MRAP – NEW ARMOUR FOR THE RESERVES

Although many credit former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who is

quoted as telling top Pentagon officials that “the MRAP should be considered the highest priority Department of Defense acquisition program” as being ‘the father of the MRAP’, in truth it’s origins are more likely to be found in a 2004 Kuwaiti ‘morale-lifting town hall discussion” with Iraq-bound troops held by then Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

 Rumsfeld was confronted by angry GIs asking why they weren’t  being given the equipment they needed to protect  themselves and had to listen to stories about improvised armour being scavenged from waste dumps to be fitted on to Humvees. It can be argued that it was this public airing of the reliance on “hillbilly armour” that was the catalyst for the MRAP program.

Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles are armored fighting vehicles designed to surviving improvised explosive device (IED) attacks and ambushes. Ironically, contemporary designs were first initiated during the Rhodesian Bush War, that technology was subsequently inherited and developed by the South African Defence Force. Fortunately South Africa had lost its ‘pariah’ status by the time western nations needed the technology and it was probably not thought useful to contemplate the circumstances of its origin.

A rush program created a huge number of MRAPs separated into different categories according to weight and size. Category I MRAPs, the most common size are classified as Mine-Resistant Utility Vehicle (MRUV), a smaller and lighter vehicle, designed for urban operations. Category II MRAPs or Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Rapid Response Vehicle (JERRV) are designed for missions including convoy lead, troop transport, ambulance, explosive ordnance disposal and combat engineering. The category III models have a dedicated mine and IED clearing function and typically carry up to six personnel.

At least five versions of the MRAP were produced, weighing from 13–28 tons, with the last being the M-ATV (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected All Terrain Vehicle) for use on rougher roads in Afghanistan. All the models featured the V-shaped under body to disperse bomb blasts.

The cost for individual production models of the MRAP ranged from $535,000 to $600,000, but field models including spare parts and upgrades came to an average of $1.29 million according to the Pentagon.

In the end a total of 27,740 MRAPs rolled off the assembly lines of seven manufacturers, including BAE Systems, Oshkosh Defense and Navistar, and About 1,570 have been sold to foreign militaries and allies.

During the course of the Afghanistan conflict Canada bought a number of mine resistant vehicles. Most numerous among them were 75 RG-31 Mk3s equipped with the Protector M151 Remote Weapon Station. Another 67 mine resistant vehicles were procured under the Expedient Route-Opening Capability program. Interestingly, it was stated that the RG-31s were to be replaced in Canadian service by Textron Systems TAPV.

The $47.7 billion era of the MRAP came to a close in 2012 at a retirement ceremony at the Pentagon for the production line of vehicles that were rushed into service in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Currently the US Army plans to modernize and retain 8,585 of its mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles, while divesting itself of another 7,456 MRAPs it no longer wants.  5,036 of the 8,585 MRAPs the Army plans to keep will be stored in prepositioned stocks all over the world, with another 1,073 assigned for training activities. The remainder will be spread among the active force.

Not all militaries are moving so quickly to divest themselves of this capability. The British Army is moving to harden its otherwise light infantry, finding good uses for the almost 2,000 armored vehicles procured specifically for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is also a place for the continuing use of the MRAP in the Canadian Armed Forces. A vehicle optimized to protect soldiers against the three classes of weapons used by insurgents: the assault rifle, the shoulder-fired rocket and the improvised explosive device, roadside or emplaced as mines, will always have its uses.

The surviving RG-31 Mk3s already in service could provide an important starting place for this program. Their ranks could be augmented with units acquired from US surplus stocks, They would not be cheap, the US Army estimates it will spend about $150,000 to reset each vehicle at the Red River Army Depot in Texas, or about $87,000 per vehicle if the work is done at Livorno, Italy, but they could still cost far less then new vehicles with similar capabilities.

As well as having military value there are benefits for Canadian industry to be found if the work of ‘resetting’ used MRAPs if the work is done in Canada. Just as international M113 overhaul, repair and upgrade programs have been an important market for several Canadian firms, getting a footing in this important future market could be important for Canada’s defence industry

James Hasik has argued that the real future for the MRAP market lies in upgrading existing vehicles. "Inside the U.S., the future of the MRAP market is upgrade programs and overhaul because they have some pretty darn good vehicles. It's hard to make the case for new vehicles when you have 20,000 in storage," said Hasik

The best place to retain this vehicle and its capabilities is in the Army reserves. They could take the place of the long departed AVGP as a training vehicle, as well as providing an important and necessary focus for reserve formations. Costs associated with maintenance and operations would be lower then those found in regular formations, adding yet another benefit to the advantages accrued in keeping these formidable vehicles available for future use.

The MRAP: Brilliant Buy, or Billions Wasted?

http://nation.time.com/2012/10/02/the-mrap-brilliant-buy-or-billions-wasted/

 

Troops' Queries Leave Rumsfeld on the Defensive
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/international/middleeast/09rumsfeld.html?_r=0

MRAP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP

RG-31 Nyala Mine Protected Vehicle 

http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/RG-31_Nyala_Armoured_Patrol_Vehicle

Canadian Forces Armour — Expedient Route-Opening Capability

http://www.casr.ca/101-army-eroc-route-openers.htm

Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-equipment/tactical-armoured-patrol-vehicle.page

Pentagon shuts MRAP production line

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/10/01/pentagon-shuts-mrap-production-line/

Majority of US MRAPs To Be Scrapped or Stored

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140105/DEFREG02/301050007/Majority-US-MRAPs-Scrapped-Stored

Between MRAPs and "a couple of Nobel Prizes"—reasonable priorities in armored vehicles in the US and the UK

http://www.jameshasik.com/weblog/2014/01/between-mraps-and-a-couple-of-nobel-prizesreasonable-priorities-in-armored-vehicles-in-the-us-and-the-uk.html

Re-Life / Re-Role

http://www.dewengineering.com/products.htm

Middle East MRAP Sales Give Hope to Truck Manufacturers

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/October/Pages/MiddleEastMRAPSalesGiveHopetoTruckManufacturers.aspx

AVGP – ARMOUR FOR THE RESERVES 

http://jgmjgm516.blogspot.ca/2014/05/avgp-armour-for-reserves.html

AVGP – ARMOUR FOR THE RESERVES

In 1977 Canada began the continuing story of the LAV fleet by placing an order for 491 6x6 LAVs, which were referred to as Armoured Vehicle General Purpose (AVGP). They were based on the MOWAG Piranha family of light armoured vehicles. There were three variants built, the Grizzly, which was an infantry carrier, the Cougar, which had a 76mm gun turret and was used by units of the Royal Canadian Armoured Corps, and the Husky, a recovery vehicle.

Canada deployed this vehicle operationally to such areas as Cyprus, the Balkans and Somalia. The AVGP fleet has since been retired from service but it was the genesis of a successful military technology which has seen General Dynamics Land Systems, in London Ontario, become a pre-eminent manufacturer of light armoured vehicles. From an original design nearly 40 years old, GDLS and MOWAG have progressively developed the armoured vehicle into new variants with many capabilities. 

This success story started in 1964 with a Defence White Paper which called for the creation of a force equipped with a flexible, light, and air transportable vehicle to serve in UN missions.

At the same time the Militia, which had been seen as the traditional mobilization base for the Canadian army had withered during the Cold War. After the Second World War its ranks were flush with veterans and into the 1950s there was money for new tanks and vehicles. However morale declined as the Militia’s role became civil defence in the late 1950s, and it languished in the 1960s and 1970s as defence budgets shrank. The Militia reached a nadir of 15,000 by the late 1970s.

When introduced in 1976, wheeled AVGPs were meant to provide the Reserves with training vehicles that were less maintenance-intensive than tracked armour. It was also intended to give new purpose and opportunities for those Reserves. A total of 269 Grizzlies were built for the AVGP program and the vehicle was originally used mainly for reserves training in its prime role as an infantry carrier.

The 195 Cougars delivered were equipped with a 76 mm main gun and a 7.62 mm machine gun to support infantry and these vehicles were given to reserve armoured regiments.

The AVGP vehicles were welcomed by the reserves. The First Hussars regimental history describes the Cougar as a “godsend” because it was a credible tank-trainer in contrast to the machine-gun armed jeeps that had been used; it improved the morale and retention of personnel.

The same characteristics which made these AVGPs useful for Reserve use, that is good mobility and low maintenance, also made them appealing for overseas deployments on Regular Force peacekeeping missions. The vehicles went on to a long career with many modifications in the Regular Force.

In the 1987 Defence White Paper, the government announced that the strength of the Reserves would be brought up to 90,000 which would allow Canada to better meet commitments to NATO and continental defence. This increase in strength would be complemented by a package of improvements to bases and new equipment purchases. One of these was for a purchase of 200 armoured personnel carriers for the reserves. This was the background of the Bison APC.

The original plan was to buy 200 M113s from the American manufacturer and have some components license-built in Canada to fulfill requirements for Canadian content. At the same time, however, Canada’s only manufacturer of armoured vehicles, Diesel Division General Motors (DDGM), in London Ontario, was running out of work. With contracts drying up the company was facing a year with empty production lines.

The point was made that the reserves might have trouble operating M113s,. There were restrictions against putting tracked vehicles on roads in Canada, and the Reserves would likely not have the personnel or money to keep up with the maintenance burden. A hastily redesigned APC variant of the LAV was proposed and the army finally decided to buy the Bison in July 1989. DDGM produced four major variants – 149 armoured personnel carriers, eighteen command posts, sixteen 81 mm mortar carriers, and sixteen maintenance and recovery vehicles.

In the end the original rationale for the purchase, to increase the quality of Reservist training so that they could beef up Regular units and bolster Canada’s commitments, disappeared just as the first Bisons started rolling off the production lines. The Cold War was ending, but the disorder of the 1990s and the proliferation of peacekeeping missions that morphed into combat operations meant that few vehicles ever got to the Reserves. Most were requisitioned by the Regular Force and pressed into service. For example, Bisons were rapidly overhauled to serve as ambulances in Somalia, and they were also used as command posts in Bosnia.

The Bison fleet remains in service today: from 2000 to 2011, the entire Bison fleet was re-roled into thirty-two ambulances, eighty-three command posts, sixteen electronic warfare vehicles, thirty-two mobile repair teams, and thirty-two maintenance and recovery vehicles.

There is no question that the LAV programme has been successful for Canada, providing the armed forces with effective vehicles and creating a new Canadian industry.

Those AVGPs originally purchased by Canada in 1976 were 10.7 ton, 6 wheeled amphibious vehicles.  The Canadian LAV III which entered service in 1998 was 17-ton vehicle 8-wheeled armoured combat vehicle armed with a turret mounted M242 Bushmaster 25mm Gun. The PiranhaV variant which General Dynamics Land Systems Canada offered for the Canadian Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) programme in 2011 is a 26 + ton 8x8 fitted with Rheinmetall's LANCE 30mm Modular Turret System.

What has been less successful is the original ideal of procuring armoured vehicles for the Army reserves. There are no longer any kinds of armoured personal carriers in reserve formations. The First Hussars are back to using machine-gun armed jeeps. About the only new equipment available are the Militarized Commercial Off-the-Shelf (MilCOTS) vehicles (trucks) provided under the Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) program. Given the inability to fulfill the part of that program designed to provide badly needed new trucks for the regular forces it is probably only a matter of time before those vehicles are requisitioned by the regular force as well.

The reserves need to have the attention they reserve. They need to have relevant roles in today’s army. They need to be equipped with modern vehicles that suit those roles. Governments and the leadership of the CF understood that in the past, they need to understand that it still applies today. 

GP (Grizzly, Cougar, Husky)

http://www.gdlscanada.com/index.php/products/light-armoured-vehicles-lav/avgp-grizzly-cougar-husky

The Success of the Light Armoured Vehicle: Frank Maas

http://www.canadianmilitaryhistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/4-Maas-LAV.pdf.

Background – Armoured Vehicle, General Purpose – 6x6 AVGPs

http://www.casr.ca/bg-army-armour-avgp-lav.htm

“The Canadian Army and the Procurement of the Bison: A Short History” by Frank Maas

http://canadianmilitaryhistory.ca/the-canadian-army-and-the-procurement-of-the-bison-a-short-history-by-frank-maas/

Canadian Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) programme

http://www.casr.ca/bg-army-ccv-piranha5.htm

1st Hussars

http://www.army-armee.forces.gc.ca/en/1-hussars/index.page

 How not to buy a truck

http://jgmjgm516.blogspot.ca/2012/06/how-not-to-buy-truck.html