• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

OFFICIAL: Singapore to Supply Bronco Amd Vhls to U.K

#1
Singapore to Supply Armored Vehicles to U.K.

By ANDREW CHUTER

Published: 4 Dec 12:52 EST (17:52 GMT)

LONDON - Singapore Technologies Kinetics has secured a deal to supply its Bronco armored all-terrain vehicle to the British military.

Negotiations on the sale of just over 100 vehicles have been completed in the last 48 hours, government sources said. The contract is expected to be announced officially by the MoD within the week.

The Ministry of Defence denied the deal had been completed.

In a statement it said, "Discussions are still ongoing as to the vehicle type to fulfill the Warthog requirement for operations in Afghanistan. We will procure over 100 new vehicles with deliveries starting at the end of next year."

More at:


http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3849630&c=ASI&s=LAN
 
#4
petergriffen said:
This seems ridiculous to me, why bring in a completly new vehicle, won't that just complicate logistics? :?
Having had contact with the team involved with WARTHOG, there will be a full ILS solution offered as well with whatever is offered. Its just as important as the vehicle itself. Now whether or not its chosen BRONCO does give that added capacity.
I could say more but cant!!!! :threaten:
 
#7
So viking wasn't up to the job on Herrick then ? So Warthog will be ? :roll:

If Warthog is a better vehicle why did we purchase the Viking ?

I asked a friend of mine, Mr J.Lydon and he said, "Cos it's British !"

This vehicle can carry more troops but will still be as vulnerable as the viking.

Are any of our vehicles being fitted with front mounted anti mine rollers as an additional protective measure ? Even the Danes have got specialised mine flails in the Stan (Although, the two I saw seemed to be on permanent "park.").
 
#8
arfah said:
So viking wasn't up to the job on Herrick then ? So Warthog will be ? :roll:

If Warthog is a better vehicle why did we purchase the Viking ?

I asked a friend of mine, Mr J.Lydon and he said, "Cos it's British !"

This vehicle can carry more troops but will still be as vulnerable as the viking.

Are any of our vehicles being fitted with front mounted anti mine rollers as an additional protective measure ? Even the Danes have got specialised mine flails in the Stan (Although, the two I saw seemed to be on permanent "park.").
VIKING was up to the job until the IED's got bigger.
Careful, WARTHOG is the project name and not the actual vehicle. If its BRONCO that is chosen to provide the WARTHOG solution, then its bigger and therefore can more than likely handle more armour.
VIKING is only British because BAe own Hagglunds.
 
#9
arfah said:
If Warthog is a better vehicle why did we purchase the Viking ?
Probably because the Viking was selected in 1999 and the Bronco was released in 2000.
The time travel machines are still awaiting shipment.
 
#10
I never profess to being an expert !

I thought Viking was finally approved in 2003ish ?

That's just an aside !

Any info on front fitted mine rollers ? Why rely on a vehicle to survive a detonation at possible risk to the occupants when a simple device would detonate IED's/mines (edit) instead and therefore creating less of a risk ?
There are pro's & cons I'm sure.

Maybe this should be a new topic ?
 
#11
I would hazard that the Viking (BvS 210) had sufficient commonality to the unarmoured Bv 206, which was already in service with the Royal Marines, that it offered some logistical benefits.
 
#13
not_observed said:
It's like the government are going for the 'made in china' cheap option.
If you are on about the "proposed" VIKING replacement, BRONCO, then it has been driven by VIKING experts and its pretty good.....i have been told :roll:
 
#14
arfah said:
Any info on front fitted mine rollers ? Why rely on a vehicle to survive a detonation at possible risk to the occupants when a simple device would detonate IED's instead and therfore creating less of a risk ?
There are pro's & cons I'm sure.
The Americans did this on some of their vehicles as a solution to the PIR threat. All the enemy did was alter the configuration of the IED to ensure that the main vehicle was targeted.
 
#16
We have other devices to counter the PIR threat.

I was thinking more along the lines of mines.

Judging by the avatar you are probably more knowledgable than I.

All I need now is a R.E. deminer to offer their expertise.

Many thanks !
 
#17
arfah said:
We have other devices to counter the PIR threat.

I was thinking more along the lines of mines.

Judging by the avatar you are probably more knowledgable than I.

All I need now is a R.E. deminer to offer their expertise.

Many thanks !
Are you suggesting a flail tank? Sort of an AVAM based on say a Chally or even a Chieftan?
 
#18
PartTimePongo said:
arfah said:
We have other devices to counter the PIR threat.

I was thinking more along the lines of mines.

Judging by the avatar you are probably more knowledgable than I.

All I need now is a R.E. deminer to offer their expertise.

Many thanks !
Are you suggesting a flail tank? Sort of an AVAM based on say a Chally or even a Chieftan?
I doubt they'd even spring for a Sherman Crab right now.
 
#19
Mine flails and mine ploughs would be effective out in the vast open expanses. Mine rollers would be easier around villages and along the tracks and paths.

We are purchasing more and more armoured vehicles to protect against bigger and bigger mines (a very good thing) yet still we receive casualties. I would think that the pre-detonation of mines may help save more of the boys and girls and cause less damage to the vehicles.

I don't know the best solution but I think it's well worth a discussion.
 

Attachments

Latest Threads