New Invitation to Qualify for the Light Utility Vehicle project released

Welp, as expected, we have a new drop regarding everyone’s favorite project.

For those of you who’ve been around here for a while, you’ll remember our reporting that the first phase of the Light Utility Vehicle (LUV) project was expected to drop sometime in October or November.

Well, ever the surprisers, the wonderful folks at PSPC have decided to surprise me not with the first phase, but with a reopening of the second phase of the Light Utility Vehicle project.

For those who don’t know, the LUV project is divided into two phases. The first is supposed to be a standing offer to replace the current Milberado fleet. The second, which we have here, is meant to replace the G-Wagon fleet.

LUV previously ran an ITQ last year, even releasing a list of qualified suppliers. However, they’ve now decided to reopen the competition to more potential suppliers.

The current ITQ will run until October 14, 2026. All of the previously announced suppliers will remain on the list. Their position has not changed, as this is a reopening of the previous ITQ from last year.

As of right now, six companies have qualified:

• AM General with the JLTV

• Armatec Survivability Group with, I believe, a new version of the G-Wagon

• GM Defence Canada with the Silverado HD-based Light Utility Vehicle family

• Oshkosh Defence with another JLTV

• Roshel with the Senator

• Terradyne Armoured Vehicle with the Gurkha

Both Terradyne and GM were added after the original list of qualified suppliers went out, so many people missed their inclusion. GM was naturally going to make the list eventually, although Terradyne’s inclusion is still a surprise.

Nothing against the company, mind you. I’ve even written about them in the past. However, they certainly feel out of place as a company that has still barely touched the military side of the security market.

Still, their inclusion is noted. Now that the ITQ is open again, the natural question is whether anything has changed since last year.

No.

Okay, a bit, but in essence the requirements remain the same. There has been little change from previous versions of LUV over the years. The big thing is numbers.

Previous documents had been pretty firm that for the G-Wagon replacement, 1,500 to 1,850 vehicles would be procured across four variants — Command and Recce (C&R), Utility Vehicles, Military Police (MP) Vehicles, and Cable-Laying Vehicles.

That number has now been increased to a maximum of 2,100 vehicles. The variants and minimum requirements remain the same. This is the most significant change.

A lot of requirements have been eliminated though. Most of the mobility, fording, and gradient requirements have been removed from this document. This is a positive step. The previous RFI to me was far too cluttered and overly complex when it came to the technical requirements it was asking for.

Sadly though, what remains is relatively unchanged. There is a new requirement for the base chassis to be in use with a NATO or Five Eyes partner in a militarized role. This includes a minimum of 100 chassis in service.

The GVWR is still set at a maximum of 12,000 kg, and more saddening, the protection requirement still leaves room for unarmoured vehicles to participate, so long as they can include add-on armor to reach STANAG II ballistic protection.

This is one of the requirements I had hoped we would see movement on. It really should include a base of STANAG II protection for any sort of G-Wagon replacement, especially when the vast majority of qualified suppliers are already at that stage.

This level of protection is becoming the standard for almost everyone, and while some will decry the procurement of what is essentially a protected mobility vehicle to replace the G-Wagons, this is the general trend that everyone is heading toward.

Especially in a world where the drone threat is consistently discussed, having a vehicle with built-in protection levels able to withstand hits from things like FPV drones is less a desire and more a requirement.

We’ve also seen many times the difficulty that merely relying on add-on armor presents, both in terms of how it affects the platform and its survivability. The requirement should really be aiming for the entire fleet to have STANAG II ballistic protection.

We have LUV Phase I for the unarmoured, blue vehicle. It can and will fill that role just fine. I see no reason to hold down Phase II of the competition by clinging to requirements from a decade ago.

And that’s essentially what this is. The requirements set by LUV are still basically the same as they were five or more years back, before the lessons and shifts seen from conflicts in places like Nagorno-Karabakh and Ukraine.

I digress though. There isn’t much in the ITQ to speak of. There is little new, and the few requirements that do remain are fairly basic and straightforward. I commend them for simplifying the requirements, however I do worry about the potential bloat of platforms that technically meet the requirements but have little chance of winning.

It’s a balance. You don’t want to arbitrarily eliminate people, but you also don’t want to bloat the potential supplier pool with lower-end, meets-the-basic options that drag out the competition.

Speaking of that, the timeline also has not changed. Contract award is still set for 2027 with first deliveries in 2029. While there is a large desire to push LUV along, to get it completed quicker, that doesn’t seem in the cards.

The goal now isn’t to get the contract signed sooner but to get deliveries quicker than 2029 or 2030. That’s an advantage for local manufacturers with excess capacity like GM and Roshel, both of which could quickly start delivering vehicles if desired.

I do plan to do a proper rundown of the competitors, however I want to wait as nothing has really changed since the last time I did it. The competitors are still the same, and unless new ones are added, it will remain that way.

For now, if you’re in the Light Utility Vehicle game, this is your chance to jump back in.