Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pajero Replacement?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 1.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	57.5 KB
ID:	697687Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 2.jpg
Views:	3
Size:	59.0 KB
ID:	697688Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus SRV 2.jpg
Views:	3
Size:	73.1 KB
ID:	697689Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 6.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	53.2 KB
ID:	697690Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 1a.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	70.6 KB
ID:	697691
    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.

    Comment


    • #62
      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 Files
      "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)!"

      Comment


      • #63
        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.

        Comment


        • #64
          A few more variations on the G.










          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.

          Comment


          • #65
            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.

            Comment


            • #66
              Are any of these actually working, the attachments I mean.

              Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 7.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	61.9 KB
ID:	697693

              Click image for larger version

Name:	Aus 5.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	77.8 KB
ID:	697694

              Click image for larger version

Name:	Canadian 4.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	116.3 KB
ID:	697695

              Click image for larger version

Name:	French Version.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	66.8 KB
ID:	697696

              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.

              Comment


              • #67
                Try again
                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.

                Comment


                • #68
                  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

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Another option could be to piggy back on some else's order as part of EDA pooling and sharing

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          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).

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            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; 28 May 2014, 17:48.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              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

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                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 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.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X