Should Canada adopt the LAV III (AKA: Stryker) as its primary armoured vehicle family?

[Kirkhill]

IIRC when the KOCR got their Cougars back in the 80s (the same time we in the CH got our Grizzlies) they came back from their first shoot with cracked hulls.  

 

[boondocksaint]

They are completely different beasts, which makes it a nightmare for everything from installing comms-new parts etc

from what I understood there was some difficulty finding sufficient LEO crews because the skill set has not been replenished since they were reduced ( I may be wrong )

the cougars have been gone for far longer, and the mechanics wont have the courses needed to run them, nor the gun plumbers

but as Homer says, 'its all moo' cuz they are not coming back

 

[McG]

The rate of fire wasn't the issue (as far as I know), the number of rounds we put down range was.  We exceeded the EFCs (equivalent full charge) on the guns years before they were retired.  We used them as a "tank" (yeah, I know : ) when the gun was orignally designed for an armoured car (the Saracen - the uprated version was installed in the Scorpion, then picked for the Cougar).

I think we are saying the same thing.

 

[silentbutdeadly]

Hey Boondock,

Lets take down the Centurian infront of the back entrance to CFB Edm and put a Lav turret on it. !  :blotto: Well i think its a tank, oh whatever!

 

[McG]

the cougars have been gone for far longer, and the mechanics wont have the courses needed to run them, nor the gun plumbers

All the more reason to develop a LAV III DFSV (not to replace tanks, but to be subservient to the infantry & coexist with tanks)

 

[Teflon]

but as Homer says, 'its all moo' cuz they are not coming back

Thank God! never rode the couger but same beast as the grizzly,.... Nightmares returning,.... leg caught in turret basket, bounce bounce bounce, can't feel my arm!  

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

IIRC when the KOCR got their Cougars back in the 80s (the same time we in the CH got our Grizzlies) they came back from their first shoot with cracked hulls. 

Firing the gun would shake the s**t out of the whole vehicle, hence the cracking around the turret rings.  IIRC, entire teeth were broken out of the gearing system - all the result of fitting a (comparatively) powerful gun to a vehicle not designed for it.

from what I understood there was some difficulty finding sufficient LEO crews because the skill set has not been replenished since they were reduced ( I may be wrong )

Tank crews aren't an issue.  Finding qualified techs is...  It's been sorted out, though.

All the more reason to develop a LAV III DFSV (not to replace tanks, but to be subservient to the infantry & coexist with tanks)

Wouldn't that be a Stryker MGS??  >

 

[Kirkhill]

Wouldn't that be a Stryker MGS??   >

You're a nasty man....

By the way, I posted this on the Armour board - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28961/post-451493.html#msg451493 - "Raytheon Company successfully conducted the first beyond line of sight mission with a test firing of its Mid Range Munition Chemical Energy (MRM-CE) guided projectile with digital semi active laser sensor. The projectile, fired from an Abrams M1A2 SEP (system enhancement program) tank, scored an extended-range, guided direct hit."   

I wonder if they have it in 105.

 

[McG]

Wouldn't that be a Stryker MGS??   >

Could be.  Could be not.

 

[gnplummer421]

I worked on those Cougar Gun systems for many years, and it is definitely too violent of a recoil for that turret. The Buffer and recuperator were fairly short and small for that Calibre.

We had one go on the range in Pet once, not a pretty sight. Sheared the pistons Bobbins off the Breech ring Yoke, and came all the way back and the barrel stop hit the mantlet cracking it. The Gunners sight also dropped down into the turret and got hung up on a cable,saving the Gunners legs. They had hot oil burns and metal schrapnel in their arms and bodies, and headaches for a while no doubt. Luckily there were no serious injuries. It turns out the expansion tank hose from the buffer had a pinhole in it , but the Hyd. fluid was soaking into the skirt and so nobody saw the leak.

Gnplummer

 

[AmmoTech90]

76mm is not an "oddball" calibre at this time.
Perry class Frigates use it
RSA Rooikat use it
Singapore Bionix uses it and if memory serves me right - the Belgians & the Dutch (or is that Danes) have em as well.......

Geo,

Just a point, there are a variety of different 76mm guns out there.  I don't believe any of the ones you mentioned are the "pumpkin launcher" used on the cougar.  Those are all high pressure guns, similiar to the 76mm fitted to our ships.  Fitting a similiar gun would a whole of implications as far a strenthing the turret and ammo stowage because these rounds are quite a bit larger than the 76mm AC (Armoured Car).  Given the comments already about recoil of the existing gun I would be leary of fitting anything larger.

D

 

[Bomber]

twin 35's just coming out of service, snap those bad boys onto a turretless lav chassis, BANG instant LAV 3 DFSV.  Won't kill a tank, but it will stop everything else.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Just a point, there are a variety of different 76mm guns out there.  I don't believe any of the ones you mentioned are the "pumpkin launcher" used on the cougar.  Those are all high pressure guns, similiar to the 76mm fitted to our ships.  Fitting a similiar gun would a whole of implications as far a strenthing the turret and ammo stowage because these rounds are quite a bit larger than the 76mm AC (Armoured Car).  Given the comments already about recoil of the existing gun I would be leary of fitting anything larger.

Exactly.  The gun fitted to the Rooikat, for instance, is a version of the OTO Malara 76mm naval gun...

 

[Kirkhill]

Exactly.  The gun fitted to the Rooikat, for instance, is a version of the OTO Malara 76mm naval gun...

Which, by the way and IIRC, is also the basis for the 60mm HVMS autoloading gun on the OTO Melara Hitfist turrets.  (76mm cartridge necked down to 60mm?)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Too many mods Colin.  you get to the point when it would be cheaper and faster to buy new...
Nothing says that a Grizz couldn't operate with LAVs & Bisons.
It isn't a Leo but bringing a 76 to bear for bunker busting duty when you need it right this instant - would be a handy resource to have in your back pocket... only ICK in that picture is that the hulls are some 30 yrs old.

The Brits did something similar, when the Vixen was cancelled, they had all the turrets built and used them on a variety of vehicles. I would be curious how many mods it could be? Plate over the standard turret ring, not sure if the grizzly basket needed a pintle on the bottom. Use the standard LAV 25 power harness, with an adapter pigtail to the grizzly turret. Weight would not be an issue as the Grizzly turret is smaller. Is it perfect? no, but it's a way to get more vehicles on the ground with least cost. It is also the way many armies work, the IDF seems to have brought the practice to a fine art!!! 

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

One problem:  we've loaned the 100 remaining servicable Grizzlies to the African Union.  Wonder what kind of shape they'll be in when we get them back... 

 

[1feral1]

One problem:  we've loaned the 100 remaining servicable Grizzlies to the African Union.  Wonder what kind of shape they'll be in when we get them back... 

Laughs, and to wonder how many attrocities they'll be used in too. Can't forget that. After all, it is Africa, and we see/hear/and know what goes on there. 100 yrs from now, the voilence and corruption will continue to prosper, and power will continue to spout from the muzzle of an AKM assault rifle, just like it does here in this crappy country. Some things in life remain constant.

I don't think we'll get them back, but once they start breaking down, who's responsible for fixing the beasts? I would have little or no faith in African EME style elements, thats even a bigger joke.

Cheers,

Wes

 

[dapaterson]

My guess is that this is a loan that will be written off, eventually.  They're surplus to our needs; they will all be beyond economical repair by the time the AU is done with them, and the cost of shipping them back will be prohibitive.

 

[boondocksaint]

Im sure they're 'jingled' up nicely

 

[Teflon]

My guess is that this is a loan that will be written off, eventually.

I Hope, does anyone really want them back?

they will all be beyond economical repair by the time the AU is done with them

The bloody things where beyond economical repair before we where done with them