Recent from talks
SIBMAS
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
SIBMAS
The SIBMAS is a Belgian amphibious infantry fighting vehicle. It was engineered from the same prototype as the South African Ratel. The SIBMAS was developed between 1975 and 1976 at a department of the BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques in Nivelles. Production was on an order-by-order basis and commenced only for the Malaysian Army.
It is due to be replaced completely under the Next Generation Wheeled Armoured Vehicle project.
During the early 1970s, the South African Defence Force issued a requirement for a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) capable of deploying troops rapidly across the vast expanses of southern Africa. IFVs such as the Soviet BMP-1 and West German Marder had traditionally been tracked; wheeled designs were generally rejected because they lacked the same weight-carrying capacity and off-road mobility of their tracked counterparts. However, South African military strategists favoured a wheeled design for logistical reasons, as it reduced maintenance costs and simplified field repairs. Excessive track wear was also an issue in the region's abrasive, sandy terrain, making a wheeled configuration for an IFV more attractive. The only other requirements were that the South African IFV was to be capable of mounting a two-man turret system. In March 1972, a prototype known as the Springfield-Büssing Buffel was completed and evaluated in trials in the Namib Desert. The Springfield-Büssing Buffel was a six-wheeled design which was engineered by a South African subsidiary of Büssing. It incorporated a boatlike hull with a sharply sloped frontal glacis plate, similar to the EE-11 Urutu, and was built on a commercial MAN truck chassis. The prototype was later altered with a front hull and driving compartment directly inspired by the Berliet VXB-170; in this form it was accepted for service as the Ratel.
While the Ratel was still under development, a Belgian defence contractor, BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques became interested in developing a multi-role, wheeled armoured vehicle for the export market. The company had prior experience producing armoured vehicles under licence during the early stages of World War II and the immediate postwar era, when it was known as SA La Brugeoise et Nivelles. By 1974, it had consolidated its research and development of new armoured vehicles into a new division, the Société Industrielle Belge de Matériel Automobile Spécial (SIBMAS). The SIBMAS division was tasked with creating a wheeled armoured vehicle capable of transporting between 9 and 16 mounted infantrymen. It was always intended as more than a simple armoured personnel carrier (APC) or IFV, however. The parent firm wanted the SIBMAS series to include a family of supporting vehicles built on the same chassis and hull to simplify logistics for potential export clients. The SIBMAS prototype had to be capable of fulfilling at least four requirements, one for a general APC, one for a turreted IFV, one for a dedicated fire support vehicle, and one for an internal security vehicle to be used for riot control.
In 1975, the SIBMAS division negotiated the rights to the original Springfield-Büssing Buffel prototype from Büssing, including the study which had resulted in its development. Work on an improved derivative began that year and had been completed by the end of 1976. In terms of external design, the new prototype was identical to the Ratel, but possessed a lighter, watertight hull and could be modified for amphibious purposes. The vehicle was simply identified by the anagram of its parent division. Initial trials were carried out that year in Belgium, and later in Malaysia and the Philippines, to test mechanical performance in tropical climates. It was announced that serial production would not commence until an export order was finalised to create the economy of scale necessary to justify production costs. Two fully amphibious demonstrators were built between 1976 and 1979, one which was propelled through water by its wheels at a speed of 5 km/h and a second with twin swivel-mounted propellers which could reach speeds of 10 km/h.
The Ratel entered serial production in South Africa around the same time the SIBMAS was first being showcased publicly, leading to allegations that their development was directly linked. The obvious similarities between the two vehicle designs led military scholars to conclude that one must be a licensed variant of the other. For instance, Jane's Defence Weekly initially speculated that the Ratel and SIBMAS were the same vehicle, and that South Africa had worked in concert with the Belgian contractor to oversee its development.
In 1979, the Malaysian Army embarked on a massive modernisation programme known as Perkembangan Istimewa Angkatan Tentera (PERISTA), intended to increase the firepower and mobility of its mechanized forces in light of the ongoing communist insurgency and the growing threat of a regional conflict between Thailand and Vietnam. Malaysian mechanized units were then equipped largely with the obsolete Panhard M3, as well as smaller numbers of the V-100 Commando. Both of these were general purpose APCs, which the army was essentially using in the role of IFVs during counter-insurgency operations. The need for a dedicated IFV to permit Malaysian infantrymen to fight mounted in addition to providing direct fire support through its integral weapons systems was identified as early as 1977. The only initial requirements were that the proposed IFV was to be suitable for both counter-insurgency and "high intensity", or conventional warfare.
Beginning in 1979, the Malaysian Army trialled several wheeled IFV designs from defence contractors in the US, Brazil, and Europe, including one of the two amphibious SIBMAS prototypes. The evaluation process was beset by numerous delays, since the army's procurement officials initially failed to specify any additional technical requirements for its future IFV programme. When the army finally came up with a series of specific technical requirements, for example a maximum road range of 1,000 kilometres and a combat weight of 12 tonnes, it altered them without notifying the contractors. No sufficiently detailed request for tender documents were issued. This resulted in confusion among the contractors, most of whom wrote to the Malaysian Ministry of Defence requesting formal clarification of the army's needs. In light of the situation, the evaluation period was extended through early 1981, when the army identified the SIBMAS, EE-11 Urutu, and Condor as the most promising candidates. In May 1981, the Malaysian Ministry of Defence announced it would accept both the SIBMAS and Condor for service, with the SIBMAS being adopted primarily as a fire support vehicle. Controversy immediately erupted over allegations that the tendering process had been rigged so that the fire support specifications for the IFV programme could only be met by the SIBMAS. These allegations led to a formal review of the SIBMAS procurement by the Malaysian National Investigations Bureau, and the army was forced to re-open its tender accordingly. Malaysia was also vilified by international and domestic anti-apartheid movements for its acquisition of the SIBMAS, which they suspected erroneously to have been licensed to South Africa as the Ratel in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 418.
Hub AI
SIBMAS AI simulator
(@SIBMAS_simulator)
SIBMAS
The SIBMAS is a Belgian amphibious infantry fighting vehicle. It was engineered from the same prototype as the South African Ratel. The SIBMAS was developed between 1975 and 1976 at a department of the BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques in Nivelles. Production was on an order-by-order basis and commenced only for the Malaysian Army.
It is due to be replaced completely under the Next Generation Wheeled Armoured Vehicle project.
During the early 1970s, the South African Defence Force issued a requirement for a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) capable of deploying troops rapidly across the vast expanses of southern Africa. IFVs such as the Soviet BMP-1 and West German Marder had traditionally been tracked; wheeled designs were generally rejected because they lacked the same weight-carrying capacity and off-road mobility of their tracked counterparts. However, South African military strategists favoured a wheeled design for logistical reasons, as it reduced maintenance costs and simplified field repairs. Excessive track wear was also an issue in the region's abrasive, sandy terrain, making a wheeled configuration for an IFV more attractive. The only other requirements were that the South African IFV was to be capable of mounting a two-man turret system. In March 1972, a prototype known as the Springfield-Büssing Buffel was completed and evaluated in trials in the Namib Desert. The Springfield-Büssing Buffel was a six-wheeled design which was engineered by a South African subsidiary of Büssing. It incorporated a boatlike hull with a sharply sloped frontal glacis plate, similar to the EE-11 Urutu, and was built on a commercial MAN truck chassis. The prototype was later altered with a front hull and driving compartment directly inspired by the Berliet VXB-170; in this form it was accepted for service as the Ratel.
While the Ratel was still under development, a Belgian defence contractor, BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques became interested in developing a multi-role, wheeled armoured vehicle for the export market. The company had prior experience producing armoured vehicles under licence during the early stages of World War II and the immediate postwar era, when it was known as SA La Brugeoise et Nivelles. By 1974, it had consolidated its research and development of new armoured vehicles into a new division, the Société Industrielle Belge de Matériel Automobile Spécial (SIBMAS). The SIBMAS division was tasked with creating a wheeled armoured vehicle capable of transporting between 9 and 16 mounted infantrymen. It was always intended as more than a simple armoured personnel carrier (APC) or IFV, however. The parent firm wanted the SIBMAS series to include a family of supporting vehicles built on the same chassis and hull to simplify logistics for potential export clients. The SIBMAS prototype had to be capable of fulfilling at least four requirements, one for a general APC, one for a turreted IFV, one for a dedicated fire support vehicle, and one for an internal security vehicle to be used for riot control.
In 1975, the SIBMAS division negotiated the rights to the original Springfield-Büssing Buffel prototype from Büssing, including the study which had resulted in its development. Work on an improved derivative began that year and had been completed by the end of 1976. In terms of external design, the new prototype was identical to the Ratel, but possessed a lighter, watertight hull and could be modified for amphibious purposes. The vehicle was simply identified by the anagram of its parent division. Initial trials were carried out that year in Belgium, and later in Malaysia and the Philippines, to test mechanical performance in tropical climates. It was announced that serial production would not commence until an export order was finalised to create the economy of scale necessary to justify production costs. Two fully amphibious demonstrators were built between 1976 and 1979, one which was propelled through water by its wheels at a speed of 5 km/h and a second with twin swivel-mounted propellers which could reach speeds of 10 km/h.
The Ratel entered serial production in South Africa around the same time the SIBMAS was first being showcased publicly, leading to allegations that their development was directly linked. The obvious similarities between the two vehicle designs led military scholars to conclude that one must be a licensed variant of the other. For instance, Jane's Defence Weekly initially speculated that the Ratel and SIBMAS were the same vehicle, and that South Africa had worked in concert with the Belgian contractor to oversee its development.
In 1979, the Malaysian Army embarked on a massive modernisation programme known as Perkembangan Istimewa Angkatan Tentera (PERISTA), intended to increase the firepower and mobility of its mechanized forces in light of the ongoing communist insurgency and the growing threat of a regional conflict between Thailand and Vietnam. Malaysian mechanized units were then equipped largely with the obsolete Panhard M3, as well as smaller numbers of the V-100 Commando. Both of these were general purpose APCs, which the army was essentially using in the role of IFVs during counter-insurgency operations. The need for a dedicated IFV to permit Malaysian infantrymen to fight mounted in addition to providing direct fire support through its integral weapons systems was identified as early as 1977. The only initial requirements were that the proposed IFV was to be suitable for both counter-insurgency and "high intensity", or conventional warfare.
Beginning in 1979, the Malaysian Army trialled several wheeled IFV designs from defence contractors in the US, Brazil, and Europe, including one of the two amphibious SIBMAS prototypes. The evaluation process was beset by numerous delays, since the army's procurement officials initially failed to specify any additional technical requirements for its future IFV programme. When the army finally came up with a series of specific technical requirements, for example a maximum road range of 1,000 kilometres and a combat weight of 12 tonnes, it altered them without notifying the contractors. No sufficiently detailed request for tender documents were issued. This resulted in confusion among the contractors, most of whom wrote to the Malaysian Ministry of Defence requesting formal clarification of the army's needs. In light of the situation, the evaluation period was extended through early 1981, when the army identified the SIBMAS, EE-11 Urutu, and Condor as the most promising candidates. In May 1981, the Malaysian Ministry of Defence announced it would accept both the SIBMAS and Condor for service, with the SIBMAS being adopted primarily as a fire support vehicle. Controversy immediately erupted over allegations that the tendering process had been rigged so that the fire support specifications for the IFV programme could only be met by the SIBMAS. These allegations led to a formal review of the SIBMAS procurement by the Malaysian National Investigations Bureau, and the army was forced to re-open its tender accordingly. Malaysia was also vilified by international and domestic anti-apartheid movements for its acquisition of the SIBMAS, which they suspected erroneously to have been licensed to South Africa as the Ratel in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 418.
Recent media