S
Steve Firth
Guest
R. David Steele <[email protected]/OMEGA> wrote:
> Question: how tough is the Defender in comparison to the Hummer?
> Will it take the abuse that US soldiers give?
The Hummer has a reputation of being rather fragile, among the British
military. Certainly the H1 at least was regarded as a mild joke rather
than a battle vehicle. I think the H2 was supposed to be better.
The Land Rover isn't perfect, but it is IMO way better than a Hummer as
far as rugged build and longevity goes. I just saw a reminder (on TV
tonight) that for the ultimate in off-road there's the Bowler Wildcat.
Loosely based on a Defender with Hummer type long travel suspension and
a decent V8. It's capable of 0.-60 in 5s but can also travel all day
across the desert at >70mph. At GBP 40,000 it's also still (just)
cheaper than a Hummer.
> Frankly, in comparison to the cost of the Hummer, an armored LD
> would allow us to equip more troops with vehicles.
The SAS tend to use very old Land Rovers, Series III with a windscreen
(only), no roof. These are both v. cheap and v. rugged and they can
carry a decent payload.
> Nothing is going to stop an RPG-7 round this side of a tank.
> But a little armor might help protect from small arms fire and
> some land mines.
Well... composite armour is a possibility as well as reactive armour. It
may be possible to get an armoured vehicle that could stop an RPG and
still weigh less than 7 tonnes.
> My concern is having a vehicle that does not cost us over
> $100,000 US.
Cost of a hammer to the US Army isn't it? (Independence Day)
--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.
> Question: how tough is the Defender in comparison to the Hummer?
> Will it take the abuse that US soldiers give?
The Hummer has a reputation of being rather fragile, among the British
military. Certainly the H1 at least was regarded as a mild joke rather
than a battle vehicle. I think the H2 was supposed to be better.
The Land Rover isn't perfect, but it is IMO way better than a Hummer as
far as rugged build and longevity goes. I just saw a reminder (on TV
tonight) that for the ultimate in off-road there's the Bowler Wildcat.
Loosely based on a Defender with Hummer type long travel suspension and
a decent V8. It's capable of 0.-60 in 5s but can also travel all day
across the desert at >70mph. At GBP 40,000 it's also still (just)
cheaper than a Hummer.
> Frankly, in comparison to the cost of the Hummer, an armored LD
> would allow us to equip more troops with vehicles.
The SAS tend to use very old Land Rovers, Series III with a windscreen
(only), no roof. These are both v. cheap and v. rugged and they can
carry a decent payload.
> Nothing is going to stop an RPG-7 round this side of a tank.
> But a little armor might help protect from small arms fire and
> some land mines.
Well... composite armour is a possibility as well as reactive armour. It
may be possible to get an armoured vehicle that could stop an RPG and
still weigh less than 7 tonnes.
> My concern is having a vehicle that does not cost us over
> $100,000 US.
Cost of a hammer to the US Army isn't it? (Independence Day)
--
Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but
are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for
friendly advice in a flame-free environment.