The Torch: "DND seeks more than $2B for vehicles for Afghanistan...

... Insiders question strategy given tough economic times". A typically inflammatory headline, Ottawa Citizen in this case:

The Department of National Defence plans to ask the government to approve a multibillion-dollar package to purchase new armoured vehicles and rebuild others that have been worn down by continued use in Afghanistan.

Defence Department equipment and policy bureaucrats, along with army officers, are working on the proposal they hope will be presented sometime next month.

They will ask Defence Minister Peter MacKay to approve three vehicle projects at once and the value of the combined equipment package is estimated to be more than $2 billion.

But privately, some defence industry and military representatives are questioning the strategy of asking the government for blanket approval of such a large amount of money at a time of increasing concern over the economy.

They worry that the price of the vehicle programs will make it easy for some members of cabinet to raise objections and withhold approval for all three.

The Defence Department plan proposes the purchase of what is being called a "close combat vehicle," [better known as "infantry fighting vehicle"] which would accompany the army's Leopard 2 tanks into action. The proposal also calls for the purchase of a new armoured tactical patrol vehicle and an upgrade of the existing LAV-3 armoured vehicle fleet [more here, not new "news"], which has been worn down in Afghanistan.

Mr. MacKay's press secretary, Jay Paxton, said the minister is open to looking at all equipment proposals from the department.

"The government has been clear in that they will provide our troops with the equipment and protection needed to do the jobs asked of them," Mr. Paxton said. "Having said that, no proposal has come forward to Minister MacKay's office on this particular vehicle acquisition."

Defence officials hope by tying the three projects together they can better explain the need for the vehicle...

The "news" seems to be the effort to tie all three acquistions together. The proposed acquistions really are not related to Afstan, except perhaps for the unusually rapid wear and tear on vehicles in use there, and for the realization that a tracked, armoured infantry vehicle is needed. New equipment is always required in any case, and I doubt too much would get to Afstan before our scheduled 2011 departure. And the, horrors!, $2 billion cost would be spread out over many years. But let's just have a headline that makes people question the Afghan mission.

More on one possible vehicle:

CANADIAN FORCES LOOKS AT CV90 FOR NEW CLOSE COMBAT VEHICLE
The Defence Department and the Canadian Army are looking at the CV90 as a possible candidate for a new close combat vehicle (aka infantry fighting vehicle).

The close combat vehicle program, which has yet to receive approval, would see the acquisition of new vehicles to accompany Leopard 2 tanks into the field.

Defence sources say the current LAV-3 does not have the mobility needed for the job in off-road conditions. The likely preferred option is to go for a tracked vehicle. The equipment program is one of three new projects that will be presented to Defence Minister Peter MacKay.

The CV90 had been previously looked at by the Army when it was first in development but there were concerns about its cost. But now the vehicle has proven itself and is in service with a number of armies, making it more attractive to the Canadian Forces, according to several sources.

The CV90 family has been developed to meet the requirements in six different countries; Sweden, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, Holland and Denmark, according to officials with BAE, the firm that builds the vehicles. The latest version is called 9035 MkIII and is sold to Holland and Denmark...

Not too many war-crazed countries there. The CV90 is in fact Swedish; it's the second picture at this post. Anyone know more about the "new armoured tactical patrol vehicle"? Might it be a Coyote replacement (more here)?

At least, in terms of selling to politicians, the LAV III upgrade and a Coyote replacement would probably be made in Canada--but how does the competition get rigged then? Aren't all our politicians and media against sole-sourcing (unless the source is Canadian)?

Update: Galea Hortus brought this to my attention:

...the CV90 had remained untested in live combat until November of 2007, when Norwegian Army CV90s from 2nd battalion saw heavy combat during Operation Harekate Yolo in Afghanistan. During the first week of November, Norwegian ISAF forces from 2nd Battalion and Kystjegerkommandoen [coastal light infantry - GH] based in Mazar-e-Sharif, responded to a Taliban attack on Afghan National Army forces in the Ghowrmach district. Having been heavily outnumbered by the Taliban forces, the Norwegians used mortars and, in particular, CV90s, to effectively beat down the attack. The operation left an unknown number of Taliban casualties, but Norwegian news sources say as many as 45 to 65 Taliban forces may have been killed, and many more wounded. ^[4]
The CV90 was later used extensively by ISAF-forces of the Norwegian Army's Telemark Battalion in May 2008, when the battalion, during Operation Karez in the Badghis Province, came under heavy machine gun and RPG fire from Taliban fighters. The attack left 13 Taliban fighters dead, and unknown number of wounded. No allied casualties were reported. ^[5]...