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

[McG]

Range practice for the LAW and Carl G?

It’s prohibited to install used AFV as new targets now. Too many environmental contaminants.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That's right! We run clean wars over here.

 

[markppcli]

It’s prohibited to install used AFV as new targets now. Too many environmental contaminants.

Oh course the M72, 84mm, and what ever other anti armour weapon ranges are otherwise pristine natural environments.

 

[McG]

Oh course the M72, 84mm, and what ever other anti armour weapon ranges are otherwise pristine natural environments.

Why needlessly aggravate a bad situation? Especially when a scrap vehicle is still more value that bespoke steel targets which are just as effective.

 

[medicineman]

It’s prohibited to install used AFV as new targets now. Too many environmental contaminants.

 

[KevinB]

Why needlessly aggravate a bad situation? Especially when a scrap vehicle is still more value that bespoke steel targets which are just as effective.

Useful 3D steel targets are generally going to cost more than used vehicles - as generally they are being scrapped as range targets as they have no intrinsic value left.

 

[markppcli]

Why needlessly aggravate a bad situation? Especially when a scrap vehicle is still more value that bespoke steel targets which are just as effective.

Well in my particular line of work theres value to seeing a similar target shape in a variety of istar platforms. Additionally afv targets simply last longer and the mothballed ones are destined to be scrapped anyways so its cost neutral frankly.

 

[McG]

Well in my particular line of work theres value to seeing a similar target shape in a variety of istar platforms.

Are you really optimally served looking at something that has been soaking at ambient temperatures for year with major internal components & many minor external components removed (and through most of its life with significant surface area mangled by HE), so it no longer presents representative sensor characteristics? At this state, you can create a bespoke target that provides a comparable level of representation. We don't need full manikin targets to train marksmanship, and we don't need real AFV targets to train gunnery.

The best place to become familiar with looking at realistic AFV with realistic signature characteristics through a variety of ISTAR platforms under realistic field conditions is during force-on-force training where all the bits are present and heating/cooling cycles follow behaviors of expected use.

Additionally afv targets simply last longer and the mothballed ones are destined to be scrapped anyways so its cost neutral frankly.

And they are worth more as scrap than a bespoke target costs. They also contain various sorts of contaminants (even after having been cleaned & de-militarized), and have many more internal cavities to trap and hold UXO (so they are more dangerous when it is time to remove).

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Are you really optimally served looking at something that has been soaking at ambient temperatures for year with major internal components & many minor external components removed (and through most of its life with significant surface area mangled by HE), so it no longer presents representative sensor characteristics? At this state, you can create a bespoke target that provides a comparable level of representation. We don't need full manikin targets to train marksmanship, and we don't need real AFV targets to train gunnery.

The best place to become familiar with looking at realistic AFV with realistic signature characteristics through a variety of ISTAR platforms under realistic field conditions is during force-on-force training where all the bits are present and heating/cooling cycles follow behaviors of expected use.


And they are worth more as scrap than a bespoke target costs. They also contain various sorts of contaminants (even after having been cleaned & de-militarized), and have many more internal cavities to trap and hold UXO (so they are more dangerous when it is time to remove).

At least the old AFV range targets, become a major source of hulls and parts to restore antique AFV's

 

[KevinB]

Are you really optimally served looking at something that has been soaking at ambient temperatures for year with major internal components & many minor external components removed (and through most of its life with significant surface area mangled by HE), so it no longer presents representative sensor characteristics? At this state, you can create a bespoke target that provides a comparable level of representation. We don't need full manikin targets to train marksmanship, and we don't need real AFV targets to train gunnery.

Actually beyond basic marksmanship, you do need human realistic multiple angle options for target training. Especially on movers that offer different perspectives when engaging.

We hit Ferets with M72's (although apparently it wasn't supposed to be a live M72 range we found out later, @MJP may have been there for that one) that had been in the impact areas for years - and they still looked like an Armored Car after we struck them with multiple volley fired M72's (and all I got was a lot of frag in my helmet - and a few minor cuts, apparently min safe ranges are there for a reason)

Similarly the Leo C1 turrets that where used for LAV ranges in Wx provided a good hull down AFV target, that provided visual feedback when hit. Was also neat to see how TPT cut them up significantly. Not as impressive as the T-72 etc targets in Afghanistan with APFSDS - but still a good confidence builder for troops.

The best place to become familiar with looking at realistic AFV with realistic signature characteristics through a variety of ISTAR platforms under realistic field conditions is during force-on-force training where all the bits are present and heating/cooling cycles follow behaviors of expected use.

Honestly if the CA had a Red Force setup with Russian/Chinese equipment I would agree, but a Blue Force training against other NATO vehicles will just give experience with other NATO vehicles.

And they are worth more as scrap than a bespoke target costs.

I don't think we shop at the same target store

They also contain various sorts of contaminants (even after having been cleaned & de-militarized), and have many more internal cavities to trap and hold UXO (so they are more dangerous when it is time to remove).

Okay fair point.

 

[dapaterson]

I don't think we shop at the same target store

Target Canada barely lasted four years...

Target Canada - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[McG]

a Blue Force training against other NATO vehicles will just give experience with other NATO vehicles.

This is true also when putting old NATO vehicles on a range to shoot at. But bespoke targets can look like whatever you need them to look like.