Diesel Motorbikes or Nothing?

#1
Just confused with the mixed rumours, I heard from seniors that the army is looking into diesel Motorbikes to replace the Harleys in order to bring the fleet inline with derv, then again I have been also told that the Army has decided not to get a replacement at all and phase out the Harleys, as they proved to be useless off-road. Does anybody have a clear idea of what furture of the Army M/C fleet likely to be? (This topic excludes Honda ST1100PE Red Cap Bike)
 
#4
The problem with the Diesel bike is lack of acceleration and its weight, which means by the time a packet of vehicles has cleared a road junction being marshalled by a don r, he would never catch them up again, oh and maverick the harley is ok off road with a decent rider.
 
#5
Why the f_ck is the environment factored into selecting operational kit!!

I should be asking which public school bum chum civil servant, fagged for the Director of which ever company is begging for the contract

Nonsense, what next solar powered radios..............may as well be from what I read on the Inf/bowman thread
 
#6
I rememember reading in an agricultural magazine about Bombardier touting their diesel quads to the MoD, admittedly this was about a year or two ago and of great interest to those with access to lots of red diesel.
 
#7
It is less the environment but the Single Fuel Concept ie far easier to re-supply ops with a single fuel - seeing as aircraft & vehicles besically run on diesel, it is the obvious choice. We'll not win a war with motorbikes but might with tanks and aircraft.
 
#9
How do you get enough power out of a Diesel without a Turbo?
As far as I know, there has only been one turbo on a bike, and it was lethal. Having control of your throttle is thought to be important and turbo's kicking in makes highsides too much fun.
 
#10
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
It is less the environment but the Single Fuel Concept ie far easier to re-supply ops with a single fuel - seeing as aircraft & vehicles basically run on diesel, it is the obvious choice. We'll not win a war with motorbikes but might with tanks and aircraft.
The problems faced by the introduction of a single fuel concept have become more prevalent over the last few years.

The original plan was to use F35 Avtur with additives added for use in specific systems. F35 plus AL48 (AL39 and AL41) for a/c systems (F34 Avtur FSII) or F35 Avtur plus Lubisol for use in diesel vehicles (as found in Iraq as Dieso KT). The problem isn't with F34 but with Dieso KT.

In the high temperatures found in countries such as Iraq the relatively low flashpoint (38oC) of Kerosene based fuels (Dieso KT) when compared with 'proper' Dieso MT (56oC) has caused a problem similar to vapour lock. Not too worrying if you are just pootling around Basrah AB but a bit more worrying if you are on your way up to Al Amaragh.
 
#11
TheHelpfulStacker said:
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
It is less the environment but the Single Fuel Concept ie far easier to re-supply ops with a single fuel - seeing as aircraft & vehicles basically run on diesel, it is the obvious choice. We'll not win a war with motorbikes but might with tanks and aircraft.
The problems faced by the introduction of a single fuel concept have become more prevalent over the last few years.

The original plan was to use F35 Avtur with additives added for use in specific systems. F35 plus AL48 (AL39 and AL41) for a/c systems (F34 Avtur FSII) or F35 Avtur plus Lubisol for use in diesel vehicles (as found in Iraq as Dieso KT). The problem isn't with F34 but with Dieso KT.

In the high temperatures found in countries such as Iraq the relatively low flashpoint (38oC) of Kerosene based fuels (Dieso KT) when compared with 'proper' Dieso MT (56oC) has caused a problem similar to vapour lock. Not too worrying if you are just pootling around Basrah AB but a bit more worrying if you are on your way up to Al Amaragh.
It most certaintly isnt AL39, it is AL41 and AL61, as for Dieso KT for the reasons you said that is now binned. Its the lack of lubricity of AVTUR that gives problems, a 70/30 Avtur/Dieso mix helps but then still doesnt fully comply to the Single Fuel Concept. Which by the way means equipment only has to have the "ability to run on a single fuel". This means only during operations and the like. There is a tax problem when using AVTUR in the UK as HM Customs and Excise ask you to account for every drop that goes into a road going veh.
 
#12
AL61, of course it is!!

Sorry, I don't keep my Def Stan at home and I was trying to run on what I could remember from my CLA course which now seems a very long time ago.

AL39 is something to do with Naval Dieso isn't it?

THS - West Moors graduate, although obviously without honours.
 
#14
VerminWA said:
AL39 is coolant! The blue stuff that tastes soooooo sweeeet but causes complete renal failure!
Naptha and Orange Juice...mmmmmm yummy!
 
#15
I have ridden a 600cc diesel twin which was more than capapble of keeping up with a wolf let alone a drops. IIRC there is a 650 wankel engined bike on trials which has clocked 100Mph, 0-50 in 5 sec and did 200mpg!
 
#16
TheHelpfulStacker said:
The problems faced by the introduction of a single fuel concept have become more prevalent over the last few years.
Not really they haven't. We've not yet had our supply lines threatened, so the basic premise of a single fuel (more focused, less diverse supply and storage issues) hasn't really raised its head. Also, deploying to oil-rich countries and local hire of vehicles has somewhat reduced any impact as well.
 
#17
I think the reasoning is to get away with using gasoline engine equipment. Apart from the motorbikes there is not a large scale usage of it (apart from the odd generator or outboard engine). All requirements for gasoline can be covered with Pkd Stock (Jerricans). In fact both Oshkosh CST and MAN UST cannot carry petrol.
 
#18
C5H12O said:
I think the reasoning is to get away with using gasoline engine equipment. Apart from the motorbikes there is not a large scale usage of it (apart from the odd generator or outboard engine). All requirements for gasoline can be covered with Pkd Stock (Jerricans). In fact both Oshkosh CST and MAN UST cannot carry petrol.
Although on TELIC 1 a certain Log Bde in Umm Qasr wanted a 3rd line 22.5m3 TTF to deploy from Coyote in order to provide a petrol point for all of the white fleet! When offered a schaeffer pallet of jerrycans the response came back that "staff officers don't do jerrycans". Cue much spitting of chips and schimffing!!!!! :x
 
#19
Ahh yes the great white fleet problem....or more to the point, expensive air conditioned taxis for on-base usage only!! Fully agree with what you are saying but if you want a petrol point i know there is expertise in our trade to provide it using a pump and some hoses, all that we need is a standalone tank to store the smelly stuff. There will always be fly in the ointment when it comes to Single Fuel Concept but another solution is apart from the biggus cheesus, get the staff officers into Land Rovers like everyone else! :)
 
#20
The petrol point wasn't as much the issue. It was the fact that we had to shift a 22.5 to Umm Qasr and then only issue a couple of hundred litres!!

The problem with trying to get everyone into landrovers is that there aren't enough of them. Within Sqn's and Tp's we were seriously down on the availability of LRs. Within formation HQs they simply aren't established for the kit, however everyone needs to get out and about.

Back on thread I believe that RMCS Shrivenham as it was called did some developmental work on a diesel motorbike. This was a few years back and I don't know if anything came from it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S REME 0
BashaBasher Films, Music and All Things Artsy 9
C Classified Ads 0

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top