Why Have we Bought the Springer?

When I looked at the Springer in a couple of previous posts I compared it to a few newer vehicles and others available from overseas manufacturers and in the context of the whizzy bangy stuff, rather than the mundane logistics tasks that are equally important.

Merlin Springer and Quad Bike Why Have we Bought the Springer?

Merlin, Springer and Quad Bike

If one looks at the original announcement for the Springer on the MoD website , it states that Springer was obtained under an urgent operational requirement to move stores from a helicopter landing site to a forward operating base. Now given the fact that this was an urgent operational requirement it would perhaps be safe to assume that it was either a new requirement or an existing requirement that we didn’t have the equipment for.

In this magazine article

The company’s Business Development Director, John Stoddart, who had just returned from a specialist training area in the Southwest where he had been involved in a driver instructor programme. As a former soldier with 35 years under his belt, first as an infantryman and then commissioned REME, who served out the closing years of his armed forces career in Defence Procurement, there can be few better qualified than Stoddart to carry out this urgent operational requirement through from drawing board to frontline deployment

In what was an unfortunate turn of phrase, Dr Andrew Tyler (Chief Operating Officer for the MoD’s Defence Equipment & Support) stated

The Springer dune buggy will will be an added capability for the troops

17 Springer Why Have we Bought the Springer?

The article goes on to state

EPS, which is primarily known for its supply of ballistic protection to the UK MoD but is also a key supplier in the UAV scene had doubled its workforce to cope and subcontracted out some of the work. In its current configuration Springer is fitted with a 1400cc Lombardini diesel engine although larger options are available.

Taking a quote from the MoD’s web site

Lack of armour is a benefit. Armour would be paid for with impaired versatility. In any case, Springer’s main purpose is to carry casualties and cargo between relatively safe helipads and base facilities.

So that confirms the requirement is to shuttle between a HLS and FOB, via a relatively safe lane and that high levels of mine protection, for example, is not a key requirement. Self evidently, some degree of ballistic protection is required, as is the ability to self load a tonne.

One might be forgiven for wondering if the ability to moves pallets of ammunition, food, water and other materials from one location to another is not something that is fundamental to air assault operations and might have been thought about before.

Of course it had.

Entering service in 1988 after a series of trials a year or so before, the All Terrain Mobility Platform from Supacat, is designed for just that, clearing landing sites and shuttling equipment short distances in difficult terrain.

As is common with anything to do with Supacat, its history is complex.

Supacat designed the ATMP but were not able to manufacture in quantity so entered into production sharing contracts (the same as with the Jackal) and in the early eighties the ATMP was accepted into British Army service, manufactured by Fairey Engineering.

ATMP01 Why Have we Bought the Springer?

In 1995, an agreement was made between Alvis (now BAe) and Supacat in which Supacat would retain design and production rights for civilian markets but Alvis would be responsible for military markets. In 2005, Supacat regained sole marketing rights.

In 1996 the MoD purchased a further 86 ATMP’s and 84 SLLPT trailers for approximately £4 million after 10 organisations were invited to tender, these included Aircraft Maintenance Support Services, Alvis Vehicles,  BI Engineering, Clarke Chapman Manufacturing Services, Glover Webb, Hawtel Whiting, Penman Engineering, Ricardo Special Vehicles, Steyr-Daimler-Puch and Stewart & Stevenson Services.

ATMP Operations Why Have we Bought the Springer?

Specifications for the Mark 3 include a 1,000kg payload increasable to 1,600kg with reduced performance, a weight of 1.6 to 1.8 tonnes, limited amphibious capability, a top speed of 65kph and permanent 6 wheel drive (the Springer is a 4×2). Although open topped, it can be equipped with a number of hard or soft cabs, winches and even a track kit to improve mobility even more. In addition to clearing landing sites the ATMP can be used for a wide variety of tasks, everything from vehicle recovery, ambulance and radio rebroadcast. Live firing trials were even completed with a mounted Milan anti tank weapon.

Its winch can be used for self loading pallets using a ramp, the same as with the Springer but interestingly a number of dedicated trailers were designed to enable rapid loading and unloading. The FLPT (Fork Lift Pallet Trailer) and SLLPT (Self Loading Lightweight Pallet Trailer)

Flipit Trailer 02 Why Have we Bought the Springer? Flipit Trailer 01 Why Have we Bought the Springer?

These trailers answered the question of how to rapidly collect ammunition and stores pallets from a landing site. There are a number of variations but the basic trailer has an electro hydraulic tipping mechanism and forks. The driver simply tilts the trailer in the down position, reverses onto the pallet, tilts the trailer back up and drives away. The whole process is very quick, simple and can be carried out without getting out of the vehicle. Maximum payload for the ‘flipit’ trailer is 1,400kg and can be converted to carry three stretchers. The trailer is fitted with demountable corner posts to which are fitted `ratchet straps’. These form sides for loose loads such as boxes from a part used pallet. Conversion takes only a few moments and the ‘kit’ is carried on the trailer.

An air mobile crane has also been developed which allows the ATMP to self load up to 1 tonne at 2 metres reach. Because traction is high the ATMP was also designed to tow the 105mm Light Gun and ammunition trailer. The total carried and towed payload is in excess of 3,500kg. There is also an Air portable Fuel Container.

ATMP Crane Why Have we Bought the Springer? ATMP Air Portable Fuel Why Have we Bought the Springer?

Air portability was a key requirement, they can be parachute dropped on medium stressed platforms, carried by helicopter as a sling load or netted load and are internally transportable in a Chinook. Given the length of time the ATMP has been in service, all necessary Joint Air Transport Establishment (JATE) clearances have been approved including various combinations of slinging and air drop with different aircraft, including the Westland Blackhawk. Whilst the Springer can be carried as a netted under-slung load, it does not have the necessary recognised and approved tie down locations for internal Chinook carriage or air drop. The Chinook has been cleared to carry 2 ATMP’s internally without lowering the roll cage or 4 as a single under slung load. Multiple stacking options also exist for carriage in larger aircraft.

In short, the ATMP and air portability/air operations go hand in hand.

As of October 2009 the Mark 4 was said to be in development that would incorporate the usual raft of improvements including a Euro emissions compliant engine.

What are we doing with these superb vehicles, that have given such stirling service and are still available from the manufacturer.

Flogging them off cheap of course, via the usual disposal routes here and here

They were withdrawn in Herrick 10 to be replaced with the Springer.

Rumour control has it that they are suffering extremely poor serviceability levels, have no where near the load carrying capacity as quoted, cannot be carried internally in a Chinook and are not as versatile as the ATMP. Now of course, these are only rumours but interesting nonetheless.

Remember, the Springers were only £7 million!

To be absolutely clear, we haven’t seen the requirements statement so any speculation is just that, but to the casual uninformed observer, it is rather puzzling why are replacing one in service platform with a UOR that would seem to be inferior.

Here are a few pictures of the All Terrain Mobility Platform.

ATMP20 Why Have we Bought the Springer? ATMP21 Why Have we Bought the Springer? ATMP02 Why Have we Bought the Springer?

 

About the author

Think Defence hopes to get people talking about defence issues, nothing more, nothing less. Please check out the Think Defence Tumblr for news snippets, images and videos; thinkdefence.tumblr.com

More posts by

 

8 Comments

  1. Richard Stockley says:

    “It is rather puzzling why are replacing one in service platform with a UOR that would seem to be inferior.”

    Puzzling, but unfortunately not suprising….

  2. paul g says:

    go onto ARSE and look at the forum called new vehicles, just read what the blokes who have to use them say, not good. secondly the ex REME guy i had the “pleasure” of him being my sgt-major, was never a tradesman,ex inf doing military training so not actually the best man to advise, decorum and respect for this site prevent me giving an opinion of the man himself.

  3. Richard Stockley says:

    Irony…..the black and green Blackhawk pictured with the underslung ATMP is the one that Westlands were going to licence produce, but the MOD never bought…….

  4. Grey says:

    I never understood this either, my guess is somebody has a cushy job coming

  5. Jed says:

    Why have bought the Springer ?

    Well because it has light weight ballistic armour which is meant to help protect its crew from AK toting Talibani taking pot shots at the boys as they move their ammo cans from the HLZ into the FOB. No requirement for anti-IED protection, so even if ATMP was offering superb maintainability, it would have to be redeveloped with the ballistic armour package, and perhaps its design even provided too much “mobility” for just shifting stores (under small arms fire) into the FOB ???

    Just to make you smile, when I was RN, I had the chance to go and exercise with signallers attached to the 5th Airborne Pathfinders platoon for a week, and I actually managed to bounce right out of the back of an ATMP because I was not holding on tight enough ! I still have the loose piece of bone floating around in my right elbow…. :-)

  6. admin says:

    The ballistic protection was the only requirement that I could think of as being unique to the springer but then the ATMP has a frame and enclosed can accessories, how hard would it have been to put a bit of ballistic protection on. Springer doesnt have any windscreen so it is only the doors and perhaps one or two other select areas.

    The forklift trailer would seem to be the ideal solution i.e. someone has already thought of the answer

    It just seems a retrograde step and at £7mil not a cheap one either

    Not going to comment on you falling off the back of a lorry

  7. Ashley says:

    Why does anyone have problems believing that a piece of equipment 22 years old and bought by the army in peace time isn’t up to the job? The fact the AMTP was already in Afghanistan and was withdrawn speaks volumes.

  8. admin says:

    Some of them will be only 10 years old and feedback from users seems to think they are still relevant, they have been proven in many environments

Leave a Comment