Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: General Purpose Vehicles LLC, New Haven, MI
doggtag    6/18/2005 1:51:41 PM
These folks developed a family of 4x, 6x, 8x, and 10x vehicles, all featuring an interesting suspension system: it appears not to just be adjustable, but actually active like several automobile manufacturers are pursuing, which smooths out the ride, regardless of terrain. They have two videos up, one of the vehicle family, and one of a comparison between a standard S&S FMTV and a modified one with the GPV suspension. Having a vehicle with such an active suspension with the range of wheel travel available (up to 20 inches, depending on vehicle) could offer considerably improved handling performances for wheeled vehicles, including improved weapons control, and possibly more important, crew comfort on extended operations. http://www.gpv.com/index.htm Lots of promising features, including cameras for buttoned-up driving, V-hull bottom for mine resistance, built-in winch allowing self recovery of the vehicle (even the 10x variant can unstick itself) as well as recovery of other vehicles or limited engineering capability, a very large crew compartment (plenty of space for enough equipment for extended ops and whatever computer gear you want to include), lots of other stuff like the interesting wire-cutting mirrors, gun ports that can accomodate various-sized crew weapons but can't be compromised from the outside, and a redundant electrical supply and APU. Sounds like a very capable system, although no direct or "ballpark figure" pricing is mentioned. Of course, that all most likely depends on the overall package (type and number of vehicles) one wishes to purchase, including the tech support. A viable contender/competitor for the wheeled variants of the FCS? Seems like American ingenuity once more has come up with another system capable of giving euro platforms a run for their money.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
RetiredCdnTanker    RE:General Purpose Vehicles LLC, New Haven, MI   6/20/2005 6:52:31 AM
It looks like an well thought out and capable system, allright. One wonders if this had come out a few years ago if we would still be operating the LAVIII in Canadian service, or the Stryker in US service. And would the MGS still be as screwed up?
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:General Purpose Vehicles LLC, New Haven, MI   6/20/2005 6:45:16 PM
" One wonders if this had come out a few years ago if we would still be operating the LAVIII in Canadian service, or the Stryker in US service. And would the MGS still be as screwed up? " How true. Very well this series could've been a real (had fair trials been conducted) competitor vs the Stryker family (but the "association" between Shinseki, Spectre, and others with GDLS would've skirted around that just as well as they did with the Stryker vs M113 "trials". I still say it's the Army's version of the USAF's Boeing tanker scandal...) Reading more into just what these vehicles (GPV) are configured to do (suspension, etc), I certainly see it as a more favorable platform than the current Stryker. I would really need to see the overall armor performance, fuel economy, maintenance requirements, and cargo footprint (how much space it takes up in a transport, and in what battle-ready condition.) But the most likely shortcoming of GPV's programs could be that they just don't have the production capabilities of the largest defense contractors like GDLS and its subsidiaries' factories. Still, the Captain, Colonel, and General carriers look like a much more comfy and roomy ride than a Piranha/Stryker platform. What would be interesting to see would be, a public-announced challenge by GPV to compete their platform with the Army's Stryker. Fit out the Captain/Colonel with the same basic kit (battlefield internet, RWS), and see just who proves to be the real winner. If the Army & Stryker take the challenge, AND come out the superior vehicle (in a fair trial with NO rigging or favoritism), then by all means, I'll lay off all my negativity towards the Stryker platform. But it seems like there finally is a home-brewed (made in USA) contender that could seriously challenge the Stryker's superiority claims. Of course, Cadillac Gage/Textron had a promising line of armored cars in the V100-600 series Commando line (4x4 & 6x6), but that was back in the day when the US (DoD) wasn't interested in fast wheeled AFVs...even though the USMC DID adopt the LAV-25.
 
Quote    Reply

Eagle601    RE:General Purpose Vehicles LLC, New Haven, MI   6/21/2005 12:59:21 AM
The Cadillac-Gage LAV-300 lost to the LAV-25 because it couldn't hit a mine and retain mobility since it's a 2 wheel platform. The LAV-25 can in most cases.
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:General Purpose Vehicles LLC, New Haven, MI   6/21/2005 8:14:34 AM
"The Cadillac-Gage LAV-300 lost to the LAV-25 because it couldn't hit a mine and retain mobility since it's a 2 wheel platform." heh! That's funny: I always thought the V300/600 were 6x6, not motorcycles. Guess I must have been looking at the wrong pictures!
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics