Logistic Vehicle Modernization Project - Replacing everything from LUVW to SHLVW

[KevinB]

Canada got into the Iltis as the Germans were getting rid of theirs for the Steyer G-Wagon, that should have been the vehicle we bought.

German and others also used a 6 cylinder engine in their Iltis - so they were not so outrageously underpowered, and we opted for a 4, which was abysmal for what we tried to do with them. Adding a Ground gear wasn't the answer, and while they lasted a lot longer than they should have been expected too - it wasn't the correct platform.

Steyr-Daimler-Puch wasn't the originator of the G-Wagon, they had a JV with Mercedes, called Galandefahrzeug-Gesselschaft that built the test models at the "urging" of the Shah of Iran (who was Mercedes largest shareholder at the time). Mercedes at the time was not into Military Vehicles and knew they needed assistance. Mercedes-Benz then brought them to the public of the 1979 Model year.

I don't think the G-Wagon then, or later was a good LUVW either - it was too big for a Jeep Role, and too small for the 5/4 type role.

IVECO which was the parent design enjoyed a much better reputation than our version and has a whole host of military truck models in various weight classes.

FIAT/IVECO had a number of issues with that platform - the frame was a giant POS, and the layout wasn't ideal for a what was wanted either, which then in turn hampered the entire thing.
Western Star building them was another matter as well, but the design was not a good one for what was wanted as a Military Light Utility Truck.



The Chevy Z72 Colorado based ISV is decently light enough to fill the Jeep role - (getting rid of some of the excess roof rack system to reduce the profile). One could likely do the same with with a Ford Ranger sized vehicle - I'm partial to the GM/Chevy offering as it is MOTS - but...

One then simply needs to find the 5/4 Replacement.

 

[MilEME09]

Really something like this is all we need

 

[Maxman1]

if Sig couldn't fix the L86, idk if anyone can fix that with the budget we could approve.

This is a major issue. Being able to identify the needs of a force and translate them into a proper requirement document for vehicles for certain roles.

While it is a nice idea to have a pure fleet of vehicle X, odds are that there is no way in hell that it will actually fill the mission needs of a force.


1) Fixed it for you
2) The LSVW was a terrible design from the get go - the only fix for it is a different vehicle

Honestly the CUCV should have replaced the 5/4 period - a diesel Chevy that could do everything the gas version did and more. I don't recall what the reason was the Militia got 2,000 or so from the USMC back in the late 80's but it probably should have been 10k in various configurations to replace the clapped out 1970's 5/4 ton gas Chevy's. In the ideal word the Hummer would have replaced the 5/4's, but alas it was not to be.

The ISV is actually a pretty decent Jeep/Iltis replacement - I would agree with @Kirkhill that for Canada's weather and the role it would be used for that some sort of tarp and doors - similar to the Iltis, and the MRZR's can fill certain lighter roles that the ISV isn't ideal for.

It however still leaves a gap that the 5/4 filled (I won't say LSVW as it really never filled the gaps) - something like a Hummer would fill that for the Unarmored Requirements -- but you are ending up in JLTV territory for the Armored aspect of a wheeled run about.

I didn't mean refurbishing the old fleet, I meant taking the blueprints and redesigning it, removing the parts that suck and replacing them with parts that don't suck. Although, it seems if you took out everything that sucks about the LSVW, you'll be left with nothing at all.

Apparently this is what we're getting to replace the LSVW, except it's a 2½ ton.

Apparently they also offer the Zetros in as light as ½ ton. Perhaps a ¾ to 1 ¼ ton version of it or the LMTV would be a good option for the 5/4 role.

 

[Edward Campbell]

 

[KevinB]

Unfortunately I think the role requires a few different vehicles.

Ultra Light: ATV and MRZR type vehicles
Very Light: ISV type
Light: 5/4 type vehicle

I didn't mean refurbishing the old fleet, I meant taking the blueprints and redesigning it, removing the parts that suck and replacing them with parts that don't suck. Although, it seems if you took out everything that sucks about the LSVW, you'll be left with nothing at all.

Apparently this is what we're getting to replace the LSVW, except it's a 2½ ton.

Apparently they also offer the Zetros in as light as ½ ton. Perhaps a ¾ to 1 ¼ ton version of it or the LMTV would be a good option for the 5/4 role.

Zetros – technical data

special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com

I'm not seeing anything smaller than the one you pictures - which by all report the series is absolutely fantastic - but still larger than what really a 5/4 ton replacement would need. It really is BIG - which is good fro some applications, but horrible for others.

As much as I like the JLTV for certain things, it is 1) Armored - which isn't needed for all of the fleets roles 2) It is enormous, it dwarfs the Hummer - which isn't exactly small.

The Roshel Senator is a vehicle like the Lenco Bearcat, in that I can't see any rational reason for a Military to have.
It isn't an armored vehicle - like the JLTV is designed. It is more like an Armored Hummer - with all the negatives that come with adding armor to a structure that wasn't designed for it.
Honestly one would be better off with the Hummer Chassis - and building an armored platform around it from scratch - as it's more robust than the Ford 550.

Honestly I still haven't found a better 5/4 type replacement than the original Hummer.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Do you think 20 yr old vehicles that have been used off road for most of their lives are going to be in good condition ?

I'm not sure the condition of the G-Wagon fleet. Some of the G-Wagons in 2006 were pretty tired. Also some tired MLVWs in theater. Not sure if the latter have finally been put to pasture.

Also I'm not sure I'd agree that G-Wagons have been used off road for most of their lives. There's lots of G-Wagons that are just commuters.

 

[markppcli]

I'm not sure the condition of the G-Wagon fleet. Some of the G-Wagons in 2006 were pretty tired. Also some tired MLVWs in theater. Not sure if the latter have finally been put to pasture.

Also I'm not sure I'd agree that G-Wagons have been used off road for most of their lives. There's lots of G-Wagons that are just commuters.

G Wagons just as commuters ? Even if they’re just with the CQ, or 9r those are all rough trails that anyone else would call off road.

 

[PrairieFella]

I'm not sure the condition of the G-Wagon fleet. Some of the G-Wagons in 2006 were pretty tired. Also some tired MLVWs in theater. Not sure if the latter have finally been put to pasture.

Also I'm not sure I'd agree that G-Wagons have been used off road for most of their lives. There's lots of G-Wagons that are just commuters.

Commuter is something of an understatement. Even if it's just a rover moving between subunits, most black tracks are little more than marks on the ground, they're not developed and can be very rough.

Those gwagons have been rode hard for decades at this point and owe us nothing. Especially so in the reserves because they're all the armoured reserve has for simulated armour or recce vehicles (most TAPVs have been N/S in the reserves for years).

 

[Edward Campbell]

OK, on ...

In the 1960s we, the Army were getting a lot of new kit: especially new APCs, new SP howitzers and new radios. Our leaders told us, on parade after parade, that money didn't grow on trees and so we would also have to make do with some pretty old kit, too. We used 15+ years old jeeps, (truck, utility ¼ ton, 4 X 4) in F Echelon, in Reece Pl, in the Atk Pl, carrying 20 year old 106mm recoilless rifles, in the MG Pl carrying 25 years old .50s and elsewhere.

We asked our RCEME guys to turn a Nelsonian blind eye to a few of the many, many rules with which Ottawa blessed us, and keep the old kit in tip-top condition ... of course they came through; they always do.

We mechanized infantry battalions, armoured regiments, using 20 years old tanks, and arty and the engineers and so on all used jeeps in F Ech and we were , pound-for-pound, the best flamin' army in all of NATO.

... off; back to the 21st century

 

[suffolkowner]

Chieftain

Chieftain · AM General

www.amgeneral.com

this dialed up Toyota Hilux was supposed to be one of the contenders for the unarmoured

 

[PrairieFella]

Chieftain

Chieftain · AM General

www.amgeneral.com

this dialed up Toyota Hilux was supposed to be one of the contenders for the unarmoured

CAF joins the Toyota War when?

In all seriousness, probably a great option for Toyota reliability and supply lines. They may as well go all in with AM General at that point, JTLV A2 and this Chieftain rig.

The Senator is cool but just too damned big. We don't need tactical short buses everywhere.

 

[Furniture]

In all seriousness, probably a great option for Toyota reliability and supply lines.

Except that in North America, the place that we will use the trucks most often and in the greatest numbers, they aren't commercially available. In the places the parts are commercially available, we won't be sending mechanics out with credit cards or stacks of cash to buy them...

It would make more sense to use a Ranger or Colorado base for our needs. Particularly the Colorado, which is a base for vehicles already in service with Canada and the US.

 

[KevinB]

Chieftain

Chieftain · AM General

www.amgeneral.com

this dialed up Toyota Hilux was supposed to be one of the contenders for the unarmoured

I thought it was a Tacoma TRD based platform (basically the NA Hilux)

 

[daftandbarmy]

Really something like this is all we need

View attachment 87874

This one's been is service since 1949