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

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

The Enhanced Recovery Capability project (DLR 8-6)  is working on fielding a recovery solution for LAV UP, TAPV, CCV and all wheeled vehicles.
 
Nerf herder said:
they'll either have to hold tight and wait or BiP it and carry on.

When I was on my reserve TQ-3 course way back when, on the recovery portion, they kept looking at me funny when I kept selecting the BiP option, even for a flat tire.

They just had no sense of haha.
 
It kind of boggles the mind that they never built/bought a ARV version of the LAV III, since at the time we were getting rid of the tank, what did they intend to use for recovery in midst of a battle?
 
Colin P said:
It kind of boggles the mind that they never built/bought a ARV version of the LAV III, since at the time we were getting rid of the tank, what did they intend to use for recovery in midst of a battle?

Unicorns?
 
Ostrozac said:
But what advantage is there to having dissimilar vehicle types within a patrol? Isn't there the risk that if the TAPV has inferior cross country mobility and the LAV is slower on the road that the patrol is held to the worst of both worlds when selecting routes?

To my mind mixing vehicle types within a patrol makes no particular sense. Now complete LAV or TAPV troops or squadrons make more sense, assigning areas according to which platform is more suitable.

Hopefully they have comparable cross country mobility. I do not believe that the Surv gear can fit in the TAPV. The mixed patrol lets us have a sensor suite in every patrol. Nothing stops commanders, though, from organizing their squadrons to meet the task.
 
Colin P said:
It kind of boggles the mind that they never built/bought a ARV version of the LAV III, since at the time we were getting rid of the tank, what did they intend to use for recovery in midst of a battle?

That is because in all the CAXs that have been run in the past several years, we always win, and don't lose any troops or vehicles either.  We don't need an ARV, you just have to tell that puckster to reset.
 
I hope/pray that the lessons learned about battlefield recovery that was acquired are kept and addressed. Sad when you think that the Germans in WWII had spent more time on this issue than we do now. In fact their recovery and repair units where instrumental in keeping the Panzer divisions equipped with tank, some that had been damaged, recovered and repaired a dozen time.

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt08/german-tank-maintenance-recovery.html

 
Maybe we should spend more time looking at what the M1117 actually does for the US armed forces, then we might have a better idea of how best to use it here.

The M1117 is an evolved version of the "Commando" armoured car of the Viet Nam war era, which was then used for such tasks as airfield security and convoy escort. Perhaps not surprisingly, M1117's today are used by the US Military police for perimeter security and convoy escort tasks. Since threats have become much bigger and badder since the 1960's, the M1117 is also much bigger and heavier than a V-150 "Commando" to carry more armour and more firepower.

So we have a security vehicle with the mobility to keep up with convoys, carry a small dismounted security team (it has a rear hatch, BTW) take a hit and punch back pretty hard. Adapting the platform to take a small recce team does not seem to be too big of a stretch, assuming it has reasonable cross country mobility. Other tasks for small teams needing protected mobility could include IA (CIMIC, PSYOPS teams), perhaps FOO/FACs (although advertising your presence in a different vehicle might make you an attractive target) and other specialties might come to mind.

This is a pretty limited subset of things you could do. The M1117 is not designed to be a front line AFV (so the idea of zooming around with the rest of the combat team is a bit of a non starter right away), nor does it have the ability to carry lots of people or "stuff", so you need to think carefully about what exactly you want to do and what tools you will have available. Once we wrap our heads around that, then we should have a much better picture of what the M1117 can actually be used for in the CF.
 
Thucydides said:
Once we wrap our heads around that, then we should have a much better picture of what the M1117 can actually be used for in the CF.


Hard target, boat anchor, paper weight,  just a few ideas of the top of my head.
 
Thucydides said:
The M1117 is not designed to be a front line AFV (so the idea of zooming around with the rest of the combat team is a bit of a non starter right away), nor does it have the ability to carry lots of people or "stuff", so you need to think carefully about what exactly you want to do and what tools you will have available. Once we wrap our heads around that, then we should have a much better picture of what the M1117 can actually be used for in the CF.

Too bad it's going to be used doctrinally about 35-45 km beyond the FEBA then.

Regards
 
Thucydides said:
The M1117 is not designed to be a front line AFV (so the idea of zooming around with the rest of the combat team is a bit of a non starter right away), nor does it have the ability to carry lots of people or "stuff", so you need to think carefully about what exactly you want to do and what tools you will have available. Once we wrap our heads around that, then we should have a much better picture of what the M1117 can actually be used for in the CF.

What exactly is a "front line AFV?" If you mean able to fight toe to toe with other AFVs then the M1117 is certainly not one. As a recce platform, however, the M1117 might just have what is required to be up front. Mobility will likely be the biggest consideration. We'll have to see how it performs cross country.
 
Some WW2 British Recce Regiment Organizations.

Mixed and matched vehicles within the same Regiment, Squadron and even Troop seem to have been more the rule than the exception.

In addition to other roles how about adding a Platoon of TAPVs to each Service Battalion as armoured liaison vehicles, convoy escort, armoured transport, armoured light tractors?
 
Nerf herder said:
Too bad it's going to be used doctrinally about 35-45 km beyond the FEBA then.

Regards

You mean the same job we used to do with the Ferret? ;D
 
GK .Dundas said:
I"m surprised they didn't look at either the French VBL or the Dutch /German Fennek .

I am not a project guy, but what makes you think they didn't look at those vehicles? My understanding is that they cast their net pretty wide. Bear in mind, though, that just because a vehicle exists in another army doesn't mean it can purchased today.
 
"Not a front line AFV" was in reference to comments about how the Infantry could not debus effectively from the M1117; thats not what its for.

The cross country mobility aspect needs to be looked at closely, the M1117 is quite large and heavy and has only 4 wheels, so ground pressure is going to be an issue.
 
recceguy said:
You mean the same job we used to do with the Ferret? ;D

crab_pic3.jpg


New from Panhard - citadel, all wheel steering, 3 crew - and light enough for a Chinook.
 
Kirkhill said:
crab_pic3.jpg


New from Panhard - citadel, all wheel steering, 3 crew - and light enough for a Chinook.

That is quite a bit larger, likely far more noisier and has an effective gun.

Those three reasons alone take it out of the Ferret category.

However, it likely doesn't also use a forward\ reverse lever to enable it to utilize a five speed transmission to make the vehicle go as fast backwards as it does forwards either ;)

But I get your point.
 
I could barely fit my leg into a Ferret, let alone a tac vest and rifle.  I guess the concept of the Ferret is still there (whatever than means), but the Ferret is about the same size as the box lunches that feed this beast.
 
Back
Top