CASR
|
- |
|
In Detail |
|
by T.S. Rea |
|
Defence Technology — March 2004
Does Canada have alternatives to the Mobile Gun System?
Part 3 — Stryker MGS: “... that willing suspension of disbelief ...” The MGS/LAV suspension employs four front wheels which turn like those in a car to steer the vehicle. Contrast with tracked armour which can simply slew while stopped. Not only does turning front wheels rob the MGS of the essential tactical capabiliity to pivot on the spot, that turning suspension also unnecessarily adds about 1m to the vehicle width. The heavy suspension arms represent a failure to exploit the vehicle’s armour body as its primary structural element. The resulting design is also unnecessarily high which creates other problems and weaknesses. 
MGS/LAV >Front Wheels Drive/Steer Rear Wheels Drive Only So, how are such design limitations circumvented? If sufficient care is used in the selection and arrangement of AFV drive train and weaponry components, then it becomes practical to employ more armour of a superior type and to better arrange that armour. In other words, by making armour considerations paramount when designing , a lower total quantity of armour will be required. Since less armour is required, the use of expensive mass-efficient armour types becomes practical. [1] 
Non-steering wheels and the hydraulic suspension systems used so successfully on much heavier tank
chassis would provide a superior ride and address all the problems typical of wheeled AFVs. The DND research
establishment at Suffield has experimented with a computer–controlled hydraulic suspension system
for the 4x4 Iltis. Such a suspension system
could provide improved cross-country performance along with the means to control the violent effect of
recoil from a large gun mounted on a small platform.
A differentially-steered wheel drive requires finely regulated drivelines to port and starboard. This type of drive system has rarely been employed due to the historical inadequacies of transmission technology. Modern hydrostatic cross- drive transmissions, continuously-variable gears, electric cross-drive motors, as well as some of the hybrid electric-drive technologies being developed for the US FCS [2], are all ample resources for providing the regulated motive force for fixed- wheel differential steering. Transmission technology is no longer a limiting factor. [1] Savings are also accrued through reduced operations and maintenance costs. [2] The US Army’s Future Combat System program aims to replace the MGS and other LAV III-based Stryker ‘Interim Combat Vehicles’ in US service. Both diesel- electric and turbine-electric hybrid drives have been tested as part of the FCS. < Part 2 — “... I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue ...” > Part 4 — “... tread a measure ...” Advantages of Differential Steering |