Dodgy Minister defends useless Snatch vehicles

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by naguere, Apr 30, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Von-Ryan

    Von-Ryan Old-Salt


    Send key setting?
  2. tankieboy

    tankieboy War Hero

    Thats two of us without a clue.
  3. Big armoured truck - EOD in Lisburn used them. No idea what the APC version is like inside
  4. tankieboy

    tankieboy War Hero

    Any chance of pictures, anyone?
  5. Kitmarlowe

    Kitmarlowe LE

  6. brighton hippy

    brighton hippy LE

    MODs slight lack of urgency over the matter.
    if they were willing to spend the money and sort it could be done a hell of a lot quicker but they won't:(
  7. POGscribbler

    POGscribbler War Hero

    Great bits of kit had them since afghanistan 2002 (not the armoured variety) but very mobile, manouverable and fun to drive, turbo charged, automatic gear box (also had a blaupunktt stereo built in....but we are a kinda "special" unit)

    Truck Utility Medium
    The Pinzgauer 716M Truck Utility Medium (Heavy Duty) perform a variety of utility roles, from carrying stores to acting as command and communications vehicles and can be carried in a C130 aircraft or ferried around the battlefield by a RAF Chinook helicopter as an underslung load.

    TUH Weight (laden) 5,300kg. Payload 1,400kg. Maximum speed 109kph.
    TUM(HD) Weight (laden) 3,850kg. Payload 1,400kg. Maximum speed 122kph.
  8. cavasfcuk

    cavasfcuk Swinger

    I still think there are some basic eroneous statements being made in this thread.

    The chap who said that in WWII bits of kit were being designed and brought into service in a matter of months is talking absoloute bolloxs. Trust me that is shite. The only thing i can think that may apply to is the GS pencil, but even that the competitive bid process and full distribution would take longer than 2 months.

    The basic here are that you guys are discussing complex systems. Not only do you have to fully define your requirement either before you approach industry or in conjunction with industry, but there are a miriad of different things to consider. How much money have you got, how many are you going to need. How are you going to support them? What reliability requirements do you have? what level of training are you prepared to go to? what kit does it need to integrate with? tracked or wheeled? amphibious? what service life do you require? do you want something of the shelf that wont satisfy your requirements exactly or purpose designed? do you want to have commonality with other platforms? and that is just the start.

    The only time short cuts are taken in development is on testing. The military test specifications are rightly many orders of magnitude higher than that in civilian life - your kit is tested to death beleive it or not. Some firing trials or reliability trials may be omitted if it is felt that the kit has proven itself or it is needed PDQ - even then all the developement and manufacture and reliability growth still has to be undertaken.

    Telic 2 was 3 years ago, but i can garuntee that telic 2 itself did not fully define the spec for Vector. It cant - the spec has to be combined with all the DLO and HQ land requirements on reliability, support and future capital buys (new equipment).
  9. I imagine that one of the problems with procuring something like LAV/Piranha/whatever is one of image. They look, to quote 'Allo 'Allo, rather like "little tanks".

    I believe that at one stage Warrior was considered for certain specialist applications here in NI but the notion was nixed on the basis that "they" would gain a propaganda victory by claiming the SF had deployed "tanks".

    As for Tavern, I have the notion that it's capacity may be a limiting factor.
  10. From my Big Boy's Book of Tanks, I think this is them. Special (EOD) version up front, APC version in back.


    Originally developed 1988, by Glover Webb, entered service in Northern Ireland (to include EOD) 1993. Officially known as the "Tactica" Taken over by GKN Defense, Alvis, Vickers and now produced by BAe Land Systems.

  11. AFAIK Tactica and Tavern are not the same vehicles.
  12. Gassing_Badgers

    Gassing_Badgers LE

    A question you might like to ask your chains of command, is how much mine protection is this vehicle is afforded?

    Given that the 'Stan is one of the most heavily mined (and IED'ed) countries in the world, this might have been considered as a KEY user requirement..?

    Every other coallition force over there seems to think so...

    Oh, and a pepsi can filled with explosive does not count as a mine threat IMHO.
  13. Bravo_Bravo

    Bravo_Bravo LE

    Is there nothing in service with another country that we can buy off the shelf? Even an up-armoured Hummer? I'm sure the Frogs would have something?
  14. The question that you probably need to ask is whether anything is available off the shelf, or otherwise that can be afforded within the current defence budget.

    I think you'll find the answer sadly predictable.
  15. Gassing_Badgers

    Gassing_Badgers LE

    Y'all might find this interesting:

    Canadian APV programme for the 'stan

    In a landmine-riddled country like Afghanistan, the need for mine-resistant patrol vehicles was obvious. But the Taliban insurgents were also applying the leasons of Iraq to Kanadahar. Suicide bombers and roadside or vehicle- borne IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) were becoming the norm in S.E. Afghanistan. A CF APV would need to be hardened agains mines and IEDs.

    As military competitions go, this APV contest was extraordinarily brief. By listing the APV as an Immediate Operational Re- quirement, the CDS was able to expedite this entire program. Delivery of these Off-the-Shelf vehicles is timed to match the CF’s 2006 combat deployment to Kanadahar. A $60M contract was awarded to GDLS Canada “to provide 50 RG-31...with an option for 25 more” in November 2005 with deliveries to begin in February 2006.

    On the subject of procurement, the average flash-to-bang time for a tank in WW2 was 13 months. Even the US Polaris project only took four years to complete, and that really was rocket science! [1]
    The truth of the matter is that fault lies on both sides: the DPA looses experience every time an SO1/2 gets posted, and industry is dominated by the nature of capitalism.

    [1] RM Ogorkiewicz. Design and Development of Fighting Vehicles
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Current Affairs, News and Analysis Cabinet Ministers dodgy relatives part 2 Oct 29, 2005
Current Affairs, News and Analysis India - Dodgy weapons shipment seized to divert attention from rape stories Oct 15, 2013
Current Affairs, News and Analysis Dodgy dealings alleged over Megrahi’ release Jul 28, 2013
Current Affairs, News and Analysis Dodgy Durex Ring Nicked :) Nov 25, 2012
Current Affairs, News and Analysis Dodgy lawyers are using health and safety regulations to blackmail Britain's employer Jul 8, 2011

Share This Page