South African prototypes, projects, concepts, etc.

[Graugrun]

I posted this in the unmanned turret section, but thought to post it here too due to it being pretty much a South African design. It was developed further, I'll post more on it soon. (Janes IDR December 2002).

 

[Graugrun]

Follow up to the above post - this is now 3 years later, where the turret has been more fully developed and place on a Challenger 1 tank for testing. The article is from Janes IDR - May 2005.

 

[Graugrun]

Here's a follow up (in a sense) to the above posts - seems the British were in some way interested in the turret, however the article is more about a modular line of tracked and wheeled vehicles being designed and developed by Mechanology for the KADDB. Unfortunately nothing more really came of this AFAIK... (Janes IDR May 2006).

 

[Graugrun]

The G-Bat (Janes IDR January 1999) - not sure how much further this was developed, hopefully someone can enlighten me...

 

[Chaffman]

Does anyone know what happened with the Mini Valkiri 5?

As mentioned by JFC Fuller, I've not heard of it since it was unveiled about 20 years ago.
It was a lightened, shortened version of the Valkiri, firing shortened missiles. It's compromises were to ensure its suitability for paratroopers and special forces. I guess for the parabats, it would be easily towed by the Ferret prime mover or even the Jakkals light jeep.
I guess it fell by the wayside with the reduction in tensions and attendant military budget cuts?

Below is the same pic in colour, with brief description, and without the ink stamp.

Picture taken at SAAF Toothrock Test Range circa 1987. Only one build but never went into production.

 

[Nashab]

Follow up to the above post - this is now 3 years later, where the turret has been more fully developed and place on a Challenger 1 tank for testing. The article is from Janes IDR - May 2005.

Can you tell me how to get to Jane's old magazines? I need it

Do you have any photos of the KADDB development project for the Al Hussein Hybrid tank development tank for the British Challenger 1 ?

 

[TomS]

Do you have any photos of the KADDB development project for the Al Hussein Hybrid tank development tank for the British Challenger 1 ?

No need to shout (bold face)

There are several results for the Al Hussein found on this site via the search tool.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/search/111326/?q=Al+Hussein&o=relevance

 

[skylancer-3441]

Can you tell me how to get to Jane's old magazines? I need it

link to those of them, pages from which I was able to photograph so far at Russian State Library, was posted in another topic:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/international-defense-review-janes-idr-wehrtechnik-and-some-other-magazines.33638/

(which could also be found via search tool)

 

[lordroel]

Was the Olifant Mk 2 design made in the 1980s and where they already working on a MK 3.

 

[Graugrun]

Skylancer-3441 - These are scans from various (IHS) Janes publications that I had when I used to run yearly subscriptions to IDR, JDW and Janes Navy International. They can only be gotten by subscription and are VERY pricey - but worth it if you are seriously interested in Defence matters, actually properly the best and most accurate open military info in the world.

I wanted to create a long post showing that ALL MRAPS from around the world originate directly from South African (and to a much lesser extent Rhodesian) design and development. All the MRAPS used by the UK, USA and others come directly from us and our many years of active combat development (mostly through our 26 year long "Bush War" in SWA/Namibia - Angola, against FAPLA, Russians, Cubans, East German and others Warsaw Pact countries). It is certainly considered a "black art" and there is a whole lot more to it then just simply creating a "V" shaped hull to deflect the blast, if it was that simple, then the USA and others would have designed their own ones many years ago... Here is some info, this time just covering how the Australians got their "Bushmaster" mine-resistant technology and development from a group of ex-South African Engineers who had emigrated to Australia and had previously worked on various Mine Resistant vehicles while still in South Africa. The article is from IHS Janes Defence dated April 2005.

 

[kaiserbill]

There is a lot of misconceptions out there regarding Rhodesian and South African mine proof development. Whilst the Rhodesians came up with interesting vehicles such as the Pookie, via Ernst Konschel, the earliest useable and manufactured vehicles were actually South African.. and actually designed as route clearance and Armoured Personnel Carriers for the police. The South African Army watched these developments and got in early, taking over the impetus for development on a much larger scale.
Dr Vernon Joynt and Koos de Wet were early pioneers, amongst others. I think Dr Joynt ended up in the USA designing vehicles for the US Army in Iraq, once they realised what they were facing.
Early vehicles such as the Telefoonhokkie, Kameelperd, and the Hyena and Hippo APC's were designed and built almost 50 years ago now, all of which predate the Pookie.
I am excluding slightly earlier modified existing vehicles such as Landrovers and Unimogs (The Bosvark) with blast plates and roll bars which were experimented with.
The Hyena was the first useful, properly designed mine protected APC if I recall, and was operational in early 1973 already. It first detonated a charge totalling 22kg, with only very minor injuries. ( A burst eardrum if I recall correctly)
To say these vehicles, and their replacements changed the way things were done, such as movement for example, is an understatement, as is bourne out by the statistics.
The above was simply a reflection of the vastly greater scientific, technical, and industrial resources South Africa had.
Many of these early vehicles served in Rhodesia.
As stated by Graugrun, there are a host of design and construction elements involved...manufacturing, materials, welds, design, seating....etc etc.

 

[kaiserbill]

Was the Olifant Mk 2 design made in the 1980s and where they already working on a MK 3.

The Olifant design story has been sort of covered on this forum.
Basically, the Centurion was morphed into the Olifant which featured better armament and mobility/automotive characteristics.
The Olifant Mk1b followed and was a drastic redesign. This redesign was intended to completely modernise the Olifant until the new TTD/Loggim would be available.
Work continued on various Mk1b designs, as is to be expected, including the Optimal.
These were standard practices, occurring in other programmes, to ensure insurance against any delays in the TTD. These could also be applied at a later date for further upgrades.
The Olifant MK2 eventuated as a result of the end of the Cold War, and the resultant cancellation of the TTD.
I am thus not aware of an Olifant MK3, unless that name was reserved for the TTD, which might or might not be the case.
But one could easily then surmise that the Loggim/TTD would have been the Olifant MK2, had the political scene remained unchanged.

In a nutshell:
The redesigned Mk1b was designed in the 1980's.
The TTD/loggim design was started in the 1980's as a new tank.
The Olifant MK2 (and further developed Olifant designs) dates from the 1990's when the TTD/Loggim was cancelled. It built upon some of the earlier continuous development work on the Mk1b, as well as elements of the TTD /Loggim.
It is best to envisage the Mk1b as a radically upgraded Olifant designed to serve slightly before and then alongside, before being replaced by the TTD/Loggim, whilst being incrementally upgraded during that lifespan with elements from the TTD/Loggim. Which is pretty much the way the Olifant MK2 turned out, but without the TTD/Loggim.

 

[lordroel]

In a nutshell:
The redesigned Mk1b was designed in the 1980's.
The TTD/loggim design was started in the 1980's as a new tank.
The Olifant MK2 (and further developed Olifant designs) dates from the 1990's when the TTD/Loggim was cancelled.

Thanks for the short recap.

Despite what South Africa was during the Apartheid Regime, they build good stuff.

 

[riggerrob]

Fascinating dear Graugrun!
That Valir cab is basically the inverse of the next dozen Unimog conversions.
Everyone else just slapped a steel tortoise shell on top of a Unimog chassis with only minor floor armour.
OTOH, Valir started with a one-piece pressed steel floor, then welded other parts on top.
Please tell us more.
How many Valirs were built?
How many Valirs survived mine explosions?
How many Valir crew survived mine explosions?

 

[kaiserbill]

Something that has intrigued me for a while..
Armscor, the weapons manufacturer, often involved private industrial manufacturers in South Africa as part of weapons system development and production.
Bell Equipment is a South African company that has designed and manufactured large industrial and earth moving equipment for decades, locally and globally.
I have not read anything about them regarding being involved, apart from selling vehicles to the Army.
Yet they appear to be exactly the type of heavy industrial manufacturer you would expect to be involved... especially on large vehicles such as the G-6 6x6, Bismarck 8x8, and even vehicles such as the very large LZN, Beestrok, and TEL vehicles.
Some of the Bell vehicles used Deutz diesels, which were an engine type also used by the SADF.
Does anyone know whether this was the case?

 

[apparition13]

I have this vision in my head of an all wheeled armoured force running on airless tires, with AC-200s replacing Buffel and Casspir in the APC and logistics roles, Rooikat scouts, Rooikat derived IFVs and ATGM, SPAAG/M and other variant AFVs possibly including the G-7 turret, G-6 artillery (although I'd prefer 8x8 so a mine blast to a front wheel doesn't leave it immobile), and something along the lines of a Bismark operating as a wheeled MBT. Is that at all realistic?

 

[kaiserbill]

Anyone have any images of the Eland armoured car fitted with the anti-tank ENTAC ATGW ?

This dates from the 1970's and was a project that was tested, but not fielded.
From what I can gather, it mounted 2 ENTAC missiles.

 

[Graugrun]

https://www.defenceweb.co.za/featured/new-contract-for-husky-user-support/

 

[Alex Connolly]

Anyone know what Samil this is? The tarp over the engine block etc. Is it just undergoing servicing, or is it a particular prototype?

 

[kaiserbill]

That is a Zebra I believe.
The Zebra was a very early vehicle, from 1973, and was not based on the SAMIL, but on Bedford mechanicals.
Used by the army and police, designed as cargo carriers, with a recovery variant too.
About 100 were built.
These, as said, were early vehicles and days in the MPV field.
The Bedford by this stage did not have a long future ahead in the inventory with the SAMIL on the horizon.
There was a factory assembling Magirus Deutz trucks in South Africa in the 60's already, from imported components. The army had already begun trials for a new truck in 70's, with a new factory for manufacturing the winner, modified ruggedized locally built Magirus Deutz trucks to be known as SAMILS in place by the 70's.

 

[Alex Connolly]

That is a Zebra I believe.
The Zebra was a very early vehicle, from 1973, and was not based on the SAMIL, but on Bedford mechanicals.
Used by the army and police, designed as cargo carriers, with a recovery variant too.
About 100 were built.
These, as said, were early vehicles and days in the MPV field.
The Bedford by this stage did not have a long future ahead in the inventory with the SAMIL on the horizon.
There was a factory assembling Magirus Deutz trucks in South Africa in the 60's already, from imported components. The army had already begun trials for a new truck in 70's, with a new factory for manufacturing the winner, modified ruggedized locally built Magirus Deutz trucks to be known as SAMILS in place by the 70's.

Thanks, Kaiserbill! Floated past on social media and it was causing some intrigue.

 

[kaiserbill]

I have this vision in my head of an all wheeled armoured force running on airless tires, with AC-200s replacing Buffel and Casspir in the APC and logistics roles, Rooikat scouts, Rooikat derived IFVs and ATGM, SPAAG/M and other variant AFVs possibly including the G-7 turret, G-6 artillery (although I'd prefer 8x8 so a mine blast to a front wheel doesn't leave it immobile), and something along the lines of a Bismark operating as a wheeled MBT. Is that at all realistic?

Most of that is realistic, with the exception of the Bismark.
It was realised that a tank is a tank, hence the Olifant upgrade initially, with the TTD/ Loggim following.
The Bismark was part of the heavy armoured car programme, not a tank/Olifant replacement.
I suspect the Buffel and Casspir would be replaced by the Veldskoen, another 4x4 APC, but with features of an IFV included.
I think the Casspir showed that a mobile, powerful APC could be used as an IFV in some instances, so the Veldskoen took that a little further... turret possibilities, fighting from the vehicle, etc.
I can definitely see the Rooikat platform as the basis for a whole range of vehicles, and indeed, there were prototypes covering that, including an 8x8 IFV as a Ratel replacement.

 

[Herman]

I did see several interesting vehicles inside the camp however, amongst them the Brazilian Urutu APC that was also trialled during the development of the Ratel.

I thought the Brazilians even under their Military Dictatorship were quite anti RSA/Apartheid. Maybe it could have been an Urutu captured from Angola or Mozambique? Lusophone connection and all that.

Here is the Urutu in question. From its general pristine condition - no bundu bashing - or battle damage, I assume it was specifically acquired for the Ratel trials. From where and through which channels I do not know.

Where is that vehicle?

Sorry for the late answer; I haven't looked at this thread for quite a while. The Urutu was acquired from Brazil, specifically for the SA Ratel trials. The vehicle was a relatively early version, fitted with a 174 hp Mercedes diesel and a manual gearbox. SA testers did not like it much. It was also too small to mount a two-man turret and carry and eight man infantry section. This was a requirement for the Ratel. The vehicle is currently inside the base of the 1st South Africal infantry battalion in Bloemfontein.

 

[Graugrun]

An update from SVI Engineering on some of their new and existing vehicle developments (and collaboration with the likes of Toyota) - they are one of the smaller/lesser known MRAP/military vehicle developers in South Africa, not sure what their heritage is, they obviously have a bunch of engineers that worked on previous anti-mine (MRAP) stuff in SA, properly from CSIR/Mechem or Denel Land Systems etc...

https://www.defenceweb.co.za/featured/busy-times-for-svi-engineering/

 

[Graugrun]

Looks like India might be buying a slightly modified version of Paramount's Mbombe 4...

https://www.defenceweb.co.za/featur...-forge-to-produce-armoured-vehicles-in-india/

 

[nester_ulrich_dalgrin]

So i am a bit of a Lurker here and i have been trying to find some info on the Suspension that the Olifant Mk.1b and Mk.2 use. I have read that it is a torsion bar system but have not been able to find any concrete evidence of that and was wondering if somebody here who knows more then i do could help?

Pictures are also nice as well

 

[Herman]

What I have read was that the Horstmann units used on the Centurion was replaced by a suspension based on that of the Leopard 2 tank, i.e. tranverse torsion bars for every wheel, actuated by either a trailing or leading arm for very wheel. This also entailed a double floor, i.e. a second floor plate above the torsion bars. Unfortunately, I don't know anything more, i.e. tube-over-bar or double bars, number and type of shock absorbers, etc.

 

[Herman]

I have recently started reading "Ratel: The Making of a Legend". For those of us on this forum, who were involved in the discussions about the development of the Ratel, a few years ago, this is an extremely interesting read. A side issue which comes out of the book, and something I had read rumors about, is how poorly the SAMIL trucks fared in the bush, especially the big SAMIL 100 and its Kwêvoël derivative. On page 467, discussing the development and final non-adoption of the Ratel Log variant, a report is presented on the performance of the SAMIL 100 trucks over a period of 3 months, during Operations Modular, Hooper and Packer.

As we know, the SAMIL 100 is purportedly a 10-ton truck, i.e one with a maximum useful load of 10 metric tons. In the cross-country mode however, the load was limited to 6400 kg for the standard truck and only 5100 kg for the Kwêvoël, and even 1100 kg less for the variants fitted with a crane. Despite these limitations, the following items were replaced at 101 Workshop, at Grootfontein: 80 engines, 99 main gearboxes, 344 clutch plates, 360 pressure plates, 93 front axles, 67 middle axles, 32 rear axles, and 130 transfer boxes. It is also interesting to note that the V-10, Deutz engine, at that time, cost about R20.000 and a main gearbox was R7000. A front axle was however R40.000, a middle axle R49.000 and a rear axle was R38.000, and even a transfer case was R12.500.

 

[curious george]

I have recently started reading "Ratel: The Making of a Legend". For those of us on this forum, who were involved in the discussions about the development of the Ratel, a few years ago, this is an extremely interesting read. A side issue which comes out of the book, and something I had read rumors about, is how poorly the SAMIL trucks fared in the bush, especially the big SAMIL 100 and its Kwêvoël derivative. On page 467, discussing the development and final non-adoption of the Ratel Log variant, a report is presented on the performance of the SAMIL 100 trucks over a period of 3 months, during Operations Modular, Hooper and Packer.

As we know, the SAMIL 100 is purportedly a 10-ton truck, i.e one with a maximum useful load of 10 metric tons. In the cross-country mode however, the load was limited to 6400 kg for the standard truck and only 5100 kg for the Kwêvoël, and even 1100 kg less for the variants fitted with a crane. Despite these limitations, the following items were replaced at 101 Workshop, at Grootfontein: 80 engines, 99 main gearboxes, 344 clutch plates, 360 pressure plates, 93 front axles, 67 middle axles, 32 rear axles, and 130 transfer boxes. It is also interesting to note that the V-10, Deutz engine, at that time, cost about R20.000 and a main gearbox was R7000. A front axle was however R40.000, a middle axle R49.000 and a rear axle was R38.000, and even a transfer case was R12.500.

Given the terrain, the absence of anything resembling a road, 3 months worth of bundu bashing in thick sand and bush, to and fro endlessly, and this whilst permanently in low range,with diff locks and 6 x 6 engaged, prob hugely overloaded initially,so none of this comes as a surprise. Pity that they didn't keep track of the drastically reduced lifespan of the off road tyres and how many of those were used up.

All "limitations" and "design parameters" are quickly overruled and tossed out the window as soon as things get "exciting",ie filling any open space with supplies as things were desperately in short supply at the front.

The very limited allocation of log assets meant that these echelon vehicles were over worked way beyond design specs and a lot more so than the fighting vehicles who also took a pounding,

I recall how it started off with just a few guys allocated to join 32Bn in support and very then very quickly escalated way beyond the initial planning.The allocated staff and assets never caught up to the requirement,least of all log assets and regular service and maintenance schedules.

I suspect the author has some "bias" favoring his pet subject,ie Ratels in general? To be objective,we have no idea how the log variant may have or would have faired under similar conditions.The non adoption preceded these operations by a few years. Given the lack of MONEY a ratel log variant was always going to be a nice to have item. If I recall even the MAN KAT 8 x 8 performance was criticized in our operational enviroment.

Edit: Some trivia from 1986/7. Don't know what it would translate to in today currency values, but at the time a million rand a day was spent on just diesel fuel in the operational area alone, this excludes "externals".

 

[kaiserbill]

I was just going to post something similar to what CG posted.
It is vastly different driving a vehicle off-road in, say South Africa or SWA for a few days or a week as part of an exercise, compared to what was happening in Angola.

These trucks were driven through the bush (and I mean through the bush literally).
Not along roads. Or at least, tracks bashed through by the combat groups.
In many instances, the "roads" were created by the SADF vehicles themselves, and as such, the word road is only loosely applied. I recall that the G6 artillery system, being the widest vehicle, had to bundu bash constantly.
These Samils were supporting elements hundreds of kilometers away across sandy bushy terrain with no roads, in a foreign country with little support...in fact, they were the support.
As CG states, you can guarantee the trucks were overloaded. The pressure to get stuff through to isolated combat groups who rely on that logistic train dictates that.
I work in logistics these days, and even on road freight, the temptation is always to "squeeze more on".

Their performance was nothing short of miraculous if you think about it, under those conditions.
I shudder to think what would have transpired with Bedfords....
The fact that the Samil is still the standard truck almost 50 years later perhaps speaks for itself.

 

[curious george]

I'm sure it's a universal theme, equipment being criticised for supposed lack of performance and then unfairly and retrospectively compared to some sexy piece of equipment that didn't make it past prototype stage. Huge difference between "lab testing in simulated conditions" vs actual combat enviroments that were not even factored into design briefs, even though it still meets and,or exceeds the up to then normal operational requirement.

Also,if it's all you have you have to make it work despite what the "manual" says.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Then again, sometimes the sexy equipment didn't make it into service for truly idiotic reasons!

 

[kaiserbill]

Herman, that book on the Ratel sounds like a "must have"!
2 volumes, about 1000 pages, including the development, from people involved in its development programme.
A Google image search of the book brings up the crazy photo below of one during "shakedown" testing....
Are the two volumes only available for purchase in South Africa?

 

[riggerrob]

I'm sure it's a universal theme, equipment being criticised for supposed lack of performance and then unfairly and retrospectively compared to some sexy piece of equipment that didn't make it past prototype stage. Huge difference between "lab testing in simulated conditions" vs actual combat enviroments that were not even factored into design briefs, even though it still meets and,or exceeds the up to then normal operational requirement.

Also,if it's all you have you have to make it work despite what the "manual" says.

Doing things that never crossed the designers' minds during their worst drunken nightmares.
Hah!
Hah!

 

[Grey Havoc]

Doing things that never crossed the designers' minds during their worst drunken nightmares.

To be fair, needs must when the Devil rides, as the old saying goes.

 

[Herman]

Military trucks are generally divided into three classes: category 1, 2 and 3, with cat. 3 being least capable and cat. 1 being most capable. Cat. 3 vehicles are designed for paved road use an are basically just commercial trucks painted green. Cat. 2 trucks are the vehicles we generally recognise as military trucks, i.e. robust 4x4 or 6x6, and sometimes 8x8 trucks. These are designed for off-road use and light bundu bashing. Cat 1 trucks are designed to support combat vehicles such as tanks and APC's, and to operate in very heavy terrain. They usually have very robust and high travel suspensions, sometimes independent suspensions and a relatively high power to weight ratio. Automatic transmissions, or at least torque converter type clutches are also preferablw. Typical examples would be the 1950's era Alvis Stalwart and the MAN Kat 1 trucks developed during the late 1960's and 1970's in Germany. The Ratel uses the suspension from the MAN Kat. 1 trucks.

The Magirus Deutz/Iveco trucks that were licenced for production in SA are typical Category 2 trucks, except possibly the little SAMIL 20, which is a Cat. 1 vehicle. The Deutz 210-32 ANWM truck which was developed into the SAMIL 100 was available in two wheelbase lengths. The standard version had a wheelbase of 3.9x1.38 metres but there also was a long wheelbase version, with a wheelbase of 5.25x1.38. SA, probably wanting to get as much tin as possible for their money, chose the long wheelbase version. This meant that the thing was almost perennially over-loaded, simply because the load bed is so enormous. The long wheelbase also put more weight on the already suffering front axle. Add to this an armoured cab weighing about 1,2 tons (on the front axle!), and you have a recipe for disaster.

CG's comments are right on the dot. The SAMILs were continually over-loaded and operated in a very harsh, Cat 1 environment. And, the author of the Ratel books is indeed prejudiced towards the Ratel Log, which was not adopted.

Kaiserbill, I believe I ordered my set from Bushwar Books. I find them an extremely interesting read.

 

[Graugrun]

So i am a bit of a Lurker here and i have been trying to find some info on the Suspension that the Olifant Mk.1b and Mk.2 use. I have read that it is a torsion bar system but have not been able to find any concrete evidence of that and was wondering if somebody here who knows more then i do could help?

Pictures are also nice as well

These pics of the Olifant Mk2 might answer your question to some degree... As an aside...Note that the road wheels themselves are an updated version of the Althane composite wheel and if they are the full composite wheel (I suspect that they are), then they save about a 1 Ton weight off of the tank's total weight...

 

[kaiserbill]

Excellent pics Graugrun.
The original Olifant had the same Horstmann suspension as the Centurion, to my knowledge.
The easy, quick giveaway that the suspension had been changed from the Mk1b onwards is to look at the 6 roadwheels in each side. They are grouped in 3 clusters of 2 wheels each.
There is a gap after the front first cluster of 2 wheels.
This is present in the Centurion and Olifant MK1.

As Graugruns pics show, the suspension was completely renewed and changed from the Olifant Mk1b. This includes the Mk1b, Optimal, and MK2.
A torsion bar suspension with hydraulic dampeners and double floor.
You can see that the "clusters" and the gap after the first pair of wheels is no longer there, being far more evenly spaced.
From the Mk1b onwards, the Centurion was basically stripped to the bare hull and turret and completely rebuilt and redesigned.

 

[kaiserbill]

Kaiserbill, I believe I ordered my set from Bushwar Books. I find them an extremely interesting read.

Thanks Herman.
I tried to order it from that website, but they don't allow me to complete the sale regarding shipping here to the EU.
That 2 volume set looks like a must-have.
Did you manage to order it to be delivered outside of South Africa?
Any ideas?

 

[Herman]

Yup. I live in the Netherlands and they just sent it up here; no problem. Took a while to come, and quite a lot of postage though. I have ordered books through them in the past. Curious that you are having difficulties.