UK to Buy Bronco

sgstars SG

The Bronco is not quite a competitor to the Bv206 market (which number in the thousands). Or even the BvS 10 for that matter (which only number in the hundreds).

True, they may have the same appearance but so does a 3-ton, 5-ton and 7-ton truck.

Think of the Bv206 as the 3 tonner, the BvS10 as the 5 tonner and the Bronco or Biking Mk2 as the 7 tonner

The UK MoD is perhaps thinking that their current mix of 3 & 5 tonners are not adequate to the task in Afghanistan and are issuing a tender for a 7 tonner equivalent - either the Bronco or the Viking Mk 2.

Viewed in this way, it's not quite the desperate fight for the same pie. A 2 ton payload ATTC is not going be in the same market fight as the 5 ton payload

right, i see, so the bit about logistics commonality is ovverated.

i see what you mean about capacity/capability.fulfilling a niche ?

I dont mean it in that sense, i was thinking in broader terms about how the Bronco's entry represents a new competitor for Bae hagglunds/ Bae Land systems.

yes, the Bronco may fill a niche now, but if it does well, it opens the doors to other variants and other european countries. Its like a backdoor entry for ST eng into the european market ? previouslly there wasnt really an alternative for the other countries, e.g no Bv206, means going for BvS10.

in that sense ST eng is providing the consumer (all the other MODs) with an alternative. The Bronco may be bigger and larger than the Bv206. but if Lifetime costs and operational costs are affordable, it represents a viable alternative to whatever Bae Has to offer?

in that sense, Bae's product "monopoly" could be broken. there is nothing quite exactly in the category of Bv206/Bvs 10 and its possible Mk2 version and the Bronco.

i was suggesting the potential of ST eng breaking into the category. But yes, i do acknowledge that the Bv206, BvS10 and the bronco/BvS mk II are not substituable products. imperfect substitues.

using your tonner analogy, irregardless of the weight class of a tonner, all 3 can fulfill logisitcal roles and purposes right ? similarily the "class" of Bv206/Bvs10 and Bvs10 mk II/bronco overlap more than they actually compete right ?

in that sense, yes while they are differntiated market products, they practically fulfill the same role/function across the board ? 3 ton 5 ton 7 ton each class got its limitations but all serve the function to varying degrees and limitations/

the Bronco's ability to fulfill that function is the real threat to Bae's market share, not so much of its class or its niche

Fingolfin_Noldor SG

Did BAe really brought Singapore Technologies to court over it? There's also a Russian version, which is blockier and larger I think and it carries 30 tonnes.

I_love_my_toilet SG

Yea, i saw russian version

of coz, only good things pple copy ma :D

sgstars SG

Did BAe really brought Singapore Technologies to court over it? There's also a Russian version, which is blockier and larger I think and it carries 30 tonnes.

30 tonnes ? thats 6X the payload of the Bronco.size wise would be a much much larger beast.

plus, at that kinda weight, should definitely be not aircraft portable. unlikely to be amphibuous. thats one feature of the Bv206/BvS10 and Bronco class.

whats the vehicle / model ?

kotay SG

Did BAe really brought Singapore Technologies to court over it? There's also a Russian version, which is blockier and larger I think and it carries 30 tonnes.

Dude, the DT-30 is not even in the same product category as the Bvs lah. Like that we might as well talk about the articulated tracked prime movers that move houses and rockets ;)

sgstars - the DT-30P is amphibious.

I_love_my_toilet SG

Russian shrink DT-30P down to similar class like BVs n Broncos liao

seen before but cant find it now...

sgstars SG

an interesting addition to the original article:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3845508&c=ASI&s=LAN

The MoD recently contracted BAE Systems to undertake a reliability demonstration on a Viking in the United Kingdom. Working at a high gross weight, the vehicle is testing performance and reliability against various parameters.

Data released by BAE in mid-November said the existing Viking's reliability under combat conditions stood at 88 percent.

The Mk II carries 12 crew and passengers, has a payload of 6 metric tons and a gross vehicle weight of 14.2 metric tons. The Bronco can fit in 16 crew and passengers, has a gross weight of 18 metric tons and a payload of 6.8 metric tons.

The Bronco vehicle is currently in service with Singapore's military, while the Viking Mk II is in development.

Release of the performance comparison between the Viking Mk II and the Bronco vehicle was part of a rearguard action by BAE to salvage a deal for around 100 vehicles, which was heading Singapore's way.

i wonder if the performance comparison is available online. cant seemed to find it. maybe my google-fu isnt strong enough.

sgstars SG

Dude, the DT-30 is not even in the same product category as the Bvs lah. Like that we might as well talk about the articulated tracked prime movers that move houses and rockets ;)

sgstars - the DT-30P is amphibious.

ah. i stand corrected :) but the DT-30 seems like a monster. its HUGE !

I_love_my_toilet SG

not easy to obtain those comparison online sia

in fact the 3rd para gave a glimpse of the comparison already ?

kotay SG

right, i see, so the bit about logistics commonality is ovverated.

Not sure if you're referring to logistics commonality as a concept or vis the BvS 10 Mk1 and Mk2.

Logistics commonality, as a concept, can never be overrated. It's good to have and is sometimes why a lesser capable platform is chosen over another more capable but uncommon one.

Logistics commonality vis the Viking Mk1 and Mk2 ... well ... will there be any?

That's oversimplifying it a tad.

In a pinch, they can perform each other's role. But you'd still purchase the various platforms and maintain seperate fleets of them to provide hi-lo capabilities.

the Bronco's ability to fulfill that function is the real threat to Bae's market share, not so much of its class or its niche

Let's not get carried away here.

Yes, it be hubris for BaE to rest on it's laurels and not pre-empt competition. But it really should be worrying about other bigger competitors/markets/platforms.

Anyhow, there's too much hair splitting going on to be worth continuing ... you and LN have fun :D

sgstars SG

eh ?

nah , i m standing in for SGTY. once he's back i wont make an effort to pwn the lion.

i m part time temp staff

kotay SG

Russian shrink DT-30P down to similar class like BVs n Broncos liao

seen before but cant find it now...

They didn't shrink down the DT-30 ... it grew out of the DT-10 and DT-20. The numbers being the payload capability in tons.

Got the reference you looking for ... DT-5 & DT-7

http://www.bolotohod.ru/en/ecat1/ecat14/

kotay SG

eh ?

nah , i m standing in for SGTY. once he's back i wont make an effort to pwn the lion.

i m part time temp staff

KNS :D

Well, he does ask for it sometimes ...

I_love_my_toilet SG

They didn't shrink down the DT-30 ... it grew out of the DT-10 and DT-20. The numbers being the payload capability in tons.

Got the reference you looking for ... DT-5 & DT-7

http://www.bolotohod.ru/en/ecat1/ecat14/

icic

thanks !

the company logo resembles SMRT logo sia lol!

sgstars SG

btw TS, i m sorry if i hijacked your thread into a bash lionnoisy thread. pai seh pai seh.

its an interesting thread really, just that the stupid lion has to come here and ask to get whacked.

lionnoisy SG

above posted by sgstars..

u must be kidding.Man.This is WW2 technology.

120 SRAMS is semi--auto with 'a high continous firing rate of up

to 10 rounds per min'!!

No loader is needed!!

It can be used in different platforms.

2.re your photo of going down the hill.ST brochure says 60% gradient.

U still have not told me if BvS 10 or Mk2 can do all as stated in ST brochure,

like 2 m trench crossing or 1 m high obstacle etc.

in case u over look,i put it here again.

can u read brochure and watch the video of Singapore

120mm Super Rapid Advanced Mortar System and come back and discuss.

120mm Super Rapid Advanced Mortar System

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

can i humbly ask again what is the status of BvS 10 Mk 2?

lionnoisy SG

http://www.stengg.com/upload/914WVBGLfb3dh4hGDkd.pdf

http://www.baesystems.com/BAEProd/groups/public/@businesses/@landarmaments/documents/bae_publication/la_hagg_brochure_bvs10.pdf

air cond ?ha ha ha!!Bronco brochure says air cond for rear cabin.

i assume drive also can enjoy air cond.

Bronco is to replace BvS 206.Right?So,it shall be better than BvS 206.

I think u guys still have a mind set Bronco is still inferior than BvS10.

I dunt know how they are compared in overall.

u can compare by the links i show above.

But one thing is sure.Bronco's payload is higher!!

BvS 10 Mk1.................Bronco

SPECIFICATION

Dimension
Length 7.6 m.......8.6m
Width 2.2 m....2.3
Height....................2.2
front car 2.2 m
rear car 2.1 m
Curb weight
front car 5000 kg.......front & rear 11,200
rear car, APC version 3500 kg
rear car, empty chassis 2450 kg
Payload (Depending on equipment/options)......enclosed 4800,flatbed 5300
front car 800 kg
rear car 2000 - 3050 kg
Passengers
front car 4....6(Bronco include driver)
rear car 8.....10
Maximum trailer weight 3000 kg
Specific ground pressure

front car 17.2 kPa.......#as light as a human foot,@
rear car 18.7 kPa

#much lower than Bionix 0.69--0.76 kg/cm2.read

SAFRA Radio (Power 98 FM)#

http://www.dsta.gov.sg/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2061&Itemid=401

@http://www.one35th.com/attc/attc_intro2.htm

Performance
Max. speed
on road 65 km/h...60
in water 5 km/h....5
Gradeability
hard surface 100% (45º).....60%
deep snow 30% (17º)........unknown

side slope...unknown....30%

Vertical obstacle..unknown.......1m

Trench crossing..unknown......2 m

Range on roads 300km.....unknown
Operating temp
max + 49ºC
min - 46ºC

BvS 10 Mk1.................Bronco

Engine
Type 6-cyl in-line
Power 202 kW (275 HP)2500 rpm.....350bhp ,2400rpm
Torque 950 Nm (700 lb.ft/1500 rpm DIN....unknown

Transmission
Type Automatic 6 speed forward;1 reverse...fully automatic

Steering system
Type hydrostatic, articulated, damped......hydraulic,articulated
Turning diameter 14 m...unknown
Emergency steering standard

Tracks

Type moulded rubber with cord
Width 0.6 m 4-track drive

Electrical system

Voltage 24 V DC

Alternator 100 A

Material

armour steel Protection...................Active Defense System AMAP-ADS and .....................................................Multi-Purpose IED-Protection.read #
Direct fire 7,62 x 51 ball (basic)
7,62 AP (option) with
add-on protection
Air-conditioning system Yes
NBC protection Option
Fire extinguishing system Option

Variants

repair recovery vehicle....Field worhshop

command vehicle,.........unknown

troop carrier ....troop carrier

ambulance.....ambulance

unknown...............120 mm SRAMS

end of quote

# read page 2 of this thread.

http://www.ibd-deisenroth-engineering.de/news.html

http://www.ibd-deisenroth-engineering.de/amap-ads-active-defense-systems.html

sgstars SG

above posted by sgstars..

u must be kidding.Man.This is WW2 technology.

120 SRAMS is semi--auto with 'a high continous firing rate of up

to 10 rounds per min'!!

No loader is needed!!

It can be used in different platforms.

2.re your photo of going down the hill.ST brochure says 60% gradient.

U still have not told me if BvS 10 or Mk2 can do all as stated in ST brochure,

like 2 m trench crossing or 1 m high obstacle etc.

in case u over look,i put it here again.

can u read brochure and watch the video of Singapore

120mm Super Rapid Advanced Mortar System and come back and discuss.

120mm Super Rapid Advanced Mortar System

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

can i humbly ask again what is the status of BvS 10 Mk 2?

LOL...

ST eng brochure and you cant even quote it properly ? ST brochure says its 18. but they have subsequently revised it down to 10. see ? ST lies.

you must be moronic. you claimed the Bv206/BvS10 cannot fire mortar. when faced with the truth in pictures what claim have you ? you now want to compare SRAMS when you know SRAMS is a propertairy ST technology which they will not release for sale to everyone ? hhaaha are you an idiot ? what do you take us all for ? noisy lions like you ?

now very cunning right ? when pwned u straight away adopt a, "oops, i meant something else" when you clearly cannot differentiate ?

maybe can ask britney to teach you the oops i did it again

cannot tell propertairy technology from functional capability ? cannot seperate colour from category ? my idiot lion, you said BvS206 and BvS10 cannot fire mortar, i proved you wrong and now what say you ?confuse when you cannot answer ? obfusticate when you cannot illustrate ?

further,can BvS 10 Mk 2 do all the followings?

dunt talk other rubbish.Just tell me relevant stuff.

I dunt like listening other irrelevant stuff-----yes or no plus explanations!!

and WWII did not have that calibre of mortar. WWII they preferred a platform called the self propelled gun. more effective that mortar.

you cant handle the truth.admit it.

i provided pictures that show the BvS10 handling slopes of at least 60 degress. what have you got save for the ST brochure ? any pictures of Bronco doing it in real life ?

so if i post this picture, you going to believe that bronco can fly to the moon lah ? are you that imbecilic to the point where you believe everything that is fed to you ?

whats a queene ?

what happened to your official source and records ? why quote from someone's posting from another forum ?

why cannot think independently ? why still flogging a dead horse ?

why when quote from ST brochure also cannot quote properly ? dunno how to differentiate from BvS10 specs and Bronco specs ?

why post some specs from Bronco dont post some specs from BvS10 ? cannot find right ? self-pwn +3

why talk about passive IBD armour when it dosent come standard ? why talk about AMAP-ADS when no operational version of the Bronco uses it ? why dont talk about intergreation issues ? why dont talk about the lawsuit ST got slapped over with the Bronco ?

why dont admit that the Bronco is a blatant rip off of the Bv206 design and hydraulic link to the point that Bae Hagglunds sued ST ? why dont criticize ST for not innovating and ripping it off ?

WRONG ABOUT AIRCON. for SAF broncos in service, air con is not a standard stock option. some variants have aircon. most dont have.

Janes however indicates that the export version is likely to have aircon for both front an rear carriage

so applying from your logic about OFFICIAL SITES AND OFFICIAL PROOF and I WANT YES OR NO ANSWERS, I DONT WANT TO HEAR IRRELEVANT STUFF

so when ST features this on their webpage, it means they must be developing an advanced flying man concept ? ai say, not bad leh ST. pity its a shame they forgot about icarus some 4,000 years ago.

i say , ai seh lionnoisy, maybe you can join them in their flying man aspiration right lionnoisy ?

gd4u SG

Did i see that he went BACK to compare BvS10 MK1 and Bronco together ???

Anyway, lion, i am not sure if u knew and asked around. The SRAMS is more difficult to maintain becasue the mortar barrel is 'fixed' at that position. New technology is not always better. Hey, the LCS is new technology, but i remembered u said it sux ...

sgstars SG

yeap.

he is just being an idiot again.

« Previous Page Next Page »