Possibly related, recent US mechanised doctrine is moving away from combat against insurgents and more towards "near peer". So maybe there is already a ready market for what is a LAV at a time when more LAVs are needed by others? (Trade in?)
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New Zealand Defence Force
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostThey are not scrapping the LAV's, they are for sale as they do not get used.
If anyone wants to make ANY offer I am sure the NZ DoD would bite your arm off.
If they have no use for them then why spend $75 million on a fleet of an inferior class of vehicles that are designed for the same role?
They've been for sale for several years and nobody wants them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostThe Bushie isn't replacing the NZLAV, its replacing the Pinz.
This will be added to the very long list of NZ DF white elephants.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostI know what its meant to be a direct replacement for but they still wadied 30 perfectly good LAV's and now spending $75 million on a fleet of vehicles which are an inferior class.
This will be added to the very long list of NZ DF white elephants.For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostI know what its meant to be a direct replacement for but they still wadied 30 perfectly good LAV's and now spending $75 million on a fleet of vehicles which are an inferior class.
This will be added to the very long list of NZ DF white elephants.
I agree that back in the early to mid 2000's everything was cut price and substandard and they bought White Elephants. However, since the DWP15 I cannot fault the quality of military acquisitions, the P-8A, C-130J-30, T-6C's, the KA-350, the new Dive Ship and the AOR. Much of that and what will be acquired in the years ahead is to rectify a decade of poor decisions. The Bushmaster is way more capable than the armoured Pinzer, which it is replacing in the Medium Protected Mobility Capability. It certainly is not a white elephant - they will be used much more widely unlike the unsafe and unreliable Pinzers. They are also in the market for a Light Protected Mobility Capability of which the Hawkei seems to be in the frame. And they are buying MRZR-D's for rapid light mobility and have bought the HMT Supacat. The one or two sizes fits all approach does not work.
The NZDF is rebuilding and equipping a coherent force structure, with a range of equipment to suit the different kinds of operations from HADR and SASO through to combat operations and special operations. Each of those involve having different tools. The NZ Army has had to go into the Pacific for SASO and HADR operations on ocassion. Using a LAV to get around in those circumstances is a really dumb idea when a Bushie or a Hawkei is much more appropriate. If the Army were sent back to Timor with a rerun of Interfet then yes you'd take some LAV's with you and 75 in the fleet is certainly more than enough to support a CATG of 800 personnel.Last edited by Anzac; 12 July 2020, 14:27.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostBut the NZLAV wouldnt be able to do the job the Pinz was doing?
What can the Pinzgauer or Bushmaster do that the wadied LAV's cant do a lot better?
Originally posted by Anzac View PostThe LAV's were ordered 18 years ago. The requirement set out in the DWP97 was for 72 LAV's to replace the M-113's. Due to a massive inter-service war (which I have neither the time or patience to go into detail) between 1999 and 2002, the Army ended up with 105 LAV's (around 30 too many) and 60 Armoured Pinzers.
I agree that back in the early to mid 2000's everything was cut price and substandard and they bought White Elephants. However, since the DWP15 I cannot fault the quality of military acquisitions, the P-8A, C-130J-30, T-6C's, the KA-350, the new Dive Ship and the AOR. Much of that and what will be acquired in the years ahead is to rectify a decade of poor decisions. The Bushmaster is way more capable than the armoured Pinzer, which it is replacing in the Medium Protected Mobility Capability. It certainly is not a white elephant - they will be used much more widely unlike the unsafe and unreliable Pinzers. They are also in the market for a Light Protected Mobility Capability of which the Hawkei seems to be in the frame. And they are buying MRZR-D's for rapid light mobility and have bought the HMT Supacat. The one or two sizes fits all approach does not work.
The NZDF is rebuilding and equipping a coherent force structure, with a range of equipment to suit the different kinds of operations from HADR and SASO through to combat operations and special operations. Each of those involve having different tools. The NZ Army has had to go into the Pacific for SASO and HADR operations on ocassion. Using a LAV to get around in those circumstances is a really dumb idea when a Bushie or a Hawkei is much more appropriate. If the Army were sent back to Timor with a rerun of Interfet then yes you'd take some LAV's with you and 75 in the fleet is certainly more than enough to support a CATG of 800 personnel.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Postwhen i think of the adulation that the Pinzgauer is held in in Europe?! Is it really that bad or it this just Not invented here syndrome?
There are then 261 unarmoured vehicles which are more like those used in Europe.
The British Army tried an armoured Pinzgauer but quickly withdrew it due to reliability and protection issues.Last edited by EUFighter; 12 July 2020, 16:36.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Postwhen i think of the adulation that the Pinzgauer is held in in Europe?! Is it really that bad or it this just Not invented here syndrome?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostThe NZ army uses an armoured version of the Pinzgauer, 23 are used as command vehicles and 37 for crew served versions.
There are then 261 unarmoured vehicles which are more like those used in Europe.
The British Army tried an armoured Pinzgauer but quickly withdrew it due to reliability and protection issues.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostWhich is what?
What can the Pinzgauer or Bushmaster do that the wadied LAV's cant do a lot better?
The Bushmaster is a huge vehicle, it's just as big as a LAV if not bigger, but has inferior mobility, firepower and protection. There is nowhere a Bushmaster will be able to go that the LAV's cant.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostWhich is what?
What can the Pinzgauer or Bushmaster do that the wadied LAV's cant do a lot better?
The Bushmaster is a huge vehicle, it's just as big as a LAV if not bigger, but has inferior mobility, firepower and protection. There is nowhere a Bushmaster will be able to go that the LAV's cant.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View PostOne thing a 17 tonne NZLAV cannot do is be air deployed intact with the logistics required to support it by C-130 noting the huge distances the NZ Army has to travel and the time, equipment and support personnel to re-instal the turret. We can only deploy the NZLAV by sealift. Where as you can send on the same flight an 11 tonne Bushmaster command and control variant and six MRMZ-D's with all they need to immediately operate and sustain themselves. The other point is, and there has been considerable research into this by the NZDF and ADF and has a pronounced political imperative - that it is not a good look for Kiwi troops to roll around the villages in the Pacific Islands, that only gained independence from either NZ or Australia over the last few decades, with something that looks like a LAV or in local eyes "a tank" during the vastly more common a SASO or HADR type operations that the NZ Army is more likely to be involved in, in which the LAV is overkill and significantly more intimidating to the local population you need to build trust and confidence with, even in small numbers. Finally, the LAV is also a greater burden on the logistics train in which an economies of scale are required for deployment, appropriate for a Task Group or Task Force sized operation, but inefficient when piecemeal with smaller Task Units or Task Elements deployments.
If the turret is somehow an issue the 30 wadied LAV's could easily be modified to take a RWS at a fraction of the cost of buying new inferior vehicles and still offer greater protection and firepower than a completely exposed Minimi gunner.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostThe NZ LAV's can be transported in a C-130, the NZ air force has already done that without having to remove the turret.
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostIf the turret is somehow an issue the 30 wadied LAV's could easily be modified to take a RWS at a fraction of the cost of buying new inferior vehicles and still offer greater protection and firepower than a completely exposed Minimi gunner.Last edited by Anzac; 13 July 2020, 12:16.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment