woa2 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Bit about Land Rovers in the news. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7140813.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84KB11 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 They will be wanting the CVRT's back next! Better to be in a Spartan than a Land Rover when someone is shooting at you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 the usual 'They' take 5 years to find out what everyone with an ounce of knowledge knew in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeEnfield Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I did read somewhere that land Rover/Ford were not tendering for inclusion in some catagory, (Too modern, don't tend to retain such infomation.......) Being cynical, with Ford producing a range of 4x4's,..........and trying to 'off load', L/R, one COULD say why promote such marque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirhc Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Remember these are not normal Land Rovers, they're the Snatch variant which were designed for use in Northern Ireland. They're getting much more use & abuse and attacked by worse things than they were ever designed for on current operations. It could be worse, the squaddies could be driving round in Hummers with some plate welded over the doors. I wonder how many people were killed in those kind of improvised vehicles in the same period? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienFTM Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 They will be wanting the CVRT's back next! Better to be in a Spartan than a Land Rover when someone is shooting at you! TBH I think I'd rather be in a Saracen. Steel armour not aluminium; Boat-shaped hull to better deflect mine blast; six wheels but easily capable of running on fewer if one or more is taken out by a mine. Wheels: cheaper and easier to maintain than tracks. Any more for any more? And why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazz Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 As I'm fairly new to the Forum this subject will probably have already been covered. The lesson on Armour V L/Rovers was it not learnt in NI. when they kept losing bods in L/Rs so started to Use Saracens and Pigs. I Know when I was there what I prefered to ride in. BAZ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da bomb Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 It's quite unbelievable that they hadn't procured wheeled armoured vehicles long before this, prior to the hastily bought in new stuff, it was Saxon's and that was it, look how many conflicts we have been involved with since the fall of the Soviet union, and they are still running around in gear designed for the Cold War. Des Browne, trying to tell us that the forces are well equipped for the situation...my arse! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisPWRR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 They won't get rid of all Land Rovers only the Snatch ones... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Saxon killed more people by falling over than it protected. Snatch was designed for Police use, the most it had to stand up to was 9mm or long range 7.62 not RPG and artilley shells at close range. Nothing is going to stop a couple of 155mm shells going off underneath it. Just because you call someone a Terrorist, does not mean they are stupid. The British Army used open top Land Rovers in the early days of the current NI troubles because they could see what was going on and return fire. Armoured vehicles have always been vunerable in built up areas. The weaponary used in Iraq and Afganastan is only called IEOD because it isn't built in a factory. The IRA could knock out a Snatch with an improvised RPG that cost about £5 to make. The most expensive bit was the Drivall used as a launch tube. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeEnfield Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Armoured vehicles have always been vunerable in built up areas. The IRA could knock out a Snatch with an improvised RPG that cost about £5 to make. The most expensive bit was the Drivall used as a launch tube. Hasn't that always been the way,...................Armour/vehicles, even cavalry, were and still are massively disadvantaged as soon as the fighting involves confimed spaces. Comes down to the PBI, to sort those out. :whistle: As for cheap to produce AT weopenary,.....look at the one shot panzerfaust, from wwii, cheap as chips to produce - and discard, but with enough power to wreck any allied armour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazz Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 In ref to WW2 Allied armour, a budgies F**t could knock most of it out. Baz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeEnfield Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 In ref to WW2 Allied armour, a budgies F**t could knock most of it out. Baz. Aye, Unfortunatly, VERY true................ :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.4854fbb26292d396a6b90659a3d1c4e2.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.