South African prototypes, projects, concepts, etc.
- Thread starter kaiserbill
- Start date
The Mfezi looks very similar to the Thales Bushmaster.
curious george
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 4 November 2010
- Messages
- 214
- Reaction score
- 63
Another bit of nostalgia of fb:
Article from Koos de Wet:
The Buffel Story
Part 3B
Out of the starting blocks
With my handshake agreement with Busaf Border Pty Ltd and Transerve Pty Ltd to develop what would become the Buffel on a risksharing basis having been "blessed" by my chairman Mr Shenker, it was time to get going.
A quick check through UCDD's civilian Unimog stock list revealed that we did not have any Unimog chassis available that were even close to the SADF Unimog specifications so next port of call was the Unimog factory in Gaggenau who advised that they were flat-out building Unimogs for the SADF and the soonest they could squeeze one in would be in about 4 weeks and when preparation and shipment were added we were looking at roughly 9 weeks from order. That was too long for us so other options needed to be explored.
About the only practical option then left was to try and get one from the latest Armscor order and replace later or buy/borrow/rent one from the latest order and replace or return to standard specification later.
I contacted Armscor immediately and met with Mr Jan Grove, the Manager B-Vehicles of Armscor in the first week of May 1976 in his office to discuss my project and to inquire how we could obtain a SADF Unimog on which to do the development
This was one of the most important, if not the most important meetings of the whole Buffel project.
The following are taken from my notes of that meeting:
1. Mr Grove reconfirmed that my proposed project was not officially approved and would therefore have no official standing, support or backing.
2. The Unimog 416.162 was being phased out as new generation locally manufactured trucks were "just around the corner" and this was another reason why my project could not be supported. Why do a new project on a product that would be phased out shortly?
3. What we proposed to do we were doing at our own risk and would not have Armscor 's blessing nor would they be associated with it.
4. As far as he was concerned, there was no other state department that could assist us as all the official landmine protection programs were agreed and signed off with Defence so we could not expect support or assistance from anyone.
5. If I still wanted to proceed it would be entirely at my own risk (as if I needed to be told this again!)
6. Bullet-proof glass was a "controlled item" meaning Armscor controlled its manufacture and who was allowed to buy it and he would not agree to my obtaining it as mine was not an approved programme.
7. The same applied to the supply of armour plate. It was a controlled item and consequently no armour plate would be made available to me.
8. At that point I had a project with zero prospect of getting the proper glass or armour plate so as a last roll of the dice I said if we could not get the correct glass and steel, we would substitute as best we could and still do the development if we could somehow still obtain a Unimog chassis on which to do the development. He said he would look into that and come back to me.
9. Just before I left, Mr Grove reminded me that Local Content was the name of the game going forward and the Department of Trade and Industries would have to be involved and would provide input regarding local content for military projects
I must admit I was quite surprised when he called to say I could use one of the Unimogs of the current Unimog contract for my project on the following conditions:
1. The Unimog was being "lent" to us for our development and remained the property of Armscor
2. We would be responsible for insuring the vehicle whilst in our possession
3. It had to be returned latest by the time the last Unimog of the then current contract was being delivered so that gave us about 6 months.
4. It had to be returned in "as new" condition and 100% as per specification.
It was clear to me that it would take time to get all the paperwork " through the system" so I decided to take a short cut to save time and to use the Unimog Busaf were using to trial local components on (these items are painted yellow in the attached photographs) until such time as we received the designated Unimog via Armscor. By that weekend we were ready to get going.
At that time I called the project Bosvark 2 as there was of course no official SADF/Armscor project name for it. By using this name I also reasoned that Bosvark 2 might just be more acceptable if it were to replace the Bosvark developed by CSIR because egos needed to be considered in the business of landmine protected vehicles and if anyone in authority felt in the least slighted it could cost you.
I should mention that DogsBodies had been acquired by Busaf and was now known as Busaf Border Pty Ltd.
At our first "project meeting" at Busaf Border that Monday we decided the following:
1. We would do the integrated rear body first as that seemed less risky and more sensible than starting with a protected cab which, if it did not work, would essentially leave us with nothing.
2. We would first build the new rear body designs in plywood to see where everything could be fitted and it was also cheaper and quicker if we had to make changes.
3. The standard Unimog rear body subframe would be deleted and the mounting system with similar geometry would be incorporated into the new body
4. The rear body would fit generally within the standard Unimog's rear body geometry and also have the standard canvas top
5. High centre of gravity (CG) was always a consideration with the Unimog so we had to keep the rear body CG as low as possible
6. Back to back seating would be used like on the standard Unimog personnel/cargo vehicle
7. The fuel tank would be mounted underfloor in the base of the body
8. A water tank with drinking water would also be mounted underfloor in the body.
9. The spare wheel would be moved from the side of the chassis frame to the back of the body.
10. The battery box with the two 12V heavy batteries would also be relocated to further "clean up" the side of the Unimog to allow easier passage for a wheel or underbelly blast
11. Storage for personal kit would be located at the rear of the body
12. A fuel balance tank (to ensure continuous fuel supply when negotiating steep gradients) would be located under the body between the chassis rails for protection from small arms fire.
13. The body would have dropsides behind which the crew would be protected against small arms fire and the dropsides would also be removable so that they could be used as shields on the ground against small arms fire.
14. There would also be hinged rear entry panels with steps to allow troops to climb in from the rear as getting in over the sides was going to be quite a challenge as we saw it.
15. We would have to experimentally determine the height of the dropsides to allow the troops to still be able to see over them and still be able to have cover behind them from small arms fire and also be able to fire back over the tops of the dropsides
16. For the prototype we would make up our own "simulated bullet-proof glass" using wood and perspex with dimensions of glass already in service at the time so that if the project was successful, we did not have to redesign the windows.
17. We would use mild steel instead of armour plate when building the prototype
18. I would endeavour to stay strictly within Daimler Benz's design guidelines for the Unimog 416.162 as the last thing I needed was a fight with either their Design or Service Departments which could derail the project and adversely affect the warranty of the vehicle.
19. And importantly - we would use standard Unimog components wherever possible to stay with the standard Through Life Support (TLS) arrangements and protocols already in place for the Unimog AND WITH THE UNIMOG 416.162 SUPPOSEDLY DUE FOR PHASE OUT SHORTLY, ANY NEW NON-STANDARD COMPONENTRY WOULD BE VIEWED AS A NEGATIVE AND ANOTHER RISK WE DARE NOT ADD TO AN ALREADY HIGH RISK PROJECT.
With the starters gun now fired we set to work immediately.
Working closely with Piet Smit, the chief draughtsman of Busaf , who could turn my ideas into drawings in no time at all, we soon had a body sketched out whilst Don McKay, the Workshop Manager got the plywood sheets delivered together with the necessary carpentry tools. This was all a bit amusing for the staff who were more used to working with steel and now here we were cutting drilling and gluing plywood in the workshop with sawdust all over the place.
Anyway, within the same week we had the concept lower V-body minus dropsides but with chassis mounts and rear kit storage platform in plywood ready for review and discussion (see photograph #1) and preliminary fitment to the Unimog. Everything appeared to fit OK so we could now move forward.
It was time to build a representative body in plywood once again without the rear platform but with full dropsides - see picture #2.
Now we also needed to find a place to fit the spare wheel and in no time a plywood spare wheel rolled out of the workshop to be trial fitted at the rear of the body to check the available space - see photograph #3 . We had to use a plywood spare wheel as the plywood body was a bit flimsy and the standard Unimog spare wheel was quite heavy.
With the plywood body fitted on the Unimog it was time to take a closer look at the dropsides ( see photograph # 4) and what height they should be, how the troops should get in and out and how the spare wheel should be fitted at the rear and we soon realized that that would be easier to experiment with this on the steel body and that could wait until we built it. It was also at that point we decided to leave the hood bows and canvas cover for later as there would likely be difficulties with the operation of the dropsides. With perfect timing the Unimog we were lent by Armscor arrived at Busaf and we could start building a prototype steel body and fitting it to the Unimog.
We now had the major dimensions agreed and locked in and now Piet Smit could get cracking producing the drawings for a more representative concept body and within days the workshop were cutting and welding away and manufacturing the body in mild steel as we could of course not access armour plate.
Concurrent engineering was the order of the day as drawings were issued and modified as required on the fly and what an exciting time it was as that rear body took shape in literally just a few days. The enthusiasm of all concerned was infectious and the workshop lights would often be on until late at night and often we shared a beer or two (r more....) to officially end the working day and talk about the project. Exciting time for all of us.
I consider myself privileged indeed to have had the opportunity to lead and direct such a willing and enthusiastic team and will always recognize their contribution to this project. The unsung heroes in my book who were never acknowledged and without whom the Buffel would never have existed.
And in what seemed like no time at all, Don McKay wanted to know what colour I wanted the body painted? Could we really have reached that point so quickly, a scant few weeks after having started this project? Yes, we had and out of the workshop rolled the concept vehicle in olive drab green - see photograph #5
No time to slow down now and time to start finalizing the actual prototype design. First major design issue - how high must the dropsides be? No-one could tell us so we made the call.
Don McKay was approximately 178m tall so we used him as our model and used his line of sight to determine a sensible height of the dropsides and the height to the ground with the dropsides folded down - see photographs #6 and #7
A bit of cutting and carving and we had the height we thought was appropriate.
Now the time was right to start address the protected drivers cab and that will be covered in Part 3C.
Up to this point no one from Armscor or CSIR had seen what we were doing or was involved in our project other than Armscor having lent us a Unimog.
Article from Koos de Wet:
The Buffel Story
Part 3B
Out of the starting blocks
With my handshake agreement with Busaf Border Pty Ltd and Transerve Pty Ltd to develop what would become the Buffel on a risksharing basis having been "blessed" by my chairman Mr Shenker, it was time to get going.
A quick check through UCDD's civilian Unimog stock list revealed that we did not have any Unimog chassis available that were even close to the SADF Unimog specifications so next port of call was the Unimog factory in Gaggenau who advised that they were flat-out building Unimogs for the SADF and the soonest they could squeeze one in would be in about 4 weeks and when preparation and shipment were added we were looking at roughly 9 weeks from order. That was too long for us so other options needed to be explored.
About the only practical option then left was to try and get one from the latest Armscor order and replace later or buy/borrow/rent one from the latest order and replace or return to standard specification later.
I contacted Armscor immediately and met with Mr Jan Grove, the Manager B-Vehicles of Armscor in the first week of May 1976 in his office to discuss my project and to inquire how we could obtain a SADF Unimog on which to do the development
This was one of the most important, if not the most important meetings of the whole Buffel project.
The following are taken from my notes of that meeting:
1. Mr Grove reconfirmed that my proposed project was not officially approved and would therefore have no official standing, support or backing.
2. The Unimog 416.162 was being phased out as new generation locally manufactured trucks were "just around the corner" and this was another reason why my project could not be supported. Why do a new project on a product that would be phased out shortly?
3. What we proposed to do we were doing at our own risk and would not have Armscor 's blessing nor would they be associated with it.
4. As far as he was concerned, there was no other state department that could assist us as all the official landmine protection programs were agreed and signed off with Defence so we could not expect support or assistance from anyone.
5. If I still wanted to proceed it would be entirely at my own risk (as if I needed to be told this again!)
6. Bullet-proof glass was a "controlled item" meaning Armscor controlled its manufacture and who was allowed to buy it and he would not agree to my obtaining it as mine was not an approved programme.
7. The same applied to the supply of armour plate. It was a controlled item and consequently no armour plate would be made available to me.
8. At that point I had a project with zero prospect of getting the proper glass or armour plate so as a last roll of the dice I said if we could not get the correct glass and steel, we would substitute as best we could and still do the development if we could somehow still obtain a Unimog chassis on which to do the development. He said he would look into that and come back to me.
9. Just before I left, Mr Grove reminded me that Local Content was the name of the game going forward and the Department of Trade and Industries would have to be involved and would provide input regarding local content for military projects
I must admit I was quite surprised when he called to say I could use one of the Unimogs of the current Unimog contract for my project on the following conditions:
1. The Unimog was being "lent" to us for our development and remained the property of Armscor
2. We would be responsible for insuring the vehicle whilst in our possession
3. It had to be returned latest by the time the last Unimog of the then current contract was being delivered so that gave us about 6 months.
4. It had to be returned in "as new" condition and 100% as per specification.
It was clear to me that it would take time to get all the paperwork " through the system" so I decided to take a short cut to save time and to use the Unimog Busaf were using to trial local components on (these items are painted yellow in the attached photographs) until such time as we received the designated Unimog via Armscor. By that weekend we were ready to get going.
At that time I called the project Bosvark 2 as there was of course no official SADF/Armscor project name for it. By using this name I also reasoned that Bosvark 2 might just be more acceptable if it were to replace the Bosvark developed by CSIR because egos needed to be considered in the business of landmine protected vehicles and if anyone in authority felt in the least slighted it could cost you.
I should mention that DogsBodies had been acquired by Busaf and was now known as Busaf Border Pty Ltd.
At our first "project meeting" at Busaf Border that Monday we decided the following:
1. We would do the integrated rear body first as that seemed less risky and more sensible than starting with a protected cab which, if it did not work, would essentially leave us with nothing.
2. We would first build the new rear body designs in plywood to see where everything could be fitted and it was also cheaper and quicker if we had to make changes.
3. The standard Unimog rear body subframe would be deleted and the mounting system with similar geometry would be incorporated into the new body
4. The rear body would fit generally within the standard Unimog's rear body geometry and also have the standard canvas top
5. High centre of gravity (CG) was always a consideration with the Unimog so we had to keep the rear body CG as low as possible
6. Back to back seating would be used like on the standard Unimog personnel/cargo vehicle
7. The fuel tank would be mounted underfloor in the base of the body
8. A water tank with drinking water would also be mounted underfloor in the body.
9. The spare wheel would be moved from the side of the chassis frame to the back of the body.
10. The battery box with the two 12V heavy batteries would also be relocated to further "clean up" the side of the Unimog to allow easier passage for a wheel or underbelly blast
11. Storage for personal kit would be located at the rear of the body
12. A fuel balance tank (to ensure continuous fuel supply when negotiating steep gradients) would be located under the body between the chassis rails for protection from small arms fire.
13. The body would have dropsides behind which the crew would be protected against small arms fire and the dropsides would also be removable so that they could be used as shields on the ground against small arms fire.
14. There would also be hinged rear entry panels with steps to allow troops to climb in from the rear as getting in over the sides was going to be quite a challenge as we saw it.
15. We would have to experimentally determine the height of the dropsides to allow the troops to still be able to see over them and still be able to have cover behind them from small arms fire and also be able to fire back over the tops of the dropsides
16. For the prototype we would make up our own "simulated bullet-proof glass" using wood and perspex with dimensions of glass already in service at the time so that if the project was successful, we did not have to redesign the windows.
17. We would use mild steel instead of armour plate when building the prototype
18. I would endeavour to stay strictly within Daimler Benz's design guidelines for the Unimog 416.162 as the last thing I needed was a fight with either their Design or Service Departments which could derail the project and adversely affect the warranty of the vehicle.
19. And importantly - we would use standard Unimog components wherever possible to stay with the standard Through Life Support (TLS) arrangements and protocols already in place for the Unimog AND WITH THE UNIMOG 416.162 SUPPOSEDLY DUE FOR PHASE OUT SHORTLY, ANY NEW NON-STANDARD COMPONENTRY WOULD BE VIEWED AS A NEGATIVE AND ANOTHER RISK WE DARE NOT ADD TO AN ALREADY HIGH RISK PROJECT.
With the starters gun now fired we set to work immediately.
Working closely with Piet Smit, the chief draughtsman of Busaf , who could turn my ideas into drawings in no time at all, we soon had a body sketched out whilst Don McKay, the Workshop Manager got the plywood sheets delivered together with the necessary carpentry tools. This was all a bit amusing for the staff who were more used to working with steel and now here we were cutting drilling and gluing plywood in the workshop with sawdust all over the place.
Anyway, within the same week we had the concept lower V-body minus dropsides but with chassis mounts and rear kit storage platform in plywood ready for review and discussion (see photograph #1) and preliminary fitment to the Unimog. Everything appeared to fit OK so we could now move forward.
It was time to build a representative body in plywood once again without the rear platform but with full dropsides - see picture #2.
Now we also needed to find a place to fit the spare wheel and in no time a plywood spare wheel rolled out of the workshop to be trial fitted at the rear of the body to check the available space - see photograph #3 . We had to use a plywood spare wheel as the plywood body was a bit flimsy and the standard Unimog spare wheel was quite heavy.
With the plywood body fitted on the Unimog it was time to take a closer look at the dropsides ( see photograph # 4) and what height they should be, how the troops should get in and out and how the spare wheel should be fitted at the rear and we soon realized that that would be easier to experiment with this on the steel body and that could wait until we built it. It was also at that point we decided to leave the hood bows and canvas cover for later as there would likely be difficulties with the operation of the dropsides. With perfect timing the Unimog we were lent by Armscor arrived at Busaf and we could start building a prototype steel body and fitting it to the Unimog.
We now had the major dimensions agreed and locked in and now Piet Smit could get cracking producing the drawings for a more representative concept body and within days the workshop were cutting and welding away and manufacturing the body in mild steel as we could of course not access armour plate.
Concurrent engineering was the order of the day as drawings were issued and modified as required on the fly and what an exciting time it was as that rear body took shape in literally just a few days. The enthusiasm of all concerned was infectious and the workshop lights would often be on until late at night and often we shared a beer or two (r more....) to officially end the working day and talk about the project. Exciting time for all of us.
I consider myself privileged indeed to have had the opportunity to lead and direct such a willing and enthusiastic team and will always recognize their contribution to this project. The unsung heroes in my book who were never acknowledged and without whom the Buffel would never have existed.
And in what seemed like no time at all, Don McKay wanted to know what colour I wanted the body painted? Could we really have reached that point so quickly, a scant few weeks after having started this project? Yes, we had and out of the workshop rolled the concept vehicle in olive drab green - see photograph #5
No time to slow down now and time to start finalizing the actual prototype design. First major design issue - how high must the dropsides be? No-one could tell us so we made the call.
Don McKay was approximately 178m tall so we used him as our model and used his line of sight to determine a sensible height of the dropsides and the height to the ground with the dropsides folded down - see photographs #6 and #7
A bit of cutting and carving and we had the height we thought was appropriate.
Now the time was right to start address the protected drivers cab and that will be covered in Part 3C.
Up to this point no one from Armscor or CSIR had seen what we were doing or was involved in our project other than Armscor having lent us a Unimog.
Attachments
curious george
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 4 November 2010
- Messages
- 214
- Reaction score
- 63
*sry for the reverse order:
Buffel part 2
The Buffel - Part 2
The Unimog 416.162- entry into service with the SADF and preparing for Buffel
Few would say the Unimog 416.162 was a pretty vehicle, but when it put on its "African bushjacket" the ugly duckling changed into a "meneer" that could take a real hammering in the wild and unforgiving country that is Africa.
When the SADF became interested in this vehicle, the Unimog 416 production line in Gagggenau was already in the process of being shut down in preparation for retooling for the new generation Unimog L130 and L170 of which some 15000 had been ordered at that time by the Bundeswehr.
I have dealt elsewhere with all the drama and excitement surrounding the creation of the Unimog 416.162 during the runout of this product which was eventually supplied to the SADF from 1974 onwards and I include a picture of me with the first Unimog 416.162 off the production line for the first Armscor Unimog 416.162 contract at the time.
The first Unimog order was indeed an interesting one.
In typically Armscor fashion negotiations went round and round the mulberry bush - hurry, get us the latest prices and then we will place an order by the end of the week followed by silence and telephone calls not being returned then an urgent request for something else again and then silence and so it went on. In the meantime the Unimog people at Gaggenau I was working with were getting pretty "gatvol" of this "now it's on, now it's off" merry-go-round and told me so in no uncertain terms - the blunt message being "get your shit together and stop messing us around". As if I could tell Armscor what to do.
Then suddenly one day my phone rang and Armscor wanted to see me urgently. Now the deal was super urgent and Gaggenau must produce these vehicles "chop chop" because they were urgently needed as if Gaggenau had no other business to do and were just sitting around waiting to build Unimogs for SA. But that was Armscor.
Up to this time, all the while going around and around the mulberry bush, we had been asked to look at various options as well from part CKD assembly, then fully built up, then full CKD assembly and then CKD assembly with some local content and then back to fully built up and and and......
At that time plans were already underway within Armscor to build a new generation of trucks in South Africa and negotiations had started with interested parties to provide examples of their products for evaluation by the SADF before a down selection was made and negotiations entered into for local manufacture, but that is another story.
So we were not really surprized when Armscor called us in to finalize the first Unimog contract and advised us at these had to be supplied fully built (and delivered yesterday of course!) because it was unlikely anymore would be ordered with the locally manufactured products "due in the near future". So do not expect to supply anymore Unimogs after this contract was the message.
For the record, the first Unimog contract price was based on a rate of exchange of 1 Rand = DM 3.5635. DM is of course Deutschmark. As an aside, today the rate 1 Euro = 15.7 Rand. I know the Euro is not exactly what the DM was but that gives some indication of how the Rand collapsed over time as well.
When I contacted Gaggenau to advise them the contract had been signed and the vehicles were urgently needed they first thought I was joking because this had been going on for weeks and only when I said I would be visiting within a week to sort out all the details did they take it seriously.
In the Daimler Benz organisation from this point onwards Armscor /SADF was called customer PAUL and I in turn then codenamed all Unimog contracts as Project Paul, Pauline, Paula and Paulette to name but a few.
But I digress.
Credit must go to Gaggenau who pulled out all the stops to get the Unimog 416 production line back up and running to produce this order at very short notice and soon the fully built up Unimogs were rolling off the production line after which they had to be corrosion protected for their sea voyage before being shipped to South Africa in batches of 30 or more.
Photograph #1 was taken in 1974 at the Gaggenau factory when I inspected and signed off the first Unimog 416.162 with front mounted winch - 50 were ordered with front mounted winches
Gaggenau met its contracted delivery schedule to the unit and day and soon we were unloading Unimogs at the UCDD factory in East London, CDA, where they were prepped before delivery by road to Pretoria.
Whilst we were still in the process of delivering the first Unimog contract, surprize, surprize! Urgent call from Armscor. Can we supply some more Unimog 416.162 vehicles.
What about the advice that it was unlikely that there would be further orders after the first one and now we were also requested, once again at very short notice and with no prior warning, to build the rear bodies locally? No explanation, just a request to get a move on with the new contract (which once again was "top urgent") and which would almost definitely be the very last one this time. Ja, well no fine.
And this is where the Buffel story had its beginnings.
We requested quotations from local bodybuilders to build the rear platforms locally and finally settled on Messrs DogsBodies in East London which was owned and managed by Mike Stent at the time to build the rear bodies.
Mike was a "straight shooter" and a "go getter" and working with him and his "get things done" workshop manager, Don McKay, was a real pleasure. Nothing was too difficult if they could humanly have a go at it and Mike was also a big supporter of local manufacture which is why his company later played such an important when we developed the Buffel.
With South Africa under rapidly mounting pressure from overseas at the time, Armscor then also put pressure on us to manufacture other Unimog components locally such as battery boxes, air tanks, braking system parts, exhaust systems, steering components, radiators etc for small quantities with no prospect of further orders. Crazy stuff. This made planning and scheduling almost impossible and furthermore, Armscor failed to realize that to replace these items whilst quantities and/or timelines were unknown or uncertain and without going through the process of manufacturing local samples first for testing and approval before incorporation was very risky but we started doing it nevertheless so that we could not be accused of being unwilling to help.
For us the logical thing to do was to pick the "low hanging fruit" first and soon Mike and his team had made battery boxes, spare wheel carriers, mirror holders and front bumpers which can be seen in photograph #2 where we used a 416.162 chassis on which we did our local content development to fit our original plywood concept Buffel body. The local parts are yellow in colour in this photograph.
With the order for 500 Unimogs being the "last" originally the final score was: 500 + 200 +396 +299 = 1395 Unimogs plus a few small orders by the time I left UCDD in 1980 when the Samils were getting into full production.
In summary, I negotiated and managed all the contracts for the supply of more than 90% of all Unimogs supplied to South Africa and when the final Unimog 416.162 was delivered to South Africa the Unimog 416 line was shut down permanently, some 8 years after the originally scheduled date and only spare parts were produced for this vehicle after that date and these mostly to order.
The Buffel development proper is covered in Part 3 which I am posting next.
Buffel part 2
The Buffel - Part 2
The Unimog 416.162- entry into service with the SADF and preparing for Buffel
Few would say the Unimog 416.162 was a pretty vehicle, but when it put on its "African bushjacket" the ugly duckling changed into a "meneer" that could take a real hammering in the wild and unforgiving country that is Africa.
When the SADF became interested in this vehicle, the Unimog 416 production line in Gagggenau was already in the process of being shut down in preparation for retooling for the new generation Unimog L130 and L170 of which some 15000 had been ordered at that time by the Bundeswehr.
I have dealt elsewhere with all the drama and excitement surrounding the creation of the Unimog 416.162 during the runout of this product which was eventually supplied to the SADF from 1974 onwards and I include a picture of me with the first Unimog 416.162 off the production line for the first Armscor Unimog 416.162 contract at the time.
The first Unimog order was indeed an interesting one.
In typically Armscor fashion negotiations went round and round the mulberry bush - hurry, get us the latest prices and then we will place an order by the end of the week followed by silence and telephone calls not being returned then an urgent request for something else again and then silence and so it went on. In the meantime the Unimog people at Gaggenau I was working with were getting pretty "gatvol" of this "now it's on, now it's off" merry-go-round and told me so in no uncertain terms - the blunt message being "get your shit together and stop messing us around". As if I could tell Armscor what to do.
Then suddenly one day my phone rang and Armscor wanted to see me urgently. Now the deal was super urgent and Gaggenau must produce these vehicles "chop chop" because they were urgently needed as if Gaggenau had no other business to do and were just sitting around waiting to build Unimogs for SA. But that was Armscor.
Up to this time, all the while going around and around the mulberry bush, we had been asked to look at various options as well from part CKD assembly, then fully built up, then full CKD assembly and then CKD assembly with some local content and then back to fully built up and and and......
At that time plans were already underway within Armscor to build a new generation of trucks in South Africa and negotiations had started with interested parties to provide examples of their products for evaluation by the SADF before a down selection was made and negotiations entered into for local manufacture, but that is another story.
So we were not really surprized when Armscor called us in to finalize the first Unimog contract and advised us at these had to be supplied fully built (and delivered yesterday of course!) because it was unlikely anymore would be ordered with the locally manufactured products "due in the near future". So do not expect to supply anymore Unimogs after this contract was the message.
For the record, the first Unimog contract price was based on a rate of exchange of 1 Rand = DM 3.5635. DM is of course Deutschmark. As an aside, today the rate 1 Euro = 15.7 Rand. I know the Euro is not exactly what the DM was but that gives some indication of how the Rand collapsed over time as well.
When I contacted Gaggenau to advise them the contract had been signed and the vehicles were urgently needed they first thought I was joking because this had been going on for weeks and only when I said I would be visiting within a week to sort out all the details did they take it seriously.
In the Daimler Benz organisation from this point onwards Armscor /SADF was called customer PAUL and I in turn then codenamed all Unimog contracts as Project Paul, Pauline, Paula and Paulette to name but a few.
But I digress.
Credit must go to Gaggenau who pulled out all the stops to get the Unimog 416 production line back up and running to produce this order at very short notice and soon the fully built up Unimogs were rolling off the production line after which they had to be corrosion protected for their sea voyage before being shipped to South Africa in batches of 30 or more.
Photograph #1 was taken in 1974 at the Gaggenau factory when I inspected and signed off the first Unimog 416.162 with front mounted winch - 50 were ordered with front mounted winches
Gaggenau met its contracted delivery schedule to the unit and day and soon we were unloading Unimogs at the UCDD factory in East London, CDA, where they were prepped before delivery by road to Pretoria.
Whilst we were still in the process of delivering the first Unimog contract, surprize, surprize! Urgent call from Armscor. Can we supply some more Unimog 416.162 vehicles.
What about the advice that it was unlikely that there would be further orders after the first one and now we were also requested, once again at very short notice and with no prior warning, to build the rear bodies locally? No explanation, just a request to get a move on with the new contract (which once again was "top urgent") and which would almost definitely be the very last one this time. Ja, well no fine.
And this is where the Buffel story had its beginnings.
We requested quotations from local bodybuilders to build the rear platforms locally and finally settled on Messrs DogsBodies in East London which was owned and managed by Mike Stent at the time to build the rear bodies.
Mike was a "straight shooter" and a "go getter" and working with him and his "get things done" workshop manager, Don McKay, was a real pleasure. Nothing was too difficult if they could humanly have a go at it and Mike was also a big supporter of local manufacture which is why his company later played such an important when we developed the Buffel.
With South Africa under rapidly mounting pressure from overseas at the time, Armscor then also put pressure on us to manufacture other Unimog components locally such as battery boxes, air tanks, braking system parts, exhaust systems, steering components, radiators etc for small quantities with no prospect of further orders. Crazy stuff. This made planning and scheduling almost impossible and furthermore, Armscor failed to realize that to replace these items whilst quantities and/or timelines were unknown or uncertain and without going through the process of manufacturing local samples first for testing and approval before incorporation was very risky but we started doing it nevertheless so that we could not be accused of being unwilling to help.
For us the logical thing to do was to pick the "low hanging fruit" first and soon Mike and his team had made battery boxes, spare wheel carriers, mirror holders and front bumpers which can be seen in photograph #2 where we used a 416.162 chassis on which we did our local content development to fit our original plywood concept Buffel body. The local parts are yellow in colour in this photograph.
With the order for 500 Unimogs being the "last" originally the final score was: 500 + 200 +396 +299 = 1395 Unimogs plus a few small orders by the time I left UCDD in 1980 when the Samils were getting into full production.
In summary, I negotiated and managed all the contracts for the supply of more than 90% of all Unimogs supplied to South Africa and when the final Unimog 416.162 was delivered to South Africa the Unimog 416 line was shut down permanently, some 8 years after the originally scheduled date and only spare parts were produced for this vehicle after that date and these mostly to order.
The Buffel development proper is covered in Part 3 which I am posting next.
curious george
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 4 November 2010
- Messages
- 214
- Reaction score
- 63
THE BUFFEL PROJECT - PART ONE
The Bosvark
I was at my desk in my office at UCDD Pty Ltd (the manufacturers and distributors of Mercedes Benz products in South Africa with Daimler Benz AG a major shareholder) when Nick Venter, the Unimog Service Specialist with special responsibility for the service support programme of the SADF Unimogs, walked in and said he had something to discuss with me.
This was not unusual since as Manager of the Tenders and Contracts Department I had negotiated the contracts for the supply of the Unimog 416.162 vehicles to the SADF and was the Program Manager for this business and all matters relating to these contracts consequently went over my desk.
This was a somewhat different matter he wanted to discuss. Whilst he had been dealing directly with the SADF up to that point he had been asked to see somebody at CSIR about their wanting to buy a "stabilizer" for the SADF's Unimogs and he wanted to know how to deal with that deal with that request as we were not dealing with CSIR about SADF Unimogs.
Whilst stabilizers had been fitted to some other civilian Unimogs sold in South Africa (civilian Unimog sales were around the 100/year mark at the time ), the Unimogs sold to the SADF as Personnel/Cargo vehicles were not equipped with stabilizers as these were not deemed necessary for them because they also restricted wheel and suspension movement.
CSIR however was not a customer of UCDD and someone had to order and pay for the stabilizers and I therefore needed to get in touch with CSIR to find out what this was all about.
That was when I first met Dr Jean de Villiers, a shortish gentleman with spiky grey hair, a mischievous sense of humour and a ready smile whom I came to know over time as a real gentleman and a thoroughly decent man.
From what I could work out, he was the overall head of a Department within CSIR (later to become or a part thereof, to become CDU - the Chemical Defence Unit) that had been tasked to do research into technologies of interest to the SADF and to help with finding replacement products that were already or were soon likely to be embargoed as part of increasing sanctions against SA. Here I am just repeating what I was told and stand subject to correction as this type of information was never made public.
Working for him at the time were people like Dr Vernon Joynt, FX Laubscher and oom "Dup" in their "skunkworks"- like workshop, to name but a few.
When we first met, he told me that they had been tasked to urgently develop landmine blast protection measures for the SADF's Unimogs which offered little or no protection beyond the sandbags which were being used (something which had originated with the Portuguese troops in Angola and Mozambique with their Unimog 404 vehicles) and they had to do it pretty quickly with all that was happening in northern SWA and Angola.
The CSIR had no design information or specifications on the Unimog 416.162 when the SADF delivered the first one to them for development and according to him they were doing their development on the "boere-manier" which was largely based on trial and error and "boer maak n plan" principles.
I told him that was obviously not a desirable way to go about things as the Unimog was quite a complex machine which derived a lot of its unequalled off-road performance from its unique design and if you did not know exactly what you were doing it would come back to bite you on the bum down the line.
I spent some time explaining to him how the chassis flexed and the suspension worked and that the chassis did not allow for solid mounting of any fixtures or equipment and for that reason both the cab and standard rear body were mounted so that the chassis could flex (twist) without constraint.
He took note of this and I offered to provide any technical information they might need during their development and he expressed his appreciation for the offer. Because his staff were totally unfamiliar with the design of the Unimog, I offered to arrange to take Dr Joynt, at a convenient time, to meet with the Unimog design department and to visit their test track in Gaggenau to see how they designed and tested the Unimog vehicles.
I made good on this offer later when I took Dr Joynt to the Unimog factory in October 1978 where he met with the chief Unimog designer and had the opportunity to drive on their test track which was a real eye-opener for him.
Without the usual "uiters geheim/top secret" and "I will have to shoot you if I tell you" BS, Dr De Villiers simply said he could not tell me what they were doing and what I saw I had to keep to myself - simple as that. I gave him my word and honoured that undertaking.
When I started asking questions about which stabilizers with what rating he was talking about he could not tell me but it was becoming apparent that they needed something to reduce the sideway leaning/swaying movement of whatever they were doing with the Unimog.
It was of course difficult to suggest a suitable stabilizer(s) because they were unfamiliar with the design data of the Unimog 416.162 and I on the other hand did not know what they were designing and there was a range of different stabilizers for the Unimog to choose from .
I pointed out to him that the Unimog suspension system worked as combination of spring compression and chassis twist to give the Unimog its simultaneous, diagonal wheel displacement of 500mm (which they were totally unaware of at that time) as specified by Daimler Benz and for that reason everything mounted to the Unimog frame had to be 3 -point mounted to avoid cracking and breaking of the frame while still allowing the required wheel movement. Even the standard Unimog 416.162 cab was mounted on 3 points and the rear body was mounted on 4 points - 2 fixed in the middle and one swivel point in front and one at the rear, so in effect two 3-point mounts. This allowed the frame to flex and twist freely under load.
He listened to me with interest and then told me that Dr Joynt was actually the man in charge of developing the blast protection package on the Unimog and he would pass on the info I had given him.
I said I would order the stabilizer assembly which I thought would be most suitable from what he had told me, but before I left he asked me to follow him and then he let me have a quick look from a distance at the Bosvark they were developing in the yard. I could not make out much detail and he then apologetically told me that he would have loved to show me more but unfortunately could not.
I then ordered a stabilizer assembly which I thought was most suitable from the Unimog factory in Gaggenau which was delivered to the CSIR soon afterwards and which they then fitted.
That was my first and last exposure to the Unimog Bosvark developed by CSIR until I later had the opportunity of looking at one of the 56 Bosvarks built by the Army workshops.
Whether the Bosvark conversions save saved lives, I do not know because that information was of course "geheim", but nonetheless here are the major elements of the Bosvark conversion design:
1. a Shallow rear V-body with back to back seating for the crew (copied from the standard Unimog and the first time this seating layout was used in a mine resistant vehicle as I recall) which was bolted straight on to the standard platform sub-frame. It had no front, rear or side ballistic protection, no protected fuel tank , no inboard water tank, no engine ballistic protection
2. a Heavy, rigid belly blast protection plate which was bolted directly to the frame in 4 places which placed significant strain on the chassis.
3. Two approximately 1.2 m long, one piece deflector plates that were fitted in the wheel wells stretching to under the cab and bolted solidly to the frame which inhibited chassis flexing and suspension movement.
4. No driver ballistic protection was provided.
I attach a drawing (schematic ) of the front blast protection kit consisting of the belly plate and the two wheel well deflector plates to give an idea of what those looked like and a picture of a completed Bosvark on which the shallow rear V-body can also be seen.
So in summary, the Bosvark conversion consisted of a shallow V-body with no ballistic protection, a set of front wheel well mounted deflector plates and a belly plate under the engine/gearbox. That was the total Bosvark conversion and all credit goes to the CSIR for this conversion.
I must mention that after the Bosvark, neither the CSIR nor any of its personnel were involved with the Buffel project until after the prototype arrived in Pretoria in September 1976 and that will be covered in detail in the next posting and readers can then draw their own conclusions.
The Bosvark
I was at my desk in my office at UCDD Pty Ltd (the manufacturers and distributors of Mercedes Benz products in South Africa with Daimler Benz AG a major shareholder) when Nick Venter, the Unimog Service Specialist with special responsibility for the service support programme of the SADF Unimogs, walked in and said he had something to discuss with me.
This was not unusual since as Manager of the Tenders and Contracts Department I had negotiated the contracts for the supply of the Unimog 416.162 vehicles to the SADF and was the Program Manager for this business and all matters relating to these contracts consequently went over my desk.
This was a somewhat different matter he wanted to discuss. Whilst he had been dealing directly with the SADF up to that point he had been asked to see somebody at CSIR about their wanting to buy a "stabilizer" for the SADF's Unimogs and he wanted to know how to deal with that deal with that request as we were not dealing with CSIR about SADF Unimogs.
Whilst stabilizers had been fitted to some other civilian Unimogs sold in South Africa (civilian Unimog sales were around the 100/year mark at the time ), the Unimogs sold to the SADF as Personnel/Cargo vehicles were not equipped with stabilizers as these were not deemed necessary for them because they also restricted wheel and suspension movement.
CSIR however was not a customer of UCDD and someone had to order and pay for the stabilizers and I therefore needed to get in touch with CSIR to find out what this was all about.
That was when I first met Dr Jean de Villiers, a shortish gentleman with spiky grey hair, a mischievous sense of humour and a ready smile whom I came to know over time as a real gentleman and a thoroughly decent man.
From what I could work out, he was the overall head of a Department within CSIR (later to become or a part thereof, to become CDU - the Chemical Defence Unit) that had been tasked to do research into technologies of interest to the SADF and to help with finding replacement products that were already or were soon likely to be embargoed as part of increasing sanctions against SA. Here I am just repeating what I was told and stand subject to correction as this type of information was never made public.
Working for him at the time were people like Dr Vernon Joynt, FX Laubscher and oom "Dup" in their "skunkworks"- like workshop, to name but a few.
When we first met, he told me that they had been tasked to urgently develop landmine blast protection measures for the SADF's Unimogs which offered little or no protection beyond the sandbags which were being used (something which had originated with the Portuguese troops in Angola and Mozambique with their Unimog 404 vehicles) and they had to do it pretty quickly with all that was happening in northern SWA and Angola.
The CSIR had no design information or specifications on the Unimog 416.162 when the SADF delivered the first one to them for development and according to him they were doing their development on the "boere-manier" which was largely based on trial and error and "boer maak n plan" principles.
I told him that was obviously not a desirable way to go about things as the Unimog was quite a complex machine which derived a lot of its unequalled off-road performance from its unique design and if you did not know exactly what you were doing it would come back to bite you on the bum down the line.
I spent some time explaining to him how the chassis flexed and the suspension worked and that the chassis did not allow for solid mounting of any fixtures or equipment and for that reason both the cab and standard rear body were mounted so that the chassis could flex (twist) without constraint.
He took note of this and I offered to provide any technical information they might need during their development and he expressed his appreciation for the offer. Because his staff were totally unfamiliar with the design of the Unimog, I offered to arrange to take Dr Joynt, at a convenient time, to meet with the Unimog design department and to visit their test track in Gaggenau to see how they designed and tested the Unimog vehicles.
I made good on this offer later when I took Dr Joynt to the Unimog factory in October 1978 where he met with the chief Unimog designer and had the opportunity to drive on their test track which was a real eye-opener for him.
Without the usual "uiters geheim/top secret" and "I will have to shoot you if I tell you" BS, Dr De Villiers simply said he could not tell me what they were doing and what I saw I had to keep to myself - simple as that. I gave him my word and honoured that undertaking.
When I started asking questions about which stabilizers with what rating he was talking about he could not tell me but it was becoming apparent that they needed something to reduce the sideway leaning/swaying movement of whatever they were doing with the Unimog.
It was of course difficult to suggest a suitable stabilizer(s) because they were unfamiliar with the design data of the Unimog 416.162 and I on the other hand did not know what they were designing and there was a range of different stabilizers for the Unimog to choose from .
I pointed out to him that the Unimog suspension system worked as combination of spring compression and chassis twist to give the Unimog its simultaneous, diagonal wheel displacement of 500mm (which they were totally unaware of at that time) as specified by Daimler Benz and for that reason everything mounted to the Unimog frame had to be 3 -point mounted to avoid cracking and breaking of the frame while still allowing the required wheel movement. Even the standard Unimog 416.162 cab was mounted on 3 points and the rear body was mounted on 4 points - 2 fixed in the middle and one swivel point in front and one at the rear, so in effect two 3-point mounts. This allowed the frame to flex and twist freely under load.
He listened to me with interest and then told me that Dr Joynt was actually the man in charge of developing the blast protection package on the Unimog and he would pass on the info I had given him.
I said I would order the stabilizer assembly which I thought would be most suitable from what he had told me, but before I left he asked me to follow him and then he let me have a quick look from a distance at the Bosvark they were developing in the yard. I could not make out much detail and he then apologetically told me that he would have loved to show me more but unfortunately could not.
I then ordered a stabilizer assembly which I thought was most suitable from the Unimog factory in Gaggenau which was delivered to the CSIR soon afterwards and which they then fitted.
That was my first and last exposure to the Unimog Bosvark developed by CSIR until I later had the opportunity of looking at one of the 56 Bosvarks built by the Army workshops.
Whether the Bosvark conversions save saved lives, I do not know because that information was of course "geheim", but nonetheless here are the major elements of the Bosvark conversion design:
1. a Shallow rear V-body with back to back seating for the crew (copied from the standard Unimog and the first time this seating layout was used in a mine resistant vehicle as I recall) which was bolted straight on to the standard platform sub-frame. It had no front, rear or side ballistic protection, no protected fuel tank , no inboard water tank, no engine ballistic protection
2. a Heavy, rigid belly blast protection plate which was bolted directly to the frame in 4 places which placed significant strain on the chassis.
3. Two approximately 1.2 m long, one piece deflector plates that were fitted in the wheel wells stretching to under the cab and bolted solidly to the frame which inhibited chassis flexing and suspension movement.
4. No driver ballistic protection was provided.
I attach a drawing (schematic ) of the front blast protection kit consisting of the belly plate and the two wheel well deflector plates to give an idea of what those looked like and a picture of a completed Bosvark on which the shallow rear V-body can also be seen.
So in summary, the Bosvark conversion consisted of a shallow V-body with no ballistic protection, a set of front wheel well mounted deflector plates and a belly plate under the engine/gearbox. That was the total Bosvark conversion and all credit goes to the CSIR for this conversion.
I must mention that after the Bosvark, neither the CSIR nor any of its personnel were involved with the Buffel project until after the prototype arrived in Pretoria in September 1976 and that will be covered in detail in the next posting and readers can then draw their own conclusions.
Attachments
curious george
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 4 November 2010
- Messages
- 214
- Reaction score
- 63
Stranger_NN
ACCESS: Restricted
...maybe, it is Buffel, Bussing prototype?
Attachments
- Joined
- 27 March 2006
- Messages
- 1,842
- Reaction score
- 1,521
Levan, those are great pics of the Springfield Bussing Buffel, and Ratel Prototype!
Thank you.
Strange Rhino indeed. I wonder what the story behind that is?
Those look like Ystervark 20mm AA guns behind there, so we can probably use that, and the Casspir, to fix a rough date.
Thank you.
Strange Rhino indeed. I wonder what the story behind that is?
Those look like Ystervark 20mm AA guns behind there, so we can probably use that, and the Casspir, to fix a rough date.
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
Reply to post # 1620
One can see the ring around the original opening for the turret. This prototype had its turret removed and a hand-hold fitted around the turret opening. It then served as a transport for ministers and other "high-ups" to travel in during military maneuvres.
One can see the ring around the original opening for the turret. This prototype had its turret removed and a hand-hold fitted around the turret opening. It then served as a transport for ministers and other "high-ups" to travel in during military maneuvres.
I read once that the first prototype Buffel/Ratel was powered by a petrol engine. I would be very interested in knowing what kind of engine was used, if this is true. There were not that many military, gasoline engines with the required power during the early seventies. I would guess a Chrysler 440 or possibly, but this seems unlikely, the flat-eight GxB unit used in the AMX 13 light tank. Both these engines developed around 250hp. The Bussing engine used in the production Ratels developed 282hp but torque was, of course, much higher than the petrol engines.
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,252
On a side note re. the Ratel: http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.ie/2016/12/ratel-ifv-close-combat-with-t-55.html
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 27 March 2006
- Messages
- 1,842
- Reaction score
- 1,521
I have just seen these new pics via Facebook.
Previously, there has only ever been one pic I've ever seen out there of the Sterkhans 6x6 vehicle, described as the first monocoque 6x6 mine protected vehicle.
It can be seen in Reply 319 on Page 22 with b&w pic and description. The same pic in colour is in Reply 1461 on Page 98.
The pics look newish..so this vehicle must still be in existence 30 years later.
Previously, there has only ever been one pic I've ever seen out there of the Sterkhans 6x6 vehicle, described as the first monocoque 6x6 mine protected vehicle.
It can be seen in Reply 319 on Page 22 with b&w pic and description. The same pic in colour is in Reply 1461 on Page 98.
The pics look newish..so this vehicle must still be in existence 30 years later.
Attachments
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
kaiserbill said:
Namibian camo scheme?, and landscape in the background?
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 27 March 2006
- Messages
- 1,842
- Reaction score
- 1,521
sa_bushwar said:
Yes.
We did say in the beginning of the thread that we would include SWA vehicles, as SWA in those days was basically administered as another province in SA.
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Messages
- 4,004
- Reaction score
- 3,052
Without some kind of image interpretation education, those blobs could be anything or nothing. Going by the images though, soft roof?
- Joined
- 27 March 2006
- Messages
- 1,842
- Reaction score
- 1,521
They look awfully like the Rhodesian Crocodile and/or MAP 75 APC's.
Why they would be in South Africa would be a mystery, South Africa having access to far superior indigenous vehicles. Perhaps they were tested in SA, at SA facilities, and simply kept there?
I seem to recall seeing that Magirus Deutz based Sprinkaan APC, as designed by the South African Army Technical Corps, sitting in a dilapidated condition with what looked like Rhodesian vehicles, equally dilapidated, alongside...
Why they would be in South Africa would be a mystery, South Africa having access to far superior indigenous vehicles. Perhaps they were tested in SA, at SA facilities, and simply kept there?
I seem to recall seeing that Magirus Deutz based Sprinkaan APC, as designed by the South African Army Technical Corps, sitting in a dilapidated condition with what looked like Rhodesian vehicles, equally dilapidated, alongside...
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
The bodies of these vehicles are basically undestructable in peacetime use. The mechanical bits are all COTS, bolted to the hulls, and the engines, transmissions, axles, etc. are designed for extended commercial use anyway. During WW2, Sweden developed an armoured pesonnel carrier (the m/42) based on a commercial truck chassis. Two versions of the vehicle were developed, one on a Scania-Vabis chassis (SKPF) and the other on a Volvo chassis (VKPF). Although these vehicles were later fitted with some new mechanical components and machine guns, they were still in use on Gotland Island in 1999! There is no reason why the Strandwolf and related Sterkhans vehicles cannot be in use in the Namibian Army for many more years.
I don't suppose anybody knows what the wheelbase of the Ratel Log was? The wheelbase of the standard Ratel is 2.81+1.4. Janes' Armour and Artillery 1985/86 gives the overall wheelbase of the Ratel log as 5.91. The rear axles are identically spaced to the standard vehicle, i.e. 1.4 meters apart. On the photo's and models that I have seen, the front axles seem to be slightly further apart than the rear axles, but I am not sure. If we simplify the measurements as 2.8+1.4 for the standard Ratel and 5.9 total for the log, I think that the wheelbase for the log was either 1.7+2.8+1.4, or 1.4+3.1+1.4.
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
panzerskool
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 13 March 2011
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 4
how sad that she is rusting away, whats the in front of the ratel on the deck?
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
sa_bushwar said:
Photo taken when still at SAAF Museum Zwartkops. Part of a Vampire A/C lying there. Ratel Log has been moved to Bloemfontein and restored for static display.
leo.nap
Gift
- Joined
- 9 August 2015
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 5
Absolutely correct! Restored Ratel Log is located in Bloemfontein. This prototype is installed in a location 1SAI Bn.
Google coordinates: -29.096247, 26.182896
Google coordinates: -29.096247, 26.182896
Attachments
panzerskool
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 13 March 2011
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 4
good to hear, should be up the hill at panzerskool around the parade ground with the rest of Ratel prototypes
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
Reply to post #1644:
Thanks. Very nice photos!
Just as an interesting aside: we know that the Buffel, the original Ratel prototype, was offered by Büssing, a German truck company. Büssing was present in SA at that time but certainly not one of the big truck companies. So, how come they built the Buffel?
In the early sixties, the German Ministry of Defence presented its requirements for a new generation of wheeled military vehicles for the seventies and later. These were to include a 4x4 armoured load carrier (Transportpanzer 4), a 6x6 armoured load carrier (Transportpanzer 6), an 8x8 armoured, amphibious reconnaissance vehicle (Spähpanzer Luchs) and a complete family of 4x4, 6x6 and 8x8 tactical trucks. A Joint Project Office (JPO) was set up to develop these vehicles but Mercedes Benz chose not to join the JPO but to develop vehicles in competition with the JPO. The JPO finally consisted of MAN, Klöckner-Humbolt-Deutz, Henschel and Büssing. They developd vehicles for the various requirements, as did Mercedes. Finally, the Mercedes vehicles were chosen for the Transportpanzer 6 and the 8x8 Luchs (the requirement for the Transportpanzer 4 was dropped), while the JPO, mainly MAN, became responsible for the trucks. The trucks were powered by Deutz air-cooled engines, the same as used in the initial versions of the SAMIL. Büssing, as part of the JPO, therefore had experience with the development of armoured vehicles. They offered the Buffel prototype to SA which finally became the Ratel. This was fitted with MAN (also part of the JPO) axles and a Büssing engine. A very similar vehicle was offered to the Belgians and went into production there as the Sibmas APC. It was even closer to the initial Buffel prototype than the Ratel finally turned out. The Sibmas had the same MAN axles as the Ratel but used a MAN engine and a ZF gearbox rather than the Büssing engine and Renk gearbox of the Ratel.
Thanks. Very nice photos!
Just as an interesting aside: we know that the Buffel, the original Ratel prototype, was offered by Büssing, a German truck company. Büssing was present in SA at that time but certainly not one of the big truck companies. So, how come they built the Buffel?
In the early sixties, the German Ministry of Defence presented its requirements for a new generation of wheeled military vehicles for the seventies and later. These were to include a 4x4 armoured load carrier (Transportpanzer 4), a 6x6 armoured load carrier (Transportpanzer 6), an 8x8 armoured, amphibious reconnaissance vehicle (Spähpanzer Luchs) and a complete family of 4x4, 6x6 and 8x8 tactical trucks. A Joint Project Office (JPO) was set up to develop these vehicles but Mercedes Benz chose not to join the JPO but to develop vehicles in competition with the JPO. The JPO finally consisted of MAN, Klöckner-Humbolt-Deutz, Henschel and Büssing. They developd vehicles for the various requirements, as did Mercedes. Finally, the Mercedes vehicles were chosen for the Transportpanzer 6 and the 8x8 Luchs (the requirement for the Transportpanzer 4 was dropped), while the JPO, mainly MAN, became responsible for the trucks. The trucks were powered by Deutz air-cooled engines, the same as used in the initial versions of the SAMIL. Büssing, as part of the JPO, therefore had experience with the development of armoured vehicles. They offered the Buffel prototype to SA which finally became the Ratel. This was fitted with MAN (also part of the JPO) axles and a Büssing engine. A very similar vehicle was offered to the Belgians and went into production there as the Sibmas APC. It was even closer to the initial Buffel prototype than the Ratel finally turned out. The Sibmas had the same MAN axles as the Ratel but used a MAN engine and a ZF gearbox rather than the Büssing engine and Renk gearbox of the Ratel.
Does anybody know if the Ratel/Buffel prototype was actually built in SA? I think it was built in Germany, and it was possibly based on the JPO's version of the Transportpanzer 6. Although the Ratel is not amphibious, the Sibmas is. The vehicle was therefore designed to be amphibious, if necessary, one of the requirements for the Transportpanzer.
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,252
Thanks for the interesting background summary, Herman!
sa_bushwar
ACCESS: Secret
Similar threads
-
-
South African artillery/cannon/guns - prototypes, projects, concepts etc.- Started by Graugrun
- Replies: 138
-
South African small to medium calibre weapon prototypes, concepts, projects etc.
- Started by Graugrun
- Replies: 142
-
-
