Designed by Supacat, the HMT product is manufactured under licence from Lockheed Martin.Wow.
Lockheed Martin bears watching...not only their US operations but also European holdings. It really makes sense though. The hole in their defense portfolio is in ground vehicles, the next logical move for LM is to buy up a small to medium company. I'm still betting Oshkosh but time will tell.
Supercat is a UK based firm specialized in this type off-road vehicle. It has nothing to do with Lockheed. The design is British origin.
ReplyDeleteGO TO THE WEBSITE BUDDY. I never said the vehicle was designed by Lockheed...the site itself says that its manufactured by lockheed. geez. i mean seriously? are you really this dim?
DeleteActually you are the dim one, the site says it is manufactured by Supacat but the design is LICENSED from Lockheed Martin, not made by them. Also Lockheed did not even design it, the original designer was HMT Vehicles Ltd which was itself acquired by Lockheed in 2006.
DeleteMy understanding was its a Supacat design, and they produce in small numbers, but large orders are built by lockheed.
ReplyDeleteI havent been able to pin down if lockheed has a licence to make and sell them, or is paid to produce them.
Its even more complicated when I point out Lockheed bought HMT from, Supacat.....
that dumbass came here looking for a fight. he didn't even read what was written he just glanced at the headline and off he went. i don't know what part LM plays in the manufacturing of this vehicle but it is a building block for them to get their ground portfolio together and if shit for brains doesn't see that then he needs to pound sand.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Deleteah you mad????? lol!
DeleteOK. Are these things delivering meals on wheels or in a war?
ReplyDeleteIn a shit storm every body is dead.
In what scenario do they think the tinky winky panzer is living?
Are they planning on scalar protection for the chariots?
WTF is going on?
i'm not sure. what i do know is that the entire special ops community is in love with the gun truck concept and i don't get it. you just gave me an idea for a blog post!
DeleteWhat is the advantage of putting the driver way in front over the wheels and the engine behind? Seems like they are putting the engine in a more protected spot then the crew. It does not seem to shorten the vehicle which is a reason why some vehicles put the driver over the front wheels but the Wildcat does not seem to be any shorter then a conventional truck with the engine over the front wheels and the driver behind.
ReplyDeleteIt looks cool but what is the advantage?
Anything to do with Supacat, especially the HMT/Jackal family, always seems very complex.
ReplyDeleteThe origins of the vehicle were in a requirement for a replacement for the SAS ‘Pink Panther’ Land Rovers in 1982. After that requirement failed to progress am urgent operation requirement (UOR) was issued in 1999 which resulted in Supacat winning with the HMT.
The MoD took over some of the intellectual property rights and negotiated with Devonport Management Limited (DML) to manufacture the vehicles.
INSYS (formerly Hunting Engineering) used the HMT in the subsequently cancelled Soothsayer ECM project. When INSYS were acquired by Lockheed Martin UK in 2005 they recognised that the Supacat/HMT as used in Soothsayer was a decent bit of kit and bought HMT Vehicles Ltd (the funders of the design and development work) after a period of licensing the design.
So DML were producing the MV under licence from Lockheed Martin, who now own the company (HMT Ltd) that originally funded the design and used to own and intellectual property
I think Supacat have since continued to develop the design but I suppose will still be paying licence fees to LM.
The basic HMT design was subsequently used as a base for a number of other projects including the US Marine Corps Lightweight Prime Mover (LWPM) and US Army Future Tactical Truck System (FTTS)
Sol, you would know better than me but did the LWPM ever enter service with the USMC?
The vehicle majors on mobility, accepting that protection is a lesser priority. Not right, not wrong, just a set of deliberate design choices dictated by user requirements.
Their mobility is said to be truly exceptional
Couple things:
ReplyDelete-- Supacat's website indicates this is the "Extenda" which offers quick and easy conversions from 4x4 to 6x6 configurations, which enhances commonality with the 4x4s already in service
-- there is a conscious design choice to trade off armor for visibility but it is not completely unarmored. The Jankel armor kit is built into the vehicle rather than as an external shell so it is not obvious but there is a good illustration of it on supacat's site for the 4x4 version here: http://www.supacat.com/products/defence/hmt/hmt-400/ I'm not saying the armor level choice is right or wrong, just that it is a hardened vehicle.
-- don't know about the Jackal in particular but mid engine designs typically have benefits, based on better weight distribution, in braking, acceleration and smoother ride. The ability of the driver to see exactly where's he's going has to be an advantage in rough or tight terrain as well.
-- again you can argue about the concept, but anyone buying these now has access to a lot of A-stan combat experience with them. It's not like these have never been shot at.
Size-wise, it is a replacement for the current unimog 'motherships'.
ReplyDeleteAn impressive post, I just gave this to a colleague who is doing a little analysis on this topic. And he is very happy and thanking me for finding it. But all thanks to you for writing in such simple words. Big thumb up for this blog post!land rover australia
ReplyDelete