Infantry Vehicles

[KevinB]

Roshel has unveiled a Senator MRAP Pick-up truck to go along with their APC version:

Canadian armored vehicle maker unveils Senator MRAP pickup

Roshel, the Canadian-based armored vehicle maker, has introduced its latest innovation, the Senator MRAP pickup. As noted by the company, this state-of-the-art multipurpose support vehicle is designed to cater to diverse operational needs, offering flexibility and reliability for modern military...

defence-blog.com

Level 2 Ballistic Protection is next to nothing.

It stops 7.62x39 AP at 30m generally doesn’t stop M855/C77/SS109 at 30m

MRAP Vehicles Ballistic protection is min of Level 3 and most are Level 4.

You need at least protection from 7.62x54R API-T which is in the L3 area.

It’s a Brinks truck…

 

[FJAG]

Level 2 Ballistic Protection is next to nothing.

It stops 7.62x39 AP at 30m generally doesn’t stop M855/C77/SS109 at 30m

MRAP Vehicles Ballistic protection is min of Level 3 and most are Level 4.

You need at least protection from 7.62x54R API-T which is in the L3 area.

It’s a Brinks truck…

I'm looking at it from a domestic manufacturing point of view for a small range group of vehicles. It beats the armour on an ISV as it sits. The level of armour protection is a specification issue to work on.

 

[KevinB]

I'm looking at it from a domestic manufacturing point of view for a small range group of vehicles. It beats the armour on an ISV as it sits. The level of armour protection is a specification issue to work on.

The ISV has no armor but it can be lifted by a Blackhawk, or fit in a Hook (albeit the MRZR options are better for that).

Fair point, I’d just like to see a min of L3 for anything that tries to label itself as an MRAP.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I see this and the Senator as perfect for many of the tasks we use pickups for now. We can increase the armour across the army with minimal impact on maintenance, training and on our budget. It would be nice to get it to L3, but what does that mean to payload, longterm strain on the chassis?

 

[KevinB]

I see this and the Senator as perfect for many of the tasks we use pickups for now. We can increase the armour across the army with minimal impact on maintenance, training and on our budget. It would be nice to get it to L3, but what does that mean to payload, longterm strain on the chassis?

The problem is that L3 is a common Russian platoon and squad support weapon.

So I’m not sure L2 will actually offer much other than protection from small splinters from shells that land 80+m away.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The problem is that L3 is a common Russian platoon and squad support weapon.

So I’m not sure L2 will actually offer much other than protection from small splinters from shells that land 80+m away.

What about ballistic protection at range? When you go out to 300-500 metres doesnt the x51 drop off to about the same energy as the x39 has at the muzzle?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The problem is that L3 is a common Russian platoon and squad support weapon.

So I’m not sure L2 will actually offer much other than protection from small splinters from shells that land 80+m away.

Still better than what most of our secondary vehicles have now. Armour is good, but if it affects mobility and reliability to much, then it become ineffective. Using a domestically produced product stretches are defense dollar and is a easier sell. By all means buy the frontline vehicles from the best makers. But getting more of the secondary vehicles armoured will be a big benefit in the long run.

 

[suffolkowner]

The Roshel/F550 products are interesting but what job is it doing? Replacing the Gwagen? Being what the TAPV should have been?
Is it a good alternative to the Gwagen? Is it a bad alternative to the JLTV or RG31?

We have our LSVS but was the LUVW project not supposed to be one vehicle? The Roshel seems like too much to replace the Milverado

 

[FJAG]

The Roshel/F550 products are interesting but what job is it doing? Replacing the Gwagen? Being what the TAPV should have been?
Is it a good alternative to the Gwagen? Is it a bad alternative to the JLTV or RG31?

We have our LSVS but was the LUVW project not supposed to be one vehicle? The Roshel seems like too much to replace the Milverado

Whenever I look at these things I tend to the familiar, which for me is an artillery regiment.

Leave the FOOs and FSCCs as they are with LAV OPVs with the forward elements, but for the gun line something in the Roshel range with a moderate armour that protects primarily against splinters could serve as the basis for the command post, troop recce, and troop sergeant major's vehicles for wheeled batteries. Same for STA vehicles such as radars and MUAVs. If you create a OWUAV battery, the whole battery could be based on it. AD: the RBS-70 system could use them for everything.

Go beyond that to rear area and other security forces. MPs, CBRN recce. CIMIC.

Yup. Replace the G Wagon (or repurpose them as rovers for them that needs them). Rochel's a larger vehicle capable of a better payload and with a domestic F550 parts supply chain with an established production line.

The current Roshel Senator apparently holds a crew of two with ten pax. That makes it a viable light infantry vehicle capable of carrying a whole section - with the proviso that it is not a primary assault vehicle, just a protected transport vehicle. It looks like a Herc should be easily able to carry two plus their crews so it makes it possible to deploy your light infantry with protected mobility on expeditions.

We could make use of hundreds of these things in a heart beat.

 

[childs56]

Level 2 Ballistic Protection is next to nothing.

Isn't that base armor?

It stops 7.62x39 AP at 30m generally doesn’t stop M855/C77/SS109 at 30m

MRAP Vehicles Ballistic protection is min of Level 3 and most are Level 4.

Don't most vehicles in this range have a base armor with add on armor to increase their protection level?

You need at least protection from 7.62x54R API-T which is in the L3 area.

It’s a Brinks truck…

I wonder why they decided to make this truck, is it based off what they are seeing in Ukraine for a specific task(s).
I wonder how the base model compares to the JLTV and the M-ATV.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Roshel/F550 products are interesting but what job is it doing? Replacing the Gwagen? Being what the TAPV should have been?
Is it a good alternative to the Gwagen? Is it a bad alternative to the JLTV or RG31?

We have our LSVS but was the LUVW project not supposed to be one vehicle? The Roshel seems like too much to replace the Milverado

The Roshel is built on the Ford F-X50 series of trucks. The Milverado could be replaced by a mix of F350s and Roshels.

Just as GM Defence is proposing with its ISV-Colorado, Milverado, Armoured Milverado

 

[Furniture]

Whenever I look at these things I tend to the familiar, which for me is an artillery regiment.

Leave the FOOs and FSCCs as they are with LAV OPVs with the forward elements, but for the gun line something in the Roshel range with a moderate armour that protects primarily against splinters could serve as the basis for the command post, troop recce, and troop sergeant major's vehicles for wheeled batteries. Same for STA vehicles such as radars and MUAVs. If you create a OWUAV battery, the whole battery could be based on it. AD: the RBS-70 system could use them for everything.

Go beyond that to rear area and other security forces. MPs, CBRN recce. CIMIC.

Yup. Replace the G Wagon (or repurpose them as rovers for them that needs them). Rochel's a larger vehicle capable of a better payload and with a domestic F550 parts supply chain with an established production line.

The current Roshel Senator apparently holds a crew of two with ten pax. That makes it a viable light infantry vehicle capable of carrying a whole section - with the proviso that it is not a primary assault vehicle, just a protected transport vehicle. It looks like a Herc should be easily able to carry two plus their crews so it makes it possible to deploy your light infantry with protected mobility on expeditions.

We could make use of hundreds of these things in a heart beat.

I think because it's in the Infantry Vehicles thread, people keep looking at them as APC stand-ins, rather than as support/combat support vehicles with some degree of inherent splinter/small arms protection. If add-on armour is needed, I bet it can be developed.

Looking at it from the perspective of a Met guy, a Senator with a utility trailer would be far more practical as a Met vehicle than the MSVS SEV we currently use. A couple of Senators with trailers could free up MSVS' for far more important logistics uses, and help reduce the footprint of the det in the AMA. If I had a Senator, a week, two Met Techs with field experience, and $10K I could jerry rig a more effective Met vehicle than the silly MSVS SEV. We looked into it based on an LSVW back in 2008, but it went nowhere because the group we were developing it for decided to go a different route.

If weather wenies could make use of them, I suspect there are a lot of other support functions that could likely do the same, freeing up larger more capable trucks for more practical uses.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The current Roshel Senator apparently holds a crew of two with ten pax. That makes it a viable light infantry vehicle capable of carrying a whole section - with the proviso that it is not a primary assault vehicle, just a protected transport vehicle. It looks like a Herc should be easily able to carry two plus their crews so it makes it possible to deploy your light infantry with protected mobility on expeditions.

We could make use of hundreds of these things in a heart beat.

How about a completely imagined, purely hypothetical scenario where we procure 108 vehicles for the specific purpose of prepositioning to provide a such a mobility aid to a flyover LIB joining a primarily mechanized Bde in a northern theatre?

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Level 2 Ballistic Protection is next to nothing.

It stops 7.62x39 AP at 30m generally doesn’t stop M855/C77/SS109 at 30m

MRAP Vehicles Ballistic protection is min of Level 3 and most are Level 4.

You need at least protection from 7.62x54R API-T which is in the L3 area.

It’s a Brinks truck…

So, Toronto/Vancouver on a Saturday night?

 

[KevinB]

Isn't that base armor?

Don't most vehicles in this range have a base armor with add on armor to increase their protection level?

I wonder why they decided to make this truck, is it based off what they are seeing in Ukraine for a specific task(s).
I wonder how the base model compares to the JLTV and the M-ATV.

JLTV is Level3 with the A kit base vehicle , the B kit is higher (4a). Note a Chinook cannot lift the B kit equipped JLTV.

The requirement for JLTV A kit was Level1, but to make the B Kit requirements all of the three competitors found it necessary to up the base armor to make the add on B kit effective.

Honestly the JLTV B kit is fairly overkill IMHO as trying to defeat 14.5mm Russian and the RPG threats as well as other blast attacks of those levels is to me foolhardy with a ‘light vehicle’. I think when you can’t lift it with a Hook, you’re way past a light vehicle.

3 is a fairly reasonable level to expect a armored light vehicle to defeat, as it’s a reasonable expectation of a small arms and splinter threat that will be seen on operations.

I’m not a big fan of add on armor to light vehicles simply because the base vehicle is rarely designed for its use (see the UA Hummers performance in that regard) you quickly see door sag and other issues with chassis and powertrain that lead to gaps in the armor and reliability issues from the increased strain.

Heck add on armor to some tracked vehicles causes powertrain issues.

 

[OldSolduer]

I’m not a big fan of add on armor to light vehicles simply because the base vehicle is rarely designed for its use (see the UA Hummers performance in that regard) you quickly see door sag and other issues with chassis and powertrain that lead to gaps in the armor and reliability issues from the increased strain.

Heck add on armor to some tracked vehicles causes powertrain issues.

They up armored the MLVWs in Bosnia and they could barely move. FWIW FFS get decent windshield wipers. Thank you.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The Roshel/F550 products are interesting but what job is it doing? Replacing the Gwagen? Being what the TAPV should have been?
Is it a good alternative to the Gwagen? Is it a bad alternative to the JLTV or RG31?

We have our LSVS but was the LUVW project not supposed to be one vehicle? The Roshel seems like too much to replace the Milverado

The G-wagons and LSVW is what I see. It's a good alternative as it helps build our domestic capability and stretches our defense dollar. We need to see them as semi-disposable and buy them in lots of several hundred a year and not have any over 10 years of age. That keeps the factory working and continuous improvements. Not sure what should replace the TAPV as recce vehicles are undergoing a shift right now. I get a feeling a recce vehicle is going to need a 25mm RWS to stay useful in the coming years and increased awareness.

 

[suffolkowner]

The Roshel is built on the Ford F-X50 series of trucks. The Milverado could be replaced by a mix of F350s and Roshels.

Just as GM Defence is proposing with its ISV-Colorado, Milverado, Armoured Milverado

View attachment 83189View attachment 83190

maybe we should stay with Chevy I like them better than Ford, lol and Chevy has a 550 now as well with a front opening hood

Site Maintenance

 

[OldSolduer]

OK so this new Roshel thing - what does it have for an engine?

 

[suffolkowner]

OK so this new Roshel thing - what does it have for an engine?

6.7 L power stroke