• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Titan and Trojan PutThrough Their Paces

tomahawk6

Army.ca Legend
Inactive
Reaction score
64
Points
530
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/TitanAndTrojanHelpEngineersCrossTheCanadianPrairie.htm

GenerateThumbnail.aspx


Titan and Trojan, the latest armoured vehicles to join the ranks of the Royal Engineers, have really been put through their paces during their first deployment in the Canadian Prairie.

Exercise Medicine Man saw the brand new vehicles deployed to Canada with the 1st Battalion the Duke of Lancaster's Regiment. The huge extremes of weather, going from bright sun to snow in the space of a day, and the pace of the exercise stretched both the vehicles and their crew.

The state-of-the-art battlefield engineering vehicles can overcome almost every obstacle on the modern battlefield – from crossing gaping chasms to breaching minefields.

The two vehicles, affectionately known by their crews as T2, both weigh over 60 tonnes and can travel up to speeds of up 56km. They are the most capable engineering vehicles that the British Army has ever operated.

Major Pete Quaite, Officer Commanding 73 Armoured Engineer Squadron, said:

"The vehicles are so reliable and more than live up to their reputation."

The Trojan can plough through minefields, build trenches and defensive ditches while Titan, as the fastest bridge-layer in the world, can lay a bridge over a 26 metre gap in two minutes, giving operational commanders a potentially battle winning edge.

The speed of the two vehicles also allows them to keep pace with the Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank and perhaps, most importantly, they also allow their Royal Engineer crews to operate under well armoured protection, utilising high technology devices such as thermal imagery cameras and night vision to do their job under cover no matter what the conditions.

Trojan, first and foremost a minefield breaching capability, can prepare and mark safe routes using an Obstacle Marking System. It can breach complex obstacles and provide short dry and wet gap crossing utilising its excavator arm and huge articulated shovel to deploy fascines, which are basically a collection of pipes chained together that can be placed over a ditch enabling the vehicle to cross.

One of the crews operating Trojan during the Canadian deployment, Corporal Ned Kelly, Lance Corporal John Gardner and Lance Corporal Paul Pepper were impressed:

"The power and speed of the vehicle is amazing – it's a really versatile vehicle and gives us so many more options on the battlefield."

Titan, as the Royal Engineers new bridge layer, will carry and lay the current range of In-Service Close Support bridges, laying them faster, and in a wider variety of terrain conditions, than previous equipment.

Titan crew, Corporal Andrew Jones, Lance Corporal Scouse Owens and Sapper Daz Bartlett, were equally enthusiastic about their new vehicle, saying:

"It's a big improvement and much more reliable than Chieftain and the enhanced protection is fantastic."

 
Terrier, Trohjan and Titan
looks like a hell of a leap forward for Armoured engineer capabilities.... WOW!

http://jdw.janes.com/public/adlink/ads/1185554.pdf
 
Interesting that the Titan still uses an scissors bridge system.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
by the look of things, the scisor bridge is only one of the products that the titan is able to manipulate.

The modular support bridge appears to be quite interesting.
 
We should get the TERRIER for the CER's for a breaching vehicle. And get the AEV 3 to follow the Leo 2's around. This way it will not be that much money for the Terrier say 4 per CER.

CHIMO
 
My feeling is that, no mater how compelling the vehicle coming out of the UK, the 1st and only big strike against it is that they are not Leo2 based....

Could be wrong, wish I was wrong, but......
 
Yes I know that they are not Leo's but it was the Terrier that i said we could use. The veh doesn't need to be leo chassie. We could use the Terrier for a breaching veh and it might be cheaper then the AEV 3. We need a veh to do engineer tasks and since someone in the ivory tower said that will will put all the AEV's in the west leaving the rest of the CER's and ESR without that capability. We still have the same obstacles on exercise but now now real way of breaching them. If you are going to have an army equip them to do the job.


CHIMO
 
FEEOP042 said:
........... If you are going to have an army equip them to do the job.

Those are the most important words of this whole discussion.  Ones that should be addressed by the Highest Echelons of Government.  As members of the CF, we are often forgotten and left to act like 'beggars' everytime we need to deploy on Exercise, Tour or in time of 'Emergency'.  Too many in high places have no idea of what is necessary for us to do our jobs, and really don't care.  Time to get rid of "Ticket Punchers".
 
FEEOP042 said:
Yes I know that they are not Leo's but it was the Terrier that i said we could use. The veh doesn't need to be leo chassie. We could use the Terrier for a breaching veh and it might be cheaper then the AEV 3. We need a veh to do engineer tasks and since someone in the ivory tower said that will will put all the AEV's in the west leaving the rest of the CER's and ESR without that capability. We still have the same obstacles on exercise but now now real way of breaching them. If you are going to have an army equip them to do the job.


CHIMO

Don´t forget the other cost´s around it. It isn´t just the cost of the vehicle. See it from an more logistical point of view. With the Terrier you would add an completely incompatible vehicle to your logistical chain. You could ask the producer to change it to use Leo2 part instead of Chally part´s, but that would probably rise the cost of the vehicle drastic. (Especially if that variant is only bought in small quantity´s, as it is likely for you.) In the end it would probably cheaper to procure more used Leo2´s and to rebuild them in the way you want them.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
+1 ironduke57

Considering the workshops strip down APCs, LAVs, Leos, and pert much anything else you might have in mind, to build a Terrier"ish" vehicle is not a bad idea.

Also, the Kodiak (Leo2 AEV) is a decent piece of kit by all accounts.
 
ironduke57 said:
Don't forget the other cost's around it. It isn't just the cost of the vehicle. See it from an more logistical point of view. With the Terrier you would add an completely incompatible vehicle to your logistical chain. You could ask the producer to change it to use Leo2 part instead of Chally part´s, but that would probably rise the cost of the vehicle drastic. (Especially if that variant is only bought in small quantity´s, as it is likely for you.) In the end it would probably cheaper to procure more used Leo2´s and to rebuild them in the way you want them.

Regards,
ironduke57

ironduke57

The Engineers require different veh's to get the job done. And the answer is not a Swiss army knife veh like the MPEV which is a mistake.

So you tell me that all the different trucks the army buys is right. Like if they just buy the MAN trucks series and we could have all the same parts from one manufacture. To 5 to 16 ton veh with all the required variants PLS/Tractor/cargo. We have the MLVW/HLVW/SHLVW/now the new AHSVS(DaimlerChrysler (Mercedes-Benz)  Actros 4100 series)/HESV. We also don't have enough trailers for the engineers to use with the HLVW and the HESV to carry all the PLS pallets to move are resours es. We are buying trucks to patch this need and that need in stead of getting a new more smart thinking fleet of trucks on the lines of one part system. You don't need to sell me on that idea. We buy excavators from a company that went out of business. Buy new dozers from one company ie Caterpiller. Well I will stop for now I can go on and on about this.

CHIMO

 
I just stated that pointing a finger on something an say "I want this!" doesn´t work. You have to look at the larger picture. "We" had to learn it the hard way that streamlining your vehicle fleet is never an error.

IMHO we have atm the same problem´s with having to much different wheeled armored vehicles with overlapping capabilities.(Dingo, Dingo2, Yak, Boxer, Fuchs, and probably some other which I forgot atm.)
And it isn´t enough money there to replace all old stuff with the new one. For example instead of replacing the Fuchs (and our M-113, too) with Boxer as it was originally planned they will coexist for who knows how long. Now we not only have to have spare part´s for the Fuchs no we must also have now spare part´s for the Boxer as well. Or our new shiny Puma. As far as my latest information go we will only buy some 4-5 hundred which will mainly used for international mission´s. Our home force will have to used the Marder for an undefined time. If they are lucky it will be upgraded with an new AT missile when it is decide which one will replace our Milan and HOT missiles. Nah I better stop and go to bed now.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
Heh.... the grass is greener on the other side???
usually - NOT!
 
    I was talking to the big wigs over in Afgn. around 2 month's ago about the 100 new leo's, there's going to be new AEV's coming with
them, they didn't know the # yet, but it's a start. We don't need to be getting Titan's and Trojan's that's all we need, it will be like the wheeled fleet  a whole hockey sock full of a mess, and no parts.
    The MPEV's what a waste of good money !
 
WRT the MPEV.... as some people have said, it's seemed to be a good idea at the time
 
Here is the Leopard 2 equivalent of Trojan, known as Kodiak, just adopted by the Swiss. It would be good if some of Canada's Leopard 2 chassis could be converted to a similar standard. Surely some could also be made into bridgelayers (equivalent to Titan). I know there is a Leo2 AVLB used by the Germans and Dutch.

http://www.defense-update.com/newscast/0107/news/090107_kodiak.htm

Britain's third new engineer vehicle, Terrier, is not based on the CR2 chassis. It is a much smaller, tracked, airmobile vehicle:

http://www.armedforces.co.uk/army/listings/l0109.html

Pdf file on Terrier, Trojan and Titan:

http://jdw.janes.com/public/adlink/ads/1185554.pdf


 
I came across some videos!  ;D


The first one is of the Trojan AEV. How does this compare with the Badger as far as power?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8F98iwLQ8U


Here is a video showing the Titan and Trojan....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9Z-YQuYFF8


Here is a video with some guy Wes having a problem with the Titan.. ::)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI58aS3PLgo


And here is the Kodiak on a Leo 2 chassis....
How does the Trojan compare with the Kodiak?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWDZHDbmMXg

 
We need Kodak's.I had one with me in the breach team,and without him we would have taken a lot longer to get around.I brag that I have overseen/directed a 20km road put in an afternoon....in your face fosters :) ;D

Having that thing attacked to tanks was excellent.
 
Watched the Vid's.
The one thing I did notice all the vehicle's were boxy,meaning crew protection.

Was impressed with the Kodiak's ripper on the dozer blade and it's ability to back blade.

As somebody stated " Why Scissors Bridge?" I operated the old Yank M64 Scissors Bridge a few times many moon's ago  it was multi tasking to the limit,both hand's working and the Mk.I. Eye Ball all at once.
I imagine that all is computerised now?Lets hope so.

But the proof in the pudding is to ask those who operate them and give us the pro.'s and con.'s
 
Back
Top