Final Terrier Combat Engineer Vehicle Delivered

BAE have delivered the final Terrier Combat Engineer Vehicle (CEV). There are now 60 vehicles delivered from what has been a troubled development and manufacturing phase. The production facility at BAE in Newcastle has been sold to Pearson Engineering.

Product description from BAE.

Likened to a combat ‘Swiss Army Knife’, Terrier is one of the most versatile, agile and adaptable combat vehicles and can carry out multiple roles in the most demanding battlefield conditions. Typical applications include providing mobility support (obstacle and route clearance), counter-mobility (digging of anti-tank ditches and other obstacles) and survivability (digging of trenches and Armoured Fighting Vehicle slots). With a flying weight of 32 tonnes, which allows it to be transported in the A400M airlifter, Terrier provides strategic air transportability as well as being extremely mobile on the ground on all terrains, reaching speeds of up to 70 kph and with a road range of 600k

Terrier CEV is a capable and deployable vehicle with many advanced features like remote control and the UK’s A400M aircraft will have a specially modified floor to carry one.

[tabs] [tab title=”Terrier Remote”]
A soldier uses a games consol style controller to control a Terrier armoured digger, which is controlled by remote control during an unveilling at the Defence Armoured Vehicle Centre, Bovington, Dorset.
A soldier uses a games consol style controller to control a Terrier armoured digger, which is controlled by remote control during an unveilling at the Defence Armoured Vehicle Centre, Bovington, Dorset.
[/tab] [tab title=”Remote 2″]

Royal Engineers Terrier MSV Remote Control 03

[/tab] [tab title=”Remote 3″]
Royal Engineers Terrier MSV Remote Control
Royal Engineers Terrier MSV Remote Control
[/tab] [tab title=”Remote 4″]
Royal Engineers Terrier MSV Remote Control
Royal Engineers Terrier MSV Remote Control
[/tab] [tab title=”Terrier Video 1″]

[/tab] [tab title=”Terrier Video 2″]

[/tab] [/tabs]

Although the Pearson Engineering Bridge Launch Mechanism (Medium) has been tested on Warrior I could see Terrier being used to carry BR90 bridge components like the No 12 Bridge in support of SV Scout for example. It does not have the same protection or capacity as the larger Titan and Trojan but they are double the weight.

Bridge Launch Mechanism (BLM)

[tabs] [tab title=”BLM 1″]

Pearson Bridge Launch Mechanism Warrior 1

[/tab] [tab title=”BLM 2″]

Pearson Bridge Launch Mechanism Warrior 2

[/tab] [tab title=”BLM 3″]

Pearson Bridge Launch Mechanism Warrior 3

[/tab] [tab title=”BLM Video”]

[/tab] [tab title=”BR90 Components”]

 

BR90 Bridging Components
BR90 Bridging Components
[/tab] [/tabs]

Both Australia and France have shown some interest in Terrier and could Terrier be used in other roles or as the base for different variants?

 

 

 

 

15 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ArmChairCivvy
ArmChairCivvy
January 6, 2015 11:33 am

Impressive.

Do we now know the unit cost? Not just with the prgrm cost, but with the cost of the first, cancelled programme, too.

Deja Vu
Deja Vu
January 6, 2015 5:04 pm

Did not realise that it could swim. seems to have plenty of freeboard. Or is it just running on the bottom. (Video 1)

Does it need to be specially rigged to swim and how is it powered in the water, water jets or just the tracks.

Peter Elliott
January 6, 2015 5:55 pm

So are these the last ever British built armoured vehicles for the British Army?

PhillEeee
PhillEeee
January 6, 2015 9:19 pm

@ PE – Unlikely. I’d be surprised if the government didn’t take the UK option on SV, and I’d hope there’s more vehicles coming out of Force Protection Europe (Another GD, there’s a pattern there…)

Peter Elliott
January 6, 2015 9:31 pm

I thought it was pretty clear now that Scout will be assembled in Spain – regardless of the current bluster about trying to increase the UK workshare.

And as and when a contract comes for UV I would expect to see it assembled in France, Germany or Italy (depending on the 8×8 selected). Unless anyone knows different?

as
as
January 6, 2015 9:34 pm

Nice to hear the factory will be sold to Pearson Engineering hopefully they will be able keep all the jobs making there mine plows etc.

I thought the GD stuff was going to be made from knock down kits in a new factory in the UK? so its just an assembly job. Not the same as making everything yourself.

PhilEeeeeee
PhilEeeeeee
January 6, 2015 9:53 pm

All SV manufacturing options are on the table as far as I know, just depends how deep the government wants to reach into their pocket! Never know, might be a rabbit out of the hat before the next election.

Chris
Chris
January 6, 2015 10:26 pm

PE – I am trying, but its not at all easy to be taken seriously. Oh well if it was easy everybody would be having a go.

mr.fred
mr.fred
January 6, 2015 10:35 pm

For UV I think it would depend on which vehicle is selected. The Patria AMV, for example, could be license built. Boxer would be German, VBCI French or we could go back to Spain for the Pandur. Or to GDLS for the Piranha V. Or III+ or some powerpoint thing. Not sure where that would be. Spain, perhaps, or Switzerland?

I would favour the Finnish design out of that lot – whether license build is worthwhile depends on what numbers we would end up needing. Mastiff numbers are up around 400, with few hundred each of light versions (Ridgeback) and load carriers (Wolfhound). Since they’ve been taken into core it will be a few years yet before it’s going to be an issue.

Given the layout of Terrier, one wonders if you couldn’t make a light/medium tank out of it, but I doubt that there would be the interest to support it.

I kind of wonder what it will get up to, being a unique platform. I suspect that we’ll end up trying to do everything with our 30-40t vehicles rather than trying to deploy the heavies. How long will that be before it hurts us.

as
as
January 6, 2015 11:09 pm

We could add these to the list,
Singapore Terrex,
Italian Iveco SuperAV,
Italian VBM Freccia,
USA/Finland Havoc based on the Patria,
USA/Swiss Striker based on the Piranha.

The South African BAE RG-35 MRAP 6×6 as an outside choice.

as
as
January 6, 2015 11:29 pm

You could also add as extreme outsiders the,
South African RG41,
Taiwan CM-32 Yunpao,
South Korean Hyundai Rotem KW2 Scorpion,
Chinese Type 07 aka ZBD-09,
Japanese Type 96.

Observer
Observer
January 7, 2015 5:19 am

as, Terrex was designed by Timony’s of Ireland. If you want it, why not just nip over next door and go to the source? Cut out the middleman.

Add the Taiwanese Clouded Leopard, another Timony’s Design.

DavidNiven
DavidNiven
January 9, 2015 9:25 am

I like the look of the Terrier as a CET replacement, but there are a few niggles I have with the capabilities they’ve added.

Firstly due to the time it has taken to design and procure the vehicle is the remote operation now redundant? When the design for Terrier was first envisioned we had been operating in areas that had just come through a period of conflict so UXO etc was a problem when clearing debris etc, we now have Mini Mine Wolf in service and there are plenty of remote control demolition plant systems available within the civilian sector that we could tap into if required, my preferred option would have been to cancel the remote feature and add a winch instead.

Secondly I glimpsed in the video what I thought to be a set of forks, is this true?

If so are they mounted on the front or on the arm? If front mounted I would have preferred the arm if so, to prevent as much as possible the Terrier churning up the ground constantly turning in small distances and making the ground unusable to wheeled vehicles (which are what I presume they would be using them with).

ArmChairCivvy
ArmChairCivvy
January 9, 2015 10:28 am

No takers for the unit cost of Terrier question
… So the sweeping under the carpet operation by stopping one prgrm, and restarting another has been successful (MOD secured some damages in between).

The thrust of my question was that if a much cheaper Warrior can do the same bridge laying, why go for the Rolls Royce solution. Or is there some distinctive centre of gravity advantage from the engine layout?

Light tank? There is an excellent version of CV90 that has sold zero & zilch.