Seems that after many years of threatening, the Hoefyster/Patria buy for the SANDF to replace the Ratel might actually be getting somewhere. I might actually get to use one before I retire!! By which time the Patria design will be how many years old already?

http://www.buanews.gov.za/view.php?ID=0705...p;coll=buanew07

Also quite a change to see some of the local newpapers (even though it is in a strange language) "lower" themselves to actually do some reporting on the military which is not totally negative.


Now just to wait and see how this gets gets made a mess of>

"Horseshoe project is Denel's biggest ever" ?

I really think that this project would be a good purchase. At least is nice....

Has some one info regarding the Patria Hulls??

Best regards

Mirlo

Finland selling wheeled AFV:s to SA is like selling sand to Kuwait.

Good choice there. You got the best machine on the market.

Why do you think is the best vehicle??

Best regards

Mirlo

In all the tests done by the byers the AMV has beaten the competition without breaking a sweat.

Yes, it has lost some competitions in bidding races though for its higher price tag, but in terms of performance there is no better.

SA is buying 264 or so vehicles in total, which makes this the second largest sale for Patria (the first one being obviously the sale to Poland). SA has ordered some of the vehicles as mortar carriers; I wonder if they'll buy AMOS?

Selling sand in the Sahara.
After you got rid of all the sand yourself first, removed your ability to replace said sand yourself and can now make more money yourself by importing it/sand from somewhere else.

Most of the previous "sand-producers" were either retired, or is now in the employ or other sand-producers around the world, that are actually prepared to employ them, pay them and not replace them with new sand-producers that are not familiar with sand at all.

Ever noticed SA-like designs in various other countries over the last 10+ years or so?

At this stage no AMOS purchase. Hulls will mostly be manufactured in SA and will be substantially adapted for local conditions. Most of the extra bits and pieces will be locally designed and developed, which includes all the varient plug-in bits. That includes turrets, command version, and other stuff like the mortar turntable etc. Would have preferred a locally buildt purpose designed veh like the original Hoefyster project (have PDF copies/scanned in pics of the hulls etc, just don't know how to post it - can e-mail it to whoever is interested in posting it/know how to), or some communality with the Rooikat project. Better yet, a Rooikat IFV.

I still find it mildly ammusing that we are spending R8b on new Mech kit, but cannot afford to train, maintain and exercise what we have now.

So it's going to be just an open-top manually muzzle-loaded mortar carrier like its Stryker cousin?

Who knows? The varients still need to be designed etc, which work will be done by Denel locally. At present the system used is a open topped design, which has served both the SADF and SANDF well over the many years it has been in service. Procurement wise cost and technical ability (apparently not much of the skills base left) will be the main issue preventing an AMOS like design, so I don't see anything other than the current open type set up.

Personally I would also be weary of a more complex and heavier AMOS-like system. Indirect fire support might then just migrate to higher echelons or even art. Just worried that with the much more expensive Patria type Hoefyster, the amount of 81's in Mech will decrease.
The 81's are currently attached to Supt Coy and theoretically controlled by the Bn Cmd but mostly attached to a specific COY or even Pl for its support. When I listen to some complaints on this and other websites re embedded indirect fire support and micro management, I can't imagine having to ask someone for this low level of fire support. Open topped mortars are also training and troop friendly, as the mortarman's skills translate very easily from the conventional MOT Inf and Light Inf's 60s and 81's to Mech.

We'll there's always NEMO if AMOS doesn't cut it for the cost.

What armament will the Denel turret have for the IFV variant, any published plans on that?

From Patria web sites:

Patria AMV platforms selected in South Africa

The acquisition organisation of South African Ministry of Defence has today signed a contract with the local defence manufacturer Denel Land Systems, a division of Denel (Pty) Ltd for the new generation infantry combat vehicle programme. Patria has been selected to supply the vehicle platforms to Denel Land Systems, which also supplies the turrets for the vehicles.

The planned total scope of the programme covers the development, industrialisation and serial production of 264 wheeled infantry combat vehicles in 5 different versions. The contract covers the entire programme, but different phases of the programme will be ordered in phases. The first vehicles will be manufactured in Finland, after which the production will gradually be transferred to South Africa.

Patria has extensive co-operation agreements with South African companies. In addition to Denel, Patria works closely with Land Mobility Technologies (Pty) Ltd concerning vehicle and logistic engineering and BAE Systems Land Systems South Africa (Pty) Ltd concerning serial production and life cycle support of the vehicles. Patria will arrange extensive engagement of local working force, services and material purchases from local suppliers as well as other activities producing economic benefits for the local industry.

“We are extremely satisfied that the South African customer has selected Patria AMV as their vehicle platform. Patria AMV has outperformed in field tests fulfilling the toughest procurement requirements of modern defence forces. Patria will work in close co-operation with its South African partners to maximise the local content in the program. Our technology transfer program will bring considerable engineering, manufacturing and life cycle support capabilities to local industry working as suppliers of local components and services,” states Mr Jorma Wiitakorpi, President and CEO of Patria.

Patria AMV is technologically the most advanced 8x8 armoured wheeled vehicle in the market at present. Patria has about 1200 AMV vehicles contracted or under final negotiations currently. AMV’s serial production started in 2004. Patria AMV 8x8 offers an outstanding possibility to unify customer’s vehicle fleet, since it is a part of a larger product family covering also 6x6, system carrier as well as heavy weapon platform versions.

Patria is a Defence and Aerospace Group with international operations delivering competitive solutions based on its own specialist know-how and partnerships. Patria is owned by the State of Finland and the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company EADS N.V.


Further information: www.patria.fi

30 or 35mm.
Turrets for both have been buildt already and have been shown on the Patria when in SA guise. Have pics of both on cradles outside veh, but unfortunately I'm too technologically challenged to post PDF format here.

Copyrigth: Patria

Have you asked if TTK Ciar could help you? More at this topic

Janes DW says the IFV gun will be 30mm cam-driven dual-feed 'cam gun'.
Mortars will be Denel's 60mm long range breech-loaded mortar.
18 vehicles will get Ingwe ATGMs.

Either you can send it to me and I can "hung" it in the web for everybody to see.

OK, I have done a Photobucket album with the pics exT70 sent me. Anybody can see them here:

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a50/glmm/

Very good and interesting pics, by the way!

Album is private.

Got the password?

Ups! I just made it public!

It might be worth mentioning over at militaryphotos.net. There's a pretty big SADF/SANDF crowd there. I'm sure they'd appreciate the pics.

Thanks
Should have asked someone to do the conversion ages ago.

These are concept mock-ups to explore the layout and set-up of what then would have been a locally designed and built SA version of an IFV to replace the Ratel series of vehicles. These are accordingly not working (“real”) vehicles, but are setups of various proposals for command, squad and other variants. The turrets shown (30 and 35mm versions) are however the real thing and probably very close to what would be fitted to the Patria. The hulls were at the time of the photographs being taken (not by me) standing at the back of a vehicle park.

There is/was a long list of (to me upsetting and disturbing) reasons why a “local” version was not accepted. The pictures showing a distant dust track, is of the Patria being tested in the background. Excellent marketing. At the time of the appraisal of the Hoefyster project, an unsolicited vehicle was sent to SA for testing. So while you show concept vehicle, a running veh is being driven around (apparently did 10,000km of testing). Would however still prefer a front engined Rooikat based IFV, but that is another story. The Patria shown at AAD06 was a typical example of planners/buyers/so-called experts once again not having a f-ing clue what is going on in the real world and on the ground. Or having been away from it for way too long.

So in your opinion Patrias AMV is wrong choise to SA? Why? Why doesn't it meet your countrys/armys special demands? You are referring polictics being part of deal but IMO there is no political aspect in Finlands side. As a matter of fact Finnish politics aren't exactly very pro-SA so this should be IMO negative side of deal.

Wrong choice? Only time will tell. When we finally get our hands on it (and break it). When we see what it costs to maintain, run, how the manufacturing deal will work out, availability of spare parts. The spec it will be manufactured to. How much money is made available in SANDF budget to maintian and train after all the money is spent on purchasing the vehicle. How well the various variants are designed, built etc. How maintainable it is in the bush. If I can fix most of it when I am stranded 600km from the nearest supplies/log because some small technical gadget broke. How well it operates in the bush. Little cameras to the side, flip down monitors, things that move, fold down, rattle, grind down, break, get abused. We do not live in Europe. Africa is Africa.

Please do not misunderstand me. I have no gripe with the Patria AMV itself (used to be referred to here as the "Finnish"). What little I know of vehicles in this class (my experience is unfortunately limited to tracked and wheeled vehs on this side of the planet and quick visits on yours) the Patria seems as good as we are going to get. By problem is more with what is put in and on it. And the development process here locally. So no problem with the Finns or the veh. After so many years of the forgotten Bush War and what was achieved equipment wise, we lost the ability to design and manufacture something we managed to do on a shoestring more than 30 years ago. To build something purpose fit for what we have to deal with. Would have loved parts communality with the Rooikat and a spin off on that design. But I'm very glad sanity prevailed over the whole iKwla proposal as well.

Okey I now understand what you mean. I had similar thought when FDF changed robust Russian tech BMP's to new Western high tech CV9030's, but I got over it when I realised the advantages what the high tech gives you on the battle field! Just remember that people tend to think that new high tech means maintenance free because the VCS gives info about maintenance problems in to the VIS if you your vehicle has one but in real life that is opposite: if the VIS shows problem - it is too late do anythig about it! With modern modular hight tech is easier to do mainatenance by changing modular components than fixing parts inside the vehicle as we used to do BUT those modular high tech components it self will need a lot more knowlege to be fixed than we are used to. Those days are permanently over when broken tanks needed just crew with bublegum and wire to be battle ready again!

You will not hear me complain about "real" ablity enhancers. Better sights, better laying equip FCS), better weapon/s (we'll wait and see), better mobility (I'll also wait and see), better survivability, comfortable ride etc. What ticks me off is gimmicks and "over-design". SA designed equipment has always been modular in design. Plug-out-plug-in. Quick, easy. But tough and simple. Better than having to sit around and wait to fix it yourself if available. Any idiot can maintain it that way. But it was also simple, robust and designed to be able to by-pass and fix yourself if needed. Because if you sit in the middle of nothing and you can't swop modules, you're screwed. Which is not something any idiot seems to be able to do. Design hi-tech but simple (or then relatively so). The old $5m pen and 2c pencil story. It only needs to be good enough to work, to do the job well. I'd rather forego the bells and wistles, save the money and spend it where it it really needed. Training. Quality in manpower. Firepower. Supplies. Leave the gameboy, Xbox and whatever gadgets at home. Get the job done.

As opposed to spending less money on designing, developing and producing an indigenous vehicle?

GI30 30mm Cam Gun for Hoefyster.

Breechload 60mm mortar to be installedin Hoefyster

So they don't want AMOS or NEMO? What's the reason behind a 60mm mortar on an APC that can carry dual 120mm?

at a guess, price.

I would say it's simply a question of communality with other 60mm mortars and the fact that those new long-barrelled designs with appropriate ammunition can achieve the same range and effect on the target like a normal 81mm mortar.

Besides, 60mm gun-mortars are an established weapon system, used on Eland 60 and Ratel 60 armoured vehicles.

Cost obviously plays a role, but is not the major mover in this regard. At one of the presentations we have had, I asked why not the existing 81. Mentioned was the increased range and effect of the 60 (and 81 for that matter), but the biggest mover apparently was the amount of bombs/rounds carried. I can't rememember the exact numbers, but it works out to more than 3 times the amount of ammo. In support the 120 would be able to deliver supporting fire for ea 15min, the 60 for 50min at the same rate of fire (I'm thumb sucking here, but the ratio was about this - they had exact figure at the ICCC). We plan on long distance ops over very bad/non-existing roads where re-supply is a problem, so being able to carry more and be self sufficient over longer periods is the greater mover. Most of the changes to the Patira AMV to create the Hoefyster/Badger configuration are basically done to this effect.

exT70, I understand what do you mean. Rosomaks (Polish name for AMV) proven damn good. Even in quite tough conditions of Afghanistan. What is more, there were significant problems with the procurement (much inaccurate information was placed into media due to ignorancy, and politicans went in)... but Rosomak after struggles went to Afghanistan, and is fighting well Talebans (journalists and politicans are already beaten, and you guys probably know how difficult it is to beat journalists and politicans in our times). But I do see your doubt about the tactics of its use. I am not fully certain of it, but Polish doctrine predicts to some extent local counterattacks by Rosomak equipped units against enemy mechanized units. Our Rosomak brigades are deprived of tank support, so you might imagine what would be result of such an action, and lack of tank (even light tank like CV90120 with APwould be welcome) support is more than disadvantageous, in other words we have units not prepared (or partly prepared) to conventional warfare, that's sad fact.
Does SA plan a wheeled tank destroyer with 105 or 120 mm for its AMVs?

Wouldn't the Polish army integrate tanks with those Rosomak formations in such an occurrence?

As far as I'm concerned any attack without tank support is madness, but I might be biased.

Naturally, they are good, for the cost of 4 million US$ per unit. Probably, they are excessively good for the real SANDF of foreseeable future, as the black soldiers (who are not great intellectuals and technicians, to put it mildly) will use them mostly for suppression of various tribal/bandit unrests, mutinies and insurrections in very vast and very wild savannah throughout Africa.
The better solution would be something cheaper, simpler and more numerous, because 264 Patrias will replace 1200 Ratels (1 to 4.5). And something indigenous, because this order means the imminent death for the local industry which is reduced to producing armoured jeeps and trucks and some subsystems. And even they will die out gradually because any viable industry cannot subsist for long without some leading valuable product. In other words, moderately modernized newly built Ratel (very successful design for local geographical conditions) would be better for the real local needs and export than Patria.
But such is the sad destiny of RSA.

The American Masters will defend you, thus, this rant is irrelevant in the African section. In South, East, Central and Western Africa (where SANDF will expectedly act) the grandiose tank battles are unlikely. Even in the "regular" armies the usual equipment is T-55/59 (rarely with laser range-finders, as few Zimbabwean T-69), the most serious threat is Angolan earliest T-72s without ERA and with very doubtful crews.


Currently SANDF has 80 active and 80 reserve Rooikats which are not excessively old (second half of 1980s) and still meet local requirements (if necessary, 76mm gun can be replaced with 105mm gun, but it is hardly necessary now).

Of course, SA people know better about SA plans and, possibly, will notify about them. But it is unlikely that Rooikats will be replaced within nearest 5 years at least.

Badger will come in Cmd, IFV (30mm), Mortar (60), Fire Support (30mm, but with more ammo etc) and Missle (ZT3 type) variants, thus at present no plans for 105 or 120. That is what Rooikat and Olifant are there for. Using an IFV against tanks is suicidal. Tanks fight tanks. Ratel 90's sucessfully fighting T's in Angola was a desperate measure which depended on the very close terrain (down to 30m at times) and extremely good crews/crew drills. May it never have to be repeated again.

That part of the SA arms industry has died years ago. The ability to design and built from scratch a new vehicle was lost long time ago (if it ever existed, the "West" helped with most of the so-called local designs), hence the Patria AMV import. However, just regurgitating the Ratel (iKwla?) is also a dead end. This has been disussed often both here and over on MilPhotos, so I'm not going to re-hash this point again. In short, I was all for a IFV-ised Rooikat type (engne in front etc) with common parts etc and I think parts of the Badger is over complex, and I'll leave it at that.
Your point on black soldiers being technically and intellectually inferior is so far off the mark, racist, uninformed and grossly generalised, that I am not going to stoop to such a level as to even commenting thereon.

Perhaps it would, perhaps not, it depends on our decidents, but combined arms is a difficult art and it's better to be prepared sooner.

Interesting point of view, that master-slave (or maybe tzar-servant?) relationship. From Russia with love... Thanks for sharing that, DIU




Sorry for OT.

In your opinion, this death bears no relation to the state policy? Even “the dead” can be revived gradually, if there is a state will to revive and develop. The previous RSA experience proves this. But the current RSA government is obviously uninterested in preserving the independent national military industry even in the branches which could be preserved.

I remember it. But RSA is not in so threatened situation now to sacrifice the local production easily for the sake of doubtful “military efficiency” (and Rooikat will inevitably follows Ratel in several years, because the official re-orientation to the imported model denies the South African military industry any credibility for potential foreign customers of Rooikat). Even downgraded, but completely locally built Ratel (or even lighter design) would be more advantageous in long run than a little number of imported super-expensive toys.


Frankly speaking, SANDF is intended mostly for police and “peace-keeping” operations in very poor and backward regions. Is a little number of expensive and complicated 25-t wheeled IFVs with 525 h.p. engine really optimal for such activity? Now all mechanized power of SANDF is reduced to two brigades approximately. Not many for the 50-million country and all South-African region with its potentially turbulent future. Possibly, it would be better to keep more numerous park of simpler 15-t APC. Taking into account that AMV or “Rooikat-IFV” are hardly more resistant to RPG-7 (the main real threat in the region) than lighter designs.

I've spoken not about “black soldiers as such”, but about the particular black soldiers of the today’s South African ground forces. Many trustworthy observers (including those who could observe the late military exercises and “live firing” of South African ground forces) affirm that the today’s South African soldiers, especially of the low ranks (and they are almost wholly black), are prepared much worse than their colleagues 20 years ago, and very badly from any objective point of view. This is probably because they are recruited from the low layers of society now, and these low layers are very far from the high layers in the specific South African conditions.
As a result, a striking contrast between ultra-modern equipment and half-literate soldiers and sergeants (sometimes with doubtful morals) can appear.


Do you deny that your government depends upon USA and not on your own powers in satisfying your paranoiac obsession, i.e. defense from evil russkies? The volume of your military expenditures and their distribution, just as your loud-voiced foreign policy, tell different tales.

But the South African situation radically differs from your Polish-Finnish one. They have no nearby distinctive mythological Russian bogeyman rejected by the symbolical US interference, but potentially very numerous mostly “unofficial and irregular” little social and tribal/national conflicts all around, which should be overcome on their own. This is why the mechanical transfer of the today’s European models of military building into absolutely different African reality looks bizarre enough.

What about protection from mines and heavy machinegun (12.7mm) fire? The AMV is particularly established in both, how is the Rooikat?

The between 3 and 5t weight difference between Hoefyster/Badger (which by the way is NOT the veh badged as such in the AAD08 pics doing the rounds)(which does not incl turret weight, as no turret has not been finalised) and the Patria AMV is almost solely in mine protection. Rooikat is similarly protected.

State policy or state spending? The previous regime spent an unsustainably large % of the budget on the military, so if a policy of not over-spending on the military industrial complex is deemed stupid and killing an industry, then so be it. The previous system was not sustainable and the general gross ineptitude that the SA arms industry has shown the last 14 years has painted it ready for extinction. If it could n't make a killing during the post 2003 MRAP era (where it was the undisputed world champ not too long ago), how the hell is it going to survive in the long run?

Going the Ratel route is going reverse gear, unless of course the country again tries to bancrupt itself as it did during the 80's by building everything at home and breaking the bank in so doing. Dispite what everybody says, the "good old days" were not "the good old days". Negative economical growth and 0% investment in infrastructure is going down hill, whether people remember it fondly or not. Kindly however remember that the whole veh system (bar the first few) will be fully manufactured in SA.

SANDF now mainly involved peackeeping (not peace inforcement) and this is done in Caspirs and Mamba's (which serve well if the inability to maintain them is ignored). Ratels are seen as too aggressive. Ratels in white UN livery are not SANDF vehs. The Hoefyster buy is for the conventional role, not peacekeeping. There is at present only two regular force Mech Bns (the only other Mech units are in the Army Conventional Reserves). There is at present no funds to properly train the regulars, let alone the reserves, so what you want us to do with large numbers of anything is unclear. Of the 264 many will stand idle due to lack of engine hours should the current situation remain.

No vehicle is "RPG proof".

Today's black soldiers are indeed "worse prepared" than their predecessors of 20 years ago, especially the jnr and snr leaders. 20 Years ago we were still at war, fighting what was called a "total war", spending gazillions of R's on the war and had a 20 year old conscription system geared and tweaked to procure and produce the best jnr leaders in the country. No post war fully funded army can be expected to be on par with an underfunded peace-time army. However, and I can tell you this after having served in both the SADF and SANDF, the quality of the individual rifleman is potentially better. My troops that are well training today are on par or better than their predecessors of 20 years ago. Support weapon skills and jnr leaders are worse, but that is mainly due to budgets. Firing huge amounts of ammo in training will prepare you better than todays' simulator and no-ammo dominated days. That is a symptom or peace divident of having no war to fight.


Your comments re the protection of the USA I don't understand. The current government is a result of a tri-partheid alliance between the ANC, Cosatu (trade unions) and the SACP (Communist Party). It is decidedly non-alligned and definately more anti-US then pro-US.