• 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

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
6,305
Points
1,090
ACSV is a LAV hull - this probably should be on the LAV 6.0 thread, not the TAPV thread (GDLS vs Textron).
 

RedFive

Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
139
Points
630
I searched this topic prior to asking to question and didn't find an answer, so forgive me if it was covered any I missed it. I see in some of the old announcements about the TAPV 500 were purchased with 100 options.

Does anybody know if those options were exercised? Were they RWS versions or the slick tops?

Also, I know reviews on the vehicle have been poor, does anybody know if any efforts have/are being made to improve on it? Besides renaming (restructuring? I haven't received the lastest versions of the course content for Armour Reserve yet) Reserve Armoured Recce units to Armoured Cavalry?
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
2,799
Points
1,010
Also, I know reviews on the vehicle have been poor, does anybody know if any efforts have/are being made to improve on it? Besides renaming (restructuring? I haven't received the lastest versions of the course content for Armour Reserve yet) Reserve Armoured Recce units to Armoured Cavalry?
I haven't seen a proper balanced "review" yet. I've seen bitching but that does not constitute a review. In my limited discussions with a few armoured MWO's there are pros and cons to the TAPV. They see value in the vehicle, it's surprisingly mobile and proved useful in the domestic operations it was deployed on. The negatives are well known at this point (signature -noise-size, crew numbers etc..).

Honestly, as an outsider, I think some of the initial roles envisioned for the vehicles are wrong. I don't think the Army got a lemon, they just bought a security/escort vehicle and were hoping it could do recce.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,275
Points
1,160
I haven't seen a proper balanced "review" yet. I've seen bitching but that does not constitute a review. In my limited discussions with a few armoured MWO's there are pros and cons to the TAPV. They see value in the vehicle, it's surprisingly mobile and proved useful in the domestic operations it was deployed on. The negatives are well known at this point (signature -noise-size, crew numbers etc..).

Honestly, as an outsider, I think some of the initial roles envisioned for the vehicles are wrong. I don't think the Army got a lemon, they just bought a security/escort vehicle and were hoping it could do recce.

Or we just didn't make up our mind, and got what we deserved: The Waffle Wagon...

A compromising Situation... TAPV

"A key problem facing potential TAPV bidders was that they were effectively being asked to replace two vehicle types from opposite ends of the capability, mobility and protection scales – the RG31 Mk3 and the Coyote LAV. At the LOI stage, the short-lived benefit for potential bidders was that there was no specific requirement for the Recce and Gen Util variants to be based on a common platform. However, the general consensus of opinion within industry was that while two distinct variants of the same base vehicle (ie: 4x4 and 6x6) might ultimately be acceptable to DND, the clear optimum solution of two totally differing vehicle platforms would never be."

 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
2,799
Points
1,010
Or we just didn't make up our mind, and got what we deserved: The Waffle Wagon...

A compromising Situation... TAPV

"A key problem facing potential TAPV bidders was that they were effectively being asked to replace two vehicle types from opposite ends of the capability, mobility and protection scales – the RG31 Mk3 and the Coyote LAV. At the LOI stage, the short-lived benefit for potential bidders was that there was no specific requirement for the Recce and Gen Util variants to be based on a common platform. However, the general consensus of opinion within industry was that while two distinct variants of the same base vehicle (ie: 4x4 and 6x6) might ultimately be acceptable to DND, the clear optimum solution of two totally differing vehicle platforms would never be."

And what did we actually end up with? The RG31 with higher mobility and lower troop transport capability.

I think it's pretty obvious that the Recce elements will be replaced by stealth (pun intended) with the LAV Recce going to be the only option available for Reg F elements in the future. Just keep sending GDLS contracts without competition and no one gets hurt.

And thus we'll end up with LAV-based platform commonality.

Though with those masts are they really recce vehicles? Or are they surveillance vehicles that can be used for recce?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,147
Points
1,060
Its too bad there wasn't a light-weight, air-transportable, tracked vehicle with high road speeds, capable of mounting cannons and missiles.

1629472753840.png

CVR(T) FV101 - Scorpion 90 (Indonesian Army)

Is it really obsolete if there is no replacement with similar capabilities?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,275
Points
1,160
Its too bad there wasn't a light-weight, air-transportable, tracked vehicle with high road speeds, capable of mounting cannons and missiles.

View attachment 66126

CVR(T) FV101 - Scorpion 90 (Indonesian Army)

Is it really obsolete if there is no replacement with similar capabilities?

Whoa... I like the size of that cannon. It's definitely no 30mm pop gun.

FWIW, they're really good in the snow and boggy ground too. They also fit nicely on a landing craft, and in the back of a Herc on an platform for parachuting or lape-sing.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,275
Points
1,160
Cockerill® CSE 90LP - John Cockerill I have seen one of these 90mm Scorpions at Port Dickson, the gun is a bit much for the poor hull and you can see signs of cracking. To be fair these were old Scorpions refitted and used hard.

I once got a chance to drive one around Salisbury Plain for awhile (no, I did not steal it) and it was awesome.

Jazzed up Jaguar engine... vroom vroom!
 

Rifleman62

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
70
Points
530
We tested out the army's new JLTV at Fort Dix New Jersey. This vehicle will replace the Humvee as the light infantry's primary tactical vehicle.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,779
Points
1,060
Is this accurate for when this happened?

Canadian Forces Training Video Series. Provided to the Department of National Defence, 2018.
 
Top