# Cougar



## Spr.Earl (22 Oct 2005)

Are any about,is so where?


----------



## armyvern (22 Oct 2005)

Spr.Earl said:
			
		

> Are any about,is so where?



Of which said type of cougar would you be inquiring? Cougars of the AFV Type or non-AFV Type?


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 Oct 2005)

armyvern said:
			
		

> Of which said type of cougar would you be inquiring? Cougars of the AFV Type or non-AFV Type?


The old boat type.  ;D


----------



## armyvern (22 Oct 2005)

Spr.Earl said:
			
		

> The old boat type.  ;D


I have no experience in this department then!!  ;D


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 Oct 2005)

How about the old boot type? ;D


----------



## armyvern (22 Oct 2005)

Spr.Earl said:
			
		

> How about the old boot type? ;D


Ahh, now some of these I know of... although I have heard they are being put on the endangered species list soon....

I have hunted down a species of "couger boat" it can be found here... (nothing a female would be interested in!!...

http://www.alaskakings.com/PontoonRafting.htm


----------



## a_majoor (22 Oct 2005)

Cougars can often be found in Sports Bars near bases, you need to be alert at all times to prevent them from circling upwind of you and pouncing.


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 Oct 2005)

In all seriousness is the Couger still in the system and I don't mean old boot's looking for Sprog's.


----------



## a_majoor (22 Oct 2005)

OK, but just for you...

The AVGP Cougar was withdrawn from the CF and made it's final appearance in Stalwart Guardian 04 for LFCA units. It was always the property of the Armoured Corps, being used as a "tank trainer" to teach crews and units the basic principles of armoured warfare, and operationally as an armoured car doing patrols, escort and rear area security (just like you would expect from an armoured car).

CASR did float a proposal for the hulls to be re rolled into an anti aircraft platfrom, with the large turret ring being able to support various off the shelf light AA and AAA turrets (and having the internal volume at the back to hold extra ammunition). While an interesting suggestion, the age and rather decrepit shape of the remaining hulls (first brought on line in, I think, 1977) made this a non starter. Remaining hulls, as well as the AVGP Grizzly APC are being rebuilt into various support vehicles.

In the mean time, stay alert in those sports bars!


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 Oct 2005)

Thanks for you reply a_majoor .


----------



## armyvern (22 Oct 2005)

Thanks a_majoor,

I really wasn't lying when I said I was not experienced in the AFV type of cougar. I knew they were gone but that was it... No details on this that I could provide!!


----------



## armyvern (23 Oct 2005)

2332Piper said:
			
		

> <Posting loaded>



Again??  ;D


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (23 Oct 2005)

> Remaining hulls, as well as the AVGP Grizzly APC are being rebuilt into various support vehicles.



This is no longer correct.  The Cougar can currently be found lurking around 7 CFSD and 25 CFSD in Montreal, having been completely withdrawn from service.  I believe that they are for sale via Crown assets (to foreign governments), but efforts to sell these clapped out pieces of junk will likely come to naught.  FWIW, the Cougar suffered from a huge variety of problems at the end of its service life, including mantlet cracks, cracks to the turret ring, missing turret gear teeth and fume extraction issues.

The Cougar was never slated to form part of the AVGP conversion programme, but was to be retained until a suitable alternative was procured.  That plan didn't survive contact (like so many recently) and all vehicles were withdrawn by 2004.  The CLS subsequently cancelled the entire AVGP conversion programme and we have now "donated" the bulk of the servicable Grizzly fleet to the African Union for duty in the Sudan.  As far as I am aware, there are no plans to retain any AVGP variants in service (some Huskies were retained for a limited period pending availability of more Bison MRTs).

Cheers,

Teddy


----------



## Spr.Earl (23 Oct 2005)

So no longer on strength then?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (23 Oct 2005)

Still owned by DND, but not on strength of any CF units otherwise.


----------



## Gobsmacked (23 Oct 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> The CLS subsequently cancelled the entire AVGP conversion programme and we have now "donated" the bulk of the servicable Grizzly fleet to the African Union for duty in the Sudan.  As far as I am aware, there are no plans to retain any AVGP variants in service (some Huskies were retained for a limited period pending availability of more Bison MRTs).
> 
> Cheers,
> Teddy



So, does that mean the limited AVGP Re-Role (just 122 AVGP excl 19 Husky - retained as MRVs), as per 29 Nov 2004 _'final WLAV LE Entitlement draft'_ (per ATI) from Maj B w\DLR (WLAV-lead) noted to Maj W DLSP5-6 (WLAV-lead), is now scrapped??

_"1.  *AVGP Re-Role*:
Pers - 0;   Light Gun Tractors - 57;   CP - 0;   UAN - 16;   2nd Line MRT - 0;   Wpn/FCS MRT - 25;
Is MRT - 14;   RRB - 10;      Total: 122.
_
[Modified 23 Oct to remove AVGP Re-Role Options - due to subsequent (to this message trail) CLS direction on Arty Restructuring.]

_*Bison Re-Role*:
NBCD Recce - 4;   Amb - 32;_   (81mm 'Wolf')_ Mortar - 24;   CP - 69;   MRT - 24;   MRV - 25;
EW - 14;         Total: 192.

Bison Re-Role Options:
Since your proposal is below the total qty of in-service Bison hulls [199], I will ask DAVPM3 to cost 7 more Bison CPs for a total of 76 CPs.
Since this full option will most likely not be affordable, I will let you know how many more CPs above 69 the project can afford, if any.
If the project cannot afford a total of 76 Bison CPs, the project can include the unaffordable qty as a contract option which could be exercised later, if we are able to find some financial slack during our contract negotiation with GDLS and DEW.

2. Assuming there is no more changes on other veh types and qty and since the project will most likely not be able to afford the full options of 76 CPs and 63 LGTs, DLSP will need to set a priority between more CPs or more LGTs.

3.   *Note that the proposed dist of Wpn/FCS MRTs to ea LFA [4] do not match the proposed dist of Bison MRT and Bison MRV to ea LFA [3].  Also, the proposal does not allocate a Log Stock for the AVGP Wpn/FCS MRT.*  If the Area allocation of Wpn/FCS MRT is reduced to 3 ea [N/C to LFAA], you could shift 2 veh to create a 10% Log stock for a revised total of 24 instead of 25.

4. Under the latest WFM concept, there will be no more unit equipment entitlement of armoured vehs.  LFAs [FCC] will hold the eqpt and will be resp to alloc eqpt on temp loan to units to sp peak ops and trg activities."_

Maj W DLSP5-6 (WLAV-lead) advised LCol S DLSP3 on 24 Jan 2005 that,
_"There is a push from the DLR folks to put the ASCC and Bty/Tp CPs under armour [Bison], however the requirement to do so should have DLSP3 input as part of a GBAD review and overall WLAV LE review.
Around early Dec 04 . . . issue ref CPs required [for ASCC/Bty/Tp] to support MMEV.  It appeared that there would not be adequate qtys of CPs to meet this late notice GBAD requirement.  DLR had proposed a minimum of 9 Bison CPs to support GBAD.  This is a significant number given that only a max of 76 Bison CPs could be produced, based on available chassis, *but possibly less depending on Proj funding.*  *This could be reduced further if the 10 RRB originally planned for AVGP are transferred to Bison.*"_


----------



## geo (23 Oct 2005)

FWIW, there's a whole yard full of em at 25CFSD/202 Wkshop
some have been cleaned up, fresh coat of paint, etc which leads me to believe they're runners BUT there's a load more of em that sport the old SFOR / KFOR stencils.

What are they going to do with em?.... your guess is as good as mine but, when you get down to it; is it worth spending any more money on em?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (23 Oct 2005)

I'll post a reference to the CLS' letter tomorrow, if I can find it.  Stale-dated, ATI-requested e-mails aren't gospel.  I find it somewhat annoying that Gobsmacked took it upon himself to post internal DND e-mail - no matter what the subject and no matter how he got hold of it.  It may not be illegal, but it is rude in my books.

Geo:  the "fresh" ones may have been destined for Africa - depends when you saw them.


----------



## Gunner (23 Oct 2005)

I have to agree with Teddy. Those email are well before the CLS direction on Arty Restructuring came out and certainly did not take into consideration purchases of light towed 155, etc.  Poor form indeed.


----------



## geo (23 Oct 2005)

Teddy....
Umm.... like last friday
There were a lot more of em a couple of months ago... but we all know where those went.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (24 Oct 2005)

Geo:  Hmmm... They could be leftovers from the last rebuild/repaint program...not sure.

What I am sure of is that the AVGP rebuild program has been cancelled in its entirety, despite the e-mail that Gobsmacked as so inappropriately posted.  NDHQ CLS 10000-1 (DLSP 3-2) 18 Mar 05 refers.


----------



## Gobsmacked (25 Oct 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> Stale-dated, ATI-requested e-mails aren't gospel.  I find it somewhat annoying that Gobsmacked took it upon himself to post internal DND e-mail - no matter what the subject and no matter how he got hold of it.  It may not be illegal, but it is rude in my books.



_"Stale-dated, ATI-requested e-mails aren't gospel."_
AHH ERR (Drool dripping from corners of mouth) 
DOH  (Drool forming pool on floor) - y'all really fur shur?  ushup:
DUH! (hold-it, moment of clarity coming ... )  DOH (almost lost it there ... ok its coming back)  
Jeesh!  No kidding, never said they were. Purely for informative purposes.
Plus, you may have noticed    that is was put in the form of a querry, the most recent info would be more than welcome.  ;D

Unlike Army PA, which - unlike the sister services - likes to blow off serious inquerries.   :tsktsk:
_"For media, we've established the Media Liaison Office and they can be contacted at 613-996-2353/2354.  
They route requests for information to the appropriate agency for a response.
Requests from other people or agencies are routed to General Inquiries.
They can be contacted at the following link:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/contact_e.asp#inquiry
Please direct your querry to one of these to agencies as appropriate."_   :dontpanic:

At least I'm trying to get the most recently available info out there 
(through that laboured ATI process that often releases info up-to 5 Months after the 'Statutory Release By' date), 
unlike the Army which would rather it's continual change of direction were kept quiet.
ie. Scrapping Leo 1C2s just finished a C$140M Upgrade, trying to sell-off ADATS in late-90s - now purportedly the 'centerpiece' of Army Transformation as the _"all-singing all-dancing MMEV-ADATS"_ (as so eloquently put forth by Mark C), Prematurely retiring Just-Upgraded (at a cost of nearly C$300M) M-113s, and the list goes on.  Point made.  :brickwall:

As to the niceties of _"post internal DND e-mail"_.
Its a good thing I didn't follow up Maj 'W' with Capt's 'T' & 'F'.
or we'd have a load of Maj 'B' and LCol 'S' .   
With the average Joe, and likely many military types also, not having a clue who these individuals are.
(Especially as its not stated if these are a First or Last Initial - Unless you possibly happen to be one of these individuals and have recognized your own paper trail?)   

Its no wonder the public gets the wrong impression of military types when they can be so touchy about the silliest little things.  :cheers:


----------



## TN2IC (14 Nov 2005)

I heard about 200 were sold to Sudan... I packed those AFV for shipment.. getting packing grease ready and stuff. Fun fun... so there when your old boats... Sorry to blust anyones bubble.


----------



## geo (14 Nov 2005)

AVGPs to Sudan were provided on loan to the UN Mission .... not sold to Sudan.
believe that only a small number have been allowed to travel thru to Sudan. Balance of bvehicles are stuck on the coast with transit country preventing em from being delivered.
The balance of AVGPs are still sitting in the lot. Right next to the fleet of Iltis... which aren't street legal in most provinces.


----------



## TN2IC (14 Nov 2005)

Ah right on... now that makes sence. Thanks for the extra info


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

An old news article to verify the LOAN: 





> Canada Sends Armoured Vehicles
> 
> for African Union Mission in Sudan
> 
> ...


----------



## REDinstaller (15 Nov 2005)

As of the 30 Oct 05, there are about 15 COUGAR DFSV's sitting in Wainwright,AB. These Veh are assigned to CMTC. They appear to be re-furbed; ie. new paint and all tarped up and ready to be issued. you definitely don't take the time to tarp scrap metal.


----------



## geo (15 Nov 2005)

not saying they are scrap metal.
they were prolly refurbished last spring & sent out to CMTC for use.... before the decision to stop drop...
If they are still sitting in CMTC after a number of BGs have gone thru .... what are they waiting for would be my question?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (15 Nov 2005)

REDinstaller said:
			
		

> As of the 30 Oct 05, there are about 15 COUGAR DFSV's sitting in Wainwright,AB. These Veh are assigned to CMTC. They appear to be re-furbed; ie. new paint and all tarped up and ready to be issued. you definitely don't take the time to tarp scrap metal.



They're probably the "leftovers" from the MTSC fleet.  They were rebuilt a short time before the vehicle was withdrawn and appear newer than the junk sitting at 7 CFSD here in Edmonton.  CMTC has no use for Cougars.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

On another note, they may have been sent there by DDSAL and DHH for dispersal to various Museums and Armouries as Monuments.


----------

