Posts Tagged ‘Close Combat Vehicle’

CANADIAN CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE PROJECT DELAYED BY DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN REPORTER

November 16, 2009

 

BY DAVID PUGLIESE

OTTAWA CITIZEN

 

The Close Combat Vehicle project has fallen behind its schedule with the delay being attributed to issues around industrial region benefits, Defence Watch has learned.

 

A solicitation of interest and qualifications or SOIQ was supposed to be issued in September to industry with a request for proposals to follow by mid-November.

 

Neither has been issued.

 

The Defence Department has declined to discuss the CCV project or allow officials to do interviews on the acquisition, estimated to be worth around $1 billion. As a general rule, neither the Canadian Army nor the office of Assistant Deputy Minister Dan Ross allow media interviews on equipment programs.

 

Public Works and Government Services spokeswoman Celine Tremblay noted that the government is working closely with the defence industry to address requirement for the Close Combat Vehicle.

 

An industry day was held on September 2 and 3 and feedback was received during one-on-one sessions with contractors, she added. That information was assessed to ensure potential changes are addressed within the Solicitation of Interest and Qualifications.

 

“The Government of Canada will issue the SOIQ for the Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) on when the review process is complete,” Tremblay stated in an email.

 

Defence sources say there is general agreement within the bureaucracy on the need for the armoured vehicle program but there has been some concern about how industrial regional benefits will be handled. The Harper government has been concerned about the criticism that it has received that billions of dollars has been spent or earmarked for new military equipment but Canada’s industry has seen little work from that spending.

 

However, defence sources believe that government concerns regarding industrial regional benefits can be dealt with and they expect a request for proposals for the CCV to be issued within the next month.

 

The Close Combat Vehicle project will involve the procurement and fielding of the armoured vehicles as well as the development and implementation of a through-life in-service support contract.

 

The Canadian Forces will acquire 108 vehicles with an option for up to 30 more. The contract is scheduled to be awarded by summer 2011 with initial operational capability (IOC) declared one year later in July 2012, according to DND officials. The CCV is expected to reach full operational capability by July 2015.”

 

The Canadian Forces sees the CCV as bridging the gap between light armoured vehicles (five to 20 tonnes) and heavy armoured vehicles (more than 45 tonnes), coming in between 25 and 45 tonnes. The CCV will allow infantry to operate in support of the Leopard 2 tanks, providing the Army with a more balanced and integrated fleet, according to the Army.

 

Nexter Systems, the French armored vehicle firm,  is offering the Canadian Army its wheeled VBCI armoured vehicles for the CCV project. The Hagglund’s tracked CV90 from BAE Systems is also being offered for CCV.

 

At this point, armoured vehicle manufacturer Rheinmetall has not indicated whether it will take part in the project.

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

 

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

 

TRACKS VERSUS WHEELS; NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE

November 10, 2009

CV903puglieseVBCI photo to use

 

TRACKS VERSUS WHEELS; NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE

 

 

 

 

 

By David Pugliese

Ottawa Citizen

 

 

Canadian Army officers have told armored industry representatives it doesn’t matter whether the new Close Combat Vehicle is wheeled or tracked and that the lowest cost system which meets the requirements will be selected.

 

The wheels versus tracks debate is not an issue for CCV that will affect the procurement, industry representatives said in interviews with Defence Watch. They asked that their names not be published.

 

“I would have thought that the Army’s future doctrine or tactics – and whether it makes sense to go wheeled or tracked from a maintenance or transportation point of view — would come into play but we have been told that is not a factor,” said one industry official. “The best vehicle that meets the requirements at the lowest cost wins.”

 

Defence Watch had requested a briefing on the Close Combat Vehicle but the Defence Department declined. DND referred all questions to Public Works and Government Services Canada. A Public Works media spokesperson, via email, noted that the requirements for the  CCV have not been finalized.

 

In 2003 Army officers announced that the service would move to an all-wheeled armored vehicle fleet in the coming years as part of the Army’s plan to build a futuristic force and improve its ability to deploy on overseas operations. As part of that decision the Army decided to get rid of its Leopard tanks and purchase the U.S.-built Mobile Gun System, equipped with a 105mm gun.

 

“Tanks are a perfect example of extremely expensive systems that sit in Canada because they are inappropriate to the operations we conduct daily around the world,” then Army commander Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier wrote in the Ottawa Citizen. “The MGS, in conjunction with other combat systems, will give us a much greater capability on operations such as those being conducted in Kabul, and still give us options for high-intensity combat.”

 

But combat in Afghanistan and concerns about the MGS’s ability to meet future requirements changed that view.

 

In 2006, the Canadian Army’s senior leaders recommended the cancellation of plans to purchase the Mobile Gun System. Leopard 2 tanks were purchased for the Afghan mission.

 

Army officers have also noted that in some cases wheeled LAVs had difficulty with the terrain in Afghanistan. In addition, more armor protection was needed because of IEDs, further prompting the tank purchase.

 

The Canadian Forces sees the CCV as bridging the gap between light armoured vehicles (five to 20 tonnes) and heavy armoured vehicles (more than 45 tonnes), coming in between 25 and 45 tonnes.

 

The CCV will allow infantry to operate in support of the Leopard 2 tanks, providing the Army with a more balanced and integrated fleet, according to the Army.

 

Industry officials say they are unsure of what the Army means by “balanced and integrated fleet.” Does that mean more tracks, to keep up with tracked Leopards, or more wheels to augment the LAV-3s, they ask.

 

Nexter Systems, the French armored vehicle firm,  is offering the Canadian Army its wheeled VBCI armored vehicles for the CCV project.

 

The Hagglund’s tracked CV90 from BAE Systems is also being offered for CCV.

 

Armored vehicle manufacturer Rheinmetall has not indicated whether it will take part in the project.

 

The Canadian Forces will acquire 108 CCVs with an option for up to 30 more.

 

COMING IN TOMMOROW’S DEFENCE WATCH: AN UPDATE ON CANADIAN FORCES UAV PROGAMS.

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

 

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

 

DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN: FRENCH INTERESTED IN CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE

November 7, 2009

 

Nexter Systems, the French armored vehicle firm, has thrown its hat into the ring for both the Canadian Forces Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) and the Tactical Armored Patrol Vehicle (TAPV) programs.

 

Nexter is offering the Canadian Army its Aravis vehicle for the TAPV program and (as noted here before) the VBCI armored vehicles for CCV,

 

The Hagglund’s CV90 from BAE Systems is being offered for CCV. I still haven’t heard whether Rheinmetall will be taking part in CCV.

 

Nexter officials will highlight its industrial benefits package by offering assembly in Canada of the vehicles.

 

Nexter Communications Director Jerome Dufour has noted that the company responded to the letter of interest issued in September by the Canadian government.

 

The Aravis is 12 metric tonnes while the VBCI is 28-tonnes.

 

The VBCI in the infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) version would be offered to Canada equipped with a 25 mm canon.

 

According to Pierre Tran, my colleague at Defense News, the VBCI production line, relying heavily on subassembly “kits,” is designed to be easily set up for local assembly in foreign markets.

 

More from Defense News:

 

Nexter is in talks with Canadian companies to assure a local supply chain for domestic production of the VBCI and Aravis.
The French Army in April ordered 15 Aravis vehicles for reconnaissance by engineers on potentially mined routes in Afghanistan. The Aravis offers NATO Stanag 4 protection against ballistic, mines, artillery and IED threats, Nexter said.
Nexter is under pressure to boost exports as domestic orders are drying up. France has ordered a total 630 VBCIs for 2.86 billion euros, down from an initial planned 700 units.

 

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

 

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

DAVID PUGLIESE OTTAWA CITIZEN: CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE

November 7, 2009

BLOWING UP A CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE FOR THE

CANADIAN ARMY

Bidders for the Canadian Forces Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) are

required to provide what is being Risk Reduction Unit (RRU)

vehicle. Essentially, that will be a vehicle that the Defence

Department can blow up in testing. The testing is tentatively scheduled for spring 2010.

Here is the answer the government provided to industry officials when they asked- “Can you further describe the Risk Reduction  Unit (RRU) vehicle?”

 

ANSWER: The qualifying bidders from the SOIQ participating in the RFP will be requested to provide a RRU vehicle for Underbelly Blast and Fragmentation Improvised Explosive Device (IED) destructive testing. The RRU vehicle should include the following:

 

Required:

• Hull (must structurally match the proposed CCV)

• Full belly armour kit

• Drive train parts such as wheels, differential, suspension and other components

• Suspension should be adjusted to respect the nominal ground clearance at combat weight

• Sufficient parts to stabilize the wheels and to allow the vehicle to be towed for a few hundred meters

• Seats, seat restraints and foot rests (all except turret seats)

• Underbelly armour and/or spall liner

• Proper surrogates are acceptable for any larger equipment that can interfere with seats and crew (such as a battery box)

 

Not Required:

• Engine, transmission, transfer case

• Turret

• Add-on armor kit and spall liner on upper walls and roof

• Instruments and electronics

• Stowage

 

Other Considerations:

 

• If the above Not Required items are not included, enough ballast should be installed to bring the vehicle to nominal combat weight; the vehicle Centre of Gravity position should be respected as much as feasible

 

• Test equipment (such as cameras, lights, sensors) will be installed on the hull by DND. Some welding and/or drilling and tapping may be required. Visual markers may be glued or painted to the hull, floor or seats for movement tracking purpose

 

• Following the test, a complete visual inspection of the RRU vehicle will be performed. All visible damage will be measured, photographed and documented. Part of the protection kit may have to be disassembled to allow for this inspection

 

• RRU should be clear of hazardous fluid (environment) except those required for the suspension parts (fluid type and quantity must be documented)

 

 

 

For more Canadian Forces and Defence Department news or articles by David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen go to David Pugliese’s Defence Watch at:

 

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/

 

 

I


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.