LAV 6.0

[PrairieFella]

Health Services is very happy with the ACSV Amb, their biggest complaint is that they want more.

Ive been crew commanding one - my only complaint is it good use some more zip from the engine.

 

[Prairie canuck]

Oryx lists 5 ACSVs as destroyed in Ukraine. links to photos included. Scroll down to

Armoured Personnel Carriers​

5 ACSV troop/cargo vehicle:(1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (3, destroyed) (4, destroyed) (1, captured)
Oryx

 

[markppcli]

Except in the Ukraine context battlefield evacuation is more likley by a UGV or a small pickup dashing in and running away quickly, if the causality is lucky.

AXPs are still a thing. The Ukranians would prefer to use these if they could / had them, if only because of higher capacity per trip and better life expectancy. If if youre extracting off the x on a pick up - these just moves back a step. In the world of 20k dead zones bot a bad thing.

 

[PrairieFella]

Interesting video that appeared in my insta feed - LAV being tested with an MCT-30 turret firing 30mm. Ive only ever seen them on the LAV 3/stryker chassis but that looks pretty clearly to be a LAV 6

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[armrdsoul77]

Apparently there is 30mm ammunition with a proximity fuse that is suitable for drone hunting(as well as regular targets). Do they have something similar for the 25mm gun on the LAV in the CF?

 

[McG]

LAV 6 Family of Vehicles

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=558103880190425

 

[HavokFour]

More PROTECTOR RS4 Remote Weapon Systems on the way for the ACSV's

KONGSBERG to deliver Remote Weapon Systems to Canada

KONGSBERG has signed a contract with General Dynamics Land Systems–Canada (‘GDLS-Canada’) valued at NOK 1.1 billion for the delivery of PROTECTOR RS4 Remote Weapon Systems.

www.kongsberg.com

 

[PrairieFella]

PROTECTOR RS4 Remote Weapon Systems for the ACSV's

KONGSBERG to deliver Remote Weapon Systems to Canada

KONGSBERG has signed a contract with General Dynamics Land Systems–Canada (‘GDLS-Canada’) valued at NOK 1.1 billion for the delivery of PROTECTOR RS4 Remote Weapon Systems.

www.kongsberg.com

Its a good system. Honestly if I had my way I might replace the DRWS from the TAPVs which are getting nearer to obsolescence and replace them with these with a 50 cal. They can also accept ATGM mounts.

 

[KevinB]

Its a good system. Honestly if I had my way I might replace the DRWS from the TAPVs which are getting nearer to obsolescence and replace them with these with a 50 cal. They can also accept ATGM mounts.

I hope
1) It is integrated with Kongsbergs Protector C-UAS
2) the CAF looks at the GAU-19 as the standard weapon for it, as the M2 .50 just doesn’t have the weight of fire for a C-UAS role.

I would have preferred the Defender RS-6 and a LW 30-35mm Cannon option for a payload for C-UAS, as well as longer range and effectiveness in more roles.

 

[PrairieFella]

I hope
1) It is integrated with Kongsbergs Protector C-UAS
2) the CAF looks at the GAU-19 as the standard weapon for it, as the M2 .50 just doesn’t have the weight of fire for a C-UAS role.

I would have preferred the Defender RS-6 and a LW 30-35mm Cannon option for a payload for C-UAS, as well as longer range and effectiveness in more roles.

Remember, this isnt a CUAS platform. This is for ambulances, fitters, EW trucks, etc. Id rather see resources be ysed to make effective CUAS platforms, not turn everything into a shitty one.

 

[KevinB]

Remember, this isnt a CUAS platform. This is for ambulances, fitters, EW trucks, etc. Id rather see resources be ysed to make effective CUAS platforms, not turn everything into a shitty one.

Everything needs an APS these days, and some sort of self defense capability against direct attack UAS.

Kongsberg has made it so these RWS can be linked into a sensor network for effective usage in a LLAD/C-UAS setup. As I understand it, for the system itself it is just software - allowing it to take input data from either onboard sensors, or a larger network.


The GAU-19 is a reasonable replacement for the M-2, same caliber, higher reliability, higher cyclic. It is already the APS weapon of choice for most manufacturers.

From my understanding the CA intends to adopt something like NGC2 Next Generation Command and Control (NGC2)

Which on the APS/C-UAS front will allow cooperative engagement down to individual RWS systems by AI/ML to Locate, Identify, Prioritize, and Engage.

There are so many different types of UAS, that defending against all will take a wide variety of systems.

 

[McG]

The days of fitted for not with weapons & comms need to permanently come to an end for all battlefield vehicles.

 

[OldSolduer]

The days of fitted for not with weapons & comms need to permanently come to an end for all battlefield vehicles.

This. Same with armor, design the vehicle to be armored and not have “up armor” added which destroys drive trains

 

[McG]

This. Same with armor, design the vehicle to be armored and not have “up armor” added which destroys drive trains

For some vehicles, I am okay with a vehicle that is purpose designed to be up-armoured and is also delivered with its up-armour package. There are trade-offs with using up-armour. Being able to change-out a fleet's armour to incorporate new technology or more precisely counter the threat of the current war are advantages when up-armour is planned in the vehicle design.

 

[Maxman1]

This. Same with armor, design the vehicle to be armored and not have “up armor” added which destroys drive trains

That's one of the flaws of the Ajax. The panels warp and bend without the up-armour plates, which then makes it impossible to install the plates.

 

[Kirkhill]

Remember, this isnt a CUAS platform. This is for ambulances, fitters, EW trucks, etc. Id rather see resources be ysed to make effective CUAS platforms, not turn everything into a shitty one.

I thought every vehicle required a CUAS capability. I thought we had moved past the notion of supplying CUAS sections to cover and escort unarmed vehicles.

 

[KevinB]

For some vehicles, I am okay with a vehicle that is purpose designed to be up-armoured and is also delivered with its up-armour package. There are trade-offs with using up-armour. Being able to change-out a fleet's armour to incorporate new technology or more precisely counter the threat of the current war are advantages when up-armour is planned in the vehicle design.

I generally agree.
Most vehicles these days (or at least combat vehicles) are being designed with the plan of some form of additional armor to be added as theatre specific protection.

Some have done it well, and others have not.
Interestingly enough GDLS manages to be on both extreme ends of that spectrum, with Canada and American designs being seamlessly integrated, and their European counterparts doing what is basically a lesson in worst practices.

Side note:
I am not a fan of buying unarmored vehicles and believing that some aftermarket bolt on system will actually provide the requisite protection levels.
- this isn’t a dig at Roshel this time,
It’s been an issue with most logistics vehicles.

 

[Bluenose_Tanker]

Apparently there is 30mm ammunition with a proximity fuse that is suitable for drone hunting(as well as regular targets). Do they have something similar for the 25mm gun on the LAV in the CF?

Projectile too small for this capability to be feasible

Its a good system. Honestly if I had my way I might replace the DRWS from the TAPVs which are getting nearer to obsolescence and replace them with these with a 50 cal. They can also accept ATGM mounts.

Haveing the DRWS being a subcontracted part of the TAPV was a big oversight. That being said the small ammo capacity and bigger logistical burden of the .50 doesnt leave me convinced its the right play.

I've used both systems and the poor old ARVs RWS (again same basic system) they are defensive weapon systems. The Stab just cant keep up at speed off road. The ARV is probably the best as it's the smoothest ride but having the CC also be the gunner is not ideal.

I hope
1) It is integrated with Kongsbergs Protector C-UAS
2) the CAF looks at the GAU-19 as the standard weapon for it, as the M2 .50 just doesn’t have the weight of fire for a C-UAS role.

I would have preferred the Defender RS-6 and a LW 30-35mm Cannon option for a payload for C-UAS, as well as longer range and effectiveness in more roles.

As for C-UAS with the RS4...no human is doing that they are significantly more difficult to keep on target then say a leopard 2 turret(joystick isn't the most effective tracking tool). C-UAS needs to be a machine run role.
That being said APS system that can control your RWS MG to engage flying targets...

As for the RS6 i wonder if the stab is more capable then the RS4?

Everything needs an APS these days, and some sort of self defense capability against direct attack UAS.

Kongsberg has made it so these RWS can be linked into a sensor network for effective usage in a LLAD/C-UAS setup. As I understand it, for the system itself it is just software - allowing it to take input data from either onboard sensors, or a larger network.


The GAU-19 is a reasonable replacement for the M-2, same caliber, higher reliability, higher cyclic. It is already the APS weapon of choice for most manufacturers.

From my understanding the CA intends to adopt something like NGC2 Next Generation Command and Control (NGC2)

Which on the APS/C-UAS front will allow cooperative engagement down to individual RWS systems by AI/ML to Locate, Identify, Prioritize, and Engage.

There are so many different types of UAS, that defending against all will take a wide variety of systems.

Any links to the Kongsberg system for C-UAS?

The days of fitted for not with weapons & comms need to permanently come to an end for all battlefield vehicles.

Preach!