# More MRAP's



## tomahawk6 (6 Jun 2007)

The Army is finally moving toward an evolution in the way military vehicles are designed. Belatedly to be sure but late is better than never. V designed hulls were pioneered by South Africa decades ago. It would have been great if the Army had taken the lesson to heart when we began buying the next generation of trucks even the humvee should have been built with a V hull design instead everything we have bought is the same flat bottom design we have always had. Iraq has been a wake up call. I am only sorry that so many lives were lost needlessly but now we are on the road to the next generation of up armored vehicles/trucks.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2007/06/more-mraps-1200-maxxpro-mpvs-from-navistar/index.php


----------



## a_majoor (6 Jun 2007)

Hindsight is always 20/20. There are plenty of might have beens out there that we are probably glad we didn't buy now (MMEV and MGS come to mind) but which seemed to be good ideas at the time.

As well, the HMMVW was _never_ designed to be a fighting vehicle, but like many pieces of military kit over the ages was forced into a new role due to changing circumstances never considered back in the Cold War when the design parameters were set. The LAV series is certainly getting a workout the MOWAG people probably never envisioned back in the 1990's.

At some time in the future we will have a fleet of MRAP's, APV's and other "protected" vehicles and the troops will be wishing for Achzarits or Chenworth "dune buggies" instead.

Certainly providing protection from all aspects is important, but current APV's sacrifice mobility and fighting power with current designs. What we really need is a LAV V (There already is a LAV IV) which incorporates APV type protection with the mobility and firepower of the LAV III.


----------



## McG (6 Jun 2007)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> There already is a LAV IV


Don't confuse Piranha IV with LAV IV.  Both vehicles are of the same famliy, but because they are redesigns based on continental supply systems, the generations do not follow symetirc evolutions.  If you look at Piranha III close enough you will see many Gen II characteristics that do not exist on Piranha IV or our LAV III.

Having recently been through GDLS, I can assure you that they do not have a product they are calling LAV IV.  By fall they will have something called a LAV IIIH.  From my perspective, this new vehicle is a gen IV, but it is niether built yet nor is it being called Gen IV by its makers.


----------



## a_majoor (7 Jun 2007)

I was numbering using my Mickey Mouse gloves again.  ;D

Regardless of the design being called a LAV 3.5, 4, 3.1415 or whatever, the next generation of fighting machine needs to combine the "all aspect" protection of the APV type vehicle with the fighting abilities of the LAV type vehicle. I certainly hope the GDLS LAV IIIH fits that bill.


----------



## McG (8 Jun 2007)

I've already posted in the LAV III thread that I'm not convinced that the LAV IIIH is the right platform for FFCV (but certaily it would work as an interim solution).  It does close the gap between what we have now and an MPV.  I will not comment on what I've seen being done for IIIH's survivability.  However, I will say that somebody should drag one of the first new vehicles out to a range & blow it up.  That is when we will know how much the gap has been closed & if Canada should consider the full upgrade to IIIH.


----------



## a_majoor (8 Jun 2007)

Interesting stuff. The choice isn't clear, since we need LAV's now to make up for attrition, could use upgrades right away based on what we are learning (a "LAV 3.5"), but lessons learned, advances in automotive, material and Information technology and evolving doctrine will demand a new vehicle fairly soon.

There once was a figure mooted that the CF needed 1400 or so LAV III class vehicles, but due to cost only purchased over 400. If these figures are still correct, then perhaps we should suck back, not replace the LAVs (and only content ourselves with minor updates) in order to have the resources to get the 1400 FFCV's right up front. Hard choices indeed.....


----------

