Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle - RG-31, LAV Coyote, and (partial) G-Wagon Replacement

[Kirkhill]

Just a point of clarification on the use of the TAPVs by the PRes.

I can't remember how I came by this but back in 2010 their was a plan for Force 2013 to allocate TAPVs to the PRes via the ATCs.

See the attachment below.  It is a slide from the PowerPoint presentation detailing the PRes vehicle holdings.

I accept that this is an old plan and that plans change.... but once upon a time there was a plan.

 

[PuckChaser]

In 2010 we probably could have afforded the PRes budget increase. Weren't we also planning on having a dual fleet of IFVs (lav and ccv) around then too?

 

[Kirkhill]

In 2010 we probably could have afforded the PRes budget increase. Weren't we also planning on having a dual fleet of IFVs (lav and ccv) around then too?

Affirm.

 

[Infanteer]

Just a point of clarification on the use of the TAPVs by the PRes.

I can't remember how I came by this but back in 2010 their was a plan for Force 2013 to allocate TAPVs to the PRes via the ATCs.

See the attachment below.  It is a slide from the PowerPoint presentation detailing the PRes vehicle holdings.

I accept that this is an old plan and that plans change.... but once upon a time there was a plan.

You missed my earlier post.  TAPVs to the reserves was never in the mix.  See your picture - no TAPVs in the TBG allocation.

Incorrect.  TAPVs are to be allocated to ATCs for use by other elements on the road to high readiness that would require the vehicle (think FP, CIMIC, etc) to train on but do not normally hold them.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I see that we have an option of 100 more and with the money being turned back, we could order those for the reserves without the RWS to save money, tech support and reduce the weight on the vehicle. By the way what is the side slope ability of the beast?

 

[Newt]

The TAPV is not the platform that PRes Armour needs right now, IMO.

To respond to DomOps PRes needs a platform that is located at least in the same city, if not right on the armoury floor. If there's another Op Lentus we can't tell the civilian leaders that we need to hire a bus, drive 2-4 hours to the nearest ATC, sign out the TAPV's, and the drive 2-4 hours back; we need to be mounted up and rolling out as fast as possible.

How much time would be spent after endex cleaning the TAPV's to sign them back in to the ATC? That's precious time that could be spent doing more training. Better to have something that could be taken to a civilian car wash on the way home instead.

There's a good article in the 2013 Armour Bulletin that I think spells out quite nicely what PRes Armour needs, and it reads closer to getting the Jeep J8 (or similar) than TAPV.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We can't maintain things at the unit/brigade level because we have gutted them of the resources to do so. At the end of the day a armoured wheeled vehicle is still just a truck that's a pain to work on. It's not rocket science, unless you make the process look like it is.

 

[McG]

I see that we have an option of 100 more and with the money being turned back, we could ...

Again, we have tossed away half of our support vehicle fleet and we are razing buildings because there is no money to sustain capital.  The option for 100 more does not matter if you have no funding plan.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

With the money we turn back could easily fill the gaps. Sooner or later and I suspect sooner, they are going to be crying out for more vehicles, support and armoured.

 

[Loachman]

Crying is irrelevant if nobody listens or cares.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Until large amount of fecal matter hits the rotary device and then it's a case of us saying "We tried to tell you".

 

[McG]

Again, we have tossed away half of our support vehicle fleet and we are razing buildings because there is no money to sustain capital.  The option for 100 more does not matter if you have no funding plan.

With the money we turn back could easily fill the gaps. Sooner or later and I suspect sooner, they are going to be crying out for more vehicles, support and armoured.

The money you identify is capital funds, the vehicles need operating funds to be sustained.  Assuming the funds could be made available to buy TAPV without sacrificing something somewhere else (a dangerous assumption), all you have identified is the means to buy 100 new vehicles to site in the divestment graveyards and rot beside MLVWs and HLVWs that we have determined are beyond our means to keep.

If money is found to buy and maintain vehicles, the B fleet needs reinvestment long before a new toy for PRes.

 

[PuckChaser]

Until large amount of fecal matter hits the rotary device and then it's a case of us saying "We tried to tell you".

I strongly doubt the PRes getting shiny TAPVs is the lynch-pin to collapse the whole reserve system.

A bigger "I told you so" moment is going to happen when the PRes no longer has serviceable LSVW/HLVWs (the MRT and wrecker to support your new toys) due to lack of parts, but that's going to be an Army-wide issue (and covered in another thread).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The money you identify is capital funds, the vehicles need operating funds to be sustained.  Assuming the funds could be made available to buy TAPV without sacrificing something somewhere else (a dangerous assumption), all you have identified is the means to buy 100 new vehicles to site in the divestment graveyards and rot beside MLVWs and HLVWs that we have determined are beyond our means to keep.

If money is found to buy and maintain vehicles, the B fleet needs reinvestment long before a new toy for PRes.

I seen capital money spent on all sorts of things, including salary. Replacing the B fleet is simply a matter of will, the M1078 FMTV 2.5 ton Cargo Truck should be used to replace the medium fleet. Milcots pickups should be purchased on a ongoing basis so no truck is more than 7-10 years old, this is standard practice in most commercial fleets. If you do this your service costs will be less in the long run. Plus it provides jobs for the local economy which makes the politicians happy. Service battalions should have a large wrecker and smaller one based on a pickup. All service battalions should be able to swap out major components in the field, including axles, motors, transmissions and do minor repairs. If Joe's logging can do it out in the bush, so can our Service Battalions. 

 

[Dissident]

Rumor is that the PRes MPs is lined up to get TAPVs c. 2017. Anyone has insight on this?

 

[dangerboy]

The last distribution plan that I saw (dated March 2014) did not have any MP units (Reg or Reserve) receiving any TAPV.  It had the majority going to Infantry and Armoured units (Regular Force) and some going to the Div training Centres and some going to EME school and Op stock.

 

[Kat Stevens]

We did the UXO clearance for the ground the TAPV barn was supposed to sit on in Pet, across from the LAV barn, two years ago.  Has any dirt been turned on the site yet?  Curiosity question only.

 

[cupper]

Rumor is that the PRes MPs is lined up to get TAPVs c. 2017. Anyone has insight on this?

They'd look kinda funny with a set of red and blues on them.

 

[MilEME09]

They'd look kinda funny with a set of red and blues on them.

gotta protect the timmies and doughnuts in the back  >

 

[MilEME09]

Under a AI request its been discovered that the TAPV has been delayed over 15 months now due to critical problems with its steering and other critical components that have appeared during off road testing. According to the Ottawa citizen it cause testing to be cancelled until the problems were fixed.