Thanks Thanks:  119
Likes Likes:  297
Dislikes Dislikes:  6
Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 439
  1. #51
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    off we go to Holland, to pick up a surplus G wagon....

  2. #52
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    they don't make pinzgauer anymore. its out of production, and the british are planning its replacement

    look at the dutch, they've opted for the VW amarok commercial vehicle slightly modiffied to replace their g WAGONS.

    http://www.janes.com/article/31556/d...pts-for-amarok
    200,000 km? don't make me laugh.............

  3. #53
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by northie View Post
    200,000 km? don't make me laugh.............
    I would imagine that that is the limit, ie if they reach that milage in the 10 years they will be taken out of service

  4. #54
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    I would imagine that that is the limit, ie if they reach that milage in the 10 years they will be taken out of service
    Certain DF units have vehicles reach that in half the projected service life of these dutch vehicles!

  5. #55
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    But others wouldn't hence rotation could be a good idea

  6. #56
    Private 3* Jungle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,523
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by madmark View Post
    g-wagon range would be a good fit for the defence forces with the 4x4 and 6x6

    http://www.mb-military-vehicles.com/...ilitary_en.pdf
    The one on the cover page is the Canadian version. We've had them for about ten years now, they're good vehicles.
    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

    Never give up!!"

  7. #57
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    They use them to recce the route of the Dakar Rally. This used to be a Pajero only job.

  8. #58
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    120 thousand miles on a Merc engine? easy. i'd have one in a heartbeat.

  9. #59
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    IMG_1054.jpg
    Quote Originally Posted by Saab View Post

    Interesting about the g-wagon.
    If you read the spec sheet.
    It has a narrower track, shorter wheel base, lower ground clearance and similar cab width to the Pajero.
    Aren't they all the things people complain about?
    So how exactly does that make it better?
    Lower ground clearance when fitted with factory tyres, put BFG 265/70/16 on em like the Canadians and Australians do and you have massive ground clearance. Not only that but huge approach and departure angles. The Mitsubishi is shaped like a rugby ball, curves inwards, the G Wagon looks like a brick, straight walls. Straight walls = more internal space. Rugby ball = less internal space. Not science just a fact. The Mitsubishi is a civilian vehicle full of civilian shite designed to take hubby wife 3 kids the dogs and a weekends worth of holiday luggage. The G Wagon (in question) was designed from the ground up for military users, all the crap ripped out of it to ensure 4 fully equipped bods cann sit in it in safety and comfort (the station wagon version) and with plenty of room for all the military shite in the back.1280px-Mercedes-Benz_G-Class_of_the_Canadian_Land_Forces.JPG
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  10. #60
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Canadian 9.jpg

    Smaller than the Mitsubishi?
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  11. #61
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  12. #62
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,149
    Post Thanks / Like
    How about THIS for an advertisement for the G-Wagen ?
    From what I can recall, the damage was due to an IED
    As displayed in the Bundeswehr museum in Dreseden, Germany
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  13. #63
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Truck Driver View Post
    How about THIS for an advertisement for the G-Wagen ?
    From what I can recall, the damage was due to an IED
    As displayed in the Bundeswehr museum in Dreseden, Germany
    Outstanding! Bet they drove it all the way home as well, German engineering at its best.
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  14. Likes Truck Driver liked this post
  15. #64
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  16. #65
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    FMP,
    You are right is much of what you say, transport procurement is baffling!

    Every 5 years or so the DF seems to enter a new contract for a light 4x4 to be delivered over 3 years. Just decide what specs are required, do extremely intensive trials over an extended period and enter a purchasing (and full life support) contract for around 15 years (if one is boarded in that time we replace with the same). It must be COTS, ideally MOTS, we can't afford (and the risk is too high) to be a launch customer doing our own R&D etc.

    We currently have a situation where there are at least 2 makes, at least 4 models, all with different training, spares etc.

    What do we need the vehicle to do? Utility, runabout, CP, ATCP, crew served wpns carrier (in trailer), 120 prime mover etc. But what roles could it take over? Staff car, OP, wpns mounted vehicle (eg A/T Plns, ARW etc), light panel van (replace the connect), ambulance (replace the LR), large panel van (replace the transit). You would need to do a cost benefit on some of these, eg a transit may be a lot cheaper.

    The problem is the bulk of the time will be spent on Irish roads (but maybe with a more capable vehicle that would change). We need a light 4x4 GS/FFR that is robust, spacious (comfort/stores), good on-road and off-road, hard top, air con (comfort and overseas), NATO trailer hitch & lighting system, able to carry at least 4/5 troops with light/heavy scales, 24V power, aerial & radio mounts. What options do we want to include? Soft top, small and large panel van, weapons mounts, ambulance, crew cab etc etc.
    DeV

    Great chatting mate. Good to see there are like minded people all on the same page on this site. You have hit the nail on the head in many (all) areas. MOTS is the way forward, and a single platform which can fulfill all the roles mentioned does exist. Its on my attachment that refuses to work lol. It was a rather glossy handout from the Australian DoD detailing the various roles and variations of their new light vehicle. The G Wagon. I have posted pics of them further down the topic and some Canadian and German variants. Pretty pictures to look at but they do highlight the issue in question, it can be done. All the roles in your post and mine are covered with the exception of the soft top. An amazing amount of thought has been put into their contract with MB and the result has been a fantastic vehicle that will serve for years and have the support services from MB to back it up. It has been the result of years of experience with Landrover and their adaptations to it. But mostly listening to the people that have had to use them. Bod's on the ground.

    More importantly, in relation to the DF's case, someone else has done all the R & D, "well done digger I'll take 600".

    Interesting you should mention the transit. Why not? I mean it, why not look at the home role of the DF within the state. They come in 4 x 4 (with raised suspension on these models) and they would be quiet capable of fulfilling the majority of the roles mentioned. There will always be some role that a particular vehicle may not be suited for but, quickly running through them in my head, the old transit,,,,,,your not a million miles away from what could in fact be the answer to the problem.

    First as you rightly said, someone somewhere needs to sit down and decide "this is the road we must travel (no pun intended) a decision has been made and this is it lock stock and barrel for the next 15 to 20 years". Across the entire fleet, modified to suit and for the best part future and soldier proof.

    I would like to think that it will get sorted in my lifetime, that only gives them a few years lol. No not really, at least i hope not. There needs to be some major changes in mindset and pressure from the DF put on the purse string holders to make them realize what currently happens is false economy. While the initial unit cost of the G Wagon (for example) would be high, the lifetime (20 years in contract) costs would be drastically reduced (not re tendering every 5 years). That is good business since. MB are going nowhere so its also a safe bet.

    There are plenty of docs and photos out there on the Aus Wagon (did i just coin a phrase there). Its worth the effort to track it all down. Just to look and nod and say to yourself "hmmmm they got that right".

    Cheers DeV.
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  17. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  18. #66
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like

    Are any of these actually working, the attachments I mean.

    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  19. #67
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Try again
    Attached Files Attached Files
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  20. Likes DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  21. #68
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Unfortunately what is preventing it is money. It could be phased in but it would probably take 5+ years after the signing of the contract

  22. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  23. #69
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,186
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Unfortunately what is preventing it is money. It could be phased in but it would probably take 5+ years after the signing of the contract
    That's the idea about doing a multi year multi unit contract, they could buy a few a year as attritional replacements until the fleet was standardised. I doubt the dod and df could arrange and justify such a contract.
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  24. #70
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    True. It should dramatically reduce the cost of maintenance over time, so long as there isn't a huge difference in purchase price.

    They have started to improve public procurement (eg departments working together on joint contracts).

    DoD's problem could be they are afraid of getting burnt

  25. #71
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Another option could be to piggy back on some else's order as part of EDA pooling and sharing

  26. Likes Truck Driver liked this post
  27. #72
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just looked out the tender that the Pajero won, it was for up to 320 vehicles to be delivered over 4 years (60-80 annually), don't think it included spares etc.

    To put into context there are still Nissan Patrols (at least 2 models around) in service. Last month, the DFR had a total of 1,524 vehicles (all types).

  28. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
  29. #73
    Friend Saab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    538
    Post Thanks / Like
    If you read the spec for both the 09 Pajero and the g-wagon you see the g-wagon's external dimension is smaller.
    If you can put bigger tyres on the g-wagon then you can for the same to the pajero.

    Just because the Canadians put a machine gun on the roof doesn't make it bigger.

    There is nothing stopping the DF doing that to a Pajero other than it would then be totally unsuitable for most of what it is currently used for.
    I don't think Jonnie Sun reader would be too happy with one of those on the M50.

    Our problem is we can't afford to have such dedicated vehicles.
    How long would it take to convert that g-wagon into a gs vehicle?

    The other variants shown in the poster would be great as replacements for the transits.
    But that has nothing to do with the pajero
    Last edited by Saab; 28th May 2014 at 16:48.

  30. #74
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    If we had the G-Wagon (or similar):

    The station wagon would be the GS/FFR (it already has 24V. power so the manufacturer doesn't have to do a costly line change), it potentially means the FFRs and GSs are interchangable (another huge plus).

    Recce pln wants to do a screen? Theres 5 GSs outside, take 5 GPMGs out of stores and mount them.

    Replace a number of chassis with 1/2 and you have huge life cycle cost savings

  31. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  32. #75
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Saab View Post
    If you read the spec for both the 09 Pajero and the g-wagon you see the g-wagon's external dimension is smaller.
    If you can put bigger tyres on the g-wagon then you can for the same to the pajero.

    Just because the Canadians put a machine gun on the roof doesn't make it bigger.

    There is nothing stopping the DF doing that to a Pajero other than it would then be totally unsuitable for most of what it is currently used for.
    I don't think Jonnie Sun reader would be too happy with one of those on the M50.

    Our problem is we can't afford to have such dedicated vehicles.
    How long would it take to convert that g-wagon into a gs vehicle?

    The other variants shown in the poster would be great as replacements for the transits.
    But that has nothing to do with the pajero
    Saab. Mate I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall here. The purpose of the pic with the 58 was not for the 58 it was for the two bods to help give you something to put the shape and size into perspective. Its the rugby ball shaped vehicle / brick shaped vehicle theory. Ignore the 58 its irrelevant. I am not in any disagreement with you in relation to spec sheet measurements. Taken at its widest points the Mitsubishi is the larger of the too vehicles. No doubt about it. Its the shape of the bloody thing that causes it to be cramped and small. After all is it not the internal space that is the point here? That's where people have to sit, where radios etc have to be fitted. Four lumberjacks in body armour, battle vests, helmets and weapons can fit comfortably in that vehicle (Or diggers if you look at the Aus Vic). There's only four single seats in it. Do you in the DF have the requirement to fit more in the Mitsubishi looking at the roles its involved in? If you do then it really is the wrong vehicle for you and the question needs to be asked how the bloody hell did it get chosen in the first place?

    To say the Aus G Wagon depicted in the poster "has nothing to do with the Pajero" has left me baffled. Bottom row, second vehicle from the right. Truck Lightweight, Station Wagon 4 x 4, four door (plus double rear doors) sounds like the Pajero to me. Only better. Why? Because the Aus DoD poster shows the same baseline vehicle being used in numerous roles. The SRV, The Ambulance, The Panel Van, The 6 x 6 and 4 x 4 Cargo. The 6 x 6 Twin cab. Imagine the amount of vehicles that one make could replace in the DF in so many roles. I know you said we could not afford it. Saab the reality is procurement the way it currently works costs us more in the long run. How long have the Pajero's been in service? This penny packet purchasing of all makes and models of vehicles in the DF has cost a fortune because so many times it's proven that the vehicle bought is not anywhere near suitable even for the most mundane tasks and needs replacing. Or just sidelined into a role it was never intended for. Goes back to one of my questions in an earlier post, "which came first, the vehicle or the role"?

    Taking a risk on a company like MB is not a risk, they will be around for years. Taking a risk on a vehicle prepared by MB to military spec's for an existing customer is not a risk, when the correct service & support is included in the contract. The Aus DOD has done all the R & D, paid for the production line start up on a Mil Spec Vic and have a 20 year contract in parts replacement.

    I am in no way saying the DF do the same, they definitely cant afford that. But the reality is mate they cant afford not to go down the MOTS road in selection of their light vehicles (as well as their 4 ton range etc.). Proven and in use by very experienced Armed Forces. Multi tasking, that is the nature of all Armed Forces, but first and foremost they must be equipped to carry out their primary role. Doing so with civilian vehicles (the Aus and Canadian G's are so far removed from their civilian counterparts they may as well be totally different vehicles) and then expecting them to preform in a military environment is is a disaster, its costly and you will never get that happy medium. Because that is what it is, finding a happy medium. One vehicle that can perform many tasks to an acceptable standard with a long service life.

    I could go on but duty calls . Good to talk mate.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  33. Thanks madmark, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes madmark, DeV liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •