View Full Version : Finally ! The News on Tankers !
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/NewRafTankersSetToImproveFrontlineRefuellingCapabilities.htm :E
John Blakeley
3rd Feb 2006, 18:52
Very good, but if the RAF truly intends to drive them down dirt roads and over mountain passes in Afghanistan I wonder what their protection is against small arms fire let alone RPG 7 variants. Is the cab protected - if so to what standard.
Onan the Clumsy
3rd Feb 2006, 19:00
American-built Oshkosh ten-wheeled fuel tankers have the most impressive off-road capability of any fuels vehicle bought for the RAF.
Geoff continued: "So far they have proved themselves extremely capable of going virtually anywhere that a tank can go. Two tankers have already left the UK for Afghanistan by sea." Now that really IS an impressive off road capability
Southside blew the tires up. Too much hot air I suppose.
pma 32dd
3rd Feb 2006, 19:14
All very good, but what sort of radio has it got? Is it MP3 ready? Or is it another procurement that just won't accept modern technology??
PTC REMF
3rd Feb 2006, 19:17
They've got an impressive fuel load, but the delivery rate is quite slow, portable pump and pillow tank/ older style bowsers, are considerably quicker. takes ages to stick 3 tonnes in a death banana.
Hang on a min' ... it said in the copy of tradewise left lying in line control that if you want to work on the new tankers apply and they will put selected persons through a license course.
I thought they ment EASA part 66 not a DVLA HGV!!!:} :} :} :} :ok:
The Helpful Stacker
4th Feb 2006, 00:29
From what I hear on the grapevine Suppliers will never get a look in at driving them all the time that their is an MT trade falling over themselves to justify their jobs.
Strange. The RAF pays thousands every year to train non-MT personnel up to LGV 1 standard but will only let them drag 3 ton trailers behind 4 toners and not drive the 'Gucci' vehicles.
Anyway, they do seem like a lovely vehicle to drive around in but I'm glad my 'wing mong' days are behind me because I'd hate to be one of the poor sods trying to cam one of these behemoths up in a tactical situation. It was bad enough when they brought in the AFDV to replace the TART. Great, replace a small trailer based refuelling set-up and two APFC's that can be carried under a Chinny plus a L/R inside with a 'beefed up' version of the Brize Norton stalwart, the Roadrunner', that needs to be accompanied by either an M-WAD (which there are very few of) or an LM with GST (which is basically a civvy tanker painted green and can just about mount kerbs, let alone go anywhere slightly rough).
Anyway I digress. Best of luck to anyone on the rapidly becoming less so Tactical Supply Wing who has to use it.;)
Always a Sapper
4th Feb 2006, 00:47
Very good, but if the RAF truly intends to drive them down dirt roads and over mountain passes in Afghanistan I wonder what their protection is against small arms fire let alone RPG 7 variants. Is the cab protected - if so to what standard.
Cab???? what about the few thousand litres behind..... :eek: you WANT to be in the cab when that lot starts taking rnds...... :E
SASless
4th Feb 2006, 01:24
Fifty odd units....gee...massive order. I would love to see what the attrition rate is for these things in a combat zone. Better hope for a short war I guess. Knock more than a hand full out and there goes the forward resupply concept. But there I go.....must quit that thinking.
They can handle snow and ice at least.....bu it's flat as a billiard table. :p
(And they could stop playing chicken with a/c on the twy.......) :D
TacEval Inject
4th Feb 2006, 10:35
Pretty impressive (to look at), but they are not going to Norway this year.
Why?
Because they cannot guarantee that they will not skid and and lose control of them on the line.
Best keep on relying on the old tankers then.......
TI
pr00ne
4th Feb 2006, 10:54
"American built Oskosh.........................."
I know they are a US company but weren't these built in good old Welsh Wales?
Samuel
5th Feb 2006, 02:56
This type of vehicle chassis is not new: Oshkosh have been building airfield crash/fire trucks for about 60 years, which is a fair bit of experience. The US Marine Corp alone has 1700 of them...the USAF zillions!
but they are not going to Norway this year.
You are quite sure, are you? :ok: :ok:
On my way to work today, my eyes saw something very similar appear by the side of the road........
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/M609/IMG_5453_600.jpg
Sorry, might be the naval variant..... :cool:
TacEval Inject
5th Feb 2006, 15:57
Fair one. Just posting the rumour that was floating around the sandpit.
I'll get back in my box. It is dark in here!:oh:
SirToppamHat
5th Feb 2006, 17:13
BEagle's plan for us to get Airbus Tankers looked a better bet to me - and they might be going to Norway, but I really don't see how these ones are going to get to Towline 5.
STH
The Helpful Stacker
5th Feb 2006, 17:19
BEagle's plan for us to get Airbus Tankers looked a better bet to me - and they might be going to Norway, but I really don't see how these ones are going to get to Towline 5.
STH
Apparently they find it easier to climb to altitude than a Jag.
;)
BEagle
5th Feb 2006, 17:27
But there again, so do I.....
Safety_Helmut
5th Feb 2006, 19:36
So, that would be the same Helpful Stacker who suggested getting Jag's to fill in for the PR9s on another thread then ? Stick to the duvets.............
SH
BEagle
5th Feb 2006, 20:14
Well, S_H, I think it's a pretty good thing for any admin/loggie to show interest in aircraft. Good on him!
Or her.
The Helpful Stacker
5th Feb 2006, 20:39
So, that would be the same Helpful Stacker who suggested getting Jag's to fill in for the PR9s on another thread then ? Stick to the duvets.............
SH
Err, I was (believe it or not) taking the mick.
Perhaps from deep within your own posterior you didn't see the ':} ' after my post.
:rolleyes: <--