on the floor and the winch operator wasn't paying attention... nice groove



Why in gods name would you want to put a howtizer in the box of a truck ???


----------



## geo

Lol.... yeah - didn't make much sense to me - just figured that all the 5 RALC drivers had failed their test at towing guns.... so the only way to move em around was in the back of a truck.

BTW - even if 105s they were itsy bitsy things... that went to the Airborne Regiment a little later in their service life


----------



## George Wallace

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Why in gods name would you want to put a howtizer in the box of a truck ???



DECEPTION.  Aerial photography easily identified Arty Units on the move by their TOWED pieces.  With the L5 inside, under the tarp, it took a skilled and knowledgeable analyst some expertice to identify a line of Deuce and a Half's with A Frames on their fronts as being Artillery on the move.


AND

The fact that the L5 Wheel bearings didn't allow for long road moves.  They burnt out easily.


----------



## MPSHIELD

geo said:
			
		

> If this vehicle is intended to replace the MLVW, then it should have a winch.  Not all of em - but a good number of them.
> 
> And WRT this A frame you are referring to... do you mean the Brush guard that protects the grill ?  Cause an "A" frame is usually a towing tool.... as in this



Geo-My apologize for not being clear, what i meant regarding the A frames is that i will be surprised if any have them due to DND usually cutting costs. It would be limited quantity on each 5th - 10th truck for qualified pers to use them only. Hope this clarifies the issue.

With your comments above, I would not be surprised if DND cuts the bush guard out alltogether. We will have to wait and see.


----------



## dapaterson

TAC MP said:
			
		

> Geo-My apologize for not being clear, what i meant regarding the A frames is that i will be surprised if any have them due to DND usually cutting costs. It would be limited quantity on each 5th - 10th truck for qualified pers to use them only. Hope this clarifies the issue.
> 
> With your comments above, I would not be surprised if DND cuts the bush guard out alltogether. We will have to wait and see.



Bush guard is part of the mandatory requirements.  A-frame and winch were listed as "TBC" in the version of the SOR I saw; no idea how it evolved.


----------



## danchapps

From what I recall on my ML course (completed this week BTW), the instructor, who is a Veh Tech stated that the A-Frames were for recovery only now, and it would be the Veh Techs using them to yank you out of a sticky situation. However, with me not being a mechanic, I wouldn't know what else they use them for. Could be that each unit would get "X" amount of them for this purpose.


----------



## geo

Chapeski... So far, In Canada, "A" frames have pert much always been the domain of the Veh Techs & possibly the Transport Section...  Given that we have never really had any experience with them - not getting em (remember - domestic ops vehicle) really shouldn't make any difference.

The driver's tool of choice would be tow chains and tow cables.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Found some pics in the Maple Leaf of the Navistar Truck.






Looks like the Flat Rack variant.







Cab interior.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Also found what the draft documents for the SMP Fleet.

Draft SMP Technical Specifications 
Notice to Potential Bidders

The MSVS SMP project includes the acquisition of the SMP vehicle, comprising cargo, cargo with crane and load handling system variants, an armour protection system, and winch, as well as trailers. The draft technical specifications listed in the table below are published on this site with the intention to solicit industry feedback.

Industry is requested to provide comments using any standard MS Office Suite format referring to the documents listed below. To facilitate the process of making comments, potential bidders should download the draft documents that are available in Microsoft WORD format and include their comments in the applicable column. Comments and questions are to be sent to the following email address: NCR.MSVS@pwgsc.gc.ca

Although comments may be provided to Canada as commercial-in-confidence, Canada reserves the right to use the information submitted to assist in refining the documents for the MSVS SMP project.

Questions sent to the email address above may be answered by Canada should it be deemed appropriate to do so. In such a case, answers will not be sent directly to the originator. Instead, questions and answers will be posted on this website. The identity of the organization seeking clarifications will not be published. Enquiries should be submitted in a form that can be distributed to all potential bidders through this website.

This website will be regularly updated, hence it is recommended that potential bidders visit the website on a regular basis. Industry will be notified through MERX of any major development in regards to the MSVS SMP project. It is recommended to monitor MERX on a regular basis for notices containing announcements and information concerning the MSVS SMP project. Potential bidders should also refer to the Request for Proposal section of this website for very important information concerning security requirements.

LOCATED ON THAT SITE ARE NUMEROUS PDF/MS WORD/MS POWER POINT FILES.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

geo said:
			
		

> Chapeski... So far, In Canada, "A" frames have pert much always been the domain of the Veh Techs & possibly the Transport Section...  Given that we have never really had any experience with them - not getting em (remember - domestic ops vehicle) really shouldn't make any difference.
> 
> The driver's tool of choice would be tow chains and tow cables.



We used to use A frames for long distances towing, as cables and chains are not legal on the road, our reserve unit had 2 sets.

Could components of the Navistar trucks, such as cargo beds be quickly produced in Canada? They are simple and the company could contract that portion and fitting to a Canadian company, merely with the required specs and CAD drawings. It wouldn't interefere with delivery greatly and would ease some of the pain. Also some longer term contracts to provide certain spare parts sourced from Canadian companies would spread the wealth around.


----------



## geo

EME types always felt the A frames were their domain while the cables and chains were for us combat arms types to use when we got our trucks stuck... they didn't want user units to tow on an A frame - for fear of our breaking something... (or muscling in on their work)


----------



## geo

Colin - WRT the fabrication of cargo beds, etc.... the specific truck is already in production and parts are all lined up... the only thing we would accomplish with subcontracting something that is already on hand is:
- additional cost
- additional time
- additional headaches


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Geo
I agree, however politics sometimes rears it's ugly head and needs a bone thrown to it. I figured something fairly simple and straightforward as a cargo bed might be a candidate for the bone, not to mention the rest of the truck could be completed and shipped in the bed productions was somewhat delayed.


----------



## geo

It wasn't all that long ago that the CF bought a bunch of 8 ton trucks for the Engineer units.
The buckets were installed afterwards - problem was, the pivot point was wrong.... in the end, I think their delivery to the units was delayed by over 1 year.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geo said:
			
		

> It wasn't all that long ago that the CF bought a bunch of 8 ton trucks for the Engineer units.
> The buckets were installed afterwards - problem was, the pivot point was wrong.... in the end, I think their delivery to the units was delayed by over 1 year.



Ah yes the Green Sterling Militia Dump Trucks  ;D


----------



## geo

Them's the ones sapper.
Not a bad truck.... just not a great truck.
Wonder what modification # they are up to by now ?


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Tell you the truth geo, I don't really want to know....


Now if we could get the beefier ones that SPV use in Gagetown I would be happy.

They have a number of good mods on them. Like a longer ladder to access the box and a duel locking mechanism on the tail gate.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Army News has a two part report on the New MILCOT MLVW replacement.

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1_1.asp?id=3369 Part 1
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1_1.asp?id=3370 Part 2


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Some info on the trucks:

3 seater
2 up front 1 in back
full sized seats too
am/fm/cd
catwalk in the middle of the traps
HLVW tyres
10000lbs payload (5 tons)
dealer maintained for the life of the vehicle
6 variants
cargo w/troop lift
cargo w/crane
QM truck
cargo w/flat deck
arty tractor (all pers will travel in cab, so cab extended 6 ft)
Engr Sect Veh
no armoured cabs


----------



## geo

Engr section vehicle!
Are they going to do a crewcab for the SEV? That would be real nice 
HIAB or Auger on the SEV?


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Auger

EDITED TO ADD

Don't think the section will be in the cab geo.

The arty one is made for 6 troops only.


----------



## geo

Darn... that woulda been nice!


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geo said:
			
		

> Darn... that woulda been nice!



Six of one, half a dozen of another


----------



## Craig B

I have a powerpoint that shows the layout of the new Milcots. It looks to me like the CEV will have the same extended cab as the Artillery Gun Tractor.

That means 4 guys in the back, plus 3 up front for 7 total.


----------



## TSM A

Damned thing is HUGE !! MLVW was 279 inches overall length. this thing is 425 Inches long. try getting that into an armoury!! BTW the arty config can hold 6 in the back for total of 9. will need an intercom to call "Halt action rear!" ;D


----------



## chrisf

Uh-oh... 

Does it have a dual 12-24 electrical system? Because that's the impression I got from the video... a system which has been nothing but a hassle with the LUVW...

Have they added anything along the lines of a roll cage for the troop carry version?


----------



## steph_3007

Does anybody have any pics of the new gun tractor. Tried finding some but no luck (must be looking with my eyes closed)


----------



## TSM A

if you have acces to the DIN do a search for OPTIMIZED_MSVS1
This is a Powerpoint of the new vehicle with instructions on how they'll be issued out.


----------



## geo

try this on for size...


----------



## steph_3007

Thanks a lot Geo.

I'm just wondering how good it will work when we get out in the field  ???


----------



## geo

Well.... it's a milcot - but I have seen some really good commercial rigs that take a licking and keep on ticking on construction & logging sites.  But I do not think we can expect them to survive for as long as the Government might think of making em last.....like another 30 years.

The GMC 2 1/2s lasted some 30 years (52-82)
The MLVWs have lasted some 27 years (82-09)

Without anything to back it up (other than Exp in equipment acquisition for Domtar logging) I think they should do fine for +/- 12 yrs....


----------



## steph_3007

Can't wait for my #1 to yell a cease fire (or a cease firing as in the books)
(sorry but learned my gun drill in french, so I know i might not have the exact terms but you get the idea), unlike the engineers,
I will not be the last one out  ;D
so we'll just have to wait and see


----------



## Nfld Sapper

geez that extended cab looks stupid. Thought they would at least get something that looks like the ones seen on fire trucks.


----------



## FEEOP042

This is the Engr Variant


----------



## George Wallace

A couple more photos:


----------



## George Wallace

This is another variant:


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Hi George,

Is the second set of photos a variant that we're actually procuring?


Thanks in advance, Matthew.


----------



## dapaterson

No, we are not buying the second, smaller model.  The photos are from CANSEC; I suspect NAVISTAR would be happy to offer them to us if we wanted them, though...


----------



## Colin Parkinson

FEEOP042 said:
			
		

> This is the Engr Variant




DAS PIG! Man that thing will have the turning radius of the QE2


----------



## dapaterson

The MSVS MilCOTS is closer in size to the HLVW than the MLVW.  I've heard rumblings that the conversion training will be different packages depending on whether the driver previously had MLVW or HLVW quals.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Me thinks that truck is way too big.........


----------



## George Wallace

Not for CE.  The post hole auger seems utterly useless for any military function.  Paint it yellow, with a Black hood, and it will sleep 20 as they do some fencing in Area 51.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Not for CE.  The post hole auger seems utterly useless for any military function.  Paint it yellow, with a Black hood, and it will sleep 20 as they do some fencing in Area 51.



Geez there goes my retirement project  ;D


----------



## dapaterson

Remember: Only one company offered to sell DND vehicles to meet the MSVS MilCOTS RFP.  So your options become:

(a) Take it; or

(b) Leave it.


----------



## Robbie

That is one sweet looking piece of kit. (hope to get on train the trainer this month in Pet)I have been following the MLVW replacement proj from the beginning and was getting a little worried that nothing was going to come through for us. It's going to be good for training and domestic ops. Like call outs for floods, ices and what ever else is thrown at Canada.

Rob


----------



## Kat Stevens

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Not for CE.  The post hole auger seems utterly useless for any military function.  Paint it yellow, with a Black hood, and it will sleep 20 as they do some fencing in Area 51.



Well, back in the day before the only thing we trained for was ripping around in LAVs shooting shit up, us engineers had to be able to do shit like blow up roads and stuff.  I'll take that auger over backhoe, Mexican, long handled, air cooled, any time for route denial, steel post obstacles, etc.  You know, that OTHER stone age engineering everyone has forgotten about.


----------



## George Wallace

Those kits were pretty handy.  Getting the compressor up and down a ramp on a 113 was fun.  Look at the height of the back of this thing.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Wheeled field troops have been hauling heavy crap such as camouflet tubes, points, thumpers, and driving caps out of the back of wheeled SEVs for 25ish years, these don't look all that much higher.


----------



## danchapps

Robbie said:
			
		

> That is one sweet looking piece of kit. (hope to get on train the trainer this month in Pet)I have been following the MLVW replacement proj from the beginning and was getting a little worried that nothing was going to come through for us. It's going to be good for training and domestic ops. Like call outs for floods, ices and what ever else is thrown at Canada.
> 
> Rob



Annual snow fall in Toronto maybe? Oh wait, we got rid of Lastman didn't we? Forgot about that, oops! (Here's some salt for the wound Toronto, lol)


----------



## dapaterson

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Wheeled field troops have been hauling heavy crap such as camouflet tubes, points, thumpers, and driving caps out of the back of wheeled SEVs for 25ish years, these don't look all that much higher.



They are significantly higher.  Don't have the specs here, but the jump down is now a definite no-no.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Was talking to one of the design team members and he stated that they wanted to put a "half" box on the SEV (as the section rides up front) but higher ups decided that we needed the full length box..........


----------



## dapaterson

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Was talking to one of the design team members and he stated that they wanted to put a "half" box on the SEV (as the section rides up front) but higher ups decided that we needed the full length box..........



I think less a need for the full-length box than easier life-cycle management if eveyone gets the same box - with internal kitting differences.  Much easier to manage the fleet that may.


----------



## McG

It's a bit bigger than the old MLVW.


----------



## newfin

So has the deliveries of the MilCOTs already started or are these prototypes that we are seeing.


----------



## Jammer

We are scheduled to receive ours here at CFSCE next month, but before before we can use them, most of us on the Instr staff here will have to go on an airbrake course.
Just in time as well, our MLVWs are pretty much done.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

MCG said:
			
		

> It's a bit bigger than the old MLVW.



You are the master of the understatment. I can see a lot of reserve unt not being able to get these into the armouries or even have the parking space for them.


----------



## dapaterson

If units identify infrastrucutre work required specifically because of the introduction of new trucks (and not lifecycle repairs and maintenance) the local support base should contact the Project Office; the project is mandated to cover costs related to the introduction.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

We used to say: "If they put a new roof on your building your doomed to be shut down"

Easier said than done. many of the armouries are old, some are heritage, others are squeezed into a already dense urban space and may have issues with neighbours and local bylaws.


----------



## Craig B

Colin P said:
			
		

> You are the master of the understatment. I can see a lot of reserve unt not being able to get these into the armouries or even have the parking space for them.



Our backdoor has already been measured by CE ..... so I guess the new door will be installed in 2014 or thereabouts  ;D


----------



## KJK

I saw one of the new trucks today sitting on a lowbed in Edmonton. Nice looking unit but I was surprised to see only 1 fuel tank and a very small tank at that. 60-70 US gals. Considering how thirsty these new low emissions diesel engines are you will not be driving very far on that. I am guessing it has a Maxx Force engine since it was painted blue rather than red or yellow. Hopefully they give good service.

KJK


----------



## Nfld Sapper

KJK said:
			
		

> I saw one of the new trucks today sitting on a lowbed in Edmonton. Nice looking unit but I was surprised to see only 1 fuel tank and a very small tank at that. 60-70 US gals. Considering how thirsty these new low emissions diesel engines are you will not be driving very far on that. I am guessing it has a Maxx Force engine since it was painted blue rather than red or yellow. Hopefully they give good service.
> 
> KJK



60-70 US gallons is somewhere like 227.12472 to 264.97884  litres. IIRC the MLVW has a 200 litre fuel tank.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

I do have pics of the Engineer Variant on my DIN ACCOUNT, will post up later.


----------



## KJK

NFLD Sapper

I don't know what size the MLWV fuel tank is. I just thought it was strange that it would have such a small capacity. My personal experience says that more fuel is generally better especially if you have the framerail space for it and also considering the new engines thirst. There is lots of unused framerail space on the truck I was looking at. It was an extended cab version, only 2 doors, with a flat deck.

KJK


----------



## danchapps

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> IIRC the MLVW has a 200 litre fuel tank.



177L according to the plate on the dash.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

As promised some pics of the MSVS ENGR SEV


----------



## Nfld Sapper

And one more.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Glad they decided to put guides on the winch, the one on the ML was dangerous to use.


----------



## Belaj

I learned today from my Transport sergeant that the engineer SEVs are being delayed. The reason: they break in half because they’re too heavy.

You'd think the people in charge would have used the lessons learned from previous projects. But hey, the more things change...


----------



## aesop081

Belaj said:
			
		

> I learned today from my Transport sergeant that the engineer SEVs are being delayed. The reason: they break in half because they’re too heavy.
> 
> You'd think the people in charge would have used the lessons learned from previous projects. But hey, the more things change...



Lets see some facts or documented proof of this. I have been in long enough to have received more than my share of rumours posing as "facts".


----------



## Belaj

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Lets see some facts or documented proof of this. I have been in long enough to have received more than my share of rumours posing as "facts".



That piece of info was given during CO’s call by the Tpt Sgt, so I find it credible. But I see your point; it could be a case of the telephone game and the real reason for the delay could be different. We’ll have to wait and see. Hopefully it won’t take too long (all our MLs are gone).

On a somewhat different note, has anyone here driven the MSVS SEV? Specifically, how’s the turning radius? Knowing how abysmal the turning radius on the MLVW SEV is, I fear that the new (much longer) trucks will be quite accident prone due to drivers lacking experience in handling big trucks. I don’t know for other brigades, but our brigade requires only 500km (used to be 300km) on the wheel course. When I did my dump truck course, we drove 1500km and I still feel we didn’t get enough urban driving. Am I being too pessimistic?  :-\


----------



## Colin Parkinson

The ML was easy to turn, mind it was the first vehicle I drove with powersteering, the deuce was a realy bugger to turn.


----------



## McG

Belaj said:
			
		

> I learned today from my Transport sergeant that the engineer SEVs are being delayed. The reason: they break in half because they’re too heavy.


I heard from the MSVS PM that the priorety was the cargo & TCV variants.  Therefore, the design & acceptance milestones for all the SEVs were contracted for later and production of the vehicles was planned for the end of the run.  This is the source of delay in the specialist vehicles, and it is part of the plan.


----------



## Belaj

Colin P said:
			
		

> The ML was easy to turn, mind it was the first vehicle I drove with powersteering, the deuce was a realy bugger to turn.



The cargo ML, yeah (even when the power-steering doesn't work right). But the SEV is a different story. The first time I drove one, I missed half my turns, even when I used two lanes! :-[



			
				MCG said:
			
		

> I heard from the MSVS PM that the priorety was the cargo & TCV variants.  Therefore, the design & acceptance milestones for all the SEVs were contracted for later and production of the vehicles was planned for the end of the run.  This is the source of delay in the specialist vehicles, and it is part of the plan.



That makes sense actually (we're getting our cargo variants in advance of schedule).


----------



## JackD

Is there anything new to be said about these trucks since the last posting? Has anyone driven/used them? What about the other part of this -  the purchase for the reg force component - indeed, what's going on in the field/sea/skies of reequipping/modernizing the armed forces?


----------



## CBH99

There has been plenty of development in regards to this thread.  If nothing turns up in a search, then look at the DND website under "News" and "The Maple Leaf".  (The DND newspaper.)

From what I understand, this contract has been implemented quite efficiently and prudently.  Not sure if units are seeing them arrive yet, but they are on the way.  (And not a moment too soon!!)


----------



## Nfld Sapper

When I left Gagetown in early October they where still doing train the trainer....


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Some pics of the first 3 MSVS's in Newfoundland.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Some more....


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Crikey! that's a fair size truck! How well does the spare tire carrier work? I missed the carrier on the old deuce, simple and easy to use. On the bright side you be able to carry a fair bit of the bulky items that take up more space than weight. What will be the exchange ratio 1 for 1 I hope, but I fear it will be less than.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Spare tire change is now a 2 person job. The box is huge, you can fit an ML in it and only have the front bumper hanGing out the tailgate.

Turns are huge too. Minimum turn diameters are 76 ft outside and 58 ft inside. Lets just say there will be a bit of a learning curve for the drivers. She is 36ft2in long, 12ft7in heigh and, 8ft4in wide.

Both the Engineer SEV and Arty Gun Tractor are the same length as any other MSVS except they will have a shorter box (this has been confirmed from the NAVISTAR INITAL CADRE TRAINING).

Not sure what the exchange ratio is. I do know that my unit is getting 7 of them, and we are turning in 1 ML (as that is all we got). Out of those 7, 4 are going to be SEV's, 1 Caged truck and the rest TCV's (I think)

EDITED TO ADD

And ground clearance might be an issue.

Maximum Ground Clearance:

Rear Diff: 12 in
Front Diff: 14 in
Transfer case: 18.5 in


----------



## Sprinting Thistle

Two of the trucks caught fire last week in Petawawa and the fleet has been grounded for the time being.  Further the trucks are being used in Fort Irwin.  Not a vehicle to be used off the pavement.  Issues are being pushed up the chain of command.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Let me guess arcing in/near the soleniods on the drivers side? If so then this is a known issue identified way back in Oct.



			
				Sprinting Thistle said:
			
		

> Two of the trucks caught fire last week in Petawawa and the fleet has been grounded for the time being.  Further the trucks are being used in Fort Irwin.  Not a vehicle to be used off the pavement.  Issues are being pushed up the chain of command.


----------



## FEEOP042

The front will bottom out on the suspension when going over very small bumps and when turning. The Arty and Engr trucks should  have been the SMP version since these trucks are not for off road. We need trucks to go off road. Make sure your QM's order the air valve adapter for the front wheels. May be take some of the cargos and turn them in to dump trucks for the PRes will be better then the dinky trucks we have now that get stuck on light snow covered roads. The Engr sev are having issues with the cost for it and all the tooling.


----------



## Sprinting Thistle

For the TCV / Cargo variant in use on Ex, the suspension is too rigid and the engine underpowered.  The troops don't like riding in the back off pavement.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

FEEOP042 said:
			
		

> The front will bottom out on the suspension when going over very small bumps and when turning. The Arty and Engr trucks should  have been the SMP version since these trucks are not for off road. We need trucks to go off road. Make sure your QM's order the air valve adapter for the front wheels. May be take some of the cargos and turn them in to dump trucks for the PRes will be better then the dinky trucks we have now that get stuck on light snow covered roads. The Engr sev are having issues with the cost for it and all the tooling.



FEEOP042 the complete vehicle EIS has yet to made avail to the gaining units.... we where told to only to keep certain tools of the ML until the complete EIS kits are made avail through the system.....



			
				Sprinting Thistle said:
			
		

> For the TCV / Cargo variant in use on Ex, the suspension is too rigid and the engine underpowered.  The troops don't like riding in the back off pavement.



Any word on what part of the truck caught fire?


----------



## FEEOP042

I am in Ottawa and I have a complete section tools and supplies transfered to the MSVS project and I get info from the pers in the project. The generic ml eis is getting transfered from each units surrent ml fleet to the new MSVS's this is not the items I am not talking about the tooling as in the auger and the hyd lines and the cages and cabinets being made for the section tools.


----------



## Sprinting Thistle

Electrical, possibly battery related but no firm idea right now.  LFCA fleet still grounded.


----------



## FEEOP042

The cause so far that I know of is the solenoid and the crse staff followed the instructions to disconect it and it fried the solenoid any ways I don't think it will be solved just yet


----------



## Nfld Sapper

FEEOP042 said:
			
		

> I am in Ottawa and I have a complete section tools and supplies transfered to the MSVS project and I get info from the pers in the project. The generic ml eis is getting transfered from each units surrent ml fleet to the new MSVS's this is not the items I am not talking about the tooling as in the auger and the hyd lines and the cages and cabinets being made for the section tools.



Ack FEEOP042. My understanding is that the auger was going to be brand new not a recycle of ML parts same goes for the gages and cabinets......especially since they had to get measurements for the camouflet set, MK 1......


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Sprinting Thistle said:
			
		

> Electrical, possibly battery related but no firm idea right now.  LFCA fleet still grounded.





			
				FEEOP042 said:
			
		

> The cause so far that I know of is the solenoid and the crse staff followed the instructions to disconect it and it fried the solenoid any ways I don't think it will be solved just yet



Yeah we had a similar problem with that solenoid arcing (was a wet snowy/misty day) on one MSVS but no damage to the vehicle.... way too much exposed wireing and the likes.......


----------



## scas

its not the solenoid.. Its actually the batteries.. They run a split 24/12v system (CRAP). Alternator puts 24, SMP connections run 24, all other parts use 12v. Theres a stepper transformer next to the batteries, that can get really hot, and start to melt the batteries and cause all other kinds of problems.  The other big problem is that the master switch is not a true master like on other SMP, as the 12v system is still live.. You can play with everything in the cab, but not start the truck. The only thing that I think is cool, is the SMP light switch is digital, and not the old switch style...  BTW Ours in Edmonton aren't grounded.. They're still doing drivers courses on them right now.


----------



## TSM A

5 Fd Regt had one with them down in Yakima  during the Easter weekend. What a POS!! could only do 40 kph up hill, it has a 75 foot turning radius, driver said parts were falling off and everytime the tailgate was lowered it would slide out of alignment.
Why couldn't we just rebuild the mlvw's? now we're stuck with a monster truck that's not suitable for most urban areas. my unit won't evan be able to get them into our compound let alone the building. just ranting.


----------

