|
|
Background
— Canadian Forces Mobile Gun System (MGS) Project |
|
Note: DND's Mobile Gun System Project has been eclipsed by the Tank Replacement Project.
MMEV and LAV TUA are also cancelled.
|
|
The Mobile Gun System – "... a mighty maze! But not without a plan."
In October of 2003, "the acquisition of a mobile gun system" for the CF was announced by John McCallum
then-Minister of National Defence. The vehicle in question is based on the US M1128 Stryker
MGS, itself an extremely controversial weapon. For Canada, MGS would be part of
a system-of-systems for
Direct Fire Support. Three vehicles were planned, all based on the serving LAV III.
|
|
|
"... like fire he meets the foe, And strikes him dead for thine and thee"
The MGS would be the CF's Medium Direct Fire system, serving along- side the LAV TUA and planned Multi-Mission Effects
Vehicle. There is considerable opposition to MGS based both on the performance of the system and on the
concept. DND takes pains to point out that MGS is
not a tank ('self-propelled gun' better describes the system ) although, at least in the direct fire support
role, MGS would replace the Leopard C2 main battle tank. And, the main armament is the same stabilized
L7A3 105mm gun [1] for use against opposing armour and other hard targets. Critics have two main questions: is the
105mm gun still able to defeat opposing tanks, and can MGS (with its high centre of gravity) maintain stability when
firing that 105mm?
|
|
|
Roots: the Stryker Brigade Combat Team
So what exactly is the Mobile Gun System? The US Army SBCT is made up of a family of LAV III variants (and other
fast-moving wheeled vehicles). MGS would be the DFS component (alongside the in-service TOW missile launcher).
The LAV III hull is lower at the rear to mount a Low-Profile Turret [2] allowing both gunner and crew
commander to be sat almost entirely in the hull. [3] But the MGS' centre of gravity remains high and
the system still battles critical weight problems.
|
|
|
Weight is the problem of most interest to DND. The US Army insisted that MGS be tailored to Hercules
tactical transports. GDLS, the makers of MGS, have had trouble meeting that stipulation without removing
vital add-on armour. Fortunately for the CF, the Canadian order is a rider on the US system
– if GDLS cannot satisfy the US Army, MGS production will not proceed. If successful, DND
planned to buy 66 MGS for just under $600M. But, the mix of DFS types was reviewed by LGen Leslie
and MGS and MMEV look like dead ends. Still, operational experience in Afghanistan show the need
for large-calibre DFS. The 66 remaining CF Leopard C2 tanks have received at least a reprieve.
|
|
|
[1] The MGS's main gun is a M68A1 (US version of the Leopard's British-designed
105mm L7A3). In the MGS, an 8-round carousel feeds ammunition to the breech, firing up to 18 rounds per minute.
Germany's Rheinmetall has already proposed an upgunned MGS – replacing the original rifled L7/M68
gun with a new smooth-bore 105mm cannon based on technology from Rheinmetall's famous 120mm L/44 series.
[2] By their very nature, low-profile turrets are extremely complex and the MGS autoloader has recently been
redesigned. An 8-rd carousel magazine presents shells to the breech (a 10-rd replenisher brings total rounds to
only 18 carried). MGS can fire the usual 105mm armour- piercing rounds but emphasis has shifted to
bunker-busting and shotgun-like anti-personnel canister rounds (effective from 50m to 500m).
[3] The LPT was developed by General Dynamics Land Systems which has since also taken over LAV III/Stryker
development. Since the LPT is an 'in house' piece, it is unlikely that GDLS
would favour the suggestions made by some to substitute a less controversial turret. As for weight,
Strykers were not to exceed a 17,300kg Hercules weight restriction. Prototype MGS
weighed in at 20,454kg. An aggressive weight reduction began in early 2002. Currently, MGS weight is
18,770kg (although this may not include 2,300-to-3,600kg for slat armour).
|
|