The B and C Vehicle Fleet

The MoD designates vehicles as A, B or C type. A Challenger 2 is an A Vehicle, Land Rover a B Vehicle and JCB 3CX a C Vehicle, for example.The actual definitions are as follows;

A Vehicle; a tracked or wheeled armoured combat land vehicle primarily designed for offensive purposes and a specialist vehicle derived from these basic designs

B Vehicle; These are split into

Green Fleet

A soft skinned tracked or wheeled land vehicle, self propelled or towed, commercial or general service. which is not primarily designed for offensive purposes but which may in some cases be armoured for defensive purposes, and which is otherwise specifically defined. Green Fleet are deployable assets.

White Fleet (procured and managed within the Field Army)

All other categories of B Vehicle not categorised as Green Fleet which in the main, are in delivery livery.

C Vehicle; a wheeled or tracked item of earth moving equipment, either self propelled or towed; all self mobile, self steering, purpose made cranes, cable laying ploughs; all industrial and agricultural and rough terrain fork lift tractors, excluding warehouse tractors

A couple of recent FOI releases reveal the full diversity of the B and C vehicle fleets.

B Vehicle

[table id=7 /]

C Vehicle

[table id=8 /]

Bet you feel better having waded through that lot!

37 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris
Editor
Chris
May 12, 2015 7:53 am

Just think of the hassle of replacing all those nice old Land Rovers now JLR has decided to stop making them (and the spares thereof).

Andrew B
Andrew B
May 12, 2015 8:40 am

Indeed the replacemnet for the Landrover is going to be a very interesting project and an important one to get right.
Posted this a while back and having reviewed it not much to add.
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2014/07/next-landrover/

Chris
Editor
Chris
May 12, 2015 8:58 am

Andrew – the cheaper more utilitarian options would need a lot of development to fill the breadth of rolls LR has at the moment. As its on the first page of lists, consider how to turn a tin pick-up into am ambulance? I assume the likes of the Ford F-150 etc or VW’s Amarok are of unitary construction – not chassis & detachable body – so putting a wider box on the back would be a more challenging engineering feat. The obvious route, as Ovik took, is to look at the Transit/Iveco/Transporter/Sprinter Van type vehicles that are made to take box bodies, but now the LR replacement is bigger and not really a tough off-roader even with a Haldex 4wd system or similar. And its based on a short-production-life commercial base vehicle.

The joy of the Landie was that it was designed from the start to be off-road, tough, repairable and adaptable, and then it stayed in production for getting on for seven decades. You couldn’t wish for a better civvy vehicle to conscript into the military. Nothing being made now will match that.

monkey
monkey
May 12, 2015 9:35 am

On a Landrover replacement my choice would be the Toyota Hilux series , global supply chain , has supplanted the Landie itself in most harsh environments by commercial users as its proven itself superior both on cost and reliability, just buy 20,000 twin cabs at £15k a piece with a bare chassis and a big turbo diesel ( all nice an EU emission compliant ) ,and let the coach builders adapt as required.

Rocco
Rocco
May 12, 2015 9:52 am

@monkey

The Ford Ranger and Mitsubishi Tritons do a better job if you want that level of spec.

NZ went for COTS for some of their Landrover placement. Started with Holden Rodeos, then moved to Hiluxes and are now using Tritons.

Engineer Tom
Engineer Tom
May 12, 2015 10:44 am

I read somewhere that UKSF went for the Hilux, in white obviously, as no one would look twice at it going past, in Africa or the Middle East, even if it had a load of rough looking blokes with guns and beards, in the back.

I would go to Toyota (substitute Ford or Mitsubishi or whoever) and ask them whether they can provide a range of vehicles with common parts i.e. standardise to 1 or 2 engines etc. with Toyota you used to be able to get Land cruisers and Hilux’s with the same engine. Then have a series of garages with trained mechanics to maintain them around the UK, you could also use these garages as part of a resettlement program to train qualified Toyota mechanics. It would also seriously cut the cost of parts as Toyotas are so common.

Whatever happens we have to go COTS as we can’t afford to pay for the design of a new vehicle.

Chris
Editor
Chris
May 12, 2015 10:59 am

ET – its one of those interesting sums. If we buy commercial designs even the likes of Ford or Toyota, in 5 years time a completely different vehicle will carry the name, probably containing less than 10% common parts with its predecessor. At this point you have to consider updating if you want a largish fleet with high availability (as in no pool of contingency in the fleet).

On the other hand, if the decision is to commission a custom military design then part of the job would be to support the fleet for the typical length of service, say 40 years or more. Upgrades would then be designed as retrofit kits; if you bought a new batch then in effect you’d buy the original spec vehicle with all the upgrades implemented. Minimal obsolescence issues compared to the purely COTS route.

I am of the opinion that (for example) re-engineering the previously used Ambulance bodies onto the next generation Hilux would over a 40 year life cost a lot. Especially when considering the likely changes in chassis rail profile, pick-up points for body mounting, exhaust routing, maintenance access and even wheelbase.

I haven’t done the sums, but the continuous fleet renewal to keep up with COTS platforms isn’t that cheap – maybe a custom platform ends up a cheaper option.

barbarossa
barbarossa
May 12, 2015 12:58 pm

JLR are only stopping production of the current Defender, this year. The new model comes out next year- Apparently it is going to aimed at farming, public utilities and other service, as well as ‘leisure’. One of the more sensible decisions is that the wheel stud spacing is going to be the same as the Toyota Landcruiser- for exactly the reasons upthread.
…A big rumour is that they are planning to use the 3l diesel out of the Disco.

…Incidently, the new Toyota HiLux is not very favoured down ‘ere in somerset. The big one is the Nissan Navara, although every farmer I’ve seen seems to have a running Defender as well If not a Discovery 3 (or 4!) Coppers seem to have lots of Freelanders, and the Paramedics are charging about in Disco 4’s. The Diahatsu Fourtrak is still much in evidence too.

Brian Black
Brian Black
May 12, 2015 1:34 pm

The Landrover Discovery name is apparently going to continue, albeit on an effectively all new vehicle. So the Army’s LR replacement could well be another LR. Available info suggests that the new vehicle would have a similar style versatile box-girder chassis on which various practical back-end bodies could be mounted; and wheel sizes and bolt patterns could even match Toyota’s to allow easier maintenance in various parts of the world.

There are though lots of versatile light tactical trucks available in the military market from Europe and America at the moment.

An issue when looking at commercial pickups and light trucks is that they won’t necessarily easily meet NATO standards when it comes to simple things like towing, recovery, and tie-down points. Not a particular problem for small packages of civilianized vehicles for special forces or other specific tasks.

I did read a little while ago about a protected vehicle that is in service with US SOCOM, and that is available with a number of different bodywork options to match the brand of your choice. Interesting, but can’t remember what it’s called. Likely costs an absolute fortune.

barbarossa
barbarossa
May 12, 2015 2:40 pm

Err….There’s a new Defender model out next year too, When the current Discovery model reaches the end of it’s model cycle- There’ll be a new version of that too…
But what BB is describing is the new Defender, the Discovery will be effectively the mid-range family.
It’s complicated but it works this way:
The Range Rover family (RR, Sport and Evoque + 1 other) will be the High-end, Luxury range.
The Discovery Family (Discovery, Freelander [now Discovery Sport] + 2 other) will be mid-range, aimed at families and similar
The Defender will be the Utility/ public service, rugged vehicle range, with three chassis lengths, four body variants and bare chassis available.

Land Rover Special Operations will still exist, doing bodies and variants for specialist customers.

Chris
Editor
Chris
May 12, 2015 2:47 pm
Chris
Editor
Chris
May 12, 2015 2:57 pm

barb – when I talked to JLR engineers about the future of military variants they suggested its not high on their priority list – exports of the existing range of softroaders are a) maxing out the production facilities and b) much better business. Reading between the lines it seemed that breaking in a military production batch would reduce cashflow; it would be done only for moral/patriotic/PR reasons?

monkey
monkey
May 12, 2015 6:14 pm

@Rocco
If the NZ forces have been down that route we could do worse than send a fact finding mission of 3 to ask the right questions , like what do you use them for 95% of the time and does it cope with the 5% ? And what was your decision process? ( always remembering brown paper envelopes may of been involved ) Most manufactures and non OEM suppliers for very popular brand models have a dozen plus year supply commitment to their customers and considering the mileage the average landie in British Armed service gets , I’d be shocked if it was greater than 20k a year , a dozen years fr a 15k core 2/4 seat cab with a 3l disel will be fine.Any coach work should add on cost will be common regardless of the base vehicles. The less electronic add ons the better so a ( very) base model as in on sold to someone in deepest Africa would be best as that is where it will get used :-)

Andrew B
Andrew B
May 12, 2015 7:26 pm

Quite a few body conversion specialists working on COTS 4×4.
East Midlands Ambulance are running a VW Amarok ambulance.
http://www.tamlans.fi/eng/content/download/1308/29057/tamlans-amarok-negea-en.pdf

A couple of other body builders doing some interesting conversions.
http://www.pickup-systems.com/emergency-services/
http://www.strongs.co.uk/sectors/pickup-tops/

Rocco
Rocco
May 12, 2015 7:52 pm

@monkey

No brown paper bags involved. Defence leveraged off an all-of-government vehicle contract. They pay the same rate as every other govt department. The reason it works is it is strictly COTS, and for non-deployable vehicles. Running between bases, range support work, etc. When the shift was made it meant the green fleet could be reduced by around 50%.

dukeofurl
dukeofurl
May 12, 2015 11:05 pm

The French are reported to be buying the Ford Ranger, an equivalent to Hilux, Triton etc.

Mark1603
Mark1603
May 13, 2015 5:58 am

Spent a lot of time in NZ, and a couple of weeks been driven round the training area in the Triton. Whilst good capability, they are merely used to go from A to B. No weapon mounts or cramming up. Wouldn’t match or replace Landrover in its various utility roles

Rocco
Rocco
May 13, 2015 6:39 am
Reply to  Mark1603

That’s right. All they do is free up money to be spent on core deployable capability and avoid wear and tear on the operational fleet. No sense in wearing out operational vehicles driving on highways and around range complexes.

shark bait
shark bait
May 13, 2015 7:10 am

Just wait for the new defender. It has to be bought from Britain!
On a side note, noticed how nice the prime minister’s car was the other day, maybe the MOD should get V8 jags!

Engineer Tom
Engineer Tom
May 13, 2015 9:50 am

@Mark1603
I very much doubt we will see a Landrover anywhere it needs a weapons mount anytime soon, they will instead turn up in an armoured beast in case anyone sues the Gov for not providing the right kit.

I think the B fleet needs to be broken down into the vehicles that may be deployed and those that never will be, and then start looking at multiple vehicle types for different roles. Remember any civilian spec vehicles that aren’t deployed need barely any support, an annual service/MOT and then day to day maintenance done by the driver, or a local motor pool. This could be an opportunity to reduce the size of the ‘military spec’ vehicle fleet, and hence the maintenance costs.

A column in the table above of how many of each vehicle type arm in the inventory would be helpful, as some of them are probably very small quantities.

Andrew B
Andrew B
May 13, 2015 10:04 am

Cant see JLR doing any Military spec version of the new Defender.

looks like they are aiming it at the profitable end of their business. A rugged hi spec version to compete with the G wagen which is suddenly very popular.
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/land-rover/defender/19933/new-land-rover-defender-plans-large-family-for-2018

I agree that we should keep the Hi spec armoured fleet for deployment and buy or lease a fleet of COTS vehicles as run abouts. Any one of the 4×4 pick ups would be ideal. Alas none are built in the UK.

Designing an evaluating a military special would be very expensive and time consuming.

Oviks have some interesting concepts. But we are going to need quite a few.

Andrew B
Andrew B
May 13, 2015 11:15 am
Reply to  shark bait

The PM had to have British even though the Armoured vehilces by the German brands are built from design stage to have an armoured version and give better head room and access.
The Public would have a field day is he had a Rolls or a Bentley.
Having sat in an Armoured Jag and an Armoured BMW I know what I would rather have the BMW hurts less to get in and out of!

Brian Black
Brian Black
May 13, 2015 1:04 pm

That was my ‘West Ham’ moment, Barbarossa. Meant Defender.

Only ever seen one British Army Disco in the black and olive drab scheme. Think it was a VIP taxi.

Slightly Agricultural
Slightly Agricultural
May 13, 2015 1:30 pm

@Rocco, Engineer Tom

Something that came up in the last Land Rover thread a lot. I certainly think there is a huge question mark over the actual NEED for a Lannie fleet. A lot of units I’ve seen prefer Ford Ranger/Hilux when they can get them for general admin stuff, as they are a lot easier to live with day-to-day. I’d argue that only deployable vehicles need to be NATO spec, and nobody has the appetite to have an unarmoured one of those any more…

What NZ has done looks like exactly the direction we should go, and looks like we may well be with “MRV-P” and the like.
http://www.defence-and-security.com/features/featureall-terrain-next-generation-armoured-vehicles-4286192/

monkey
monkey
May 13, 2015 2:56 pm

The link to Brigadier Ian Rigdens team has been listening to Chris when the Brigadier points out all vehicles have to be prop against or operate inspire of cyberattack or IT failure.
“”Future vehicles must be resilient and able to operate when digital IT systems cannot,” Rigden explains.”
This family of four types seems to shout out the need for some across the range commonality as has been espoused here so often ( same MTU engine range as in the Scout SV ? or from the MAN trucks we use ? ) but we shall see .

Frenchie
Frenchie
May 13, 2015 4:19 pm
Reply to  dukeofurl

The Ranger is not intended to operate in a war zone, they will be used on the national territory, it is not militarized civilian vehicles. Choice understandable, reliable, sturdy, readily available and cheap.
For military vehicles we will have to make a choice between the “Bastion High Mobility” from ACMAT and RTD “Sherpa Light” for heavy vehicles of special forces, with 200 vehicles to buy, while the “ALTV Torpedo” from ACMAT, for light vehicles of special forces, should be purchased to 240 units.

Chris
Editor
Chris
May 13, 2015 4:37 pm

monkey – which link to where? I’d like a read…

monkey
monkey
May 13, 2015 5:36 pm
Reply to  Chris


The link is at the bottom of Slightly Agriculturals post.
He seems to be quite switched on , maybe of a secret TD follower and fan ;-)

Deja vu
Deja vu
May 13, 2015 5:40 pm

I presume that the last Vauxhall Chevette is no longer in service. I heard a rumour that the MoD of the day ordered a hell of a lot at the end of the manufacturing run and kept them somewhere for issue as required.
Chevettes for RMP and MoDPlod but Range Rovers for RAF Police something wrong there.

Tried to add a photo it worked first time but I lost it when I edited the post (30) so I deleted it

monkey
monkey
May 13, 2015 5:42 pm

@TD
I use a Windows phone to keep up , just a heads up I cannot edit my posts and this thing has the weirdest intuitive texting, no grammatical sense at all , I type the word I want spelt correctly and it changes it for some nonsense word. :-(

Chris
Editor
Chris
May 13, 2015 5:45 pm

monkey – thanks for that. Its a shame that, while the various experts in the Army think along the same lines as I have, they don’t get off the fence and just buy some (a lot??) of my vehicles. Did I mention they are really very good? I might have done. All the complements and nodding references are welcome but they don’t help the funds much.

A Caribbean Perspective
A Caribbean Perspective
May 13, 2015 11:23 pm

Maybe we could take all those old Defenders and turn them into these:

Andrew B
Andrew B
May 14, 2015 9:49 am

Too late Supacat have already done it……
http://www.military-today.com/trucks/supacat_wildcat.htm

A Caribbean Perspective
A Caribbean Perspective
May 14, 2015 7:10 pm
Reply to  Andrew B

I should have guessed that they would. I see that their LRV400 is based on the Wildcat as well.

http://www.supacat.com/products/defence/lrv-400/

oldreem
May 29, 2015 7:52 pm

The Defender celebration tour at Solihull is well worth a visit for LR junkies, but heavily booked – see https://shop.landrover.co.uk/driving-experiences/bookings-overview/book-defender-celebration-tour-solihull
Only 7 robots – the rest is like a 1960s production line. (This is seeing the production, plus a 1948 line re-creation, not driving)