14.1 |
Military equipment (post-conflict)
163.
To meet the
immediate requirement of 228 vehicles, the merits of deploying
either
Snatch or
Tavern were debated including on the grounds of protection,
mobility, capacity
and
sustainability. The need for climate modifications and
communications adaptations
was also
considered.
164.
The Group
concluded that Snatch was the preferred option because there
were
Integrated
Logistic Support issues and reliability concerns with Tavern. It
acknowledged
that the
“protection levels afforded by Snatch may not meet the requirement
to counter
the local
threat”.
165.
Other
solutions considered were:
•
fitting the
in‑service Wolf (a Land Rover variant) or Pinzgauer with
appliqué
armour –
discounted because of the scarcity of suitable
vehicles;
•
refurbishing
the Armoured Patrol Vehicle (APV)1.5 awaiting disposal
–
discounted
because of the poor mechanical condition of the fleet and
the
“political
implications” of utilising equipment marked for
disposal;
•
refurbishing
Snatch – discounted as an immediate response because of
the
timescales
and level of technical risk but considered a possible
long‑term
solution to
Project DUCKBOARD; and
•
procuring
new vehicles – discounted as an immediate response because
of
the timescales
but considered a valid solution in the medium‑to‑long
term.
166.
The Group
recommended that:
•
the
deployment of Snatch be taken forward to meet the timescale for
the
provision
of 228 vehicles for Iraq in four weeks; and
•
a new
vehicle purchase, with protection levels similar to or better than
Snatch,
be
considered to meet the requirement of enough vehicles for two
brigades
within four
to six months.
167.
180 Snatch
Land Rovers were dispatched from Northern Ireland to Iraq
on
168.
An operational
analysis for Project DUCKBOARD was produced at the end
of
September,
making a number of recommendations for further analysis to examine
the
requirements
for a “Rest Of [the] World” PPV capability.80
That is
covered in the Vector
operational
analysis later in this Section.
169.
Lt Gen Lamb
told the Inquiry that there was a need for “a less aggressive
means
to
transport people around” but “the need to armour it was
self‑evident”.81
Lt Gen Lamb
79
Minute Comd
CSS to CSVS IPT, 16 September 2003, ‘SNATCH Deployment from
Northern Ireland’.
80
Report
DSTL, 31 March 2004, ‘VECTOR Operational Analysis’.
81
Private
hearing, 24 May 2010, pages 25‑26.
31