NZ Army's new APCs

Discussion in 'New Zealand' started by BlackHand, Jan 21, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. This report in The New Zealand Herald has prompted the joke that the NZ Army has purchased one vehicle for peacekeeping and 104 as spare parts .

    Breakdowns plague Army’s new vehicles.

    Defence Minister backs $NZ 672 LAV fleet after first arrivals strike problems.
    Mechanical faults have struck the first six of the Army’s expensive new armoured vehicles. The faults include breakdowns a turbo unit, a heater and an auxiliary power unit. One vehicle was out of action from October24 until mid-December after breaking an axle.

    But Defence Minister Mark Burton yesterday defended the LAV III’s reliability saying the glitches were minor and to be expected with a new piece of equipment.

    NZ First MP and former Army officer Ron Mark attacked the vehicle’s reliability after Mr. Burton revealed the faults in answers to his parliamentary questions. Mr. Mark said that he would not accept it on a Toyota Landcruiser.

    The Government is buying 105 LAV’s from General Dynamics Land Systems Canada at a cost of $672 million (circa 245 million pounds) to replace the Army’s aging M113 APCs.

    An American version of the LAV, the Stryker, has been criticised overseas for its lack or armoured protection but is being widely used in Iraq. A Canadian Army project director, Major Jim Atkins, was quoted in a Canadian newspaper on Monday as saying concerns about the Strykers ability to withstand rocket propelled grenades had been partly addressed. But its landmine armour had always been a concern, and new Strykers would probably need extra armour bolted on. Many US soldiers in Iraq seemed to like the vehicles.

    Has any one experience with this vehicle ? Any comments on the price ? Which does include tools and spares - for 6.4 million bucks each I would have thought they would have thrown in a complete LAD
  2. as far as i have heard they are about on par for reliability with the sa80 and the collins class submarines and weren't they a great investment for the british army and australian navy respectively

    oh and as for spares i think they come with a jack and a philips head :wink:
  3. Unknown_Quantity

    Unknown_Quantity War Hero Moderator

    If they work the same way as the MOD then they got a jack out of a mini and all the screws need a flat head :oops:
  4. 1. Its a new vehicle in the Kiwi army so there are bound to be problems.
    2. Its much better than saxon so can we have some please.
  5. No need, FRES is the answer to........ all our dreams? If it TRACER!!!!
  6. i guess it just goes to show how truly difficult it is to build stuff for the forces that works with minimal problems from the word go. especially when it is designed and decided upon by those in government who do not use it and never ask those who do "hey what would work best, what do you need?". some of the best weapons and vehicles that are still in use by many armed forces today, were those designed in ww2 or post war. they are reliable, popular with troops and were designed with harsh operational environments in mind. there is no point designing something that looks pretty and shiny and has all the whizbang gadgets in it that then jams the first time it gets condensation/sand in it, or has so many electrical faults it is in for repairs more often than on active duty, or has to have lots of retools to make it operationally safe.

    i would not ever try to say i have the answers to these kinds of issues, but someone out there does and someone needs to find them and ask them how to fix the problems we have, and do it fast.
  7. Real world engineering maxim:

    "You can have it quick, cheap, or good. Pick two, you won't get the third"
  8. Cynics might say that the NZ Army does not actually want its shite and briney new LAVs to move. Stationary they make an ideal billboard on to which the NZ Army can paint the new, super-improved and vastly expensive new logo. To be admired by all those who coughed up - i.e. the NZ taxpayer

  9. oooo pretty! that is way better than our one. what does it say "army be depressed"? :wink:
  10. Its good to know that its not only the British Army that buys turkeys...

    The aussies are also looking at a replacement for the M113 called the bushmaster, again it has all the makings of a white elephant, I saw one at Enoggra (aus army garrison) when I enquired to the drive "how well" it went he simply replied "dunno mate its hasnt moved for two months!"
  11. With new vehicles, radios, a replacement for the Land Rover that looks like Lada are trying to compete with Range Rover it's nothing but smiles over here. Pity there's such a manpower shortage that we won't get a chance to break anything as we won't have enough people to use them.
  12. AAAAH! Its good to see that as well as giving you the gift of parliamentary democracy, shakespeare, the rule of law, Adam Smith economics, beer, the english language...... we also provided you with the priceless gift of being able to completely **** up the eqpt procurement process and a mindset which selects 'shit kit' over 'effective kit' everytime........ that way we preserve our cherished interoperability. THREE CHEERS FOR THE BRITISH EMPIRE!!!!!!!! HURRAH!!!!!!
  13. The Pinzgaur


    The Pinzgaur web site says;

    Loads of squaddies sitting around discussing Bernoulli's Theorem and when the fcuking truck broke down again :?: :?:
  14. The Irish army had similar problems with mechanical breakdowns in the Swiss built version (MOWAG Piranha III= LAV III series), the first battalion group deployed to Liberia reported poor serviceabilty, and before that the initial conversion courses managed to flip one due to faulty suspension as well as seperate instances of armour cracking.

    But then what vehicle has had a flawless entry into service?
  15. Err..........the horse......?