Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MOWAG problems

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

  • MOWAG problems

    Todays Sunday Times. It seems the worst kept secret in the Army is entering the public spotlight

    Irish army vehicles suffering multiple faults
    A fleet of 80 armoured personnel carriers has been hit by a series of problems, including wheels that fall off

    Mowag armoured personnel carrier
    Richard Oakley
    A FLEET of 80 armoured personnel carriers bought by the Irish army at a total cost of €120m has suffered a series of problems including multiple cracks, faulty transmissions, failing speedometers and wheels that simply fall off.
    Documents released by the defence forces under the Freedom of Information Act reveal “ongoing concerns” with the Mowag Piranha IIIs and that €5m has been paid to acquire spare parts, despite an extensive warranty.
    The documents also reveal that monitoring equipment is to be used in an effort to establish if the failures are being caused by faults in the vehicles, or because of the way in which they are being driven by soldiers in harsh conditions.
    Delays in sourcing spare parts have, on occasion, affected overseas humanitarian operations involving the Irish army.
    The snag list on the vehicles over the past two years reveals that they have been recalled under warranty in order to fix steering wheel assemblies, driver instrument panels, suspension systems and unspecified “firing safety issues” relating to turrets. Modifications have been required to wheels, electronic control units and driver hatch locking mechanisms.
    A monitoring system to be fitted on 80 Mowags can be programmed to activate a remote alarm when operating limits are exceeded.
    Mowag, a Swiss-based manufacturer that supplies vehicles to armies all over the world, declined to comment last week. The Irish defence forces expressed confidence in the fleet, insisting that they are reliable, capable and sophisticated. “Without Mowags, Irish troops abroad would not operate as effectively or as safely as they do,” the defence forces said.
    But correspondence sent back by soldiers in the field suggests otherwise. A November 2006 letter from Philip Cotter of the defence forces' Combined Vehicle Base Workshops (CVBW) contains a long list of problems.
    He reported: “The Mowag has now been in service for over five years. A number of issues have arisen during this time. To date some have been resolved and others are the subject of continuing investigation and ongoing trials of modified/new components. The majority of these problems occurred early in the vehicles' life and can be defined as design issues.”
    His snag list includes hull cracks, problems with the driver's outside instrument panel, as well as modifications to wheel rims, driver's hatches, pedal assemblies, seats and electronic control units. He outlines alternator repairs, ball joint replacements and an issue with the turret.
    “Failures have occurred in other areas of the vehicles,” Cotter said. “These include differentials, auto-transmissions, engines and suspensions. Some units were replaced under warranty by Mowag.” Sourcing parts took up to a year at times.
    In another letter written in the same month, Cotter states that 56 cracks have been found on 26 Mowag hulls and that the company would repair them. Problems with the instrument panel meant any would-be driver was “receiving no indication of the speed he is travelling” in some cases.
    Another report by Captain J Fitzgerald in February 2006 states that the decision to replace ball joints in the entire Mowag fleet was taken “to ensure the safety of all personnel”. The issue with the ball joints came to attention of the CVBW after “an incident” in Kosovo in June 2005.
    Other reports reveal a September 2006 incident where a control arm of a wheel was damaged as the vehicle travelled over a log. “This obstacle should have posed no problem,” it said.
    In an unsigned June 13, 2007 letter from the Lebanon, “a wide array of different issues ranging from alternators to starting motors” are complained about. The same letter states the need for parts to be supplied quickly. “At the current casualty rate of vehicle breakdown, it is without doubt that all parts sent out to the mission area will be consumed during the lifespan of this tour of duty,” it says.
    An email sent the next day describes how a Mowag “lost one of its wheels” on a dirt road.
    A similar letter from the United Nations Mission in Liberia in August 2006 showed operations there being affected by problems with the Mowags.
    In October 2007, Cotter recommended the installation of a monitoring apparatus to “provide long-term savings in the cost of maintenance and repair of the fleet, as drivers will know that their every action is being recorded and may have to account for them were disciplinary action considered”.
    He added: “A serious situation has arisen over the last 24 hours whereby the number of Mowag Piranha APCs available to 95 Infantry Battalion has reached a critical level. Camp Clara had eight in operation up to yesterday morning. Unfortunately this figure is down to just four operational vehicles after another four were deemed unfit for operations.”


    I know one Fitter Sgt who came back from Eritrea and said he wouldn't even cross the Liffey if it meant travelling with Mowags, so I'd hate to imagine what they are like in Chad
    Last edited by REX; 21 July 2008, 19:45.
    CRIME SCENE INSTIGATOR

  • #2
    So....
    Someone sanctioned a witch hunt then.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

    Comment


    • #3
      OK, something is a bit dodgy here. Piranha IIIs are not exactly a unique vehicle in the militaries of the world. I understand that the suspension system is a bit rarer than most countries picked, but why are driver's instruments panels falling off Irish ones and not the other 8,039 Piranha IIIs that my Jane's says has been sold?

      NTM
      Driver, tracks, troops.... Drive and adjust!!

      Comment


      • #4
        I did hear that the Irish DoD specified changes to the original design for our purpose(i.e penny pinching). Could be coming home to roost now. It would be interesting to see if the faults were confined to the initial batch, or the later ones. There are differences between the first 40 and the next 25 it seems.


        Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

        Comment


        • #5
          [QUOTE=REX;214337]Todays Sunday Times. It seems the worst kaept secret in the Army is entering the public spotlight

          [B][COLOR="Yellow"][B]Irish army vehicles suffering multiple faults
          A fleet of 80 armoured personnel carriers has been hit by a series of problems, including wheels that fall off

          Mowag armoured personnel carrier
          Richard Oakley
          A FLEET of 80 armoured personnel carriers bought by the Irish army at a total cost of €120m has suffered a series of problems including multiple cracks, faulty transmissions, failing speedometers and wheels that simply fall off.
          Documents released by the defence forces under the Freedom of Information Act reveal “ongoing concerns” with the Mowag Piranha IIIs and that €5m has been paid to acquire spare parts, despite an extensive warranty.
          The documents also reveal that monitoring equipment is to be used in an effort to establish if the failures are being caused by faults in the vehicles, or because of the way in which they are being driven by soldiers in harsh conditions.
          Delays in sourcing spare parts have, on occasion, affected overseas humanitarian operations involving the Irish army.
          The snag list on the vehicles over the past two years reveals that they have been recalled under warranty in order to fix steering wheel assemblies, driver instrument panels, suspension systems and unspecified “firing safety issues” relating to turrets. Modifications have been required to wheels, electronic control units and driver hatch locking mechanisms.
          A monitoring system to be fitted on 80 Mowags can be programmed to activate a remote alarm when operating limits are exceeded.
          Mowag, a Swiss-based manufacturer that supplies vehicles to armies all over the world, declined to comment last week. The Irish defence forces expressed confidence in the fleet, insisting that they are reliable, capable and sophisticated. “Without Mowags, Irish troops abroad would not operate as effectively or as safely as they do,” the defence forces said.
          But correspondence sent back by soldiers in the field suggests otherwise. A November 2006 letter from Philip Cotter of the defence forces' Combined Vehicle Base Workshops (CVBW) contains a long list of problems.
          He reported: “The Mowag has now been in service for over five years. A number of issues have arisen during this time. To date some have been resolved and others are the subject of continuing investigation and ongoing trials of modified/new components. The majority of these problems occurred early in the vehicles' life and can be defined as design issues.”
          His snag list includes hull cracks, problems with the driver's outside instrument panel, as well as modifications to wheel rims, driver's hatches, pedal assemblies, seats and electronic control units. He outlines alternator repairs, ball joint replacements and an issue with the turret.
          “Failures have occurred in other areas of the vehicles,” Cotter said. “These include differentials, auto-transmissions, engines and suspensions. Some units were replaced under warranty by Mowag.” Sourcing parts took up to a year at times.
          In another letter written in the same month, Cotter states that 56 cracks have been found on 26 Mowag hulls and that the company would repair them. Problems with the instrument panel meant any would-be driver was “receiving no indication of the speed he is travelling” in some cases.
          Another report by Captain J Fitzgerald in February 2006 states that the decision to replace ball joints in the entire Mowag fleet was taken “to ensure the safety of all personnel”. The issue with the ball joints came to attention of the CVBW after “an incident” in Kosovo in June 2005.
          Other reports reveal a September 2006 incident where a control arm of a wheel was damaged as the vehicle travelled over a log. “This obstacle should have posed no problem,” it said.
          In an unsigned June 13, 2007 letter from the Lebanon, “a wide array of different issues ranging from alternators to starting motors” are complained about. The same letter states the need for parts to be supplied quickly. “At the current casualty rate of vehicle breakdown, it is without doubt that all parts sent out to the mission area will be consumed during the lifespan of this tour of duty,” it says.
          An email sent the next day describes how a Mowag “lost one of its wheels” on a dirt road.
          A similar letter from the United Nations Mission in Liberia in August 2006 showed operations there being affected by problems with the Mowags.
          In October 2007, Cotter recommended the installation of a monitoring apparatus to “provide long-term savings in the cost of maintenance and repair of the fleet, as drivers will know that their every action is being recorded and may have to account for them were disciplinary action considered”.
          He added: “A serious situation has arisen over the last 24 hours whereby the number of Mowag Piranha APCs available to 95 Infantry Battalion has reached a critical level. Camp Clara had eight in operation up to yesterday morning. Unfortunately this figure is down to just four operational vehicles after another four were deemed unfit for operations.”

          It's nice to be vindicated after all.
          So I guess the figures I posted earlier this year on this forum are correct after all.
          Out of 22 vehicles in Liberia just 4 were operational.....!

          Comment


          • #6
            Where does it say that?

            P.S, can you quote others posts properly? It's difficult to see where yours begins, and others ends.


            Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

            Comment


            • #7
              Isn't the turret that we have fitted with the .5's of our own design?
              Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

              Comment


              • #8
                No, the turret is a Thales design!

                IAS

                Comment


                • #9
                  Wasn't the FVT800 designed by Helios, which subsequently became part of the Thales Group?

                  NTM
                  Driver, tracks, troops.... Drive and adjust!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not wanting to be pedantic, but it was originally a Helio design before Thales took them over. I presume the original post referred to it needing to be to our own design requirements.
                    You will never have a quiet world until you knock the patriotism out of the human race

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      There's mention of a monitoring device to keep an eye on the crew, which suggests a belief that the crew are at fault for some of the snags.Perhaps they should consider a kind of data recorder, like those in aircraft, to monitor the engine and systems rather than just blaming the crew first and troubleshooting later.If the hulls are cracking, then it's a problem more fundamental than simply bad driving or carelessness.All the same, it's a mature design,by now and should not be showing up such faults at this stage.
                      As regards reliablity, we in the airline business use reliabilty monitoring of overhaulable components to track service life and allow proper planning of stores needs.Does the Df do anything like that for vehicles or it just; it's broke, buy new bits!
                      regards
                      GttC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        we in the airline business use reliabilty monitoring of overhaulable components to track service life and allow proper planning of stores needs.Does the Df do anything like that for vehicles or it just; it's broke, buy new bits!
                        regards
                        GttC
                        This is fairly close to the system in use, it goes more like "It's broke, order new bits, wait for anything up to a year, fit parts"

                        Unfortunately we make trouble for ourselves by looking for non-standard spec on the things we buy, if it's non-standard then the parts are not available off the self and this leads to enormous delays. And non-standard will not have been tested by anyone but us so we are the lab-rats
                        Last edited by REX; 21 July 2008, 19:55.
                        CRIME SCENE INSTIGATOR

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Could be because too few were bought and the (now) 80 have been doing the work of what should have been a larger number, on the other hand the DF first reported cracks in the armour in 2001 shortly after they were delivered. The MOWAG expert put it down to heat stress during the welding process and said it wasn't unusual. Appartantly it is common with poorly trained/skilled welders.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ok to be fair drivers do drive the vehicles hard on a daily basis which adds to wear & tear...we have excellent staff who know them cars inside out but have been plagued by a lack of parts up to recently which meant using parts off one car to keep another operational....thankfully this has improved as of late and the cars that spent 4/5 yrs in africa in eritrea/liberia are being re-conditioned but this takes several weeks/months to overhaul them, we had quite a few (any curragh heads will know how many) cars from africa off the road in bits rotting away but now we are down to only a few, so we are making progress....There are probs with the cars alright, mainly hydrops suspension and minor armour cracks but i believe that media report is a little sensationalised... ive veing working with/on these cars since there introduction, have been o/seas twice with them and there quite good, jus comes down to good APC Sgt and spares!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              According to a General Dynamics presentation on FRES (http://www.generaldynamics.uk.com/FRES/Suppliers.asp) the Piranhas in Iraq & Afghanistan 97% availability

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X