The contract, known as PMETS (Protected Mobility Engineering & Technical Support) covers the MoD’s fleet of 2,200 Protected Mobility Vehicles until 2024.
The vehicles covered under the contract include the Mastiff, Wolfhound, Ridgback, Buffalo, Choker, RODET, Foxhound, Jackal, Coyote and Husky.
NP Aerospace won the contract over other leading players in the Defence market, giving the company the Engineering Authority role for the MoD platforms via its Vehicle Systems and Services part of the business, based in Coventry, UK.
NP Aerospace say it has years of experience leading complex military vehicle integrations, robust testing and battlefield certification, together with class-leading capability in composite armour.
The company designed, manufactured and installed the full multi-hit CAMAC platform armour for the Mastiff, Wolfhound, Ridgback and Buffalo vehicles used to protect army staff on UK MoD operations and continues to be at the forefront of armour and vehicle technology today.
UK Minister for Defence Procurement, Stuart Andrew, said:
“Armoured vehicles save lives on the battlefield and this contract will ensure they are repaired, upgraded and returned to the frontline as quickly as possible.”
Major General Colin McClean, Director Land Equipment for DE&S (Defence Equipment & Support), said:
“The Protected Mobility fleet has been hugely important for defence over the last 15 years. It is vital that we continue to invest in our battle-winning capabilities, ensuring that they are always ready for training or operational purposes. Given its significant role now and in the future, I am pleased we are partnering with NP Aerospace to deliver this contract.”
James Kempston, CEO, NP Aerospace, comments:
“The UK MoD is a key partner for NP Aerospace. Winning the Protected Mobility Engineering & Technical Support contract demonstrates our commitment to delivering world class armour technology and vehicle integration to protect the British Armed Forces. It puts us at the forefront of strategic delivery within the Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) Vehicle Systems.”
The contract will support approximately 100 jobs in Coventry and 250 jobs across the UK supply chain until 2024 say the MoD.
Mastiffs always seemed huge and clumsy Americanised beasts, I thought we were getting rid of them.
Given the love of them by the army, I am not sure why we would get rid of them…
Replaced by another vehicle possibly boxer.
Even just mothball them. They did serve a useful neice when needed. They are to expensive to dump and replace next time we have an urgent operational requirement they should last another 25 years if properly maintained.
I expect it will be like the surplus 430 APC series, refurbished then sold as surplus for less than the price of replacing the tracks?
Any disposal of Mastiffs and their like must be resisted at all cost. Though the Army said, they were no longer a priority in their core fleet, you can be sure without them we will be back to lightly armoured soft-skinned trucks.
The Heavy Protected Mobility Battalions, of which there are 3, 1 for each Armoured Infantry Brigade, are equipped with Mastiff.
They are due to be replaced by 4 Battalions of the future MIV, probably Boxer.
I would hope once they are replaced as infantry carriers they are retained by other units, as you just know as soon as the army get rid of useful vehicles with all the lessons we learned about IED’s, they will be needed again.
Remember the Humber ‘Pigs’ all but written off charge, before most were quickly dragooned back into service for Northern Ireland. The UK’s propensity to be rid of serviceable machines is nothing new, and nothing appears to be learned.
I agree the MOD is a threat to our security. Defence is too important to be left in their hands! They seem to have a built in focus on selling perfectly serviceable kit for peanuts.
Is it not the treasury who is the real evil. Defense as a proportion of gdp must be at it lowest in history.
Hopefully someone, somewhere in HM Government has the foresight to treat them like Nuclear weapons. Have them to hand just in case, but do everything possible to avoid entangling the country in an unwinnable conflict that would necessitate their use in the first place. This person has proven tricky to recruit/elect in the past.
Absolute beast of a truck. A mate of mine was in a convoy near Gereshk, his Mastiff was attacked by a remote IED. They lost the complete rear wheel and suspension. The driver felt a bump and carried on. The guys in the back knew, but apart from being shaken, nothing much else, the truck carried on. I know people bad mouth the Foxhound, but when it was working it did what was necessary and ours came with a Gimpie fitted to a remote turret. The only issue being you still needed to go up top to replace the ammo,… Read more »
Great to hear from someone who’s actually used the things. Good vehicals then.? The ammo thing, we never seem to have enough ammo.. Wots up with them.?
We had two, one had its engine constantly overheating, which turned out to be a blown head gasket. The other had electrical gremlins, where we could loose power to the radios or the RWS, turned out to be a melted fusebox. Once these were sorted they were very reliable.
A very useful vehicle which it would be nuts to get rid of. It will be replaced soon by Boxer as the armoured infantry carrier in the two Mechanised Bdes, fine, that’s progress (if you believe that wheeled mech bdes have much to offer on a hot battlefield). Mastiff has a couple of decades service life left and would be ideal kit for transport, logistics and RCZ troops and also for army reserve units, being far more robust with better protection than the current range of wheeled B vehicles. Of course we should keep them, either issued to rear echelon… Read more »
Thank you, and of course your right. I agree.
These vehicles are excellent for patrolling in post conflict zones or supporting UN intervention/humanitarian relief. A squadron of Boxers would give the wrong image on UN type deployments.
They aren’t being got rid of. Boxer won’t be turning up until at least 2023.
I commanded a Mastiff in Afghan for a while, being tank crew I couldn’t get used to commanding from the front seat where visibility is terrible so would command from the gunners position, not ideal. Overall sturdy vehicles that could take a good hiding (I even barrel rolled one down a hill and managed to drive it home). There is a flip side to this, they are terrible when used for conventional warfare, they get bogged in too easy, they are slow cross country and my god they are massive!! They are useful to have and would be a great… Read more »
They were ideal for ops in Afghanistan but food for thought from the pros who used them and question there suitability for good old fashioned armoured warfare. Battlefield taxis at best but well protected ones. Good solid and robust vehicles. Max up the firepower, make em hit a bit harder. We only have the CR2’s who can stand. Everything else we have is shoot if we’re lucky, and scoot.