Tellar EOD vehicles for sale at Withams...

#1
I visited the auctions at Withams Specialist vehicles yesterday and saw 7 of these 'Tellar' felix vehicles in their yard (along with dozens of bedfords and Saxons etc.) . 2 of them were damaged but the rest of them looked o.k.......why are they flogging them so soon? is this another example of defence procurement at its finest?

The link below has a few words to say about these vehicles as well ;

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2007/05/purely-imaginary-world.html
 
#3
Richard North at Defence of the Realm is a cowboy, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

But god knows why they're selling those EOD vehicles, I thought they were quite new! Wonder if they're replacing them with anything.
 
#4
Older_by_the_day said:
Richard North at Defence of the Realm is a cowboy, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

But god knows why they're selling those EOD vehicles, I thought they were quite new! Wonder if they're replacing them with anything.
I was using the link to illustrate the vehicles as I didn't have any pictures - ..I wonder what the guide price will be but I bet it won't be £250.000 odd..

I checked the pictures again - they were vectors :oops:
 
#5
Why did that article bitch about vikings? i thought they where doing a great job? OMG!!! LIKE CHALLY 2 WAS HIT BY LIKE AN IED AND SQUADDIE WAS INJURED LIKE THEY AINT SAFE WE NEED SOMETHING MORE ARMOURED!!!!
:x

On a lighter note, should i get one for driving through most inner cities? Lets see a chav nick that :twisted:
 
#6
trackbasher said:
Older_by_the_day said:
Richard North at Defence of the Realm is a cowboy, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

But god knows why they're selling those EOD vehicles, I thought they were quite new! Wonder if they're replacing them with anything.
I was using the link to illustrate the vehicles as I didn't have any pictures - they were definitely them!..I wonder what the guide price will be but I bet it won't be £250.000 odd..
Very true, sold at a knock down price as usual, one would suspect!
No idea if they were fit for purpose when purchased though.
 
#7
The Latvians purchased the last lot of South African built EOD vehicles,which had been used in Bosnia,and sold by Witham.Maybe they will buy these too? The Latvians deployed these first ones to ISAF.
 
#8
That EOD vehicle in the article is still being trialed at Eelmoor, Aldershot.
So i'm guessing it's not that vehicle as they are heading into service rather than out of it.
Maybe i'm wrong? i standby for the corrections!
 
#9
trackbasher said:
I visited the auctions at Withams Specialist vehicles yesterday and saw 7 of these 'Tellar' felix vehicles in their yard (along with dozens of bedfords and Saxons etc.) . 2 of them were damaged but the rest of them looked o.k.......why are they flogging them so soon? is this another example of defence procurement at its finest?
Probably best to ask in the RLC forums one of the Ammo Techs would be able to tell you I am sure...
 
#10
REstitcher said:
That EOD vehicle in the article is still being trialed at Eelmoor, Aldershot.
So i'm guessing it's not that vehicle as they are heading into service rather than out of it.
Maybe i'm wrong? i standby for the corrections!
Having studied the pictures from Richard Norths blog I believe the vehicles I saw at Withams were the Vectors :oops: (pictured with the EOD operators.) Still, they are still relatively new vehicles to be flogging off.
 
#11
They are probably selling the earlier versions that were bought quickly to meet the theatre requirements. These earlier versions had a host of problems - No air con, ECM varient poorly configured so could not be loaded with a wheelbarrow amongst other things.

The latest versions have most of these ironed out now.
 
#12
Had them out in thearte in 03 so guess couple of years being thrashed around have left them needing a lot of mechanical work .And armoured vechicles are now used instead .
Always seemed to have a joyrider at the wheels wether coming or going
doubt there a good buy .
 
#13
Older_by_the_day said:
Richard North at Defence of the Realm is a cowboy, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

But god knows why they're selling those EOD vehicles, I thought they were quite new! Wonder if they're replacing them with anything.
This "cowboy" is trying to keep you stupid b******s alive and in one piece! If you think equipping EODs with unarmoured vehicles is clever, then you are on the wrong planet.

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2008/01/lessons-to-learn.html
 
#14
But you seem to ignore the experiences of those who've used the vehicles you criticise, Viking and WMIK in particular, on ops and try to push your idea of everyone trundling round in massively over-armoured vehicles instead!
 
#15
Richard_North said:
Older_by_the_day said:
Richard North at Defence of the Realm is a cowboy, so take everything he says with a pinch of salt.

But god knows why they're selling those EOD vehicles, I thought they were quite new! Wonder if they're replacing them with anything.
This "cowboy" is trying to keep you stupid b******s alive and in one piece! If you think equipping EODs with unarmoured vehicles is clever, then you are on the wrong planet.

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2008/01/lessons-to-learn.html
yeah I do say cowboy, mainly because, as written by Charlie above, you refuse to listen to the point of view of people who've actually been there and used the kit. Even though you don't have the experience yourself.

The fact that you are so stuck on your own beliefs and are unable to understand anyone else's point of view is a fundamental flaw.

If you don't know what I'm talking about then, well proves the point in case!
 
#16
psychobabble said:
But you seem to ignore the experiences of those who've used the vehicles you criticise, Viking and WMIK in particular, on ops and try to push your idea of everyone trundling round in massively over-armoured vehicles instead!
You paraphrase and parody my arguments and then attack the version of them that you devise, rather than what I actually write - which is based on listening to the experience of many people in the real world .. and then you complain that I ignore the parodies on this forum.

On no account ever do I argue that you should trundle around in "massively over-armoured vehicles" - those are your words not mine. I have argued on this forum until I am blue in the face that mine (and to an extent IED protection) and mobility are not mutually incompatible. It is simply a matter of design.

In terms of balistic protection versus mobility, compare and contrast the WIMIK with the Ferret armoured car and you will find that the Ferret actually comes in under the combat weight of a WIMIK - and no one ever complained about the Ferret's off-road performance.

The point, which I have laboured ad nauseam, is that with our current understanding of the threat, and our greater understanding of the design principles needed to afford protection, it is eminently feasible to build a light mine-protected, high mobility vehicle rather than rely on Land Rovers which, after all, originated as light/medium utility trucks stemming from a 1945 design.

If you can't understand that, then it is you who have problems, not me.
 
#18
Richard_North said:
psychobabble said:
But you seem to ignore the experiences of those who've used the vehicles you criticise, Viking and WMIK in particular, on ops and try to push your idea of everyone trundling round in massively over-armoured vehicles instead!
You paraphrase and parody my arguments and then attack the version of them that you devise, rather than what I actually write - which is based on listening to the experience of many people in the real world .. and then you complain that I ignore the parodies on this forum.

On no account ever do I argue that you should trundle around in "massively over-armoured vehicles" - those are your words not mine. I have argued on this forum until I am blue in the face that mine (and to an extent IED protection) and mobility are not mutually incompatible. It is simply a matter of design.

In terms of balistic protection versus mobility, compare and contrast the WIMIK with the Ferret armoured car and you will find that the Ferret actually comes in under the combat weight of a WIMIK - and no one ever complained about the Ferret's off-road performance.The point, which I have laboured ad nauseam, is that with our current understanding of the threat, and our greater understanding of the design principles needed to afford protection, it is eminently feasible to build a light mine-protected, high mobility vehicle rather than rely on Land Rovers which, after all, originated as light/medium utility trucks stemming from a 1945 design.

If you can't understand that, then it is you who have problems, not me.
Apart for a tendency to roll like beach-ball and burn like a Roman-Candle!

Also suffered from a poor driving position (very tiring with a bad view), cramped fighting compartment with limited stowage - most of our kit travelled on the Colour man's wagon - and was hideously difficult to evacuate in an emergency...

Point to note: emergency drills and demonstrations ALWAYS take place on level ground, with the vehicle in a convenient attitude... never in a deep, water-filled ditch, tangled up in brush-wood.

The brilliance of hanging the spare wheel on the escape hatch always did elude me, especially when I was trying to push it off/upwards from the inside and the b*gger was starting to burn! :roll:

Ferret? Nice little run-about for collectors and wannabes but don't take one to war...
 
#19
OldAdam said:
Richard_North said:
psychobabble said:
But you seem to ignore the experiences of those who've used the vehicles you criticise, Viking and WMIK in particular, on ops and try to push your idea of everyone trundling round in massively over-armoured vehicles instead!
You paraphrase and parody my arguments and then attack the version of them that you devise, rather than what I actually write - which is based on listening to the experience of many people in the real world .. and then you complain that I ignore the parodies on this forum.

On no account ever do I argue that you should trundle around in "massively over-armoured vehicles" - those are your words not mine. I have argued on this forum until I am blue in the face that mine (and to an extent IED protection) and mobility are not mutually incompatible. It is simply a matter of design.

In terms of balistic protection versus mobility, compare and contrast the WIMIK with the Ferret armoured car and you will find that the Ferret actually comes in under the combat weight of a WIMIK - and no one ever complained about the Ferret's off-road performance.The point, which I have laboured ad nauseam, is that with our current understanding of the threat, and our greater understanding of the design principles needed to afford protection, it is eminently feasible to build a light mine-protected, high mobility vehicle rather than rely on Land Rovers which, after all, originated as light/medium utility trucks stemming from a 1945 design.

If you can't understand that, then it is you who have problems, not me.
Apart for a tendency to roll like beach-ball and burn like a Roman-Candle!

Also suffered from a poor driving position (very tiring with a bad view), cramped fighting compartment with limited stowage - most of our kit travelled on the Colour man's wagon - and was hideously difficult to evacuate in an emergency...

Point to note: emergency drills and demonstrations ALWAYS take place on level ground, with the vehicle in a convenient attitude... never in a deep, water-filled ditch, tangled up in brush-wood.

The brilliance of hanging the spare wheel on the escape hatch always did elude me, especially when I was trying to push it off/upwards from the inside and the b*gger was starting to burn! :roll:

Ferret? Nice little run-about for collectors and wannabes but don't take one to war...
So, instead, you use a Land Rover based on a 1945 design, strapping Kevlar matting to the sides to improve safety? And that's progress?

The point about the Ferret was simply to demonstrate that it is possible to produce an armoured vehicle at under four tons. With current technology, and the understanding of protection needs, it is surely possible to produce a vehicle which fulfils the role of a light gun platform and patrol vehicle which, at the same time affords better protection for crews?

I think the real problem is that the Army has always been treated as the poor relative when it comes to kit. If a fraction of the effort and money had been spent on an up-to-date replacement for the Ferret (compared with the billions spent on Eurofighter and the Type 45s, to name but two projects), we would not be having this argument.

I readily agree that the Mastiff is too big for the role and, most probably the proposed Ridgeback will be as well. Probably, there is no ideal vehicle on the market, but that should not stop us agitating for one. It really is about time the Army was given better tools to do the job.

What, incidentally, think you of the French VBL and the Otokar Cobra?

Cobra link here: http://www.otokar.com.tr/en/products/product_detail.aspx?urun=44
 
#20
Richard,

This thread (and many others with your involvement) sounds like a repeating arguement between my wife and I over a tweed jacket. It's old, smelly and probably quite scruffy...but I like it. And no matter what arguements are put up, I'm going to carry on wearing it.

That isn't to say that your views are incorrect, merely that the majority of people truly qualified to comment seem to like the vehicles you oppose. Maybe it's like the tweed jacket scenario hey?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
usmarox Gaming and Software 2
Provost The NAAFI Bar 139
Draft Dodger Health and Fitness 9

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top