Introduction:
During the 1990’s, under Project Musuku, the South African defence firm Denel was tasked with developing a 105mm artillery system with range, accuracy, and lethality similar to or better than 155mm artillery systems. This resulted in the development of the LEO 105 (Light Experimental Ordnance), occasionally referred to as the G7.The LEO 105 stood out from other 105mm artillery as it was capable of firing rounds up to 30 km at sea level. In 2000, the LEO 105 was revealed for the first time at the AAD (African Aerospace and Defence) Expo, where it generated international interest, especially from the US Defence firm General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). General Dynamics was interested in the new LEO 105 due to the US having set out requirements for a new armoured SPG that could be transported in a C-130 aircraft. In an attempt to secure the contract, General Dynamics would team up with Denel. General Dynamics worked on modifying the hull of a LAV-III, and Denel was tasked with creating a new turret to equip the LEO 105, as well as developing a range of new 105mm ammunition for the cannon. The new turret would later be known as the T7 Turret and would feature an autoloader, allowing a fire rate of 6 rounds per minute. Once completed, the LAV-III LSPH was demonstrated to the US Army between 2004 and 2006 at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. Around 2010, the US Army sadly moved its focus to other projects, leading to the cancellation of the US Army’s NLOS-C (non-line-of-sight, indirect fire, cannon) programme, meaning the LAV-III LSPH developed by GDLS and Denel was no longer required. The LAV-III (T7) would however make an appearance in 2010 at the AAD Expo and then again in 2011 at the Alkantpan Test Range in South Africa, where it demonstrated direct firing capability, with members of the South African defence community witnessing three shots that were fired through the same hole in a wall at a distance of one kilometre.
LAV-III is a Canadian Vehicle, not an American one.
So its a modified variant of the LAV-III intended for South Africa. Even if America did some of the modification work. Unless the rules for where vehicles go have changed, surely that makes it either a modified Canadian vehicle or a South Afircan vehicle. In both instances, surely the UK tree would be more fitting?
from the description on the suggestion it can also be suggested under other nations - South Africa as South Africa also tested it. But im unsure if those tests were private or done with the south african military.
It was built for the US, modified by the US, it wasn’t intended for South Africa, so why would it be a South African vehicle?
Class 3 P was a South African vehicle built by Germany, and it rightfully went to Germany, and this should go to the US. Besides, the US at the very least uses the LAV 3 chassis, aka Stryker, and Britain doesn’t, which already makes it more fitting for the US.
I still don’t see the supposed “SA-built” Class 3 in the SA subtree, do you? Unlike the Type 62 and that 37 mm SPAA that were added to the Chinese tree.
That means ISNT BY US but by defence company that wants sell it to US.
Do you know what General Dynamics also made Ajax for UK?)))) Does that means that General Dynamics - UK ?)))
BAE Systems land was created in UK. Does it means all Sweden vehicles to UK TT?)
