A new Universal Carrier

The Rhodies had very few of these,

Before they got their Crocodiles, Pumas and MPCV .
good site here.

Rhodesian Mine Ambush Protected Vehicles 1975-80 | WeaponsMan

The Bedfords they had , renamed RHODEFs by changing the letters on the front of the cab.

To anti mine proof them they went for.

1. Water in the tyres. Life of the tyre was reduced but on detonating it dissipated the blast.

2. Mine conveyor belting the thick rubber stuff with steel matting in between. This was riveted into the wheel arches.

3. A layer of sand bags in the cab and back covered with the same mine conveyor belting.
 
So, a modern UC, same footprint as the old one, fitted with a rubber track, a flat four or similar low-profile diesel engine, a snorkel for the engine in case you need to wade, a proper flat bed at the rear instead of two holes for the passengers (so that you can lie a stretcher patient flat), a standard tow hitch, convoy lights, a folding windscreen and provision to fit a simple canvas tilt. Build it out of aluminium and have Kevlar panels on hand that can be fitted for added protection. Give the design contract to an engineering university like Loughborough or Cranfield, with the emphasis on KISS.
 
Whilst there was/is a lot of discussion/ideas, I am surprised no-one has mentioned a (diesel'ised) version of the "modern" CVR(T) Scorpion/Striker/Sultan/Samaritan/ Samson et al.

The APC version - Spartan - would do admirably with the superstructure (above the tracks), to be removed at a to-be-agreed height.

There was/is a flat-bed version, but to provide that, you would cover over and deny access to the lower "foot space" inside, between the tracks :( .

[God! I am brilliant . . !! . . .;) ]

Whatever might be the width of the flat-bed, you make it from armoured metal, and split it down the center-line, both halves hinged at the outer edge, above the tracks.

Raised vertical, it would provide armoured protective backrests, whilst in transit; and an armoured screen from behind which Inf could fire before/instead of dismounting.

Lowered flat/horizontal above/covering the central "footwell", the "sides" would provide the flat-bed on which to carry casualties/pallets.

[Brown envelopes containing expressions of your appreciation, to the usual address . . . ;) ].
That’s Stormer.
 
One thing that ought to be borne in mind is how the modern UC gets into theatre, and how do the infantry get there? And where is “there”?
Tracks are great for getting around once you are there, but not so great for getting there. If they are carried that puts a limit on how many you can take.

Engine technology might be better as a hybrid rather than a direct drive diesel, since this would allow electric-only movement over short distances, which is quieter and would also provide substantial generating capacity for the greater amount of electrical kit carried by the infantry.
If you could change the suspension from low to high settings, depending on what the threat is, that would seem advantageous, but equally could add complexity and cost while reducing reliability.
 
We made good use of quads bikes in Afghanistan, and looking at the Sandf , it wouldn't make a bad start point.
 
One thing that ought to be borne in mind is how the modern UC gets into theatre, and how do the infantry get there? And where is “there”?
Tracks are great for getting around once you are there, but not so great for getting there. If they are carried that puts a limit on how many you can take.

Engine technology might be better as a hybrid rather than a direct drive diesel, since this would allow electric-only movement over short distances, which is quieter and would also provide substantial generating capacity for the greater amount of electrical kit carried by the infantry.
If you could change the suspension from low to high settings, depending on what the threat is, that would seem advantageous, but equally could add complexity and cost while reducing reliability.
TINGER TRACK 2. Something on those lines, with hybrid power train and steel/alloy construction.
One question, for air portability would it need to be armoured.
 
One thing that ought to be borne in mind is how the modern UC gets into theatre, and how do the infantry get there? And where is “there”?
Tracks are great for getting around once you are there, but not so great for getting there. If they are carried that puts a limit on how many you can take.

Engine technology might be better as a hybrid rather than a direct drive diesel, since this would allow electric-only movement over short distances, which is quieter and would also provide substantial generating capacity for the greater amount of electrical kit carried by the infantry.
If you could change the suspension from low to high settings, depending on what the threat is, that would seem advantageous, but equally could add complexity and cost while reducing reliability.
Not really air portable unless you have some big kit but hybrid running off a generator driving six independent electric motors, one for each wheel. Loads of torque and pretty quick over rough terrain. Medical version around somewhere as well for casevac.

Ratel 90



Ratel 20



Plenty of other add ons

 
So, a modern UC, same footprint as the old one, fitted with a rubber track, a flat four or similar low-profile diesel engine, a snorkel for the engine in case you need to wade, a proper flat bed at the rear instead of two holes for the passengers (so that you can lie a stretcher patient flat), a standard tow hitch, convoy lights, a folding windscreen and provision to fit a simple canvas tilt. Build it out of aluminium and have Kevlar panels on hand that can be fitted for added protection. Give the design contract to an engineering university like Loughborough or Cranfield, with the emphasis on KISS.
One thing that ought to be borne in mind is how the modern UC gets into theatre, and how do the infantry get there? And where is “there”?
Tracks are great for getting around once you are there, but not so great for getting there. If they are carried that puts a limit on how many you can take.

Engine technology might be better as a hybrid rather than a direct drive diesel, since this would allow electric-only movement over short distances, which is quieter and would also provide substantial generating capacity for the greater amount of electrical kit carried by the infantry.
If you could change the suspension from low to high settings, depending on what the threat is, that would seem advantageous, but equally could add complexity and cost while reducing reliability.
I feel as though we’re getting somewhere, no pun intended.
 
Those Ratals look OK, but in reality their moving miles away from a UC. That's more armoured Reccie vehical.
Used as IFVs. Carry a load of troops in the back and operate as mobile artillery/anti tank/anti aircraft once dismounted. There's also a medevac and command version.
 
One thing that ought to be borne in mind is how the modern UC gets into theatre, and how do the infantry get there? And where is “there”?
Tracks are great for getting around once you are there, but not so great for getting there. If they are carried that puts a limit on how many you can take.

Engine technology might be better as a hybrid rather than a direct drive diesel, since this would allow electric-only movement over short distances, which is quieter and would also provide substantial generating capacity for the greater amount of electrical kit carried by the infantry.
If you could change the suspension from low to high settings, depending on what the threat is, that would seem advantageous, but equally could add complexity and cost while reducing reliability.
my first instinct is that we're increasing the cost per unit significantly in order to satisfy things that would be secondary requirements however a call would need to be made about the role of the vehicle. if it's primary function is to carry kit and stores then it seems over the top, if you're going to start using it as recce veh or for moving troops close in to the point of an attack then i can see the use for it though.

i like the idea of providing a charge point as it's something that should be relatively cheep to add.
 
Whilst there was/is a lot of discussion/ideas, I am surprised no-one has mentioned a (diesel'ised) version of the "modern" CVR(T) Scorpion/Striker/Sultan/Samaritan/ Samson et al.

The APC version - Spartan - would do admirably with the superstructure (above the tracks), to be removed at a to-be-agreed height.

There was/is a flat-bed version, but to provide that, you would cover over and deny access to the lower "foot space" inside, between the tracks :( .

[God! I am brilliant . . !! . . .;) ]

Whatever might be the width of the flat-bed, you make it from armoured metal, and split it down the center-line, both halves hinged at the outer edge, above the tracks.

Raised vertical, it would provide armoured protective backrests, whilst in transit; and an armoured screen from behind which Inf could fire before/instead of dismounting.

Lowered flat/horizontal above/covering the central "footwell", the "sides" would provide the flat-bed on which to carry casualties/pallets.

[Brown envelopes containing expressions of your appreciation, to the usual address . . . ;) ].
Been done already in respect of a diesel engine across the FV4300 series of vehicles - over 10 years ago now. The 'new' FV432 is known as Bulldog.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
Been done already in respect of a diesel engine across the FV4300 series of vehicles - over 10 years ago now. The 'new' FV432 is known as Bulldog.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
As part of my job as an HGV driver I went to Collie where they were converting those 432s into Bulldog spec. I couldn't believe how quiet they are. Moving around, gone is that screaming engine to a pleasant purr. No NBC pack so a bit of extra storage internally.
There's a recycling possibility there. Cutting the body down to make something on the lines of an old UC. Flat floor would get 2 or possibly 3 pallets down the middle.
 
Buy pickup trucks off the shelf.
Why? Because once you've agreed that a vehicle is needed to carry " stuff", you've agreed the parameters re load capacity, hill climbing ability etc etc etc, added on " nice to haves" and " what ifs", then got whichever design to meet EU road safety standards, environmental standards, crew ergonomics, H&S requirements, and so on, you're at a point some 5 to 10 years from now, and still manpacking the stuff.
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top