5 ms·
The most bizarre thing in the article for me (as a total layman) is that linked Jackal vehicle[1]... It's an armored vehicle which does not protect the... crew?
by loxs 5y ago
The most bizarre thing in the article for me (as a total layman) is that linked Jackal vehicle[1]... It's an armored vehicle which does not protect the... crew???
Why is it armored at all? Why are they not just using a Toyota Hilux instead of this 7 tonne monster?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal_(vehicle)
- pjc50 5y agoIt is basically a big technical, isn't it? It appears to be the replacement for the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snatch_Land_Rover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snatch_Land_Rover , which got its name from the use by military units grabbing civilians off the street in Northern Ireland.
- loxs 5y agoYeah, but I don't get the concept at all... why use this kind of vehicle, why develop it at all? What is the benefit of having the crew so exposed and how is it a good idea at all?
- chrisseaton 5y ago> Our Jackal vehicles are lightly armoured so that we can see more and use our weapons more freely. Armour is a trade-off. More armour means less manoeuvrability and less ability to fight. You could completely encase yourself in a foot of steel if you wanted and just sit there on the battlefield, but you wouldn't be able to achieve anything.
- evancox100 5y agoYour comment is not really worth responding to, since the article you linked addresses all your points/questions, but the armor is on the bottom to protect the crew from IEDs.