ATV RECCE TRIALS

[ackland]

I'm currently stuck with this trial but was wondering what others thoughts are. Do you all fret the possibilty of conducting "mud recce" from and ATV?

 

[Franko]

Already been trialed.

Regards

 

[ackland]

Well not in the reserves The ONTR's are currently entering the third year of a trail. We are now going to try and conduct armoured recce tasks mounted on them.

 

[George Wallace]

OK!.......I'll wade into the pool.

They will do fine as a short term fix for short periods and localized operations.  

I don't see them as being of much use in actual HARD Armd Recce tasks.   I don't see them having sufficient armoured protection, speed, range, etc. of a "Recce Vehicle" to do the job properly.   As a cost effective Training Aid, to take out and do a short time/distance Trace and return to a classroom and discuse movement and tactics, maybe.

I would say that a Sqn outfitted with Dirt Bikes would be more effective and more flexible, but doubt that DND would want us to train so many BAD ARSE BIKERS.

GW

 

[Armymedic]

Maybe not in the Armour recce where the Coyote is used. Infantry recce may make good use of them.

 

[Yard Ape]

I am convinced we need an armoured LUVW for what has become known as "mud recce." 

Recce need some survivability should it become compromised.  Something along the lines of the VBL or Fennick would provide protection from small arms, MG, and fragmentation.  This is not much protection, but it may make the difference in a chance encounter with enemy infantry.

Fire power is also required (but not much).  Being able to suppress an enemy with MG fire may allow a recce vehicle to break contact.  In an ATV, there is only a driver who cannot shoot & move at the same time (this means he cannot suppress the enemy and break contact).  In a ALUVW or LUVW the driver can manoeuvre the vehicle out of contact while the gunner suppresses the threat with GPMG fire.

One or two fire & forget AT missiles in a patrol would be good in environments where armour is a big threat.  This number is not enough to engage in offensive acts, but may be enough to allow a recce driver to break contact after the gunner has fired.

An ATV is not amphibious, an ALUVW could be (depending on what we would buy).

 

[George Wallace]

Yardape

Some excellent points there.

One can not do Recce inside a cab.  No windshield.  No A/C.  No roof.  No turret on the rear half of the vehicle.  You have to be able to use your eyes and your ears and you cannot do that inside a vehicle like the armoured G-Wagen.  That is why there is a C&R version.

GW

 

[Lance Wiebe]

I still think that the reserves should get the Weasel.

Probably the best mud recce vehicle made today.

 

[Spr.Earl]

I am convinced we need an armoured LUVW for what has become known as "mud recce."  

Recce need some survivability should it become compromised.   Something along the lines of the VBL or Fennick would provide protection from small arms, MG, and fragmentation.   This is not much protection, but it may make the difference in a chance encounter with enemy infantry.

Fire power is also required (but not much).   Being able to suppress an enemy with MG fire may allow a recce vehicle to break contact.   In an ATV, there is only a driver who cannot shoot & move at the same time (this means he cannot suppress the enemy and break contact).   In a ALUVW or LUVW the driver can manoeuvre the vehicle out of contact while the gunner suppresses the threat with GPMG fire.

One or two fire & forget AT missiles in a patrol would be good in environments where armour is a big threat.   This number is not enough to engage in offensive acts, but may be enough to allow a recce driver to break contact after the gunner has fired.

An ATV is not amphibious, an ALUVW could be (depending on what we would buy).

Hmm even though I'm not a Zipper Head is not a Recce supposed to be
" get in close,observe and leave with out a trace of being there?"

We all know that Recce is the most dangerous job of all our trades wheather it be Armoured,Engineer or Infantry.Right?

So what is wrong with a plane old   methods but up date   say the old   Ferret for Armour Recce?

By the sounds of it we are beginig to rely on weapons and tech to much and not the ability to sneak and creep as it used to be.
In the end it will always be the man on the ground who will pass on the best intell.

I have been OPFOR with the Ham Shanks in Yakima with the Iltis and sat back and Recced and done all sorts with it as the the Iltis was meant for and have run cricles around Hummers.
The Yanks were very impressed with the Iltis as a Light Jeep/Recce Vehicle and how we used it!

Hey lets keep it simple.
Jus look what our for fathers did in Jeeps in WW2 we can do the same!!

Just my penth worth even though I know will be shot down for my comments.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

Check out this link for a brief blurb on the Weasel.   It would be great for our reserve recce units, supplementing the reg force.

http://www.rheinmetall-ls.de/fahrzeuge_komponenten/leichte_fahrzeuge/pages_englisch/wiesel1.htm


edited to add:

This is the link to the follow on vehicles, command posts, arty, engineer recce, etc....

http://www.rheinmetall-ls.de/fahrzeuge_komponenten/leichte_fahrzeuge/pages_englisch/wiesel2.htm

 

[LCISTech227]

Lance, nice lookin vehicle, looks kind of like the old Lynx to me.  But I don't see Canada buying track ever again.

On another point, has anyone been following the LUVW progress? because I heard that they were snapping axles because of the added weight of the armour package.  And does anyone know of when these vehicles are supposed to trickle down to the units? because I haven't seen one yet, besides some pictures that is.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

They are much smaller, much lighter, and much more capable than the lynx, may it rest in peace.

They are also extremely cheap to operate, and although they are tracked, they are rubber tracked, so you don't leave piles of chewed up pavement behind. 

But, you are correct.  Tracks = bad, mean, scary  Wheels = UN, friendly

The armoured Mercedes they trialed in Gagetown got beat up pretty bad, lots of rough cross country, with no major faults.  I haven't heard anything about broken axles.  Anyone else?

 

[LCISTech227]

Lance,  I agree with you on the weasel it's probably a very capable piece of equipment and would definetly suit our needs..... But, um when has the CF/Politicians ever got the idea that to get good stuff you have to spend money?  I mean if it was the case that the CF went and bought the best piece of kit for the job then we wouldn't have vehicles like the LSVW running around.

As for the LUVW I know of a few Ottawa Veh Techs that went down to Gagetown to be their for the trials, and they were the ones who told me about the axles thing, I was just trying to confirm it, is all.

I have mixed feelings about the LUVW, and I think I'm going to reserve judgement on them until I actually drive/see one.

 

[ackland]

I would like to hear from a few more reserve Armd Recce Crwm. What would you all do if you were told you getting these at your units?

 

[Yard Ape]

I would like to hear from a few more reserve Armd Recce Crwm. What would you all do if you were told you getting these at your units?

What is your opinion of them (seeing as you can speak from experience)?

 

[ackland]

It's a waste of time and energy. To try and deploy a squadron of ATV's is rediculous. We can't load enough kit for 48 hrs operations, we can't put down any surpressing fire. We can't operate for more than a couple hours driving with out fuel and they are a huge saftey risk to the rider when he is wearing FFO. No to mention his only weapon system is in a rifle back straped down to the vehicle and most of the time requires dismount to get to it. To carry enough op kit you'll need about 10 ATV's with rider. While this makes the OP rotaton easier adn sentry alot less tiring it seem a like a bad i Idea.
  the only thing we think as for employment for these peices of junk would be to clear blind corners and gaps for a LAV. The expensive LAV would provid secruity as the cheap little ATV would clear the obsticle.

 

[Yard Ape]

I think I would use infantry dismounts for that LAV security task, but aside from that your experiences live up to what I expected.

 

[bgreen]

I have a few questions with the three year trial the Ont Rs have been undergoing.

Part of the task in off and def ops is the op screen.  How did you configure the vehs (ATVs) into patrols.  As you are aware we currently use two veh patrols with 6 crewman that can sustain observation post ops.  Did you have 6 Atvs in a patrol?

Where does the crew kit like tents,stoves,Nodlr, first aid kit, crew wpn, pots water fuel and rucksacks stow.

Have you operated in -30 and for how long.  Did you tow toboggans and do they have a over snow capability.

What is the fuel consumption rate and/or distance you travel before resupply.

If one of your buddies gets hurt or your ATV goes down can you double up on another Atv.

Are they street legal so you can use them on grid roads and highways and do they have night convoy lamps and lights?  Have you a tarp or covering to get minimal protection in a  chem environment?

I am very interested in this concept.  In winter on the prairies we do one ex in winter with snowmobiles.  We usually leave our kit at a base camp and operate from there in two man crews.  But there is lots of maintenance and repair that has to be done to keep 7  snowmobiles going for even a weekend of tough going.  Might there be a parallel with the ATV? 

On another note I drove a ferret and it was one quiet veh but a little cramped and only a two person crew.  But stealthy and a low profile go anywhere tough veh.  I only mention this because in todays tempo of ops I think you need a minumum of 6 pers crews.  I understand the new recce doctrine is calling for an 8 veh troop.  This would give some flexibility in task matrix work.  Would that mean an Atv equivalent troop would be 24 Atvs?

BG

 

[George Wallace]

On the Ferret issue; it is an 'old' vehicle and a plumbers nightmare to maintain.  Later generations of the 'Ferret' line are out there.  In the '80's the Brits had the Fox, which was basically the same thing to the Ferret as the LAV III is to the Coyote, a larger version and it had a turret with a 20mm Rarden Cannon (?) if I am not mistaken.  Like the Ferret, the Fox is a very quiet vehicle.  It has a three man crew.  But we digress.....

At the looks of the comments so far, the ATV as we most commonly see it, is not going to be a suitable Recce veh.  No Range.  No stowage capacity.  Back to the days of one man, one horse; and a much more difficult recovery/maint problem when deployed.
GW

 

[12alfa]

On the Ferret issue; it is an 'old' vehicle and a plumbers nightmare to maintain.   Later generations of the 'Ferret' line are out there.   In the '80's the Brits had the Fox, which was basically the same thing to the Ferret as the LAV III is to the Coyote, a larger version and it had a turret with a 20mm Rarden Cannon (?) if I am not mistaken.  

You are, it's a 30mm, and quite effective, vs the 25 we have.

Back from the last Cougar firing in Alantic Canada, and yes by a Reserve unit!

I'm soooo depressed now.