ATVs

[a_majoor]

Makes perfect sense.
So, taking this a step further (or more), is there a requirement for all nine battalions to be mechanised?  Or is there a role for an "airmobile" or "Light" brigade?  One that is truly strategically deployable?  We have a (small) fleet of CC-17 Globemasters now, Chinooks on the way and this AGLS with smaller, agile vehicles may be perfect to go where Mech can't go.  (I wouldn't offer anything smaller than a brigade, thus allowing a deployed battlegroup to be rotated, it would have brigade assets, etc). 
Going back to Haiti (again) in our Hemisphere, or elsewhere for that matter, would there be a role for such a brigade, with such lighter vehicles?

Perhaps like this?

 

[dogger1936]

When we worked with the commando's in afstan they used only dirtbikes and 4 wheelers. While a IED would mean near certain death, they had the option to not go on routes and into smaller alleyways etc at a high rate of speed. As well they could be mistaken at night/day for local transportation from afar. Not allowing the triggerman copious amounts of time to set up. I.E like lavs coming loudly for miles and miles with cat engines roaring and dust cloud.

Having said that thinking back a few years I remember reserve armd recce did some trials on it as IIRC a platform to use after cougars were taken away and "tank" sqns re rolled into recce with not enought iltis to go around.

As for the BV-206 it's another great vehicle. I did my course with the RCR back in the 0's and had a blast.

I see the valid use of both in todays combat environment. sacrifice security for speed isnt a new idea....sorta like taking the op by force! dam time apperication!

 

[57Chevy]

It would probably be great in an air transportable/droppable role
for an even quicker first reaction airborne force, and modified for the
needs thereof.

Like this  John Deere :

 

[daftandbarmy]

The Royal Marines' use an armoured BV 206 called the Viking:

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/viking/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqvSHkp_wew

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BvS_10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marines_Armoured_Support_Group

This vehicle is the workhorse behind their new 'Commando 21' orbat:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commando_21

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?134254-Commando-21-and-FSG-organisation-vs-traditional-way&p=4256396#post4256396


Call me crazy, but perhaps a country like ours might consider adopting a vehicle like this if we're serious about arctic sovereignty, or just shifting an infantry battalion quickly around a battlefield.


Oh, I forgot, the F35 will guarantee our sovereignty all by itself... :

 

[Rogo]

And at very minimum they do make zipping around within bases quick, wether it is in Canada or abroad.

I remember seeing MPs in Bagotville zip around base on them when the Cadet portion of the base was running some sort of Bicycle rally thing. 

I like the idea, I just figure (keep in mind I'm still untrained) that if I were to go outside a base or FOB on deployment I'd much rather be on foot (where I can quickly engage threats) or be inside a real vehicle (where there is some protection from threats).  You did concede though that this wouldn't be in a combat role, hence winning my support.

 

[SeanNewman]

BV206s are a phenominal vehicle, no question about that.  I remember from the Science and Tech OPME where they covered every vehicle's displacement ratings (contact patches vs weight and a few other factors)...basically the BV206's rating number was off the charts because it's so light and essentially 2/3 of the surface area on the bottom is contact patch.

ATVs also had a comparitively high rating.

That being said though, like any vehicle there are some limitations to the BV206.  I like the idea of having a Recce Platoon with a mix if dirtbikes and ATVs and then a couple BVs for the HQ/CP.

Rogo,

Just because something is not a fighting role does not mean it only has to be on FOB admin duties.  What I am saying is that it is not the type of vehicle you would actually bring on the assault portion of the operation with you like you can with a LAV where it fires you on to the objective and you dismount to mop op.

Once you see how patrols work, how I see ATVs being employed is doing all the heavy lifting from your start point (patrol base, FOB, whatever) to either the Initial or Objective RV, where everyone stops for a bit to sort themselves out.  Then everyone could go to the trailer and get their extra ammo, top up their water, etc.  What happens now is that a soldier humps every single pound on his back, every round and every litre of water, but if there were something like an ATV mule the soldier would only need first line ammo and a couple litres on them while doing the walk.

Then they get left in place with a small security element who is there anyway to watch the rucksacks (D Security by the book).

Their employment is almost endless on the march there and back, too.  I can think of all sorts of occasions when I turned to the weapons det commander and said something like "I need the C6 pushed up to that intersection to cover that gap while we cross", not to mention how if the ground allows you can leapfrog the MGs in bounds so you always have one covering you.

Any time the rear C6 has to take his next bound, he could just really quickly hop on the back and get carried for that 100-1000m instead of the poor guy shuffling with his helment flopping all over the place before he gets to the next hill.

 

[a_majoor]

Of course for every positive there is a negative (or your Karma would become unbalanced....)

In the book "Not a good day to die", there is an incident where the entire operation was endangered because several Taliban found the tracks of the ATV's the SEALs had used to insert recce parties into the Sha-i-kot valley. Luckily for the SEALs and the rest of the incoming task force, the Taliban proved to be poor or incurious trackers, following the trail partway up towards where the horrified SEAL OP was but then just shrugging their shoulders and walking away.

Yes, any vehicle or person can leave a trail that can be followed, this is just to remind everyone that there are no "wonder weapons" or pieces of equipment.

 

[SeanNewman]

Yes, any vehicle or person can leave a trail that can be followed, this is just to remind everyone that there are no "wonder weapons" or pieces of equipment.

To hit the tennis ball of karma back in your court, when you say "any vehicle" can leave a track you're of course excludingthe wonder vehicle that is the helicopter, right 

Now you can say "But yes, even those get shot down those and cost $100m when they do", which is when I say "Exactly, think of all the ATVs you could have bought for that!"

:argument:

 

[57Chevy]

Take into consideration that any vehicle can also
cover her tracks.
In the same manner as fighting patrols on foot
secure their perimeter in the wee hours.

Actually it could make things even more confusing for trackers  ;D

 

[daftandbarmy]

Take into consideration that any vehicle can also
cover her tracks.
In the same manner as fighting patrols on foot
secure their perimeter in the wee hours.

Actually it could make things even more confusing for trackers  ;D

I recall trying to track a Norwegian platoon in arctic Norway in winter. We were on skis (and thought we were pretty hard core) and they were in BV 206s. We had stalked BV 202 - borne untis before and were always able to find them stuck in the snow somewhere and 'slaughter' them.

With the BV 206, we could barely climb the snow slopes that they, effortlessly, scaled straight up. They were able to lay down a completely confusing track plan that was pretty difficult to figure out. It wasn't much of a contest really (until we figured out that the best way to get them was to ambush the DOP for their equivalent of the NAFFI truck!).

 

[George Wallace]

Ah!  The NAFFI Truck.  Now there was a person who had access to COSMIC Level INT.  That Truck was parked in our Hide before we even knew the Grid.

 

[a_majoor]

So a NAFFI driver on an ATV would be an unbeatable combination?

 

[ArmyRick]

As far as the brit viking goes, it is being replaced already by the warthog (singapore industries). Heavier and better protected.

 

[Oh No a Canadian]

According to Defence Watch ST Kinetics is marketing the Bronco to the CF

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2010/09/05/bronco-all-terrain-tracked-vehicle-to-be-marketed-to-canadian-forces.aspx

 

[dangerboy]

On OP MEDUSA in 2006 while the acting Pl 2IC I drove a Gator (I classify it as an ATV) with the medic.  We carried resupply of water, ammo and her jump bag and stretcher.  While the troops were dismounted we followed behind.  It worked good using it as a resupply vehicle and I did not feel any more scared of IEDs/mines than the dismounts did.

 

[ArmyRick]

Crooks, PM inbound with "words of wisdom"

My take on the ATV as a close support vehicle sure. Exactly how Dangerboy described it is awesome too.

They are quite usefull in domestic operations as well. Not full on combat, but any operation has the potential to get ugly. It could be protestors turning on army guys or a person/group with a real grudge agaisnt the government (FLQ type stuff).

As for international operations (combat/peace enforcement/whatever). It would depend on the threat level, what the threat is and what the terrain is like.

Maybe a place like Sierra Leone with lots of heavy wooded areas and steep hills, the ATV would be awesome for moving a 50 cal or a mortar into position and carry out re-supply/cas evac as per Dangerboys example.

My take. Not based on cadet expirience.

 

[vonGarvin]

there is a bit of common sense there, too (so I suppose I'm in the wrong for stating the obvious), such as an ATV having no cover, and not being bulletproof. That would require a lot of money and time in improvements that may just turn out to be more expensive than its worth.

There is a trade-off between firepower, protection and mobility for any vehicle.  Tanks have the best of all three, naturally, but are very expensive.  And heavy.

ATVs for use by our forces on operations has some merit, and I'm certain that other countries' forces are, as I type this, using an ATV somewhere.  And the Taliban use motorcycles, cars, etc.  So, it's not just us, it's them.

So, it comes to the question at the start: do ATVs have a role in the combat arms?  There is a fairly recent example posted earlier from Op MEDUSA, and given that we travel by foot in spots, then it makes perfect sense to have an ATV that can not only carry logistical supplies, but also ammunition, and even a weapon as stated at the start of this thread: the AGLS (which is rather heavy, but has very good range and a variety of terminal effects that are....desirable)

So, without focussing on Afghanistan, but thinking of operations in general (and not dom ops that would involve unarmed help, eg, digging out cities, aid to the civil power, etc), I am a firm believer that this country of ours needs some sort of "light infantry" that can deploy with or without any specific vehicle.  ATVs offer a degree of logistical support, so yeah, they aren't bullet proof, but neither are our soldiers.  But the benefits they offer could have second or third order effects that spare lives.

 

[Franko]

After a bit of fall cleaning.....back on topic troops.

The Army.ca Staff

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

Two examples:  in planning for MEDUSA, each of the LAV Coys were given 4 gators (C Coy wanted 6).  It was expected that when they moved onto Phase 3 - Clearance they would be in for an urban fight.  With the narrow paths, grapefields, buildings / huts and lack of solid roads or manoeuvre space, it was expected the LAVs would only make it into the village areas so far.  It was going to be a dismounted fight.  Therefore it was determined that there was a need for a way to move ammo, water, demolitions forward and wounded rearward in an expeditious manner.  Thus, deployed by low bed, the requisite number of gators to Coy leaguers prior to H Hr.   

Second example would be G8 Summit.  Light companies needed ATVs to traverse the myriad of trails and paths throughout the AO.  Further, partnered LEA were operating on ATVs thus our patrols needed to have the same mobility.  Again gators or ATVs with trailers were used to move supplies forward to hides, OPs and biv sites. 

One a mech force on a combat mission and another a light force on a Dom Op.  ATVs and UTVs are another tool in the toolbox to be used at the right time in the right place.

Offered for what its worth.

 

[George Wallace]

I think the enphasis should be on "right time" and "right place".  They are another tool in the tool box, but not an all singing, all dancing one.