In some ways Canada
In the post war environment an attempt to
design a Canadian APC, named Bobcat, joined the Avro Arrow and HMCS Brasd'Or (FHE 400) as ‘might have beens’ that never were. One of the
things that killed the Bobcat was the ubiquitous M-113 (Gavin) APC.
Cold war strategy in the ‘60s assumed WWIII
might start with tactical nuclear strikes on military targets. Dispersal was
the answer to the problem and the M-113 was the answer to dispersion. An
armoured, tracked, amphibious vehicle capable of holding 11 men it was
perfectly suited to the task. Not too heavy at 12 tons, mechanically reliable,
simple and affordable it was purchased in quantity by all the western forces. If
WWIII or something like it had broken out it would have been as common on the
battlefield as the jeep was in WWII.
Designed to safely take troops around the
battlefield, it was not expected to enter directly into combat but rather to
transport troops to the battle; it was referred to as a battlefield taxi. It
could keep up with tanks but was not designed to fight with them. As time progressed
the whole concept of the APC was superseded by the Mechanized Infantry FightingVehicle (MICV). Much more heavily armoured and armed then the M-113 class of
APC’s, MICV’S were designed to accompany tanks into battle while carrying
troops and supporting them.
In the late 1970’s the
Armoured Vehicle, General Purpose (AVGP) entered the Canadian Forces inventory.
A six wheeled Swiss designed family of armoured vehicles they were procured for
use by the reserves. They were used mainly as APC and tank surrogates for
training purposes. Inevitably they ended up in the hands of the regulars on
operations who valued them for their low maintenance and ease of use on roads.
With the end of the cold war and the necessary
re-orientation of the army as a more general purpose force a new APC was
needed. Experience with the AVGP and the need for an MICV class vehicle led to
the introduction of the LAV III. “LAV” in this case stood for Light Armoured
Vehicle which was something of a misnomer. Twice as heavy and with eight wheels
it was much more heavily armoured and armed (with a 25m automatic canon) then
its predecessors. Oddly enough its wheels made people think of trucks while the
tracks on an M-113 reminded people of tanks which led to a situation in which some
felt the LAV III was a step back in terms of capability. Combat in Afghanistan
The LAV III has been a
success in service. The platform has been updated and will continue in use for
many years, at the same time some of the limitations inherent in a wheeled
design have been noted. Wheeled vehicles ride higher then tracked vehicles
which can give them a greater ability to withstand ground based explosives. However
the higher center of gravity can limit the amount of armour they can carry.
They have a generally lower maintenance footprint and can self deploy for long
distances on roads but lack the all terrain mobility of tracked armour.
Tracked vehicles come with their own set of
compromises. Drawbacks include slower road speeds, greater maintenance demands,
and a lower center of gravity which, although good for stability, leaves them
more vulnerable to mines and IED’s
The obvious solution is a
mixed fleet of vehicles. Rebuilt and re-purposed M-113’s are in use for
engineers and support duties but it was felt that an infantry carrier was needed
to keep up with newly acquired Leopard II tanks. So was born the Close Combat Vehicle Project. The project has not gone well. DND so far seems incapable of
defining its requirements in a manner that satisfies both itself and industry.
With budgets shrinking there is some doubt that a new Armoured Personal Carrier
of any description will enter the inventory of the Canadian Armed Forces any
time in the near future.
