No, they would be stripped of their current equuomemt and then sent over. They won't retain their recce role. As for the issues? I don't know if there has ever been a large, public file on the various issues.
One thing to note is the original contravt was signed in 2014, and the project itself is a product of the Afghanistan era. Similar to Cyclone it's a product whose requiremwnts were written twenty years ago, based off the expectation of a different era with different technology.
There were lots of issues with the surveillance system itself. The demands and requirements set out were woefully hopeful to the point of being fantastical. We accepted that risk and hoped that the platform would mature.
Needless to say it didn't work out that way. If im not mistaken (someone correct me) the original manufacturer for the mast went belly up, go figure, and a long fight over requiremwnts delayed a new one being brought on.
Im summarizing a lot obviously, but there have been loads of issues with integration, software, and costs that have hampered and delayed the project. A lot stems from our own over-the-top requirements mind you, but a lot is also on GDLS not being able to deliver as promised and the spiral that caused.
These days a lot of peoppe are confident other things like tethered drones and UGV can make up the gap. I'm not as confident. I wanna see results first, but thats the mentality.
I would assume (but I din't know for sure) that the extra ISR kit would be stripped out and they'd be delivered as the infantry section carrier varient
My concern is that donations like the 2 billion given to Ukraine seemly is billed to our own defense budget. 2 Billion that could and should go toward things our own military requires. If our government is going to donate monies to Ukraine, and they should, it should be coming from foreign aid accounts and not to falsely show we are spending more on our Defense than we actually are.
Any whisper of a chance that the LAV6's could get a tracked partner from the BAE/GDLS partnership?
The CV 90 did win the orignal Close Combat Vehicle Competition & they do have a Light Tank, Auto-Mortar, Tank Hunter Killer, Air Defense Variants along with the Original IFV. New Leopard's will be hard to come buy for decade or more while the CV 90 Light Tank's could be made here by GDLS/BAE
I feel like we’d see Hanwha standing up Canadian production for the K2 and Redback long before we’d ever see BAE agreeing to GDLS building CV90s here lol
It’s my understanding there is no confirmed plan to build them in Canada. Rather, BAE would manufacture the BvS10 on its existing overseas production line, while GDLS-Canada would focus on Canadian integration, customization, and long term in-service support.
Has Roshel ever addressed the off road limitations of their platforms given that they are built on a relatively basic F550 chassis and suspension setup?
There have been consistent reports out of Ukraine of accelerated wear on suspension components and a noticeably harsh ride compared to more purpose built platforms. That feels like a real capability gap for a LUV role, especially when other offerings are running more advanced suspension systems.
the numbers match up, would have thought it would be ACSV
They're available hulls, which is likely the deciding factor here lol.
too much work to return them to CAF?
Are details of the techincal issues with LRSS public knowledge? Will these issues impact on their use in Ukraine?
No, they would be stripped of their current equuomemt and then sent over. They won't retain their recce role. As for the issues? I don't know if there has ever been a large, public file on the various issues.
One thing to note is the original contravt was signed in 2014, and the project itself is a product of the Afghanistan era. Similar to Cyclone it's a product whose requiremwnts were written twenty years ago, based off the expectation of a different era with different technology.
There were lots of issues with the surveillance system itself. The demands and requirements set out were woefully hopeful to the point of being fantastical. We accepted that risk and hoped that the platform would mature.
Needless to say it didn't work out that way. If im not mistaken (someone correct me) the original manufacturer for the mast went belly up, go figure, and a long fight over requiremwnts delayed a new one being brought on.
Im summarizing a lot obviously, but there have been loads of issues with integration, software, and costs that have hampered and delayed the project. A lot stems from our own over-the-top requirements mind you, but a lot is also on GDLS not being able to deliver as promised and the spiral that caused.
These days a lot of peoppe are confident other things like tethered drones and UGV can make up the gap. I'm not as confident. I wanna see results first, but thats the mentality.
I would assume (but I din't know for sure) that the extra ISR kit would be stripped out and they'd be delivered as the infantry section carrier varient
Im still working on confirming plans but this seems very close at the initial. Of course I don't wanna blurt out before verifying lol
My concern is that donations like the 2 billion given to Ukraine seemly is billed to our own defense budget. 2 Billion that could and should go toward things our own military requires. If our government is going to donate monies to Ukraine, and they should, it should be coming from foreign aid accounts and not to falsely show we are spending more on our Defense than we actually are.
Any whisper of a chance that the LAV6's could get a tracked partner from the BAE/GDLS partnership?
The CV 90 did win the orignal Close Combat Vehicle Competition & they do have a Light Tank, Auto-Mortar, Tank Hunter Killer, Air Defense Variants along with the Original IFV. New Leopard's will be hard to come buy for decade or more while the CV 90 Light Tank's could be made here by GDLS/BAE
I feel like we’d see Hanwha standing up Canadian production for the K2 and Redback long before we’d ever see BAE agreeing to GDLS building CV90s here lol
BAE & GDLS have partnered to build the Arctic Capable BvS 10 Marginal Terrain Vehicle in Canada ;)
It’s my understanding there is no confirmed plan to build them in Canada. Rather, BAE would manufacture the BvS10 on its existing overseas production line, while GDLS-Canada would focus on Canadian integration, customization, and long term in-service support.
Has Roshel ever addressed the off road limitations of their platforms given that they are built on a relatively basic F550 chassis and suspension setup?
There have been consistent reports out of Ukraine of accelerated wear on suspension components and a noticeably harsh ride compared to more purpose built platforms. That feels like a real capability gap for a LUV role, especially when other offerings are running more advanced suspension systems.