Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Universal service vehicle

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

  • Universal service vehicle

    I just want to know what people think of the viability of equipping all PDF units with Vehicle variants based on one highly capable chassis, lets say for arguments sake an Acmat or Hmmwv.
    Starting with the RRF bn and then equipping the remaining bns and corps units.
    i.e
    The RRF battalion with its need to operate as part of a highly mechanised multinational force will be equipped with Piranha 8x8s and the LTV.
    Lets say the LTV selected is the MOWAG Eagle; thats a Hmmwv chassis already selected for service, and scheduled to eventually replace all the AMLs.
    1.Now equip the remaining infantry battalions with a mixture of High troop/cargo capacity (10 fully laden troops), M114 (essentially a four man APC variant) for specialists such as assault pioneers, add a weapons mounting ring to a few more standard vehicles for transporting a support platoon, and finally accompanying FOOs and the command post could be accomodated in modified versions of the LTV and utility respectively.

    2.Ambulance variants and general utility are obviously enough for medical coys.

    3.The LTV will equip cav units anyway and, the narrower Nissan type vehicle might still be useful for certain recce tasks.


    4. Artillery usage would involve the use of the dedicated FOO vehicle, as well as utility types as tractors/general carriers.

    5.Sigs sorry CIS, I'm not sure if there is enough space on a Hmmwv chassis to carry the neccesary equipment, but obviously thats what I had in mind.

    6.Air Defence, apart from using them as tractors I still firmly believe that our limited SAM arsenal should be mobilised this has been done already with the Mistral.

    7.Mps general utility, and M114 for site recovery.

    8.Engineers, utility version.

    Now as to why, firstly because we run a small light infantry force a few gaps have to be closed..the most immediate one is the gap between our maximum artillery range and that of an enemy equipped with 2s19s or even a MLRS: the most immediate remedy for this is to be able to close the gap faster.
    Also given the tiny manpower levels of the army we cannot really afford the kind of service and support elements that larger forces can therefore we need to minimise our reliance on bridgebuilding and roadrepairs etc. because our engineers are quite likely to be needed for their assault and defence roles as well as forming a manpower reserve.
    Similarly the few AD, Arty and A/tk assets available need to be highly manouverable without mechanisation.

    THerefore I suggest the adoption of a single high performance vehicle chassis to perform 70-80% of the roles required by the army, on the basis that the cost savings from the standardisation would be ample to compensate for the procurement and running of such vehicles.

    (No I don't see it happening but I'm just bouncing ideas.)
    "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

  • #2
    Are you sure you dont know what happened to Imish - Yhall???
    Over the centuries, mankind has tried many ways of combating the forces of evil...prayer, fasting, good works and so on. Up until Doom, no one seemed to have thought about the double-barrel shotgun. Eat leaden death, demon...

    http://www.iamawesome.com/

    Comment


    • #3
      Come-Quickly where do you come up with this stuff :confused:

      Your theory sounds solid enough, I would agree with you that a universal chassis would make good sence. One big problem with our arty is that we are pretty tight on transport, using the Huumwv as you suggest would be a nice but we woudl still need trucks for ammo resupply.

      The Brits are testing this vechicle as a 105mm gun tower, don't know much about the vechicle though.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        It looks like a beefed up supacat, a transport vehicle used by 16 Air Assault Bde. I like the idea Imshi, but I'd go with the Pinzgauer as the baseline vehicle rather than the Hummer.
        "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

        Comment


        • #5
          According to An Cosantoir, the DF are to start taking tenders for a new Recce vehicle along the lines of the Humvee/Mowag Eagle in 2004/2005. Could be the start of a new line of vehicles with specialisation in different roles, but be guaranteed, it will be years before the PDF see them and decades before we do.

          Comment


          • #6
            I thought about the PINZGAUER myself and in most roles I'd prefer it for its narrower frame...but that same characteristic makes it a bit dinky for use as an ambulance, cargo vehicle etc. as well as in the LTV role.
            I'd envision the FEBA tasks of the Army beingg divided among the Pirhana and Hmmwv variants with secondary roles such as carrying the giraffe antennae on trucks.
            By my calculations so far in the configuration I have envisaged an infantry battalion (5 coy) would require 60 Hmmwv including M114s for the assault pioneer platoon.
            Come-quickly
            Commandant
            Last edited by Come-quickly; 10 February 2003, 09:05.
            "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


            • #7
              Nice train of thought. I'd be a bit wary of the Hummmvee as it is a little too wide for countrylanes.Horrific expierince tearing up a forest road trying to navigate at 70mph when something rather large appears in front of you....bad enough in a nissan whats it gonna be like in a hummve.....another trouser warming moment.
              Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

              Comment


              • #8

                I'd envisage this: Infantry
                Hq Coy-1x Command vehicle (M1037)
                -2xHmmwv utility (M998)
                -Recce Platoon 2x Pinzgauer
                - Assault Pioneer platoon 3xM114 (with relevant loadout)
                1x Field Ambulance Hmmwv (M997)

                Rifle Coy
                -1x Eagle II command vehicle
                3x Hmmwv utility (M998)
                3xHmmwv Truck (M1097)
                2xHmmwv weapons carrier (M1025)

                Support coy
                -1x Eagle II command vehicle
                -12xHmmvw weapons carrier
                -2x Hmmwv Truck

                Cavalry:
                Sqn HQ-1x Eagle II command vehicle
                -1x Ambulance
                -1xHmmwv truck

                Recce Troop
                -3x Eagle II scout car
                -1x Piranha fire support vehicle

                Support troop
                2xHmmvw utility
                1x Piranha recovery vehicle

                I won't do all the corps until I've done a bit more research.http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m998.htm
                Come-quickly
                Commandant
                Last edited by Come-quickly; 10 February 2003, 10:30.
                "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


                • #9
                  Unit replacement cost for USMC US$50,000 (thats E46,000+) vs How musch for a Nissan, or a MAN?
                  "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


                  • #10
                    Nissan Patrol GR will set the individual back €42,000


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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thats not too big a disparity even if the Patrols are bulk discounted, the Hmmwv would be used in more tasks and therefore numbers, plus nothing says we have to rely on O'Gara and Hess for the Uparmouring etc...a little offset investment in Timoney wouldn't go astray.

                      That'd make the cost about E3m per battalion, the entire PDF infantry force could be done for 27m, say 9m a year over three years.
                      Come-quickly
                      Commandant
                      Last edited by Come-quickly; 10 February 2003, 17:19.
                      "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


                      • #12
                        It seems that the Humvee is being marketed as an artillery tractor for the US 105mm howitzer
                        "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


                        • #13
                          How wide are the Humvee's, I ask because I'm under the impression that are very wide, which would make them a nightmare for drivers to drive around Irish backroads.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I dunno, the Pinzgauer still looks good. Check out the field ambulance version:

                            Here's the trauma management vehicle:

                            And here's the armed recce variant:
                            "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Well frankly the Breadth of the Humvee also concerns me but I selected it because of the existing range of Vehicles being in place for all the roles in the DF, and it's Cross country capacity which would eliminate the need for road rebuilding and heavy span Bridges for combat units, tasks which given the small size of the DF would be impossible to carry out in the face of any serious opposition without mechanisation, which would be impossible to support in such a small Army!

                              Therefore I set out with the following parameters in mind first thing sfirst the vehicle had to make economic and operational sense, therefore using one proven vehicle as a base for between 60-80% of combat tasks was essential as it creates economies of scale in purchase maintenance and modernisation.
                              Secondly it had to be capable of moving large loads and personnel in cross country conditions under some degree of protection.

                              The candidates I deemed eligible were the Landrover 6x6, The Pinzgauer and the Hmmwv.
                              I picked the Hmmwv because I could find no evidence of the Landrover being suitable as a load carrying vehicle, and the Pinzgauer cannot be (as far as I could determine) configured to carry twenty personnel, also only one of the candidates was likely to form a basis for the LTV.
                              So I chose the Hmmwv, there are definite issues to be debated about it, so debate away, I think you'll find the dimensions at www.FAS.org.
                              Just remember that it’s really a small truck (1 ¼ ton, max speed 55mph) not a big jeep.
                              "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

                              Working...
                              X