As I wrote before the very intrinsic qualities of the Bv206 undermine the efforts to greatly increase the protection against IEDs and mines. It was designed to provide unrivaled mobility in the most difficult terrain (swamps, snowclad slopes and so on). I like to refer to it as chamois on stamina.Adrian and Chino, thanks for the pixs.
I understand that ST Kinetics sent two Bronco hulls to the UK for the UK squids to blow them up to their heart's delight (to test their resistance to IEDs).
With the size of the IEDs being found in Afghanistan (and that the IEDs used seem to be growing bigger over time), I'm a little worried about survivability for the Warthog. I understand that the Warthog variant produced for the UK is even heavier than the version of the Bronco (which stands at 18 tons) inducted into the SAF. When asked just how much heavier by the local press? The ST Kinetics spokesman refused to comment. Anyway, the growing size and power of IEDs and mines are such a concern that the SAF has inducted a 30 ton class Counter-Mine Vehicle (CMV) called the Trailblazer, which uses a mine flail system.
The Bronco was the logical consequence, as you simply need a very strong chassis to carry a heavy cell designed with IEDs in mind to provide very high levels of protection. If the Bronco was constructed in such a way than it could be magnitudes safer than the Bv206.
Last edited by a moderator: