|
BG – Future Combat Systems – Close Combat Vehicle – Overview |
|
Update –
05 Sept 2012: Having 'reset' the already delayed CCV Project in May 2012, bids are
once again being accepted for the revised CCV Request for Proposals. Bids have been
received by BAE Systems ( for a vehicle "based upon" their CV90 ), Nexter with
their VBCI 25 (with no sign of the VBCI 30 ), and General Dynamics Land
Systems Canada's Piranha 5 (with Rheinmetall Lance 30mm Modular Turret System).
|
|
Close Combat Vehicle Project – Leopard 2 Companions
When the Close Combat Vehicle project started, it seemed straight forward. The CF's wheeled LAV IIIs had
mobility issues in winter conditions and when facing steep Afghan irrigation ditches. What was required were
highly-mobile, well-protected, infantry fighting vehicles [1] to accompany the Leopard 2 tanks. That seemed to dictate a tracked
IFV. Favored were the proven Swedish CV90 and a heavier but
untried German type, PSM's Puma. The latter had the edge with armour options but was expensive. Other
possibilities were mulled but DND options narrowed.
|
|
|
On the frugal side, one option was rebuilt surplus German Marders. What Rheinmetall came up with as its
updated Marder, the IFV/CCV, represented an astonishing transformation. Whether it would still
qualify as frugal was another matter. Another possibility was a GDLS derivative of the ASCOD
(Pizarro/Ulan) family, which had been submitted for Britain's FRES contest. Both Rheinmetall
and GDLS-C were 'pre-qualified' as bidders to provide CCV hulls but shocked DND by declining to do so. Rheinmetall
Canada offered neither Puma nor IFV/CCV. GDLS-C held back ASCOD.
|
|
|
CCV's Wheel Turns – Does IFV mean Tracks or Wheels?
CF LAV IIIs[2] are Infantry Fighting Vehicles in that they are armed with medium calibre guns and
carry infantry. But LAV III mobility issues also prompted the CCV project. So it was a surprise when French
Nexter pushed hard to get its wheeled VBCI
into the CCV contest. GDLS-Canada followed suit and submitted LAV III's larger cousin,
Piranha 5. Between drop- outs and surprise
entries, DND now finds itself considering (and hull testing) two wheeled candidates [3] and one tracked
( CV9035 ) for its future CCV.
|
|
|
Of course DND gets itself into these conceptual quagmires. In the first CCV go-round, all the submitted
contenders were rejected and DND/PWGSC had to relaunch CCV and a revised NPP/SOIQ was published. In effect this stipulated that CCV will have an armoured hull
in the 25t weight class and a medium calibre gun of otherwise unspecified size in a turret or RWS. So, potential
suppliers were asked to risk their own development capital to match their hulls to some random-calibre gun system
to be produced in Canada. And this is all for 108 vehicles. Small wonder that some potential suppliers wonder
if CCV was worth the candle. Canadian citizens may ask the same. CCV is supposed to be a modest order for
off-the-shelf vehicles. A taxpayer could make sense of that if CCV was introduced while the CF were in a combat
mission. Now it's value is less clear. Over to you NDHQ.
|
|
|
[1] Although the CF terms its LAV III an Infantry Section Carrier, these vehicles are employed as IFVs. The
distinction is between a 'battle taxi' (the ISC or Armoured Personnel Carrier) and more heavily armed IFV with its
smaller complement of 'dismounts'. The LAV III is both.
[2] Existing LAV IIIs are to be improved under 'LAV-UP', the Light Armoured Vehicle III Upgrade Project. The LAV III Upgrade
program is intended to "capitalize on existing and evolving technology to improve the protection, mobility and
lethality of the LAV III fleet." LAV-UP may benefit from the CCV Project in mobility (Piranha 5 components?)
and lethality (perhaps helping to determine CCV armament choice).
[3] A third wheeled candidate – the ARTEC Boxer (with Rheinmetall Canada) – made it on to the
pre-qualified bidder list before the 'reset' button was hit on the CCV Project. After the revised CCV NPP/SOIQ was
issued, ARTEC declined to enter the Boxer as a CCV candidate.
|
|