UK confirms to buy more than 100 Bronco worths 150 m pounds

• sgstars

  30 Dec 08, 11:59

   

  Originally posted by Man!x:

  i read in the Straits Times that the armour can protect up to 7.62 and fragmentation, how about RPGs & IEDs?

  i read somewhere that the bronco comes standard equipped to withstand up to 12kg mines at the bottom.

  RPG and IED would really depend on what kinda armour it is using. Bronco is  speculated to be using Mexas-L if this manufacturer's link is to be believed.

  source: gary1910

  http://www.ibd-deisenroth-engineering.de/products-in-use.html

  for RPG protection i think they will have to prepare a bronco SLAT armour kit. i wonder how would the Bronco look like with SLAT armour.

• I_love_my_toilet

  30 Dec 08, 12:12

  Originally posted by Man!x:

  i read in the Straits Times that the armour can protect up to 7.62 and fragmentation, how about RPGs & IEDs?

  Slat armor for RPGs

  Jammers for IEDs

• lionnoisy

  6 Jan 09, 19:44

  Today zao bao hard copy get a report on ST Branco and a interview with

  LAND SYSTEMS--SEW Chee Jhuen--President.

  http://www.stengg.com/img/orgcharts/storgchart.pdf

   

  pl bear with me to quote the full article here.There is life span in the link.

  ST may not report this.zao bao report more on defense news.

  summary of the news 06 Jan 2009

  ---huge potential for Bronco.30 countries need to get replacement for old

  BV 206 .

  ---Only two versions for UK MOD--BvS and Bronco.

  ---France and Finland have showed interest.

  ----UK MOD and Afghnan service men came to SG to test drive Bronco.

  ---ST understood that BAE going to use BvS 15 for tender.It took at least

  half year to develope new product.There is risk for UK MOD to use

  new platform.ST has improved Bronco according to SG servicemen feedback.

  ---UK press did not query why UK needs to buy ATTC from a former colony.

  This shows the public has confidence on the professional judgement of MOD.

  ----With UK MOD as a reference customers,ST is looking for more biz.

  ----ST just a small fry,compared with BAE etc US$30 b sales a year.

  Innovations and new ideas do help.

  ---SAF Op Ready servicemen has to familiar with platform (again)

  within few days when they are back for ICT.

  ---find out more if u interested..eg get a transalation engine .

  http://www.zaobao.com/sp/sp090106_514_4.shtml

  本地军车开å�‘海外 让本土“éª�马”奔腾三å��国

  （2009-01-06）

  � 陈颖佳

  我国研制的“éª�马”全地形履带å�ŒåŽ¢è¿�输车（Bronco All Terrain Tracked Carrier）具庞大外销潜能。30多个国家å�¯èƒ½è€ƒè™‘以它æ�¥å�–代陈旧的BV206å�ŒåŽ¢è¿�输车。

  研制�马�输车的新科工程�公�新科动力（ST Kinetics）上月获得英国国防部总值1亿5000万英镑（3亿3000万新元）�约，为在阿富汗执行维和任务的部队供应100多辆�马�输车。这是新加�首次出�自制战场用途军车到�线执行任务。

  �马�输车用途广泛，除�兵载货，也�改装为野战救护车�战场�动指挥站和战地抢修车。

  新科动力总��志�最近接�本报专访，分享�功竞标因素，并展望�马�输车的�景。

  BV-206目�是最普�使用的�厢�输车。这�玻璃纤维车身的战车，能在地形��和气候�劣�件下�作，�将军队和物资�到车辆无法抵达的地方，有30多个国家的军队使用。

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒè¯´ï¼š“但多数BV-206已陈旧，因此采用它们的军队都å�¯èƒ½æ˜¯éª�马的潜在用户。”

  他说，���BV-206车队的军队实际上�有两个选择：英国航空�航天系统公�（BAe）瑞典�公�赫格隆（Hagglunds）出产的BvS-10（维京），或�马。

  过去八年，新科动力积�地�国外促销�马，连续四次�加两年一度在巴黎举行的欧洲防�科技展（Europe Satory）。�知，法国和芬兰表示有�购买�马，新科工程师就曾到欧洲雪山测试�马的雪地作战能力。

  ��志�了解，英国军方�现派到阿富汗的维京战车，装置�外护甲装备�，车厢�得更狭�，能�载的武器因此�少，速度和爬�能力也�弱，因此寻找负载�较大的战车替代。

   

  1 2 3 4 5 6 下一页

  “éª�马”è´Ÿè½½é‡�

  比“维京”高50ï¼…

  �马的负载�比维京战车高50%，�爬60%�度，并在30%斜�横行，能跨1公尺高障�和2公尺宽壕沟，几乎所�披�。

  �志�说，英军�年对�马�输车感兴趣。在去年的欧洲防�科技展上，英国国防部官员对�马战车进行详尽的资料收集，过�，英国国防科技人员和曾在阿富汗�役的军人也��我国试驾和评估�马。

  根�新科动力掌�的情报，竞争对手BAe当时�出替代方案，声称能在今年推出全新的BvS-15解决现有战车的问题。

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒè¯´ï¼Œæ–°ç§‘动力因此掌æ�¡äº†æ—¶é—´ä¼˜åŠ¿ã€‚他说：“以国防业界ç»�验，研制新战车至少需å�Šå¹´æµ‹è¯•ã€‚或许，英国国防部会认为选择全新的战车须é�¢å¯¹å¾ˆå¤§çš„技术风险。”

  他说，新加�武装部队使用�马已七年。在这个过程中，新科动力按照�役军人的建议对�马进行改良。

  英国军方将为éª�马进一步改装，并命å��“疣猪”。在投入阿富汗任务å‰�，英国军方委托的厂商将为它们安装å�‘炮装置ã€�é¢�外护甲ã€�电å­�对抗装备和通讯仪器，以适应作战环境。

  除技术优势外，人为因素也在这项军购扮演é‡�è¦�角色。è�§å¿—æ�ƒå½¢å®¹è‹±å›½å›½é˜²éƒ¨çš„评估过程é�žå¸¸ä¸“业客观，æ��出的è¦�求é�žå¸¸å�ˆç�†ã€‚他说：“当地舆论并未质问英国国防部å�‘å‰�殖民地购买军备的ç�†ç”±ã€‚这显示英国公众相信他们的国防部具备专业判断。”

  �志�说，英军是具有�照价值的客户，因此希望这项交易能促使更多国家考虑采用�马o

  以“è“�æµ·ç­–ç•¥”外销军备

  新科工程去年出�总值14亿元军备，但销售规模与大型国际军�供应商比较�说是�巫�大巫。

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒé€�露，新科的“è“�æµ·ç­–ç•¥”是专攻竞争对手较少ã€�容易å�–得领先æ�ƒçš„专门市场。

  他�承，英国BAe或美国通用动力（General Dynamics）�年的销售�300多亿美元，新科工程没野心，也��能�展�如此大规模的军备供应商。

  è¯�虽如此，新科在国际市场难å…�会与财雄势大的跨国军ç�«ä¾›åº”商交锋，但新科的策略是é�¿å…�你死我活的割喉å¼�竞争，陷入血腥的“红海”，而是以创æ„�å’Œé�©æ–°å¯»æ‰¾ä¸€ç‰‡ç”Ÿç”Ÿä¸�æ�¯çš„è“�海。

  他说，新加å�¡æ­¦è£…部队是新科主è¦�客户，因此所设计的军备须符å�ˆäºšæ´²äººä½“型，ç�€é‡�å‡�å°‘å�Žå��力ã€�轻便易用。他说：“新加å�¡æ­¦è£…部队是国民æœ�役军队，战备军人æ¯�年回è�¥å�—训一次，须在数天内学会使用新器æ��。”

  新科的策略是把资�集中在竞争较少的领域，例如飞�马155毫米轻型榴弹炮车，市场上�类产��有一个。

  新科�年将3%收入投入产�研�，与高等学府和政府研究机构�作，开�特有军备。

  它所开å�‘çš„120毫米超速先进迫击炮系统就是一个例å­�，通过研å�‘使å�Žå��力å‡�少一å�Šï¼Œå�ªæœ‰20å…¬å�¨ï¼Œå¹¶å…·å¤‡è‡ªåŠ¨è£…弹功能，最高射速æ¯�分钟18å�‘。è�§å¿—æ�ƒè¯´ï¼š“亚洲军人体型较å°�，我们就应用液压技术使他们ä¸�必费劲扛炮弹。”

  由于��力低，这个迫击炮系统�装置在轻型�击机动车，增强�型作战��的�力。今年2月，一个中东国家�新科工程购买超速先进迫击炮，安装在RG-31防雷装甲�输车。

  新科以出�40毫米榴弹炮和弹�著称，也研制了Ultimax-100轻型机关枪和SAR21冲锋枪。�志�说，新科动力在40毫米榴弹的领域领先，能�供了���伤力的榴弹让军队执行���类任务。

  “飞éª�马”

  �加�度军购招标

  �度陆军为新一代155毫米榴弹炮系统招标。我国将以自制的FH-2000牵引�炮和飞�马（Pegasus）155毫米轻型榴弹炮车竞标。

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒè¯´ï¼Œæˆ–许是“冤家路窄”，新科工程å†�与BAe系统交锋，飞éª�马炮车的唯一竞争对手就是BAe生产的M-777轻型榴弹炮。但FH-2000牵引å¼�ç�«ç‚®é�¢å¯¹æ›´å¤šç«žäº‰å¯¹æ‰‹ã€‚

  �志�说，�度的军备市场具有挑战性。较早�的一项155毫米榴弹炮竞标活动，因为�度高级官员涉嫌贿赂而�消。

  �度陆军�炮军购案的结果最早年底�晓，�能拖上好几年。角�者必须在高原和平原通过冬季和�季测试。

  新科动力总��志�：看好国防工业�景

  展望2009年，�志�认为，�国�能因为�济�景削�国防开销，但一些军事强国得继续执行战争与维和任务，必须维�一定的军事开销。

  �志�说，�济衰退促使国内生产总值下跌，导致政府预算�少。�国为扶��济，将把更多资�用�推动基础建设，而削�部分的国防开销。

  但他认为，2009年美军将继续驻扎伊拉克，而北约盟军将加紧阿富汗的军事行动，对军备还有一定的需求。以色列对加沙的军事行动会维�多久，也�得而知。

  �一方�，�使和平稳定的东北亚，中国日益增加军费，促使日本�韩国和�湾增加军事开销，这场军备竞赛会�续下去。

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒè¯´ï¼š“我ä¸�认为2009年会çª�然实现世界和平。全世界放下武器，导致国防开销全é�¢ä¸‹è·Œçš„å±€é�¢ä¸�å�¯èƒ½å�‘生。”

  他也表示，新加�国防工业将继续�供许多就业机会，他希望更多工程系毕业生加入。

  新科动力产�外销潜能①

  新科动力在2003年与土耳其的Otokar签署�议，开�新款�的Terrex步兵战车。�志�说，这项�作目�还在进行中。由于土耳其陆军�开�国产主战�克，步兵战车的�展项目被延误。

  但他认为，未�的战争多是城市战，轮�战车比较能应付城市战需�。

  新科动力产�外销潜能②

  自从在美国陆军竞标的最�一个回��选�，新科工程并未宣布Bionix履带步兵战车获得任何国外��。

  �志�说，公��尔会接到国外询问。论战车的性能，瑞典生产的CV-90是Bionix的最大竞争对手。

  新科动力产�外销潜能③

  è�§å¿—æ�ƒè®¤ä¸º“冠军”是最先进的榴弹炮车，根æ�®æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„军事环境é‡�身订å�šï¼Œå› æ­¤å›½é™…需求é‡�ä¸�高，新科动力并没有积æž�外销。

  《简æ°�防务》科技主编Rupert Pengelley去年8月形容“冠军”榴弹炮车展现了网络化作战能力。EOQ

• lionnoisy

  14 Jan 09, 15:51

  Today www.mypaper.com.sg and zaobao report on this deal.

  This is interesting two researchers RSIS said SG is on par,

  if not overtake,Israel and Sweden .

  ST K had ordered materials before they got the contract.

  I think it did help ST Kinetics got the contract.

   

  few points worth to note:

  www.mypaper.com.sg  14.01.2009

  by FELIX SOH

  title--S’PORE NOW 1ST-TIER
  ARMS PRODUCER
  Breakthrough Bronco UK deal means it’s exporting
  major weapon system to First World nation

  BOQ--

  
  ----They(Bronco ATTC) were shipped at STK’s
  expense to the United Kingdom
  to undergo brutal tests against
  improvised explosive devices
  (IEDs) and mines

  ---The British Army is currently
  stretching its existing Viking
  ATCs above their limits – by
  some two tonnes.

  ----TECHNICAL SUPERIORITY
  The protection level demanded
  by the British Army was one
  that has never been seen before
  for an all-terrain carrier, due to
  the increased lethality of Taliban
  roadside bombs and mines.

  ---The Bronco can operate not
  only in extreme weather and
  dusty conditions but also in difficult
  off-road terrain of mountains
  and valleys.

  ---STK provided the British
  with all the answers they needed
  in their evaluation of the
  Bronco, including test data kept
  by the company and references
  that the British could check,
  such as the National Automotive
  Testing Centre in the US
  where the Bronco had been put
  through its paces.
  The SAF chipped in as well
  by providing data of its own experience
  in using the Bronco.

  in theatre.
  ---“Based on that, even though
  we haven’t got the contract in
  the bag, we worked backwards
  and placed a pre-order of materials.
  “That cut short some of the
  lead time and that is why we can

  meet the delivery deadline,” he said

  ---In 2007, the British placed a 65million order for 40mm grenades
  from STK.
  Singapore continues to reinforce
  its pole position in this area
  with new innovations, such
  as the air-burst round.
  STK’s self-destruct 40mm
  ammunition has a 99.8 per cent
  reliability and has been widely

  used in Scandinavia.(lion note---another order in late 2008)

  picture caption---

  LIGHT-FOOTED HERCULES: One Hercules of a combat vehicle,

  yet incredibly light-footed.The Bronco is seen here climbing a

  dune in the desert.

  --EOQ

• lionnoisy

  14 Jan 09, 15:57

  the United Kingdom  of military vehicles is not the way of major arms deals: sophisticated military exports should  move from the big advanced nations  to small  states, not the other way around. Singapore’s sale therefore bucks the established trend, representing a major breakthrough for the small state into the lucrative but highly competitive international arms >Ron Matthews and Curie Maharani specialize in defence economics and defence acquisition respectively at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Professor Matthews is a British-trained specialist in Defence Management, holding the Chair in Defence Economics and also the deputy directorship of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at RSIS. Curie Maharani is a researcher at RSIS with a Masters degree in defence studies from Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), Indonesia. She has worked on security sector reform with local and international NGOs in Indonesia.>Secondly, small country defence viability is profoundly influenced by economics. Small defence economies traditionally do not export entire weapon systems to major defence industrial powers. Small nations typically do not have the experience, resources, value chain, indigenous R&D capability or systems engineering expertise. In this respect, Singapore has surpassed Israel’s acknowledged defence industrial excellence; the latter has only a chequered performance in the export of entire integrated platforms rather than sub-systems.

  Furthermore, Singapore has not benefited from the substantial US foreign aid that Israel enjoys.  Remarkably, Singapore has technologically leap-frogged over several development stages, achieving a level of defence-industrial maturity akin to that of Sweden.  The Swedish defence-industrial model has evolved an indigenous capability -- over generations -- to produce fully- integrated sophisticated weapons systems, such as the Gripen fighter, that was recently exported to Thailand---EOQ

• lionnoisy

  14 Jan 09, 16:03

  They  are from the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU.

• sgstars

  14 Jan 09, 23:22

  dead horse dead horse ?

  no one likes your new F35b thread so come here and practice a little bit of necromancy ?

  reviving the dead ?

  Let your dead threads Rest In Peace, so you wont be subject to more humiliation and sarcastic remarks about you.

• spencer99

  15 Jan 09, 09:59

  Hi,

   

  I watched the asia1 razor video on the Bronco. Interestingly, the 'empty' weight of the Bronco is 11 tons and can have up to 5 tons of 'payload'.

   

  However, the UK version total weight will be more then 16 tons due to the increase in armour/protection.

   

  According the the STK guy, the drive train will be 'upgraded' to handle the increased weight. He seemed to allude that the tracks will be made wider to ensure the same low ground pressure despite the increased weight. but I wonder whether it will have an upgraded engine. Given the increased weight, surely we need more power to ensure the same level of mobility.

   

  The UK sale is wonderful... but i think the UK guys are desperate.... givenn that we can meet the delivery schedule and the protection requirements, surely they will buy it..

   

  i hope the STK guys get it right.. hopefully the Bronco will be able to fulfill the 'hopes' of all present.

   

  Remember that the env that it is operating in will be harsh.... and also they will probably not be so mindful or maintainence or operating limits given that it is a 'wartime' environment... hopefully, we don't see a lot of breakdowns etc etc...

   

• Sepecat

  15 Jan 09, 18:24

  I surely hope that ST does get it right not only for the sake of the British Army ! Dont forget that the SAF is using it too !  

  Good military equipment are supposed to be designed to work in very harsh environments with minimal maintenance, be easily repaired in the field, be soldier & idiot proof,   work 99.99 % of the time etc etc.  Wud you be asking for less while in a war zone ?

• I_love_my_toilet

  15 Jan 09, 21:55

  The is no such thing as a maintenace-free equipment.

  Certainly when you rely on this piece of equipment to save your life during actual operations, you will maintain it properly and more properly.

  Anyone can share their experience in maintenace of the SAF Bronco ?

• ktk

  15 Jan 09, 23:39

  of all things holy, this thread made me LOL.

   

  2 forumers duking it out while all of us sit back wif popcorn watch show.

   

  thanks for the entertainment :)

• touchstone_2000

  19 Jan 09, 14:34

  Lionnoisy, good job on the research.

   

  I have a small request, can you please remove the HTML tags before you post?  Makes your hardwork goes to waste.  You can strip off the tags by pasting into notepad and then copy and paste from there again.

• lionnoisy

  7 Feb 09, 22:17

  UK parents and former defence chief said UK force is under protected. Also,there are 300 vehicles to be sought!! ''Under the new proposal, the Vikings will be replaced by 100 better-protected “high-mobility tracked patrol vehicles�. The 500 other new vehicles will consist of 100 Mastiffs, a huge British-modified version of the American Cougar troop-carrier, 100 Jackals, a mine-resistant open-top vehicle, and 300 light-support mine-protected vehicles, which have not yet been identified. General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, the former Chief of the Defence Staff and now a patron of the United Kingdom National Defence Association, which campaigns for better conditions for the Armed Forces, said: “Defence has been underfunded and risks have been taken with security and the size and equipping of our Armed Forces for many years. The Government has been forced by events and the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan to urgently find additional funding, but it is too little and too late. Despite repeated warnings our services are neglected and under-resourced. This has cost lives.� '' EOQ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4841750.ece
• lionnoisy

  24 Feb 09, 08:53

  Day 1 (29) | Day 2 (26) |

  http://www.janes.com/events/exhibitions/idex2009/

  First public showing for STK’s Warthog

  Christopher F Foss

  Sunday, 22 February, 2009

  

  ''Singapore Technologies Kinetics (STK) has chosen this year’s IDEX to show for the first time in public its Bronco All Terrain Tracked Carrier (ATTC), with many of the modifications to be incorporated into the British Army’s Warthog configuration.

  Following a competition between the BAE Systems BvS 10 Mk 2 and the STK Bronco ATTC late last year, the UK Ministry of Defence selected the latter to replace the BvS 10 (called the Viking in UK service) currently deployed in Afghanistan. Under the terms of this £150m (US$215m) contract, STK will supply more than 100 enhanced versions of the Bronco ATTC to meet the UK Warthog requirement.

  First production vehicles will be completed towards the end of the year and sent to the UK for final modifications under the leadership of Thales UK, before being deployed to Afghanistan in 2010.

  The British Army will take four versions into service: ambulance; command vehicle; repair and recovery; and troop carrier, which will have seats for four people in the front and eight in the rear.

  The first Warthog demonstrator is being built and will be completed in mid-year. Being shown at IDEX is a standard Bronco ATTC with many, although not all, of the Warthog modifications. According to STK, the fielding of Warthog will provide the British Army with a vehicle offering enhanced volume, payload and protection. Compared with the current Bronco, Warthog will feature additional protection, especially against mines, diesel fuel tanks moved from the floor and positioned one either side of the door in the rear unit, and a gross vehicle weight of 18 tonnes inclusive of armour. It will also be slightly longer and wider.

  Warthog will be powered by a Caterpillar C7 diesel developing 350hp, coupled to an Allison MD3500 fully automatic transmission, giving a top speed of 65km/h. It will be fitted with the General Dynamics UK Bowman digital communications system and devices to counter improvised explosive devices.

  The standard Bronco ATTC was originally developed to meet the requirements of the Singapore Armed Forces, which have deployed significant quantities of the vehicle in numerous configurations.''--EOQ

  all the above and below caption  from Janes...

  Displayed is a standard Bronco with many of the Warthog modifications

• lionnoisy

  24 Feb 09, 08:55

  
  First public showing for STK’s Warthog

• touchstone_2000

  25 Feb 09, 09:01

  It is interesting to note that the Warthog's tanks are located by the sides of the rear door of the rear unit.

  Warthog will feature additional protection, especially against mines, diesel fuel tanks moved from the floor and positioned one either side of the door in the rear unit,

   

  Long fuel lines is a worry and no rear unit, the whole system stops?

• Orcishwarrior

  26 Feb 09, 02:25

  thats better.Thanks Noisylion.

• Shotgun

  26 Feb 09, 02:47

  Bravo! Finally a proper "looking" post from our resident noisylion.

• lionnoisy

  18 Mar 09, 12:08

  The discussions in Pegasus and M777 lead me post to here.

  I think this shall be the correct thread to talk Warthog.

  http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/337139?page=8#post_8924255

   

  More Upgrades for U.K. Vikings in Afghanistan - Defense News

  read this forum then u know more.

  http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-145098.html

  @@@@@@@@@@@@

  www.stengg.com went into extra mile by ordering materials

  before they got the contract of Warthog aka Viking replacement,

  The tender came from UK  urgent operational requirements (UOR) procurement system.

  This shows ST has high confidence and think for the customer--

  UK MOD.Becos MOD needs Warthog very urgently to protect

  their soldiers' life.

  BAE Mk 2 is a little too late.They were still under development.

  Bronco has been in operation for a no. of years.I think some

  improvement has been done.So,if u were MOD top brass,

  will u trust a proven platform like Bronco or the promoised

  Mark 2?

  fr

  http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-145098.html

  Hagglunds Designs New Viking
  
  ''By andrew chuter
  Published: 17 Oct 12:21 EDT (16:21 GMT)
  
  LONDON - A new version of the Viking tracked armored vehicle offering enhanced protection to crews is on the drawing board at BAE System Hagglunds in a bid to beat competition from Singapore aiming to unseat the Swedish company as the supplier of all-terrain vehicles to the British military.
  
  A spokeswoman for the Sweden-based subsidiary of BAE said the company hopes to have a prototype Viking Mk2 running early next year with the vehicle available for delivery in the summer.
  
  Earlier this year, the British announced a competition for between 47 and 212 vehicles to replace earlier Hagglunds BV206s in their fleet. A contract is scheduled to be awarded at the end of next year as part of the MoD's standard equipment procurement process.######
  
  Singapore Technologies Kinetics' Bronco vehicle is also a strong contender. The Singaporean and Swedish vehicles are tracked and consist of two linked armored units.
  
  
  The new Swedish vehicle would offer protection up to Stanag 2 level and have a better payload than the current Viking used by British forces in Afghanistan.''
  

  The procurement has been upgraded to

  urgent operational requirements (UOR) procurement system,due

  to heavy loss in road side IED.

   

• lionnoisy

  18 Mar 09, 12:12

  i need repeat this MOD article to clear the air--

  http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/TheWarthogIsOnItsWay.htm

  Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, Quentin Davies, said:

  "Warthog will be true to its name as a beast of a vehicle that can manoeuvre across difficult terrain, power-up steep gradients and even cling to slopes. Warthog will provide improved protection to our troops in Afghanistan's Green Zone, where water and a fragile infrastructure make it difficult for other vehicles to operate. It will be able to move through deep water while carrying troops at the heart of our operations."

  A protected gun mount, extra armour, specialist electronic counter-measure equipment and communications tools will be added before Warthog is deployed on operations.

  @@@@@@@@@@

   Equipment and Logistics news article

• lionnoisy

  18 Mar 09, 12:14

  i like Bronco 3 in 1 package.

  

  http://www.malaysiandefence.com/?p=530

• lionnoisy

  18 Mar 09, 12:41

  this is interesting why Viking is used--

  ''On tracked vehicles, the Viking was used because the Marines had nothing else. It will be replaced by a larger version of the same type, the Warthog. There are advantages and disadvantages to tracks versus wheels, but I cannot understand why if a mine-protected tracked vehicle is required, it cannot be produced quickly—to say it cannot be done is simply absurd.''

  House of Commons Hansard Debates for 20 Jan 2009 (pt 0008)

  @@@@@@@@@@@

  Viking is good,but not good enough.Or u can say there is better alternative.

  House of Commons Hansard Ministerial Statements for 29 Oct 2008 (pt 0001)

  ''Viking has provided an excellent capability in Afghanistan, giving us unparalleled access to areas around the Helmand river. But, although we are providing
  29 Oct 2008 : Column 29WS
  some further enhancements to its protection, we have reached the limit of its ability to carry extra weight and protection. This is why we intend to replace Viking in Afghanistan with an alternative, better protected, high mobility vehicle, to be known as Warthog; work is underway to identify the right vehicle to fulfil this role. We will procure over 100 new vehicles with deliveries starting at the end of next year.''

  so u see MOD alreday announces the deliveries date in Oct 2008,

  before the announcement of the award of contract to ST in mid DEc.

  Why MOD has confidence in the delivery date?

  One of the reasons may be ST had showed them the order for the Warthog materials

  .

   

• sgstars

  19 Mar 09, 08:55

  does this

  we have reached the limit of its ability to carry extra weight and protection. This is why we intend to replace Viking in Afghanistan

   

  equate with this ?

   

  It only will be proved if it is up to the task after assessment.

  In UK ATTC,The BAE Viking  is proved not up to the

  requirements of UK MOD!!

  ?

  kindly prove which part of this says that BAE viking is NOT UP TO THE REQUIREMENTS of UK MOD ?

  simply because you lack the mental capacity to think, or the logical faculties to process this information, dosent mean the BAE viking is not up to requirements.

  rather, it means that the mission requirements, have increased to the point where the viking as a platform, is unable to meet or service these requirements. dosent point to the viking as a flawed platform. points to the fact that mission requirements have escalated.

  and it points to this, quote you

  ''with greater protection levels,''mean Bronco is better than Viking

  in protection lah,stupid!!

  exactly my point. its better in protection but does that make it a more combat effective platform. how stupid can you get ? make a point but dont get what it means.

  being better in protection dosent make it a combat effective platform for that matter. i can put you in a battleship grade armour, but if you cant fight and if you are not reliable, you can be shitting in your pants like what you're doing now.

  flawed, stupid and almost criminal ignorance. sad lionnoisy. a new low for you ?

  look at the sherman M4. inferior in gun, inferior in armour, inferior in crew but in sufficient numbers to ovverun the german mark IV panzers. its sheer virtue of strength in numbers, allowed the americans to overcome superior german armour.

  does this mean the m1 abrams is a weak tank ?

  

  

  on the contrary.

  combat experience has allowed the platform manufacturers to find out the weaknesses of the m1 abrams as a weapons platform and improve on it.

  the m1 as a platform has evolved to include new urban combat variants and improved baseline performance in the m1A2 SEP and the M1A2 TUSK

  http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/street-fighters-m1-abrams-tusk-tank-conversions-updated-02546/

  so let me settle this once and for all.

  why are combat proven platforms so in demand ?

  simply because like in the case of the M1, they have met the threat, experienced the danger and have had upgrades/improvements that allows them to overcome their weaknesses. simply put, a combat platform with combat experience, allows the FLAWS within a platform to be recognized and solved. it is a more competent vehicle with lesser known / existing flaws.

   

  the problem with the viking and its replacement by the ATTC is not because its a incompetent vehicle platform or that is so flawed that it cant be rectified. the problem with the viking / BvS10, is that it has reached the limits of its capability growth.

  i.e, you can only add on so much armour to a proven platform. additional armour costs greater wear and tear on the engine and transmission. use under combat conditions implies increased wear and tear and mileage.

  the viking as a platform is combat exhausted. it has reached the end of its capability upgrade curve. any further upgrades would probably NOT be cost effective and wasting money on a worn-out / overused platform.

  2 years of combat wear and tear under operational conditions have probably subjected the viking to the equivalent of about 10 years worth of peacetime operations. is it worth spending on a SLEP / refurb program on something that has no future potential for growth without incurring a performance penalty ?

  oh waitaminit, isnt that your poor little lion's problem ? cannot think for himself ? only copy and paste articles and information without thinking them through ?

  well, ild like you to think about this

  But wat is the fzzking use of these articles?

  Paper and lip services alone cant save the ass of UK soldiers.Right?

  Only the right armour can save their ass.

  what is right armour ? does right armour mean heavy armour ? what kinds of armour platforms are you talking about ? what qualities of that kinda armour ? what kind of terrain that armour is operating on ? how reliable is that armour under certain terrain conditions ? does that armor platform have capability upgrade options ? does it have future growth potential ?

  you obviously have failed to think this through. dont waste my time with your spam. come back to get your ass pwned when you have a more thoroughly thought through nonsense idea.

   

   

   

   

   

• gd4u

  19 Mar 09, 19:05

  sgstars, too chim he no unsderstand (as if he would understand simiplicity)
  
  but just to add on to ur point. Lion, do u think RSAF would choose F-15E over Eurofighter or Rafale if not for the combat proven record ???

• Sepecat

  19 Mar 09, 19:37

  Following up on  gd4u's diversion,  I think F15E, Eurofighter and Rafale are all very excellent aircraft although they are also very different aircraft. A  combat proven record is a good criteria for selection but it really depends on what were the SAFs requirements.

  Winning the Warthog order  from UK is an unparalled achievement for STK. Obviously there were no other contenders besides the Bronco ( & a modified one at that )  that cud have met UKs requirements in the short time that they required the vehicle. Only time will tell ( & it will be soon )  if the Bronco will be proven a combat worthy ATTC.  

  Additional orders from UK for STK's Bronco soon after they are fielded and battle tested  will be the litmus test.