# Norwegians consider G-wagon inadequate



## Kommando (24 Apr 2006)

Hi all,long time reader,first post...Norway decided on the 24th of March to buy up to 72 IVECO vehicles, which are called the Panther by the UK and will also be fielded by the Belgian Army. The initial order is for 25 be delivered in 2006 (15) and 2007 (10), and there is also an option to buy a further 47 vehicles over a two year period.The purchase is said to come as a reaction to experience in international operations where the current inventory, up-armored Mercedes "Gelendevagen" has been proved inadequate, especially after the events at Meymaneh, Afghanistan in early February.The MLV has vastly improved protection against IED land mines,this is achieved through a number of design features... 
"The MLV's wheel stations are located away from the crew cabin so that if a wheel detonates an antitank mine, the explosion is vented upwards, leaving the crew cabin undamaged." 
"The bonnet is hinged to the chassis to reduce the shock transmitted to the cabin." 
"The light alloy rear body is fitted with a canvas roof over a supporting frame. It is sacrificial and severs from the cabin in the event of a mine detonation under a rear wheel." 
"The underside of the vehicle is v-shaped and the ground clearance has been maximised to allow maximum dissipation of the blast." 
"The location of heavy components under the cabin floor has been avoided because they can be projected through the cabin floor by a mine blast." 
"The lower part of the vehicle has a three-layer sandwich structure that collapses on detonation of a mine under the belly, absorbing a high percentage of the energy that has not been vented away laterally."                                      The overall MLV Protection system meets various levels, from STANAG level 1 to STANAG level 4.Italian MLVs use the latest version AMAP composite armor to get to STANAG 4, placing the applique armor panels in pre-set slots between the inner and outer hull. The armor protection of the MLV is concealed under the panels, and can be quickly changed to meet mission requirements, or to make use of better materials as they become available.With Norway taking part in the current expansion and redeployment of the ISAF, defense officials probably saw a need to provide for better mine and small-arms protection, to avoid more pictures of burning Norwegian vehicles as seen in the February incident,where the Norwegian led PRT base in the North-Afghan city was attacked and at least one of their vehicles burned.The procurement process was conducted within only two months, which is quite fast by Norwegian standards.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Apr 2006)

Panther Here


----------



## Thorvald (25 Apr 2006)

Out of curiosity, what is the status of the new R31 APVs that were supposed to start deliveries in Feb 2006?  Isn't this our current solution to the up armoured G-Wagon's limitations?



> By listing the APV as an Immediate Operational Re- quirement,  the CDS was able to expedite this entire program. Delivery of these Off-the-Shelf vehicles is timed to match the CF’s 2006 combat deployment to Kanadahar. A $60M contract was awarded to GDLS Canada “to provide 50 RG-31...with an option for 25 more” in November 2005 with deliveries to begin in February 2006.  Orders were also placed for a RWS (remote weapons station) type, the Kongsberg Protector (in US army service as M151s on Strykers). The same Kongsberg RWS model will probably be used on the proposed CF LARV (Light Armoured Reconnaissance Vehicle) project



Quoted from http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-vehapv.htm


----------



## 3rd Horseman (25 Apr 2006)

It is still the wrong veh (either of them) for the wrong mission and improper tasks. This is due directly to poor leadership that has never fought and thinks they understand the battle when they learned under the wrong environment and now implement errors in taskings. They only need to read the AARs from the last battles (war) we fought 92-95. The answers are all their.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (26 Apr 2006)

As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.  Spent a lot of time in a Nyala, have you?


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (26 Apr 2006)

that new pather looks sort of like a hummer but shorter and smaller,  if looks mean anything some one might be on to something here. G4 people should be looking to buy those for the troops. 
anything to improve the chance of getting out alive should be looked at.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (26 Apr 2006)

Thorvald said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what is the status of the new R31 APVs that were supposed to start deliveries in Feb 2006?  Isn't this our current solution to the up armoured G-Wagon's limitations?
> 
> Quoted from http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-vehapv.htm



There are Nyala's in-theatre now.  Some of the footage of the hit G-Wagen showed Nyalas moving along the same road.

Unfortunately as feared, every once in a while the commander of the bad guys has enough common sense to target the thinnest-skinned vehicles in a convoy to cause maximum casualties....The partial solution remains up-armouring everything including supply trucks because although the enemy can always build a bigger bomb, it requires much more effort, time (increases likelihood of being spotted) and resources (I can't imagine carrying large amounts of explosives like a Sherpa is very easy in the mountains of Afghanistan).  The other component which I contend is more important is absolute 100% overhead surveillance of the area of operations with some sort of high endurance UAV, because if you can see them digging the holes for the IED, you can take them out before it ever becomes a threat to your personnel.  My understanding based on something I just read is that Predator B may not the right solution.  The sound from its engines is loud enough to be detected and so the bad guys scatter, head for caves, etc.  I don't know what the right solution becomes at this point, but I hope we find it and then DND is given fast-track authority to direct-procure what it is we determine we need.

That's just me....


Matthew.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (26 Apr 2006)

Teddy as usual you like to sound like you know it all. You dont.

  The light up armoured vehs we are discussing are not suitable combat vehs and this point should be driven home.


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Apr 2006)

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> Teddy as usual you like to sound like you know it all. You dont.
> 
> The light up armoured vehs we are discussing are not suitable combat vehs and this point should be driven home.



So what is the solution then? Have everyone in LAV's?? That's not realistic... Never leave the camp? Then why send troops at all...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Apr 2006)

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> Teddy as usual you like to sound like you know it all. You dont.


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Apr 2006)

:rofl:


----------



## 3rd Horseman (26 Apr 2006)

;D Very funny

Mike you have a good point. I was discussing the decision of the veh purchase and its usage, I can under stand the can do attitude of you guys over there as it is all you have...and I respect that. My point is that it was the wrong veh purchase for that task and we need to get on top of that quick and get better heavier kit in bound.


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Apr 2006)

It's all a mix, LAV's and even Nyalas can't go places the G-Wagon can, and don't forget the GWagon has saved a bunch of lives already, we were using the soft-skinned Iltis before... and if someone packs a culvert with explosives it doesn't matter what you're in...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (26 Apr 2006)

*sigh*

Apparently, I find myself defending my position:



> Teddy as usual you like to sound like you know it all. You dont.



In this case, I have time in G Wagons in Afghanistan, and - believe it or not - have spent more time in the very Norwegian G-Wagons that were the original subject of this thread than I have in the Canadian version - again in Afghanistan.  As an armour officer, I have extensive time on AVGP hulls, M113, and Coyote and a fair amount of time "in back" of a LAV III (the latter _again_ in Afghanistan).  I have also been heavily involved in Nyala tasks both Canadian (in Bosnia) and Estonian (in Afghanistan).

So, 3rd Horsey, war hero extrordinare and commentator on everything Special Forces, Bosnian, FOO/FAC, Agent Orange, DU, and operational, what recent (ie: in the last decade) experience do you have to back up your assessment of what vehicle is of best use in the _current_ theatre?  You have NO idea of the tasks being performed or the equipment actually in use.  None of the vehicles you could possibly have any experience on are operational in Afghanistan.  Typically, you're seriously out of your lane and routinely spout absolute nonsense on this site, relying on your mythical "black ops" (yes, I have a long memory regarding your posts) resume from 10+ years ago to back you up.  _In this particular case, you're deliberately attempting to reduce confidence in equipment that the troops in contact are required to go to war with every day._

I am loathe to engage in personalizing a discussion, but I have seriously had enough.

TR, out.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (26 Apr 2006)

Teddy Teddy Teddy,..... I chose not to waste band width trading insults with you. Nice job attempting to character assassinate but my record stands on its own merit.  I stand by my view that the light veh up armour Gwagon and its variants are not the proper veh for the task. Hours of being driven around the countryside in a G wagon does not make one an expert on that vehs capability to withstand a mine blast. As a note I departed the CF in late 03 not that long ago with my last job being heading up tactics, doctrine and procurement for the Artillery.


----------



## Koenigsegg (27 Apr 2006)

I must...

My invisible god has a bigger dick than your invisible god.

I support Teddy, and I also think that different people in different positions will have different experiances and knowledge with the same piece of equipment.  The Gelandewagen is fine at what it is supposed to do.  If you want to take troops into battle well protected and provide heavy fire for them, an LAVIII is in order.  But that situation is NOT what the G-wagen is for.  The Americans have, or had, the same worries about their hummers, because they were using the vehicle for things it was not originally meant to do.
Some of the bombs that took out the Iltis, and G-wagens were meant to take out tanks, of course they will destroy a relatively lightly armoured patrol/recce/battle taxi vehicle.
The Gelandewagen can go places, like stated before, that the LAV, and Nyala cannot even ponder about going, for that, it is valuable in theatre.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (27 Apr 2006)

Agreed, that is what I was arguing. It is the use of that veh in wrong tasks that is the problem and begs a better veh.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Apr 2006)

So, you admit they have a use over there. What task(s) ARE you envisioning for the G wagon to fulfill over there. Given that it has it's value and unique areas of mobility. Oh, and explain why they couldn't be attacked or blown up in these situations. I will accept some generalizations, given you've never been there on Ops and you would only be making uneducated guesses. But go ahead and give it a shot anyway.




_edit for spelling_


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (27 Apr 2006)

I'm not intending to step on any toes here, but is the question being asked not "Is there a better vehicle to fulfil the same roles?" 

That could mean welding a steel "V-bottom" (or double V-bottom) on the bottom of the G-Wagen to deflect more of the blast (with the sacrifice of some road clearance) or perhaps a vehicle like the VBL.

In short, if we know we have to put people in harm's way down narrow roads that more heavily vehicles like LAV-III's or Nyalas cannot reach, how do better protect our soldiers while they're undertaking that task?

Respectfully,

Matthew.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (27 Apr 2006)

Recceguy,
                I never said nor did I implie that the Gwagon was a bad veh or that it did not have a role in Astan. It is a good veh and so much better than the Iltis it replaced. You are correct any comment I would make on Astan would not be from my direct involvement in theatre. My views would be from my military and civilian experience and my friends who have been in Astan with both the Canadian, USA and British forces and private contractors. I trust you would respect opinions based on training and experience as a general approach and may not be the detailed answer but in general it would have value.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Apr 2006)

Thought that's what I said. Offered you some slack, didn't I? So what's your answer(s). You didn't manage to get around to those in your last post.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (27 Apr 2006)

Oh, thanks for the slack. I have been too busy to give a detailed response, but I will. Having coffee with a buddy that just came back from A stan last month. I will seek his opinion after showing him the print out to see if Im off base here or not.


----------



## geo (27 Apr 2006)

There's another thread going on aboud damaged vehicles that has made commentaries about the GWagon being restricted from being used in the Mountains and such area..... Nyalah have been given the job of filling the gap - good truck

BTW - the Norwegians do have GWagons..... just not the same model as the one we use - it's smaller/narrower and, from what I have heard, less stable than the one we went with.


----------



## COBRA-6 (27 Apr 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> BTW - the Norwegians do have GWagons..... just not the same model as the one we use - it's smaller/narrower and, from what I have heard, less stable than the one we went with.



That's the hard top version of the Mercedes "Wolf", smaller, 2 doors, more like a modern Iltis.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (28 Apr 2006)

Mike/Geo:

Here's one.  This is the OC's rover from the Norwegian recce sqn in Kabul - late 2004.  The pic is mine.  We'd launched the QRF downtown as part of a major incident outer cordon...


----------



## geo (28 Apr 2006)

biggest comment I've had on the Norwegians is that they will jurry rig - bolt down MG mounts onto the floorboards without necessarily having the framed up support to back it up........

(think they've been following Red/green show for too long


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (28 Apr 2006)

Well, I never did see that .50 cut loose!  

You should have seen what was done to some of the Nissans they were using...!    Great bunch, though - I have all the time in the world for the Norgies...


----------



## COBRA-6 (28 Apr 2006)

I like the .50!!  >

The Germans, Hungarians, Norwegians and a few others were running a lot of them... the Hungarians had a cage around theirs, riot-style... whatever works I guess...
I would have liked to mod my nissan or toyota...  ;D


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (28 Apr 2006)

I had a Nissan that the NSE kindly fitted with GPS and ballistic blankets (along with removing the identifiers - it was likely still at Warehouse when you were there).  It was a complete POS, though...the roads battered it into junk in pretty short order.  We generally used a Brit Toyota that was so bashed up it attracted very little attention from the locals...a decent way to gain force protection...


----------



## COBRA-6 (28 Apr 2006)

Yep (329'r?), less than 7000km and completely busted up... the NSE had to tow it to CJ for me once. I used a KMNB Toyota Land Cruiser Prado as my daily veh... it handled the big-assed potholes on violet much better, no blast blankets though...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (28 Apr 2006)

That's the one!   ;D   You've gotta love it when the Canadian dispatcher is apologizing for the vehicle as he's handing you the keys...!   Came in mighty handy, though...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Apr 2006)

I know the recce guys would love to have a G wagon you could drop the front windshield down.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Apr 2006)

I signed for the Nissan Terranos for CIMIC, brand new, in 03. By the time we left in Feb 04, I wouldn't have given you $100.00 for any of them. Well, maybe a $100.00 Canadian. Mind, for 12 guys (six vehicles), plus interpreters, we did twice as many patrols as any other outfit in the Brigade Group, and ranged further than most. So the vehicles took a major beating. All the ballistic blankets would have done was keep our pieces together, and the boys attached to my crotch.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Apr 2006)

CFL said:
			
		

> I know the recce guys would love to have a G wagon you could drop the front windshield down.



That's the one that Arm'd Recce asked for. With the MG mounts, MBSGDs, roll bars and stowage racks. Could have been bought off the shelf, as is. No special modifications. But somehow we ended up with the soccer mom version. Mind, we'd prefer a real armoured car, like a VBL, or similar but what are you gonna do, when no one asks or consults the end user.


----------



## COBRA-6 (28 Apr 2006)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I signed for the Nissan Terranos for CIMIC, brand new, in 03. By the time we left in Feb 04, I wouldn't have given you $100.00 for any of them. Well, maybe a $100.00 Canadian. Mind, for 12 guys (six vehicles), plus interpreters, we did twice as many patrols as any other outfit in the Brigade Group, and ranged further than most. So the vehicles took a major beating. All the ballistic blankets would have done was keep our pieces together, and the boys attached to my crotch.



+1 on the blast blankets... I was considering zap-strapping two together to make a Kevlar Moo-Moo, but it didn't work out  ;D

Tearing down old-jbad at ~80-100kph almost destroyed mine, the potholes once you got near CW were just retarded... I actually bent two of the steel wheels on my Land Cruiser and had to bang the rims out with a sledge and cold chisel, what the hell it was an Italian veh, drive it like you stole it... I also cracked two windshields and half-ripped of a bumper... plus too many scrapes dents and dings to mention from giving taxis the rub in traffic... Kabul EATS vehs! seen a strut mount ripped clean off the frame of a GWagon from a pothole... real road-warrior stuff... madness!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Apr 2006)

........but those yellow and white Ladas are just like the Energiser bunny....................they just keep going, and going, an goi........ ;D


----------



## Canadian Sig (14 May 2006)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I signed for the Nissan Terranos for CIMIC, brand new, in 03. By the time we left in Feb 04, I wouldn't have given you $100.00 for any of them. Well, maybe a $100.00 Canadian. Mind, for 12 guys (six vehicles), plus interpreters, we did twice as many patrols as any other outfit in the Brigade Group, and ranged further than most. So the vehicles took a major beating. All the ballistic blankets would have done was keep our pieces together, and the boys attached to my crotch.



Rover troop signed for about 20 of those as well and did our level best to kill them before handing them over to the Van Doos. I actualy think we had the worst record in theater for traffic accidents, one of our guys cracked up a Terrano with less than 50 kms on it. He rear-ended an LSVW while transporting the brand new Nissan from CJ to Warehouse. We had to bitch just to get the blast blankets BTW. Still they felt safer( even though it was all psycological ) than the iltis we also drove around .


----------



## 3rd Horseman (30 May 2006)

I guess this sums up what I was saying.....nice! 


"O'Connor disclosed Tuesday that most of the military's jeep-like G-Wagons will be confined to the Canadian base in Kandahar and, in general, soldiers will venture out in armoured vehicles." 
(copy CP Vancouver Sun, Jim Briskoll)


----------



## paracowboy (30 May 2006)

put as much armour around you as you want, I'll still blow your ass up.

Best possible defence against attacks is aggressive, intelligent patrollinig. Gather info, isolate the enemy, then shoot him in the face.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (30 May 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> Best possible defence against attacks is aggressive, intelligent patrollinig. Gather info, isolate the enemy, then shoot him in the face.



After training to aim for the centre of mass, wouldn't that mean you're a terrible shot? 

But yes, if someone wants to kill you badly enough, they'll find a way, armour or no armour.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 May 2006)

Threat analysis determines what state your in (ie LAV's or jeeps).  To get that you have to get humint which is near impossible in a LAV.  The more tools in the bag the better job you can do.


----------



## paracowboy (31 May 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> After training to aim for the centre of mass, wouldn't that mean you're a terrible shot?


who said I train for center of mass? Medulla oblongata, baby!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (31 May 2006)

lol


----------



## 3rd Horseman (31 May 2006)

*


			
				paracowboy said:
			
		


put as much armour around you as you want, I'll still blow your *** up.[/b]


Para, your point is taken and is true to a point. The more armour the bigger the explosive has to be to blow it up. That requires more sophisticated attacks and the more difficult the attack the easier it is to defend against. When a single mine is stacked to get a big armour target you need more time to dig the hole you need a bigger hole and it is more obvious were the big hole is.  



Best possible defence against attacks is aggressive, intelligent patrollinig. Gather info, isolate the enemy, then shoot him in the face.


Click to expand...


I think we all agree on this part...but shooting in the face, I am not that good a shot.*


----------



## paracowboy (31 May 2006)

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> I think we all agree on this part...but shooting in the face, I am not that good a shot.


no worries. Two to the chest, one to the head. If ya gotta do it after he's stationary...


----------



## geo (31 May 2006)

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> I think we all agree on this part...but shooting in the face, I am not that good a shot.



Yikes..... a gunner who isn`t  a good shot

Ubique really does = all over the place (i guess)


----------



## 3rd Horseman (1 Jun 2006)

Lol......I guess I lined up for that one! ;D   We gunners have always had problems with the little tiny bullets, the big stuff...well I could skip a 500 pound bomb down a street and into a living room window, or bounce a 155mm up a sloap and into a cave. Its the big stufff that counts I will rest easy leaving the 5.56 to the experts. :warstory:


----------



## geo (1 Jun 2006)

hehe.....  C4 @ 20 paces


----------

