Jump to content


Photo

Joint Light Tactical Vehicles For The Uk


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#21 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,274 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 0823 AM

 

"Joint LIGHT Tactical Vehicle" is somewhat optimistic for something that weighs around 14,000 pounds.


That's in essence a 2.5 ton cargo truck as a light vehicle.

How long before there's a demand for a light soft skin runabout that doesn't consume fuel at 10 mpg?

then the British Forces can buy a bunch of Mahindra Boleros under contract for MOD...

 

That demand won't be back for a long while.  British and American combat troops are very hard targets and going after support forces is much easier for insurgents.  Given that, the JLTV is likely to have a good long service life.  Light softskin vehicles have no place in service outside of safe countries and military bases in US and UK service.


  • 0

#22 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,158 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 0915 AM

 

UK MoD is still sorting through the hodgpodge potluck UOR purchases they have made the last fifteen years to standardize on less types.

 

Land Rovers will stay in service as your general purpose "jeep", but uparmouring them has its limits (see the Snatch debacle) and a purpose designed vehicle with a higher  weight class is much better at the job. The interest has been there for some time a bigger lightly armoured mine resistant vehicle:

 

 

Indeed. There were a number of somewhat successful South African (I believe) designs like the Casspir and the Mamba which were based on rather conventional chassis-types (the Mamba using a Unimog one which are quite common in the UK already).  Would a vehicle based along these lines - or even a modified example - be accepted by the UK MOD?  

 

Or maybe it would be yet another case of NIH? 

 

UK had some Mambas that were sold to estonia. we used it for EOD work in Afgh. and as ´´ambassadors of goodwill, winning hearts and minds of locals , where-ever that clown car appeared, wildly swinging in every way´´ -due to its high center-of-gravity and suspension. that was a quote from someone who used it in afgh 


  • 0

#23 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,075 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1052 AM

It's a frikken runabout vehicle for light personnel moves and load carrying tasks. The more complex you make these things the more they're going to be deadlined due to mechanical faults and other issues. SIMPLE.
  • 0

#24 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1108 AM

 

I guess it depends on what kind of vehicle Land Rover come up with Chris. If its like a cut down version of the Range Rover, Ive got a feeling we might end up buying G wagens.

 

Ford Rangers would be my bet.

 

 

Yeah, I had a look at those a couple of years back when we were in the market for a car my father could get in and out of. We opted for a Kuga in the end, but Rangers looked quite nice vehicles. Rough ride apparently but then anyone whom has been using a Land Rover for any period is probably not going to sweat that so much.


  • 0

#25 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1109 AM

It's a frikken runabout vehicle for light personnel moves and load carrying tasks. The more complex you make these things the more they're going to be deadlined due to mechanical faults and other issues. SIMPLE.

 

Says the country that moved on from the M151 and adopted the Hummer. :P


  • 0

#26 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,075 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1233 PM

By modern standards the HMMWV is still pretty simple (I've worked on one to fix some issues). Working on the portal axles is less complex than working on those on a Ferret or 60s era British all wheel drive (*cough*Champ*cough*). 

 


  • 0

#27 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1235 PM

By modern standards the HMMWV is still pretty simple (I've worked on one to fix some issues). Working on the portal axles is less complex than working on those on a Ferret or 60s era British all wheel drive (*cough*Champ*cough*). 

 

I knew that one was coming :D

 

Ive actually got one in the garage, not run in 30 years though. Awesome vehicle, but you are quite right, it was far too over engineered to hauling squaddies about a battlefield. Hence the rise of the Land Rover. Ironically, I understand the first batch of 30 Landrovers the Army bought had the Champ engine in it. Try and work that one out.


  • 0

#28 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,075 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1256 PM

The Champ's weakness wasn't the engine. The weakness was that rear Transaxle thingy that added too much critical complexity to one component. 


  • 0

#29 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,274 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1406 PM

It's a frikken runabout vehicle for light personnel moves and load carrying tasks. The more complex you make these things the more they're going to be deadlined due to mechanical faults and other issues. SIMPLE.

 

Then we buy more so we have enough of them available.  Cheap and simple runabouts can't survive in contested areas in the Age of the IED and Asymmetric Warfare.  The kind of enemies the US and UK have been facing aren't looking to defeat us militarily; They are looking to blow up enough of our troops that resulting media coverage (enhanced by much of said media's biases) causes much of the public to see the effort as futile and politicians to favor admitting defeat as opposed to continuing an unpopular policy.

 

Vehicles like MRAPs and the JLTV are overbuilt in some ways and they incur serious costs.  But they are needed because they reduce the casualties that cause support for US or UK military efforts to falter.  In important ways, the JLTV's function is political as well as military.


  • 0

#30 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,075 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 1712 PM

I guess a cheap CUCV makes sense for runabout work. 

COTS truck from a US or foreign maker.


  • 0

#31 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,311 posts

Posted 18 July 2017 - 1714 PM

For getting shot at, there is not a chance in hell that the politicians will allow anything to be used that is even close to being as fragile as a Snatch - it's political suicide.

 

If they want to move people about the UK in penny-packets, they use hire cars. If they want bigger parties, they use coaches. Land Rovers are still seen as convoy escorts and presumably will be used as light utility until they wear them all out.

 

I expect they still move troops about in lorries, but after a relatively recent collision and roll-over accident that killed some troops on a night movement exercise, I bet that risk assessments for movements using such get a lot more scrutiny.


  • 0

#32 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 21 July 2017 - 0745 AM

There was a bad lorry accident near Tilshead not long ago, was it that one?


  • 0

#33 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,942 posts

Posted 22 July 2017 - 1743 PM

DB, I thought they had stopped moving troops on bench seats in lorries some years ago for exactly the reason you state.


  • 0

#34 TOW-2

TOW-2

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 760 posts

Posted 22 July 2017 - 2155 PM

Can I ask a dumb question?  If you're going to have a wheeled vehicle, why not do car type seating, say you've got a 6x6, why not a bench seat at intervals with a crew door on either side?  Is it an armor issue...?


  • 0

#35 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 0217 AM

DB, I thought they had stopped moving troops on bench seats in lorries some years ago for exactly the reason you state.

 

Well they were doing it as recently as 2015, not sure if they have done it since.

http://www.dailymail...bury-Plain.html


  • 0

#36 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,942 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 1710 PM

 

DB, I thought they had stopped moving troops on bench seats in lorries some years ago for exactly the reason you state.

 

Well they were doing it as recently as 2015, not sure if they have done it since.

http://www.dailymail...bury-Plain.html

 

 

I can remember going on an ACF camp in 1980 in the back of a petrol engined Bedford RL with one cadet swinging over the tailgate on a rope :)


  • 0

#37 Dawes

Dawes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,619 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 1748 PM

Wonder what paint scheme the UK examples will be delivered in?


  • 0

#38 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,478 posts

Posted 24 July 2017 - 1026 AM

Wonder what paint scheme the UK examples will be delivered in?


Either tan or the usual black and green pattern is my bet.
  • 0

#39 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,720 posts

Posted 25 July 2017 - 0252 AM

Pink for diversity awareness?

 

3016_0-auto_downl.jpg


  • 0