432s - time for a dine out

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by Shelldrake, Mar 18, 2003.

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. Plenty of coverage on UK TV today of AS90 stomring to a halt in "its own sand storm" but then BBC News 24 and C4 News cut to shots of static 432, spanner monkeys and apologetic sgt RA.

    Seem to have misplaced my copy of Jane's but memory is tellling me the 432 have have reached the 'LS' bit of LS&GC... time to dine the 432 out and find soimething better?

    ??? :-X :'(

    S.
     
  2. They will still be around in 15 years.

    Built 1964 to 1970. the corporation still has over 1000 of them "in service" so they out number warrior by quite a large margin. Mostly the mortar (no mortar variant of warrior purchased) and support arms variants but still quite a lot of the Infantry variant (432 Mk 2) in service

    Once the army decides what the new medium bn's are going to be equipped with we will see a lot of them go.
     
  3. I saw it is as well, an AS90 thundering along then grinding to a halt amidst a sand storm - bit embarrasing.
     
  4. Ventress

    Ventress LE Moderator

    They used them in Band of Brothers, modified into German tanks and Sturmgeshutz's (sic)

    Can't see the problem with them- the lads loved 'em as they rarely rolled out of the back gate onto the Plain!

    [​IMG]

    This one may even be mobile!
     
  5. whats a possible replacement? any suggestions?

    Its like the 12 by 12, the bedford and the 320
    They have all been around for years, they all work well, they will all be around for many more years (poss except 320) since they do the job well.

    The 432 is so adaptable and is used in so many capacities it is invaluable. The only problem I can see developing is that of armour in future years, but thats easy enough to solve by upgrading.
     
  6. 430 series didn't work very well on SS2, did they? On one Bde HQ move only one of eight made it 60km under its own steam.

    They're ancient and knackered. Mind you, on SS2 they did outperform the CR2 in reliability...
     
  7. Despite the drawbacks of the 430 series, you have to admit they have provided sterling service (and still are !)

    About 40 years old now. It would be the same as entering the 2nd WW with some equipments that were around at the turn of the century in the 1900s. Not bad at all.
     
  8. DangerMouse

    DangerMouse Old-Salt Moderator

    Perhaps they are impressive - in a sort of a "museum piece" way..  How, though can it be a badge of pride (Ramillies: "Not bad at all", above) that we are forced to use equipment that is almost four decades old?  There are numerous problems caused by the continued use of 432 variants: The ES burden imposed on to REME assets, the damage to unit and fmn integrity when part of a unit, or Bde or Div HQ 'doesn't make it' to the new location because they've broken down, and the pathetically slow tempo imposed by the fact that even when they are working they are left behind by everything else on the battlefield.

    Quite.  Humour aside, if we can't deploy eqpt on exercises with any reliability, how can it be trusted on operations?

    Exactly.  After the first phase of the SS2 (Ex DESERT RHINO) the AOR was an armoured graveyard, with REME spending about four days collecting about 70 u/s vehs from around the area, many of which were 432 variants.  During the six-day second phase (Ex DESERT WARRIOR) an "operational pause" of 24 hrs was programmed in to the middle of the exercise, to allow REME fix the kit that we knew would by then have broken down - Awe-inspiring stuff.  Not.

    4 Armd Bde, who were being tested for CP 5 in preparation for their high readiness year, took months to recover, because their 432s were trashed.

    An unfair assessment, because some staff officer in MOD made a risk assessment not to "desert-ify" CR2s, and take accept the loss in capability.  It wasn't appreciated, however, how great that loss would be.  By the time it was realised, and efforts started to be made to get spares in to theatre, September 11th happened, and the airlift priority went to, for example, HMS Trafalgar, conducting TLAM launches against Afghanistan.  (It had a broken periscope, I think, and according to 1 (UK) Armd Div staff, problems like that we crippling support to the exercise).  A more appropriate comparison would be with the Omani Desert variants of the Challenger, which performed very well apparently.  (NAO report on SS2: www.nao.gov.uk/pn/01-02/01021097.htm)

    To preempt another point - 432s and CR2s weren't the only vehs failing in the desert conditions, but most other veh cas were B vehs, and therefore comprised either Combat unit A1 echelons, or Combat Support/Combat Service Support assets.  They weren't, therefore immediately reducing combat power at F echelons as the CR2 failures did, or C2 capability at Bde and Div HQs as the numerous 432 failures did.  CR2 problems were unfortunate, but avoidable, 432s are beyond redemption.
    (It was particularly embarrassing to compare the speed of Omani HQ vehs, and ours.  E.g. seeing the Omani Bde HQ staff and vehicles zoom off in to the desert after a change of control from MAIN to ALT, while the UK liaison personnel in their 432s chugged slowly away behind them, having arranged to meet up at the new RV, once (if?..) our guys eventually got there.)

    The Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle (MRAV) is the planned replacement, details can be found at:

    www.mod.uk/dpa/ipt/MRAV.htm
    http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/index.html
    www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/mrav.htm
    www.alvisvickers.co.uk/stdpage.asp?Pid=110
     
  9. Well done Dangermouse, lots of useful information.

    Now get on with your booty course!!!

    Good Luck

    CO@DLO
     
  10. Dangermouse,

    I agree with nearly all you say about the FV432. It does have many failings but despite them, the vehicle has managed to remain in service up to the present day and beyond. That is a good record !

    Slightly off thread, MRAV is big, heavy and non depoloyable in large numbers by air. Bearing in mind the need for a highly deployable medium to light force, I do not get a warm glow that this is the vehicle we really need. Perhaps something lighter and with less protection- maybe Piranha 4 or something of that ilk ?
     
  11. Never did workout how to get into the fridge at the back.... ;D

    Every section Cmd I had swore blind that the doors were always sticking on the damn things
     
  12. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Th primary problem with the 43 series is that, (despite upgrades), it's engine is noisy and thirsty and not very powerful, it's armour is not going to stop an RPG, it's vision blocks are crap (are there any), it's IR sig is probably an issue as well (eg. there has been 40 years of improvements in technology on this).

    The good point for it is that it looks like an M113 and so less likely to get shot at by the yanks.
     
  13. I remeber the "geriatric" 43's all to well, we used the 436 version, out of a troop of nine of em we were lucky if five crossed the start line and then by the second day of exercise we would be lucky if two were still going, I think track bashing 43's was my major reason for doing P company!!

    Look on the bright side the yanks are still using M113's (also very old)  and the Aussies are running Lepard I's which they have resorted to trawling scrap yards to maintain spares..

    Theres always someone worse off than you!
     
  14. All good points which is why the vehicle is now mainly an HQ vehicle. What we need is a well protected, spacious and highly mobile vehicle that will replace the FV432. Evewryone realises its shortfalls. MRAV is meant to be replacing it or perhaps revamped WARRIORs. The jury is still out. (Unless someone can update us all ?)