• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Logistic Vehicle Modernization Project - Replacing everything from LUVW to SHLVW

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
2
Points
180
Another article on the truck fleet replacement


The numbers don't look particularly amazing, talking about replacing an original 2879 LSVW (now 1333) with 650-1100 and over 1500 Heavy (now 591 +86 AHSVS and 59 Osmosis water(?)) with 300-550. I get not needing as many heavy due to the overlap with the new mediums but that shouldn't result in such a large reduction in the LSVW's, should it?
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
107
Points
680
Another article on the truck fleet replacement


The numbers don't look particularly amazing, talking about replacing an original 2879 LSVW (now 1333) with 650-1100 and over 1500 Heavy (now 591 +86 AHSVS and 59 Osmosis water(?)) with 300-550. I get not needing as many heavy due to the overlap with the new mediums but that shouldn't result in such a large reduction in the LSVW's, should it?
Only way that makes sense for the LSVW is if we go heavy on the milcot replacement.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
44
Points
530
Gotta remember there is a separate project for a new LUV in addition to the LVM Light. And there are 330 ULCV that don't exist in the inventory now. And finally there is the Arctic Mobility project to replace the Bv206 capability.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
240
Points
680
Gotta remember there is a separate project for a new LUV in addition to the LVM Light. And there are 330 ULCV that don't exist in the inventory now. And finally there is the Arctic Mobility project to replace the Bv206 capability.
What, with another BV? What can possibly compete in that field?
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
98
Points
480
The BV's in our inventory are pretty old. I imagine they will be replaced with a newer version of the BV.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
759
Points
910
The BV's in our inventory are pretty old. I imagine they will be replaced with a newer version of the BV.

Cpl Frisk has an informative piece on the subject:

Bv 206 meets Mercedes​

Several modern vehicles are found on the market, including BAE System Hägglund’s BvS10 Viking Mk 2 and ST Engineering’s Bronco ATTC, which underwent snow mobility testing in Finland last winter. However, for a country like Finland which has over 600 Bv 206 and a number of older indigenous Sisu NA-series (as well as a handful of the lightly protected Bv 308), getting a similar number of modern protected all terrain vehicles is probably overly expensive. The BvS10 Viking is found in an unarmoured (and likely cheaper) version designated BvS10 BEOWULF, but with modern military vehicles ‘cheap’ doesn’t necessarily equal ‘little money’.

 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
44
Points
530
The only problem I have with Beowulf is that, unlike the 206, it won't fit in a Chinook. The market needs new build, up-engined 206s. Or at least a cabriolet version of the Beowulf.

On the other hand they can be sling loaded.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
107
Points
680
Gotta remember there is a separate project for a new LUV in addition to the LVM Light. And there are 330 ULCV that don't exist in the inventory now. And finally there is the Arctic Mobility project to replace the Bv206 capability.
Also have to note these projects have to stay in budget, so that night be the max vehicles they can get with the current allocated budget for the project.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
240
Points
680
The “give them back to the taxpayer” option is the preferred COA, more so for should emergencies arise where non-jettisonable heavy weight is undesirable.
I much prefer a slung load for alot of the same reasons. And it is much easier on my aged body not putting heavy things into a helicopter and pulling them out again....
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
14
Points
430
Is the replacement project considering future needs or current requirements?
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
317
Points
880
Another article on the truck fleet replacement


The numbers don't look particularly amazing, talking about replacing an original 2879 LSVW (now 1333) with 650-1100 and over 1500 Heavy (now 591 +86 AHSVS and 59 Osmosis water(?)) with 300-550. I get not needing as many heavy due to the overlap with the new mediums but that shouldn't result in such a large reduction in the LSVW's, should it?
Not to mention when they replaced the 5 ton, Deuces, 5/4ton, jeep it was on a roughly 1-2 new for every 3 old vehicles.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
107
Points
680
Not to mention when they replaced the 5 ton, Deuces, 5/4ton, jeep it was on a roughly 1-2 new for every 3 old vehicles.
We keep trying to do more with less, yes the truck may be bigger and can haul more but I can't deliver to two units at the same time unless doing a centralized DP, which is what we will be forced to do due to smaller numbers of trucks.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
317
Points
880
We keep trying to do more with less, yes the truck may be bigger and can haul more but I can't deliver to two units at the same time unless doing a centralized DP, which is what we will be forced to do due to smaller numbers of trucks.
Russian and Chinese artillery is happy that we are so obliging in concentrating our assets for them and saving them money on future Fire Missions. :confused:
 
Top