Totally agree and I think that whole UOR era was a massive own goal, no one else was buying 6 or 7 different platforms to meet urgent requirements and the army is still paying for it. Did Panther even make it to Iraq?Mercator wrote: ↑04 Jan 2022, 23:57Doors were an option back then – see the Bushmaster 'Ute' variant of the time. And whether that and price were ever truly a big issue, it didn't bother your SF people too much.RunningStrong wrote: ↑04 Jan 2022, 21:58Because it was more expensive than the US military vehicles that were being made in huge numbers.BB85 wrote: ↑04 Jan 2022, 10:20 Does anyone know why we didn't order bushmaster 15 years ago when we ordered the UOR vehicles? It was available at the time, or where they not able to meet the production numbers required in such a short space of time?
I'm all for ordering Australian but the vehicle is over 20 years old now, would griffon not be a better option even if it is French
And it didn't have front doors...
IDK, I feel that the fact that you ended up with Foxhound, Husky, Mastiff, Wolfhound, Ridgeback, Panther, Pinzgauer as well as Bushmaster – not to mention Bronco – kinda tells me that there was not much of a plan (more of a scramble really), and you might be over estimating the brilliance of any contracting decisions they made in that period. And not making a decision to replace the Snatch Land Rover earlier was a contracting decision as well – made by the same people, more or less.
Nope. Not your finest people. Australia shipped off 25 of our own (new) vehicles to the Dutch to fulfil their urgent requirements (they asked in July 2006 and had them by August). What do you think we might have done for our oldest ally? Don't know – because you never asked.
Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
Trying to find method in the madness here - if there's "the big one" in the next decade, what kind of contribution was the army ever going to make? Trying to get it to the action would likely be more trouble than it's worth. Apart from Air Assault plus Marines embedded with Carrier StrikeLord Jim wrote: ↑04 Jan 2022, 14:29 the problem I see already with Future Soldier, is that the Top Brass is looking too far in the future and is neglecting the present and near future. This is probably down to funding issues and future tech is always sexier than belt and braces requirements, especially when it comes to ticking boxes for career progression. Taking the Army off line as a combat force for at least ten years is a big gamble by the MoD and Government, and I am sure other nations have taken note. Having a few forward deployed units that are really still only capable of COIN and Peace Keeping Operations will not fool anyone except the media and many voters. We had better be very good at playing poker.
But the reality is we're in a kind of pre-conflict phase, where defence engagement becomes super important. The CCP are buying up strategic resources all over Africa. The Ranger Regiment and SFAB have an important job helping to keep some old friends in "our" camp while at the same time having eyes and ears on the ground. Right now that's arguably more important than another 50-60 CR3s.
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
- Has liked: 34 times
- Been liked: 38 times
The US had plenty of variants... And it's all relative to the scale of the force deployed. Canada had several variations on armoured wheeled platforms.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-s ... n-1.850849
I don't know if this is correct thread for this news but luck who is joining the fight in the frontlines of the East of Ukraine. If this is not a testament of a well thought and made vehicle