Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A new Universal Carrier

"cough, cough"

Toyota War - Wikipedia

200 FJ70 + MILAN + nutter Chadians = 7.5k dead libyans, $1.5bn equipment destroyed/captured.

veh, veh asymmetric work by the French advisors

French are sly as yer like and quite frankly so should we be. It shows what fast mobile light strike can achieve in the right circumstances.
It won't work quite so well against a properly resourced and constructed defence with a good indirect fire capability and helicopter hunter killer teams.
But then we should be able to adapt to circumstances and have a good solution stashed in the back pocket.
What we don't want to be doing is taking a rifle to an artillery fight.
 
French are sly as yer like and quite frankly so should we be. It shows what fast mobile light strike can achieve in the right circumstances.
It won't work quite so well against a properly resourced and constructed defence with a good indirect fire capability and helicopter hunter killer teams.
But then we should be able to adapt to circumstances and have a good solution stashed in the back pocket.
What we don't want to be doing is taking a rifle to an artillery fight.

Re the French - absolutely and they were in to the deniable/proxy/Wagner space way before the Russians.

I have heard dits of tasks that legionnaires were sent on back in the 80s ( @Condottiere might be able to verify if these were even feasible) where it was joked that if they were killed, France would go "oh yes, they used to be ours once a long time ago, but there are lots of ex legionnaires out there" to the back ground noise of a shredder in a personnel office going into overdrive.

This is where the UK has a gap; SF are automatically deniable, SPiBs not so much. PMCs are a tricky proposition - the US seems to manage it at scale much better than the UK with outfits like MPRI & Airscan being easily absorbed into bigger defence contracting firms.

The Toyota Horde wouldn't work well against anyone who could deliver even moderate casualties, while the Army's (& the government's) risk appetitie is so low.
Look at the whole body armour question @MrBane brought up here: https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/t...rick-you-personal-kit-and-uk-training.133200/ when sub unit or pl commanders desires for ditching protective equipment (calling it PPE opens a whole new can of worms..) are overruled at a higher level as the strategic impact of casualties outweighs any local tactical gains, then unless the UK is fighting a peer or near peer who cares for their troops more, there is an automatic disadvantage.
 
Last edited:
French are sly as yer like and quite frankly so should we be. It shows what fast mobile light strike can achieve in the right circumstances.
It won't work quite so well against a properly resourced and constructed defence with a good indirect fire capability and helicopter hunter killer teams.
But then we should be able to adapt to circumstances and have a good solution stashed in the back pocket.
What we don't want to be doing is taking a rifle to an artillery fight.
Very fast moving manoeuvre warfare (raids, attack from unexpected directions etc etc) - hello Strike Bdes and Light Cav
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
The Gambia ?

Female mzungu grannies from the UK seem to like it for the S/MBC. Best you keep the existence of Zululand a secret to avoid a plague of loose dentures and walking frames chasing BBC.
 

itchy300

Old-Salt
Sorry for the random outburst during an interesting part of the conversation but the original carriers had an anti-aircraft mount for the bren, is anyone aware of any accounts (en or FF) of its use? Any manuals, training programs etc...

Or more recently if anyone is aware of anything

Cheers chaps!
 

mattB101

Old-Salt
It’s a little off topic but I feel that our forces, predominantly the yanks, have a dependancy on fire support and air support which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The bad thing comes when we can’t work without it. This will no doubt happen if we did ever end up in a war with Russia. We would not have air support, wasn’t the RAF expected to last just 2 days before it became combat ineffective. From what I’ve seen troops on the ground have too good of a supply chain, the only time that I can think of a supply chain being stretched was 3 para in Afghan in 2006. I feel that our forces need to get used to fighting without a ready supply line and without easy access to support. I mean we’re taught to only do an ambush if we have a 3:1 ratio something that would never happen in a war with Russia.
Just my thoughts and rambles
 
In reality, THIS is the universal carrier for the 21st century. Fast, versatile, cheap, effective, able to shift people and supplies towards or away from the action in a fast moving battlespace. Forget robot mules OR blokes shuffling around with half a house on their backs. Yes, vulnerable if they sit within sight of armour, but so is everything else. And even your MBT is vulnerable to fast air, attack helicopters or a couple of chancers with ATGMs who manage to get into position to ambush it. Or IED's or mines. Real wars will result in serious losses to the whole array of kit, so vulnerable is a relative term, and useful may be a more important measure. Wars won't wait around any more for 1mph. Even if you don't plan for it, troops in a hot war won't sit around hours waiting for resupply or even extraction if there are pickView attachment 390788ups or white vans that can be acquired that can get them miles away in minutes. Remember Blitzkrieg: if you aren't fast enough, you aren't capable of responding to the enemy's effort.


All joking aside, there was a very prescient paper in 2006ish that warned of the rise of semi industrialised manoeuvre warfare based on Toyota technicals.

Oh how the Generals laughed!

They stopped laughing when fleets of technicals overran huge swathes of North Africa and the Middle East, even in the face of proper armies with heavy armour.
 
All joking aside, there was a very prescient paper in 2006ish (actually 2010, 4 years before ISIS' run for the south)that warned of the rise of semi industrialised manoeuvre warfare based on Toyota technicals.

Oh how the Generals laughed!

They stopped laughing when fleets of technicals overran huge swathes of North Africa and the Middle East, even in the face of proper armies with heavy armour.

https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/a-new-universal-carrier.292358/page-16#post-9282500
RTFA....
 

Attachments

  • 410-owen.pdf
    80.7 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
In terms of carrying supplies and such in support of either fast moving units or in unusual conditions, surely the Saffers were pretty good at it before Apartheid ended. All the Bush Conflicts and such.
 
In terms of carrying supplies and such in support of either fast moving units or in unusual conditions, surely the Saffers were pretty good at it before Apartheid ended. All the Bush Conflicts and such.
Yes, but no, but.

They went wheeled in Ratels with conscripts against the Angolans in a vast area of bush on/over the border where the population and habitation was not very congested.

Look at Charlie Squadron's operations as part of 61 Mech on the River Lomba in late 1987.

They were up against a peer minus armored bde, the 90mm gunnery required to get repeated kits for a kill sounds impressive

E2A: the SA paras did an assualt in to Angola in 1978 called the Battle of Cassinga - there have been some saffers on year a while back talking about that
 
Last edited:

MoleBath

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I remember that back in the day the infantry component of 24 Airmobile Bde had what could loosely be described as 'dune buggies'. They were primarily used as mobile Milan firing posts but they were also used in a G4 role.

More recently the Paras used to have a thing called Springer (I think) which was a UOR from Op Herrick to enable supplies to be transported quickly from an HLS into a FOB and could carry about a ton. So it would seem that there is a requirement for something of that nature.
Having served on Bde staff I recall there were some major reliability issues. The biggest problem is we tend to gold plate mundane items of kit (RGOCATwas simple and cheap. The original Series 1 LR was light , simple and cheap.
Pending the further development of exoskeletons or drones perhaps the best solution is cheap off the shelf carriers as UOR purchases as needed and to suit particular theatres?
 
All joking aside, there was a very prescient paper in 2006ish that warned of the rise of semi industrialised manoeuvre warfare based on Toyota technicals.

Oh how the Generals laughed!

They stopped laughing when fleets of technicals overran huge swathes of North Africa and the Middle East, even in the face of proper armies with heavy armour.

Ex Chad mil colleague tells me the standard crew for a Toyota technical is 20 men. No idea how they got them all on board but I guess being skinny as fuck helps, along with being able to live on mosquitoes and jerboas.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Bouncing ideas around, why was the universal carrier successful?
Protection, profile, mobility seem key attributes

Mobility was key. Protection really was minimal. People talk about profile; ever seen a Universal Carrier fitted with a canvas tilt (such a thing did exist)? It was quite tall.

There are some good points being made about cheap and cheerful, especially Toyotas, for example. Remember that Blitzkrieg was achieved with often inferior equipment. Panzer II versus a Matilda? No, thanks. The key was manoeuvre.

But, again, my ambition with the thread was to discuss a light, universal solution for portage, not war-fighting.
 
All joking aside, there was a very prescient paper in 2006ish that warned of the rise of semi industrialised manoeuvre warfare based on Toyota technicals.

Oh how the Generals laughed!

They stopped laughing when fleets of technicals overran huge swathes of North Africa and the Middle East, even in the face of proper armies with heavy armour.
Which is pretty much what the LRDG and SAS did in WW2: light vehicles used to get troops into position from all angles.
 
Top