PDA

View Full Version : Timoney



Rhodes
13th January 2013, 11:01
US marines will put Irish troop carriers to the test


AN Irish-developed armour-ed vehicle has been selected for testing by the US Marine Corps which is seeking nearly 600 new armoured personnel carriers.

The 8X8 Terrex armoured vehicle was developed in Ireland by world leaders in vehicle and suspension design, Timoney Technology of Navan, for the Singapore Technologies Kinetics company.

One of the most modern armoured vehicles in production, it has exceptional mobility and agility using a Timoney suspension system.

The vehicle, which has a V shaped hull to protect against mine blasts, can carry up to 14 troops or 11 tonnes of cargo internally.

It underwent initial trials in Ireland and the UK before being shipped to Singapore for evaluation.

It is now produced there and the Singapore Army has bought 135 vehicles, while another version is produced in Turkey by Otokar.

The vehicle is one of four that has been selected by the US Marine Corps and manufacturers have been given $3.5m (€2.6m) each to deliver a vehicle for testing which will run until August 2013.

The marines need 579 personnel carriers to fill the gap left by another vehicle – the so-called expeditionary fighting vehicle – which was cancelled after $3bn (€2.25bn) was spent in developmental funding.

The contenders in the trials are Lockheed Martin with their Finnish Patria vehicle; Bae Systems with a 24-tonne Italian Superlav; General Dynamics; and Science Applications International Corp, a US-based company which is putting forward the Terrex vehicle.

Timoney Technology has vast experience in designing armoured vehicles and suspension systems.

One of its most successful has been the Bushmaster troop carrier, with hundreds produced in Australia by a licensee.

The vehicle has saved the lives of countless soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan as it was one of the first designed to withstand mine and improvised explosive device (IED) attacks.

Timoney, which designed and built armoured vehicles for the Irish Army in the Seventies, is also involved in developing the Crusher unmanned vehicle for the US military.

Last year, Singapore Technologies Engineering increased its shareholding in Timoney Holdings from 25pc to 27.4pc.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/us-marines-will-put-irish-troop-carriers-to-the-test-3350354.html

ias
14th June 2016, 23:36
Interesting article from Shepard today: https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/eurosatory-secret-behind-terrex/

Good to see Timoney is still building, even if only prototypes, in Navan.

na grohmiti
14th June 2016, 23:45
Hopefully they make a bid for the proposed APC replacement. It would be nice to have irish soldiers operating overseas from Irish designed APCs.

DeV
15th June 2016, 07:29
The MOWAGs may not necessarily be replaced

The real Jack
15th June 2016, 07:33
There's a good few companies that would be able to produce sub assemblies here if we wanted to, our religious following of EU tender rules kinda rules out any industrial offsets. Politicians seem to think that call centres and financial services companies are "industry" when they don't make a ****ing thing and can move to another tax haven at the drop of a hat.

DeV
15th June 2016, 12:47
There's a good few companies that would be able to produce sub assemblies here if we wanted to, our religious following of EU tender rules kinda rules out any industrial offsets.

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/docs/defence/guide-offsets_en.pdf

There could have been plenty of work from offsets into Irish based industry but unlike other EU countries Ireland never went down that road. Unfortunately when they did there was political interference and legal action resulted.


Politicians seem to think that call centres and financial services companies are "industry" when they don't make a ****ing thing and can move to another tax haven at the drop of a hat.

They are .... tertiary/service industry, the higher proportion the more developed your economy

trellheim
15th June 2016, 14:08
werent' the old ones a bag of ham .... the Piranha design is fairly std these days ?

GoneToTheCanner
15th June 2016, 17:47
they may have been shite but the design sold well enough; Behrmann built variations on the theme as the BDX. Timoney probably made more money on suspension design and sales than any from AFV sales.

EUFighter
15th June 2016, 17:52
I would love to see again Irish soldiers again in Irish design APC's. The Terrex has made it onto the final shortlist for the USMC contract and has a good chance to win. But it is not only there that Timoney have provided the design there is also the CM32 family of afv's built in Taiwan. The mobile gun variant would be a great replacement for the retired AML90's or?

EUFighter
15th June 2016, 17:59
Some détails on the often over-looked CM32 (especially its price)

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product2671.html

na grohmiti
15th June 2016, 18:10
The MOWAGs may not necessarily be replaced

If they are still in service as long as the Panhard APCs were I will be very disappointed.

Bravo20
15th June 2016, 18:30
At a Euro 1 million plus a mid-life upgrade per vehicle you can bet your ass they will be in service until they fall apart

trellheim
15th June 2016, 19:06
At a Euro 1 million plus a mid-life upgrade per vehicle you can bet your ass they will be in service until they fall apart Yep ...

DeV
15th June 2016, 19:23
Note WP15 doesn't say they will be replaced (necessarily)

na grohmiti
15th June 2016, 20:43
Is WP15 your new bible?
6.3

The current fleet of Armoured Personnel Carriers (APCs) and associated variants are essential for a broad range of operations. In order to ensure continued force protection, a study is currently underway to identify whether a life-extension programme, replacement programme or another alternative, is the most cost effective option..
Page 65

10.4.2

Equipment acquisition has had to be progressed over longer time frames than is desirable. This has required the prioritisation of equipment that is essential to maintaining ongoing operational outputs to the detriment of contingency requirements. There is a continued need to provide for essential equipment replacement as existing equipment reaches the end of its useful life. Not securing the funding to replace this essential equipment will result in key capabilities being eroded. This also has implications for force protection and the health and safety of personnel
Page 117

At the end of the Term of the recent White Paper, some of the Mowags will be older than the soldiers being carried within. The vehicles will also have spent a lot of time working in a high tempo overseas deployment.

apod
15th June 2016, 22:09
For those of you with IKON access the Armour board report is on there with all the options for the Mowag fleet outlined and costed.That report has been submitted to the general staff for consideration.
Letting the Mowags rot was NOT one of the options as funnily enough they are the cornerstone of our FP measures overseas.

DeV
15th June 2016, 23:47
Is WP15 your new bible?given how it more or less governs Defence policy..... Yes

If you had IKON you'd be able to see how it feeds in everything at the strategic and operational level (which also filters into the tactical level).

Eg the monthly battle rhythm draws a lot from it.


At the end of the Term of the recent White Paper, some of the Mowags will be older than the soldiers being carried within. The vehicles will also have spent a lot of time working in a high tempo overseas deployment.
Did you read the last sentence of your first quote?



Letting the Mowags rot was NOT one of the options as funnily enough they are the cornerstone of our FP measures overseas.

I assume you mean as is without any LEP?

GoneToTheCanner
15th June 2016, 23:53
some of the Mowags will be older than the troops carried within? So what? The DF has always fielded equipment on the basis that it will stay in service for at least thirty years; 1944 25-pdrs? 1963 Alouettes? The Fougas were already old when we got them. The Cessnas are 40 years old. The Mowags are capital equipment and will be kept on until you can see thru the hulls.

ODIN
16th June 2016, 01:12
some of the Mowags will be older than the troops carried within? So what?

Given the places that the Mowags are sent, and the abuse they get I think it is important. The purpose is to protect the young men and women who travel inside them. If, or when they are no longer able to do this job they should be replaced.

The Terrex looks like a nice car...similar dimensions, but a lot heavier (extra armor perhaps?), and allows for up to 12 troops. Also, it's a modular design, which would give an element of future proofing and allow for future customization and upgrades.

na grohmiti
16th June 2016, 09:31
some of the Mowags will be older than the troops carried within? So what? The DF has always fielded equipment on the basis that it will stay in service for at least thirty years; 1944 25-pdrs? 1963 Alouettes? The Fougas were already old when we got them. The Cessnas are 40 years old. The Mowags are capital equipment and will be kept on until you can see thru the hulls.

Having obsolete junk should never be acceptable policy, even if it was done in the past.

apod
16th June 2016, 10:14
"See through the hulls"LOL
Read the report.Not likely.

GoneToTheCanner
16th June 2016, 10:35
It has always been the case that equipment will be kept in service as long as possible and that is still the case. Mowags and LTAVs will be kept on, because the DF operates at the whim of the Dept of Finance. When you have kit that can be overhauled ad infinitum, such as aircraft, then they will be kept on. Plenty of airlines operate 25, 30 year old aircraft. Plenty of Militaries keep old stuff going because, like Bedford trucks, they cannot be killed, can easily be fixed and spares are plentiful. For example, I'd rather they got rid of the Scorpions or actually made the decision to do so and replaced them with a 90mm Mowag. In terms of obsolencence, the Df has to be as aware as everyone else is about the rate at which electronics go out of date.

EUFighter
17th June 2016, 20:29
Actually modern Airlines get rid of their planes when they are more than 10years old as the maintenance becomes too much. Check the average age of Ryanair's fleet. What was acceptable in the 1900's should not be the way we manage of AFV fleet.
Let order a load of Terrex IPV'S and a few with a nice 105mm pointy thing as replacement for the retired AML90's.

hptmurphy
18th June 2016, 16:20
Check the average age of Ryanair's fleet

Ryanair are actually the biggest trader of second hand 737s. They have block booked so man options on 737s into the future people come to Ryanair rather than Boeing to buy 737s.

Age is nothing in Aeroplanes, 'cycles' being the key, how landings they have performed. An operator like Ryanair would have a huge amount of cycles per aircraft and so don't hold onto them all that long to ensure they hold value.

Jetjock
18th June 2016, 22:41
Ryanair are actually the biggest trader of second hand 737s. They have block booked so man options on 737s into the future people come to Ryanair rather than Boeing to buy 737s.

Age is nothing in Aeroplanes, 'cycles' being the key, how landings they have performed. An operator like Ryanair would have a huge amount of cycles per aircraft and so don't hold onto them all that long to ensure they hold value.

That once was the case alright. Been a bit of a change in thinking of late. The oldest 737-800 fleet is coming up on 14 years in service and hull turnover is low at the minute. Some newer birds have left the fleet over the years to add to the confusion.

https://m.planespotters.net/airline/Ryanair

northie
19th June 2016, 10:42
Exactly. Look at the likes of the M113 that the Danes have just decided to replace with more 300 MOWAG Piranhas at the end of last year (they've brought the Piranha V by the way) or the FV432's that are still clinging on to service in the uk as "Bulldog".

I'd love to serve in a DF that has a new fleet of Terrex or CM32 a likes built in Ireland (wallace, daly etc would have breakdown) but that won't be happening anytime soon if additional life can be found in the MOWAG fleet.

EUFighter
20th June 2016, 17:30
If we do not want to go for a full APC but something a little lighter there is always the other great selling Timoney design the Thales Bushmaster IMV of Australia. Good for peacekeeing in auster hot places such as Chad or Mali.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/defence/bushmaster

DeV
20th June 2016, 18:24
If we do not want to go for a full APC but something a little lighter there is always the other great selling Timoney design the Thales Bushmaster IMV of Australia. Good for peacekeeing in auster hot places such as Chad or Mali.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/defence/bushmaster

It is a full APC

The real Jack
20th June 2016, 18:46
If we do not want to go for a full APC but something a little lighter there is always the other great selling Timoney design the Thales Bushmaster IMV of Australia. Good for peacekeeing in auster hot places such as Chad or Mali.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/defence/bushmaster

The bushmaster weighs more than a mowag...it's a quasi MRAP....

apc
21st June 2016, 00:51
The bushmaster weighs more than a mowag...it's a quasi MRAP....

Bushmaster 12400 kg Piranha 3 18000kg

DeV
4th January 2018, 17:08
http://euscreen.eu/item.html?id=EUS_F6E291D124D248D1B146778D551C5D62

Orion
4th January 2018, 17:41
Given that was '82 wonder what their workshops look like now - great shame they don't produce vehicles for Defence Forces

Flamingo
5th January 2018, 08:34
What were their APC's like in service? Are they still used for anything?

DeV
5th January 2018, 10:07
What were their APC's like in service? Are they still used for anything?

I only heard good things (although being 4x4 I think they had limited mobility off-road (open to correction)).

There used to be at least 1 in the National Transport Museum, 1 I think is still serviceable in the Cav Sch (as a museum type piece).

At least some were used for target practice in the Glen.

morpheus
5th January 2018, 10:33
Timoney Drive Systems At Heart of Yugoimports Lazar 8 X 8

http://armscom.net/news/timoney_drive_systems_at_heart_of_yugoimports_laza r_8_x_8

hptmurphy
5th January 2018, 12:53
I only heard good things (although being 4x4 I think they had limited mobility off-road (open to correction)).

You only ever spoke to people who never used them then!

In fairness there was a mixed response as each of the marks that entered service had their problems from being under powered to being plagued with mechanical problems due to being short run vehicles with attempts to cross engines and gear boxes in the different marks, by the end of service in the 1990s my last run in with one was in 1996, they were on their last legs.

Over engineered and under developed , had the production runs been longer the issues would have probably been ironed out. They were an attempt to move into the 1980s as opposed to the M3s which were a 1960s car.

there were comfortable to drive I believe, good crew conditions and the license built versions overseas with Belgium the BDX was a good car. The later progressions like the Valkyrie again suffered lack of investment and gain if the army had gone into the level of partner ship we did with Panhard or even Mowag there could have been a different result.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-53-TqhvDqko/TC3fwlhzITI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/TORuKGmpJYA/P7160002.JPG

Two in the Curragh, a Mk 5 and a Mk 6, the prototype hull was in Coolmoney for years until some one cut it up after it had been used as a hard target, sad loss. Transport Museum in Howth has one on display and I think one in reserve.

Timoney actually built an armoured car for Tanzania that went into service and was comparable with the AML 90.

The Timoney with the AML turret featured was a trial and worked quite well but the turret took up so much space internally the vehicle was no longer an APC....and performance was comparable with the AML 90 so no need for change.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/13/a0/80/13a080e1f2ffefe1b9bf23b62c22a59d.jpg

sofa
5th January 2018, 20:52
One also in National Museum Collins Barracks Dublin.

I think their Fire tender (Aer Corps)had on going problems with steering

northie
7th January 2018, 21:27
Given that was '82 wonder what their workshops look like now - great shame they don't produce vehicles for Defence Forces


https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/eurosatory-secret-behind-terrex/

They built the Terrex 3 prototypes in Ireland.

na grohmiti
7th January 2018, 23:14
Given that was '82 wonder what their workshops look like now - great shame they don't produce vehicles for Defence Forces

They have to go through the tender process like everyone else. Their offering did not make the final grade when the Mowag was in the running against the Pandur. It was still at prototype stage, while the P3 and pandur were in full production and in use with other armies.
I'm sure if the competition was run in the morning things would be different. However the fact is Timoney is not capable of the large scale production General Dynamics European Land combat systems can achieve in either their Mowag, Pandur or Santa Barbára manufacturing facilities.

P.S. @Northie, Paywall at that site.

sofa
8th January 2018, 00:06
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/eurosatory-secret-behind-terrex/

They built the Terrex 3 prototypes in Ireland.

Also sent over I belive a Bushmaster in mild steel to the Australians

EUFighter
8th January 2018, 18:18
Also sent over I belive a Bushmaster in mild steel to the Australians

Is pretty common for prototypes that do not have to be put through ballistic tests, and the Aussies and others seem to have liked the Bushmaster as they have built over 1000 and there is even a new version being built in Indonesia: Sanca MRAP.

Also they are the go-to company for 8x8 design, CM32, Terrex, Lazar................, do the design and then rake in the royalties. Also they have a major co-operation with Rheinmetall makers of the HX/SX trucks, Boxer, Lynx.........

It still would be great if we did have some kit made by them and I would hope that through PESCO they could get on the next generation of vehicles.

Jetjock
9th January 2018, 00:00
While the rest of the world unashamedly buys or manufactures locally, every Irish government has of yet failed to see the value in supporting local industry with local manufacturing or basic industrial offsets.

However you would suspect that had the Terrex been an in existence when a Mowag and a Pandur were facing off in the Curragh, there may have been a different outcome. The Bushmaster, fine niche vehicle that it is just didn't meet the specs. It was probably the first Irish military acquisition process where the tender specs were exceeded. ( 8x8 vs the tender specified 6x6)

expat01
9th January 2018, 05:41
Given the state of Irish industry in the 1970s and ‘80s (trade unions, I’m looking at you) it was, I say reluctantly, a smart play to buy foreign. It might have been possible if government had declared, say, VCD and Timoney to be strategic industries, taken a large share and curbed union rights. In fact, between the 1930s and 1990s it would have made security sense for the state to invest and maintain a limited domestic arms industry - an ammunition factory, capacity to license build small arms - as well as vehicles and vessels. However it would only have been practical if the domestic market for these could provide a cradle for foreign sales and partnership growth. Government support through partnership, control and purchases would have been essential in every case.
The navy never got enough ships, the army never got enough vehicles and the ban on civilian firearm ownership meant you’d be making rounds to sell to yourself. The imagination, the money and the will to develop an arms industry never existed.

morpheus
9th January 2018, 10:27
The other side of it is, that yes they design vehicles, but I somehow feel that to ramp up a production plant in ireland for producing mil spec mine protected vehicles (i.e. heavy industry) would just end in disaster in this country. We just dont seem capable of managing heavy industry on any scale.

GoneToTheCanner
9th January 2018, 11:23
expat01 has it right; the environment was impossible at the time; look at all the large and small firms that have had to close in Ireland because manufacturing here was too expensive per unit/unions were strike-happy/workforce unruly. Some of the bigger firms only survive because of Govt subsidy or because the workforce has learned that agitation will drive the company abroad. Look at Combilift, makers of the Moffett Mounty forklift in Monaghan. It exists now because it has been sold to people with more money to invest but at least it is still in Ireland, when it could easily be across the border and be lauded as a "British" product. If you wanted Timoney to survive and operate here as a military vehicle builder, you'd have to have a compliant workforce, a union that won't agitate for the kind of useless shite that broke firms in the 70s and some kind of a home market (DF, fire services, heavy vehicles for special use).

ropebag
9th January 2018, 12:41
you'd need a home market that had a more or less continuous requirement for vehicles with a steady - every 10 years or so - new model requirement. you'd also need a government and body politic that wasn't overy fussy about who the manufacturer could sell to and provide ongoing support to.

neither of these two conditions are going to be met by any Irish political class that has existed in the last 100 years or is likely to exist in the next 100 years.

hptmurphy
9th January 2018, 13:03
Really a chicken and egg situation as they built enough cars at home to attract an overseas order that built 100 BDX vehicles for Belguim.

Timoney was more of a research facility than mass production and stayed in the development of low production vehicles namely Airport Fire tenders rather than taking on the likes of Mowag or BAE in the construction of what was a very limited capacity APC. The range of prototypes after the initial models were never really picked up on by major manufactures although the Valkyrie was developed along with Vickers in the UK never went into production.

They never had the capacity for large scale production and 99% of vehicles imported into this country at the time were in kit form. Without having ready overseas market I'm not sure did Timoney want to go out on a limb, especially in Ireland.

Bushmaster, 1000 vehicle success story is not a pure Timoney product and is a result of a partnership for a very specific vehicle.

I think they only still exist in their current format because of the mistakes they didn't make as alluded to above.

expat01
9th January 2018, 13:56
The army selected the Landsverk tank in the 1930s explicitly with a view to having it built in Ireland. The government's argument was that no Irish manufacturer was interested in building it. Probably because they were quietly told there might be a requirement for 7 or 8 tops.
Not even making bullets is mad. The potential civilian market alone could have justified a small facility, I know a shooting club of 20 guys that gets through 100k rounds of 9mm a year by themselves.
There is something odd about this state's attitude to things weapony.

DeV
9th January 2018, 18:52
If we wanted an indigenous defence industry it has to export and/or minimum quadruple the size of the DF.

If it armoured vehicles you need to be building minimum 10s of vehicles every year.

If it rounds, it’s probably in minimum the tens of millions.

It has to at least equal the quality and cost of the foreign competition.

Flamingo
9th January 2018, 19:18
Quite how much range time does everybody want to put in? :-D

na grohmiti
9th January 2018, 19:40
If I remember correctly, Timoney ended up getting Bombardier (Then building Busses), in shannon to do much of their mass production. Then Bombardier pulled out of Ireland.
Ireland with notable exceptions (Liebherr in Killarney) just don't grasp the importance of high quality engineering, be it vehicles or plant. It is a skilled trade but nobody is being trained here for it any more.

expat01
9th January 2018, 21:19
If we wanted an indigenous defence industry it has to export and/or minimum quadruple the size of the DF.

If it armoured vehicles you need to be building minimum 10s of vehicles every year.

If it rounds, it’s probably in minimum the tens of millions.

It has to at least equal the quality and cost of the foreign competition.

For quantity of vehicles, yup. Which is precisely why arms companies often need government investment until they have a reputation and market. If you’re not willing to lose money for five to ten years you haven’t the vision to be in the game in the first place. Anyway, too late, ship sailed.

For quality, I don’t fully agree. The world’s militaries are full of equipment made by the lowest bidder, politically acceptable bidder, domestic bidder etc. with quality an afterthought so long as it doesn’t fall apart immediately. However if by quality you mean “good enough” and you can match that with “cheap enough” you might have a chance in markets that can’t afford shiny and don’t want Soviet.

For ammunition - no civilian market in Ireland is the killer, I did say it made most sense when we had no friends and only got Britain’s leftovers.
But I could set up a factory in my garage producing 40,000 rounds per day for a capital outlay of less than 20,000 euro and employing 5 people. That’s with 5 presses meant for home use. If it’s 9mm I would have to sell them at 30 cents each to make a profit, more for rifle ammo. But that’s what some guys have done here. There are about 15 large and small ammunition producers I know of in SA. Some of them export too. You don’t need tens of millions of rounds to make it worthwhile.
But you do need more than one customer. Hence the civilian market.
I only shoot a paltry 3000 or so rounds per year and most are like me. But any serious team or competition shooter I know shoots 3000 - 5000 rounds per month. I can find 30 of those any given weekend.

DeV
10th January 2018, 07:34
When I say quality I mean a quality design and product which is able to meet or exceed our needs in line with alternatives (eg STANAG levels, ISO standards). They would need to be comparable to say MOWAG or FN.

No you need a market full stop. Not sure what issues changing tooling for different calibres would cause or for example making ball, AP, tracer etc.

To give you an idea of the market we are looking at:
- generally the DF contracts last about 3 years at a time
- the DF hasn’t issued a tender for any small arms (they have issued 2 for 5.56mm blank) in the last 10 years

expat01
10th January 2018, 12:25
When I say quality I mean a quality design and product which is able to meet or exceed our needs in line with alternatives (eg STANAG levels, ISO standards). They would need to be comparable to say MOWAG or FN.

No you need a market full stop. Not sure what issues changing tooling for different calibres would cause or for example making ball, AP, tracer etc.

To give you an idea of the market we are looking at:
- generally the DF contracts last about 3 years at a time
- the DF hasn’t issued a tender for any small arms (they have issued 2 for 5.56mm blank) in the last 10 years

Gotcha.

Don't know for commercial machines, but on the press I use (manual) the tool head contains all the dies for the calibre I'm loading and I can just swap out the entire tool head to change from, e.g. 9mm to 5.56 in a couple of minutes. The assembly of the round is really independent of the bullet - ball, tracer, AP. You just size and prime the case, load the required measure of whatever propellant your using for the weight and type of bullet you want, stick the bullet on top and crimp. The hard work is figuring out the load in the first place.
It's not that we should make it now, it's just amazing that we never did make something so easy to manufacture when it made sense and we had a market. If we weren't going to do that, what odds for Timoney?

hptmurphy
10th January 2018, 13:17
Problem with Timoney being they were really a one trick pony, They built piecemeal singular unique firetenders and one small batch of APCs.

Multiple products with solid numbers in the hundreds per anum need to stay afloat at a certain level, but you can always piddle around in the shallow end of the pool in R&D and a few prototypes and still make a nice few quid without too much risk and investment

paul g
10th January 2018, 13:29
The army selected the Landsverk tank in the 1930s explicitly with a view to having it built in Ireland. The government's argument was that no Irish manufacturer was interested in building it. Probably because they were quietly told there might be a requirement for 7 or 8 tops.
Not even making bullets is mad. The potential civilian market alone could have justified a small facility, I know a shooting club of 20 guys that gets through 100k rounds of 9mm a year by themselves.
There is something odd about this state's attitude to things weapony.
There was a plan in the 1930s to build a munitions factory in clare in conjunction with ici. Duggans history of Irish army had details

I believe the plan was to build the landsverk in Dundalk or drogheda in the railway engineering works.

pym
30th January 2018, 23:31
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qPdWrYla-5k" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

IAV 2018: TIMONEY Products and Markets

GoneToTheCanner
7th February 2018, 12:29
There were quite a few ammunition factories in Ireland supplying the Empire; Kynoch had a plant in that triangular building beside Heuston Station, making .303 rounds and there were more around Ireland (most of the large cities and towns made ordnance of all kinds for the British, ie, canvas belt order, harnesses for men and animals, leather belts, straps, bridles, rucksacks, bags, uniforms, rifle slings, clothing and making propellant and shell cases, none of which would be beyond the Ireland of 1920, let alone today's Ireland. In fact, it came as a surprise to me that the rebels in the Rising had IEDs, improvised hand grenades designed and built by college students. In addition, there were plans for the mass production of land mines by Thompsons of Carlow and other engineering shops for the Emergency.......the most ironic thing about ammunition production in Ireland was that private reloading was never banned in the North during the Troubles, whereas it is banned or very heavily restricted here. same applied to Class F weapons........there is no good reason why Ireland could not manufacture all sorts of military goods, except people like AFri will be on your case if you do.

hptmurphy
7th February 2018, 12:48
There were quite a few ammunition factories in Ireland supplying the Empire; Kynoch had a plant in that triangular building beside Heuston Station, making .303 rounds and there were more around Ireland (most of the large cities and towns made ordnance of all kinds for the British, ie, canvas belt order, harnesses for men and animals, leather belts, straps, bridles, rucksacks, bags, uniforms, rifle slings, clothing and making propellant and shell cases, none of which would be beyond the Ireland of 1920, let alone today's Ireland. In fact, it came as a surprise to me that the rebels in the Rising had IEDs, improvised hand grenades designed and built by college students. In addition, there were plans for the mass production of land mines by Thompsons of Carlow and other engineering shops for the Emergency.......the most ironic thing about ammunition production in Ireland was that private reloading was never banned in the North during the Troubles, whereas it is banned or very heavily restricted here. same applied to Class F weapons........there is no good reason why Ireland could not manufacture all sorts of military goods, except people like AFri will be on your case if you do.

In times of conflict there is a very lucrative market for all sorts of consumables and local artisans and craft workers were often able to alter their production to make equipment for armies, In Waterford for instance the local foundry produced artillery shells for the British Army, stocks of which were probably expended during the civil war given the calibres on offer.

Thompsons of Carlow are that one company that was really divergent ,given they started with carts and ended up with Armoured Cars with Naval Mines also on their inventory.

Given the local military would not suffice to be your bigger customer to consume your product of say ammunition and competition against the likes of Belguim, Israell and Pakistan ammunition production would need to be of a very specialist natures, say high end quality as opposed to the standard ball crap we normally buy.

Try putting some Swedish or Finish Match grade ammo through a steyer and see the difference.. but I digress.

Uniforms , boots and webbing , the trends have changed and Ireland should be able to compete if the product is good enough but is the risk trying to break into a al ready highly subscribed market to high?

Protac had some good product but seemed to lack support, Irish begrudgery perhaps?

DeV
21st March 2018, 10:59
https://twitter.com/DF_COS/status/976085770514698240?s=20

COS visits Timoney and seems at least one member of RDF was involved

Rhodes
2nd February 2019, 16:38
<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uCaRASNPr1Q" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>..