Our 'maybe' new recce vehicle

[RequiemVK]

In couple of weeks its gonna be the armored conference in valcartier and for this event the armored corps have been able to get their hand on the new vehicle they looking to purchase. So far the info we have its gonna be an armored fighting recon recce vehicle thats suppose to be between the coyote and the g-wagon. During the night the vehicle gonna be in our vehicle compound so I'm gonna go take some picture of it and give my general feeling about the vehicle. So stay tuned for more info in some weeks.

 

[RequiemVK]

Finally the truck arrived, it seem a nice truck with certain flaw. First keep in mind its suppose to be a recon recce vehicle and not a jeep we have the g-wagon for that. Its suppose to go with coyote when we need some traditional recon. Its a big vehicle look like a mixed between a German Dingo and a Humvee. It have a couple of nice option like remote controlled weapon, positive pressure for NBC, add on armour and add on mine protection. Its made by General Dynamics (who also construct the engineer mine protected truck). I was quite impressed by it, but the space inside is tight without lcv and frag vest, so imagine with them and the engine look a bit underpowered. Here the link to the maker of the truck its name is the Duro APV.

http://www.gdlscanada.com/pdf/duro_apvspecs.pdf

DURO APV
Weights
Baseline weight 5000 kg
Payload 2400 kg
Gross vehicle weight (GVW)
with run flat inserts 7600 kg
w/o run flat inserts 7400 kg
Curb weight (Level 3) 6000 kg
Dimensions
Overall length 5.09 m
Height (over cabin) 2.00 m
Overall width 2.16 m
Ground clearance 0.40 m
Number of seats 4
Performance
Max. speed on roads 120 km/h
Acceleration 0-50 km/h 11 s
Gradient 60%
Max. side slope 40%
Vertical obstacle 0.4 m
Turning circle diameter 14.5 m
Fuel tank capacity 140 L
Range on roads 480 km
Power-to-weight ratio 33.0 hp/t
Engine
Manufacturer Cummins
Type ISBe 5.9L Turbo Common Rail
Function 4-stroke / Diesel
No. of cylinders 6
Perfomance 184 kW (250 hp)
Transmission
Manufacturer Allison
Type 1000
Transmission 5-speed automatic
Driveline and Suspension
Wheel drive Permanent, four wheel
Transfer case Two-speed
Differential Torsen, self locking
De-Dion axles with wheel hub gear, patented roll stabilizer
Brakes Hydraulic disc type with ABS
Steering Hydraulic power assisted
Tires 335 / 80 R 20
Optional Equipment

    * Winch
    * Central tire inflation system (CTIS)
    * Air conditioning system
    * Preheat unit
    * NBC overpressure system
    * Runflat tires
    * GPS
    * Add-on ballistic protection kit up to Level 3 STANAG 4569
    * Add-on mine protection kit up to Level 2a STANAG 4569

 

[blacktriangle]

Anyone have more info on this?

 

[kincanucks]

Anyone have more info on this?

What more did you want?  The fuel mileage?

 

[kincanucks]

RequiemVK,

Thanks for the post.  It certainly is a ugly beast.  You can definitely see that it would be a tight fit with FO on.  Again thanks for the info.

 

[RequiemVK]

When i was taking the pictures my Chief Warrant came by and said they were 3 prototype looked at, 1 was supposed to be higher than an coyote ?!, for the other i dont know. But he said this 1 the Duro was the favorite so far. So ...

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

My first reaction is that it's too big for recce; maybe my impression would change on seeing one in person.  Personally, I like the VBL - but that's just me.

 

[Infanteer]

Personally, I'd like to see an M1 as the new recce vehicle; especially when recent experience and studies show that commanders will have to fight for their information.

Since when did the Armoured Corps shift from being "the arm of decision" to the "the arm of information"? 

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

You're not far off, Infanteer.  Back in the days of yore, Div recce had tanks (the FGH were, in the Mulroney delusional days, slated to be activated as a Div Recce Regt using, IIRC, Leopards), on paper, for that very reason.

However, recce is a traditional cavalry (and hence armour) task.  I am all for speed and violence, but there is certainly a place for both stand off and close recce, particularly in a maneouvrist context.

 

[Infanteer]

However, recce is a traditional cavalry (and hence armour) task.   I am all for speed and violence, but there is certainly a place for both stand off and close recce, particularly in a maneouvrist context.

The Coyote seems to do the stand-off recce quite well, but close recce seems to require heavier vehicles, not lighter ones - seems we've indeed traded saber for stealth.

 

[a_majoor]

The Duro is an  HMMVW if it were designed and built in the late 1990s as opposed to the late 1970s (when the HMMVW program kicked off). For "Three Block War" and CIMIC, it is certainly a player, but if the push is on for fighting for information (and the ability to drop off dismounts to talk to people when possible), then the smallest and lightest vehicle they should be seriously looking at is the Fennik, and in terms of logistical interoperability combined with the need to fight the most serious contender would be a LAVIII with a four man dismount team in the back (extra space taken by consumables for those 72-96hr missions).

Other recce tasks like convoy escort and rear area security "might" benefit from using the Duro vs the Illtis or G-wagon, but given real world experience something bigger and better is required, the ADI Bushmaster comes to mind, or the American "Buffalo" (If you want more cross country mobility you go with the Bushmaster; while the Buffalo is more road bound it would also make a good Engineering vehicle platform).

Sneak & Peek recce belongs to my trade, and you might argue that long range surveillance and UAVs should be taken by the Artillery. Tell the powers that be to stop smoking that stuff and get you a proper recce vehicle.

 

[Infanteer]

The Duro is an   HMMVW if it were designed and built in the late 1990s as opposed to the late 1970s (when the HMMVW program kicked off). For "Three Block War" and CIMIC, it is certainly a player, but if the push is on for fighting for information (and the ability to drop off dismounts to talk to people when possible), then the smallest and lightest vehicle they should be seriously looking at is the Fennik, and in terms of logistical interoperability combined with the need to fight the most serious contender would be a LAVIII with a four man dismount team in the back (extra space taken by consumables for those 72-96hr missions).

Agreed.  I also think that equipment should be purchased with the "highest order" in mind rather than the "lowest order" - we can always gear down for Peace Support, Humanitarian, and Intervention ops but it is pretty hard to gear up for warfighting when you're equipped in the manner of a constabulary force.  Instead of saying "hey, this looks like it'd be great for driving around (insert shithole here)" say "hey, this looks like it would really contribute to the combined arms team we've built to fight the enemy".  When we need to gear down, we can go to an open jeep (Iltis/G-wagon) or the trusty black caddies - we don't need big heavy jeeps sealed off from the outside world for SASO (if we want to do that, deploy LAVs).

 

[Bomber]

Nuts to all the complaints, this is a big friggin truck that can finally mount the bigger guns, take a blast, and not tip on a hard corner.  This truck has been trying to get into the Army for a while, some of you might remember this as the Rhino, then the Eagle 4 and now the Duro Armoured Patrol Vehicle.  Being big, boxy, and sealed off seems to fit the job description perfectly.  I don't know, finally some new kit.  Lets enjoy it as the Liberals make a scramble for some Christmas votes.

 

[Infanteer]

Being big, boxy, and sealed off seems to fit the job description perfectly.

What job description?

I don't know, finally some new kit.   Lets enjoy it as the Liberals make a scramble for some Christmas votes.

Let's not assume that because it's new, it's good for us - is this what we need?  More of our problems probably stem from internal mismanagement than from political neglect - sometimes, I just don't think the Canadian people are getting the 13billion dollar military they deserve.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

What job description?

Let's not assume that because it's new, it's good for us - is this what we need?   More of our problems probably stem from internal mismanagement than from political neglect - sometimes, I just don't think the Canadian people are getting the 13billion dollar military they deserve.

Ahhh, someone's identified the problem - buying equipment before we have fully identified where it fits in to our tactical concept of operations.  Lest anyone think this is a recent problem, we do this all the time:  AVGP fleet, ADATS, Bison (remember MILAPC?), Coyote (the biggest example), LAV III, MMEV, M113 upgrades, AVGP fleet upgrade programme, Coyote "cav" vehicle (Coyote with the radars yanked) - on and on.

I'll be the first to admit that I support the quick purchase of equipment where the requirement - and the solution - are self evident.  M777 seems to me to be a good example.  I'll also support the snap purchase of items where we can borrow the doctrine from allies or where the concept of operations is so glaringly obvious that even the uninitiated can see how they'd be used (Chinooks, for instance).

However, when something hasn't been fully thought through, I begin to question the sanity of that tiny group of "concept" people who drive these things.  Take the G Wagon, for instance.  I cannot imagine it being more ill-suited to close recce and told the Army Equipment Board as much in the late 90s.  Yet, we purchased a "C&R" varient and deployed it - simply because we couldn't afford (politically or financially) to staff a separate project for a proper recce vehicle like the VBL.  The result?  Now we play "catch up" and are looking at yet another vehicle produced by General Dynamics (GM Diesel).  In this case, close recce has been part of our doctrine for many, many years and we should have had the wherewithal to identify the proper vehicle the first time around.

Again, back to my original criticism.  We know what close recce does; why are we looking at such a large unwieldy vehicle with limited armament and protection?  It looks remarkably like a German Dingo, which is certainly not a recce vehicle. There are plenty of alternatives out there.  Oh yeah...never mind...  "General Dynamics".... :

a_majoor:  Fennik is a surveillance vehicle, with much the same role as Coyote.  We used them in Kabul with the Franco-German Brigade - not as effective as Coyote.  As I said earlier, there is, and always has been, a place for close recce within the Armour Corps and close recce and surveillance can function hand in glove operationally if permitted to.  Again, we have done this very effectively on operations.  An argument could be made, in fact, for mixing close and surveillance assets at the troop level.

 

[Kirkhill]

Since when did the Armoured Corps shift from being "the arm of decision" to the "the arm of information"? 

The "Armoured Corps" may be "the arm of decision" or "arme blanche",  inheritors of the tradition of tin suits and clydesdales, but all those other guys on horses and ponies have always been about patrolling and information. Long before even the stirrup was invented.  That's what they did when they weren't fighting, in other words that's what they most of the time.

 

[a_majoor]

a_majoor:  Fennik is a surveillance vehicle, with much the same role as Coyote.  We used them in Kabul with the Franco-German Brigade - not as effective as Coyote.  As I said earlier, there is, and always has been, a place for close recce within the Armour Corps and close recce and surveillance can function hand in glove operationally if permitted to.  Again, we have done this very effectively on operations.  An argument could be made, in fact, for mixing close and surveillance assets at the troop level.

I thought the Fennik was more of a 21rst century "Ferret" scout car, which only goes to show you can't believe everything you read in Janes. Even so, it is far more mobile and better protected than a G-Wagon or Duro, and can mount some serious weaponry if needed. If something like the Duro is being considered as a compliment to the Coyotes, then a "Ferret" in a more modern guise would probably do a lot better as the complimentary vehicle.

For many of the reasons alluded to by Infanteer in another thread, I would think the best way to compliment a LAV based surveillance vehicle would be another LAV carrying a dismounted scout team. If the Government and the Army are serious about spending a bucket of money on the Duro (a vehicle of dubious worth in the suggested recce role), they would be better off spending the money for more LAVs instead.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

I thought the Fennik was more of a 21rst century "Ferret" scout car, which only goes to show you can't believe everything you read in Janes. Even so, it is far more mobile and better protected than a G-Wagon or Duro, and can mount some serious weaponry if needed. If something like the Duro is being considered as a compliment to the Coyotes, then a "Ferret" in a more modern guise would probably do a lot better as the complimentary vehicle.

Well, the Fenniks we used were (of course) the German variants - a good looking vehicle.  It has the benefit of a low profile and centre of gravity but ours were not heavily armed and mounted a surveillance suite on a mast.  The Germans thought highly of them, but they weren't as operationally flexible (they didn't have the same sensor capability as Coyote) as Canadian vehicles.  Again, I am convinced that a VBL-like vehicle is the way to go for close recce, much as you recommend.

 

[Bomber]

A great APV "Armoured Patrol Vehicle" which was its own job description, if we use them for close recce then that is our problem.  As a bigger, more robust vehicle that could end our long running "we need hummers thread" I see this thing as great.  And it is home grown.  Unfortunately we will never get the kit that this message forum actually wants.  I want us all to have the greatest sleeping systems, KevinB wants everyone to have more weapons training and SFW's, Bomber for Life just wants comfy boots, all of the armour doesn't want the MGS and wants M1A2's or would settle for 2A6's.  Every piece of kit that we need is long coming like Herc's, Chinooks, C17's, rucksacks, and for once the government kind of gave a little bit of cash and said lets see the wish list.  Stuff needs to be readily available when this fun money comes and this is one of the things.  The Fenneks were not available in time, and VBL's, I don't know, but they just seem real old.  I think Mowag has a 4x4 version of the Coyote on its site, seats 4 with a crew of 2, maybe a decent vehicle and would have commonality.

 

[Recce41]

This veh is one of the maybe vehs, we may purchase. The Armour School is the SME for the new Recce Veh.