FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7177
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by SKB »

Image
^ FV432 Armoured Personnel Carrier variant

Introduction
The FV430 series covers a number of armoured fighting vehicles of the British Army, all built on the same chassis. The most common of the series is the FV432 armoured personnel carrier.

Although the FV430 series has been in service for a long time, and some of the designs had been replaced in whole or part by other vehicles, such as those of the CVR(T) range or the Warrior, many have been retained and are receiving upgrades in the engine and control gear.

The FV430 chassis is a conventional tracked design with the engine at the front and the driving position to the right. The hatch for the vehicle commander is directly behind the driver's; a pintle mount next to it can take a machine gun. There is a side-hinged door in the rear for loading and unloading, and in most models a large split-hatch round opening in the passenger compartment roof. In common with other such old designs, there are no firing ports for the troops carried - British Army doctrine has always been to dismount from vehicles to fight.

There is a wading screen as standard, and the vehicle has a water speed of about 6 km/h when converted for swimming.

FV430 vehicles, if armed, tend to have a pintle-mounted L7 GPMG. There are two three-barrel smoke dischargers at the front.

Other British Army Variants

FV431 - Armoured load carrier - one prototype produced, Alvis Stalwart 6x6 vehicle selected instead for load carrier role.
FV432 - Armoured Personnel Carrier
FV433 - Field Artillery, Self-Propelled "Abbot" - 105 mm self propelled gun built by Vickers
FV434 - "Carrier, Maintenance, Full Tracked" - REME Maintenance carrier with a crew of four and a hydraulically driven crane with a lifting capacity of 3,050 kg
FV435 - Wavell communications vehicle
FV436 - Command and control - some fitted with Green Archer radar, later Cymbeline radar
FV437 - Pathfinder vehicle - based on an FV432 with integral buoyancy and other waterjets - prototyped only
FV438 - Swingfire - Guided missile launcher
FV439 - Signals vehicle - Many variants
FV430 Mk3 Bulldog - Upgraded troop carrier that began serving in Iraq in August 2007

FV430 Mk3 Bulldog
Introduced in December 2006, the Bulldog was designed to meet an urgent operational requirement for extra armoured vehicles for use in counter-insurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. It features an applique reactive armour package designed by Israeli company Rafael capable of defeating hollow charge warheads such as the RPG-7 rockets used by insurgents. A new engine and steering gear provide better mobility and manoevrability. Other features include air conditioning and a gun station fitted with a 7.62mm machine-gun that can be controlled from inside the vehicle. Nine hundred FV430s are expected to be modified in this way and are being deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan alongside the new Mastiff PPV and Pinzgauer High Mobility All-Terrain Vehicle (Vector), relieving some of the pressure on the Warrior fleet.

The modifications, as well as bringing the vehicle's level of protection up to that of the Warrior, give it better cross country performance and a new top speed of 45 mph (72 km/h).

Modifications on the first 50 units were underway between January and October 2006 at the ABRO facility in Dorset by BAE Systems Land Systems at a cost of £85 million. However, these were deployed to Operation Telic in an incomplete state and were brought to completion, along with the rest of the Bulldog fleet during Operation Telic 10, in theatre, in a joint venture between BAE Systems Land Systems and 6 Battalion Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers.

FV432 Specifications

Type: Armoured Personnel Carrier
Place of origin: United Kingdom
Weight: 15.3 t
Length: 5.25 m
Width: 2.8 m
Height: 2.28 m
Crew: 2 minimum
Armour: 12.7 mm max
Main armament: 7.62 mm L7 GPMG
Secondary armament: smoke dischargers
Engine: Rolls-Royce K60 multi-fuel 240 hp
Power/weight: 15.7 hp/tonne
Suspension: torsion-bar, 5 road wheel
Operational range: 360 mile (580 km)
Speed: 32mph (52 km/h)

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7177
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by SKB »


User avatar
Opherrick
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 May 2015, 09:57

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Opherrick »

So is the Bulldog variant still in service or placed in storage ?
Per Ardua

Pymes75
Member
Posts: 279
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:17
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Pymes75 »

Opherrick wrote:So is the Bulldog variant still in service or placed in storage ?
Saw a couple of Bulldogs on transporters heading south from Tidworth * yesterday, so I don't think they're in storage.

* i.e. not north to Ashchurch

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

FV432

Post by marktigger »

is there any likely hood of these being replaced ?
Last edited by The Armchair Soldier on 22 Aug 2016, 17:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Merged with the FV430 series thread.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Yes, by UV/ MIV.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

not expecting enough to do a proper job though are we?
@LandSharkUK

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2292
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Timmymagic »

shark bait wrote:not expecting enough to do a proper job though are we?
Were there ever enough Bulldog though? There were hundreds converted with new engines etc. but how many up-armour kits were bought? Given that the up armour kits were Theatre Entry for Iraq to take the heat off the Warrior fleet I'd be surprised if we got more than 100. Any moderate MIV buy will result in far more real capability than 100 odd up armoured Bulldog. The sensible thing would be to put a load of Bulldog in storage as they'll have little mileage on them unless they were of the comparatively small number that had the up armour package. So you can expect to see a load in Withams as soon as a MIV buy is announced...

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

Isn't that why we UORed Mastiff?

I don't think a 100 odd MIV is going to do anything other than make the strike brigades look all new and shiny on the surface. I worry its going to be a long time before they're properly replaced.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote:Any moderate MIV buy will result in far more real capability than 100 odd up armoured Bulldog. The sensible thing would be to put a load of Bulldog in storage as they'll have little mileage on them
I would differentiate between battlefield taxis and IFVs
- the new Warrior will be an IFV, and I hope we purchase an IFV version (or at least 50% of the fleet) of the MIV (whatever will be selected)
- it still useful to have the Mastiffs and up-armoured Bulldogs, but you would probably not want to advance to contact with a peer enemy? Rather, have a protected ride against artillery splinters and small arms ambushes, and dismount when advancing to contact (or, with the Mastiffs, simply just provide force protection for the logistics tail on a dispersed battlefield)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1120
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by mr.fred »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:and I hope we purchase an IFV version (or at least 50% of the fleet) of the MIV (whatever will be selected)
Feeling flush, are we?
That sort of cash you could spring for RWS for the whole fleet and a larger fleet. Or the same size fleet and some money left over for training.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I did think about it afterwards, not just from the cost point of view, but how to carry a functional team (how many wagons, considering that a manned turret plus bulky ammo will eat up about four seats from the back). And came to this:
- 4 MIV
- one with CTA (manned turret)
- one with a 40 mm grenade MG
- two with shielded miniguns (great for suppressive fire and pretty good accuracy far out)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

The 40mm CTA should be there, especially since we are unlikely to ever see a Mobile Gun System on the MIV, but why a manned turret?

Also desirable with the replacement is a mortar variant.
@LandSharkUK

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 744
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

The Kongsberg Defender RWS will already take a GMG, GPMG and HMG. I'd be surprised if it wasn't a requirement by MoD.

Nexter already do an unmanned CTA turret with reportedly zero hull intrusion. That would be an interesting fit on MIV.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2292
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Timmymagic »

RunningStrong wrote:The Kongsberg Defender RWS will already take a GMG, GPMG and HMG. I'd be surprised if it wasn't a requirement by MoD.

Nexter already do an unmanned CTA turret with reportedly zero hull intrusion. That would be an interesting fit on MIV.
I think if we're realistic the best we could hope for is a Protector RWS. That at least opens up the chance of putting Javelin on it. You could put a 30mm M230 Chain Gun in an RWS even...lot easier on the vehicle than a CT40.

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3643.html

According to the article the worldwide licence is/was owned by Royal Ordnance...somehow I think it will be a normal RWS at best.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Timmymagic wrote: Nexter already do an unmanned CTA turret with reportedly zero hull intrusion. That would be an interesting fit on MIV.
I was a bit torn here.

You would want to have three manoeuvre units; that's your three squads.

Making the CTA turreted vehicle the commander's wagon is controversial as it would go most head to head with the opposition, and thereby be the most vulnerable. On the other hand, the turret gives the kid of optics, thermal sights etc that benefit the commander even more than the gunner
- some of this "situational awareness, allround" would be lost by going for an unmanned turret
- the riders in the back can be the javelin guys; may be also a sniper or a medic
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1120
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by mr.fred »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Making the CTA turreted vehicle the commander's wagon is controversial as it would go most head to head with the opposition, and thereby be the most vulnerable. On the other hand, the turret gives the kid of optics, thermal sights etc that benefit the commander even more than the gunner
You've also positively identified the highest value vehicle out of your platoon.

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 744
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

I agree that going unmanned does provide an issue for the vehicle commander, and it certainty flies in the face of current British doctrine.

However, the US Stryker lethality upgrade uses the Kongsberg medium calibre RWS which is unmanned. And the Russians have gone the same way.

I can't see a manned turret going on MIV.

All that said, I do agree that we'll be lucky to get MIV with RWS mounted Javelin.


RE: Fred. Fake turrets for all!

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1120
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by mr.fred »

RunningStrong wrote:RE: Fred. Fake turrets for all!
Good point. A Thule roof box and a drainpipe would probably b quite useful

benny14
Member
Posts: 556
Joined: 16 Oct 2017, 16:07
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by benny14 »

How many of the 895 FV430s in service have been upgraded to the Mk3 Bulldog standard?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6196
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Put this here as it is a fun video regarding crossing water obstacles, including with an FV432, in times gone past, enjoy. :D

At times I wish we could get a vehicle similar to the Stalwart today. Having an amphibious platform would certainly have its uses even beyond those that were its primary function.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7177
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by SKB »


User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3015
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

With Bulldog now staying until 2030 should we look to upgrade them with RWS systems with 12.7 HMG and 40mm GMG

also could we do a limited upgrade of Warrior by removing the turrets and fitting RWS with 30mm. Then as Warrior goes out of service these RWS mount could be fitted to other vehicles

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Tempest414 wrote: do a limited upgrade of Warrior by removing the turrets and fitting RWS with 30mm.
for 4 years?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3015
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: FV430 Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Tempest414 wrote: do a limited upgrade of Warrior by removing the turrets and fitting RWS with 30mm.
for 4 years?
Knowing what has happen to date will Warrior be gone in 4 years plus with the speed thing are hotting up why not even if its every one in three giving some the ability to shoot on the move

Post Reply