Duke of York launches scathing attack on "Hopeless MoD"

#2
"The Duke told executives at Universal Engineering in Weymouth, Dorset: “Why do they have to do blast tests? It's just increasing the cost. "

Absolutley, we should just accept the manufacturers assurance that it meets the spec.
 
#4
"The Duke told executives at Universal Engineering in Weymouth, Dorset: “Why do they have to do blast tests? It's just increasing the cost. "

Absolutley, we should just accept the manufacturers assurance that it meets the spec.

Welll....MoD has form for repeating tests just to be seen to be doing something, rather than actually doing anything.

The Company website reports that the Ranger has been tested to STANAG 4569 Level 4. In which case MoD knows what the tests consist of. If the Company had any sense then a suitable independant carried out the testing for them.

If that is the case then MoD is just wasting time and money to be seen to be doing something, rather than actually doing something.
 
#6



Weird looking thing... how is it more agile than mastiff/ridgeback?
 
#9
Weird looking thing... how is it more agile than mastiff/ridgeback?
Probably because it is designed to carry the weight - the Cougar is massively up-armoured to create the Mastiff and Ridgeback.
The Ranger in that picture appears to be fitted with ERA, similar to that fitted to Warrior in the WRAP2 upgrade. That stuff will not be light.
 
#10
Probably because it is designed to carry the weight - the Cougar is massively up-armoured to create the Mastiff and Ridgeback.
The Ranger in that picture appears to be fitted with ERA, similar to that fitted to Warrior in the WRAP2 upgrade. That stuff will not be light.
So they still haven't learnt the lessons with the IERA! Let's hope it's just for show and not being fitted.


Edited for being a mong!
 
#11
Why exactly would we need ranger, and why would we buy it without comprehensive blast tests, especially since STANAG 4569 Level 4 became a pointles standard for underhull detonations years ago.

Frankly if we're buying something in the 20 ton baseline class I prefere the BAe RG-35
 
#12
So they still haven't learnt the lessons with the IERA! Let's hope it's just for show and being fitted.
Well it's not for UE to learn the lessons if the MoD won't tell them. They just put something on there, it's pretty heavy, it's designed for it. You could put anything equally heavy on it without reducing mobility.
 
#13
The Company website reports that the Ranger has been tested to STANAG 4569 Level 4. In which case MoD knows what the tests consist of. If the Company had any sense then a suitable independant carried out the testing for them.
That standard is a 10kg AT mine under the wheels/hull. Not that representitive of the IED threat.
 
#15
It would be a jolly good idea to have the M.O.D. present when testing is taking place,put the buggers inside the vehicle,if it does what it says on the tin,they can sign it of,if it doesn't,hey ho,back to the drawing board.
 
#16
Well it's not for UE to learn the lessons if the MoD won't tell them. They just put something on there, it's pretty heavy, it's designed for it. You could put anything equally heavy on it without reducing mobility.
It's not a problem with mobility...........it's a problem with IERA and the way it was brought into service.
 
#17
MOD would test water to ensure water was wet after first spending 3 years drawing up a DEF STAN for 'Water (Wetness)'
 
#18
Why exactly would we need ranger, and why would we buy it without comprehensive blast tests, especially since STANAG 4569 Level 4 became a pointles standard for underhull detonations years ago.
Whilst I agree there is no need for Ranger, could explain just why STANAG L4 is pointless?
 
#19
I was about to rant on what an 'effin tool that man is (the Prince, not vvaannmmaaan), but I think I just underestimated the PR power behind UE, and their ex-erving senior officer backers (who may be known to ex-inmates of MB ;-))

FFS, why don't we just buy everything based on manufacturers claims - I hear the Iraqis reecently bought a bunch of 'IED detectors' on just such a basis...
 
#20
At least he is well qualified to make an assessment of 'hopeless'.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top