TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


7. Finding a MAN HX or SX Second-Hand


*********************************


Although the HX and SX are still fairly new, some used, ex-military HX’s and SX’s have begun appearing for sale in the UK specifically – see http://www.mascus.com/transportatio...-32-440-8x8-heavy-recovery-unit/cl5jgghh.html and http://www.trucklocator.co.uk/uk-man+-hx+-truck-131373/ . Of course, one potential draw-back is that these will be British-style, driver-sits-on-the-right configurations:


SX 32.440 (SX-45):






HX 32.440 (HX-77):






For another ex-military HX on the British second-hand market, see http://autoline.info/sf/truck-platf...HICLE-2008-L042514--13091202442672192500.html .

Note that MAN SX 32.440 corresponds to SX-45, and MAN HX-32.440 BB corresponds to HX-77. Further:

MAN SX 25.440 corresponds to SX-44
MAN HX 25.440 BB corresponds to HX-58

and

MAN HX 18.330 BB corresponds to HX-60

See http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_gl#HX-Serie and http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMAN_gl%23HX-Serie .

I tried researching comparative deployment in Germany versus the UK, but came up short. The only "hard" number for the German armed forces that I found was 14,000, which is the total number of MAN-KATs that were delivered up to 1984, or 30 years ago -- see http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_kat1_8x8.htm . Of course thousands of MAN-KATs have also been exported. But I could not find a total figure for the number of MAN-KATs still in service in Germany today, or the comparative number of newer SX and HX trucks. Furthermore, my impression is that Germany’s “GTF” procurement program is very slow-moving, and that aging Bundeswehr MAN-KATs have not necessarily been replaced by HX or SX trucks, but rather, as often as not by Zetros or Actros trucks. Again, see http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...f_K7rTcHdV7XVX NUJwzzvP8BsADx5A!!/&sandbox=1 . And even if the Bundeswehr were not replacing MAN-KATs with Actros and Zetros, the German government probably wants to replace aging MAN-KATs as slowly as possible, in order to save money.

If all of this is true, then it seems quite possible that one might sooner find a used HX or SX truck in the UK, as opposed to Germany. At present (May 2014), no ex-military HX or SX trucks are for sale by Aigner, FTN, or Mobile.de. Instead, just the usual assortment of MAN-KATs – see http://www.aignertrucks.com/en/vehicles/current-stock , http://www.inter-commerz.com/index.php/en/katalog-3 , http://suchen.mobile.de/lkw-inserat/man-kat-8x8-ladekran-perfekter-zustand-freiburg/194619517.html , http://suchen.mobile.de/lkw-inserat/man-kat1-mil-5t-glw-4x4-pritsche-winde-h-zul-fähig-potsdam/182488836.html , and http://suchen.mobile.de/lkw-inserat/man-man-kat1-a1-dfaeg-6x6-militärtruck-geländegig-hennef/36400632.html . But again, I am not certain whether this is an accurate description of that state of HX and SX procurement in Germany, and egn would be in a much better position to make such an assessment.

Now overall, one gets the impression that a Tatra 815 chassis – either a commercial “Phoenix” construction truck, or a military-specification T 815 – would be much easier to find, especially second-hand, than an equivalent SX chassis.

It’s worth remembering that the HX chassis is not sufficiently rigid to mount a fully integrated camper body without a sub-frame, and the HX suspension uses leaf springs instead of progressive coil. The SX is the true "technology successor" to the the MAN-KAT A1, and not the HX. The HX, instead, is really just a militarized version of a MAN TGA chassis. One wants an SX chassis, not an HX. But MAN does not seem to be selling nearly as many SX models as HX models, so finding a used SX chassis might prove comparatively difficult.


*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


8. Finding a MAN SX-44 6x6 Chassis


*********************************


Furthermore, what one really wants is a SX-44 6x6 chassis, and not a SX-45 8x8 chassis, for reasons explained by egn in his thread about Blue Thunder – see http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/11614-MAN-6x6-camper/page2:

The problem with 8x8 is that you loose valuable space below the cabin for storage. And the cabin itself cannot be much longer than on a 6x6.

The few times an 8x8 would be really beneficial like when passing a trench is not really worth it.

Throughout this thread others have also suggested that while a 6x6 might still prove workable as a vehicle to travel the Third World, an 8x8 is simply out of the question. But a used SX-44 variant would probably prove even more difficult to find than a used SX-45.

However, if one wants the first two axles forward, and only one axle in the rear, as per various Tatra 6x6s shown earlier in the thread, then perhaps one might want to buy a SX-45 8x8 after all, and simply "chop off" the fourth axle. This was suggested by egn in an earlier post:

A friend currently sells his modified 6x6 KAT, which was created by cutting the last axle of an 8x8.

During my build I discovered that I was very restricted regarding placement of heavy load, because the front axle could easily hit the weight limit, if I didn't distribute the load accordingly. This was the reason why I put the 600 kg lead acid battery bank at the back. The two axles at the back were placed there to support about 7 t (metric) added load. I built a weight distribution model to find out what axle loads I would get depending on the place where I placed the load. This helped me to get a nearly even weight distribution, when the truck is loaded fully with about 18 t (metric) with all equipment and fluids.

If I had thought about the possibility of cutting an 8x8 down to 6x6, then I probably would have chosen this variant. You can place all the load nearer to the center of the vehicle, giving better stability. And you are much more flexible regarding placement of load.

These are videos, first, of an HX-58 6x6, and second, of a MAN-KAT 6x6 -- see also http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx58.htm . Neither one is strictly speaking an SX-44, but they still usefully suggest what's needed:




The following is a video of a real SX-44 driving the course of the Milbrook Proving Ground in the UK, circa 2007. But the video is point-of-view, and we don't get to see the truck exterior:




The following are videos of SX-44 radio-controlled models. Sure, not the real thing, but still interesting, up to a point:




Here are some images specifically of the SX-44 -- see http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/SX-44_a001977001.aspx , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_sx44.htm :






The following three images are all photographs of HX-58 6x6 trucks, and not SX-44:





Needless to say, the following are also HX-58's:





If an image does not have a label attached, it's not easy to tell the difference. Superficially the HX-58 seems identical to the SX-44. But the chassis underneath is quite different, and only the SX-44 is completely rigid and more or less torsion-free.

So one big give-away, if they are visible in an image, are the springs: if they are leaf-springs it's an HX-58, whereas if they are progressive coil springs, it's an SX-44. Furthermore, the air-intake for the HX series is mounted on the left hand side of the vehicle behind the first axle. It's a very large, noticeable, square-shaped grille. Whereas for the SX series, the air-intake is mounted above the engine behind the cab, and on the side the only thing visible are small air vents. And finally, in the HX series the spare tire is mounted transversally behind the cab, whereas in the SX series it's mounted length-wise on the side of the cab.

For instance, in the photographs of British MAN trucks posted above under "5. HX and SX Procurement: Britain", all of the vehicles are HX, with the sole exceptions of the the two stylized, computer-rendered images of SX-45 recovery trucks. The HX vehicles all have square air-intake grilles that are quite visible.

Now as one might expect, because SX-44's are more robust, they are more expensive than HX-58s. And so in the UK at least, many fewer were purchased. I found the following brief description of the comparative UK acquisition of SX versus HX trucks on, of all places, a website dedicated to 3-D modeling for ArmA3 -- see http://www.rkslstudios.info/about-rksl/history-rksl-studios and http://www.rkslstudios.info/public-forum/2/130:

The SX-44 cargo trucks are the same category as the 6x6 HX-58 trucks: 9-tonners. However, there are fewer than 200 SX-44 in service (compared to 600-odd HX-58), and by far the biggest single role for them is as Unit Suport Tankers [SV(C) UST IMM].

The big 15-tonne 8x8 trucks are HX-77s. A lot of these were converted to EPLS (Enhanced Palletized Load System) vehicles fitted with hook-lift á la DROPS.

Then of course there is the SV(R) recovery vehicle which is based on the SX-45, and by far the most numerous SX/IMM variant in service. IMO the SV(C) IMM vehicles aren't really all that worthwhile [to model in 3d] unless you end up doing the SV(R) in future, to give you a basis for the SV(C) versions.

Finding a used SX-45 8x8 in the UK is certainly possible -- the previous post's images of an SX-45 for sale in the UK are evidence enough of that. But finding a used SX-44 6x6 for sale might prove more difficult.


*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


9. MAN SX versus Tatra 815


*********************************


Here it's worth noting that MAN does not sell any commercial trucks that are even remotely equivalent to the Tatra Phoenix, with its rigid, torsion-free chassis as standard specification. All MAN commercial trucks, even the heavy TGS truck sold as an off-road construction vehicle, have chassis that flex.

So it does seem much likelier that one could find a used Tatra Phoenix 6x6 chassis, than a used SX-44 6x6 chassis. And a completely new Tatra Phoenix chassis might even cost the same, or less, than an ex-military SX-44. It's also possible that it's much easier to find a used Tatra 815 ex-military 6x6 chassis, than an SX-44 6x6 chassis. And here too, the Tatra would probably cost less for the same quality and age of vehicle. Of course, MAN might be willing to build a civilian with deep pockets a completely new SX-44 chassis. But it does seem likely that a new SX-44 would cost more (considerably more?) than a comparable Tatra military-grade 815 6x6 chassis.

So which would be better, a MAN SX-44 (if one can find one...), or a Tatra 815 6x6, either commercial or ex-military, of the sort that Jago Pickering used for his expedition motorhome? On the plus side:

•....a used Tatra Phoenix or T 815 6x6 chassis would probably be easier to find than an SX-44 chassis
•....a Tatra chassis would probably cost much less than a comparable SX chassis, whether built new, or found used
•....a Tatra chassis would be even stiffer and more torsion-free than an SX-44 or SX-45 chassis

But on the downside:

•....Tatra is a small company in comparison to MAN, and Tatra's service network is not nearly as large
•....Tatra's ownership has changed a number of times over the last two decades, and Tatra's future always seems somewhat in doubt – see for instance http://www.opinicus-sro.com/Tatra-et-son-futur-en-point-d
•....The Tatra 815's central tube-frame might be heavier than a comparable MAN SX-44
•....The Tatra's 815's fuel consumption might be comparatively high

The last two "downsides" were suggested by egn, again in his thread about Blue Thunder:

I know the regular T815. Be sure that you won't drive 135 km/h with off-road tyres. And the fuel consumption is extraordinarily high.

And you know where the engine is? In the mid of the drivers cabin. You get deaf when going on high rpms.

The 6x6 version was on my short list. But I decided against it because it is just to heavy because of the central tube frame. BTW, I would only take the T815 if it has full air suspension. Otherwise you will kill your tyres on regular road very fast.

But egn: I wonder about the last two downsides. Earlier in the thread, a bit of research suggested that the weight of a Tatra Phoenix 6x6 would not be all that different from a comparable Zetros 6x6. And a Zetros 6x6 would certainly weigh no more than a SX-44 6x6 -- see http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page9 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page10 .

Furthermore, the most recent Tatra military-grade 815-7 gives one a choice of engines, and surely the fuel consumption will depend mostly on the engine. The Tatra 815-7 offers a choice between Tatra's own engine, which is a direct air-cooled V8; and liquid-cooled engines made by other manufacturers such as Caterpillar, Cummins, and Deutz -- see http://www.tatratrucks.com/why-tatra/tatra-vehicle-design/tatra-engine/ , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_815:

The [Tatra] engine is a directly air-cooled eight-cylinder diesel engine with direct fuel injection, ‘V’ cylinder configuration (opening angle of 90°) with a displacement of 12.7 litres, turbocharged with a CAC (charged air cooler) situated directly above the engine. The engine is equipped with a mechanically controlled in-line injection pump. A roller bearing crankshaft bolted together from individual segments is among the unique technical solutions.

The engine is available in emission specifications Euro 2 (T3B-928 range), Euro 3 (T3C-928 range), Euro 4 and Euro 5 (T3D-928 range). To meet the strict pollution limits according to Euro 4 or 5, a selective catalytic reduction system (SCR) is used when an oxidizing agent known under the trade name AdBlue is injected into the exhaust manifold.

The output parameters of original directly air-cooled TATRA engines range from 230 kW to 325 kW, or 1,400 Nm to 2,100 Nm.

Other manufacturers’ engines are liquid-cooled, feature emission specifications according to customer requirements, use EGR or SCR technologies.

As an alternative to its own air-cooled engine, TATRA TRUCKS a.s. offers, mainly in the FORCE and T 815-7 ranges, liquid-cooled engines from international manufacturers.

One of these alternatives is Cummins engines in the ISL ranges (power output of up to 260 kW and 1,550 Nm) and the ISM ranges (power output of up to 325 kW and 2,100 Nm). These are six-cylinder in-line diesel engines with displacements of 8.85 litres or 10.8 litres with supercharging and a CAC.

A higher-output alternative are Deutz engines, which are liquid-cooled eight-cylinder diesel engines with a ‘V’ cylinder configuration (opening angle of 90%), BF8M 1015 or 2015 type. The engines with a displacement of 16.5 litres, supercharging and a CAC differ in their injection systems. The 1015 type uses a mechanical injection pump, while the 2015 type is equipped with electronically controlled injector units. Their output parameters range from 340 kW to 440 kW and from 2,450 Nm to 2,750 Nm depending on adjustment.

Also see http://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/product-catalog/t-815-7/ , http://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/customer-segment-catalog/defence/more-trucks/6x6-high-mobility-heavy-duty-chassis/ , http://www.tatratrucks.com/underwood/download/files/tatra-t815-790rk9-6x6-chassis_en.pdf , http://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/customer-segment-catalog/defence/more-trucks/8x8-high-mobility-heavy-duty-chassis/ , http://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/c...ity-heavy-duty-universal-cargo-troop-carrier/ , http://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/customer-segment-catalog/defence/more-trucks/8x8-high-mobility-heavy-duty-universal-container-carrier/ , http://www.tatratrucks.com/underwood/download/files/tatra-military-vehicles_en-2.pdf , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/tatra_t815_78or89.htm , and http://www.military-today.com/trucks/tatra_t815_7mor89.htm .

At the very least, Tatra certainly produces much cooler promotional videos for its military vehicles than Rheinmetall-MAN. There is no HX or SX video on the web that looks even remotely as good as the following promotional video for the T815-7 -- see http://www.tatratrucks.com/about-the-company/gallery/videos/vojenska-rada-tatra-t-815-7/ :




Videos like this, and the easy access that Tatra provides to information about its military vehicles, suggest that Tatra is very keen on selling to whomever it can. MAN's civilian trucks division also provides a wealth of information on-line, but Rheinmetall-MAN does not seem to, at least when compared to Tatra or Oshkosh. Perhaps I am reading too much into this, but companies will tend to skimp on promotional literature and web-information if they feel it's not necessary, because they already have all the customers they need, of the type they want. Rheinmetall-MAN's military trucks division has some big fat government contracts that should keep it very busy for at least the next 10 years (e.g. Australia), so why spend money on pdfs or videos? And why go through the trouble of selling a new military truck to one or two interested civilians?

All best wishes,



Biotect

 

[biotect]

.

*********************************


1. More HX and SX imagery


*********************************


Although HX and SX videos are hard to come by, it's much easier to find photographs of the same on the web, if one knows where to look. But because these are often drowned out by MAN-KAT or “gl” images more generally, it seemed useful to continue the previous "Photo-Essay", creating a comprehensive gallery of HX and SX images, as per the earlier gallery of Rosenbauer Panther images.

So continuing, with some “action shots”:







*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


2. HX and SX Fording Capability


*********************************


The fording capabilities of the HX and SX are formidable. As egn suggested, initial development work on the SX explored semi-amphibious capability, although this was eventually abandoned as too expensive:

The engine of the KAT/SX is located behind the crew cab and not below like the TGA. The reason for this that the military versions have to be able to be transported on railway and concurrently the fording depth has to be kept to at least 1.20m. So the engine has been placed behind the crew cabin. Another reason for this placement was that originally the KAT was designed to be able to swim. But after first successful tests with the first 3 prototypes this concept has been dropped because of cost.

Note that engine placement in the HX, which is based on the commercial TGA truck, is standard COE. In the HX the engine does not sit behind the cab, as per the SX, but rather it sits below the cab. But even still, according to the "Mobility Elite" brochure, "the thermostat-controlled cooling system and air intake can be found on top of the frame behind the [HX] cab, which protects them from dirt and dust and allows for prolonged fording." See http://www.scribd.com/doc/17296072/The-Mobility-Elite .

The fording depth of the SX series without special preparation is 1.2 m, and with preparation, a maximum of 1.5 m. Deagel, Military Today, etc. state the same figures as the fording capability of the HX series. But I wonder if HX fording capability is in fact the same, given its COE engine placement?







*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************






*********************************


3. Armored HX and SX Trucks


*********************************


The previous images should have suggested just how “utilitarian” HX and SX trucks actually are. They are military trucks, to be sure, but strictly speaking they are not combat vehicles. Instead, they mostly serve as logistics support trucks. One of their primary functions has been to make the "containerization" of military transport possible.

Of course they can carry substantial crew-protection armor, and some light weaponry, as the following images will all suggest.

But it's worth remembering that these are "defensive" measures, measures designed to protect the crew. For the most part HX and SX trucks do not carry "offensive" weaponry, in the sense that they are not tanks; and neither are they "IVF's", i.e. infantry fighting vehicles; nor are they purpose-built "APC's", armored personnel carriers; nor "IMV's", infantry mobility vehicles -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_fighting_vehicle , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_personnel_carrier , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infantry_Mobility_Vehicle , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AFVs , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_fighting_vehicle , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_armoured_fighting_vehicles .

To state the obvious: HX and SX vehicles are trucks. They might be well-armored trucks, but they are still trucks.

The only exception to this generalization might be SX-45's fitted out as missile launchers. More on those below.






*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST


*********************************









*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST


*********************************









*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************








These images also provide a good overview of the varied roles that the HX/SX family of trucks play. They can serve as water and fuel tankers, recovery vehicles, reconnaissance platforms, bridge-layers, tank-tranporters, troop transporters, and simple payload delivery trucks. And yes, they can also serve as missile platforms. But carrying missiles is only one, very specialized application, and it does not define what these trucks primarily do, or what they fundamentally are.


*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


4. Most MAN-KATs were not missile platforms


*********************************


Although the HX and SX are primarily logistics support trucks, many people seem to imagine them as present-day versions of the MAN-KATs that carried Pershing II, Patriot, Gryphon, and other kinds of rockets and missiles during the Cold War -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-31_Pershing , http://olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_man_8x8.php , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-31_Pershing , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMGM-31_Pershing , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109G_Ground_Launched_Cruise_Missile , http://www.maquetland.com/phototeque/impression/2662 , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_(missile) , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_(Waffensystem) , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRoland_(W affensystem) , http://www.bredow-web.de/Drohnen_und_Raketen/FlaRak_Rad_Roland/flarak_rad_roland.html , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans.../FlaRak_Rad_Roland%2 Fflarak_rad_roland.html , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot , http://www.army-technology.com/projects/patriot/ , http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_american_missile_system_vehicle_uk/patriot_mim-104_surface-to-air_defense_missile_data_sheet_specifications_info rmation_description.html , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMIM-104_Patriot , http://www.bredow-web.de/Drohnen_un...gabwehrsystem/patriot_-_flugabwehrsystem.html , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...gabwehrsystem/patriot_-_flugabwehrsystem.html :







Imagining the HX and SX along these lines is understandable, because during the 1970's and 1980's the media were full of images of MAN-KATs carrying missiles. But even still, it is a mistake.

Even during the Cold War, the MAN-KATs that carried Roland, Pershing, and Patriot missiles were "extra-wide" variants that proved the exception to the rule:

"In the early 1980s, MAN supplied the Luftwaffe with improved vehicles of the KAT I A1 version as carriers in the 15-ton class. The 15 t mil gl BR A1 trucks, modified with a wider track of 2,900 mm, served as carriers and launcher systems of the Roland and Patriot weapon systems. The missiles are transported with a standard chassis truck with flatbed and 2.5-ton swiveling crane by Atlas." -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_KAT1 .

"Anfang der 1980er Jahre lieferte MAN verbesserte Fahrzeuge der "KAT I A1"-Version als Trägerfahrzeug der 15-t-Klasse an die Luftwaffe. Umgebaut auf eine größere Spurweite von 2900 mm dienen diese Fahrzeuge mit der Bezeichnung 15 t mil gl BR A1 als Geräteträger und Startsystem für die Waffensysteme 'Roland und Patriot. Als Lenkflugkörpertransporter wird ein herkömmliches Fahrgestell mit Pritschenaufbau verwendet, das um einen Anbaudrehkran 2,5 t der Firma Atlas erweitert wurde." -- see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_gl and http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...earch?q=MAN+KAT+wikipedia&biw=1920& bih=1102 .

These missile-carrying MAN-KATs were variants that had to be widened beyond the 2.55 m limit, rendering them unsuitable for second-hand civilian use. But even during the Cold War, most MAN-KAT trucks were not missile-carriers; egn might know the comparative percentages. Like present-day HX and SX vehicles, during the Cold War most MAN-KATs were logistics support trucks. It is these trucks that are now being converted to expedition motorhomes like egn’s “Blue Thunder”. Just consider: MAN sold a total of 3500 MAN-KAT 1 trucks of the 7-ton class to the Bundeswehr, the kind of 6x6 MAN-KAT that has three axles instead of four. Vehicles this short could only serve as light rocket-launchers at best, and most in fact served as logistics support trucks -- see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_gl , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...e.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_gl&biw=1607&bih=1102 , and http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_kat1_8x8.htm .

And to repeat, most contemporary HX and SX trucks are not missile platforms, they have not been "widened", and they respect the 2.55 m width limit. For confirmation, please refer to the information about vehicle width on the "Military Today" and "Deagel" websites, at http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/HX-58_a001978002.aspx , http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/HX-60_a001978001.aspx , http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/HX-77_a001978003.aspx , http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/SX-44_a001977001.aspx , http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/SX-45_a001977002.aspx , http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/SX-45-Multi-2-IAC-3_a001977003.aspx , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx60.htm , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx58.htm , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_sx44.htm , http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx77.htm , and http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_sx45.htm . Observe that even the MAN HX 81 tank-transporter is 2.55 m wide -- see http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx81.htm .

One contributor earlier in this thread seemed to mistakenly imagine that MAN-KAT, HX, and SX vehicles are only ever used as missile platforms, and that they are always oversized. The exact opposite is nearer the truth.


*********************************


5. The SX-45 as "Pantsir" missile platform


*********************************

With all of that said, it's worth mentioning that more recently the SX-45 has been sold to the UAE as a mobile platform for “Pantsir” or "Panzir", an air-defence system developed by Russia, whose research and development costs were partly funded by the UAE – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1 , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzir-S1 , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPanzir-S1 , http://weapons.technology.youngester.com/2010/06/russian-pantsir-s1-to-uae.html , http://defencerussia.wordpress.com/2013/10/ , http://www.janes.com/article/27950/kbp-presents-new-pantsir-capabilities , http://www.armyrecognition.com/russ...tem_techni cal_data_sheet_specification.html , http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-96K6-Pantsir-2K22-Tunguska.html , http://www.military-today.com/missiles/pantsyr.htm , and http://arc.web.id/artikel/592-pantsir-s-1-sang-pagar-udara-bag-2.html :





But again, it must be emphasized that this is not a "typical" application of the HX/SX series, and if anything, it is a bit unusual.

Now looking closely at these pictures of the SX-45 serving as a Pantsir platform, the vehicle itself does not seem to have been widened to 3.0 m. It still seems 2.55 m wide. So even if an SX-45 carries missiles, perhaps it does not have to be made "extra-wide" for that reason alone? For stability when firing missiles, outrigger beams of the sort that stabilize firetrucks might prove sufficient.

By far the best website I've yet come across that provides detailed imagery of MAN trucks equipped as missile and rocket platforms, is “panzer-modell.de” – see http://www.panzer-modell.de/haupt.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...tp://www.panzer-modell.de/haupt.htm&sandbox=1 , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/referenz.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...//www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/referenz.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/in_detail.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...er-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/in_detail.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/cobra/cobra.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t_drohne/7t-drohne.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/lars2/lars2.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/patriotwerfer/patriot.htm , and http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/carola/carola.htm . Browsing through these images, in some cases the front profile of the truck used as a missile carrier seems no different than an ordinary MAN-KAT or SX-45 truck. After all, the Pershing II and the Patriot are very big missiles, so it is quite possible that an extra-wide chassis is necessary only to carry these in particular? Whereas when MAN-KATs carry "LARS" rockets or "CL-289" rocket-launched drones, perhaps they remain just as narrow as regular, logistics-support MAN-KATs?

"LARS" is an acronym for "Light Artillery Rocket System" -- see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leichtes_Artillerieraketensystem , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...a.org/wiki/Leichtes_ Artillerieraketensystem , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Artillery_Rocket_System , and http://www.armyrecognition.com/germ...rman_army_germany_technical_data_sheet.h tml . And for the CL-289 rocket-launched drone, see http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Unmanned-Air-Vehicles/CL-289_a000636001.aspx , http://www.army-technology.com/projects/cl289/ , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CL-289 , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...ttp://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_ CL-289 , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...de/referenz/in_detail/7t_drohne/7t-drohne.htm , http://www.bredow-web.de/Drohnen_und_Raketen/EADS_CL_289/eads_cl_289.html , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...en_und_Raketen/EADS_CL_289/eads_ cl_289.html , and http://www.dglr.de/veranstaltungen/archiv/2004_uav-ucaf-mav/6-Arning/dglr_2004uav_CL-289.pdf .

Of course, it is hard to say one way or another from mere photographs, and only very detailed research could settle the question.

The following are videos of MAN-KATs launching various kinds of rockets and missiles:


[video=youtube;mJWzMtzGaFc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJWzMtzGaFc&list=PL4NNUWtjwt9JD6kA8EBqz8lzCTCIMAjCf&index=13 [/video]
[video=youtube;nikXMg_g_Es]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nikXMg_g_Es [/video] [video=youtube;EWJrsCXXjqE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWJrsCXXjqE [/video]
[video=youtube;svZtg_PBr6s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svZtg_PBr6s [/video] [video=youtube;wcC8E-ZFIPk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcC8E-ZFIPk [/video] [video=youtube;jR3BkIvrRxQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR3BkIvrRxQ [/video]


Warning: some of these videos are clearly about ground-based “army revenge” against aircraft….:sombrero:


*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


6. The Desert Challenger was originally a missile platform, and is not a "standard-width" MAN-KAT


*********************************


Now notably, the ActionMobil 8x8 "Desert Challenger" is not 2.55 m wide, but rather, like the Rosenbauer Panther, the Desert Challenger is an "extra-wide" 3.0 m. The ActionMobil website clearly states that the Desert Challenger was constructed on a MAN-KAT chassis variant that was originally used to carry missiles -- see http://www.actionmobil.com/en/4-axle/desert-challenger . So those who are familiar with the ActionMobil Desert Challenger should not imagine that it is in any way a standard MAN-KAT, or that it is the only possible MAN-KAT configuration. Many narrower MAN-KAT variants do exist, like the one on which egn built Blue Thunder .

The best images of the Desert Challenger are to be found at http://www.actionmobil.com/en/4-axle/desert-challenger , http://www.vanzarirulote.ro/blog/top-10-cele-mai-neobisnuite-rulote-si-autorulote-din-istorie , and http://offroadclub.ru/automobiles/cargo_truck/review/action_mobil_desert_challenger.html . The last two links have the "slide-show" images that were once available directly on the ActionMobil website, before it changed format.








*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************








egn's response to Lynn in the "Blue Thunder" thread is particularly instructive here -- see http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/11614-MAN-6x6-camper/page2?p=164695#post164695 :

Lynn, you cannot transform the standard 8x8 KAT1 into the Desert Challenger. The standard 8x8 is only something less 100" wide. But the dessert challenger is based on a 118" wide chassis. This was used for missile transport and is used for airport fire brigades. The base truck is much to wide for normal roads. The Desert Challenger is allowed to drive only with special permit on european roads. It is really designed for the desert.

You find more information about the desert challenger in the following document:
http://www.actionmobil.at/page17/page17_assets/DESERT CHALLENGER ENG.pdf

Images in a slide show you find here:
http://www.actionmobil.at/page18/page18.html

I was already in the desert challager once when it was at service at http://www.aignertrucks.com . It is really a luxury home on wheels comparable to your Class A. But this would be nothing for me because it is to large and to heavy. You cannot go really off-road. And don't ask for the costs ...

Here is the Desert Challenger video, available on the ActionMobil website at http://www.actionmobil.com/home/videos:




And for a fun, here is a video of a Desert Challenger RC model:





*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


7. More Images of the MAN “Multi”


*********************************


In sum, the HX/SX family of trucks are really just logistics support vehicles, and most of them are 2.55 m wide. Most are not missile launchers; most are just off-road-capable "payload delivery" trucks.

Again, many of the larger 8x8 HX and SX trucks are flat-bed container transports, of the kind that enable the quick erection of field hospitals – see http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page26 . This is nicely underscored by “Petra's Royal Signals Pages” for British Army MAN vehicles, in which the various utilitarian functions of the HX and SX series are effectively illustrated – see http://www.henderson-tele.com/royal-signals/vby/vby/v07b.html , http://www.henderson-tele.com/start/ , http://www.henderson-tele.com/artwork/page12/page12.html , and http://www.henderson-tele.com/vtm/links/links-0.html :









*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************








[Brief aside:.. Not sure what to make of the white crescent + star painted on the boxes in many of these images. Seems reminiscent of the symbol for the "Red Crescent", i.e. the Islamic equivalent of the Red Cross -- see http://redcrescent.org and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross_and_Red_Crescent_Movement . But it also resembles the flags of Turkey, Algeria, and Pakistan -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Turkey.svg , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Algeria.svg , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Pakistan.svg . If anyone knows what the white crescent + star painted on these boxes symbolizes, please post.]

Also see the “panzer-modell.de” website, for lots of detailed close-up shots of the “MULTI” in particular, and MAN-KAT, HX, and SX trucks in general, at http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/15t_multi/multi.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/multi2/multi2.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/haupt.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...tp://www.panzer-modell.de/haupt.htm&sandbox=1 , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/referenz.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.panzer-modell.de%2Freferenz%2Freferenz.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/in_detail.htm , http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...er-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/in_detail.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/cobra/cobra.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/faltstrassengeraet/fsg.htm http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/fera/fera.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/MAN_5t_mit_Tankanlage/MAN_5t.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t_drohne/7t-drohne.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t_san/7t_san.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/lars2/lars2.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t_entgiftung/7t_e.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t_kipper/7t_kipper.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/7t/7t.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/man_10t/man_10t.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/patriotwerfer/patriot.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/carola/carola.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/franziska/franziska.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/elefant/elefant.htm , http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/slt70/slt70.htm , and http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/slt2/slt2.htm .

And see “Prime Portal” for ultra-detailed, super-high-resolution photographs of a “MULTI”, at http://www.primeportal.net/trucks/michael_wulbrandt/man_multi_walk_1.htm and http://www.primeportal.net/trucks/michael_wulbrandt/man_multi_walk_2.htm .


*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*********************************


8. MAN HX-60 4x4


*********************************


It should also be emphasized that a 4x4 variant of the HX series does exist, the HX-60 – see see http://www.military-today.com/trucks/man_hx60.htm and http://www.deagel.com/Military-Trucks/HX-60_a001978001.aspx .

The wealth of HX-60 images that follow is meant to drive home a simple point: the HX/SX series is just a truck. Sure, a military-grade truck with exceptional off-road capability, and some interesting armoring and armament options. But in the case of the HX-60, a rather ordinary, quotidian, not terribly huge, 4x4 sort of truck:








*********************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.