Likelihood of becoming a Scimitar crewman in the HCav?

0

03oldreyd

Guest
#1
Hi there,
I'm currently applying for the Household Cavalry and was just wondering what the likelihood would be of me getting the opportunity of serving in Scimitars rather than Jackal/ Panther?

Does everybody get the opportunity? Or is it literally what they have a position for?

Cheers :-D
 
#5
You don't really have any choice at all is the honest answer. If you go to a recce regiment you could end up on many platforms. You will soon get bored of being cramped and hot.
 
0

03oldreyd

Guest
#6
You don't really have any choice at all is the honest answer. If you go to a recce regiment you could end up on many platforms. You will soon get bored of being cramped and hot.
Cheers, an honest answer is what I was after :-D Thanks.
 
#7
Scimitars are alright. But they're definitely Cold War kit with bolt ons IMHO, besides aluminium armour burns!
New kit=better. More reliable,better armed, better protected,faster,current etc.
It goes to show how adaptable they are (CVRT) on account of how long they have have lasted but as far as survivability verses cost goes...............
Why not just buy one when they get binned? ;-)
 
0

03oldreyd

Guest
#8
Scimitars are alright. But they're definitely Cold War kit with bolt ons IMHO, besides aluminium armour burns!
New kit=better. More reliable,better armed, better protected,faster,current etc.
It goes to show how adaptable they are (CVRT) on account of how long they have have lasted but as far as survivability verses cost goes...............
Why not just buy one when they get binned? ;-)

Yeah, I realise how outdated they are. Sorry what is IMHO (Sorry if it's a stupid question). It's just I don't know why I like them? I think it's just the firepower in such a compact package :-D

There is a good article here about their flaws Scimitar tank used in Afghanistan is 'past its sell-by date', warns most decorated soldier - Telegraph

Anyway, if we do actually get the FRES Scout (not sure if it's going to happen), I'll probbably never even get in a scimitar by the time I'm in the HCR (After the two years at Knightsbridge).

Haha, if I had the money spare I would... currently haven't got the funds for this... - CVRT - Sabre - Running and Driving MoD Army & Military Surplus Parts & Auctions
 
#9
Scimitars are alright. But they're definitely Cold War kit with bolt ons IMHO, besides aluminium armour burns!
New kit=better. More reliable,better armed, better protected,faster,current etc.
It goes to show how adaptable they are (CVRT) on account of how long they have have lasted but as far as survivability verses cost goes...............
Why not just buy one when they get binned? ;-)
You clearly know very little about the different capabilities of equipment currently is service. New kit may but certainly does not always equal better. CVR(T) certainly does have it's limitations, but it also delivers a capability which JACKAL, etc does not. Not quite sure how you figure that JACKAL gives more protection, especially from SAF. Likewise, in terms of firepower.

To the original poster, on current form you will be trained as a CVR(T) driver (or gunner) during Phase 2 training at Bovington (or Lulworth, if they still conduct 30mm B3 gunners courses).
 
0

03oldreyd

Guest
#10
You clearly know very little about the different capabilities of equipment currently is service. New kit may but certainly does not always equal better. CVR(T) certainly does have it's limitations, but it also delivers a capability which JACKAL, etc does not. Not quite sure how you figure that JACKAL gives more protection, especially from SAF. Likewise, in terms of firepower.

To the original poster, on current form you will be trained as a CVR(T) driver (or gunner) during Phase 2 training at Bovington (or Lulworth, if they still conduct 30mm B3 gunners courses).
Thanks, I agree the Jackal seems to make the crew appear rather exposed. That is good news :-D I would like to be on CVR(T) if possible.
 
#11
Scimitars are alright. But they're definitely Cold War kit with bolt ons IMHO, besides aluminium armour burns!
No it doesn't.
In extremis it might melt, but it certainly does not burn.

You've got to pulverise aluminium before it burns.
 
#12
Brave Coward, honest-Iknow more than you think you know about the capabilities of a CVRT and any other recce vehicle for that matter. Thanks for the Pooh Pooh though...
Anyway
Raden Cannons are not as good as what is currently available-90 RPM. Who would want to use a Raven sight post 1990?
Fuel tank?!!!
Yes incendiarycutlery-you do have to pulverise Aluminium before it burns. Thats why the Russians invented the TM-46 anti tank mine about 30 years ago.Afghanistan has got loads.They stack 'em. You would be better off in a Jackal.
RAF Regt still has CVRT to guard runways if you fancy it!
 
#13
Brave Coward, honest-Iknow more than you think you know about the capabilities of a CVRT and any other recce vehicle for that matter. Thanks for the Pooh Pooh though...
Anyway
Raden Cannons are not as good as what is currently available-90 RPM. Who would want to use a Raven sight post 1990?
Fuel tank?!!!
Yes incendiarycutlery-you do have to pulverise Aluminium before it burns. Thats why the Russians invented the TM-46 anti tank mine about 30 years ago.Afghanistan has got loads.They stack 'em. You would be better off in a Jackal.
RAF Regt still has CVRT to guard runways if you fancy it!
Oh dear, are you even in the army?

RARDEN is the only AFV mounted cannon around that calibre (20-40mm) currently in service with UK forces.

SCIMITAR is not (nor I believe has ever been) fitted with the RAVEN sight. The three sights currently in service on SCIMITAR are BGTI (BG Close Recce) and ESPIRE and MSPIRE (both FR), all three are TI. RAVEN is is an II sight fitted to a minority of WR.

I don't know what you are trying to imply by "Fuel tank?!!!"

The RAF Regt got rid of their CVR(T) back in the 90s, if I recall correctly.

Your point that "you would be better off in a Jackal" (sic) indicates that you do not understand that we have a variety of different platforms to suit different situations and environments. Given the varied nature of Afghanistan (or even Helmand Province), it should be obvious that different platforms will be better suited to different areas and tasks.

In terms of stacked AT mines, if the bang is big enough it will defeat anything. However given that JACKAL has very little mine protection and CVR(T) has it's hull and the additional mine blast protection it gets to get it up to theatre entry spec, I know I would tend to plump for in respect of protection. Clearly the CVR(T) will also provide much better protection against SAF.

Out of curiosity, do your opinions come from any form of military experience or are they purely based on what you read in the media/Internet and what you hear the bigger boys saying?
 
#14
.
Yes incendiarycutlery-you do have to pulverise Aluminium before it burns. Thats why the Russians invented the TM-46 anti tank mine about 30 years ago.Afghanistan has got loads.They stack 'em. You would be better off in a Jackal.
RAF Regt still has CVRT to guard runways if you fancy it!
I think that the Russians invented the TM-46 as a blast mine, with the intent to break tracks on heavy armour and destroy smaller vehicles by blast effect. There is no penetrator or incendiary effect.
Hitting one while in a CVR(T) would most likely be pretty sucky. Hitting two would really hurt, but no amount is going to set the armour on fire.

Against mines, you probably would be better off in a Jackal, as it's higher off the ground, has some underbody protection and has blast-attenuating seating.
 
#15
No B-C, I'm not in The Army. I've never been operational with Armoured Recce either. I've also never operated or commanded a CVRT(Samson/Sultan),Mastiff,Jackal,Ridgeback,CRARRV,Warrior(512/513),434 or any and all kinds of military vehicles.
I'm not REME and I havn't been for a number of years working on and fixing kit for fat headed egocentrics such as yourself. So yes you're right;I don't know what I'm talking about.
I would elaborate on my fuel tank implication, but since this is a public access website and I don't know what I'm talking about, having not worked on CVRT's extensively for several years I'll keep shtum.

I also wont go into the sustained fire capabilities of a CVRT hull or the blast deflection capabilities on here.

The RAF still operate Scimitars with the Jag 4.6 power plant as far as I am aware.

Raden 30mm Cannon uses the same sort of barrel ad the Aden belt fed Cannon fitted to the Tornado and Harrier however Raden has a 3 round manually fed breach which slows its rate of fire down to 90 rounds per minute-allegedly, I wouldnt know-having never worked on them...

The bang doesn't have to be that big to knack a CVRT. It has to have extra armour bolted onto it to get to theatre entry level, Jackal does not. Does that not speak volumes? I mean even as a civvy who gets his info off the net, it does to me...

I would ask the "bigger boys," if I were in The Army and was for example working in a Wksp in the REME in an operational unit. But there aren't any boys in this unit bigger than me -and I'm not talking about my gut.

You were right about Raven sights. CVRT sights are much older and more out dated.

Incendiary-they burn.Believe.
 
#16
Whilst this thread is deviating, would anyone like a CSV file of all the CVRT variant registration numbers I have collected from my personal sightings over the past 40 years? Please let me know if you would like the data sorted by a particular field.
 
#17
Just to clarify a point on here for Jim, the RAF Regt did indeed get rid of all CRVT in the 90s.

We now operate Wmik, jackal, coyote,panther,mastiff,ridgeback aaaaand vixen.
 
#18
Thanks.My mistake.If I had joined The Army Last time I would have had owt to do with CVRT would have been the RDG recce in 2006/7. Hazy memories of some recce bloke saying that RAF Regt hadn't been deiselised and were still kicking about with jag engines. Ages ago now in terms of kit.
 
#19
See! 40 years old! Load of old pup- CVRT.Same as Bulldog. Don't bother going H Cav and trying to serve on them mate (IMHO). Back on thread. (kind of). I'll pass on the spotters list though.Thanks...:)
 
#20
The bang doesn't have to be that big to knack a CVRT. It has to have extra armour bolted onto it to get to theatre entry level, Jackal does not. Does that not speak volumes? I mean even as a civvy who gets his info off the net, it does to me...

You were right about Raven sights. CVRT sights are much older and more out dated.
Do you honestly think that all vehicles that go into an operaitonal theatre are designed to have the same level of crew protection? The whole point of JACKAL (and WMIK before it) is to provide a light weight wheeled vehicle in which physical protection and firepower are sacrificed for mobility (albeit it a different sort to that provided by a tracked vehicle)and situational awareness (itself providing an element of protection). The balance of the holy trinity of military vehicle design (mobility, protection and firepower) has always meant that you need very different vehicles for different situations, hence CVR(T) and JACKAL/COYOTE both deployed to do different things.

Your comment about RAVEN sights being more modern/capable than BGTI, ESPIRE and MSPIRE shows that you are either blagging beyond your experience level or just mince. RAVEN is an II sight and the others are TI. BGTI and MSPIRE are both extremely capable, ESPIRE is older but by virtue of being TI will give much better results than RAVEN. This really is not your subject is it.

This will be my last post on this subject as it has deviated far enough. To the original poster: Yes, you will almost certainly be trained on and serve on CVR(T) if you join now. You would (at present) be unlikely to go straight to the BRF Sqn, who operate the majority of the JACKAL/COYOTE in the regiment. Be aware that CVR(T) is being phased out at some stage over the next 7 years or so, in favour of FRES SV in the next few years. FRES SV promises to deliver much which CVR(T) does not. If you want an idea, just Google FRES or ASCOD (one of the competitor vehicles). You may also end up in something similar to the US STRYKER vehicle (itself based on the PIRHANA / LAV vehicle). In the mean time, be assured CVR(T) is an old vehicle, but still pretty good in its own way. Don't believe everything you hear about JACKAL (or any other vehicle) being automatically superior to CVR(T) in all circumstances. The reason we have so many different types of vehicle is because we need to operate in a variety of areas against a range of different threats. We also need to recognise the what that the locals will view us based on the appearance of the vehicles we operate from.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top