Tweet
This is my first time posting. I came across this site while I was doing some research into the RG32 recently purchased for the Army from BAE South Africa. Sweden and Finland have also chosen the vehicle.
I note from some previous postings on this matter that the RG32 was not considered a very likely winner by some of the members here. However, having some experience of the pedigree of this vehicle I would like to offer the following few observations.
The RG32 is a derivative of the South African Nyala which itself belongs to a stable of monocoque V-shaped hull vehicles developed initially in the then Rhodesia. The South Africans were quick to learn from the Rhodesian experience and subsequently became world leaders in this design. The US has now placed orders running into the thousands for variants of this design with BAE.
In the final years of the Rhodesian war the latest (Mark 1V) vehicles practically eliminated completely losses due to landmines/RPG/IED. With these vehicles the Rhodesians " no longer attempted to detect and avoid the killing ground of an ambush, they detected and attacked directly into it". While serving with the BSAP (Rhodesian Police) I had first-hand experience of the reliability and effectiveness of these vehicles. Incidentally, even in sanctions-bound Rhodesia trooping and convoy instructions in the late 1970's stated that Landrovers must not be used other than in routine safe urban environments.
The RG32 has already proved its worth in Afghanistan where it has been deployed by the Swedish/Finnish element of ISAF. In one insurgent-initiated contact last year the crew of four survived an initial RPG attack without injury and went on to win the subsequent firefight resulting in 3 enemy killed and 2 captured.
By comparison, there should be great concern at the performance of the British Jackal. I note that the Irish Army used experienced drivers in their tests. There should be many questions asked on the disgraceful procurement process for the Jackal in the UK. I would like to come back to this subject later.
For an independent view of the v-shape hull debate some of you might like to Google an excellent paper
Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles
by
Maj Roy Mc Griff III
United States Marine Corps.
This was a paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requrements for the
School of Advanced Warfighting at Quantico.
The Army should be congratulated on an excellent choice-good work by everyone from the drivers upwards.
Tim Horgan
I note from some previous postings on this matter that the RG32 was not considered a very likely winner by some of the members here. However, having some experience of the pedigree of this vehicle I would like to offer the following few observations.
The RG32 is a derivative of the South African Nyala which itself belongs to a stable of monocoque V-shaped hull vehicles developed initially in the then Rhodesia. The South Africans were quick to learn from the Rhodesian experience and subsequently became world leaders in this design. The US has now placed orders running into the thousands for variants of this design with BAE.
In the final years of the Rhodesian war the latest (Mark 1V) vehicles practically eliminated completely losses due to landmines/RPG/IED. With these vehicles the Rhodesians " no longer attempted to detect and avoid the killing ground of an ambush, they detected and attacked directly into it". While serving with the BSAP (Rhodesian Police) I had first-hand experience of the reliability and effectiveness of these vehicles. Incidentally, even in sanctions-bound Rhodesia trooping and convoy instructions in the late 1970's stated that Landrovers must not be used other than in routine safe urban environments.
The RG32 has already proved its worth in Afghanistan where it has been deployed by the Swedish/Finnish element of ISAF. In one insurgent-initiated contact last year the crew of four survived an initial RPG attack without injury and went on to win the subsequent firefight resulting in 3 enemy killed and 2 captured.
By comparison, there should be great concern at the performance of the British Jackal. I note that the Irish Army used experienced drivers in their tests. There should be many questions asked on the disgraceful procurement process for the Jackal in the UK. I would like to come back to this subject later.
For an independent view of the v-shape hull debate some of you might like to Google an excellent paper
Mine Resistant Armor Protected Vehicles
by
Maj Roy Mc Griff III
United States Marine Corps.
This was a paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requrements for the
School of Advanced Warfighting at Quantico.
The Army should be congratulated on an excellent choice-good work by everyone from the drivers upwards.
Tim Horgan
)
Comment