"Army to ditch 1800 vehicles in Afghan pull-out"

[Not_a_boffin]

Surprised no-one has picked up on this yet.

British Army vehicles may be abandoned in Afghanistan | British Forces News (http://bfbs.com/news/afghanistan/british-army-vehicles-may-be-abandoned-afghanistan-51883.html)

The actual article is in the Sunday Times, but subsciption only. Essentially what is being implied is that the UK is going to abandon £3Bn-worth of MRV, bought specifically for Herrick, when we leave, because we can't afford to bring them back. Assuming that it isn't anywhere near £3Bn as some of the vehicles will be in the UK and further noting that transfers to the ANA/ANP will account for some of these and be a good thing, that's still a lot of money.

Worse still, it appears to be predicated on airlift out (AN124 @ £400k a sortie for a max of 3 at a time). I appreciate that overland to Karachi may not be the ideal route, particularly in a withdrawal, but you'd think someone would at least look at the cost!

The BFBS talking head appears to suggest that the vehicles (UOR) are "owned" by the Treasury, rather than MoD. I appreciate the difference between UOR and "core", but you'd think they'd check all costs in the round.....

[Biggus]

Nothing new here. I seem to remember hearing stories (I'm old) of perfectly serviceable Bedford trucks being driven over cliffs when the UK mil pulled out of Aden - or is that an urban myth?

[goudie]

I think it's common practice for the military to leave behind various bits of hardware, when they pull out of a Country. The USA has left countless hardware here and elsewhere. Common practice is to wreck, bury, or burn it.

[Geehovah]

No matter how much I loved it, I'm not sure I'd air freight my car back from an overseas tour if it had covered 100,000 miles. I suspect the military vehicles in question might be in the same boat - or not!

[Not_a_boffin]

Agreed. But not perhaps when the kit has been bought at such expense and more importantly in such stringent times. Don't think we left anything like that on completion of TELIC, but stand to be corrected.

[Stuff]

In TELIC you could drive a short distance to a friendly port and load anything you like onto a comparatively cheap cargo vessel.

Not quite the same case in HERRICK.

[Tourist]

I'd drive a mastiff home for the adventure!
I'm sure if they offered the chance to drive them home, fuel cards supplied, they would get plenty of takers.

[Chox Away]

I would imagine that many of these vehicles would indeed be UOR's. As such, they would/should have had a limited Safety Case produced (much quicker to produce than a full Safety Case) that would have allowed quicker transfer in to theatre for use under specific conditions. Risk/severity/probability/tolerability etc all taken into account for its intended (and urgent) use.

However, as is often the case regarding UOR’s, if these vehicles were repatriated back home, not only would it entail the inevitable transport costs as outlined in the first post, but would also attract further expenditure in allowing safe and continued use at home. A full Safety Case including homologation/ legislative requirements, compliancy and of course, the eventual disposal costs would have to be compiled, which may affect the overall picture to the extent that it may be regarded safer and cheaper to leave said vehicles where they are.

[Fareastdriver]

Think of all the foreign agricultural pests and diseases tucked away in various inaccessable corners of a vehicle; until the British rain washes it out.

The Australians wouldn't even consider repatriating vehicles from overseas.

[MATELO]

I'd drive a mastiff home for the adventure!
I'm sure if they offered the chance to drive them home, fuel cards supplied, they would get plenty of takers.

Sounds like a script for the Top Gear team.

[Evalu8ter]

Despite the inevitable Daily Mail-esque comments this is "normal business" for the MoD. As the majority of these vehicles were purchased "off the shelf" using CPF funding as UORs the MoD has only two options at the end of the campaign. Firstly, we could pay a large amount of money to move them back to the UK, provide a full Safety case (as mentoned above), pay for upgrades to make them compatible with non-Herrick kit and (the real killer) is that the MoD would be responsible for the full support costs for the vehicles from within its' budget - patently unaffordable unless the army give up capability elsewhere or receive an uplift in funds. Secondly, they leave them in Theatre and the FCO makes political capital out of "donating" them to the Afghan government - hmm, which is more likely?

There are aggravating factors; a lot of the UOR kit is made overseas - to keep it would cut UK manufacturers out of UK defence market for several years. Additionally, a lot of the Granby kit that did get brought back was disposed off very cheaply under the RAB restrictions, only to be very expensively (and publically) bought back a few years later...no politician wants those sort of headlines.

[500N]

The Aust return equipment from other OS locations / deployments (ie Timor) but it is a huge undertaking by the Quarantine service and Customs BEFORE they leave the country.

Not sure what if anything has been returned from Afghanistan.
.
Of course our size is a lot smaller.

.

[jamesdevice]

As the majority of these vehicles were purchased "off the shelf"..... and a lot of the UOR kit is made overseas......

it means the forces for once have kit that actually works and should be kept!

[Unchecked]

I wonder who's going to take ownership of the top-secret Aldershot-sized desert aerodrome when we all leg it away ?

[Unchecked]

James - i completely agree, the kit is awesome and rather than re-inventing the wheel we should look to adapt them best for future roles. Surely, as the drawdown begins (whenever that may be) there will be scope for getting them back slowly, a few at a time, now and every so often. Can't help but feel that if it's done correctly it will still be a cheaper option than procuring new kit.

Ah, i see the snag - when did the MoD last do anything correctly ?

[huntaluvva]

The Aden stories were not a myth, I clearly remember seeing trucks being driven into the sea on the TV news.

I suppose that makes me old, as well..

[Jollygreengiant64]

Wouldn't it make sense to gift or sell the vehicles to the ANA? It's not exactly like they could do too much damage with them, but surely it would oil the wheels of this Anglo-Afghan relationship...

Or is it the case that equipping a 3rd world army with gear of that calibre is just not the done thing?

[LongTimeInCX]

With regard to the Aden story, the same occurred in Vanuatu when the Brit/French administrators thought the Americans were going to leave all the kit there.
Americans wanted to sell it, colonial administrators wouldn't buy it, so the Americans left it - in the sea!
CABINET // Million Dollar Point (http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/10/million_point.php)
One of the pilots I flew with said it is a great dive site.

[Not_a_boffin]

The gear isn't particularly offensive in nature, so not a particular drama. The points re long-term support and safety cases are also entirely valid, as is the case for donation to ANA/ANP.

Uum Qasr is of course a very different kettle of fish to Karachi, but I repeat, does everything have to enter/leave Herrick by air?

[parabellum]

There was a time when there was a large collecting point in Cyprus for all MELF vehicles, many of which were then taken out into the Libyan desert to be used as hard targets for the Army live firing battle run, (mid sixties, pre Qaddafi). Maybe that training area and facility can be resurrected? RAF El Adem once more!;)

[racedo]

Report is B/S as 1800 vehicles costing £3 Billion means average cost is £1.67 million each................... MOD purchasing ain't that great but

[rh200]

The gear isn't particularly offensive in nature, so not a particular drama

Does that really matter, considering the ease at which a Toyota can be modified to carry anything on its back over there:).

[TBM-Legend]

The Australians wouldn't even consider repatriating vehicles from overseas.


well we did from Vietnam/Timor/Malaysia/PNG/Solomons

[TBM-Legend]

The Australians wouldn't even consider repatriating vehicles from overseas.


well we did from Vietnam/Timor/Malaysia/PNG/Solomons. An extensive decontamination process is used.

Give the stuff in A/Stan to the ANA to play with...

[Buster Hyman]

Left a lot of kit at Dunkirk if I recall correctly.... :p

[NutLoose]

As to who is going to take over the Aldershot sizeed secret base, there was some cynical remarks on that one on the Channel 4 new series Fighting on the front line on Sunday that covered the Chinook and Apache operations, in case you did not see it, it is here, thought it was put together rather well.


Fighting on the Frontline - 4oD - Channel 4 (http://www.channel4.com/programmes/fighting-on-the-frontline/4od#3236805)

As for the US leaving stuff behind, didn't the US offer to sell all of the chattels in the quarters and the heated runway at Brize to UK PLC who declined thinking they would get them anyway.... so the US dropped a blade on the back of a caterpillar and went up and down the side of the runway and ripped out the heating element wiring....... also they dumped all the furniture and US fridges etc in a big pit crushed and buried them??

[Pontius Navigator]

Historically it depends.

Where the country is a friendly country then the kit is parked up or handed over. In Egypt much of the 8th Army kit was parked up at Tel El Kebir. It was then in situ until such time as it was obsolete/fell to pieces/thieved by the indigenous population. Technically it was a forward holding war reserve.

In the mid-50s a Hastings aircraft was pranged and categoried Cat 5 and towed to the bone yard. Then came Nasser and it was decided we could not leave a state of the art transport aircraft behind. Rather than destroy what was left it was recovered and flown home. It was eventually converted in to a T5.

[Willard Whyte]

...perfectly serviceable Bedford trucks being driven over cliffs when the UK mil pulled out of Aden

One hopes they were pushed, not driven...

[alisoncc]

One hopes they were pushed, not driven...

First driving lesson for some of the locals. :}

Solo of course.

[jamesdevice]

It won't be the first time a British army has left Afghanistan without its equipment

[PPRuNeUser0139]

I'd drive a mastiff home for the adventure!
I'm sure if they offered the chance to drive them home, fuel cards supplied, they would get plenty of takers.
I'm with you Tourist..!:ok:

[rh200]

Could hold a fire sale on ebay, no reserve, local pick up.

[L J R]

The Reaper was (is) an UOR - will it be left there as well, as I cannot see it holding over the Salisbury Plains soon....

[Whenurhappy]

Safe to say it would cripple teh defence budget if all the UORs went into core. Still seems a waste, though.

My father, injured during the war, had a civilian job to make US Army vehicles that had been left in Auckland serviceable...so they could be driven on to barges, taken outside the 3 NM limit and pushed over the side. Though, he led me to beleive, not all of them made their way to the barges. We had some odd pieces of machinery in our workshop, including the seat armour from a Curtis P-40 Warhawk/Kittyhawk, which made an admirable arc welding table, as well as lots of Dodge truck spares.:{

[goudie]

Left a lot of kit at Dunkirk if I recall correctly....


As did the German Army, a few years later, at the Falaise Pocket!

Nutloose. You're correct about the Yanks burying all the white goods etc. at Brize. They didn't want any mony for them but apparently, Customs & Excise demanded import tax on the items, if they left them behind in the MQ's!

[Pontius Navigator]

As for the US leaving stuff behind, didn't the US offer to sell all of the chattels in the quarters and the heated runway at Brize to UK PLC who declined thinking they would get them anyway.... so the US dropped a blade on the back of a caterpillar and went up and down the side of the runway and ripped out the heating element wiring

I believe they left the fuel system behind - full of fuel. Didn't it all leak out 40 years later?

[cazatou]

jamesdevice

If you are thinking of the episode that I think you are - then the only survivor of the British Forces to reach safety was Surgeon Reynolds.

Marks out of 10?

[Whenurhappy]

OK - name of the Surgeon's horse then?

[Biggus]

caz - marks out of 10.....zero. James Henry Reyolds was the surgeon at Rourke's Drift.

Wrong continent and war.....

I think you mean William Brydon! Actually he was not the only European survivor, and since his horse apparently dropped dead when reaching Jalalabad it was probably called "dinner"!

[Whenurhappy]

I was going to add 'Main Course'!

[Strucky]

Guys, no wonder the informed tax payer considers a great deal of defence expenditure as a waste when MoD suggests scrapping 3BN of very specialised equipment! 'Should have spent that money on schools, hospitals, welfare, overseas aid, etc'!!!

What is wrong with sea transportation? Why opt for very expensive AT?

What happens if in 2016 we either have to go back into Afghanistan or another similar theatre? Will we again buy the same type of vehicles to protect our troops?

PPruners should be leading the way on this and highlight yet another terrible and short-sighted decision by MoD!

[cazatou]

Biggus

My apologies - too many Rupert's conducting too many disasters; it was of course Dr Brydon.

I thought, however, that the Surgeon at Rorkes Drift was a Dr Reynolds.

[Biggus]

caz

Typo on my part.

However, to balance it up, having left the "n" out of Reynolds I introduced a non-existent "u" into Rorke's Drift..... ;)

[4mastacker]

Pontius Navigator wrote: I believe they left the fuel system behind - full of fuel. Didn't it all leak out 40 years later? I don't think the leaks were down to the cousins. One was down to the MPBW/DoE/PSA/what ever their name was at the time, taking a blanking cap off the end of a branch pipe and not telling POL about it before a cross-base fuel transfer. The affected area was near to the big circular pan the Britannias were parked on.

An even bigger leak occurred over at Fairford not long afterwards when the cross-base pipeline burst during a fuel transfer. Many leaks were discovered along the pipe's length during the investigation. Lack of proper maintenance by Works & Bricks was, I believe , a contributory factor.

[Jimlad1]

Sigh, I remember working on UOR policy a couple of years ago and writing the DIN on it. I and my colleauges were shouting from the rooftops then that we'd need to consider UORs into core.

Sadly this didnt survive contact with any planning round, nor, I suspect, the FRES agenda. Now, some vehicles are not suitable for wider use - one in service now has no wider requirement in HM Forces, and was never intended for use elsewhere, so I expect that to be scrapped. The rest, well I suspect as we're now into PR12, this is probably the first opening salvos of the army demanding a large cash injection to pay for its toys in addition to the extant budget.

Expect to see more stories like this in an effort to force the treasury to give up the cash, or the defence board to force pain on other TLBS. Its about to get messy...

[dkh51250]

Certainly when we pulled out of Sharjah we oggin tipped a lot of the vehicles. Loaded onto mexeflotes and dropped about a mile out.

On a more positive note, we did salvage about a dozen cage pallets of SWOs Camay, the old yellow bar soap, and sent it down to Masirah.

As the Warrant down there said in his signal to NEAF "Have enough 33D 1234567 to solve Americas colour problem. Request advise disposal instructions."

I think it equated to about fifteen years supply for them.

[goudie]

the old yellow bar soap

ISTR one needed special soap in Sharjah, to produce a lather in the de-salinated water supply.

[Not_a_boffin]

Jim - I sympathise.

Aah yes, the FRES agenda. You're right, it is indeed about to get messy again........

[Two's in]

Given the specialised role for most of these vehicles it's hard to see what would be served by going to the cost of repatriating them (other than not losing the good will of voters or Daily Mail readers) - probably not much use for them shuffling troops between Colchester and Salisbury plain I would think. Spending all the money on such a highly specialised vehicle was the first mistake, paying to ship them back and then languish on a UK airfield will be the next.

[VinRouge]

I am sure there are plenty of scenarios where this kit can be used, outside of the stan. We just need extra capability from platforms that we have to utilise it in different AORs, its not hard to think up a few realistic scenarios, is it really?

[Whenurhappy]

There seems to be several conflicting aspects to this story:


No need for the vehicles after the pull out from Afghan(istan)
MOD will be caned for the cost of these, as they were purchased via the UOR route.
Difficult to bring back
But we might need them in the future.


Let’s consider the wider issues of force protection – because that is why most of these vehicles were purchased.

Unless someone is a tree-dweller in an Amazonian forest, it cannot have escaped their notice that IEDs are the best thing to slow down an otherwise mobile enemy since, well, probably the battlefield use of barbed wire. Whilst technology is being used to defeat these devices, it is hard to imagine any future conflict when IEDs won’t be used by some, or all, belligerents (Ottawa Convention notwithstanding). They are effective, simple to construct, day/night all-weather compatible, oh, and very cheap to construct. And they scare the sh!t out of troops and politicians alike. A real force multiplier.

There are many practical problems of maintaining a diverse fleet of vehicles - WFM costs would be considerable, as would the effort to bring these vehicles out of storage and update comms/ECM/adaptive armour/weapons systems etc. However, I suspect that this would be cheaper and considerably quicker than the 6 years it took the MOD to eventually start to deliver these vehicles into Theatre.

Giving them to the locals. Hmmm. Not sure. They have been provided with squillions of HMMVES which they can’t maintain without massive (and expensive) contractor support. And the locals are crap at driving.

Establish a NATO-wide reserve? Although some of these vehicles will employ sovereign technologies, how about we make them available as an Alliance-wide reserve? We could find some new member of NATO just gagging to be taken seriously and park these vehicles there and share the cost of WFM, allowing Alliance members to draw on them with MC approval..

Use DSO (successor to DESO) to sell these to the usual suspect countries (Bahrain and Saudi would cheerfully take many of them; the US might not be happy with the UK exporting US-sourced technology, Defence Trade Treaty 2007 notwithstanding!).

[dkh51250]

Goudie wrote.

ISTR one needed special soap in Sharjah, to produce a lather in the de-salinated water supply.

That was Vel soap. The SWOs Camay was used for scrubbing of floors etc, and had a rather distinctive and unattractive aroma. Think institution.

[Fareastdriver]

Army to ditch 1800 vehicles

As a comparison Stagecoach has 8,400 buses in the UK alone. It ditches those every few years or so.

[Tourist]

How much do you think a bus costs compared to a Mastiff etc?

[Not_a_boffin]

And more importantly, how long to get hold of one from when you need it?

[Widger]

I am sure that the so called 'fools' in the MOD would love to keep all the vehicles and bring them back. Unfortunately, as already mentioned they were purchased under 'Urgent Operational Requirement' which means the money comes from HMT and not the Defence budget. To keep these vehicles, the MOD would have to 'buy them back' or ' bring them into core'. It is not just the vehicles that have been purchased under UOR but a whole lot else including, as already mentioned, Reaper.

The MOD is broke. It has no money. It has been told by the government to cut its spending on top of paying back its debts. It is engaged in a war and a small scale intervention. It is struggling to afford some of the equipment it needs for the future (post 2020). Amongst all of this, it needs to decide what equipment it needs to 'buy back'. It cannot afford any, to be honest but some items will have an overwhelming case for retention and this will be the subject of upcoming planning rounds like PR12 and PR11 before it.

These 'fools' in the MOD therefore have the very difficult issue of meeting their standing commitments whilst trying to scrape together enough money for the future in order to defend Britain's interests worldwide, whilst having the budget cut and dealing with the legacy of past ministers who would not make difficult political decisions lest they lost votes and now we have the Pprune armchair specialists up in arms because equipment (which does not belong to the MOD) will have to be left in theatre/disposed off.

Simple household economics really. If you have a company car unless you can afford to buy it off your employer, it will go to the big auction in the sky when you no longer need it!

[jamesdevice]

"As a comparison Stagecoach has 8,400 buses in the UK alone. It ditches those every few years or so"

More like 18-20 years. For instance here locally they sold off the bulk of their J - reg double deckers (1991) last year, with a couple still in service awaiting a buyer. And a good proportion go on to second users

[thowman]

They should repatriate the vehicles and hand them over to the Met police. They're probably going to need them again soon. :ok:

[tonker]

They don't belong to the HMT or the MOD, they belong to us. They should all be brought back in expectation of the next and inevitable threat you brave folks have to face.

I don't understand why we have such a lax attitude to preparing , when history tells us that to do so is so costly in people and money.

Enemy at the gates, fix bayonets would be my defence policy. No levels of preparedness other than it's about to happen or probably already has:ouch:

[Biggus]

tonker

If they belong to you I suggest you go out and collect them.....

What condition do you think many of them are in? They haven't been driven over nice tarmac roads to Tesco's and back, rather they have been used aggressively for years in a harsh environment. If you are about to suggest that they be refurbished, as we have already have an investment in them, then you are suggesting spending yet more money on them.

Once we have pulled out of Afghanistan the Army will be reduced in size with a lot of serviceable kit being disposed of.

If your basic objection is the money wasted in disposing of serviceable equipment, which might possibly be of use in a future conflict, then I take it you are also upset at the disposal of the GR9 fleet, various warships, tanks/artillery etc all disposed of under the SDSR, all of which was bought and paid for, and didn't require shipping back to the UK, refurbishing and storing until the next war might come along.......


Have you any idea of what the bill has been for fuel, ordnance, spares, various expendables in Afghanistan since we have been there - one could argue that all of that was a waste of taxpayers - "your" - money, to say nothing of the most important cost - LIVES!

[GIATT]

I would imagine that the MoD will sensibly elect to leave/scrap the kit as they can't afford the UOR costs from their budget.

The Treasury will then notice that they have an entry on the balance sheet that relates to a mountain of kit of a military nature that they cannot realise via any form of sale.

As the No11 trumps Main building there will be a transfer of liability and MoD will find that Catch 22 was a pamphlet not a novel. The MoD have just bought something that doesn't exists.

The best way to deal with it might be to send out a small team every year to do a serial number check of all these "assets" allowing for a normal life cycle write off. Of course to maintain this farce a small logistics unit will have to be permanently stationed in order to keep the kit serviceable. So by spending on something they can never use they avoid getting billed for something they can never use. This sounds just the sort of thing that BaE might be willing to take on in perpetuity. :ugh:

[tonker]

I didn't say "my" money i said "us" ie you as well, and my main gripe was the waste of of the shelf kit that could in the future cost lives.....AND money:rolleyes:

[NutLoose]

Trouble is a lot of it was really theater specific, I mean a Jackal and a Coyote doesn't even have a windscreen or a roof :ok:..... just what you need for a rain swept Salisbury plain in mid winter.. :O

And think of the spares we can flog them......

Still you could have got a lot on the deck of a carrier though...... oops!

When it looked like we were going to evacuate Cyprus during the troubles, they had the bays put all the servicable high value equipment, correctly labeled up and palleted ready for a Herc to collect, the rest was either to be destroyed or readied in case another flight was available, Herc came in was filled, 15 mins later another appeared, opening the ramp and pushing out the other stuff, the guys were suprised to find it was the same Herc and all their nicely packed, labeled and prepped equipment was now sitting on the bottom of the Med..

[jamesdevice]

"a Jackal and a Coyote doesn't even have a windscreen or a roof"

Nor do many of the lan drover s they were intended to replace.

[orgASMic]

Strucky - What is wrong with sea transportation? Why opt for very expensive AT?


What is wrong with sea transportation is that Afghanistan is land-locked:

The drive to the Pakistan border en route to the nearest sea port is extremely dangerous (the stories of the regular, numerous deaths of locally-employed civilian drivers do not make the papers) and difficult. It is no picnic once the other side of the border either.
The fuel for the vehicles has to be flown in (expensive in cash terms) or trucked in (expensive in human terms).
The spares for the vehicles necessary for such a trip are in very short supply as they are UOR items, not regular production items, and have to be flown or trucked in at enormous cost. (Getting the idea, now?)
There are insufficient Heavy Equipment Tranporters to lift them all by road, so most would have to be driven.
The convoys would need protection by both air and ground support and the manpower available for that duty will be diminishing as we withdraw. I cannot see ISAF providing it for us as they will still have a job to do in the parts of the country which have not transitioned to local control.
IMHO, the long and the short is that anything useful will come out by road early enough to be protected as it does so, anything of enduring value or that needs to stay until the end will come out by air, and anything else (including that which we cannot afford) will be written off and left behind . It has happened that way every time before.

[jamesdevice]

all very well, but all those problems pose one big question........

If its all so flaming difficult how did the stuff get there in the first place? It wasn't all flown in.


How much did the Soviets leave when they pulled out?

[pasir]

... if true then simply following form since I recall reading reports that
when the British forces pulled out of the Crimea they abandoned huge numbers of their horses - left to to starve or freeze to death in the frozen wastlands of the region.

...

[BATCO]

I'm too far up country to hear the British Army cheering this one. After quite a few years and quite a few million quid, they have nothing much to show from the FRES project. I had heard around the corridors of power (ok, Andover) that they would do almost anything to prevent Mastiff/Ridgeback etc becoming renamed FRES.

So, 10 years after we could have settled on buying a MOTS (eg Stryker) and upgraded along with other users we're still working on it. Here's how it seems to go, we tried to write down all of the characteristics of something like Stryker and then asked companies to bid against that description. And that is where a lot of our procurement budget goes. See MRA4 and Waste of Space threads for further examples.



Batco

[orgASMic]

If its all so flaming difficult how did the stuff get there in the first place? It wasn't all flown in.


True, but a lot of it was. Back then it was an Urgent Operational Requirement to get it into theatre in order to save military lives. The fleet has been built up over years as a steady trickle. We will want to leave quickly and in good order when the word is given. Getting it out again will not be urgent, an operational requirement or cost-effective, because the same military lives will be saved by being flown out over a period of days not by driving out through bandit country over a period of weeks.

How much did the Soviets leave when they pulled out?

Judging by what was in and around Bagram 10 years ago, loads. There was a local living in a T62 (I think) that had got stuck fording a stream a few miles from the airfield boundary and abandoned.

[VP8]

"""jamesdevice all very well, but all those problems pose one big question........

If its all so flaming difficult how did the stuff get there in the first place? It wasn't all flown in. """"

You would be surprised how much was flown in on AN124 and AN225 aircraft and as to earlier post how many were carried on each aircraft!!

:E

[high spirits]

Surely if AFG is such a secure place by the time we leave, they can drive them to the ports....if not then shouldn't we be staying to finish the job? If you can drive tankers and food across the country then a few heavily armed vehicles would stand a chance....

It would be the ultimate road trip!

[Uncle Ginsters]

But surely we'll only be pulling out when we've 'won' and made the world a safer place?

Surely driving out through a newly safe & peaceful country, through a former Commonwealth nation and current ally would be a piece of cake?!?:ugh::ouch::confused:

EDIT...High Spirits - Oops, you're a split second ahead in the sarcarsm stakes!

[Mustique]

Is the cost ofthe Antonov realistic? Presumably this is using it to ship all the way home? Why not ship the vehicles to a safer location and then take them by sea ?

[Mustique]

whaen I wrote "ship" I meant "fly"!

[high spirits]

Ginsters,
Good timing with the double sarcasm onslaught. Leaving the vehicles behind is a bit of a tacit admission that we have screwed the pooch as far as providing security is concerned....

[Pontius Navigator]

Mustique, we haven't got the sealift capacity either. And back to the previous posts - why do we want knackered, special to type, unsupportable and unuseable stuff anyway?

In Egypt, when the US pulled out of the Aswan dam project they abandoned all their heavy equipment. Years later it was still where they dumped it.

We simply do not need the expense of shipping lots of equipment home when at the same time the numbers of troops that would be in UK post 2015 will be far fewer than now.

[NutLoose]

Sell it to Lybia as aid :ok::E

[Not_a_boffin]

PN

Au contraire, we DO have the shipping capability (>14000LIMS of it). Specifically bought for the purpose of helping the Army meet people world-wide....

Point class sealift ship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_class_sealift_ship)

That does not solve the potential issues of extraction and non-funded vehicle types. However, it means that costings based purely on extraction by air may not be the most appropriate to use.

[jamesdevice]

On which point, is Atlantic Conveyor (II) still around?
the terms of its build financing was that is was available at short notice to the MOD

[jamesdevice]

ah silly me, I should have checked first - she's in the North Sea at present though Swedish flagged.
How the heck did that happen?
Live Ships Map - AIS - Vessel Traffic and Positions (http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/default.aspx?mmsi=266018000&centerx=3.975117&centery=52.95879&zoom=10&type_color=7#)

Interesting to note her displacement is 51648 t - more than twice the size of the Point ships @ 23,000 t
Whats the betting the MOD have forgotten all about her after having paid for the build....???

[philrigger]

;)

The Aden stories were not a myth, I clearly remember seeing trucks being driven into the sea on the TV news.

Were they suicide drivers ? And where were these 'cliffs' over which the vehicles were 'driven' ?

I do seem to remember that some vehicles were taken out to sea and dumped overboard although I never actually saw this.

[Tankertrashnav]

Anyone who has been to the Phillipines will be familiar with Jeepneys, small minibuses originally converted from Jeeps left behind by the US Army after WW2, and now mainly scratch built locally.

I'm sure the Afghans will put our kit to good use - leaving 1800 vehicles behind is a small price to pay to get out of that mess.

[NutLoose]

What you need is more transports...........

here we go, a temp solution in the offing.... you should be able to recoup the cost by selling on afterwards..... :E

Ideal to upgrade the Tristar fleet

7 DAKOTA DC3 AIRCRAFT FOR SALE & HUNTER JETS | eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/7-DAKOTA-DC3-AIRCRAFT-SALE-HUNTER-JETS-/290615165428?pt=UK_CPV_Aviation_SM&hash=item43aa0381f4)

[Clockwork Mouse]

And there's an advert for RAC breakdown cover on the same Ebay page, which could be useful!