Jump to content

Ferrets in Afganistan.


Hedgehog
 Share

Recommended Posts

Would the Daimler Ferret (suitably redesigned to counter an IED threat) be a good replacement for the opentopped Jackle?

Discuss.

I'm feeling that this may be a similar situation as the Cobra/Apache in Iraq debate.

That the Ferret with modified hull would be a superior vehicle in countering IEDs and Taliban ambushes.

Just thought if you guys agreed, maybe its one of those design classics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are less then 15 ton you are in deep trouble

i saw an RG 31 right in front of me going up 150 feet.....result 4 injured no death...wonder a 4 ton ferret?

but not good in cross country.

The 60's era ferret we got in front of my unit will not resist for shure....

The whole point is crew survability(tonnage an emplacement) VS ground clearance

Overall bigger truck is bringing bigger bomb.

my 5 cents

McDLT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To counter the IED's the AFV/truck needs to have a "V" shaped hull bottom to redirect the blast/shock wave from going vertical to a more horizontal direction. The ferret does not have such a hull bottom.

Also it as McDLT posted have a close ground clearance compared to such afv's as the LAVIII of similar modern AFV/trucks.

It's all about standoff distance or redirecting the blast/wave.

I have driven the ferret (showing my age), and on the recce side without IED's around they are the cats ass (in a good way). Sort of like what the Fennek is today.

OH, Al, Nils we need the ferret/fennek in a bad way in SB:biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

give me height width and lenght measurements, what weapons you want, whether you guys want it wheeled or tracked, and list the features of defence and ill get right on it :)

this is what i think so far from the design exercise I did before:

1. A "v-hull" design or higher ground clearance

2. Weight distribution (ground preasure)

3. A good power to weight ratio (a powerful and efficent powerplant)

4. a 40mm CTWS, 35mm auto-cannon, a 30mm chaingun or .50 cal MG as main armament

5. A wheeled or tracked vehicle

optional: 6. spare parts as additional armour ie spare track links, spare tank road-wheels and spare 4x4 wheels

optional 7. Applique Armour ie ERA, bolt-on side armour, "cage" armour (the armour that is made of bars that surround the whole vehicle which was currently used in afghanistan and Iraq) and EM (electro-magnetic) skinned armour.

also ive looked into other things like "band track", replacable rear role compartments(ie command, recce, troop transport, equipment carrying, ARRV, etc,etc) and one-man turrets (this is to reduce th size of the platform or to carry more equipment and troops) look at my thread to get further details on the products.

Edited by FletchRDG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

is this something your looking for ?

Daimlerferret2.jpg

and to compare.....

ferretsideandfrontelavation.gif

and also an upgraded version

ferret2.jpg

This all new Ferret has an new one-man turret complete with a 30mm Auto-cannon with .50 coax MG. Replaced scopes for 2inch thick transsteel windows for better view, intergrated smoke grenade launchers into the turret design, a "V" hull design, it also features spare parts and appliqué armour and an upgraded powerplant.

You could say its an entirely new scout car with all the bells and whistles, you can now tear me apart lol

Edited by FletchRDG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well packing a 30mm turns it more into a Fox, which was top heavy.

What I was thinking of was redesigning the hull to better counter the IED threat. (make it a V shape with sacrificial storage lockers between the wheels. With sacrificial suspension & drivetrain which is external to the main hull.) and a new diesel engine, B60 petrol is a bit outdated now, and doesn't fit the one fuel policy of the MoD. Whether it has a manual or auto transmission is debatable, but probably swings in favour to the auto.

50.Cal as a main armament,

I'm thinking that glass windows would add a fair amount of weight.

In the desert the driver doesn't need that much visabilty when closed down, bigger peris, sure.

Maybe if a TIS can be shoe-horned into a one man turret, then go for it. And Bar Armour, Applique probably too heavy.

But the main changes which are required:

Redesigned V-shape hull with sac storage lockers.

Diesel engine.

Max .50 cal main gun.

Runflat tyres.

Self Sealing Fuel tank goes in the bottom of the hull. (Diesel = Great armour)

Bigger Hatches, big enough to allow external assistance to evac crew.

With these ideas, maybe a Daimler Mk4 Big-Wheel Ferret would be a better starting point than the Mk 2.

Oh and fit the damn thing with those natty Leo Driver's seat slings, or a blast absorbing seat and harness seatbelts.

The whole idea of the thread was to come up with soemthing better than that opened up Jackle thing,

which when/if it gets hit by an IED the crew are usually hit by blast over-pressure, EMP, shrapnel, other nastiness.

Ferret 2 MK1 should (hopefully) prevent this nastiness.

Edited by Hedgehog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well that was the point of my thread but when I put on a 30mm cannon I was looking at the new ammuntion 30mm cannons are getting. these cannons can now fire the baby 30mm APFSDS, HE rounds and the turret also has a coax fitted with a .50 Cal MG to sort of "spray and scoot". But looking at the ferret and the fox the ferrets turret is more towards the front end rather then in the middle or back.

what i was thinking with this design was that because there maybe abandoned cars with IEDS planted in them, or a bunker attackin the scout cars position, something with abit more punch then an MG maybe needed whether its actually going to be used or its used psychologically.

as for IEDs I think ordinary square boxes arent good enough anymore, they should be triangular or have an angle to the design to divert the blasts. but why not use the chasis of the bedford "4 tonner" trucks, its high enough, fit a v-shaped armoured plate to the bottom and still fit spare wheels underneathgive its and add an angled metal box fitted with windows, and im guessin it can already be fitted with a .50 cal MG but we could put a remote weapons system there with that passenger seated slightly further back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for IEDs I think ordinary square boxes arent good enough anymore, they should be triangular or have an angle to the design to divert the blasts. but why not use the chasis of the bedford "4 tonner" trucks, its high enough, fit a v-shaped armoured plate to the bottom and still fit spare wheels underneathgive its and add an angled metal box fitted with windows, and im guessin it can already be fitted with a .50 cal MG but we could put a remote weapons system there with that passenger seated slightly further back.

British Army has done this already, tis the Saxon APC.

The thing with a 30mm is its all nice and good, but the vehicle is a good 50% bigger with one of those, with the power traverse, the ammo x2, the power feed to the cannon and the protection of the above. Its also bigger and more likely to be spotted.

Size matters.

Unless of course you know of a self contained 20mm cannon like the Oerlikon or Polsten, but these should be considered the upper limit.

And the heavier it is the less mobile it shall be, and defeats the point of a wheeled vehicle. If you're going with tracks and a 30mm look at the Scimitar, which can't take 7.62mm hits. A Ferret can.

The role of the Ferret is to scout, there-fore smaller is better.

The Fox and such like perform the role of Scout/light fire support, so they have the cannon etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well whats goin through my head is:

will it fit into a C-130?

will a C-130 carry it?

does it have sufficant weapnry to take on something simular?

will it have the sufficant power to weight ratio?

how tall is it?

how wide is it?

how long is it?

how many crew members?

what role will it play?

what can be applied to be used as applied armour?

will it effect performance?

I know that if you want really thick armour it will effect performance but if you want performance you'll have less armour so to find that balance is kind of hard. I think square boxes are a no go, as easy as it is to apply something to it but it compromises deflection of a blast or projectile.

but i can see what your saying that 30mm is too big and too powerful but something is needed to to combat bunkers, cars, pick-ups, and general positions. Im thinking of using less ammo but still pack a threatening amount of firepower, the one shot one kill sort of thing.

but thats how im thinking. I might not be right on this.

Edited by FletchRDG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

am i thinking too big?

its just that ive seen alot of AIFV families like the Boxer MRAV, Scorpion CVRT family, CV-90 family, and they seem to do the job pretty well or is it because they're so big and heavy that they're not as fast as say a Land Rover or a Humvee?

is it that it needs to be very nimble like a land rover but needs armour and power of an AFV?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

CV90: Tracked.

Boxer: (Nearly) no armament.

You wanted a nimble, survivable, and powerfully armed vehicle that was also C130 transportable. With that combination all you can hope for is something like the Stryker family, and here there already arfe significant compromises made with respect to crew ergonomics, protection level, and long-term life expectancy of the vehicle hull due to the use of very hard but also brittle steels for dynamic load bearing structural elements (and not just as add-on armor plates).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well i was looking at a Land Rover chasis, that being reinforced would make a good place to start because its light but strong. then add suspension units that can be entirely replacable in 5 mins (3 or 4 pins ate the most holding it to the body). Im thinking addin slight angles to almost anything that would normally be straight to make it more resistant to smalls arms fire and maybe IED blasts depending on the quality of the armour. .50 cal MG fitted in the turret, the idea of a 30mm cannon has gone out the window, though i could do a family but we're specificly talking about a scout car with enough armour for crew survivability and an engine that will get them out of trouble quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
well i was looking at a Land Rover chasis, that being reinforced would make a good place to start because its light but strong.

By the time you have it 7.62mm AP proof it will no longer be light, and it will probably be underpowered and not very mobile either.

Just look at the Fennek. Even the Dutch version isn't 7.62mm AP proof, just 7.62mm ball. And neither the German nor the Dutch apparently behave well when running over a mine. And the Fennek was designed from ground up and not a 30 year old design shoehorned into a fighting vehicle platform that it wasn't meant to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its nearly an impossable task but what about dorchester armour, maybe a lighter composite of that armour could be used to hopefully solve that problem. I mean you cant have too much armour because it'll effect performance but too little armour and a rifle round will shun through but maybe if the quality of light armour were to change it would improve performance and the weight issue.

It is a big problem but hopefully it can be solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
its nearly an impossable task but what about dorchester armour

Dorchester is heavy. If you need to have a lightweight solution you must look into products like AMAP by Deisenroth (successor to MEXAS, which is mounted on all the Strykers).

Most armor is not suitable for bearing the loads for which the chassis is designed. But on the other hand, if you want a lightweight solution the chassis HAS GOT to be the main armor element, so you need materials which are reasonably cheap, relatively easy to handle in the manufacturing processes, suitable both as armor material and to withstand the strain of loads for which you usually pick a steel that is tailored for elastic deformation.

The only known material to combine all these mutually exclusive requirements is Unobtanium.

Even if we place our bets on active defense systems (which aren't fully mature yet) we will still need a minimum of passive armor to stop the remaining projectile fragments, and plain rifle/MG ammo. We can't shoot down incoming rifle bullets with laser beams just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well what i was thinking is cut elements of the dorchester armour to make it a lighter. say the thickness of the challenger 2 and half that or miniturise it to make it a light but strong armour composite. Im sure it would work in the same way but on a smaller scale. the vehicle might not to take the beating of IED but if it just deforms and doesnt breach the vehicle im sure it will definitley help the crew, but i could be wrong. miniturising it could just weaken the structure of the armour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...