South African prototypes, projects, concepts, etc.

[kaiserbill]

What I was referring more to was the recent post about a Plessey Radar. Then we have numerous mentions of MAN and the Spanish truck company. I wonder if there is a statute of limitations on sanctions busting?

Must of this stuff wasn't against the UN embargo because trucks could be transferred for civil use and radars for ATC. The acquisition of dual use material was a legal method the RSA used to get past the embargo.


Plus somehow I doubt that this forum is breaking news about RSA sanction busting efforts.

Indeed.

Plessey SA has been going for over 50 years.
Many Plessey products are and were used in SA for the control of Civil Aviation.
If a company or entity buys something, and then sells it a few years later, that's just the simple marketplace.
As mentioned MAN have had an assembly plant in SA since 1962.

There are/were plenty of local heavy industry manufacturers anyway, either making local products, licence produced components, or assembling imported components into indigineous platforms.
Truckmakers, TFM, ADE etc to name just a few.
ADE engines for example were used on commercial trucks, including Nissan, in the civil marketplace too.

Sanctions are often a sham in many ways in any event, very often contrary to commercial interests and political needs.
From what I can gather, the US, and others, made good use of information supplied by Silvermine and other tracking facilities in SA.

 

[panzerskool]

ya that looks about right but it had a much higher back even with tarpaulin over it. do you have a side shot of the 2nd vehicle?


what are they and where are they now?

As noted in one of my previous threads, I had the pleasure of seeing a TEL in Lohatla in late 80's (sans Jerrico/RSA missile) in the tiffies area (must have been getting a service or something) and it was a MAN cab with an inverted front elevation like in Pierre's book and not a flat face like the MAN 8x8. Thought nothing of it at the time but have had a fascination with the TEL since then .


Strange that neither an Israeli Jerrico TEL or a SA RSA TEL have even appeared in the form of a photo.

Panzerskool - Was this perhaps what you saw...? (note the 2nd vehicle in particular)

 

[panzerskool]

slightly off topic, anyone been inside Silvermine more importantly down deep inside?


Also strange conversation I had with a guy in Australia many years ago about silos his dad was involved in building at Langebaan AFB in the late 70's early 80's which were supposedly IRBM or ICBM (Jerrico / RSA 2 base).

 

[curious george]

Also strange conversation I had with a guy in Australia many years ago about silos his dad was involved in building at Langebaan AFB in the late 70's early 80's which were supposedly IRBM or ICBM (Jerrico / RSA 2 base).

Hmm,now THAT could be an interesting one...

 

[Graugrun]

Strange that neither an Israeli Jerrico TEL or a SA RSA TEL have even appeared in the form of a photo.

Actually, part of the TEL is in clear and open sight (and still in it's original blue/grey colour), it's the launching arm for the RSA 3 missile as displayed at Swartkops Airbase. The reason for the blue/grey colour is that it (the TEL/RSA missile program) actually fell under the Air force and not the Army.

I had a pic of the side of the 2nd vehicle (two pics I posted above), cannot find it now - if I do I will post. It was outside Ermetek many years back when I took the pics, got as jags as hell because the 2nd vehicle's arm looks exactly like a missile launching arm, however it is simply the bridge laying trucks as pictured on Page 50 post # 746 earlier in this thread (without the bridge).

 

[kaiserbill]

So, not the TEL vehicles then, although the one with the storage boxes is interesting.

The TEL vehicle should be longer than these vehicles.

Graugrun, I take it Ermetek a seperate facility or company completely from LIW "Spes B" division, that apparently built the TEL vehicles.

 

[panzerskool]

i would imagine then that even if these trucks aren't the TEL there was a version that was seeing as the TEL was apparently an indigenous design and not the Jericho TEL the Israelis used.


The wheels look like they are off the 80's MAN N or M series (West German Army trucks like our 8X8 recovery truck we got from them) which may suggest that the TEL was a hybrid of MAN chassis and local cab? Wouldn't reinvent the wheel if technology existed

 

[panzerskool]

Strange that neither an Israeli Jerrico TEL or a SA RSA TEL have even appeared in the form of a photo.

Actually, part of the TEL is in clear and open sight (and still in it's original blue/grey colour), it's the launching arm for the RSA 3 missile as displayed at Swartkops Airbase. The reason for the blue/grey colour is that it (the TEL/RSA missile program) actually fell under the Air force and not the Army.

I had a pic of the side of the 2nd vehicle (two pics I posted above), cannot find it now - if I do I will post. It was outside Ermetek many years back when I took the pics, got as jags as hell because the 2nd vehicle's arm looks exactly like a missile launching arm, however it is simply the bridge laying trucks as pictured on Page 50 post # 746 earlier in this thread (without the bridge).

Ive seen that and its not part of a TEL launcher from what I can gather, Its a staging structure used to transport , work on or store missiles. its also a RSA 3 when TEL was initially conceived /procured to utilize RSA 2 weapon which was significantly shorter missile. I believe that the first RSA 2/ Jericho's were supplied with the Israeli TEL which we then used as a template to build our own TEL's and the Israeli ones sent back

 

[Graugrun]

Strange that neither an Israeli Jerrico TEL or a SA RSA TEL have even appeared in the form of a photo.

Actually, part of the TEL is in clear and open sight (and still in it's original blue/grey colour), it's the launching arm for the RSA 3 missile as displayed at Swartkops Airbase. The reason for the blue/grey colour is that it (the TEL/RSA missile program) actually fell under the Air force and not the Army.

I had a pic of the side of the 2nd vehicle (two pics I posted above), cannot find it now - if I do I will post. It was outside Ermetek many years back when I took the pics, got as jags as hell because the 2nd vehicle's arm looks exactly like a missile launching arm, however it is simply the bridge laying trucks as pictured on Page 50 post # 746 earlier in this thread (without the bridge).

Ive seen that and its not part of a TEL launcher from what I can gather, Its a staging structure used to transport , work on or store missiles. its also a RSA 3 when TEL was initially conceived /procured to utilize RSA 2 weapon which was significantly shorter missile. I believe that the first RSA 2/ Jericho's were supplied with the Israeli TEL which we then used as a template to build our own TEL's and the Israeli ones sent back

I have just spoken to someone who worked on both the LZN and the TEL programs - he assures me that the arm at Swartkops is definately that of TEL (and not a staging structure), he also says that it is possible that you saw TEL at Lohatla...

He has never shown me a photo/drawing etc of TEL, so I cannot be completely sure of him being what he says he is, however from other stuff I have seen and conversations I have had, I think he is the real deal...(BTW I have always got the feeling that I also shouldn't ever ask him to see a pic of TEL, if you know what I mean).

 

[panzerskool]

If that is the case then the Swartkops TEL is for a much bigger 3 stage RSA 3 missile compared to the 80s TEL which was for the RSA 2 which was a 2 stage Missile. The RSA 2 /Jericho was originally an Israeli vehicle and a 70s era design which was then converted to a locally manufactured vehicle which is what we are trying to find/see.


The TEL as a result gets much bigger (look at Russian evolution from 8 wheeled Scud type TEL (IRBM) to 16 wheel SS24 ICBM). This means that there is a vehicle bigger than what has been discussed or drawn previously to launch the RSA 3.


From what I have read and seen the RSA 3 (ICBM) was intended to not be a mobile deterrent and was due to be silo based leaving the RSA 2 as the mobile deterent based on a 8x8 vehicle.


all speculative of course in the vacuum of real evidence but based on bits and pieces that are slowly coming to light.

 

[Graugrun]

Thanks for your input Panzerskool - one day the truth will come out - hopefully we are still around when it does...

On a brighter note - here is something for the record books - the first (and possibly only) brochure for the 35mm SPAAG/Rooikat - it might just answer some questions in terms of the specs...

 

[kaiserbill]

Great post!
I see the brochure confirms the ZA-35 chassis was indeed extended, albeit slightly.

 

[Graugrun]

This should be interesting for some - Reumech OMC's official brochure for TTD - it also has a nice list of specs in it.

 

[kaiserbill]

Excellent post.

Thanks for that Graugrun.
Lot's of additional detail and pics there.

Long may your brochure cabinet deliver!

I see the TTD prototype was armed with the GT3 instead of the GT8.
I wonder if this was because the GT8 hadn't been refined yet, or whether it was simply an expedient for the prototype testing.

Also, how many TTD's were built?
I've seen it mentioned on another forum by someone who is extremely well connected that he seems to recall two were in fact constructed, with one being at the Armour Museum in Bloemfontein, as seen on this thread.

 

[Graugrun]

I cannot comment much on it using the GT3, I also think it just expedient in terms of the prototype (too much else to test before they worried about the main gun too much).

Regards only two being made, this is what I have also been told - and yes one is a the School of Armour, they take it out once in a while and let certain visitors sit on it while they drive it a short way around (including their one small test track/course), naturally I made sure I did not miss my seat on it....

Below is a good article on it, courtesy of Janes IDR 4/1994.

 

[Graugrun]

I was having a look around, and came upon a dissertion or thesis that has been posted in the public domain.

The paper dealt with steering tests on 6x6 and 8x8 vehicles, with the test vehicle being a 6x6 armoured vehicle that I've not seen nor heard of before. It's a highly technical paper, but if anybody is interested, I can post a link.

Anyway, the vehicle used for the test is described as the Bison Weapons Platform.

This is a large 6x6 armoured vehicle developed by Ermetek, which was the design bureau of Reumech.

The front two axles are steerable, and the Bison was developed for the SADF as a concept demonstrator, but was not released for serial production. It is powered by an Atlantis Diesel Engine (ADE) 447T turbocharged diesel pushing out 300hp, with an automatic 6 speed transmission.
From what I can gather from the thesis, unladen (empty) weight was just over 14 tons, width was about 2,4m, and height was 3 meters. Tires were 16x20.

It was retained as a test vehicle.

As said, I've never heard of this vehicle before.
It looks like it has certain features of the Tapir 4x4 mentioned earlier (pg 25 post 360) in the thread, as well as possibly having some features of the Okapi 6x6, which is a larger vehicle, but there are a lot of differences too, not least size.

Looks like you might appreciate this then:

 

[kaiserbill]

Holy Moly, Graugrun..

Where've you been my whole life?
Well ....... for the 4 years this thread has been going at least. ;D

I'd not seen nor heard of the Bison before, and here you post a comprehensive data list.
When was the vehicle made?
I see the brochure says it is a Truckmakers design, but the technical steering test mentioned Ermetek.
2 seperate companies, as far as I know?
The brochure also shows it is a much bigger vehicle than the thesis states, at 21 tons GVM.

Also, the post regarding the Remark project, with those 4 vehicles between the Buffel and Casspir ..... any other info or pics?
Please feel free to go through the thread and add any additional info on any of the vehicles mentioned, especially the mystery ones.
And correct any mistakes or misconceptions on any.

And of course, any additional prototypes or concepts that haven't been mentioned.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Holy Moly, Graugrun..

Where've you been my whole life?
Well ....... for the 4 years this thread has been going at least. ;D

I agree. Thanks a lot Graugrun for all the info the last few weeks.

I'd not seen nor heard of the Bison before, and here you post a comprehensive data list.

This looks like the MAP vehicle used by the SADF recce regiments and also as a command vehicle for arty and I think an ambulance as well.

 

[panzerskool]

strange to think the TTD is over 20 years old now. if memory serves me well it was kept in a garage next to the T-72 that was "procured"

 

[Graugrun]

Holy Moly, Graugrun..

Where've you been my whole life?
Well ....... for the 4 years this thread has been going at least. ;D

I agree. Thanks a lot Graugrun for all the info the last few weeks.

I'd not seen nor heard of the Bison before, and here you post a comprehensive data list.

This looks like the MAP vehicle used by the SADF recce regiments and also as a command vehicle for arty and I think an ambulance as well.

Only a pleasure - glad I can share it with people who have similar interests!


Unfortunately my interest has waned a little over the years, and I have from time to time cleaned out my piles of brochures to the point that I have about a quarter left of what I did have. It's a pity as the brochures that I mostly threw away were on the weird and wacky concept/prototypes and projects that would have been ideal for this forum....

Never the less, I still have some brochures of oddball stuff - here is one, this is on the Intelligent Horizontal Mine, utilising a self forming fragment charge (threw away my brochures on the SFF charge itself , they wanted to apply it into the mining industry as well - BTW it is also one the of the mines that Wynand Du Toit was carrying when he was captured in Angola...). I got this at DEXSA 1992.

Abraham - the Recces told me they did not like the Bison/Tapir etc, they found them too bulky and big, they preferred something lighter for their strike operations (BAT/WASP etc). They paraded the Tapir at a few of their medal/receiving the colour parades, however that was about it in terms of them using it.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Abraham - the Recces told me they did not like the Bison/Tapir etc, they found them too bulky and big, they preferred something lighter for their strike operations (BAT/WASP etc). They paraded the Tapir at a few of their medal/receiving the colour parades, however that was about it in terms of them using it.

Interesting info, thanks for sharing. Australian SASR used a mediumweight Unimog (U1700) in a role called "Mother Mog" which would provide logistic support to a troop of Landrover LRPV (6x6) used in the raiding/special recce role. The Bison/Tapir could perhaps be useful in this role for SADF Recces. But would still be GVWing twice as much as a Unimog carrying the same amount of cargo. Maybe as a logistic vehicle for mechanised forces who would need the high level of protection for their cargo.

 

[curious george]

Abraham - the Recces told me they did not like the Bison/Tapir etc, they found them too bulky and big, they preferred something lighter for their strike operations (BAT/WASP etc). They paraded the Tapir at a few of their medal/receiving the colour parades, however that was about it in terms of them using it.

Interesting,they used caspir extensively(maybe for non-fighting roles?dunno?The only recce unit (5RR) I ever saw in the flesh was in Rundu base during 87 if I recall correctly,incl a few caspirs + armed mogs + kwe log vehicles),ie how much bigger is this than a caspir,just curious as to the logic/thought pattern?

 

[Graugrun]

Abraham - the Recces told me they did not like the Bison/Tapir etc, they found them too bulky and big, they preferred something lighter for their strike operations (BAT/WASP etc). They paraded the Tapir at a few of their medal/receiving the colour parades, however that was about it in terms of them using it.

Interesting,they used caspir extensively(maybe for non-fighting roles?dunno?The only recce unit (5RR) I ever saw in the flesh was in Rundu base during 87 if I recall correctly,incl a few caspirs + armed mogs + kwe log vehicles),ie how much bigger is this than a caspir,just curious as to the logic/thought pattern?

They did use Casspirs but not really that much - 5.2 Commando and 5.3 Commando were the strike teams within 5 Recce (5.2 more so), They would often borrow or use other unit's equipment if they happened to to a combined Op. What you may very well have been witness to was Ops Firewood (1987), which included elements of 5 Recce, 2 Recce, 1 Para and most of 101 Bn. Since 101 Bn used Casspirs extensively, when the 5 and 2 Recce guys joined up - that's what was predominantly used. Firewood was a fairly big Op BTW- being a strike on one of SWAPO's biggest bases at the time, which was situated rather deep in Angola.

 

[curious george]

They did use Casspirs but not really that much - 5.2 Commando and 5.3 Commando were the strike teams within 5 Recce (5.2 more so), They would often borrow or use other unit's equipment if they happened to to a combined Op. What you may very well have been witness to was Ops Firewood (1987), which included elements of 5 Recce, 2 Recce, 1 Para and most of 101 Bn. Since 101 Bn used Casspirs extensively, when the 5 and 2 Recce guys joined up - that's what was predominantly used. Firewood was a fairly big Op BTW- being a strike on one of SWAPO's biggest bases at the time, which was situated rather deep in Angola.

I could be wrong timing wise,but I dont recall or associate this with "Firewood" as I had a mate that went on "afgedeelde diens" for that IF memory serves and not sure if they would've deployed from Fort "Foot", in Rundu for a "sector 10" op?(Pretty much everything in our neck of the woods was in direct support of Unita.)

The recce convoy only had prob max 10-15 vehicles in it,and no 101 elements were visibly deployed into our area(sector 20) at the time,in fact the only time was in support of "Modular" me thinks.(Well nothing around Rundu or the Bittersoet trainining area anyways,would be cool to know offcourse but we were the main/only log unit/base in the area/sector and pretty much everyone HAD to draw supplies from us,be it food,ammo or fuel. We normally "knew" when/what stuff was happening due to that.)

This deployment could've been slightly prior to the official start of that ops.Its been 26-7 odd years ago now,so I wont be placing any bets(beers,bucs or otherwise) on being "right" as to how I remember stuff lmao!

Thx for all the lovely surprises you are/have been posting btw!

 

[Graugrun]

A pic of a pic I took at the School of Armour, TTD at speed at what looks like Lohatla.

 

[Graugrun]

I've posted more on the older stuff, time for something that's new - this is the RG 34...

 

[kaiserbill]

Very much so.
I'm interested in any new info on any of the weapons/vehicles in here, and any others that aren't in here too, of course.
Another great post.

 

[Graugrun]

Very much so.
I'm interested in any new info on any of the weapons/vehicles in here, and any others that aren't in here too, of course.
Another great post.

My above reply was in haste BTW- forgetting that we (now) have a thread for South African missiles - I have asked the Mods to move it.

As you are interested in ALL SA weapons, and that this weapon has been referenced to a few times in this thread - Attached is the first brochure for the prototype EMAK in it's 35mm iteration. I understand that a much refined and changed form (incl now in 30mm amongst others), will be the main gun on the new Badgers coming in to service in 2015, thus I hope the attached still falls within the realms of what this site is about - if not, the Mods are welcome to remove it.

I got this at DEXSA 1994 IIRC.

 

[kaiserbill]

Thanks for that Gruagrun.

I see it has a dual feed system, for rapid selection of different ammunition types (eg. high explosive or armour piercing) that was also a feature in the Ratel 20mm gun, allowing quick and effective ammunition type selection when in combat.

I assume this is the same 35mm gun fitted to that prototype Ratel with a 35mm turret gun, and it appears, as can be seen on the various earlier Hoefyster vehicles, that this weapon seems to have been the one selected for whatever was originally going to replace the Ratel.

 

[Graugrun]

Many thanks Jemiba!

I got to chat to the two designers of the EMAK at the show - they were rather excited about it as they felt it had a few unique (to the SADF perhaps?) aspects to it at the time. They also gave this info pack.

Kaiserbill it was meant to update existing Ratels and any project that replaced them AFAIK, elsewhere I have a drawing from the same DEXSA '96 show of the proposed turret on a Ratel (Ratel "B"?) - when I find it I will also post it as well.

 

[kaiserbill]

Kaiserbill it was meant to update existing Ratels and any project that replaced them AFAIK, elsewhere I have a drawing from the same DEXSA '94 show of the proposed turret on a Ratel (Ratel "B"?) - when I find it I will also post it as well.

I was just going to ask if you had any info on the 35mm turret as fitted to that Ratel.

It appears that the Ratel replacement programme was in development at the time.
From what I can gather, that Rooikat based 8x8 prototype as seen in the Armour museum in Bloemfontein was a vehicle geared towards this replacement, as well as the other later original Hoefyster vehicles.

As over 1200 Ratels were produced, it probably made sense for a 35mm Ratel upgrade to complement any new vehicles, at least initially.
I speak under correction, but I think Ratel Mk2 production ended in 1987, followed by upgrading of existing vehicles to Mk3 standard. This intimates that a new vehicle would have followed shortly.
Also, the OMC Iklwa is a radical Ratel upgrade, with repositioned engine. large crew ramp at rear, etc.
There was also the Mechanology Ratel upgrade, called the Mk4, which also featured a repositioned engine and rear ramp, but I've not been able to find out anything further...

 

[Graugrun]

Kaiserbill, that I remember there initially was a program to just update the existing Ratels in small but effective ways, I'm also fairly sure this was associated/connected to a project called "Lobo", of which I will post more later. In the meantime here is some (very basic) info on the turret. Lobo might have also have later become known as Ratel "B" - and the further iteration was obviously iKlwa and such.

It was as you can see meant to have all crew members placed within the hull of the vehicle and not in the turret (the start of our later collaboration with Jordan). I am sure they built up the turret and had it on display - however I could just be imagining things....

I have added in something on the overhead sight by M-Tek (they were later involved in the tracking sights for our new frigates IIRC)

EDIT - Sorry I forgot to rotate the scans before posting..

 

[Graugrun]

GT1 - ? (possibly 20 pounder fitted to Centurions as purchased?) It was indeed the 84 mm gun from the original Centurions, to be used in the Rooikat project. For this the 84mm was to be heavily upgraded for and of course a new range of ammo developed for it. At that same time though we received our first naval Strike-Craft, and with them the 76mm OTO Melara's. The decision was taken to rather work with and modify/upgrade the OTO's for use as the Rooikat's main gun instead. The Cheetah test vehicle/s (one of three Rooikat prototypes) was actually fitted with the 84mm gun - see pic of one of the 84mm test guns for the Rooikat project below (note of course the Rooikat picture attached to the .
GT2 - 90mm (Eland/Ratel)
GT3 - 105mm L7 for Olifant Mk1A
GT4 - 76mm (Rooikat-76)
GT5 - This was an advanced rifled 105mm gun for the Olifant Mk 1A
GT6 - Smoothbore 120mm, upgradeable to 140mm for the TTD (superseded by GT9)
GT7 - 105mm (GT3 development for Rooikat 105mm) - Low pressure version
GT8 - Upgraded 105mm for Olifant Mk1B? - Also for Rooikat - rifled
GT9 - Smoothbore 120mm for TTD (3 produced?)
GT10 - ?
GT11 - ?
GT12 - Lightweight low recoil 120mm for the Rooikat 120

Some updates (in Itallics) on the list above - I've just had the chance to ask someone in the know about it. Still no info on GT10 and 11 though...

 

[kaiserbill]

Very interesting about the concept of an upgraded 84mm (20 pdr) initially looked at for the Rooikat!

The Cheetah vehicle fitted with the 84mm..... is that the 6x6 vehicle below?

 

[kaiserbill]

I've just re-discovered this vehicle, that I posted originally into the Rooikat thread a while back.

Is this the Cheetah, rather?
If you look on the hull above the 2nd wheel/axle, there appears to be a name stencilled that looks like "cheetah".

Were these development vehicles for the Rooikat, and fitted with the 84mm?

I wonder where this/these vehicles are now?
It is also worth bearing in mind that the various original 8x8 development vehicles for the Rooikat, as displayed at the Armour Museum in Bloemfontein, appear to have 77mm HV Mk2 guns from Comet tanks.

The turret on the Ratel 35mm appears different from those 35mm turrets fitted to the Hoefyster mock-up vehicles.
Do you have any other info?

 

[Graugrun]

I've just re-discovered this vehicle, that I posted originally into the Rooikat thread a while back.

Is this the Cheetah, rather?
If you look on the hull above the 2nd wheel/axle, there appears to be a name stencilled that looks like "cheetah".

Were these development vehicles for the Rooikat, and fitted with the 84mm?

I wonder where this/these vehicles are now?
It is also worth bearing in mind that the various original 8x8 development vehicles for the Rooikat, as displayed at the Armour Museum in Bloemfontein, appear to have 77mm HV Mk2 guns from Comet tanks.

The turret on the Ratel 35mm appears different from those 35mm turrets fitted to the Hoefyster mock-up vehicles.
Do you have any other info?

You could be right regards the gun on the Cheetah demo vehicle above (GT1), I saw another pic when I got the one above that showed the breech side of it, it seemed to have the number '17' stamped on it - for 17 pounder? If so then it is the 77mm HV gun. I will ask about this again - perhaps the person I spoke to confused the two guns when we chatted.

BTW - yes the pics you have of the Cheetah are of the vehicle that he was referring to.

I'm sure I had more on the 35mm turret BTW - must have thrown it out though - (I will ask around, lets see what I can find...).

 

[Rickshaw]

You could be right regards the gun on the Cheetah demo vehicle above (GT1), I saw another pic when I got the one above that showed the breech side of it, it seemed to have the number '17' stamped on it - for 17 pounder?

That would be very interesting and if true more than likely something adopted in South Africa as the 77mm in reality had no real relationship to the 17 Pdr apart from calibre and using the same projectile (which I suspect it didn't). It was actually a completely different weapon with a very different development ancestry to the 17 Pdr., being a Vickers design whereas the 17 Pdr was IIRC Royal Ordnance.

 

[CostasTT]

You could be right regards the gun on the Cheetah demo vehicle above (GT1), I saw another pic when I got the one above that showed the breech side of it, it seemed to have the number '17' stamped on it - for 17 pounder?

That would be very interesting and if true more than likely something adopted in South Africa as the 77mm in reality had no real relationship to the 17 Pdr apart from calibre and using the same projectile (which I suspect it didn't). It was actually a completely different weapon with a very different development ancestry to the 17 Pdr., being a Vickers design whereas the 17 Pdr was IIRC Royal Ordnance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_17-pounder#77_mm_HV
Same AP projectile as the 17-pdr, different casing.

 

[Rickshaw]

You could be right regards the gun on the Cheetah demo vehicle above (GT1), I saw another pic when I got the one above that showed the breech side of it, it seemed to have the number '17' stamped on it - for 17 pounder?

That would be very interesting and if true more than likely something adopted in South Africa as the 77mm in reality had no real relationship to the 17 Pdr apart from calibre and using the same projectile (which I suspect it didn't). It was actually a completely different weapon with a very different development ancestry to the 17 Pdr., being a Vickers design whereas the 17 Pdr was IIRC Royal Ordnance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_17-pounder#77_mm_HV
Same AP projectile as the 17-pdr, different casing.

Different weapons (from your source):

As the breech length of the 17-pounder was too long to fit in many tanks, a new version was designed with a shorter breech, firing the same projectile as the 17-pounder from a 3-inch 20 cwt AA gun cartridge through a shortened 17-pounder barrel. This new gun's ammunition was not interchangeable with the 17-pounder, so to prevent confusion over ammunition supplies, it was renamed the "77 mm HV"—the 'HV' standing for High Velocity—although it was the same 76.2 mm calibre as the 17-pounder.

You would not want to attempt to load a 17 Pdr round into a 77mm gun - it wouldn't fit!

 

[CostasTT]

That's what I wrote. The PROJECTILE (the thingy that comes out of the barrel) was the same. The CASING was not, which made the complete rounds different.