Author Topic: Medium Support Vehicle System  (Read 32159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MedCorps

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 572
  • Career Student
Medium Support Vehicle System
« on: March 15, 2008, 22:00:44 »
For those interesting in vehicle procurement...

A MERX Notice - Letter of Interest went out last Wednesday (12/3/08) for the SMP (aka "the tactical truck) part of the Medium Support Vehicle System. 

Why a new LOI for a project that is already had an LOI issued (the first one went out 1 Feb 2007 with a 20 April 07 closing)

Here is CSAR's take on it:

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/doc-loi-msvs-smp.htm

They suggest that the original SMP specification did not provide enough armour protection for overseas deployments.  The 800 MilCOTS MSVS are unaffected as are the 1000 SEV MSVS, the focus is on the 300 SMP MSVS

For information on the project here:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmpd/msvs/index_e.asp

Enjoy,

MC

Offline steveyb4342

  • New Member
  • **
  • 560
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 34
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2008, 19:12:12 »
I dont know if this is due to the fact that I only slept 2 hours last night but..... I dont understand your post. Can you dumb it down a bit? lol. Ill try reading again in the morning too lol.

                                                 Thanks Steve
If you don't believe your country should come before yourself, you can better serve your country by livin' someplace else.
Stompin' Tom Connors
If it doesn't fit, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.

Offline delavan

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 10
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 317
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2008, 09:43:15 »
I`ve seen those in the States earlier this year....nothing new, but they look nice. And most fluids checks can be done from outside the vehicule (right behind the cab, driver`s side)..

http://www.chrishodgephotos.co.uk/funpics/pixww/2002/2002dvd04.jpg

They almost look like mini HL`s, looks like they are Steyr variants...

Offline milnews.ca

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 257,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,863
  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2010, 13:18:59 »
Some time later, this from MERX:
Quote
The Medium Support Vehicle System (MSVS) Project mandate is to replace the Canadian Forces tactical medium lift capability that is provided by the current fleet of Medium Logistics Vehicles Wheeled (MLVW). The project is comprised of three distinct parts: the acquisition of 1300 Militarized Commercial Off The Shelf (MilCOTS) trucks for use within North America; the acquisition of up to 1500 medium Standard Military Pattern (SMP) trucks, 150 armour protection systems and 300 military trailers; and the acquisition of up to 1000 Special Equipment Vehicle (SEV) variants, that will be carried by the previously described vehicles and trailers, providing specific functionality such as command posts, maintenance workshops, kitchens, movement and stowage of logistical stores and medical facilities to name a few. Each SEV variant will be based on one of five baseline shelters already procured in a separate procurement process. The baseline shelters will be provided as Government Supplied Materiel (GSM) to allow "kitting" work to be carried out.

Purpose

The purpose of this notice is to inform industry that a second draft of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the kitting of SEV variants is now available on the project website .... for review and comment.

Response

Industry is invited to provide comments on the draft SEV Kitting RFP using any software compatible with MS Office Suite 2003.

Industry should ensure that its comments are clearly traceable to a particular paragraph or section of a particular document.

Comments are to be sent by email to the Contracting Authority identified at the end of this notice. Canada intends to use the information submitted to assist in refining the documents for the MSVS Project ....

Deadline:  6 Aug 10 02:00 PM Eastern Daylight Saving Time EDT
"I do my best proofreading after I hit send."  @ComedyPosts

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline MedCorps

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 572
  • Career Student
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2010, 17:40:38 »
Looks like the SEV kits are well defined:

The Airforce has a notable collection of SEV's:

Aircraft Life Support Equipment SEV
Aircraft Metal Repair SEV
Aircraft Refinishing SEV
Aviation SEV
Avionics SEV
Aircraft Battery Servicing SEV
Aircraft Mobile Repair Party SEV

As do the EME's:

Electronic / Optronic (EO) Mobile Repair Team SEV
Vehicle Component Reapir SEV
Tool Crib SEV
Welding Mobile Repair Team SEV
Vehicle Mobile Repair Team SEV
Weapons Mobile Repair Team SEV

And the CFHS:

Dental Clinic SEV
Medical SEV
Pharmacy SEV

And the mapping  guys:

Geomatics SEV
Map Storage SEV
Map Distribution SEV
Map Production SEV

And the others:

Non-expandable Field Office SEV
Expandable Field Office SEV
Postal Field Office SEV
Land Communications Informations Systems SEV
Dive SEV
Field Kitchen SEV
Meteorological SEV
Binned Stores SEV
Command Post SEV
Command and Control SEV

This should be interesting...

MC







Offline milnews.ca

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 257,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,863
  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #5 on: March 07, 2011, 06:51:02 »
.... courtesy of the MSVS project page:
Quote
.... No.     Name of Pre-Qualified Bidders    Pre-Qualified
Base Vehicle
1    BAE Systems (TVSLP)    FMTV
2    Daimler AG    Zetros
3    Oshkosh Corporation    MTVR, FMTV, HEMTT-A4
4    Navistar Defence Canada Inc.    ATX8
5    Renault Trucks Defense    KERAX 8 X 8
6    Rheinmetall / MAN Military Vehicles Canada Ltd.    HX77 8 X 8 ....
"I do my best proofreading after I hit send."  @ComedyPosts

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Grizzly

  • Guest
  • *
  • 150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 23
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2011, 08:23:53 »
Is it just me, or do a lot of the trucks in the pre-approved list look more like HLVW replacements rather than MLVW replacements? Are there any plans to combine the requirements and purchase one family of vehicles to replace both fleets?

Offline Kirkhill

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 85,965
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,743
  • Just plain difficult
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2011, 12:52:43 »
Is it just me, or do a lot of the trucks in the pre-approved list look more like HLVW replacements rather than MLVW replacements? Are there any plans to combine the requirements and purchase one family of vehicles to replace both fleets?

Or is it just the continuing tendency that has seen the 1/4 ton jeep replaced by the 1 ton HMMWV and the HMMWV replaced by the 2.5 ton MRAP? When does the trend end? or should it?

From one side of the argument - bigger trucks mean that fewer soldiers can carry more tools and therefore do more jobs without needing to call in specialists.
On the other side you have bigger trucks that are harder to deploy and less able to access many parts of the country side.

Of course you also have the trend that if you give a soldier a 30 lb pack he will try to carry 50 lbs of kit in it and start looking for a donkey.
Give him a donkey he'll break that critter's back and want a mule.
Give him a mule and soon he'll be wanting a horse and expect to ride the thing.
When he breaks the horse he'll have to have a jeep, then a HMMWV, then an MRAP.....

There is a thread here about the usefulness  of the ATV - a small, light, unarmoured vehicle that could be easily transported and carry useful loads over rough ground and narrow trails.  I thought we had one of those at one time..... Wasn't it called the Iltis?
Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.
"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”  - James Lovelock

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 237,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,667
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 90,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,410
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2012, 23:54:18 »
Well, at least there is a standing offer for the duct tape to keep the MLs together.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Pat in Halifax

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 29,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 802
  • Jackwagon
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2012, 05:17:48 »
And the MSVS SMP has been stopped...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-slams-the-brakes-on-plan-to-buy-new-military-trucks/article4408849/
This has GOT TO be frustrating for you guys. I just heard it on the radio this morning and though I am in the Navy, I know there was some subdued excitement amongst my brethren in green about this acquisition. I wonder if a plan for a more conservative (aka cheaper) option is there...a Plan B perhaps?
"No ******* ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other dumb ******* die for his"
George S. Patton

Offline PuckChaser

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 808,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,400
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2012, 09:07:12 »
What shortsighted junk. We under-order MSVS in anticipation of the MSVS SMP, and then they cancel the SMP variant leaving people short on serviceable medium-lift. Next they'll tell us they're cancelling the LSVW replacement project.

Offline George Wallace

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 282,575
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26,639
  • Crewman
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2012, 09:24:59 »
Let's see now.....the old Deuce and a Half was in service for just over 30 years.  The MLVW that replaced it is nearing that same timeframe.  It being "newer, better" may be the reason that some government weenie figures we can stretch it further, or in the words of Jean Chretien: " we don't want to drive a Cadillac, we will drive a Chevie."  With the LSVW and HLVW both reaching the end of their life cycles, the Army is really in a world of hurt.

Perhaps the solution is for Public Works to recall all the government vehicles it has on the road and replace them; trucks, buses, and limos, with vehicles from 1985.  The PM and all Government Ministers can come to work in one of Jean Chretien's 1985 Chevies.   >:D


What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.

Any postings made by me which are made on behalf of Army.ca will be followed by the statement "George, Milnet.ca Staff".

Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline SOES_v

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 86,547
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
  • "What we do in life echoes in eternity"
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2012, 14:27:24 »
I saw this in the news but I am a bit confused as to what is happening. Isn't the MSVS supposed to be the MLVW replacement? Or is there a second contract associated with the MSVS, or is the National Post mixing things up.

Either way, the author of this article:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/07/12/matt-gurney-tories-bring-another-proud-moment-in-military-procurement-history/#Comments

failed to mention the present MSVS at all which kind of confused me.

Quote

On Wednesday afternoon, just minutes before final bids from private corporations were due, the federal government unexpectedly cancelled the process to replace the Canadian Army’s fleet of trucks with 2,300 new vehicles. In a statement sent out to the interested companies, the government claimed that, “Economic, marketplace and budgetary circumstances have changed since this solicitation process began. Therefore, the government of Canada needs to reassess this procurement to ensure that the right equipment is acquired for the army at the best value for Canada, prior to proceeding with a new solicitation.”

No kidding. Of course economic, marketplace and budgetary circumstances have changed since the process began: It began six years ago. And in all that time, the Conservative government has still not been able to get its act together sufficiently to accept bids from companies interested in addressing the Army’s need for new vehicles, a need that both the military and the government agree is real.

Yes, indeed. Another proud chapter in Canadian military procurement history, brought to you by your troop-supporting Tories.

Army trucks are not glamorous. They don’t have the sex appeal of a sleek new fighter jet or a deadly tank, and certainly aren’t as impressive as a giant transport plane or a new Navy warship. But they are absolutely vital. Trucks form the backbone of any military operation, at home or abroad. They move soldiers quickly to where they need to be, keep them supplied once they’re there, and can be instrumental in delivering desperately needed humanitarian aid to disaster areas in Canada or elsewhere. A modern military simply doesn’t function without trucks.

The Canadian Army has trucks. But the current version, the MLVW (Medium Logistics Vehicle Wheeled), first entered Canadian service in 1982, 30 years ago. These vehicles are aging, suffering from brake problems and are simply worn out. The Defence Department called replacing these trucks an urgent priority six years ago, when the Conservatives first announced that replacements would be ordered. They haven’t gotten any younger since. The aging of these trucks not only hurts their reliability, it adds to their costs. That’s unacceptable.

And yet, for the second time, the government has cancelled the process to replace them. Last November, the government claimed that it needed to “further refine’ the specifications for the trucks, and it was that refined competition for the contract that was supposed to have begun on Wednesday. No such luck for the Army, sadly, which will continue to use its 30-year-old trucks while the government, yet again, resets the entire program.

Military procurement is always complicated. Equipment intended to be used in combat environments, when lives are on the line, must always be built to a high standard. And military equipment must also be compatible with existing military technologies, able to fit inside the military’s existing ships and aircraft for transportation, and be adaptable to the wide variety of geographic environments that the Canadian military is required to operate in. It’s not surprising when military equipment purchases run over time and budget — frustrating and expensive, but not surprising.

But it is certainly surprising that, unlike with Canada’s balky submarines or chronically delayed Navy helicopters, the blame for these delays cannot be laid at the feet of anyone else but the federal government. If a contractor goes overbudget on a program, even though the government picks up the tab, it’s not the government’s fault, per se. That’s why modern military procurement contracts include provisions for fining the companies for cost overruns to delivery delays. But the government has no such excuse here. The equipment hasn’t even been ordered yet, six years apparently not being enough time to pick a truck.

For that, the responsibility must rest with the government. The Harper Tories have long talked a good game about supporting the troops and rebuilding Canada’s military, and in some significant ways, have lived up to their own boasts. But the Army’s trucks are just the latest example of long-identified needs for new military equipment going unfilled because Ottawa can’t effectively organize a competition and select a winner. As much as our soldiers must appreciate the admiration the government has so publicly expressed for their hard work, they’d probably appreciate a truck with reliable brakes that much more.

National Post


Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 237,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,667
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2012, 14:39:06 »
The MSVS was intended to provide two types of vehicles: MSVS MilCOTS, an off-the-shelf purchase with minimal militarization, for use domestically, and a second fleet of MSVS SMP, for deployed operations, which would include armour packages and a variety of accessories (trailers etc).

It is the second fleet, the MSVS SMP, that has had acquisition stopped.


(MODS: Can we merge with the other thread on this topic?)
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline milnews.ca

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 257,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,863
  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #15 on: July 12, 2012, 14:47:06 »
(MODS: Can we merge with the other thread on this topic?)
Ask and you shall receive ....
"I do my best proofreading after I hit send."  @ComedyPosts

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline TSM A

  • New Member
  • **
  • 485
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 34
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #16 on: July 12, 2012, 17:26:59 »
I can see the Reg force clawing back all the MSVS Milcots.

Offline GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 178,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,381
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #17 on: July 12, 2012, 17:28:53 »
The MSVS was intended to provide two types of vehicles: MSVS MilCOTS, an off-the-shelf purchase with minimal militarization, for use domestically, and a second fleet of MSVS SMP, for deployed operations, which would include armour packages and a variety of accessories (trailers etc).

It is the second fleet, the MSVS SMP, that has had acquisition stopped.

Thanks for posting that....it never twigged that there were 2 different fleets under order...
REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.

My mind is like lighting, one brilliant flash, then its gone.....

A young boy asks his father "Dad, where did I get my intelligence from?"

Dad replies "You must have gotten it from your mother, I still have mine."

Offline Nerf herder

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 20,188
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,905
  • The usual suspect.
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #18 on: July 12, 2012, 21:18:57 »
I can see the Reg force clawing back all the MSVS Milcots.

More like fleet management via CFTPO.

I'm sure it'll get messed up as per usual.

Regards
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who kept their swords.--Ben Franklin

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion."
    -Norman Schwartzkopf

Offline SOES_v

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 86,547
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 57
  • "What we do in life echoes in eternity"
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2012, 13:02:43 »

It is the second fleet, the MSVS SMP, that has had acquisition stopped.


Thanks for the heads up! Question. What is wrong with the MSVS Milcot? I know that the AHSVS is based very heavily on a civilian truck, so I don't know why the MSVS Milcot can't be modified to fulfill the role of the MSVS SMP?

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 237,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,667
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2012, 14:39:17 »
Thanks for the heads up! Question. What is wrong with the MSVS Milcot? I know that the AHSVS is based very heavily on a civilian truck, so I don't know why the MSVS Milcot can't be modified to fulfill the role of the MSVS SMP?

There's a number of reasons - the first and most significant is that we didn't scope the MSVS MilCOTS for armour.  There's no (easy) way to armour it, and I'm not certain what an improvised armour system would do to its characteristics (loss of range, payload etc).  The SMP variant was explicitly defined to require optional add-on armour.

For permissive environments, the MSVS MilCOTS is fine.  Once there's an enemy messing around in rear areas or over lines of communications, it's less appealing.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Hurricane

  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,293
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 150
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #21 on: July 14, 2012, 04:35:48 »
Thanks for the heads up! Question. What is wrong with the MSVS Milcot? I know that the AHSVS is based very heavily on a civilian truck, so I don't know why the MSVS Milcot can't be modified to fulfill the role of the MSVS SMP?

Having driven both the AHSVS and MSVS Milcot, there is NO comparison. An AHSVS can be buried up to its fenders in thick sandy mud, and still back out of it. The MSVS Milcot cannot even drive through 4 inches of sand without getting stuck even with 6x6 engaged. The fact is, the Milcots version of the MSVS was a crutch to replace the badly worn MLVW fleet for domestic use only. What I find very interesting is that MGen. Ferron just visited us a few days ago and assured us that the procurement was continuing. Guess he was also misinformed.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 90,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,410
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #22 on: July 15, 2012, 00:14:55 »
Here is how you do an Army mobility project.

http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Projects/Project-LAND-121
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Hurricane

  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,293
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 150
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2012, 04:30:35 »
That vehicle reminds me of an armadillo.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 90,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,410
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Medium Support Vehicle System
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2012, 12:49:22 »
It's not the actual vehicle, but the fact that the project rolled all mobility capabilies into a single project.  We insist on a small project to replace capability A1 with project X, and another project to replace capability A2 with project Y, which is competely different.  Meanwhile, a third project to replace capability A3 falls through, so we are forced to use X, Y, and A3, creating 3 times the requirement for parts, trained maintainers and operators, etc, etc.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr