ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by in_the_cheapseats

Originally Posted by Crunchie

Not an expert, but i believe FRES was envisaged by the MOD in the mid 90's in line with our role as a "peacekeeping" army, light, transportable, less thtreatening etc.

Trouble is the armies needs have moved on, the Israeli's have realised that if the majority of people are going to be living in urban areas, and urban warfare gives the insurgent a more level playing field, that is were the fighting is going to take place,then APC's need to be better protected, hence heavier armour, therefore heavier and slower, the whole concept of FRES is probably out dated.

The constant up armouring of Warrior, Bulldog, Mastiff is testamony to the focus on more protection over mobility.

What about buying Striker straight off the shelf, the yanks have sorted most of its problems out and it is held in high regard by its troops, more so than Bradley. Also makes it easier to beg parts off the yanks if we are using the same kit.

So you suggest buying the the more lightly armoured US version of the CA LAV III that is being replaced by the US own upgrade programme FCS and is as Crap Spy has pointed out, is a vehicle already in service 10 years and doesn't have any stretch left?

Good forward thinking, mate

..............................................

................the whole concept is a waste of money. Foward thinking is more helicopters to transport everone about..

As said not an expert, just read that the Striker is poular with its users, wasn't on initial invasion, but upgraded and armoured extensively since.

What about those ones in that documentary, even tho they were for Artic use, sure they could be adapted quickly, you know the ones, big 4 legged troop carrier and a smaller 2 legged recce version, AT-ATs or something.

In-the -cheapseats, i bow to your superior knowledge

Originally Posted by Crunchie

As said not an expert, just read that the Striker is poular with its users, wasn't on initial invasion, but upgraded and armoured extensively since.

What about those ones in that documentary, even tho they were for Artic use, sure they could be adapted quickly, you know the ones, big 4 legged troop carrier and a smaller 2 legged recce version, AT-ATs or something.

In-the -cheapseats, i bow to your superior knowledge

No worries, mate. Fully equiped with anorak, with additional hood, at this end :D

Saying that, the enemy reccy mechs were using their winches to bring them down, so maybe they are not that good?

Originally Posted by Crunchie

you know the ones, big 4 legged troop carrier and a smaller 2 legged recce version, AT-ATs or something.

All Terrain Armoured Transports (Walkers) are susceptible to TOW (cables) and the diddy ones, All Terrain Scout Transport (AT-ST) are easy to destroy using improvised large log devices. :P

No announcement has been made as promised, and the ISD has been put back several years, because BA Systems has not yet been able to come up with a clever enough plan to suck the MoD budget dry and stiff the taxpayer.

Standby announcement of new trials including a BA Systems offering.

Standby further announcement of BA Systems offering being the best value for money and thus contract winner.

Standby even further announcement of massive budget overrun and further ISD shift to the right.

Let's face it, I'm hardly predicting anything new, am I?

Originally Posted by whitecity

No announcement has been made as promised, and the ISD has been put back several years, because BA Systems has not yet been able to come up with a clever enough plan to suck the MoD budget dry and stiff the taxpayer.

Standby announcement of new trials including a BA Systems offering.

Standby further announcement of BA Systems offering being the best value for money and thus contract winner.

Standby even further announcement of massive budget overrun and further ISD shift to the right.

Let's face it, I'm hardly predicting anything new, am I?

The depressing thing is you aren't far off. BAe really trying for a SEP solution.

However, there is a bit of hope.

Down select to one vehicle was announced today.

Note though it says nothing of the down select being of the best vehicle but a lot of chat about the best commercial proposal.

The best vehicle has appears to be already been past over - Drayson's resignation has shown that. Unless something changes extraordinarily we will be presented with the compromise that too often happens out - political necessity and a suite of data (presented as a benevolent gift to the poor Army who MUST feel blessed....) that suits our glorious leadership.

I await a publication of the unadulterated results of the Trials of Truth to prove me wrong.

Having been involved in the GD "take the piss" exercises with BOWMAN, do we really expect anything but a piss take if they get the UVI job, Comms supplier and Veh provider in one go.

Can I please just remind the general audience of what GD's favourite line was during BOWMAN

"I'm sorry, but that isn't in the contract...."

A point of view from the 'orrible civilian side, if you'll excuse me:

Things "Not in the contract" are very high on the c*ck-up risks when it comes to military/industrial projects. Mainly because not writing it into the contract means that the work to achieve it is not properly planned and supported, end result being a horrible series of problems due to badly integrated systems and design decisions taken at earlier stages being not optimal for, or even detrimental to, the revised design.

If the MoD can't get the contract good enough or at least fixed in the first place, then that's where the blame lies.

I'll get down off my soap box now...

The one thing I don't quite get is that the Artec Boxer, which has the most British design input, was going to be procured along with the Germans and Dutch, to replace 432 and Saxon, IIRC. When the MoD and associated politicians were swept up in C130-transportable-mania, it was shelved, and this was probably partly related to Big-And-Expensive Systems snapping up Alvis (who were going to be the UK manufacturer) and thus becoming the giant overlord of military mis-procurement.

Since the UK's involvement in places sandy, it's become apparent that the heavier vehicles aren't so stupid, so the Boxer would make sense to come back in. GD's (really the Swiss firm Mowag, although they are owned by GD) have an admirable record of producing vehicles with the minimum of government and political inteference, but since theirs is the only vehicle not in production, that raises the spectre of politicians demanding the latest things they've seen on the discovery channel and ballsing the whole thing up.