True scale of army kit failures in Iraq

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by in_the_cheapseats, Jan 29, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

  2. msr

    msr LE

    It comes as little surprise: the kit was mainly procured for fighting a defensive battle in Germany, not expeditionary warfare in the desert.

    Given the combination of heat, dust and useage it is surprising that anything works - I heard it said that the Spams reckoned their kit was wearing out five times faster in Iraq than in Germany.

  3. While Toms are quite happy to complain about the kit (2nd best thing they do after using it to fight with!), the number of EFRs is a fairly pointless indicator as these are completed on a regular basis for faults, no matter what the cause. This includes mis-use as well as general failures, it also indicates reported failures of one 1000 per annum across the entire theatre, covering all of the equipment used. I'd be more concerned about the 90 serious failures but again this will include a multitude of kit used in quite arduous condition. The number of fatalities due to accidents is also likely to be misleading, what are the accidents attributed to, are they really all due to equipment failure? I would doubt that. I've no doubt that there are failings that need addressing, but these figures actually suggest that incidents due to failures are actually quite low. Additionally, the primary route of getting these failings addressed is by raising EFRs.
  4. I once flicked through some ancient official publication found on a shelf in the TAC about desert warfare (possibly some flavour of AFM). It was based on WW2 experiences and one of the things that stuck in my mind was that kit wears out far quicker in the desert - or indeed anywhere with large temperature extremes and lots of sand. This is not news and SOP is to take more spares along. Manufacturers also offer a range of extra filters etc and mods for desert use.

    However - and check the Saif Sareea report as well for evidence of this - the problem we've had is that the MoD just didn't buy extra spares or filters. Hence kit fails quicker. There's no conspiracy over shoddy kit here, just budgetary constraints. For, let's face it, the civil servant who runs spares procurement gets promoted for spending less and is never held to acount when insufficient spares cause the kit to fail.
  5. Don't know what all the fuss is about? look at the new G10 wellies I was issued:

  6. Muzzleflash, my entire unit was issued with those boots, went rather well with the Billy Smarts tent that BHQ used.
  7. .....we had a massive sense of humour failure rate

    but those wellies cheered me up no end! ;-)
  8. Serviceability of battle-winning eqpt on Op GRANBY (GW1) was much better than on exercise in Germany. You can imagine a combination of reasons for this. My theory is that tracks will keep going much longer/further if they are running basically on the flat and in a straight line!
  9. Yes, but it took every spare power pack in 1 Br Corps just to keep one square division's worth of kit going on GRANBY.
  10. The personal kit issue now is ''top draw'' compared to Telic1 where i had 1 pr of trousers for 3 weeks on the Al Faw .
    I have no dramas with the kit issue now , i guess each unit has its own problems i guess and its down to how good your QM is .
    I do think using bog standard FFR rovers is pants but there are a few Snatch mk 2's kicking about . Things are getting better
    but if you look at the big picture the money for all this stuff comes from somewhere and that somewhere has cost us loads of regimental merges etc .
  11. "Even the army's troublesome SA80 rifle - supposedly fixed at a cost of almost £100m - failed on at least 100 occasions in Iraq since 2003, according to the MoD's own figures."

    so in a 3 year period, the sa80 has failed about 100 times? How many SA80s are in iraq? At least 8,000 minimum at the moment? Seems like less than 1% are failing. Hardly a lot when you put it into perspective. A damn sight better than the old A1 SA80 (pre upgrade) anyway. People just like sticking the knife into thge Army's side.
  12. Just how much of this equipment failure is due to old age and lack of maintenance, lets face it most of the vehicles have been chased from one combat area to another. I wonder just how many time the mileometer has gone around on some of those Land Rovers, and when was the Challenger issued to the army and how many hours has been charging around the Desert with out a major overhaul. Lets face it the desert is a very harsh environment which means your weapon needs to be cleaned several times a day to keep it in working order. Now seeing that the sergeants are not allowed to take the men to task like they used to there must be number of them who will skip the cleaning of their weapon for a longer break, then complain when it does not work. Lets face it on first Gulf war they Army was using tanks that had served in Korea, Suez and Germany and were 50 years old by the time they went to war again, just how long is this equipment expected to last
  13. I know where you're coming from, as i personally sent just about every Challenger powerpack,engine and aircon unit in BFG into theatre from RAF Gutersloh.Speaking to the transport guys(drivers and REME) every stores area and warehouse was robbed blind .Even spares not on the books,pieces of trAshed Challengers were being sent.
    In-theatre REME were regularly telling us that most of the kit lasted around 40%of normal life compared to usage in BFG.
    The RAF had similar problems with the Tornado fan blades until they spoke to the Saudi Air Force and retro fitted heavy duty blades like the Saudi's had.