'Widow maker' Lav3 in army budget blowout

National Business Review ^ | June 10, 2004 | Nick Bryant

[Vetvoice]

You can rename the Stryker to the LAV III, send it to New Zealand and it still does not deliver anything except big prices.

[VaBthang4]

Yawn...

The Stryker's have been performing admirably. Every weapon system is tweaked after it is fielded and especially when it is a combat zone.

This is a case of "Write it and they'll come" syndrome. Only it's after the fact. The Stryker is doing just fine.

[VaBthang4]

Sorry: 'Strykers'

[norton]

Got references?
[Not PR sources]

Note: I don't think Stryker is 'bad',
I think it is far less than advertised.
Ergo, money wasted on a side trip.

[VaBthang4]

No.
Do your own homework. The Stryker is doing just fine.

[Androcles]

Ha. You should have seen the tender process we used to get them. Our MOD wrote it so tightly it could only applu to the Lav/Stryker, right down to the measurwements for the map and cupholders!

Then we faddled around tossing up between turreted/unturreted and the cost balloned because the non-turreted models needed centre-of-weight reenegineering cos of our extensive mods..

This was a classic case of our military deciding what we wanted and then making it fit the jobs rather than the other way around. I'm not necessarily opposed to the Lavs, but they're certainly not what NZ needs. At least an amphibious capacity and easier transportaion given our remoteness should have been factors.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Stryker and LAV III are different vehicles. There are no LAV III's in US service.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

LAV III's have turrets and 25mm cannons.

09 July, 2003

Kabul, Afghanistan

Canadian Forces Corporal Douglas Gill stands sentry atop a LAV III (Light Armoured Vehicle) at an observation point in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Cpl Gill, a member of the 2nd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment (2 RCR), is one of the first soldiers to arrive in support of Operation ATHENA, Canada's contribution to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Kabul.

[VaBthang4]

Ahhhh....'kay. My bad...I was wondering what a LAV3 was...but when the article quoted 'Stryker unit' I made and ass out of you & me.

If you could...what then is an LAV3?

[VaBthang4]

I google image searched LAV3 and got this...

No wonder they arent doing too well.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Lonnie Shoultz is a Freeper, or was.

[VaBthang4]

Alright now you might have to make me understand...

This is an LAVIII...

Now that is indeed a Stryker Chassis. Perhaps I am missing something. Why is that not a Stryker[it is at the very least one of the many variants]?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

LAV3 is what the various Stryker sucks websites like Combat Reform and G2 mil and Airborne Equipment Shop call the LAV III AND the Stryker. By being imprecise they can better emphasize any shortcoming of any of a large family of 8-wheeled armored cars and ascribe them to the Stryker.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Danish Piranha III in Kosovo. It is not a Stryker either.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

In the beginning, there was the MOWAG Piranha

[VaBthang4]

Okay...thanks. I figured as much.

Is the LAV3 one of the what 9[?] different variants of the Stryker?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The Swiss MOWAG Piranha III and the Canadian General Dynamics Land Systems LAV III are in my opinion essentially the same vehicle. General Dynamics bought MOWAG last October.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Negative. LAV III is the vehicle from whence the Stryker derives.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Variants of the LAV III:

Infantry Carrier

Commander's Vehicle

Anti-tank Guided Missile Vehicle

Reconnaissance

Mortar Carrier - 120 mm

Mortar Carrier - 81 mm

Fire Support Vehicle

Engineer Squad

Recovery

Medical Evacuation

Medical Treatment

NBC Reconnaissance

Mobile Gun System

Self Propelled Howitzer

[VaBthang4]

Cool.
After looking around a bit it seems that the LAVIII is indeed a weapon system built on a Stryker platform. But in the end...it isnt a Stryker and does not have the same weapon systems, targeting or C&C capabilities.