Did you know the Artec Boxer, as well as all the usual optics, armours and weapons, is en suite?
Neither did I until ISAF released a few photographs of the Boxer, about to start operations in Afghanistan (click the images to see more)
How very civilised and the perfect antidote to the doom and gloom around today
Is that white seat where they got the SDSR from?
Hello Think Defence,
isn’t there a toilet on the Warrior?
They used to be important in the days when nuclear war was expected.
There is at least one vehicle with an external toilet which folds down,I can’t remember what it is though.
Fast jet crews have got it worst,ablutions are no fun during a 15 hour sortie in an F15,see “The Kabul-Ki Dance”:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/11/bowden.htm
GrandLogistics.
“isn’t there a toilet on the Warrior?”
there is, but having sat on one it isn’t nearly as gucci, and a serious curry would present the real danger of overflow conditions!
ah, the joys of NBC U&D Drills
speaking of NBC, can anyone confirm the rumour that RAF regt have got the nbc recce gig no more joint stuff. If so that’s shit on the tankies who worked hard on it
Somebody’s been reading the ARRSE thread on the RAF Regiment…….
I thought if true it was a bit shit too.
But I have been good lately on not spouted any RAF conspiracy theories here.
@ x: So have the RAF re-trained their alsatians to work in NBC suits? Or will they be used as “sniffer” dogs (a.k.a. the “canary” role)…
Oh, is that my coat? OK got the hint!
http://images4.cpcache.com/product/86863394v17_480x480_Front_Color-White.jpg
I’d heard that the NBC recce role was being removed entirely. Are the Fuchs vehicles being sold? Or is that just speculation?
Sorry was out of the loop for a while in a field in Germany, missed out on some of the most recent cuts.
I think Grim is right, the JCBRN Reg were the SME for all 3 services, they also trained up various civil agencies that would require such training. They covered quite a lot at Honington. Another gap in knowledge we’ve still got fixed CBRN such as Colpro but the recce role will be gone soon.
CBRN I think also had a lower proirity in the Army than in the RAF, anyone serving army confirm they no longer do it on annual basis, I think the RAF are the only ones that do.
Back on topic for the boxer, I noticed it also has the most important component a (British) vehicle can have
http://www.flickr.com/photos/isafmedia/6004850929/in/photostream
Surely a BV is more important than a toilet?
I can shit in a bag and tie it up for a week.
I cant not eat….
Strange, I was under the impression that Boxer had received roof-suspended shock absorbing seats for better protection against under-hull blast mine effects (Puma did).
Those seats seem to be a left-over from the 1990′s when DPICM roof protection was the most important improvement of the protection requirements, not IED protection.
I have just checked the ARRSE thread on the RAF Regiment. And it appears that the rAF Reg are to get the CBRN role solely.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/current-affairs-news-analysis/166702-more-army-cuts-but-raf-regt-still-endure-8.html#post3880697
This is the “Cooking and Boiling Unit 800 Watt” in the Boxer:
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6128/6004850929_4cf413dbc8_d.jpg
Comment:
Lightweight and incredibly compact immersion heaters of about 800 W power can be purchased for about ten bucks in retail stores.
@X
Thanks for the link to the ARRSE thread on the RAF Regiment. It certainly seems that the RAF are to have the CBRN role transferred to them as sole practitioners.
It appears from some of the discussion on the site that the CBRN recce role will go completely, leaving just the fixed CBRN (the RAF Regiment being a non-manoeuvre force). I would like to echo Grim’s question about the Fuchs vehicles. They are highly specialized and among the most technologically advanced vehicles in the world. They have also relatively recently undergone a major upgrade. I trust that they will either be transferred to the RAF or kept in storage for the emergency that almost certainly will arise. They should certainly not just be flogged off! Remember that they were the first British vehicles into Iraq of the main ground force during the first Gulf War.
Or is it a case of saving yet more money and losing an invaluable capability into the bargain?
Who cares about a toilet? The most plush REME truck I ever saw was in Canada many years ago.
A fitted twin hob, fridge, hi-fi, tv, games console, mood lighting…
“Has anyone seen the gauge for the… oh bollocks, we didn’t pack it.”
And DominicJ, keep your toilet habits to yourself. What you get upto in the privacy of your own home should stay between you and your conscience.
my tels repair truck had 34 plug sockets, it was rude not to use them all! ‘kin techs was a phrase often heard, never turned down a microwaved egg banjo though did they!
oh point to note i always found it was the army that were mega keen on NBC
@ Mike W
I think if there was a need the RAF Reg would have to “manoeuvre”!
It seems odd to me that one of the world’s major nuclear powers has decided to virtually go without this capability. A bit of trend as T45 was built without NBC protection too.
What a cock up.
Cheers paul g, must have been a bit of bad gen.
@X
You’ve said it! But then there’s been so much about the SDSR and recent defence decisions that’s smacked of sheer insanity.
I didn’t know the T45 was built without NBC protection. That’s very re-assuring, isn’it?
Thanks for the reply.
X
Are you absolutley sure ref your statement about T45 ??? What is the providence of your source ?
I would find it very hard to believe – how expensive would it be to fit the NBC filtration to a ventilation system you need anyway ?
I think he means an automatic exterior deck spraying system.
@ DominicJ “Surely a BV is more important than a toilet?
I can shit in a bag and tie it up for a week.
I cant not eat….”
I wouldn’t recommend tying it up for a week as the pressure will wreck your bladder and kidneys.
Apologies it was only what I read on the internet. But NBC protection isn’t just about filtration it is about keeping the citadel at a positive pressure. And when I had my brief stroll through Dauntless I can’t remember going through an airlock as I have done before in T22, T23, Leander, and the old bold Bristol. And as Grey said I saw no pre-wetting system either. If I am wrong as always I will admit it; as I have said before I only comment here for fun, though I don’t wish to mislead anybody I am not in the same situation as the site owner when it comes to accuracy. If I am wrong it will make me happy because being without such systems isn’t very clever. But this is the MoD and BAE we are talking about!
Where’s that Italian when you need him?
Have just found on the ARRSE site (under “MOD cuts and multi-roled brigades”) some references to the handover of CBRN skills and equipment to the RAF Regiment AND YEOMANRY.
This possibly means that the news is not as bad as at first feared. If the Yeomanry is to be involved then the TA regiment concerned could take over the manoeuvre CBRN role and that in turn could mean that invaluable equipment such as the FUCHS could remain in service. The TA carried out such a role briefly before 1 RTR assumed it later.
What will the future of 1 RTR be? Some new armoured role? Possibly a merger with 2 RTR?
Mike W, no one knows yet it’s all to be decided in the make up of the army.
The Yeomanry do seem to have a role, but that it’s clear as to what yet. The RAF Regiment may well perform the manoeurve element.
Because the MRB ORBAT seems to be such a movable feast at the minute its hard to make any sense of it, if the RAF Regt to get the manouver element of NBC recce I wonder if they will get the Fuchs vehicles or the kit in them transferred to something else?
Who know, I am sure the various cap badges are fighting like cat and dog so the ultimate MRB makeup will be delivered to ensure maximum regiment survival
@Topman and TD
Your’re probably both right. We shall just have to wait and see. One thing I am certain of, though, is that CBRN is too valuable a capability to lose. Thanks for replying.
TD
Just one other point on the subject of CBRN. The British Army has something in service (or used to) called a Light Role Team (LRT). It is the UK’s early entry capability for CBRN and consists of 8-man teams (Para and Commando trained). The idea is that they can deploy and fight alongside rapid deployment/expeditionary forces. Their equipment is organized so that they can deploy forward and cover every situation from vehicle-mounted to fully man-portable tasks. They operate from specially adapted Pinzgauer 6 x 6 vehicles.
I just hope that our CBRN capability is not to be reduced to just that. They are no doubt excellent but do not have the full capability of the Fuchs-based armoured arm of the CBRN regiment which can facilitate freedom of movement while the land forces advance (or operate).
TD
“Because the MRB ORBAT seems to be such a movable feast at the minute it’s hard to make any sense of it.”
I agree absolutely. However, do you think that units/formations such as CBRN; artillery regiments such as those based on MLRS, Watchkeeper, possibly Fire Shadow and other units/formations will NOT be integral parts of the new MRBs but simply be kept as a range of divisional-type support assets, to be called on as needed?
Actually, although the matter of the formation of the MRBs was discussed to a certain extent under Structures, I, for one, would appreciate a further opportunity to discuss their likely configuration, preferably before the changes are announced officially. I know that this could be an excuse for some of us to come up with unattainable fantasy fleets but the discussion that has taken place so far has been very sensible. It would be interesting to find out which of us gets near to the actual configuration when it is announced. Any chance some time in the future?
With regards to CBRN. There is a statement from Commandant General RAF Regt on http://rafregt.org.uk
It mentions the capabilities to be gapped with the Fuchs, the future of the light role teams, etc.
Unfortunately the full link is too long for me to copy on this phone, and I’m not writing it all out for you. Perhaps someone could fetch the link, or copypasta the whole statement.
@Brian Black
Thanks very much for providing the link to the Commandant General’s statement.
Since I read that, TD has taken up the subject with a new thread on the future of CBRN provision, so I might take up the discussion there. Not that there is much to say, I think. I’m just saddened by the loss of yet another key capability from the British armed forces.
Thanks once again.
@S O: The BOXER seats are decoupled from the hull. Protection against blast under the belly is proven to be excellent – under STANAG conditions. Hope my fellow comrades will not need to try out much larger charges while sitting inside…