Ottawa slams the brakes on plan to buy new military trucks

chris vickery · #1 13-07-12, 00:20

I thought todays modernized CF was trying to be more universal; no more "us" and "them" mentality AKA militia vs regulars???
Sounds like going backwards instead of forwards with regards to veh replacement, serviceability etc. Two different fleets, two different sets of problems with procument of parts, servicing etc etc.
Are the LSVWs going to become mil-surp, similar to the Iltis or will they suffer the same fate as the MLVW series???

rob love · #2 13-07-12, 04:43

But there is "us" and "them". The reserve force has only been used to supplement the regular army in either peace keeping or war for the last what? 60 years? So why buy a truck for them that has wartime features that will never be used. In aide to the civil power situations, where the reserve units do occasionally get called out, their milcot vehicles will fit the bill.

In this day and age it would be hard to justify the expense of 800 extra full SMP vehicles which in all likelihood would never leave the geographical areas they were initially issued to.

Note the same principle also applied to the G-wagons, where milcots were supplied in lieu of a 1/4 ton vehicle. There were some exceptions like the recce militia who would have a hard time doing recce in crew cab silverados. In the case of that class of vehicle, the G wagons were around $160,000 each, and the Silverados were likely closer to $35K.

If there was ever a vehicle that deserved to be crushed beyond recognition, it would be the LSVW. Plagued by problems from the day they were issued, they will always represent the results of political interference in what should have been a technical selection process.

chris vickery · #3 13-07-12, 13:46

Very good points Rob, that I never considered.
Can you explain to me why we have chosen to purchase foreign made equipment rather than building it ourselves?
It seems to me a point in case once more where we are sending Canadian jobs outside of our boarders rather than keeping them at Home. You would think something like our our Defence should be made from home grown expertise, construction and manpower.
For the naysayers out there, recall our military vehicle capacity during WW2 and the fact that we could be a vendor instead of a buyer, just like in WW2.
Canada should maintain its own Defence Industry, on a smaller scale, least in my opinion. Being close neighbours with the US has me wondering why we do not consider anything that they use and perhaps ride coat tail on some of their contracts as a second option?

rob love · #4 13-07-12, 13:57

It very likely will be built in Canada if possible, although I can't say is that is a condition of this tender. The IHC DEfense trucks were an exception. Vehicles like the AHSVS Mercedes Actros were wartime purchases and in the need for timeliness they were bought straight from Mercedes in Germany. The G-wagons were also bought straight out of Europe.

Understand that to simply set up a production facility to manufacture a limited run of 1500 trucks every 25 years is not economically feasible. Normally a Canadian or North American company will pair up with a known foreign producer of a SMP vehicle. Once the vehicle is selected, it will then be assembled in Canada, with as much Cdn content as is reasonable. This will normally mean a North American made alternator, Canadian tires, M-series lighting, and things like choke or throttle cables.

rob love · #5 13-07-12, 19:22

Canadian content on the Iltis also included the choke and throttle cables. I met an LCMM once who related the story that he met a guy at some function who's company made these cables. Bombardier promised that if the company ever sold cables directly to DND rather than through Bombardier, that Bombardier would never buy another cable from them again.

I believe there was also some debate between DND and Bombardier as to who owned the drawings for the parts. In the end, the DND name was on the bottom corner of the drawings, so we were able to source parts from alternate suppliers.

rob love · #6 14-07-12, 00:15

It is my understanding that when Atco lost the Cancap project to SNC Lavalin in Bosnia, Atco tried to claim that all the written docs wrt SOPs etc were the property of ATCO and not transferrable to the replacement company. In the end, DND pointed out that they were all written on the DND's dime, and thus were the property of DND.