We could realistically quadruple the LUV-L numbers and be much better off. The blue fleet are increasingly clapped out, and frankly our logistics situation is dire.
The LUV-L numbers should be a lot higher. Realistically it should be similar to what the Brits are looking for, especially when speaking on increasing authorized strength
Realistically we need a *lot* more of the civilian truck painted green vehicle category. In the end it’s saving us from using F Echelon vehicles to do runner tasks. The Latvians have a ton of Hylux’s in Matt green with minimal militarization beyond that. Something to that effect is what we need.
Outside of this contract, I like to see a research program, buying small batches (10-25) of Canadian made vehicles each year, for testing and issue to units as part of the test program. This will give the CAF an idea what is out there, what works and does not. The purchases and feedback, keeps the smaller companies going and growing, with the ability to sell overseas as well.
Also no vehicle in the CAF should be more than 15 years old. If we bought new vehicles every year, we don't need to buy large batches and we reduce maintenance needs.
Continuous procurement is the way to go IMO, especislly when discussing large fleets like these. There are inherently some risks that do come with having potentially varying models in service, some of which over time might develop some different supply chains to themselves, but the rampant pace of technological development, coupled with an ever changing battlefield as we see in Ukraine, where new threats can develop surprisingly quickly, and new situations can arise unexpectedly means that we need to have lines prepared to rapidly develop and push out solutions quickly.
That takes time and effort, a luxury you wont be afforded. When you have the system in place you aren't starting from scratch, and you have the experience developed through supporting those innovations and developments to utilize. Thats part of why Roshel, for example got to where they are, and thats one company doing it independently.
General Dynamics Land Systems Canada offers the 'Eagle' light tactical vehicle (available in 4x4 and 6x6 variants). The specs are not listed on the Canadian website but it seems relevant. Presumably it would be manufactured here in Canada under licence from GDLS-E.
Are you surprised this wasn't offered or, if it was, that it didn't qualify?
There are a few I was surprised about. The big one was the Hawkei. That was a fairly popular choice, and quite liked by people who got a chance to see them in action. However, both we're not qualified for reasons I have never learnt.
Eagle was offered AFAIK. There were at least thirteen different submissions! Vehicles like these are a dime a dozen. I could probably name thirty if I tried lol. Theres several manufacturers at a similar level to Terradyne here alone.
I think people care so much about this project because it is absolutely vital that it goes well and is sped up. MILCOTS are the backbone of the non-RCAC reserve. The VOR of thr fleet is seriously fucking a bunch of reserve units.
LUVWs are the backbone of the RCAC reserve and an administrative workhorse for the entire reg Army. The lack of available LUVWs is actively destroying the ARes armoured units since they can't really train, especially in conjunction with TAPV VOR rates.
Both vehicles are something of a face of the Army since they're common runners when units have to run into town or run around base. Heck, the terminal rust-out of both fleets is emblematic of the Army as a whole since Afghanistan ended.
I will reseeve the majority of my opinions for now (besides, they've been vented on X...)
But LUV should absolutely be pushed forward & on greater volume. LUV-L being a COTS truck painted green is a great thing to support training & admin... In Canada & overseas. I just hope they think about things like basic comma integrations as well. That they are looking at a SO for procurement is great... Honestly, we should scope it such that we can replace a good chunk of our COTS blue fleet trucks with the same LUV-L platform.
As for LUV-H... We need more & more variants... & A mechanism to keep them in production as long as possible. It's easier to generate a new variant of an existing platform than to compete from scratch & integrate something totally new every single time the situation changes & you need something different.
I'd also focus on the most versatile platforms possible. SENATOR is great, because yoy can go from a 4 person C&R or general utility, up to a full APC carrying a section of infantry & a proper fighting CAV variant would be good). Just think if the P Res possibilities if they are all equipped witha proper deployable, protected platform... For training, DOMOPS & overseas operations.
We could realistically quadruple the LUV-L numbers and be much better off. The blue fleet are increasingly clapped out, and frankly our logistics situation is dire.
The LUV-L numbers should be a lot higher. Realistically it should be similar to what the Brits are looking for, especially when speaking on increasing authorized strength
Realistically we need a *lot* more of the civilian truck painted green vehicle category. In the end it’s saving us from using F Echelon vehicles to do runner tasks. The Latvians have a ton of Hylux’s in Matt green with minimal militarization beyond that. Something to that effect is what we need.
Outside of this contract, I like to see a research program, buying small batches (10-25) of Canadian made vehicles each year, for testing and issue to units as part of the test program. This will give the CAF an idea what is out there, what works and does not. The purchases and feedback, keeps the smaller companies going and growing, with the ability to sell overseas as well.
Also no vehicle in the CAF should be more than 15 years old. If we bought new vehicles every year, we don't need to buy large batches and we reduce maintenance needs.
Continuous procurement is the way to go IMO, especislly when discussing large fleets like these. There are inherently some risks that do come with having potentially varying models in service, some of which over time might develop some different supply chains to themselves, but the rampant pace of technological development, coupled with an ever changing battlefield as we see in Ukraine, where new threats can develop surprisingly quickly, and new situations can arise unexpectedly means that we need to have lines prepared to rapidly develop and push out solutions quickly.
That takes time and effort, a luxury you wont be afforded. When you have the system in place you aren't starting from scratch, and you have the experience developed through supporting those innovations and developments to utilize. Thats part of why Roshel, for example got to where they are, and thats one company doing it independently.
General Dynamics Land Systems Canada offers the 'Eagle' light tactical vehicle (available in 4x4 and 6x6 variants). The specs are not listed on the Canadian website but it seems relevant. Presumably it would be manufactured here in Canada under licence from GDLS-E.
Are you surprised this wasn't offered or, if it was, that it didn't qualify?
There are a few I was surprised about. The big one was the Hawkei. That was a fairly popular choice, and quite liked by people who got a chance to see them in action. However, both we're not qualified for reasons I have never learnt.
Eagle was offered AFAIK. There were at least thirteen different submissions! Vehicles like these are a dime a dozen. I could probably name thirty if I tried lol. Theres several manufacturers at a similar level to Terradyne here alone.
If people are interested I can ask around.
I think people care so much about this project because it is absolutely vital that it goes well and is sped up. MILCOTS are the backbone of the non-RCAC reserve. The VOR of thr fleet is seriously fucking a bunch of reserve units.
LUVWs are the backbone of the RCAC reserve and an administrative workhorse for the entire reg Army. The lack of available LUVWs is actively destroying the ARes armoured units since they can't really train, especially in conjunction with TAPV VOR rates.
Both vehicles are something of a face of the Army since they're common runners when units have to run into town or run around base. Heck, the terminal rust-out of both fleets is emblematic of the Army as a whole since Afghanistan ended.
I will reseeve the majority of my opinions for now (besides, they've been vented on X...)
But LUV should absolutely be pushed forward & on greater volume. LUV-L being a COTS truck painted green is a great thing to support training & admin... In Canada & overseas. I just hope they think about things like basic comma integrations as well. That they are looking at a SO for procurement is great... Honestly, we should scope it such that we can replace a good chunk of our COTS blue fleet trucks with the same LUV-L platform.
As for LUV-H... We need more & more variants... & A mechanism to keep them in production as long as possible. It's easier to generate a new variant of an existing platform than to compete from scratch & integrate something totally new every single time the situation changes & you need something different.
I'd also focus on the most versatile platforms possible. SENATOR is great, because yoy can go from a 4 person C&R or general utility, up to a full APC carrying a section of infantry & a proper fighting CAV variant would be good). Just think if the P Res possibilities if they are all equipped witha proper deployable, protected platform... For training, DOMOPS & overseas operations.