There are some pretty big differences from piranha and LAv-25/strikers in service with USA
Nah I think the brits should get this LAV
3 Likes
but the British never used the CF-105 whereas the US has an F-105 in their tree, your argument doesn’t make sense, General Dynamics Canada is a Subsidiary based in CANADA so is a canadian vehicle, not American, the same way the CF-105 is not British, the same way the CV-90 isn’t British, THE SAME WAY THE STRV 122 ISNT GERMAN
2 Likes
Yes, that is the LAV -1 which UK used
The UK did not use that LAV…
1 Like
Shi u right mb
CF-105 is completely diff aircraft from US f-105
Don’t you mean the F-104?
yes my bad, however they are still canadian aircraft, no? they have no connection to the UK, other than commonwealth
1 Like
Then where do you want them to go if added? US?
I would want them to go whereever Canadian vehicles get put in game, whether it be through a Sub-tree or full tree
Now neither the US or UK really need canadian vehicles as they both have enough aircraft to fill at least 10 lines on their own, and more if you consider ZA and India
1 Like
US will probably end up getting every variation/derivative of LAV it used that would fit the game, and UK might get some. As for the aircraft, my bet is the unique or British based ones will go to UK and hopefully the American license made/modified ones will go to US as squadron or event or premium
1 Like
I dont agree with that as it splits up their vehicles so they cant make a lineup with them, its already bad enough that the canadian ADATS has to face off against the 2A4M CAN, all canadian vehicles should be given a place and go there
1 Like
Ok, first of all, I said variants/derivatives of LAV used by USA and those have differences from Canadian LAV
Secondly, Canadian vehicles are probably going to go to the most relevant country for each vehicle so your want of all Canadian stuff in one tree is probably never gonna happen
1 Like
My biggest question would be: are the rounds capable of killing tanks or just soft targets?
One resource says that it can shoot all NATO ammo include APFSDS.
Some more detailed sources on the LAV III T7, from Janes Armour and Artillery 2011-2012:
LAV III T7:
Spoiler
G7/LEO Howitzer:
Spoiler
Rules as written it should go to the US as they tested it, but I think the logic is fairly thin. That logic can be used to justify the USA and Russia getting Centauros among other things - it works as a last resort, but I don’t think it’s practical when there are other opportunities.
I’ll bare my own biases, I’m Canadian, I think it should go to Canada (prospectively). I think the LAV background is greater in Canada than it is in the United States - we make the thing and have exported thousands (we are also looking at procuring thousands more if Noah Gairn’s comments about ACV(W) are correct). If this requires “Operator Nation: USA” and “Research Country: Canada” to happen, that’s fine with me. Significant modifications did not occur in the United States. The US Ground Forces tree does not need it when it has plenty of other options to fulfill similar roles. There is also a claim for South Africa - but there is little additive value for it in the UK tree when we already have wheeled South African SPGs.
The greatest additive value from the perspective of the game, is if it were used for a prospective Canadian tree. It is a good opposite to the Object 120 - an unstabilized high penetration cannon with high velocity, on a slightly awkward chassis. It could fit as a successor/sibling to the Piranha TS-90 and LAV-AG(S) we exported to the Saudis, or as a predecessor to the 105mm armed LAV III LPT (canned by the Canadian Army due to Afghanistan) or the LAV-700AG. If Gaijin uses it to support a Canadian faction, they unlock more value/money through the deluge of new vehicles/modules/premiums than by short-term throwing it into the US.
Here’s how I tackled it myself:
Thanks,
Hydroxideblue