Snatch Land Rover Meeting with Secretary of State Des Browne

#1
To all those people who have lost a loved one in a SNATCH Land Rover, we will be meeting Des Browne on the 12th December if you would like to come or discuss it would you please get in touch with Jocelyn Cockburn on TEL: 020 7874 8452 or E-Mail jcockburn@hodgejonesallen.co.uk as soon as possible, many thanks Sue Smith
 
#2
chewey said:
To all those people who have lost a loved one in a SNATCH Land Rover, we will be meeting Des Browne on the 12th December if you would like to come or discuss it would you please get in touch with Jocelyn Cockburn on TEL: 020 7874 8452 or E-Mail jcockburn@hodgejonesallen.co.uk as soon as possible, many thanks Sue Smith

Good luck Sue... can I suggest taking a MGB Carrying Handle along? Makes an excellent negotiating tool!
 
#4
Mabey you could make sure the Snatch Land Rover is doing about 30mph when you intorduce to him that would be great.

Alternativly if he thinks they offer enough protection, strap him in one and then hit with an EFP.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
It would be very handy if you could take a list of second-hand excuses and verbal diversions with you. Before you start discussing the matter with him, you could read off the list and tell him: "Please don't use any of the following".
 
#6
This will be interesting and I hope it answers a few questions. I saw the thread title and had visions of Swiss Des splattered on Tampa, luck would be a fine thing!
 
#7
Playing Devil's Advocate here - will there be a meeting for all those who have had a loved one saved because they were in a Snatch, or in a vehicle move escorted by Snatches?

We all know Snatch is not the best bit of kit around, no one disputes that, but it was the best thing we had for a while.
I know I was happier travelling in a Snatch than I was travelling around in a GS Rover with Hesco Bastion mesh zip-tied to the side of it.

Just a thought eh?
 
#8
Hmmmm, I loved travelling through Bosnia, on a summer tour, nearing 40 degrees C, in a Snatch, with no aircon!

I also loved driving round Pristina, in a snatch, in winter, on 4" of ice, great fun! Not!
 
#9
Biped said:
It would be very handy if you could take a list of second-hand excuses and verbal diversions with you. Before you start discussing the matter with him, you could read off the list and tell him: "Please don't use any of the following".
if you have a number of people going, you each wear a t-shirt with one of the excuses printed on it. the wearer then stands up when the excuse is used.

either that of you get those 'bullsh1t bingo' cards with the excuses printed on them, and cross them off as they come up. i'm sure everyone will be able to jump up and shout 'bullsh1t' at some point during the meeting!

Ski.
 
#10
Nige said:
Playing Devil's Advocate here - will there be a meeting for all those who have had a loved one saved because they were in a Snatch, or in a vehicle move escorted by Snatches?

We all know Snatch is not the best bit of kit around, no one disputes that, but it was the best thing we had for a while.
I know I was happier travelling in a Snatch than I was travelling around in a GS Rover with Hesco Bastion mesh zip-tied to the side of it.

Just a thought eh?
That is a very good point Nige. I have always felt that the Snatch issue was, to some extent, a rod that was used by the press to beat the govt with.
Out on the highways they were un-stable and incredibly un-reliable but I think that in the city was where they were badly flawed on the level of protection. You have to bear in mind that they were built for a different environment entirely. The point is that it took so long to replace Snatch- how long would a British company like Jankle have taken if the MOD had gone to them and said 'help'?
 
#11
I too have equivocal feelings about this. If there is evidence that some minister, when told that SNATCH was not up to the job said 'tough - that's all your getting, there's no more money' then there is clear culpability. However, as debated elsewhere on this thread, it seems that there was a combination of the Army wishing to persist with the vehicle for various (largely posture-related) reasons, combined with a rapid UOR game of catch-up with BULLDOG etc.

In hindsight we could have undoubtedly done better. But so could the Americans who, with the biggest armed forces in the world were still deploying soldiers in unprotected HMMVs in a higher threat environment. We were far too optimistic about the damage that could be wreaked by insurgents with small arms, RPG and IEDs.

It brings to mind the thought of the families of all those killed in the under-armoured and under-gunned Shermans in Normandy making a delegation to Winston Churchill asking why he hasn't got Tiger tanks. There is an argument that this would not at all have been wrong - how else do wrong decisions get changed and future lives saved, and who cares more than the bereaved? - but it just seems a slightly peculiar way to run a war.
 
#12
Nige said:
Playing Devil's Advocate here - will there be a meeting for all those who have had a loved one saved because they were in a Snatch, or in a vehicle move escorted by Snatches?

We all know Snatch is not the best bit of kit around, no one disputes that, but it was the best thing we had for a while.
I know I was happier travelling in a Snatch than I was travelling around in a GS Rover with Hesco Bastion mesh zip-tied to the side of it.

Just a thought eh?
Hit the nail on the head with what i was thinking. Its better than walking when warriors are just too big!
 
#13
Dilfor said:
I too have equivocal feelings about this. If there is evidence that some minister, when told that SNATCH was not up to the job said 'tough - that's all your getting, there's no more money' then there is clear culpability. However, as debated elsewhere on this thread, it seems that there was a combination of the Army wishing to persist with the vehicle for various (largely posture-related) reasons, combined with a rapid UOR game of catch-up with BULLDOG etc.

In hindsight we could have undoubtedly done better. But so could the Americans who, with the biggest armed forces in the world were still deploying soldiers in unprotected HMMVs in a higher threat environment. We were far too optimistic about the damage that could be wreaked by insurgents with small arms, RPG and IEDs.

It brings to mind the thought of the families of all those killed in the under-armoured and under-gunned Shermans in Normandy making a delegation to Winston Churchill asking why he hasn't got Tiger tanks. There is an argument that this would not at all have been wrong - how else do wrong decisions get changed and future lives saved, and who cares more than the bereaved? - but it just seems a slightly peculiar way to run a war.
I can't remember the exact details but I seem to recall a number of MP's were learnt on to stop them from bringing up the issue of the M4 Sherman's frankly feeble armour in the House of Commons, on the grounds of National Security and civilian morale, both pretty weak points as 1)The germans know that Sherman's go up when tapped (Tommy Cookers anyone?) 2)Civies knew their familiy members were being killed anyway.....!
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#14
I concur, my issues with snatch are few. Its a rod to hit the govt with, and whilst the govt needs hitting, its also a reasonable starting point because it leads so effectively into lack of procurement and investment. But snatch still did what it said on the tin, just the menu changed between NI and Basra
 
#15
762baynet said:
Nige said:
Playing Devil's Advocate here - will there be a meeting for all those who have had a loved one saved because they were in a Snatch, or in a vehicle move escorted by Snatches?

We all know Snatch is not the best bit of kit around, no one disputes that, but it was the best thing we had for a while.
I know I was happier travelling in a Snatch than I was travelling around in a GS Rover with Hesco Bastion mesh zip-tied to the side of it.

Just a thought eh?
That is a very good point Nige. I have always felt that the Snatch issue was, to some extent, a rod that was used by the press to beat the govt with.
Out on the highways they were un-stable and incredibly un-reliable but I think that in the city was where they were badly flawed on the level of protection. You have to bear in mind that they were built for a different environment entirely. The point is that it took so long to replace Snatch- how long would a British company like Jankle have taken if the MOD had gone to them and said 'help'?
Dont bother with Jankels, no better protection than Snatch.
 
#16
i was involved in two incidents a while back one of which showed the positive aspects of the snatch and the other showing one of its weaknesses.

An ied hit our lead snatch and although the front of the vehicle was wrecked all on board survived. a little banged about but all lived. If the ied had been better placed it would have been another story but luck was on our side that day. Either way the vehicle protected all on board in this instance.

The second incident happened on night patrol and we were using the iraqi version of A roads through a suburb of basra. front left wheel dug into the side of the road and the vehicles weight pulled it down the embankment over onto its roof. Again all of us banged up but all ok.

Think luck played its part in both incidents.

If the ied had been positioned slightly differently it would have torn through the side of the snatch like tissue paper and caused serious injury to all on board.

The snatch is top heavy and on most secondary routes struggle to cope. they are really not designed to be taken off road or on the kind of roads we found.

However as has been said by many since the debate on the pro's and con's of the snatch began, it was way better than nothing and beggars cant be choosers. It was a stopgap that outstayed its usefullness.
 
#17
I like to see the gov stiffed as much as the next bloke.

However

Surely it is common knowledge that if for every invention to protect ourselves the enemy will just change tactics to beat us. They fired small arms so we got in snatch. They IED'd/RPG'd us so we got in warrior the pimped up 432, oh i meant Bullsh1t/Dog...

Anyhoo.

Snatch has saved me walking thousands of miles and I can safely say protected me where Body armour just couldn't have cut it. Its kept me safe from bricks/bullets and grenades and if i'm honest I have a soft spot for it.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top