Welcome Guest. ( logon | register ) | ||||||
|
|
|
| Topic Tools | Message Format |
Author |
| ||
DUTCH Administrator Doppelgänger Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: US, GA, Atlanta Vehicle(s): 2015 Audi Q7 3.0 TDI,2018 Sprinter Posts: 9963 | Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? Accurate or not. Here's the story: Canadians Escape Suicide Blast (Thanks to One of Our Relatively New Nyalas) cnews.canoe.ca ^ | September 27, 2006 | Les Perreaux Posted on 09/27/2006 8:13:27 PM PDT by NorthOf45 Canadians escape suicide blast cnews.canoe.ca By Les Perreaux September 27, 2006 KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP) - With a muffled thump and the flash of a "second sun," Canadian soldiers faced another brush with death Wednesday as a suicide bomber hit their convoy. There were no Canadian casualties but one Afghan civilian was hurt. Such attacks have happened so frequently in Kandahar that local firefighters drove past the blast's aftermath on their way to collect a modest gift of rudimentary firefighting gear at a Canadian camp. The spade shovels and tin buckets were neatly stacked earlier in the day for the hearts-and-minds gift presentation at Camp Nathan Smith, home of the Canadian provincial reconstruction team in Kandahar. The familiar thud of the bomb's detonation sent a plume of black smoke high into the blue sky just a kilometre away. "In a split second there was a combination of a quiet thud, the pressure of the explosion and what seemed like a second sun," said Capt. Adam West, one of four soldiers riding in the Nyala armoured truck. "I can't tell you which I saw or heard or felt first." Since the spring, suicide and roadside bomb attacks have been almost weekly occurrences for Canadian soldiers who sometimes escape with little or no injury. But at least 16 of the 37 Canadian deaths in Afghanistan since 2002 were from bombs, including four who died while on foot patrol earlier this month. This time the suicide bomber drove from an adjacent lane into the side of the Nyala RG-31, which was part of a convoy returning from a supply mission west of Kandahar. Soldiers described the moment when they realized the attack was imminent. Their bodies seemed to prepare for the shock independent of their minds, they said. Their muscles tensed for the jolt. Their ears somehow fended off the noise from the blast. "Your body is ready before you are," said Staff Sgt. Chris Murdy, who has twice been hit in bombings. "It's just 'holy crap, something just blew up!' Afterward, you just get angry." With blown tires, a rumpled front end and a shattered side window, the limping Nyala was driven back to the PRT camp by Cpl. Scott Rhoads of Stratford, Ont. Smoke billowed from several corners of the vehicle. "Thank God everyone is OK," said Maj. Scott Campbell, an Ottawa native and the senior officer on the convoy. "I'm a little shaky, a little happy and confident in the equipment. There's a couple of little bruises here and there, but everyone is good." The Nyala is part of a fleet of million-dollar-plus armoured personnel carriers built to survive mine strikes. The Canadian government rushed the vehicles into service in Afghanistan earlier this year, flying them directly from their South African factory two at a time aboard rented Russian cargo planes. Soldiers have increasing faith in the four-wheeled vehicle that is meant to blow apart but protect its occupants in the event of a mine explosion. Soldiers are less keen to ride in their G-Wagon jeeps - lightly armoured vehicles that have proven deadly in recent bomb attacks. A G-Wagon was right behind the Nyala hit Wednesday. In 2004, soldiers had welcomed the G-Wagon as it replaced the much-maligned Iltis, a vehicle left over from the early 1980s with an optional canvas roof that left soldiers completely exposed. Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor declared earlier this year that the G-Wagon would no longer leave camp, but it has continued to roll on patrols and into combat zones. "This thing is just not safe," declared one soldier who was cautioned against speaking out by a superior. "If it had been hit today, we'd all be dead." Images of vehicles damaged in attacks are usually banned under the embedding agreement with the Canadian Forces that allows The Canadian Press and other news organizations to work in close quarters with soldiers. The army says pictures of bullet-ridden light armoured vehicles or blasted G-Wagons could give insurgents information on the effectiveness of their weapons. This time, however, with the damaged Nyala vehicle still rolling and basically intact, army censors allowed the images to be distributed, saying they offered no helpful information to insurgents. TOPICS: Canada; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Technical; War on Terror KEYWORDS: AFGHANISTAN; CANADA; CANADIANMILITARY; WHEELEDARMOR; WOT Thank God for some of the new kit our guys have there now. I say the Nyalas are relativeley new in that we've had variants in A'stan since pretty much day one. It's only recently though that we purchased a fleet of the RG-31 variant. Here is the link to the article which includes photos: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1709726/posts | ||
#48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
gwagen460swb Extreme Veteran Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Vehicle(s): 280GE SWB, Toyota Highlander, BMW530i, RR HSE Posts: 513 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? For some reason, I thought the Canadian Forces Gs were "specially" armored like the Gs used for foreign dignitaries. Could the Canadians not use some additional plating like the U.S. does for their humvees in Iraq? From reading the article, I guess we should not post anymore pics of damaged or destroyed Gs. We never know if some terrorists might be visiting our site. | ||
#48144 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
G350DT Date registered: Dec 1899 Location: Vehicle(s): | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? I remember reading that they were switching to the more robust Nyala due to the bombs being bigger and stronger. The gwagon was no designed for such blasts and they can say anything bad they want but it has the Hunner beat. If you look at this Nyala it is something totally different in design, shape and it is a tank by god. Glad that they have made the changes as they need fit but the G did its job well. | ||
#48147 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
roughneck Expert Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: UK, Germany & USA Vehicle(s): 270 cdi.300 GD 300 GE.lwb 300 GE.swb. Disco 2 Posts: 4398 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? gwagen460swb - 10/11/2006 1:34 PM From reading the article, I guess we should not post anymore pics of damaged or destroyed Gs. We never know if some terrorists might be visiting our site. Inteligence gathering is like doing a puzzle, the more of the pieces you have the clearer the picture, I have thought a long time that in todays instant media far too much is given away. I was horrified recently to see shots of the inside of UK troops defensive positions in Kahdahar shown on UK TV, 3 days later the position was mortared. Edited by roughneck 10/11/2006 9:36 AM | ||
#48148 - in reply to #48144 | |||
Author |
| ||
douglas dees Member Date registered: Jun 2006 Location: Vehicle(s): 1986 280 GE LWB Posts: 15 | RE: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? I think we have to put the G into perspective in it's role in Afghanistan. It was never intended as a front line fighting vehicle and as the war intensifies, the size of bombs and mines increases . None of the vehicles are bullet proof. The praise heaped up the G wagen for saving pte Paul's life now is being heaped on the Nyala, except with the death of another Canadian in a Nyala, even they are not bomb proof so the government is bringing in the Leopard tank but we all know how vulnerable tanks are. Ask the Hungarians from 1956 how to destroy Russian tanks at close quarters. The Taliban are adapting very quickly to our tactics and weapons and that is why they were successful against the British in 1888, the Russians in the 1980's and now we face the same enemy that hides in Pakistan. Doug Dees 280GE 1986 | ||
#48218 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
Maxwell Smart Date registered: Dec 1899 Location: Vehicle(s): | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? Uh but look what some hummer devotee writes as a comment: Note the none-too-kindly references to the "G-Wagon:" That would be the Mercedes "Gelandewagen," much admired for profiling down safe boulevards in such places as, say, Frankfurt, but fairly useless in combat. Edited by Maxwell Smart 10/11/2006 10:27 PM | ||
#48244 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
Kermit Date registered: Dec 1899 Location: Vehicle(s): | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? And Humvees have good press? Look at this: http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2005/050810-humvees.htm As Doug says above, it's just a game of catch-up: the tougher your vehicle, the bigger they make their bombs. The South Africans are probably world leaders in mineproof vehicles, thanks to their decades of experience as well as the arms embargoes of the apartheid days where they had to make their own. The Nyala is a descendant of the Buffels and Casspirs that South Africa started building in the 70s. There's no way you can compare a 7-ton Nyala to a G or a Humvee. You just have to accept that the world - and warfare - has changed. A friend of mine who drove Buffels on landmine clearing runs on the Namibia/Angola border in the early 80s says that though they could withstand one mine blast, the enemy started burying two, or even four mines together. They lost a few this way. This is a Buffel: http://www.thebestlinks.com/Buffel.html This is a Casspir: http://www.thebestlinks.com/Casspir.html | ||
#48255 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
elevatorbernie Expert Date registered: Aug 2006 Location: Vancouver B.C. Canada Vehicle(s): 1989 280GE Posts: 1347 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? Warning to any taliban gathering inteligence from this form...these are coming to f..k you good! (tanksleaveedmonton24 (Small).jpg) Attachments ---------------- tanksleaveedmonton24 (Small).jpg (40KB - 9 downloads) | ||
#48259 - in reply to #48244 | |||
Author |
| ||
elevatorbernie Expert Date registered: Aug 2006 Location: Vancouver B.C. Canada Vehicle(s): 1989 280GE Posts: 1347 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? This is what the Gwagen replaced it's called a Iltis; I call it a piece of s..t The G is a tank compared to the iltis. (Iltis (Small).jpg) Attachments ---------------- Iltis (Small).jpg (31KB - 9 downloads) | ||
#48263 - in reply to #48259 | |||
Author |
| ||
AlanMcR Expert Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: US, CA, Los Altos Vehicle(s): G300DT E300DT 230SL Posts: 3500 | In the end, it's hard to have a lot of hope for our species. | ||
#48358 - in reply to #48255 | |||
Author |
| ||
gjvander Regular Date registered: Jul 2006 Location: Cincinnati, OH Vehicle(s): 2000 G500 Posts: 65 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? Interesting fact about the Buffel is that it based on the Unimog chassis. I have looked at it long and hard, and to me it appears to be similar chassis as U1300 series. The Casspir does not have portal axels, so based on something else. Regards, Geo | ||
#48472 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
roughneck Expert Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: UK, Germany & USA Vehicle(s): 270 cdi.300 GD 300 GE.lwb 300 GE.swb. Disco 2 Posts: 4398 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? A suicide bomber needs to be lucky once, our guys need to be lucky all of the time. | ||
#48546 - in reply to #48472 | |||
Author |
| ||
Braingears Expert Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: St Petersburg, FL Vehicle(s): G320 & ML320 Posts: 1450 | RE: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? douglas dees - 10/11/2006 7:54 PM I think we have to put the G into perspective in it's role in Afghanistan. It was never intended as a front line fighting vehicle and as the war intensifies, the size of bombs and mines increases . These two vehicles were truly designed for two different purposes. The G-Wagon was never designed to be a fully armored troop carier. The cost of these two vehicles are quite a bit different too. | ||
#48585 - in reply to #48218 | |||
Author |
| ||
Luky Elite Veteran Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: Bratislava, Slovakia, EU Vehicle(s): 300GE LWB auto, E320CDI 4M, VW Polo Classic 1.6 Posts: 1062 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? We had also a problem with Gs, our army has in Iraq last week. In the first months our troops had UAZs in Iraq, but as this is not a standart NATO vehicle, they had problems to obtain parts. So our Department of Defense decided to buy Gs for them(it is also interesting, they bought them from a company owned by two former high-rank officer for 160k euro for a piece) , but between the order and delivery two our soldiers were killed in a mortar attack. So the army decided to get those Gs armored before they were sent to Iraq. This was done by a company here in Bratislava, but the problem is this company did not modify the axles. Now the soldiers have armored Gs, but most of the time they can not use them because they have problems with axles, springs and shocks. This was discused in all the newspapers, and there was also a question, why they did not buy Slovak armored vehicles like the Tatrapan or Aligator. Somebody answered, that the G and those vehicles have different purpose. The G is used in mainly for operations where the troops do not need a much of attention, like VIP transport or actions of the MP, and Tatrapan/Aligator are fighting vehicle. Edited by Luky 10/13/2006 10:04 AM | ||
#48597 - in reply to #48141 | |||
Author |
| ||
roughneck Expert Date registered: Apr 2006 Location: UK, Germany & USA Vehicle(s): 270 cdi.300 GD 300 GE.lwb 300 GE.swb. Disco 2 Posts: 4398 | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? In my opinion, the G Wagon is a very capable SUV that can be fitted with some blast proof panels, small arms proof glass and light armour panels it can also be specified with uprated axles suspension and mine resistant run flat tyre systems on 2 piece rims. However, I have a Daimler Chrysler Sales Brochure titled, G-Wagon Armoured Vehicles, The specification states that the protection available is to 2 standards. B6 or B7. B6 in van type can carry up to 8 person payload =800kg B7 in van type can carry up to 4 person payload = 400kg This suggests that the B7 is more heavily armoured, as you would expect. both meet, Class 1acc.STANAG4569 for protection against hand guns, fire arms, other light arms and explosive charges of defined size. Quote " In addition to the vehicles which are completely armoured ex factory built and include double skin floors as extra shatter protection and specially reinforced chassis components, an after market kit is offered to enable current owners to armour their G Wagons in a matter of hours. Conclusion: the G is marketed by Mercedes as an armoured personell carrier. | ||
#48614 - in reply to #48597 | |||
Author |
| ||
BenzDieselTuner Date registered: Dec 1899 Location: Vehicle(s): | Re: Canadian Military Losing Confidence in the G ? LONG LIVE THE G !!!! | ||
#48794 - in reply to #48141 | |||
« View previous thread :: View next thread » |
|
|