South African prototypes, projects, concepts, etc.

[Rickshaw]

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.

But they are fixed case rounds, not separate loading, which means putting the number 17 on the breech would not indicate the round to be fired.

 

[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.

But they are fixed case rounds, not separate loading, which means putting the number 17 on the breech would not indicate the round to be fired.

Sure they are. But read again how the 77mm round was developed.
As for the number stamped on the breech, I'm not an expert on such markings, so I won't be able to tell you exactly what it means.

 

[Herman]

In March 1942, Vickers-Armstrong delivered the prototype of a new, high velocity tank gun in calibre 75/50 (75mm calibre, barrel length = 50 calibres). The gun was originally intended to be fitted to the Cromwell cruiser tank. By May 1943, it became clear that the turret ring of this tank was too small to allow this piece to be fitted. The later Comet tank was intended to take the 17 pounder but once again the turret proved to be too small for this gun. The 75/50 was then openend up slightly to take the 76.2mm projectiles of the 17 pounder and the gun was fitted to the Comet. The cartridges of this gun are significantly shorter than those of the 17 pounder. To avoid confusion with the 17 pounder gun that was fitted to the Sherman Firefly and with the American 76mm gun fitted to some US versions of the Sherman, the Comet's gun was called the 77mm high velocity gun although the actual calibre was 76.2mm, the same as the 17 pounder. The armour piercing performance of the 77mm was substantially less than the 17 pounder.

South Africa bought a small number (28?) of Comets after the war to serve in a reconnaissance squadron for the armoured division. 77mm guns from these tanks were used in the Rooikat prototypes to evaluate various aspects of the installation and the ability of the turrets/vehicles to stand up to recoil. As far as I can tell, the decision to fit a rifled gun of around 75mm calibre in the Rooikat was taken early in its development. The initial intended combat weight of the Rookkat was about 20 tons. The reason why the gun for the Rooikat was based on the Oto Melara 76/62 was probably because ammunition for this gun was produced in South Africa at that time and the gun was in service with the Navy. The Rooikat ended up weighing 28 tons which meant that it was significantly undergunned with the 76mm gun.

 

[Herman]

I recently had the opportunity to visit the SA Armour museum and 1 SAI in Bloemfontein. Took a number of photo's with my tablet (Android), including some of a prototype of the Rooikat which I have never seen before. The vehicle is fitted with a two-man turret, with a 105mm gun and an autoloader.

I know this is stupid, but how can I post the photo's on this forum?

 

[CostasTT]

I recently had the opportunity to visit the SA Armour museum and 1 SAI in Bloemfontein. Took a number of photo's with my tablet (Android), including some of a prototype of the Rooikat which I have never seen before. The vehicle is fitted with a two-man turret, with a 105mm gun and an autoloader.

I know this is stupid, but how can I post the photo's on this forum?

Post them as attachments.
Below the reply box there is the Attach panel. Just follow the instructions and you'll do fine.

 

[kaiserbill]

I recently had the opportunity to visit the SA Armour museum and 1 SAI in Bloemfontein. Took a number of photo's with my tablet (Android), including some of a prototype of the Rooikat which I have never seen before. The vehicle is fitted with a two-man turret, with a 105mm gun and an autoloader.

I know this is stupid, but how can I post the photo's on this forum?

Now that sounds interesting!

As CostasTT said, when you reply, below the text box that you type your reply in is an option to attach an attachment.
You will have to download the pics to your computer, and when you click on the attachment function, browse to the folder on your computer you have downloaded your pics to.
Bear in mind that they may need to be resized if too large.

As CostasTT said, quite straightforward once you have done it once.

Looking forward to the pics of this "Rooikat prototype with autoloader and 105mm", as well as any of the other interesting vehicles there.

 

[Herman]

The Rooikat armoured car is fitted with a turret that looks somewhat like the turret of the Merkava Mk 1. The commander sits on one side, the gunner on the other and the gun is in beteeen them, in a separate compartment as far as I can tell. The back of the turret is taken up with a large bustle, containing the autoloader and ammuntion, somewhat like the stuation in the French Leclerc MBT.

 

[Herman]

Ok, that worked well. Some more images:

 

[Herman]

The vehicle is fitted with a lot of hydraulic pipes under the mudguards, etc. These are connected to little cilinders, approximately 6cm in diameter, stuck all over: some under the mudguards, some prtruding through the frontal armour and some on the sides of the turret. Very peculiar.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post # 810.
Here is another image of this vehicle. It would have been superior to the Eland 90, imo: better ground clearance, wider and longer (more stable), more powerful diesel engine and generally probably more reliable.

 

[Herman]

I also went to 1 SAI. At the front gate are 2 prototypes of the Ratel. To the right the original "bullet-nosed" vehicle, without a turret, with a driving hatch reminiscent of that of the Eland. To the left of the gate is a later, turreted version with the driver position similar to the production version but with the sides still atypically inward sloping. The bullet-nosed vehicle has no turret and a hand rail is fitted around the turret opening. This vehicle was used as an observation vehicle in the eighties. I remember seeing P.W. Botha cruising around in it during some large army maneuvres, many, many years back.

When I attempted to take photos of the vehicles, the gate guard became agitated and I was invited inside the camp to request permission to photograph the cars. After much strolling about and muttering amongst sergeants and corporals, it was decided that I should speak to the colonel. He was however at lunch and the corporal accompanying me was, understandably, not eager to call him away from is meal. It was suggested that I come back the next day but that was unfortunately not possible as I was returning to Europe. I should mention here that everybody was very helpful and friendly. Inside the camp, I saw a number of interesting Ratel variants as well as the Brazilian Urutu APC trialled during the development of the Ratel.

 

[Herman]

This vehicle was one of the prototypes built and eavluated during the development of the Rooikat. It uses Ratel mechanicals, i.e. solid MAN axles, the Bussing 280hp engine and Renk gearbox. Length approximately 8 meters, estimated weight, with turret, close to 20 tons. The turret is fitted with the 77mm gun from the Comet tank.

 

[Herman]

This development vehicle was based on Eland suspension units and it weighed 15 tons. I opened the engine compartment and it was powered by a Detroit Diesel, two-stroke, 6V53 engine of 215hp. Transmission unknown. Same turret and gun as the previous prototype. I expect the thing was driven rather gingerly during the trials as the Eland was powered by a 4 cilinder petrol unit of about 105hp and the 215hp diesel would probably have destroyed the suspension/drive units in short order if it was pushed.

 

[Herman]

This prototype was based on Saracen running gear. Weight was also about 15 tons, it was also powered by the same V6 Detroit Diesel engine as the Eland-based veihicle and the same 77mm HV gun was fitted as in the first vehoicle.

 

[Herman]

This vehicle is the "Onsbok", I believe. It was evaluated for use as an APC for the SA Army and was based on the Franch M3 APC. It used Eland running gear but was fitted with a more powerful, American, 6-cilinder petrol engine. I had a look inside and the engine had been removed but the lay-out was quite interesting. In the original French car, the engine was situated directly behind the driver, off-set to one side. In the Onsbok, the engine is at the back of the vehicle, in the centre, with seats on either side of the engine. There is a door on each side of the vehicle as well as 2 doors at the back, on either side of the engine compartment. The driver sat on a stainless steel fuel tank, in this prototype. Weight is stated to be 6.2 tons. This is small vehicle. It would have been very crowded and would have suffered from the same poblems as the Eland: relatively poor off-road mobility and an inaility to keep up with the larger SAMIL trucks and other vehicles.

 

[kaiserbill]

Herman, that is a most excellent series of posts.

That Rooikat is extremely interesting, and I was not aware of its existence before your post.
I wonder what time frame this vehicle is from?
I assume it is a later development, and I also wonder if this is the turret, or an extrapolation thereof, that the proposed 120mm Rooikat would have been based on?

Fascinating.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #826.

I had been to the School of Armour museum in November 2012. This variant of the Rooikat came to the museum after that, as did a number of other vehicles. They are therefore still busy with the museum collection. I have some more photo's; will probably post them this evening.

 

[kaiserbill]

Please do post them Herman.
Looking forward to them, as well as your descriptions of opening engine covers/hatches..etc.

I wonder, are there no placards that detail the various vehicles history?
I wonder if there is someone over at the museum who one can talk to in relation to some of the mystery vehicles.
I do understand it is part of a functional military base of course, and so this wouldn't exactly be their primary priority.
Also, as you say, some of those vehicles are recent additions.

 

[Herman]

Here are some more photos of the fascinating Sprinkaan prototype built by the Technical Services of the SA Army as a possible candidate for the Ratel. It uses Magirus Jupiter truck axles, probably from a gun tractor and is powered by a Detroit Diesel 8V71 normally aspirated, two-stroke diesel. The axles are no longer sprung on leave springs but rather coil springs and the axles are located with longitudinal rods, Panhard rods and a kind of A-frame for the second axle. The two steering axles are suspended on 4 coils each, one in front and one behind the axle, on each side. The two rear axles have a single spring per side, each. The driver and co-driver sit at the front, behind the engine an on either side of the gearbox. The turret is behind them and behind the turret are two bench seats down the center of the vehicle where 8 dismounts sit back to back. Doors in either side, next to the turret and two doors at the back which, when opened, allowed a ramp at the bottom to open outwards.

I would really be interested to know who was involved in the design and manufacture of this thing. A lot of thought and ingenuity went into it. It is potentially a very attractive vehicle. Design wise, the major flaw is the use of solid front axles. If you do this in a conventional front-engined vehicle, the engine has to sit high and you either end up with a very high vehicle, like the armoured versions of the SAMIL trucks, or, if the vehicle is lower, like the Sprinkaan, with very poor forward visibility.

 

[Herman]

A cut open, demonstration model of the Saracen.

 

[kaiserbill]

Herman, I was just going to ask if you'd got any other pictures or info on the mystery 8x8 front engined IFV earlier in the thread.

So, this is definitely the Springkaan submission by the Technical Services in the original Ratel project?
If so, then we seem to have managed to identify and bring into the light the various candidates/prototypes for that programme

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #832

It has to be it. I wrote a summary, as I saw it, of the various prototypes that were evaluated in the runup to the Ratel elsewehere in this thread. All the vehicles were known products of established manufacturers such as Panhard, Berliet, Mercedes and Engesa (Brazil). The only "new" vehicles were the Bussing/MAN vehicle originally known as the Buffel, which became the Ratel, and the mysterious "Sprinkaan" entry by the technical services of the Army. As I mentioned earlier, I would really, really like to know who was involved in the design of the vehicle and where it was actually put together. If I think of the technical services of the army, I imagine a bunch of tiffies running around with welding torches, spanners and hammers but that was certainly not the case with this truck. A lot of thought and engineering design and capability went into it.

The greatest pity to my mind is that many of these things are standing around outside, unprotected, many without turrets. They are filled with leaves and muck and generally in a poor state, slowly rotting away. They should all be together, under cover, somewhere. The Military Museum in Pretoria should really have a hangar where the various prototypes can be housed, with plaques identifying them and giving their history. I realise however that this is very unlikely to happen as S.A. is doing poorly economically and the actual interest base in these vehicles is very small (almost all on this forum?!), almost entirely white and to a large extent living outside of S.A.

 

[Herman]

I also have a couple of poor photos of a Russian BMP vehicle inside the large shed at the School of Armour museum. The thing is fitted with an unusual turret which I believe is of South African origin. It seems to be a two-man turret fitted with a Russian 30mm 2A42 cannon (I think) and a three cell lanucher for 3 South African ZT-3 missels on the left side. Next to the vehicle is the same turret fitted on a stand. As in the case of the "hunter-killer" type turret fitted to the Rooikat, described earlier, this thing is also festooned with various optronic devices.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Thats a remote weapons station design from either ATE (now part of Paramount Group) or IST Dynamics (now BAE); I understand the Algerians use it on their upgraded BMPs. My memory on this is shaky but it might have been an IST Dynamics turret but an ATE platform upgrade.

 

[CostasTT]

It's the IST Dynamics Unmanned Multi-Weapon Platform. Tested in Algeria.

 

[kaiserbill]

I think I also see the Vektor/Denel Y3 40mm automatic grenade launcher on that turret, between the 30mm cannon and ATGM's.

 

[CostasTT]

Indeed. The full armament is 30mm main gun, 7.62mm coax, 40mm AGL and 3 ATGMs.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #836.

Thanks for the info. The turrets on display in Bloemfontein are probably early prototypes:no grenade launcher fitted. I did not see a co-ax machine gun either but I admit that I did not examine the thing very carefully. The light was poor and I wanted to get to the Rooikat. Next to this vehicle there was also parked a Polish T72 with a South African fire-control system fitted.

 

[CostasTT]

Reply to post #836.

Thanks for the info. The turrets on display in Bloemfontein are probably early prototypes:no grenade launcher fitted. I did not see a co-ax machine gun either but I admit that I did not examine the thing very carefully. The light was poor and I wanted to get to the Rooikat. Next to this vehicle there was also parked a Polish T72 with a South African fire-control system fitted.

You are welcome.
By the way, the turret mounted on the BMP-1 still has the AGL on. The one on the stand could be a mockup. If you look at this picture carefully, you'll see it.As for the T-72, was it the one pictured below?

 

[curious george]

*off f/book

Out and about during some parade.

 

[xiaofan]

Not long ago found these on http://strangernn.livejournal.com/927099.html

 

[curious george]

Not long ago found these on http://strangernn.livejournal.com/927099.html

Which came from here?

 

[kaiserbill]

Not long ago found these on http://strangernn.livejournal.com/927099.html

Which came from here?

They're Hermans pics from earlier in this thread, post 817 to 819.

Ran it through a translator, and the guy on the blog is just bringing it to the attention of whoever follows his blog.
Additionally, it appears he speculates whether the ammunition bustle/unit at the back might be detachable, as a sort of plug-and-play system that can be replaced with a pre-packed fully bombed up unit.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #841
Nice picture. Still wondering what the little cylindical thingies are portruding from all over. On your photo you can see them at the front of the vehicle, on top of the front of the vehicle, where the gun exits the turret, on the side of the turret, between the first and second wheels, and halfway between the third and fourth wheels? The ones I could see seemed to be connected to hydraulic lines.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Is there any indication of date for the autoloading 105mm Rooikat? I can not find any reference to such a variant anywhere except for these photos.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #846:
Don't have a clue. I've also never seen any reference to it. I was at the museum in November 2012 and it wasn't there then. I expect it is probably something from about 2011. It may be, and this is pure speculation, a turret that was developed for somebody else and only fitted to a Rooikat chassis for testing. Afaik it has been decided that the S.A Rooikats are to stay with their tiny 76mm rifles rather that being upgraded to 105mm. It therefore seems unlikely that the turret was developed for S.A.

As far as the 76mm guns are concerned, it is interesting to note that armored cars and tracked vehicles of the weight of the Rooiat are now almost routinely being fitted with 120mm smooth bore guns. S.A.'s Rooikats are really undergunned. If one should fit the cars with an autoloading 76mm gun however, it becomes a different kettle of fish.

 

[xiaofan]

Reply to post #846:
Don't have a clue. I've also never seen any reference to it. I was at the museum in November 2012 and it wasn't there then. I expect it is probably something from about 2011. It may be, and this is pure speculation, a turret that was developed for somebody else and only fitted to a Rooikat chassis for testing. Afaik it has been decided that the S.A Rooikats are to stay with their tiny 76mm rifles rather that being upgraded to 105mm. It therefore seems unlikely that the turret was developed for S.A.

As far as the 76mm guns are concerned, it is interesting to note that armored cars and tracked vehicles of the weight of the Rooiat are now almost routinely being fitted with 120mm smooth bore guns. S.A.'s Rooikats are really undergunned. If one should fit the cars with an autoloading 76mm gun however, it becomes a different kettle of fish.

Ragarding the 120mm guns, personal think the 120mm gun is little bit too big for the wheeled vehicles.

 

[JFC Fuller]

I was looking for something else today and noticed something potentially mildly interesting. The auto-loading 105mm Rooikat turret is very reminiscent of the turret installed on the Polish Anders light tank/fire support variant. That turret carries a 120mm RUAG gun but the turret was apparently designed in Poland. The basic layout is remarkably similar though.

See here for the Anders turret: http://www.armyrecognition.com/poland_polish_tanks_heavy_armoured_vehicles_uk/anders_120mm_light_tank_expeditionary_technical_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures_video.html

 

[kaiserbill]

I was looking for something else today and noticed something potentially mildly interesting. The auto-loading 105mm Rooikat turret is very reminiscent of the turret installed on the Polish Anders light tank/fire support variant. That turret carries a 120mm RUAG gun but the turret was apparently designed in Poland. The basic layout is remarkably similar though.

See here for the Anders turret: http://www.armyrecognition.com/poland_polish_tanks_heavy_armoured_vehicles_uk/anders_120mm_light_tank_expeditionary_technical_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures_video.html

Interesting.

IMHO, it does show, as you've said earlier, quite a lot of affinity with the Falcon turret as fitted to Jordanian Challenger tanks, which is hardly surprising, seeing as two South African companies, Mechanology Design Bureau, and IST Dynamics, were mainly responsible for that.

 

[Herman]

Reply to post #848:
Regarding the 120mm guns, personal think the 120mm gun is little bit too big for the wheeled vehicles.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. This whole business of putting enormous guns into armoured cars is silly. The only facet where a 120mm will besuperior to a NATO 105mm gun is if the car engages a modern, Western MBT. This is obviously not a role for a lightly armoured, armoured car. In all other aspects the 105 will be superior or equal to the120: the 105 is lighter allowing a lighter vehicle, has less inertia allowing lighter layer and trainer motors and easier stabilizing and the 105 equipped vehicle will carry more ammunition. Furthermore, the 105 Rooikat has no muzzle brake. If you fit a 120 to a vehicle <30 tons, it has to have a muzzle brake, resulting in enormous blast an noise when the piece is discharged.