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

[Tank Troll]

Yay another peice of junk, to big for Recce not big enough for a infantry section to fit in. Always one war behind. :facepalm:

 

[Kirkhill]

How about "General Utility?

As in B echelon?  Command and "Semi-Tactical" (TV's predecessors used to love that phrase) Reconnaissance?  Gun Tractor?

LAVs and CCVs seem to me to be at least as well suited to Recce as these machines.  And at 17 tonnes AUW (at least according to CASR) and over 3 m OAH, exclusive of the RWS, it would appear that early entry forces would have to rely on the 4 C17s to bring them in at the rate of 2 or 3 apiece.  Roughly the rate at which they could bring in the LAVs and the CCVs.

Perhaps we have to wait and see what happens with the LSVW replacement project?

 

[Tank Troll]

The new Recce Sqn look is going to mix these in with the LAV III surveillance vehicles. So much for sneak and peak. 

 

[noneck]

What will the distribution of these be and will the Mo be getting any?

 

[Miller97]

sweet..another big POS, shoulda got the M-ATV.

 

[Snaketnk]

Yet another purchase that makes me want to stop paying my taxes. God forbid we use something that's been proven and had the kinks worked out already.

 

[GK .Dundas]

This purchase to put it mildly qualifies as an act of stupidity on several levels.The vehicles are to large and have too high of a silhouette for recce at least sneak and peek , They also lack the firepower to do recce by fire and I could go and on .
This make the AVGP purchases actually look good.You know part of me is hoping this was either blatant political interference or some Deputy Minister is about to retire to some tropical country that has no extradition treaty with us.
The alternative is the NDHQ couldn't plan and stage a piss up at a brewery.Not a pleasant thought considering what they are responsible for defence of the nation. :

 

[George Wallace]

This purchase to put it mildly qualifies as an act of stupidity on several levels.The vehicles are to large and have too high of a silhouette for recce at least sneak and peek , They also lack the firepower to do recce by fire and I could go and on .
This make the AVGP purchases actually look good.

I agree with you in that they are not going to do 'sneak and peek' well, which is what we used to use as the Canadian doctrine, and mention that it has not been Canadian doctrine to 'recce by fire'. 

Not too much can make the AVGP purchase look good, except that it eventually led to the LAV III.

On another note; I was just informed recently that 'Spec Fire' was against the Geneva Conventions.  True or not, it still is an interesting note.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Let the Canadian industrial backlash begin!

Tempers are flaring after two London companies were denied a $1.25 billion contract with the Canadian Military building armoured vehicles.

London Machinery Inc and General Dynamics Systems Canada were both up for the long term project which could last 25 years.

The government instead awarded the job to the Canadian division of Textron Systems.

And critics are speaking out.

Local MP Irene Mathyssen says she is appalled and it makes no sense to take the investment out of the country.

CAW President Ken Lewenza said it was a slap in the face.

Lewenza said it shows a lack of sensitivity to the manufacturing job losses in the area.

The vehicles will be built in Louisiana instead of London.

But Textron says the job will still have economic spinoffs for Canada - seven other Canadian firms will act as suppliers.

CJBK London, 9 Jun 12

 

[Snaketnk]

If these thing have the kind of suspension I've experienced with other Mine Protected vehicles (and judging from their little promo video it is) We won't be allowed to take these off road for fear of shaking them to pieces and killing the crew.

 

[Kirkhill]

Before getting too bent out of shape, (for little reason in my case as a by-stander), I keep being drawn back to the fact that the Bison, an AVGP with the missing wheel put back where it belonged, was originally procured for the Militia as an Infantry Section Carrier.

Those Carriers have carried precious few sections of infantry from the Militia, unless they were attached to a deployed Regular Force unit.
They have all since been converted to support vehicles.

These TAPVs, now that they are in the system, may go through the same life-changing experience.  When reality intrudes on the plan are there any guesses as to what these vehicles may actually end up being used for?

 

[GnyHwy]

In the interest of fair debate, I will take the other side to keep this from being and endless slag.  I'm not sure if we made the right choice, but I will take other side nonetheless.

First off, the title is a bit misleading.  The TAPV will not be replacing the Coyote; it is replacing the RG, which filled the gap that the G-Wagon couldn't.  This gap could briefly be described as the capability to patrol without getting annihilated by the first ambush that it encountered.  The RG was a quick fix that filled a gap, and we bought it in haste, and with full understanding that we wouldn't be keeping it.

The Coyote is being replaced by the LAV Up Recce Variant.  While we all see the importance of "sneak and peek", if it in fact exists, we also have to protect the troops inside, which is a priority.  We could all make the argument that if you're not seen, then you won't be hit, but that is impractical given the tasks of presence patrols and convoy escorts that the vehicle is most likely to perform.  Was the picture below what everyone was expecting?

As far a recce by fire, I'll leave that to the CCV, if it ever happens.  A true recce by fire vehicle is likely going to be a monster (40 tonne +) once you add in all the protection and firepower that it will need.

As far as the firepower of the Textron vehicle, I doubt it will be lacking.  Not all TAPVs will be equal, but the ones where firepower is required, you will likely see a .50 cal and 40mm AGL combo.  That seems sufficient to me.

Lastly, in response to the question of the reserves getting them?  Since this has evolved from the G-Wagon, it seems reasonable, and I would like to see at least one unit per brigade area get them if possible.  Convoy escort tasks will never go away, and I feel the reserves could fill that role, if they have the proper training.

 

[cupper]

Just from what I saw in the promo vid, it seems that there could be a stability / roll over problem with higher speed manouvers.

And seriously, the spare tire to be mounted on the roof? That's going to be fun.

 

[DELTADOG13]

Interesting to read that the Bison was never used for what it was intended......an armoured vehicle for the Reserves. Back in the early 90's when it was procured, the Reserves did receive them. I was in the units that were assigned them. I was both in the West Nova Scotia Regiment and the 1st Bn The Royal New Brunswick Regiment, which had a Mechanized role. I remember quite vividly rolling up and down the Lawfield Corridor in both a Bison and an M113 on multiple exercises over many years. Regardless of the role assigned to the Reserves in a true Mechanized or Motorized role, the TAPV with be pre-positioned at the Area Trg Centres for the use of the Reserve Brigades. I would also assume as it is wheeled that some will have to be assigned to the units for PCF courses. The same as the Coyote was in in its early days with the PEIR. 

We'll have to see what happens. Another operation requiring the stripping of these vehicles from the Reserves to man this possible mission may happen. As it did for the Bison in Afghanistan. :threat:

WAIT OUT!
DD13

 

[m2austin]

Text deleted in accordance with Army.ca policy

Milnet.ca Staff

Anyone here have any comments on this unit?

Image from cbc.ca <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/topstories/2012/06/08/tapv.jpg">Here</a>

 

[m2austin]

^Ack.

Here is similar information authored by a different source.

Sourced from CBC.ca, 9 June 2012, Link <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/06/08/nb-gagetown-ashfield-fantino-621.html">Here</a>

Ottawa company lands $1.25B armoured vehicle contract
Textron Systems Canada Inc. will supply Canadian Forces with 500 new vehicles
CBC News
Posted: Jun 8, 2012 8:07 AM ET

An Ottawa company has landed a $1.25-billion contract to replace the army's fleet of armoured patrol vehicles, federal officials announced at a military base in New Brunswick Friday afternoon.

Textron Systems Canada Inc. will supply 500 vehicles to the Canadian Forces, with the option for another 100, said Fisheries Minister Keith Ashfield, the Conservative MP for Fredericton, and Julian Fantino, the associate minister of national defence.

The first tactical vehicles are expected to be delivered in 2014, they told the crowd gathered at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in Oromocto.

The fleet is scheduled to be fully operational in 2016.

The federal government says jobs will be created across Canada for skilled workers to build the patrol vehicles.

Improved protection for soldiers

The Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle (TAPV) is an updated model of the one Textron's parent company currently produces for the American military.

The TAPV is specifically designed to protect soldiers from land mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) — major causes of death for Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.

Fantino believes the upgraded vehicles will give soldiers a greater sense of security.

"We have learned many lessons through our combat operations in Afghanistan, one of which being the importance of armoured vehicles in protecting our soldiers from today's threats in operations," he said.

Major Carl Gendron, one of the experts who evaluated the four competing bids for the contract, said the TAPV is a tough vehicle.

"It has sustained 10 kilograms of explosive under the wheels and eight under the hull. So it makes it extremely resilient to IEDs," said Gendron.

The TAPV, which has a weapon system that's controlled from inside the vehicle, will replace the Coyote reconnaissance vehicles and an armoured vehicle called the RG-31.

Of the 500, about 200 will be used as reconnaissance vehicles, while the remainder will be personnel carriers.

The TAPV can, however, be reconfigured for various roles, said Brigadier-General Chris Thurrott.

"One of the interesting things about this contract are the packages that have been put in place to allow for replacements, to allow for adjustments," he said.

"So what you have is a pool of specialist equipment, some which is already prepared for vehicles for specific roles and other ones that will allow us to adjust."

New Brunswick company loses bid

Dieppe's Malley Industries was one of four other bidders who were beat out by Textron Systems Canada.

Malley had partnered with a U.S. firm, Force Protection, to bid on a $1-billion contract to build 750 armoured military vehicles for the Department of National Defence.

Force Protection designed the patrol vehicles, while Malley hoped to assemble them.

"It's one of those things," said Steen Gunderson, general manager of Malley Industries. "We're looking for the region to grow. We're looking for sectors such as this to grow, and today, unfortunately, is a sad day."

The company said winning that contract would have meant 120 new jobs and as many as 500 others through spinoff work.

"Support industries, supply chain industries would have seen significant benefits," he said.

Malley Industries congratulated Textron on its success. Gunderson said Malley's involvement in the bid was a positive experience because they were able to make connections with a number of big companies such as Lockheed Martin and Elbit.

"We've got some alliances there that we put a lot of sweat and time into these things, and I think these relationships will grow as well."

 

[Edward Campbell]

There's already a lengthy discussion of the TAPV here.

 

[ArmyRick]

While alot of people are screaming fowl and bad choice, etc, etc.

here is a consideration. The new TAPV is based on a vehicle very much an upgraded ASV (M1117 I Believe). The yanks have been using it for years and seem interested in keep using it. Is their something the americans know that we do not?

 

[Lance Wiebe]

While alot of people are screaming fowl and bad choice, etc, etc.

here is a consideration. The new TAPV is based on a vehicle very much an upgraded ASV (M1117 I Believe). The yanks have been using it for years and seem interested in keep using it. Is their something the americans know that we do not?

The Textron variant is the oldest vehicle design in the competition, by far. The first variant was used by the USAF for air field defense in Vietnam. While it is new produced, it is still close to being a 50 year old design. While this may be a good thing, it makes me think of, say, new produced AMC Gremlins, or Pinto's......new produced wouldn't improve those much.

I also understand that both variants will have an RWS with a 40mm AGL and a C6.

A recce tp in a recce Sqn will have both LAV Recce (surveillance) and the TAPV. I kind of think that there may have to be some doctrinal changes....and I wonder what role the Armour Reserve Units will be given once they get these?

I also think that we had better spend some time training drivers; at 2.6 meters high, and a heavy RWS mounted high, this vehicle will be very tricky to drive on anything but improved roads.

 

[m2austin]

I also think that we had better spend some time training drivers; at 2.6 meters high, and a heavy RWS mounted high, this vehicle will be very tricky to drive on anything but improved roads.

Anyone who drove (read: wrecked) an RG-31 in Panjwaii should have nothing to fear. And by this, I speak from the experience of my sect. setting the fastest turnaround time with them - under six hours from repaired, back into Medusa, back on a flatbed with a snapped axle.

Really hope this unit is able to off-road.


Chimo