FRES Scout Vehicle

**Bradstyley** · 10-09-2009, 06:45

Pic & article here

Defencetalk

**Turk** · 10-09-2009, 11:48

I'd just been reading the no knives for scouts thread, and my first thought someone is going to want to put a cork in the end of that barrel before somebody gets hurt.

Good find.

**incendiarycutlery** · 10-09-2009, 21:40

I like the way the the news article talking about the Big And Expensive contender for FRES SV has a rather poorly modified picture of the Generally Disappointing ASCOD 2.

And the way that the Cased Telescopic concept is described as revolutionary when the US spent twenty years or so working on it since the late 1950s before it was cancelled by government audit for being fundamentally flawed. Maybe the French have got it right this time?

**jonwilly** · 10-09-2009, 21:53

The guns French and the hull is not V shaped.
A MUST buy for Ganistan.
john

**incendiarycutlery** · 11-09-2009, 15:44

Well, it'll be better than Scimitar.

**ugly** · 11-09-2009, 19:53

Originally Posted by incendiarycutlery

Well, it'll be better than Scimitar.

Because its new like Bulldog?

**incendiarycutlery** · 11-09-2009, 20:19

Better protection, better armament (if it works), more room, more mobility with armour, better sensors.

It's not the ideal vehicle for Afghanistan, but it's primary purpose isn't that. But it will be a damn sight safer and more capable than the CVR(T) in whatever role it's put in. Unless the role requires it to be small and light over all other things.

**ugly** · 11-09-2009, 20:29

Where is thhe irony icon when you want it?
never mind, if Warrior is too big is this warrior junior?

**incendiarycutlery** · 11-09-2009, 21:18

Irony, that's sounding like iron isn't it? ;)

In some ways the vehicle hulls put forward (CV90 MkIII and ASCOD 2) are bigger than Warrior, although I think that BAE have lowered the top of the CV90 hull to make it a bit lower profile, as they don't need the room for 8 infantrymen in the back.

**petergriffen** · 12-09-2009, 06:19

Originally Posted by jonwilly

The guns French and the hull is not V shaped.
A MUST buy for Ganistan.
john

British and French.......plus are there many tracked armoured vehicles with purpose designed V shaped hulls?

**petergriffen** · 12-09-2009, 06:21

Oh yeah, pic of the CV90 with the CTA cannon on it, the BAE FRES SV entry

**incendiarycutlery** · 12-09-2009, 09:04

Originally Posted by petergriffen

Originally Posted by jonwilly

The guns French and the hull is not V shaped.
A MUST buy for Ganistan.
john

British and French.......plus are there many tracked armoured vehicles with purpose designed V shaped hulls?

Built and designed in France, on a Nexter site. Some of the funding's British though.

V-hulls are all well and good, but you'll note that most vehicles with V-hulls also have a metre or so of ground clearance. Not much good on a tactical vehicle designed to operate in an environment where the primary threat is direct fire.

**rampant** · 12-09-2009, 10:34

They might also be placing the new RG35 in the running for the LPPV bid, which caught my eye:

(1st link is video, top left)

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/art...cle-2009-09-11

http://www.baesystems.com/Newsroom/N...098810917.html

http://www.baesystems.com/DSEi/RG35launch/index.htm

Interesting to note the side mounted engine and (proposed) hybrid drive.

**Grey24-7** · 21-01-2010, 17:13

I think you might be confusing the RG-35 with the RG-34 iguana which has the engine next to the driver

**P2000** · 21-01-2010, 17:18

Originally Posted by incendiarycutlery

Better protection, better armament (if it works), more room, more mobility with armour, better sensors.

It's not the ideal vehicle for Afghanistan, but it's primary purpose isn't that. But it will be a damn sight safer and more capable than the CVR(T) in whatever role it's put in. Unless the role requires it to be small and light over all other things.

My bold. So why bother procuring something that costs lots and won't necessarily contribute to the main effort?