A number of orders have been confirmed at this years Defence Vehicle Dynamics (DVD) show.
An additional 140 Jackal 2A’s and 28 Wolfhounds will be obtained.
The Jackal 2A is the latest version that features additional cab protection. Some might say the need for additional protection could have been foreseen by anyone with eyes and a brain and successive versions have featured greater protection and the older versions are likely to be upgraded. The UK has clung to the mantra of mobility providing protection, but almost inevitably, add weight and armour as reality chips away at the doctrine.
First introduced as part of an Urgent Operational Requirement in 2007, in excess of 500 Jackals have now been ordered. The latest batch of 140 will cost a total of £45million. Given that the usual additional costs of logistics, training and other equipment introduction costs have also been absorbed this is likely for just the vehicles, so that’s £285k apiece. Jackal vehicles are produced by Babcock under an alliance with Supacat, the prime contractor and design authority. Supacat is responsible for design, development, prototyping, integration and programme management, while Babcock takes responsibility for detailed production planning, purchasing and manufacture at its Devonport factory.
The Force Protection Wolfhound is the logistics version of the Mastiff and this order takes the total ordered to 125. The order value is about £20million, or £715k each (yes, that is Pounds, not Drachmas)
Although not announced, the MoD has also ordered an additional 37 Mastiff 2’s, taking the total to 314.
Digg it!
Add to Delicious!
Share on Facebook!
Share on Reddit!
Stumble it
Add to Technorati
21 Comments
Do they not operate under the economies of scale principle? why these bit part orders when they clearly need hundreds in not a few thousand of these vehicles…its the same with the merlin fleet..they have announce they want 75 but only ordered 22…what do they expect that AW will keep the Yeovil plant open for years just for them??? idiots
ron
orders are likely placed on timescales agreed with the builders.
Force protection can only build so many vehicles a day.
As for the vehicles. In jackals first fifteen months, it fifteen percent of combat deaths were jackal crew.
My research wasnt exhaustive, but i didnt find any jackal crew who got shot, lots who died in mine strikes, but no gunshots.
Anyone think an uparmoured jackal can now survive a mine strike?
More Mastiff 2′s? I thought the current MRAP’s had a big problem with off-road mobility. Shouldn’t we be loooking at a Mastiff 3 with enhanced off-road capability?
The big problem with the current crop of MRAP’s is that most are based on commercial platforms so off-road performance is naturally compromised. The benefit is intended to be cost savings but at the prices the military buys them it really doesnt appear to be the case. But again with development cycles for new equipment likely to stretch into years Mastiffs and Jackals are the best options I guess. As for the Jackals protection levels, the lack of doors et all is heavily compensated by the ridiculous firepower these things carry. Field reports on them (and for that matter the Snatch Land Rovers) always state that Taliban gunmen rarely want to get within firing range because of this. The issue with IED and Mine protection is less easily addressed. You really do need about 20 tonnes of solid armour in addition blast deflection shaping to truly protect yourself and even then the big IED’s (artillery shells and such) will still do substantial damage. There is no easy solution to this problem other than simply avoiding the IED traps altogether which can be solved with more helicopter transport…which isn’t really possible given the pathetic state of Joint Helicopter Command. Basically, they military simply isnt equipped for the current war, and probably wont be for the foreseeable future. Sad state of affairs.
Ron
Off Road mobility is an issue, but the Britih Army isnt Mobile in Afghanistan.
We cant resupply our patrol bases with water and diesel via helicopter, no one can.
A 40t HGV vehicle is never going to be off road, so anything guarding it doesnt need to be.
Cost, well, the things are expensive, but.
A Wolfhound costs about £500,000 and will be written off by a mine strike with no casualties.
A Warthog costs £15,000,000 and will be written off with multiple deaths in the event of a mine strike.
The Jackals do carry masses of firepower, but any vehicle can have a 40mm grenade launcher of a 30mm cannon mounted now, not any vehicle can survive a mine strike.
I would have thought that vehicles to counter the threat posed by IEDs and mines were a higher priority at the moment than more patrol vehicles. Are the new orders the result of higher than expected attrition rates or because the older versions of the vehicles are now becoming outmoded?
On the subject of mines etc., I know that the Talisman system was showcased at DVD 2010 but does anyone know whether it has actually entered service in Afghanistan yet? Incidentally, we procured some Husky mine detection and clearance vehicles a few years ago. Why aren’t those being deployed? Are they outmoded? Have they been sold off or what?
Mike W
The UK Husky is little more than a commerical truck with some armour bolted on to the sides. The crew are the only thing that could dectect and defeat mines.
Why are these being ordered?
Well, the oppositin thats now the government screamed the forces were under resourced, and now has to resource them.
They clearly have no idea what resources are needed, so are just plumping for more of whatevers cheap and looks good in The Sun.
Just read on Janes that:
“The UK Treasury has passed 17 of the 19 defence projects that were reconsidered as part of a government-wide review of all major spending projects approved by the previous Labour administration between 1 January and the General Election in May”
Major procurements approved include the A400M (GBP3.29 billion) and the Airseeker program, which is intended to replace the Nimrod R.1 (GBP1.4 billion).
Can anyone find and post the full list of approved programs, be interesting to know whether FRES ASCOD got through or whether its one of the two that didn’t make it
DominicJ,
Thanks very much for the reply and I agree with your sentimnts. However, as far as the Husky is concerned, I think we are talking at cross purposes.
The thing is that there are unfortunately two vehicles called the Husky. The first is the one that you mention (the Amercan truck based on a commercial chassis). The other is a South African mine detection and clearance vehicle obtained some time ago now and used by us, I think, in the Balkans. I think the latter is still used by several nations in Afghanistan (including the USA). I don’t know whether anyone can shed any light on this matter.
mike
i was convinced there was another husky that was mrapy, but couldnt find anything, although the canucks call a type of stryker husky apparently.
I think we had a mrap in the balkans, but they were sold.
Might have a look tommorrow
Have a look here
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/09/british-army-vehicles/
and
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/08/on-the-subject-of-ieds/
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/08/mine-and-ied-resistant-vehicles/
By the way fellas, am working on a big post on Talisman, similar to the one on FRES Scout, its not pretty I can tell you so far
Watch this space
I think the “MRAP-Y” Husky being referred to might in fact be what the U.S. call the Buffalo, a specialist mine clearance MRAP based on the South African Casspir:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_%28mine_protected_vehicle%29
The Husky in UK service is an armoured ‘truck’ – it is the lightweight protected logistics vehicle, with the Mastiff2 (MRAP) based Wolfhound being its ‘heavier’ brother, and the armoured MAN trucks being the heaviest “protected” logistics vehicle.
Husky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_MXT-MV#Husky_TSV
The Canadian Husky is yet another South African mine clearance system:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chubby_%28mine_detection_system%29#Husky
All clear now… :-)
Thanks for the replies and information, fellas.
I think that the Husky to which I am referring was procured by the UK as part of the Chubby system (3 sets bought for use in the Balkans). The information given in one of the links suggests that their status today is unknown.
Hang fire Mike, all will become clear in the next post!
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/LatestCounteriedEquipmentShowcased.htm
I understand that an announcement will be made on FRES ASCOD this week and will be good news for GD.
bad news for all those who work in the north east for BAe. Seems it wasn’t a bluff and big lay offs on the way.
That would certainly seem to be the case, paul,if John L’s information is correct. I’ve no reason to doubt it, as “The Sunday Telegraph” last week ran a large piece in its Business section on how BAE job cuts are looming after the company lost out to General Dynamics on the key FRES contract. Those cuts would almost certainly include the loss of Britain’s last tank-making factory in Newcastle.
What a shame that the CV90 solution was not deemed good enough for FRES SV. It would have brought in millions of pounds in future exports for this country. I suppose there is little or no chance of keeping the factory open. Apparently Terrier production will only last until 2014. After that, what? The Warrior upgrade programme, if it goes ahead, might possibly extend the plant’s life a little longer but I know of nothing else. A little bit of Britain’s history due to disappear?
GD certainly seem to think it’s in the bag:
http://www.generaldynamics.uk.com/FRES/
witness the “trusted to deliver FRES SV” logo on the microsite. BTW, what swung it away from BAe/VDS Newcastle? I would have thought keeping the main Callanger II production/maintenance facility open was a big draw? Or was BAe not able to produce enough of CV-90 in the UK. Or couldn’t it guarrantee IP residence in the UK (CV-90 being a Haaglunds design originally)?
Other Options:
CV90 wasn’t as good?
BAE’s option was too expensive?
BAE tried to win using the oft repeated threat to cut jobs in the UK and the customer got fed up with it?
GDUK wanted to work with DSG Donnington rather than take it over?
Mr.Fred – I hear ya, but….
As has been noted here before, CV90 FRES SV exists, in real tangible, touchable hardware (even if “prototype”, whereas GD’s offering is a a paper ‘design’.
Not as good – well maybe, but actually sometimes good enough is, well, good enough !
CV90 is is service with a lot more nations than ASCOD and is ‘combat proven’ in the Stan. CV90 Armadillo seems to be a lot more like we what FRES required than more on paper variants of ASCOD.
Anyway, I am a CV90 “fan boy” so there… :-)