 |
With a gross weight of only 5,3 tonnes, the MUNGO can transport up to ten fully equipped soldiers. The MUNGO is the ideal solution for deploying air-transportable forces in crisis situations. The vehicle can be both disarmed for loading on a CH53 or CH47 transport helicopter as well as re-armed for deployment in only five minutes. In the transport airplanes of the type C130 and A400M two or even three MUNGO vehicles can be transported together with their crew. Furthermore, the MUNGO is air-transportable as external cargo by helicopter.
Performance characteristics of the MUNGO Group vehicle
- Transportable as an internal load / external load on board the CH 53 and CH 47 helicopters
- 3 vehicles simultaneously transportable in a C130, C160 and A400M
- Protection against ballistic threats and mines
- Battle proven in multitudinous missions of the Bundeswehr, such as in Afghanistan or the Congo
|
Quick.
Off the top of your head. Name the vehicles on the market today that meet the Army requirements for an Ultra Light Combat Vehicle (
read about the ULCV program here).
The British Warthog in its former form could fill the bill, but they've armored that puppy up to such a degree that I don't think it can be airlifted by a UH-60.
So if the Army is serious then they are looking at a competition of one. Only the combat proven Mungo meets the specs. Ain't that a kick in the pants.
Just look up German wikipedia and translate the part "Mängel" (deficiencies).
ReplyDeletehttp://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESK_Mungo
The Mungo is a piece of crap and Germany won't order more.
The British Warthog is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BvS_10
the big brother of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandvagn_206
A splitted Bandvagn 206 could be transported by an UH-60. The BvS_10 is to heavy.
I would recommend some additional Wiesel 1 for firepower.
2 (TWO) Wiesel 1 fit in one CH-53.
Wiesel 2 is to heavy for UH-60.
According to already existing vehicles, I expect the ULCV program to fail and just produce some nice CGIs. Just like GCV did. Skip the UH-60 requirnment and buy the BvS 10.
For airborne troops the Mungo might still have some value (thats why over 400 Mungos are in use with the Bundeswehr.
DeleteHowever there are indeed some chassis problems. I would not recommend it therefore for the ULCV (And it would probably fail during tests ;)
the concept itself points to this being the only vehicle that meets specs. if you're going to make it internally carriable by CH-47 then you're not going to have great off road mobility. the Germans forgot that and if the US Army does then they'll find that they have another vehicle program headed nowhere.
DeleteThe Mungo ESK was missused in Afghanistan.
DeleteThe Mungo was the only available amoured vehicle for German Army at the early stages in Afghanitan. To seize an airfield this car is OK. It was never thought to drive for years through the desert. The Wolf is not armoured and ATF Dingo was introduced much later.
The UH60 requirement reminds me of our FRES-must-be-C130-transportable cock up. Aircraft have enough trouble carrying themselves mostly, especially small aircraft like UH60.
ReplyDeleteULCV requirement for for 9 man infanty squad +Internally transportable by CH-47 Chinook helicopter in combat configuration under high/hot conditions does sound a loot like they are looking at Mungo class vehicle.
ReplyDeleteInternal carry limits vehicles to low profile Mungo uses small wheels and folding top to fit into the CH53.Mungo is a specialist vehicle for cases where you need to insert an mechanized airborne force Mungos would be utilized along with the Wiesel 1
Small wheels are bad for off road so Mungo is quite limited, but sure as hell beats walking with full gear.
New version has larger wheels and more armor.
http://www.kmweg.com/home/wheeled-vehicles/mungo/mungo-large-capacity-vehicle/product-information.html
Can this be airdropped without getting smashed up? I know Wiesels can't be airdropped but am not sure about this. Even so, it is a ton to heavy to be airlifted by blackhawks.
ReplyDeleteA better alternative would be a modified Ripsaw(or its lighter amphibious brother the Riptide) by Howe & Howe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripsaw_%28vehicle%29
http://singularityhub.com/2012/01/19/ripsaw-and-riptide-%E2%80%93-high-speed-tanks-rampage-across-land-and-water/
http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/01/riptide-amphibious-light-tank.html
http://tp-speed.blogspot.com/2013/05/riptide-amphibious-light-tank.html#.UypitoVRSDo
German Army is rather inexperienced with airdrop and lack of suitable equipment. After two failed attempts further tests were stopped. There was another problem. To get the crew save and quick to the vehicle. The crews are special paratroopers. No problem there. Exercises showed that it was far more effective to use CH-53 with manned Wiesels ready to drive off.
DeleteAn empty Mungo ESK weights 3.4 t but an empty Mungo LCV 5 t.