Originally Posted by Dollsteeth

Your post that I quoted talked about a lack of training in the thought processes required to effectively deploy a variety of vehicles in theatre - it didn't mention learning to change gear in a Jackal. In fact, your very last line begs the reader to look at employment and tactics before vehicle specs. I believe this capability can fulfil the gap you've indicated, and I'd plead with anyone in a position to exploit it to come to me for a fuller explanation.

Thats a fair point I should have made my statement clearer though I did not want to drag what is a quite interesting thread into the mud by turning it into a gay catfight but ill chuck it in and see how it goes....

I believe alot of units do not have a clue how to use the wmik/jackal, this goes from there employment on the ground both in areas to maximise their effect but also job/task employment and everything down to the smaller but in my opinion very important matter of packing a wmik for prolonged use on the ground.

The fact that there are no vehicles to train with for extended periods of time prior to deployment in all aspects for units to be fully versed pre-tour is what i believe to be a contributing factor to the problems listed in my original post and therefore the main issue in the thread, hope that makes everything less clear

Fair enough. If platform training is still an issue then VBS2 won't solve it - it's not made for that. Tactics and employment contribute a lot, but not everything. There needs to be adequate training all round, but I believe that there is sufficient capability about to cover the tactics and employment side so long as someone knows and wants to use it. Getting enough vehicles for individual training is, unfortunately, something I have no say over :(

Oh, and JCOVE/VBS2 is already used for counter-ambush and IED detection training (i.e. spotting the tell-tale signs) in a variety of other areas beyond mounted combat - particularly convoy movements. This is all public domain so no worries about mentioning it, but I reckon that such uses easily factor into the heart of this discussion.

Originally Posted by Gassing_Badgers

Originally Posted by meridian

Veering into DIS there

I think its quite shocking that an industrial major nation like the UK doesn't have the ability to manufacture all of its own fighting vehicles because as you say, we end up being a queue, not at the front

We do have the ability to manufacture our own AFVs, but in the case of MRAP-type vehicles, we simply don't have any serious home-growns.

The amrketplace exists primarily in the US, because they have enough $$$ (over 10,000 MRAP!) to throw at the problem, which is the main incentive for industry to get jiggy with solutions.

...and that is where the DIS falls down.

What do you mean we have no home grown vehicle? Have a look at the UEC Ranger. Fag-packet sketch to running prototype in 11 months. BAE hasn't worked that fast since Barnes Wallis was on the team. It's at Millbrook now, Bovington at the end of Aug and DSEI Docklands in September.
RANGER in the Dorset Echo

Its all well and good for people to say we need better armoured vehicles but what happens when the taliban decide to chuck more explosives onto an IED to counter the effect of thicker armour. The whole mill will start turning again about better armour and we'll be back to square one. Journos need to shut up or do more thorough research before they start spouting random sh1t

There's no doubt that a big enough IED will wreck anything, but the typical IED in RC S is about 20kg of HME. An MRAP will suffer an M kill from that but the occupants will all survive with bruises and sore heads. A Jackal will be K killed and, from the reporting I see (uh, every IED in the RC), the average butcher's bill is one KIA/Cat A, two Cat B and one Cat C.

Jackal is an excellent recce/fire support platform, but using them as convoy escorts or RCPs is not much better than murder.

No wonder our soldiers get killed this is what we give them
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:58 pm

Correct me if I am wrong but this is s***!!!


Correct me if I am wrong - but it is still s**t and should not be used in the role it is now being used in - sorry to say so; especially given casualties but I and a number of others pointed out the severe shortcomings of this platform 3 years ago.

As a Spec Ops WMIC great as a daily patrol vehicle - suicide.

superslime - if you do see what you claim to and you know so much about the IEDs, you should know better than to publish it on here. Have a word with yourself - do you really think showing off about the 'butchers bill' is really the thing to do?

Having just read for 6 pages there are a couple of opinions being bandied around like truths’ which I want to take issue with.

1. I don’t think the UK populace or the media is assuming a zero-casualty war. NI has rather underlined the point for 2 generations that British Army soldiers can and do die regularly. I think the zero-casualty expectation does not exist in the UK, in the US prior to 9/11 absolutely. But not the UK. What I think ‘you’ are confusing with zero-casualty is the press current fixation of blaming the incumbent government for everything. “Soldier Dies – Government’s fault”. “Jade Goody dies” – Governments fault. “Mexican Swine Flu” – British Governments fault. I saw it at the end of the Conservative governments’ time, and I see it now.
2. Strapping in. ISTR several stories where WMIK gunners were paying the price for being over the rear wheels of the L/R so that if the front wheel missed the mine the rear wheel might get it, and the gunner, who might have survived by being flung out of the vehicle was instead killed by being wrapped around his cupola. I don’t have first hand experience of this but other arrser’s contributed it. Certainly, in a open vehicle with a low RTC likelihood, I’d be very open to being not-strapped in. In a closed environment, like the Bokker says, I’d prefer to be locked in. Interesting point about FOD.
3. The British Military Industrial Complex is not dead. Just because its not making huge sales to us does not mean that it is not expanding into new, more lucrative markets. BAe is of course doing fantastically well with not only almost a guaranteed UK sale for any of its products but also the US and much of the rest of the world (that can afford it). That there is not a lot of competition against BAe in the UK is a fare criticism, but in the US, the competition between, say, Northrop Grummen, MacDonald Douglas and Lockheed Martin wasn’t / isn’t all that competitive either…

As for the Jackal itself, I’ve no experience but read from the posts here over the past couple of years that it is good warry kit but shouldn’t be employed escorting convoys. Because entire convoys have to go where the least capable vehicle has to go, which is fine for that least capable vehicle if it has 15 tonnes of armour around it, but when the Jackal has to go through the same choke point its just gonna get the whole RCIED full in the face.

If it were me, a big cheque book to the Russians for any of their hele-kit still working might well be a better UOR than more armoured cars.

Originally Posted by really?_fascinating

superslime - if you do see what you claim to and you know so much about the IEDs, you should know better than to publish it on here. Have a word with yourself - do you really think showing off about the 'butchers bill' is really the thing to do?

I don't think he posted anything that Terry cannot work out for themselves and that adults shouldn't have a fear to read about.

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

2. Strapping in. ISTR several stories where WMIK gunners were paying the price for being over the rear wheels of the L/R so that if the front wheel missed the mine the rear wheel might get it, and the gunner, who might have survived by being flung out of the vehicle was instead killed by being wrapped around his cupola. I don’t have first hand experience of this but other arrser’s contributed it. Certainly, in a open vehicle with a low RTC likelihood, I’d be very open to being not-strapped in. In a closed environment, like the Bokker says, I’d prefer to be locked in. Interesting point about FOD.

I must take issue with you there. This is a dangerous myth that continues to perpetuate despite strong attempts to correct it. All those going through OPTAG should be taught the 'mine/IED rules'. If they have not been, then something is very wrong.

Originally Posted by Gun_Nut

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

2. Strapping in. ISTR several stories where WMIK gunners were paying the price for being over the rear wheels of the L/R so that if the front wheel missed the mine the rear wheel might get it, and the gunner, who might have survived by being flung out of the vehicle was instead killed by being wrapped around his cupola. I don’t have first hand experience of this but other arrser’s contributed it. Certainly, in a open vehicle with a low RTC likelihood, I’d be very open to being not-strapped in. In a closed environment, like the Bokker says, I’d prefer to be locked in. Interesting point about FOD.

I must take issue with you there. This is a dangerous myth that continues to perpetuate despite strong attempts to correct it. All those going through OPTAG should be taught the 'mine/IED rules'. If they have not been, then something is very wrong.

I look at it this way:

The MOD wallah probably doesn't want to take responsibility for telling people to drive without seat belts. So get them to strap in, it makes sense right?

But yet, for some reason, any motorcyclist will tell you, that in the event of a crash... they don't want to be near their spinning motorcycle.

So given the motorcycle argument and the MOD CYA syndrome, can you tell me why being flung from a Jackal or the back of a WMIK is NOT PREFERABLE to say, being strapped into it when it lands on its roof (e.g. you) and bursts into flames?

Again, no first hand experience (apart from the motorcycle) but you know, nobody has seatbelts for motorbikes....