Foxhound Protected Vehicle

[RetroSicotte]

A thread for the continued use of the Foxhound mine protected vehicle within the British Army.



Foxhound

Designed by Force Protection Europe and the automotive engineering company Ricardo, the Foxhound (Market name - Ocelot) is intended for use as a light protected patrol vehicle (LPPV) with specialised protection against roadside bombs and improvised explosive devices (IED)s. It can weigh up to 7,500 kilograms (16,500 lb) when loaded.

Powered by a Steyr M16-Monoblock Diesel engine (6-cylinder, 160 kW), connected to a ZF 6HP28X 6-speed automatic gearbox, it reaches a speed of 50 mph (80 km/h) in 19.75 seconds, and has a maximum speed of 82 mph (132 km/h). Its wheels function independently, so the vehicle's other wheels should continue to work if one is blown off. It is claimed that the engine can be removed and replaced in 30 minutes.

The design is modular, and all of the components can be removed easily. The protective pod where up to six people can sit is interchangeable to allow easy modification according to the vehicle's role. For example, it can perform as an ambulance, supply vehicle, or jeep. Parts can also be easily replaced for minimum service time. It can travel through terrain that would not be accessible to other civilian vehicles, such as jungle, deep mud, or ruts. Its cabin is made of advanced composite materials. It is claimed that such composite materials can provide protection like metal armor with a composite spall liner, but at a lighter weight, saving fuel. Critical parts such as the crew compartment, engine, fuel tank and transmission are contained within the V-shaped armored ‘spine’ that deflects potential blast away from the pod, thus protecting the occupants and key components.

The Foxhound will be the first British military vehicle to meet the MoD’s recent Generic Vehicle Architecture (GVA) requirements. The GVA requirements are intended to create a single, standard digital electronic and electrical architecture for UK vehicles.

Currently, 400 Foxhounds are listed as in service as a final order and have seen deployment to Afghanistan.

[RetroSicotte]

Half the reason I started that was to post this.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/idef_201 ... 05151.html

The article isn't fully related, but it's the image. In the past we've seen a WMIK version of the Foxhound, here it is again for reference:



Note the image in the article, here it is again:



Back right corner from out viewpoint, that looks to me like some sort of ISTAR mast once again that we saw in the second above image. At least I think it is? (These are likely the same vehicle) The idea of replacing the current remaining WMIKs with the Foxhound version certainly seems desirable, if somewhat budget unable. (Especially given the continued existence of Jackal in that role, which I suspect will see WMIK retired without direct replacement alongside Jackal/Coyote such as this) It is, however, nice to know it's capable. These to make up numbers would be a cracking presence, leacing Jackals to do their real duty of deep recon with that added cargo space.

For reference point, there is also the Utility module for the Foxhound chassis. Pictured here:



If only, eh? A full range fleet of commonality assured protected Foxhounds performing various roles? If only...

[Happyslapper]

400 Foxhounds are listed as in service as a final order and have seen deployment to Afghanistan.

Just spent 6 months working with them in Kabul.
Generally they're very good, but not without fault. It goes without saying that they're a VAST improvement over Snatch, but they can be a bit temperamental. They certainly kept REME busy, and unlike most of the Army's kit, you can't fix any given fault with a roll of black-and-nasty.

From a protection point of view; superb. There are modular kits available to up, should the threat go up, but even the baseline protection is very good - and proven to be so.
Mobility is also excellent, much superior to MRAPs that the yanks and various other nations were using. You could easily get through crowded streets (withour losing an intimidation factor), put your foot down on open highways, as well as tackle steep embankments, dirt tracks, and off-road it up in the mountains.
Situational awareness was also pretty good. The electronics coupled with GPS meant that you had alot of info at your fingertips, all of which can be real-time relayed to zero. The downside is that with any sort of high-tech system, there's the risk of a "computer says no" situation, and boy does it spit warnings at you as soon as there's the slightest fault. There's 3 screens (driver, cmdr, dismount) which can be set to different functions and cameras (of which there are several day and night cameras covering 360 degrees).
The cab is ok, but not great. It's cosy to say the least with 4 blokes in the back, plus daysacks etc., especially when fumbling about trying to change radio presets and so on. The seats, however ballistically protected they may be, feel like they've been taken from that rickety rollercoaster in Blackpool after about 20mins on the road.

The greatest omission for our role was the lack of an RWS. It's a faff to pop top cover, and leaves you pretty exposed compared to most other modern vehicles. From a situational awareness point of view it would be great too, as the cameras really only give a snapshot of what's going on in the wagon's immediate surrounds (great for keeping an eye on pedestrians nearby, not so great when you're looking for potential VBIED's or other threats in depth).

All in all a good vehicle, but it will take time to match it to what the Army will eventually use it for (which is a bit of a hodge podge at the moment). I understand that Gen4 vehicles are currently rolling off the production line, with a number of improvements over previous generations.
It needs a lot more support and TLC than previous vehicles, which I suspect may prove to be role-limiting in the future, especially with certain units.

A handful of pics that show it in an operations setting:

[Happyslapper]

This one is from a top cover view

[seaspear]

These type of vehicles with the V shape bottom have come a long way since the concept was developed to protect South African forces during the Apartheid conflict the designer of these went on to design the Australian Bushmaster which was successful in Iraq and impressed other countries to make similar concept vehicles ,I was at an establishment where the early models were tested .

[Gabriele]

The lack of RWS puzzled me from the beginning, but the "it's much better to stick out and watch and hear with eyes and ears" crowd said it was really perfect this way...

[marktigger]

how do they compare size wise with land rover/ 4 tonner. Just thinking if 2016 gets out of hand could hey successfully patrol in Belfast?

[SKB]

Found a Foxhound video on the Army's Youtube channel:

[bobp]

I kind of like the foxhound, unfortunately they seem mighty expensive compared with a landrover.

[bobp]

Foxhound Dimensions 7.7ft High 6.8Ft Wide 17.7ft Long. When I first saw one it was parked next to a long wheel base landrover, there is very little difference in size although the foxhound is taller. The company that produced them has been bought out by General Dynamics.

[The Armchair Soldier]

The Royal Irish Regiment is leading a major international exercise in Europe in their new role as a Light Mechanized Battalion.
Exercise Wessex Storm sees the Royal Irish working alongside American, Canadian, Czech and other nations as they get to grips with tactics and skills for close combat with their range of military vehicles, including the Foxhound, RWMIK, Wolfhound, Husky and Ridgback.

[Tony Williams]

I kind of like the foxhound, unfortunately they seem mighty expensive compared with a landrover.

You're thinking of cost as a matter of £££££'s

Why not think of the cost as a matter of lives saved

Quite so. A lot of the cost goes into the very sophisticated armoured body, using advanced materials.

You can buy a cheaper version with steel armour which provides just as much protection, but it weighs a lot more so the payload and mobility are reduced.

[Ron5]

It will be interesting to see how Foxhound stacks up against the JLTV winner.

[marktigger]

will they be replacing panther with them?

[Gabriele]

will they be replacing panther with them?

No. They will continue to co-exist. Panther will stop playing MRAP, which it never really was to start with, and will work in the role it was originally intended for, command and liaison.

[RetroSicotte]

Canadian SOF To Buy New Vehicles, Improve Airstrike Comms

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /71298070/

Canada’s special forces, which are becoming the government’s go-to organization for international missions, will purchase new fleets of vehicles and upgrade its ability to direct airstrikes.

...

Companies have already expressed interest in the NGFV project. General Dynamics Land Systems Canada of London, Ontario, will examine whether the Ocelot would fit the requirements. The Ocelot, which the British military calls the Foxhound, has a modular design, allowing for quick modifications of its cabin for specific missions

[marktigger]

wonder how long it'll be before Foxhound, Panther and landrovers are replaced by these

http://forces.tv/11708710

to improve US exports sorry commonality

[Ron5]

wonder how long it'll be before Foxhound, Panther and landrovers are replaced by these

http://forces.tv/11708710

to improve US exports sorry commonality

You've got to admit it looks a shed load more studly than Foxhound. I wonder how it really stacks up. Pretty much the same requirement.

[shark bait]

You've got to admit it looks a shed load more studly than Foxhound. I wonder how it really stacks up. Pretty much the same requirement.

I dunno, just going by looks I prefer foxhound.

I also hope the UK doesn't go for it. We should be able to order in enough volume to build our I've vehicles and we have a great aitomative industry that could rise to the challenge and produce something great.

Either way foxhound has a lot of life left in it any way

[marktigger]

You've got to admit it looks a shed load more studly than Foxhound. I wonder how it really stacks up. Pretty much the same requirement.

I dunno, just going by looks I prefer foxhound.

I also hope the UK doesn't go for it. We should be able to order in enough volume to build our I've vehicles and we have a great aitomative industry that could rise to the challenge and produce something great.

Either way foxhound has a lot of life left in it any way

yes but the SDSR might indicate we have to standardise! wonder if we'll get to input into the next US review?

[shark bait]

yes but the SDSR might indicate we have to standardise! wonder if we'll get to input into the next US review?

I hope it does, its a mess ATM, but hopefully foxhound can survive.

[marktigger]

yes but the SDSR might indicate we have to standardise! wonder if we'll get to input into the next US review?

I hope it does, its a mess ATM, but hopefully foxhound can survive.

its the fallout from having an Afghan centric defence policy for the last 10 years any UOR buying large ammounts of mission specific kit.

[Cooper]

You've got to admit it looks a shed load more studly than Foxhound. I wonder how it really stacks up. Pretty much the same requirement.

What!!!...fully pimped out Foxhound looks way tougher than that wide load fat ass.

[arfah]

...............

[bobp]

Give me foxhound any day, far better piece of kit in many ways. It may be expensive but carries far more protection for our boys inside. I have seen quite a few lately running up the M5 on the backs of civilian low loaders, still in their desert colours. Was wondering if and when they will get a lick of NATO green?