35 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris
Chris
June 23, 2014 4:04 pm

TD – don’t you mean “Wonder how much FRES subsidised these?” – No of course not, that wouldn’t be ethical.

Chris Werb
Chris Werb
June 23, 2014 4:20 pm

I could see all that gear at the back getting seriously bent out of shape in a variety of scenarios.

Chris
Chris
June 23, 2014 4:30 pm

ChrisW – the sensor bin has a housing it sinks into – you can see the top of the drum and the open flat lid hinged open over the back. I imagine its not intended to move with the sensor elevated.

DavidNiven
DavidNiven
June 23, 2014 4:30 pm

At least they’ve had the common decency to call it an SRV instead of SV.

Chris
Chris
June 23, 2014 4:32 pm

TD – only a 20% increase in contract value – positively tiny compared to most overspends. Although it is early days…

monkey
monkey
June 23, 2014 5:02 pm

One for the pot , if this works in the scout role why don’t we just buy them ?
I believe they have other variants to other armies would you Adam and Eve it , in service and getting muddy/dusty depending on who bought it .
VCI/C – Infantry / Cavalry Vehicle
VCPC – Command Vehicle
VCREC – Recovery Vehicle
VCZ – Engineering Vehicle
LT-105 Light Tank
Donar – Medium 155mm SPA
Stupid boy why buy what already works when you can change every thing armour ,engine , suspension , armaments (‘no missiles thank you very much , they make such a racket when they go off and not much use anyhow’) new comms, new sensors ,in fact why don’t we change the hull too while were at it.

monkey
monkey
June 23, 2014 7:02 pm

On the cost front a report on the Spanish having reduced their latest order by 17%
“The cut is given by reducing the number of contracted units from 190 to 117 of which 81 will be in infantry configuration and the other 36 for Zapadores(REME equivalent)
In return, it will include integrated logistics support (ISS) for five years. Thus, the slope of this program spending through 2030 is reduced from 949.95 million euros to 786.95 million euros.”from indefensa.com
So including 5 years support that’s 6.7m Euros for the infantry/sapper variant.
The all ‘sensored’ up SRV would be north of that per unit I would guess .

Chris Werb
Chris Werb
June 23, 2014 9:20 pm

. Hi Chris. I meant the stuff behind where the hull would normally end on an IFV variant and behind the rear idler/track tensioner wheel. Not the mast.

Chris
Chris
June 23, 2014 9:35 pm

ChrisW – the worst of that is as far as I can see an open cover hanging down, maybe the lower cover of a box mounted on the rear flank (the thing with the three deep channels in the side) – could this be a stick dispenser for NBC recce? I don’t know, but its hard to think of another reason for opening the underside of a stowage box? The bin behind the open cover is standard ASCOD and a permanent fit. But at least it tries to maintain a rational departure angle.

x
x
June 23, 2014 9:52 pm

Um. Can we rename the REME to the Zapadores?

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
June 23, 2014 10:24 pm

@x – I actually think “Zapadores” might be…er…Sappers? The clue being in the name…my guess being that the name originated in the Peninsula War…be interested if anybody out there knows? Have we got any Spanish or Portugese readers… :-)

GNB

x
x
June 23, 2014 10:26 pm

@ GNB

I don’t care who we rename, the British Army needs Zapadores…………….

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
June 23, 2014 10:31 pm

@x – You mean the Sappers need to speak Spanish? Very helpful for covert trench digging around Gibraltar I suppose…

GNB

ArmChairCivvy
ArmChairCivvy
June 23, 2014 10:33 pm

I will venture out with all the knowledge that eleven lessons in Spanish gave me:

Zapadores, as those who used to keep the horses’s shoes in working order.
– therefore, the shoe maker naming in the BA for REME might soon be quite apt, as the immediate family never has any shoes (or is it tanks, with tracks… there won’t be many around at this rate)

El Sid
El Sid
June 23, 2014 10:49 pm

@ACC/GNB
Sapping dates back long before the Peninsula War, it probably dates to an earlier Anglo-Spanish War, the one featuring the Armada. Ultimately derives from the Latin word sappa, a spade, by way of French – we got matey (-ish…) with them once we’d lost Calais and they needed allies against a Spain fuelled by American gold so I imagine there was quite a bit of tech transfer at that time.

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
June 23, 2014 10:56 pm

– I’m afraid I just “Asked Paco”…zapador = sapper…un-enterprising I know, but we Gloomys don’t get out and about much, especially not anywhere sunny…although I gather Osborne and Cameron are now planning HS3 so we can really whizz to Hull or Liverpool.

Struggling to imagine why. mind you… :-)

GNB

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
June 23, 2014 11:03 pm

@el Sid – Cheers – I was thinking about a point where we might have started using the same word, but a parallel evolution from the same Latin root seems wholly plausible…in which case it might well go back to medieval times or even earlier, when Latin was the pan-European written language for the educated classes…that would explain the use of Sapeur en Francais ne c’est pas?

GNB

ArmChairCivvy
ArmChairCivvy
June 24, 2014 6:49 am

Had to ask my Spanish wife, and indeed, the words for a shoe and a horse shoe are totally different
– she was intrigued about the reason for me to be asking the question…

x
x
June 24, 2014 8:47 am

@ GNB

Seeing as the Army has more horses thank tanks then I think it is a goer.

I feel a new uniform is called for………

Gloomy Northern Boy
Gloomy Northern Boy
June 24, 2014 10:24 am

@x – Having referred to Vanished Armies by A.E.Haswell Miller (Editor John Mollo) I note that the Spanish Army of the 1920’s had some red trousering in evidence, so there are definitely possibilities to be explored…

GNB

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 7:08 pm

Jesus wept. For people who think like i do, that is a bloody abomination.

Unfortunately, not that many in the MoD think like I do. :( But then, most of them have never actually been in the business of leading recce troops in battle, so they haven’t got a fucking Scooby about recce effectiveness and how it all sort of depends on what you can do and where you can go without standing out like the balls on a shaved racing dog. And most us us recce people don’t have to make statements in the House of Commons about avoidable deaths. And as they are in charge in MoD decision making, protection overules effectiveness.

And so the trade off is between protection and not having to knock up LCpl Snooks wife in the early morning to tell her that Snooks is no more. Despite the fact that Snooks would have eaten his evening scran and delivered far better actionable intelligence if he hadn’t been in a thirty ton monster that became a missile magnet because it was belching exhaust fumes all over, could be heard from 2 miles away, and had to become canalised because his wagon weighed 30 tonnes and there was clearly only one bridge available to him.

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 7:24 pm

The first two tenets of recce doctrine:

1. Don’t be seen. Stealth design, with a bias to being very small and unobservable to OPFOR in all of their sensors in all bandwidths, including acoustic. And really decent training for Commanders to pick non-obvious approaches.

2. If seen, don’t be hit. A bias towards speed and presenting a small, difficult target, with Drives well trained in being able to respond to the shouted command over the intercom of “jink like fuck!”, and the wagon being able to do so.

Then it gets into the protection argument of “if hit, don’t be penetrated”. But the first two are better than relying on the third.

Wagons designed to optimise the first two tenets also tend to be airmobile, which means you can often over-match OPFOR in the first week before he can move his heavy stuff in, which is what FRES was really about: into-theatre strategic effect.

Unfortunately, the slowness of political decision making and lack of strategic lift, and an unwillingness to take casualties mean casualties later were preferred to casualties now, and utterly discounting the difference in effect that time can buy.

FRES kit buying should really have been about more rough strip aircraft into service sooner, more pre-positioned ships, and more effective Whitehall joined up decisions. The Army’s kit buys were utterly irrelevant. Bikes, motorbikes and stripped out strike vehicles were more than good enough for FRES, along with palletised logistics to get going quickly, and even such things as investing in freeze dried rations at one tenth the mass and volume.

The Other Chris
June 24, 2014 7:29 pm

@RT

Genuine question: Did you have BV’s in your vehicles? Worth it? Any of the modern kit to support crew/dismounts (e.g. Water Generator mentioned on the FRES thread) that you would have liked if it could be squeezed in sensibly?

Deja Vu
Deja Vu
June 24, 2014 7:44 pm

RT

Just a question, what is your opinion on wheeled or tracked all things being equal, Fox v Scimitar/Scorpion etc.

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 7:55 pm

TOC, yes we had BVs, why not as they did not reduce the stealth of CVR(T), and so why not. But I would have far preferred a stripped out space frame wagon of two tonnes without a BV than one of ten tonnes with a BV. Nothing wrong with cold food or drinks, nor a Triangia alcohol burner boiling a mug of brew while dug in 24 inches and unobservable. I have a much loved Kelly Kettle that will boil one litre of water in about 30 seconds again while dug in, enough for a scrape with a razor, quick go with a flannel around your balls and pits, and a mug of instant.

Neither a Triangia nor a Kelly Kettle do you have to turn the engine on to heat. On troop training and exercises, i used to go around an hour before dawn to listen. You could tell where troops were by sound when they cranked up a wagon to boil a BV. Absolute chuffing bollocks drills, they only did that once after I got my Squadron.

DV, wheels every time.

Chris
Chris
June 24, 2014 8:09 pm

TOC – armour without BV? Unthinkable!

Anecdote 1: The Americans I dealt with on the armoured truck design were bemused when I bought a beat-up old BV off Ebay to fit into the prototypes. I could go further to describe the dressing down they issued for wasting time/money. They didn’t apologise when senior Army types being shown the interior of the vehicle all commented that they were glad to see a BV included.

Anecdote 2: A Sgt detailed to run me round the Plain to watch an exercise explained on new posts to vehicle crews he would arrive with a Tommee Tippee plastic mug complete with picture of teddybear on the side, much to the amusement of the new crewmates. First stop of the night; the BV would go on and tea would be distributed, just about the same time the call to move came through. Choice for those with tin mugs – try to hold on to the tea and get scalded every time the vehicle lurched, drink the superheated tea down in one, or throw it overboard. The sensible ones threw the tea out. Except the Sgt, whose plastic mug with its snap-on lid and drinking spout remained safe to drink from no matter how the vehicle crashed about. Next day, the rest of the crew had brightly coloured plastic Tommee Tippee mugs…

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 8:17 pm

Chris, Tippees were popular, but I’d question the wisdom in “first stop” the tea going on. If you are driving about, the BV is on because it makes no difference. You don’t use a BV after you have stopped. And you absolutely never put a Tippee about the hatch line, because it is a thermal beacon. I found a troop of the 15th/19th Hussars once during an ice cold November exercise in BATUS once because some stupid Trooper was on radio stag with his hot mug of tea, sitting in the Commander’s seat of a CR1 and i saw him on thermal from about 2 miles away, and we cracked that Troop with artillery at dawn, and got a break in to the Squadron position after their AWES Confirmed we’d killed the three tanks in ten seconds.

Nothing wrong with cold tea or unheated compo: designed to be OK to be eaten cold, if your gunner hasn’t sorted it before you halt.

There is a lot wrong in being in a wagon big enough for a BV that gets seen because it is a big wagon.

monkey
monkey
June 24, 2014 9:51 pm

@RT
A new completion from our cousins for an existing vehicle launched in Jan for trials ongoing right now for the ULCV.(Ultra Light Combat Vehicle)
Carry 3200lbs of fuel/people/kit.
Kerb weight 4500lbs
Survive a rollover
Drive off-road with ease up to ridges and summits. “TERRAIN LEVEL III”?
Carry at least a machinegun.
Ride internally on a Chinook, sling under a Blackhawk, and air drop out of a Hercules
Cruise at least 300 miles
Fit the bill?

BV Buster
BV Buster
June 24, 2014 10:21 pm

Did I miss a discussion about BVs? Jet boil all the way, just make sure your inside your thermal cam before brewing up or else Mr DS will be throwing smoke grenades like they are going out of fassion.

Attended a good brief a few weeks back about how we have lost the skills we aqired during the 80s to conceal our selves, all this Iraq/Afghan business has caused massive skill fade. Back to basics on that one.

BV

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 10:40 pm

Monkey,

Kerb weight 4500lbs

Seems unreasonably lardy. But then, the Cousins have a different perspective on deployability than we do, given that they have big oceans on both coasts.

The critical path on FRES is strategic deployability. It’s not all about air transport, it could be solved by forward positioning, in which case you can go heavier. A mix, probably.

But as a pure recce wagon, 4500 lbs seems unreasonably lardy.

Red Trousers
Red Trousers
June 24, 2014 11:02 pm

No TD, I want a Chenowth Desert Strike Vehicle, except with muddy tyres for non deserts, a WMIK ring with either a Javelin (8 missiles loaded) or 40mm AGL (2 of each in each Troop), the bash plate conversion, spare tyre moved to the back not on the bonnet, electrics uprated to 28v DC, slightly more suspension travel, and the water jerrycans moved both forwards and downwards to compensate for CoG. And a mounting point for a very small aerostat for over the horizon directional comms. I think that puts on about 60 kgs. Add a clip in for a Brompton, about 70 kgs extra, but lower. Source an engine chip to compensate for the American mucle grump lump of iron, performance unaffected.

I want no part of the weather kit, US comms system, or 7.62mm proof front bonnet.

Not much to bloody ask, is it?

Gloomy Northern Boyr
Gloomy Northern Boyr
June 25, 2014 5:25 pm

@Thread – Is there a market niche for large military grade Tommy Tippee Mugs in MTP with regimental badges? Sounds like a bit of an earner for anyone with the right injection moulding equipment to me.. :-)

GNB