Saw on the road a trailer carrying few Ford SUVs in MID colours. I guess these are the replacement for our land rovers. How well are these commercial vehicles rated compared to the land rovers. Just imagine sometimes even rovers got stuck in mud or can't go up slopes. Is there no other replacements available in the market other than these SUVs?

Good point, agree with your concerns

I blogged about this issue in 2006
http://opsw.blogspot.com/2006/01/replacing...over-hmmwv.html

maybe its time to revisit the military market to see what other options are available...

besides what i mentioned in the blog post, some additional vehicles to consider are the Pinzgauer or the G-Wagen.

today in straits times....870 Thai-made Ford Everest SUV (option for 500 more) to replace Land Rover....

looks to have some add-ons
-roof rack
-bull-bar
-tow hook
-bracket for antenna
-snorkel

I was half expecting something based on F550 chassis, but I guess an armoured urban replacement is too much to hope for ....

IF these ford rovers get stuck in the mud, or can't go up slope, the old and dying Defender will also suffer the same fate.

I'll bet the interior will be junked by a year's time. Look at how the LR's are used right now, it's not a surprise.

Then again, personnel in the Ford will have a much comfy ride.

Read some articles before that New Zealand army replaced the Landrovers with Holden Rodeo 4 wheel drive vehicles for light transportation & Pinzgauer High Mobility All-terrain Vehicle for rugged environment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PinzLRear02.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinzgauer_Hig...Terrain_Vehicle

http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/n...1222_01_n.shtml

I seriously question the feasibility of using civilian technology for military purposes. I mean this vehicle may not even survive the daily usage during peace time. Firstly, when conducting IPPT, or PT, the transport is used to ferry Lobos, jerry cans, water dispenser, medic, stretcher, MOP. Is there seriously enough space for these stores? Secondly is the signal set issue, vehicular signal sets are large and require outlets for the atennas to jut out, does this vehicle allow such provisions. This vehicle is ok to ferry staffs, or observers during military ex, but I doubt it can tahan prolong abuse and driving.

I agree with Alpha84. The stuff that the LR carries daily, and the rough usage that it goes through..

I can't see how long this SUV can last. IMHO, they should have replaced the LR with another similar type of vehicle that has a military specification, especially one that has a rear entry system like the LR that is durable and can withstand years of heavy duty usage.

I think the Series 70 Land Cruisers are much better.

Yeah, the Toyota Series 70 Land Cruiser is one of my favourite vehicles too! It's very capable and tough as nails! I spent a week running around in the bush in with a Series 70, and my guide really loved the vehicle. He had been driving Rovers previously and he was saying that the Toyota was actually more reliable and comfortable than the Rover. We also came across another 15 year-old (!) Series 70 that was still going strong (just a few more dents some paintless patches, and the doors closed... sort of) and rattling along. The Series 70 would have been my pick as well, but apparently they are not cheap (so i was told) and I also don't recall many militaries using them. Anyone can prove me wrong?

I admit, the wheels look like they'd lose traction easily compared to the old land rover. Perhaps they'd have different sets of wheels for off road use.

hopefully this ford SUV will be used for more "civilised" missions, while the real missions will be fulfilled by another vehicle...how about the Panhard PVP?

I feel that Mindef don't forsee an conflicts in the near future. Its more of anti terrorist nowadays. More to PDF type of everyday mission....... HEAVILY ARMED SECURITY GUARDs......... Dun think these vehicles will last.......

Imagine its ver comical to see these SUVs going to exercise with our 5 tonners, Broncos, Bionixs and especially the LEOs. They miss the SUVs and go over them...... :ph43r:

Ok. I guess I will prove myself wrong :P Ah well. Nothing to see here, back to the topic pls. Do-be-do... :rolleyes:

Did any blokes high up consider the ST light armoured vehicles? That vehicle machiam like pickup, they can modify the rear with a canvas sheet to become a somewad like rover vehicles. At least that vehicle looks more rugged, larger wheels and best of all, it is made in SG.

I'm still not believing my eyes. Gah.

Imagine the Ford going through Area D.

Japan is using this vehicle in the Rapid Deployment Force...for example in Iraq

I am wondering if they have added light armour to the Ford during the manufacturing process. Well we must have at least some form of protection against small arms fire. :D

Good old faithful landrovers....

This may also signify a trend to separate soft skin ultility transport, and urban armoured patrol vehicles - we may see some dedicated light armour in time to come, mebbe wheeled? ;)

On the other hand, the uparmoured 5-tonners beggars belief.... <_<
This could also mean the day SAF volunteers for PK missions etc, it'll be a cold day in hell ... coz the SUVs and 5Tnrs are RPG magnets :blink:

Save for within safe zones and within FOBs,I don't think we will be using SUVs and 5-tonners in PK missions within mission areas.. maybe we'll have the wheeled IFV then.

Ford dun provide armouring service. Looks like SAF may need to DIY with ST. Ford SUVs/4X4s dun have reliability like Landrovers or Toyota

thats true, but Fords are great as low-cost technicals

Logic forbid that , thats what SAF is looking at ... the days of 106s and MGs mounted on softskins are over ...

:angry: indeed they are.

For once, I think the SAF stuffed up in terms of procurement wisdom.

It is good news if there is any form of up-armouring to the Fords but the vehicle may not be able to take the additional weight as the vehicle is not designed to have a heavier frame in the first place.

i hope the SUV is to replace the GP car...

get the HUMVEE to replace the rover...

Nowaday, it all comes back to cost. well, money talks......... Buy bicycles better, at least its proven!!!!!!

Well...HUMVEE is too wide for SG roads. Also it consumes fuel like nothing biz.

Actually how difficult is it for ST to come out with a version based on the LSV chassis design? It's adapted for the fire dept already. Wonder why no CD version yet. Lengthen the frame abit, upsize the engine. Box it up with armor. Zheng it up with weapons....SG very own jeep. =P But then no economy of scale. not worth it.

I think the way to go is to source for some hybrid vehicles. Runs both diesel and electric. When near area of operations, or crossing dangerous areas, switch over to electric. Totally silent run. Saves fuel cost too. But not so sure abt maintainability, as it is more complex. And if it can take the wear and tear.

But IMHO, I agree with Lazerlordz & Alpha84. This SUV interior simply cannot take the normal abuse we gonna throw at it. Seen a few up close during ICT. There are provisions for the vehicle radio set. But I definately won't like to mount and unmount the set.

Imagine having to transport ammo, GPMGs, barang-barang for CP and all that stuff. Leaking jerry cans of POL and water..

Radio would be the least of our worries.

Furthermore, I think our mini-buses need replacement much more urgently, because those vehicles keep the SAF running daily on an admin basis too.

If they had purchased 200 Pajeros/Landcruisers instead of 800, and used them as GP car and mini-bus replacements that can double up as off-road admin vehicles and unit commanders' personal vehicles outfield (replacing the Mercedes GD 290 jeep), that might seem much more prudent.

From Stomp.

I think its a bad choice, and this cannot be true. I just cannot see a Ford SUV coming off a fast craft in ship to shore ops.

I think Land Rovers will continue to operate.

I just hope that this SUV is used as a back echelon ultility vehicle and not for tactical work
Its true that the Rover role in today's military has also been severely curtailed by IEDS and RFGs, but this SUV will fare no better; other than a better ride for the COs and high rankers.
The entire replacement program is probably based on cost savings alone and someone looking for more comfy wheels... otherwise little to no military value

My unit will be slated to get those New SUV's as our rover replacements.
Incase you are wondering, we already of some Korean made SUV's (Ssangyong?)
So yes those are our rover replacements.
And Selarang camp has been using Ford SUV's as medic veh for quite awhile liao.
Then again my unit doesnt exactly go out field so i wont know how it's performs out there lol.

If ST can leverage on the rumoured Terrex program and develop a generic electric hub motor technology(including brakes etc)......then it will be really something. They will be well positioned to ride a sizeable amount of the next wave, IMHO.

Well, if your LRs are used as admin vehicles, like some units do. That's okay.

those are long overdue for replacement, as well as those white non-tact logistics vehicles

Good points for purchase of the Ford SUVs are

1) Cheaper 4X4 with more current electronic and engine package
(Thai baht payment eh.... cheapo what)

2) Ease in getting vechicle to bend with civil ones. (only need to repaint)

3) Unmanned concept is easier but ........then again same can be said to other vechicles which are not choosen.



Ssayong SUVs are using American GM engines which is not fuel encomonical.

I wonder if up armouring the Fords is cost effective as it also means the beefing up of the suspension and chassis too. If the whole cost of the Ford + up armouring programme results in S$XXX,XXX spent per SUV, some "group of people" should be kicked in the pants for this purchase.

hoimng, you forgot a very impt point - SUV comes with a/c :P