Rebuilding the Capability of the New Zealand Defence Force 6/6

Why are we buying new armoured
vehicles?

They will be used as fire support vehicles (FSV) and infantry mobility
vehicles (IMV).
NZ no longer has a fire support vehicle. The Scorpion was withdrawn from
service in 1998.
NZ's existing armoured personnel carrier, the M113 is over 30 years old
It is unreliable, expensive to run, and struggles to meet the operational
requirements expected of it (e.g. it is deficient in speed and protection)
The LAVIII is able to carry two patients on stretches and can be used in
this role when needed.

What is a LAV III?

The LAV III is a third generation light armoured vehicle manufactured in
Canada. It is in service with, or has been chosen by other defence forces
including Canada, Ireland, Denmark and Sweden.
The LAV III is an eight-wheeled vehicle crewed by three people. It has a
25mm cannon in a turret and is able to carry 7 people in the back.
The LAV III provides ballistic protection, is able to resist anti-personnel
mines, and will prevent most artillery splinters injuring its occupants.
The LAV III fits in a C130 Hercules.

How much will the LAV III cost?

The total project cost is NZ$611million (GST inclusive)
This is made up of the base cost of the vehicles, and all other expenses
such as spares, simulators, ammunition, infrastructure, documentation and
training.

Is the LAV III gold plated?

No. The vehicle is the standard Canadian LAV armoured personnel carrier. LAV
III will have to be in service for 25 years. It must be modern. Across the whole
project the LAV III is fully competitive. While the individual unit cost of the
LAV III is higher than some other wheeled vehicles, its greater carrying
capacity and its common configuration reduces the overall numbers required.

How many vehicles are we purchasing?

The Army's requirement is to provide a lift capability for 2 battalions
105 LAVs are being purchased - 51 for one battalion, 50 for the second and
four training vehicles.
If we went with a smaller vehicle, such as an upgraded M113, we would need
about 150 to provide the same capability.

Why not upgrade the M113s?

We do not have enough M113's for our total needs.
An upgrade would require substantial improvements to a very old vehicle.
The M113s are not reliable over long distances and require significant
maintenance (wheeled serviceability is 96% vs tracked 80%)
They also require more support (e.g. transporters, more mechanics, more fuel
tankers)

How many M113s are in East Timor?

What will happen to the old M113s?

They will remain in service until the Army has been trained to use their new
vehicles.
Then they will then be sold or disposed of.

What do the Australians have?

ASLAV - the Australian light armoured vehicle. It is manufactured in
Australia.
ASLAV is a 2nd generation LAV. It is smaller and, when turreted, carries
fewer soldiers.
A combined Ministry of Defence-Army team visited Australia in December 1998
to investigate the ASLAV and concluded it did not meet New Zealand's
requirements. It is at the end of its development cycle and has no growth
potential.
144 ASLAVs would be needed to do the same task as 105 LAV IIIs.

Did the FOX vehicle provide a viable
option?

The tender proposals suggested that the total cost of a FOX capability would
be more than the total cost of a similar LAV III capability.
Individual vehicle costs are approximately 10% different (the FOX being 10%
less). However, to motorise 2 battalions, 144 FOXs would be required against 105
LAV IIIs
Project costs for simulators, spares, infrastructure, ammo, tools and test
equipment all have to be considered in describing the total project cost.
The FOX vehicle was considered deficient in several areas, including
mobility. The proposed turret has never been fitted to a FOX.
While this was not a project determinant, the FOX does not fit into a C130
Hercules

Why not have both wheeled and tracked
vehicles?

A mixed vehicle fleet would be more expensive. Aside from the deployable
battalion vehicles, two pools of training and reinforcement vehicles would be
required. Two lots of specialist tools and test equipment would be required.
Twice as much simulation equipment could also be required.

Why do we not require an amphibious
vehicle?

The LAV III has the ability to ford rivers up to 1.5metres.
The NZ Army does not have all the other equipment necessary to conduct
amphibious operations, which require substantial air and naval support, a ship
from which armoured vehicles can depart, and the sort of specialist equipment
found within the US Marines.

Will all the LAVIIIs come with turrets?

Yes. New Zealand has no tanks and the turrets are required to provide fire
power and infantry support. The turrets will not be removed.

Prior to tenders being called were specifications
changed?

The initial Army specifications were changed after independent analysis to
ensure the tender would attract a broad range of interest.
The tender was open to all wheeled armoured vehicle manufacturers,
irrespective of country.
After tenders were called, firms that could not meet some of the
specifications were able to request waivers. These were given in areas where the
Army's requirements would not be significantly affected.

Why did vehicle trials not take place?

Vehicle trials would have been conducted if, after the due diligence
process, they were considered necessary.
This was not the case for an "off the shelf" vehicle in service with another
army.
Trials cost significant sums of money and are not necessarily any more
effective than using the results of testing overseas.

When will the LAVIIIs be in service?

LAV IIIs ordered now will take about two years to build, deliver and be
accepted in NZ.
Soldiers will take six months to learn to drive and operate them.
Battalions will then take a further year to learn to use them as a larger
force.
The proposed delivery schedule is: 13 vehicles in July 02; 17 vehicles in
September 02; 16 vehicles in November 02; 10 vehicles in January 03; 14 vehicles
in July 03; 18 vehicles in July 04; and 17

Go to