South African prototypes, projects, concepts, etc.

[Herman]

Reply to post #1653
Thanks. The Sibmas is mechanically slightly different to the Ratel in that the engine is a 12 liter MAN rather than the Büssing engine used in the Ratel and the Sibmas uses a ZF 6HP transmission which, as far as I can tell, is coupled directly to the engine, with a seperate transfer case between the first and second axle whereas, in the Ratel, the engine is connected by a shaft to the Renk HS106 integrated gearbox and transfer case situated between the first and second axle. Axles are the same MAN units on coils. Although Büssing apparently still operated independently, to some extent, in the seventies, the company had been taken over by MAN in the sixties. The design of the Ratel and the Sibmas was therefore all under the umbrella of the MAN concern.

I have very little doubt that the Prototype Buffel had been built in Germany, the more I think about it. The only company building armoured vehicles in SA, in the mid-seventies, was Sandock-Austral, who was building the Eland. The Ratel was a totally different kettle of fish, requiring a lot of expertise in the field of integrating power-packs, suspension geometry, etc. We know that the Buffel prototype was extensively tested in SA before being declared the best vehicle of all those tested. Sandock Austral did not have the expertise to built a one-off prototype which immediately worked great. I am convinced that the Buffel prototype was the result of development work done in Germany, in the sixties, by the Joint Project Office, during the development of the Luchs and the Transportpanzer 6. It should also be remembered that all the candidate vehicles tested during the selection process for the Ratel, were manufactured in other countries (France, Germany and Brazil), except the mysterious 8-wheeled Sprinkaan, currently in a dilapidated state at the School of Armour Museum, in Bloemfontein. This was supposedly constructed by the Technical Services Department of the SA Army. Nothing is known of this vehicle and there are no records of it being tested during the trials.

 

[skylancer-3441]

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.

http://imgur.com/a/i72Cw some pics of what appears to be some early version of Sibmas.

 

[Herman]

The following are the technical details of the Ratel Log, as far as I could figure it out. Figures for the standard Ratel in brackets.
Overall length: 8.74 meters (7.212 meters
Overall width: 2.516 meters (same)
Empty weight: 19 tonnes (16.500 tonnes (Ratel 20))
Combat weight: 29 tonnes (18.500 tonnes)
Wheelbase: 1.7 x 2.81 x 1.4 (total=5.91 meters) (2.81 x 1.4 meters)
Track: 2.08 meters (same)
Tyres: 14 x 20 (same)
Ground clearance: 0.415 meters (0.34 meters)
Turning radius: 10.5 meters (7.95 meters)
Vertical obstacle: 0.6 meters (0.35 meters)
Trench crossing: 2.1 meters (1.15 meters)
Engine: Mercedes (ADE) V10 diesel, 15.960 liters, 430hp @ 2300 rpm. (Büssing BTXF, 282hp @ 2200 rpm)
Transmission: 6 speed automatic. I have not yet been able to find the make and type, but it is bound to be either a ZF or Renk. (RenkHSU 106, 6-speed automatic).
Fuel capacity: 560 liters (430 liters)

Noteable differences compared to the standard Ratel, aside from the 8x8 configuration and the bigger engine, is that the ground clearance is significantly greater that that of the Ratel. The ground clearance of the Log is determined by the height of the axle differentials. On the standard Ratel, it is determined by the transmission hanging down below between the first and second axle. The transmission of the Log was mounted parallel, next to the engine, I think. Both the trench crossing ability and the obstacle climbing ability of the Log is greater than those of the standard vehicle; this is due to the double axles at the front.

 

[panzerskool]

I'm reading Mobility Conquers and in the section on operation Reindeer (first use of ratels) they talk about dedicated Ratel Ambulances that had been modified from a standard Ratel 20. Never seen or heard about these before . Anyone know anything?

 

[Herman]

Never heard of that. Might have been a kind of ersatz temporary conversion because the dedicated MRAP ambulances (Rinkhals) were not available yet.

 

[sa_bushwar]

And here is a Ratel 20 now in Libya in March 2017 without main armament being used for what seems to be a command vehicle. Clearly it is not fitted with run-flat tyres as makeshift steel plates have been fitted over the wheels.

 

[Herman]

Although run-flat tyres are often mentioned in connection with South African armoured vehicles, I doubt if they were often, or possibly ever, used. One always sees pictures of Ratels with one ot more spare tyres piled on the back.

 

[Rickshaw]

Although run-flat tyres are often mentioned in connection with South African armoured vehicles, I doubt if they were often, or possibly ever, used. One always sees pictures of Ratels with one ot more spare tyres piled on the back.

Run-flat tyres only work for about 100-150km after being holed by gunfire. In South Africa, you also have to contend with 150mm long thorns which pierce the sidewalls of the tyre when on long road marches. The result is that wheeled vehicles often carry more tyres than you'd need in Europe or any other sort of benign environment. If your tyre is holed you need to replace it at your next halt.

 

[panzerskool]

Although run-flat tyres are often mentioned in connection with South African armoured vehicles, I doubt if they were often, or possibly ever, used. One always sees pictures of Ratels with one ot more spare tyres piled on the back.

A number of references to ratel using run flats during Reindeer in Mobility conquers so it is combat proven . A great book if you guys can get your hands on it, i ordered mine form Amazon for Dubai delivery

 

[Mech]

We used run-flats quite a lot. They used red wheel nuts to distinguish them from regular tires. I remember they were heavy as all hell.

Although run-flat tyres are often mentioned in connection with South African armoured vehicles, I doubt if they were often, or possibly ever, used. One always sees pictures of Ratels with one ot more spare tyres piled on the back.

 

[Herman]

OK. Thanks for the info. They are both heavy and expensive. That is one reason why I thought they might not have been used a lot.

 

[Dinges]

The following are the technical details of the Ratel Log, as far as I could figure it out. Figures for the standard Ratel in brackets.
Overall length: 8.74 meters (7.212 meters
Overall width: 2.516 meters (same)
Empty weight: 19 tonnes (16.500 tonnes (Ratel 20))
Combat weight: 29 tonnes (18.500 tonnes)
Wheelbase: 1.7 x 2.81 x 1.4 (total=5.91 meters) (2.81 x 1.4 meters)
Track: 2.08 meters (same)
Tyres: 14 x 20 (same)
Ground clearance: 0.415 meters (0.34 meters)
Turning radius: 10.5 meters (7.95 meters)
Vertical obstacle: 0.6 meters (0.35 meters)
Trench crossing: 2.1 meters (1.15 meters)
Engine: Mercedes (ADE) V10 diesel, 15.960 liters, 430hp @ 2300 rpm. (Büssing BTXF, 282hp @ 2200 rpm)
Transmission: 6 speed automatic. I have not yet been able to find the make and type, but it is bound to be either a ZF or Renk. (RenkHSU 106, 6-speed automatic).
Fuel capacity: 560 liters (430 liters)

Noteable differences compared to the standard Ratel, aside from the 8x8 configuration and the bigger engine, is that the ground clearance is significantly greater that that of the Ratel. The ground clearance of the Log is determined by the height of the axle differentials. On the standard Ratel, it is determined by the transmission hanging down below between the first and second axle. The transmission of the Log was mounted parallel, next to the engine, I think. Both the trench crossing ability and the obstacle climbing ability of the Log is greater than those of the standard vehicle; this is due to the double axles at the front.

From what I have seen , the Log used conventional wheels of the same size , but not the split rim of the Ratel.

 

[Herman]

Are the split rims required for run-flats? I suppose so. The Log was only built as a couple of prototypes and was never used operationally, afaik. I expect that if it had gone into production, it would have used the same wheels as the Ratel. The axles were identical MAN units to those used on the Ratel.

The Log was a bit over the top (expensive) for a supply vehicle. Something like the prototype 8x8 artillery tractor would have been more appropriate for a logistics vehicle. I also read that the Samil 100 was found to be not quite up to the job and an 8x8 would have been better.

 

[Dinges]

Are the split rims required for run-flats? I suppose so. The Log was only built as a couple of prototypes and was never used operationally, afaik. I expect that if it had gone into production, it would have used the same wheels as the Ratel. The axles were identical MAN units to those used on the Ratel.

The Log was a bit over the top (expensive) for a supply vehicle. Something like the prototype 8x8 artillery tractor would have been more appropriate for a logistics vehicle. I also read that the Samil 100 was found to be not quite up to the job and an 8x8 would have been better.

That is my take on it too , I just wanted to point that out as we all are studying the evolution of the Log in retrospect , and small things like that could create a better understanding of the program and the development.

 

[tround]

developement of mortar's ammunitions in 1991

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #1666
I had always thought that adding an extra front axle to the SAMIL 100 would have created an interesting truck. The axle could go just behind the door. It would have been more or less unique, I think, as it would be an 8x8 truck with a long ("torpedo") nose. A truck like that would require about 400hp. This could be achieved by using the turbocharged version of the SAMIL 100 engine, i.e. the V10, Deutz BF10L413 of 400hp instead of the normally aspirated, 320hp F10L413. As an alternative, a MAN V10 of anywhere between 430 and 560hp could have been fitted. This was the engine used in Ratel log and later, in an uprated version, in the Rooikat. On the other hand, if a 8x8 was contemplated in the mid-1980's, it might have been better to fit it with a MRAP type cab, like the Whitings, as standard.

 

[Dinges]

Reply to post #1666
I had always thought that adding an extra front axle to the SAMIL 100 would have created an interesting truck. The axle could go just behind the door. It would have been more or less unique, I think, as it would be an 8x8 truck with a long ("torpedo") nose. A truck like that would require about 400hp. This could be achieved by using the turbocharged version of the SAMIL 100 engine, i.e. the V10, Deutz BF10L413 of 400hp instead of the normally aspirated, 320hp F10L413. As an alternative, a MAN V10 of anywhere between 430 and 560hp could have been fitted. This was the engine used in Ratel log and later, in an uprated version, in the Rooikat. On the other hand, if a 8x8 was contemplated in the mid-1980's, it might have been better to fit it with a MRAP type cab, like the Whitings, as standard.

Very much like the experimental 8x8 gun tractor that was built , but from what I can see the 8x8 gun tractor had the extra axle in front of the existing front axle , unlike your idea. The space between the 2nd and 3rd axle on the experimental truck is therefore much longer than your proposed Samil 100 8x8 , and would have affected the turning circle radius negatively.

 

[curious george]

I invited a gent to join this forum but that was a while back and sofar it doesnt seem like he did.

If I remember correctly he was closely involved in some "B" vehicle projects and if memory serves he said that a mine resistend cab was develope,or in the process of being worked on, on the MAN 8 x 8 chassis before funding dried up in the run up to the new political dispensation.

 

[sa_bushwar]

Never saw the armoured cab Mack in SADF service. Was it a prototype? This one photographed after the end of the Bush War. Much larger than the Withings SAMIL 100 Recovery vehicle.

 

[leo.nap]

Never saw the armoured cab Mack in SADF service. Was it a prototype? This one photographed after the end of the Bush War. Much larger than the Withings SAMIL 100 Recovery vehicle.

Bulperd.
These mine protected recovery vehicles were used during the Bush War.

 

[sa_bushwar]

Never saw the armoured cab Mack in SADF service. Was it a prototype? This one photographed after the end of the Bush War. Much larger than the Withings SAMIL 100 Recovery vehicle.

Looking at the war era photos this is then a Bulperd.

 

[panzerskool]

what happened to destroyed vehicles during operations . I assume they were recovered apart form a few oxidants that were destroyed in place. Seen numerous images of burnt out or damaged beyond repair ratels but obviously somehow trucked out .

 

[miker]

I saw those in Angola a few times, Bulperd, yes what a powerful thing it was, tiffies loved it.

But it was too big for bundu bashing, forever smashing against the lower branches of big trees, too large to take the sharp snakey bends you get in bundu bashing.

 

[sa_bushwar]

From www: This looks like an early attempt to make a Magirus 6x6 Jupiter mine resistant?

 

[curious george]

Popped up in a fb group today, labled as "aardvark" by the poster:

A quick google image search brought up this page: http://unitegroup.co.za/riot-vehicles/aardvark-2/

 

[kaiserbill]

I seem to recall this vehicle as being a melding together of Ratel IFV and Saracen APC. I think it was used in the movie District 9.
I think I had some pics on my laptop, which has sadly had an hdd failure. I must retrieve the data from it still.

Edit: Hmmmm...the back of the vehicle in the link you provided looks familiar..I wonder if it is that mystery vehicle hull that nobody knew anything about earlier in the thread. I must get those pics and data off my hdd....

 

[sa_bushwar]

Here it is again...from the www.

 

[Rickshaw]

The nose and grill look very Saracen like:

 

[Dinges]

It was the MNU vehicle in District 9 as mentioned. IIRC it was made by a father and son team (both farmers) in the Northern Transvaal , Potgietersrus I believe. It was made by using two Saracens. The underpinnings are all Saracen. I have some pics I took of it years ago.

Pardon the quality , it was with the phone's camera.

 

[Herman]

I must say, this MNU vehicle, movie prop, is really attractive looking! Whoever built it, put in a lot of effort and work, i.e. lengthening the hull to allow side doors between the second and third axles, ading an additional axle at the back and changing the nose profile. The Saracen was never a success in SA. Over-heating was a perennial problem with vehicles frequently coming to a stop due to vapour-locking of the fuel lines and the insides of the cars becoming unearably hot as a result of hot air from the engine exit louvres on the top being blown into the vehicle through the open driver hatch and the ventilation "mushrooms" on the side of the troop compartment. The exhaust pipe also passed under the feet of the driver with the floor of the vehicle becoming so hot in summer time in the Free State, that he could frequently not continue driving the car. In British service they had similar problems, in the middle-East. In response to this, a reverse-flow cooling system was develope, typified by louvred "beehive" type air intakes in front of the driver compartment. In the eighties, diesel powered versions of the Saracen, Saladin and Ferrit were developed in the UK but these were only supplied in small numbers to some export customes. I don't believe dieselisation of the Saracen was ever seriously considered in SA.

 

[kaiserbill]

Another view of the single Olifant Optimal prototype. It's missing its armoured mantlet.
The T-54/55 alongside, and the civilian car shows the size of this massive 60 plus ton vehicle.

 

[Herman]

 

[Herman]

Recently visited the School oArmour museum in Bloemfontein, where I took this picture of the original Buffel prototype, the progenitor of the Ratel. This vehicle was, I believe, built in Germany by Büssing. The vehicle was also offered to various other governments and prototypes of derivatives of this vehicle were also produced elsewehere. In Belgium, BN Constructions Ferroviarines et Metalliques built a vehicle in 1976. This vehicle, the SIBMAS was very similar to the Büffel, inclusing the 282hp Büssing engine and presumably the Renk gearbox used in the Ratel. In 1979, an improved prototype was built of the SIBMAS, with a more powerful engine (MAN D 2566 MK) of 320hp and a ZF HP 500 automatic transmission. In 1981 Malaysia ordered 186 of these vehicles, with delivery starting in 1983.

OAF and Graf and Stift in Austria also built a vehicle, virtually identical to the Büffel but fitted with a two-man turret mounting a two-man Oerlikon GDD-BOE turret with a 35mm Oerlikon automatic cannon. Aside from the crew of three, it could carry two infantrymen at the back and it was intended as a reconnaissance vehicle. Power was provided by a MAN 320hp V8 diesel. The prototype was built of mild steel and engineering vehicles and armoured personnel carrier variants were envisaged but no further vehicles were built due to lack of interest. It would be interesting to know whether the Ratel prototype above is built of armoured or mild steel.

In 1965, a Joint Project Office (JPO) was formed in Germany to develop a new range of wheeled armoured vehicles. Companies in the JPO included Büssing, Klöckner-Humbolt-Deutz, Krupp, MAN and Rheinstahl-Henchel. Mercedes stayed outside of the JPO and developed their own range of vehicles and in the end, the competition was won by Mercedes who went on the produce the Späpanzer Luchs 8 x 8 reconnaissance vehicle. With their experience in the JPO, Büssing built the Büffel prototypes. The initial vehicles were powered by their own 6-cilinder engines (282hp) but Büssing was taken over by MAN in 1971 and later vehicles had MAN powerplants.

 

[Herman]

Notice the handrail on top of the vehicle. This particular vehicle was used, in the eighties, for transporting high level political figures (minister of defence, prime minister, etc.) on sightseeing tours during military maneuvres. The minister would then stand in the turret-opening and hold on the handrail.

 

[Herman]

This is the second prototype, or one of the second series of 4 prototypes of the Ratel. It is currently also serving as a "gate guard" at 1 SAI, with the previously shown prototype. One can clearly recognise the final Ratel but their are differences, notably the sloping lower part of the side door. This is still similar to that of the original Büffel prototypes, and the various European prototypes.

 

[Herman]

In the above pictures one can see the left and right side respectively of the second prototype. Clearly, there was still experimentation with the design. Note that various types of vision blocks are installed and that simple firing ports are installed on the one side while the rotating ports seen on the final vehicles are fitted on the other side.

 

[Herman]

This thing is now also mounted at the gates to 1SAI and has been put there since the end of last year. It is a 8 x 8 hull made up mild steel sections, spot-welded together. It was not intended to be a running vehicle but seems to have been built examine things like crew placement, powerpack position, etc. It is fitted with seats, various storage boxes and an engine compartment. The vehicle would have carried 7 dismounts who could enter and leave the vehicle through doors at the back. The power pack was to be fitted at the right front of the vehicle with the driver sitting at the front on the left and another man seated behind the driver, also to the left of the engine, both with periscopes above their positions. The 1.5 meter diameter turret ring (same as in the Ratel) is in the centre of the vehicle, behind the engine compartment and the 2 men at the front. The crew of this ICV was therefore intended to be 11 men: the 2 at the front, 2 men in the turret and 7 men at the back.

The spacing of the axles and the presence of a box to house a transfer case in the centre of the vehicle indicates that the vehicle was not intended for the Panhard type "in arm drive" suspension units of the Rooikat but either live axles or possibly conventional independent suspension units. No suspension attachment points are fitted to this prototype, so it is unclear if the intention was to fit live axles, such as those seen on the Ratel, or possibly double wish-bones or McPherson strut suspension units.

I have never seen this thing before, or heard of it. It would be interesting to know when it was constructed. I suspect it was an early, initial prototype for an eventual Ratel replacement, probably constructed around 1985-1990.

 

[Herman]

This is the view through the rear doors of the above hull.

 

[Herman]

This is the 24 ton, 6x6 prototype that was built in the development program which resulted in the Rooikat. What is quite interesting is that the information plate mentioned that the armament consisted of a 76mm HV gun and coaxial machine gun, but a 60mm breech-loading mortar is also mentioned. This is obviously the licence built DTAT mortar also found in the Eland 60. The Israëli Merkava tank as a 60mm breech-loading mortar in the turret roof and it seems that a similar setup was possibly planned for the Rooikat.

 

[Herman]

A view through the back of the a Saracen 88. This is the Saracen modified and rebuilt in 1988, in SA. On the identification plate inside the vehicle, it is identified as a Mk. 3. This is quite interesting as it was never clear to me what marks Saracens South Africa received from Britain. The initial 10 trials vehicles were supposedly mark 1's. In Bill Munro's book on the Alvis Saracen, there is a photo of a South African Saracen training in typical South African terrain and the caption states that it is a Mark 1. Munro mentionesw that people from Alvis visited SA (when is not clear: probably late fifties) and that the South Africans were unhappy with the performance of the Saracen and that they wanted "upgraded vehicles". It seems that SA did later receive at least some Mk 3 cars.