Domestic and Arctic Mobility Enhancement Project

[Kirkhill]

While we are in the game of opining....

I wonder if there is any appetite to move the DAME project timelines forwards.  One reason for wondering is the confluence of policy

Renew Canada’s focus on surveillance and control of Canadian territory and approaches, particularly our Arctic regions, and increase the size of the Canadian Rangers.

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/minister-national-defence-mandate-letter

and technology

. 

This is the new BAE Hagglunds BvS10 Beowulf - an UNarmoured version of the Viking used by the Royal Marines and the Royal Netherlands Marines.


In 1987 Perrin Beatty, in his Challenge and Commitment white paper, to anchor his Domestic Force (The SSF + Militia Brigades + Vital Point troops (Security Guards with Guns)) on a mixed fleet of

820 to be purchased and built in Calgary by Foremost

And 199 of these (or similar)

I thought then, and I still think, that on that score Minister Beatty had it about right.

The Bv206, supplied to the Militia Service Battalions across the country, and prepositioned in the north, would make for a "poor man's helicopter", supplying a platform that would access the 70% of the country that isn't accessible by road and would permit access when the roads are impassable, as during domestic disasters.  It would also permit realistic off-road training by both regs and reserves.  And finally, it is an excellent expeditionary vehicle being transportable by air and can swim off a ship.

Unfortunately the Bv206, although more than 10,000 were built, was taken out of production and allowed to become obsolete.  And the only way to acquire the capability was to buy armoured vehicles, in particular the Viking.

In Afghanistan the value of the vehicle was demonstrated by both the PPCLI and the Royal Marines (in armoured form).  That spurred a renewed interest which generated competition in the form of the Singapore Technologies / General Dynamics competitor, the Bronco. Also armoured.

While both the Viking and Bronco are apparently great pieces of kit they suffer from being armoured.  This drives up purchase price and operating costs.  It also drives down payload, mobility and transportability.

What was missing was an unarmoured, cheap, replacement for the original Bv206.  The Beowulf is apparently that replacement - 30 years in the making.

Additional info is available at these links:

http://www.military-today.com/trucks/bvs10_beowulf.htm

http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_kingdom_british_army_light_armoured_vehicle/bvs10_beowulf_all-terrain_tracked_vehicle_technical_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures_video_12509156.html

As noted above Beatty proposed a fleet of 820 Bv206s and 199 Bisons.  I think his numbers are still about right. But instead of the Bv206s and Bisons I  would be proposing Beowulfs and Vikings - in the same strengths.

A Transport Platoon of 30 to 40 Beowulfs in each Territorial Battalion Group would permit training and a quick response to domestic emergencies.  Together with prepositioned vehicles in the north at the Air Forces FOLs, Resolute and Nanisivik that adds up to 300 to 500 vehicles.  Put some more into the Regs hands, some in storage and some onboard the CSCs..... ...... some armoured and you quickly find yourself back up around the 1000 vehicle mark.

And if you don't like the Hagglunds, we can always get a Canadian made knock-off through General Dynamics supplying Singapore Technologies new UNarmoured version of the Bronco, the Extremv

I know it is to dream, and I know we must wait for the new white paper in 2017 but ..... in the words of my daughter, "Maaaaaaybe". 

 

[a_majoor]

I like how you are thinking 

If the TAPV program were to collapse, that might be a very interesting way of gaining much of the capabilitiy the program was initiated to provide.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

License built in Canada would be acceptable and save us currency exchange and make the politicians happy. Seriously we sort of created this niche, we should own it! But it has to be an existing facility that gets the contract and they need to maintain the jigs and special equipment for building them. Have the contract specify slow rate production so you get a continuous supply and the line stays open with potential other buyers.

 

[Kirkhill]

Somebody like these guys perhaps?

http://foremost.ca/foremost-mobile-equipment/tracked-vehicles/chieftain-c/

I wonder if the wounds have healed yet.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

wounds healed, pray do tell?

 

[Kirkhill]

wounds healed, pray do tell?

BV-206 NTV PROJECT GETS PROD FROM ACTION-ORIENTED ALBERTA FIRM

Lack of activity on Mobile Command's Northern Terrain Vehicle (NTV) acquisition programme has prompted Hagglunds Foremost Inc. of Calgary, Alberta to issue a discussion paper in the hope of generating political support for the project. In July 1988, DND approved an acquisition of 820 Swedish BV-206 northern terrain vehicles to be used for territorial defence tasks. The same fiberglass hulled, rubber tracked over-snow vehicles was successfully used by the Canadian Air Sea Transportable (CAST) Brigade.

Hagglunds Foremost Inc. (HF) was formed in February 1989 as a joint venture between Hagglunds Vehicle AB of Sweden, manufacturer of the BV-206, and Canadian Foremost Ltd. of Calgary, Alberta to produce the vehicle in Canada. By early 1989, the firm had actually started converting Swedish technical drawings to Canadian standards and had sent out a number of information packages to potential subcontractors in expectation of a contract award by March 1990. Then came the April 1989 budget cuts. The NTV programme was reduced by half and delayed indefinitely. The company began to cut its staff. Since April the project has remained frozen. An increasingly uncertain HF is awaiting a contract to begin project definition and the NTV Project Management Office (PMO) is waiting for funding to proceed with a Canadianization study to determine which Canadian parts can be used with the BV-206. HF, on its own initiative, issued its paper.

According to Shari Pusch of Canadian Foremost Ltd., the discussion paper was prepared to update HF's internal management staff, its Board of Directors and any concerned subcontractors. The company also seeks political support. The document reminds its readers that the NTV meets Mobile Command's requirement for a vehicle which can traverse difficult terrain and that the BV-206's low ground pressure minimizes risk of damage to the fragile northern ecology. The paper stresses western industrial diversity for the benefit of any politicians who need to be reminded of this well known political and regional development imperative of the current government.

While the company is conducting its private sector briefings, the NTV PMO is in a continual briefing process of its own, keeping senior DND decision makers informed. An Interdepartmental Senior Review Board (ISRB) is scheduled for today, November 29, at which representatives from DND, DSS and regional development departments will be briefed on project status. There are bright spots to the otherwise irritating situation which are keeping HF guardedly optimistic. DND is experimenting with an air droppable BV prototype which shows promise. Discussions between Hagglunds AB and Canadian Foremost Ltd. may result in HF producing BV-206s in Calgary for the U.S. Army. At present the U.S. buys its BV-206s directly from Hagglunds AB in Sweden. Lastly, the HF paper argues that when an NTV contract is finally awarded, there will be a high degree of Canadian content involved. Svante Andersson, Hagglund's representative in Ottawa, states that as much as 60 percent of the NTV may be made up of Canadian parts.

http://www.thewednesdayreport.com/twr/twr48v3.html

In other news from the same 1989 Bulletin

RESERVE UNITS TO GET NEW COMPUTERIZED PAY SYSTEM

CANADA CAUGHT SLOUCHING

For a country which has depended on others to help fulfill its military requirements and commitments, these are tough times. The ongoing fragmentation of eastern Europe and the potential dismemberment of NATO will cause grave concerns for Canada's security interests.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Northern defence was a Harper thing. Don't expect much out of the Trudeau Liberals on that front. That would mean admitting Harper was right and the Liberals would rather set themselves on fire than agree with him.

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't doubt that.

But if the ChiComs can figure out how to make Capitalism Communist I am sure the LPC can figure out how to make Conservatism Liberal (they've had practice).

 

[quadrapiper]

Northern defence was a Harper thing. Don't expect much out of the Trudeau Liberals on that front. That would mean admitting Harper was right and the Liberals would rather set themselves on fire than agree with him.

Northern presence, on the other hand (or at least giving the appearance of caring about "the North") has been something of an on-again, off-again bullet point for any number of governments.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Northern defence and anything in the west was a Harper thing. Don't expect much out of the Trudeau Liberals on that front. That would mean admitting Harper was right and the Liberals would rather set themselves on fire than agree with him.

Fixed it for you  [

 

[dangerboy]

The Army's twitter feed shows that we can easily work with the BV206 and that it is a good platform for the C16 AGLS.

Link to actual twitter post https://twitter.com/CanadianArmy/status/692761297478356993

 

[Spencer100]

Here you go the Russians have the perfect solution!

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/02/12/russian-sherpa-atv-frozen-lake/

The Sperpa ATV.  It looks fun!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was planning on posting that. What I would base in the arctic for summer use is the CB-90 fast attack boats and a couple of fast vehicle landing craft. Sped in the Arctic waters can allow you to escape the ice fronts or find some shelter from them.

 

[Kirkhill]

I was planning on posting that. What I would base in the arctic for summer use is the CB-90 fast attack boats and a couple of fast vehicle landing craft. Sped in the Arctic waters can allow you to escape the ice fronts or find some shelter from them.

Be nice if you could get them on and off the back of the larger vessels - like the AOPSs and the CSCs as well.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We slung these POS landing craft/fuelbarge from our buoy tenders, either from the main crane or the workboat davits, big enough for large ATV's

of course the Swedes have their own ideas (thread drifting....)

 

[a_majoor]

Getting around on most of the terrain, water and ice is easily accomplisned by the LCAC, which also allows you to carry and deliver all kinds of "stuff" depending on the mission. For the best of all possible worlds ( ) LCAC's carrying troops mounted on BV-206/Bronco type MTV's gets you pretty much anywhere in the arctic and far north.

Second pic is a smaller hovercraft operating in the ice, this type is more flexible since the fans are fully steerable.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Actually Thuc, hovercraft operation on ice is a real bitche. It is slow, dangerous and require a lot of training because you are going over a surface that is neither solid like the ground, nor reacts like water (i.e. as "hard" if you put evenly directed high air pressure on it). Such operation is slow and perilous. Moreover, it is downright dangerous in certain conditions, such as entering frazil, where the lift is suddenly lost and the hovercraft can tip or sink by digging in. 

Look at your second picture: You can see that the hovercraft is not getting hardly any lift on the ice (the side walls show no lift) and is in fact relying on the flotation of its hull, which is not the best hull shape for speed and direction on ice.

The Coast guard uses small hovercrafts on the St Lawrence river area in the spring (only) to dispose of ice dams, but they don't quite go on the ice. They come at it from the open water side and simply lunge at the ice dam and then stop just over its edge. That way, they blow an open pocket of air under the ice's leading edge, and climbing on top of it, rest the weight of the hovercraft on that unsupported edge to break it. Very difficult work for highly experience drivers and which requires complete concentration to avoid accidents.

This said, there are people up there in the Arctic, the Inuit, who know the waters better than we do, know how to orient themselves and have been operating with small boats for a long time (Kayak at first and large aluminium fishermen's boat nowadays). If the Navy is serious about having a minimal presence on water when actual commissioned vessels are not around, I personally think that it should consider the possibility of creating a "Marine Ranger" system that could operate small, fast but effective boats whenever the waters are open (someone suggested the CB-90 - I am not convinced, but its little brother the SB90E would be a good candidate). 

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Second pic is a smaller hovercraft operating in the ice, this type is more flexible since the fans are fully steerable.

Actually, Thuc, the LCAC is just as steerable as the smaller one, possibly more steerable. On the LCAC, the two tube like cowlings at the front (both sides) are not air intakes, they are orientable trusters used for steering. The only reason they are pointing straight forward in your picture is that this LCAC is backing full, probably a picture taken from the deck of an American phib just as it exits the well deck.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Actually Thuc, hovercraft operation on ice is a real bitche. It is slow, dangerous and require a lot of training because you are going over a surface that is neither solid like the ground, nor reacts like water (i.e. as "hard" if you put evenly directed high air pressure on it). Such operation is slow and perilous. Moreover, it is downright dangerous in certain conditions, such as entering frazil, where the lift is suddenly lost and the hovercraft can tip or sink by digging in. 

Look at your second picture: You can see that the hovercraft is not getting hardly any lift on the ice (the side walls show no lift) and is in fact relying on the flotation of its hull, which is not the best hull shape for speed and direction on ice.

The Coast guard uses small hovercrafts on the St Lawrence river area in the spring (only) to dispose of ice dams, but they don't quite go on the ice. They come at it from the open water side and simply lunge at the ice dam and then stop just over its edge. That way, they blow an open pocket of air under the ice's leading edge, and climbing on top of it, rest the weight of the hovercraft on that unsupported edge to break it. Very difficult work for highly experience drivers and which requires complete concentration to avoid accidents.

This said, there are people up there in the Arctic, the Inuit, who know the waters better than we do, know how to orient themselves and have been operating with small boats for a long time (Kayak at first and large aluminium fishermen's boat nowadays). If the Navy is serious about having a minimal presence on water when actual commissioned vessels are not around, I personally think that it should consider the possibility of creating a "Marine Ranger" system that could operate small, fast but effective boats whenever the waters are open (someone suggested the CB-90 - I am not convinced, but its little brother the SB90E would be a good candidate).

I support the Marine Ranger idea, as for hovercraft, the big issue was that they actually go faster over a hard surface than water as no "bowel" is formed underneath, the limiting factor that we used for speed over ground in the SRN6 was the time it took for the bag to deflate and the hull to impact the hard surface, which meant 30Kts. Several of my Captains had served in the Arctic, lot's of good stories. the SRN6 used to suffer from "shallow water effect" which meant the bow wave would get so big the craft struggled to get over it and we would often go up onto the beach a bit to get more speed, getting over the "hump" meant getting up to over 13kts and then the craft would break over the bow wave and be able to pick up speed. With the "Econo" model of props we had reverse was not much of an option either.

 

[a_majoor]

Interesting discussion. The general idea that most people like me have is a hovercraft can travel over most relatively flat surfaces, including ice, beaches, muskeg or tundra. The thought I had in mind was the hovercraft can come in from the water or even run a ways up river, then deposit the load This should work along much of the arctic coast, and inside Hudson Bay. If the troops are in MTV's, then they can move further inland without much difficulty (considering the mobility of the beast).

Obviously there is a little more to it than that...