CASR
|
- |
|
In Detail |
|
by T.S. Rea |
|
Defence Technology — March 2004
Does Canada have alternatives to the Mobile Gun System?
Part 4 — “... now we tread a measure ...” Advantages of Differential Steering There is another advantage to employing differentially-steered wheel drive. This arrangement is also inherently capable of accepting tracks with little or no weight penalty. This capability addresses a mobility issue which is usually ignored with wheeled vehicles. Considering the nature of Canada’s climate and terrain together with the CF’s emphasis on wheeled light armour, this omission is a very odd one.
Tracks for these AFVs could be allocated whenever operations demanded extra traction. [1] The design of the tracks could be optimized for specific terrains (eg: designed for deep snow or for arid/desert conditions). Performance on the tracks would not be critical, since the primary purpose of the tracks would be to extend the AFV’s effectiveness rather than to maximize motive efficiency. Linked tracks – or overlapping band track segments connected with ‘Velcro’ or other means – would allow repair of battle-damaged tracks as well as permitting ‘short-tracking’. Running the Experiment – Designing a Future AFV With Armour in Mind Having discussed the importance of an armour-considerations-first approach to design and the advantages of differential steering, we will examine a hypothetical AFV [2] based on these concepts. Since MGS is the most vulnerable and limited of the LAV III family, we will devise a potential alternative ‘Mobile Gun System’. As always, the design begins with armour considerations. The weight summary table below is a simplified summary of armour employed by our alternative MGS.
[1] Track sets would not need to be purchased for every vehicle in the fleet. [2] Following this approach (where the most heavily armoured AFV might weigh as little as 25,000 lbs), an entire family of lightweight armoured vehicles could be built using drive components derived from the primary platform. APCs and other lighter-duty platforms through to logisitics vehicles could all share drive parts. [3] Thickness of armour equivalent to ballistic protection of 40.8 lb. steel armour. < Part 3 — “... that willing suspension of disbelief ...” > Part 5 — “... we have seen the future ...” Advances in Armour Technology |
