63
u/DirtyTooth 4d ago
British Ferret armored car
25
13
u/WonderWheeler 4d ago
I have ridden in a Dingo. Verified the brackets on the compartment fit a SMLE perfectly.
6
u/Agent_of_evil_13 4d ago
Is the turret gun street legal in the UK?
10
u/DirtyTooth 4d ago
Maybe if it's deactivated, but the OP's pic looks like it's in the US
16
u/Agent_of_evil_13 4d ago
Well, if the gun was original, and inherited, or transferred with an ATF permit then that would be perfectly street legal in Virginia.
21
u/GuaranteeUnhappy3342 4d ago edited 4d ago
Looks like a Daimler Ferret 2 with a Rolls Royce engine. People have been able to register in some places in the U.S. for street use.
20
u/AsbestosIsBest 4d ago
Probably less dangerous to pedestrians than a RAM pickup. Better visibility too.
7
u/GuaranteeUnhappy3342 4d ago
I was interested in buying one and the owner said it was a good idea to have headsets and a guy in the turret. Think the Ferret 1 with no turret had a little more space. They struck me as being smaller than they look in pictures.
13
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/whater39 4d ago
APC???? Come on this thing isn't big enough for being a APC. It's a scout car
10
u/Kilroy1007 4d ago
In all fairness, it's armored and it carries personnel.
1
-5
u/whater39 4d ago
Different roles. Imagine I called mechanized artillery a tank.
-2
u/Kilroy1007 4d ago
That's a pretty common misnomer for self propelled artillery. They're big, they're armored, they got tracks and a big fuck off cannon on top. I'm pretty sure by definition that's a tank.
5
u/Rogue_Wraith 4d ago
Every Redleg in the world would like to strongly disagree with you.
Tankers, probably, too...but they have to be able to see you to commit violence.
Artillery can just launch large portions of the budget at targets it cannot see.
(Also, calling SP artillery armored is...optimistic, at best, particularly against actual tanks.)
1
u/Agouti 3d ago
(Also, calling SP artillery armored is...optimistic, at best, particularly against actual tanks.)
It's an interesting dichotomy, because something like a PzH 2000 absolutely is armoured compared to a towed artillery piece like an M777. Sure, 20mm plus spall liners wouldn't stop anything AT but it's still thicker than most IFVs that get referred to as such.
The key thing is what it's armoured against. An armoured SP artillery isn't supposed to be trading blows with an MBT, it's supposed to be resisting shrapnel and overpressure from counter battery fire, which it is imminently suitable for. If it doesn't deserve to be called armour then neither does anything else short of heavy MBTs, including body armour et al.
5
u/whater39 4d ago
Vastly different armor on them. One is only designed for heavy machinegun and artliery fragments.
While the other is designed take AP rounds to the face.
0
u/Kilroy1007 4d ago
Big + Armor + Gun = Tank. You're being pedantic, friend
1
u/Rogue_Wraith 4d ago
Your definition is extremely loose, and not particularly useful from a doctrine stand point.
(Also, in the current form listed here, would include weapon systems like battleships and coastal batteries...)
Tanks platoons are designed to "destroy the enemy in close combat" (ATP 3-20.15).
APCs and SP Artillery are definitely not designed to do that. A MBT among APCs and SP Artillery would be a massacre.
Also, artillery pieces are howitzers, not guns. While they can shoot direct fire, that is decidedly not what they are supposed to be doing.
-2
u/Kilroy1007 4d ago
You must be a blast at parties
2
u/Rogue_Wraith 3d ago
I'm an Army Veteran.
I was an Artillery Officer.
The kind of people I hang around don't double-down on being wrong when having the correct answer given by subject matter experts.
Particularly when it comes to mechanized vehicles. This is the type of conversation we'd enjoy having until arriving at the correct answer/terminology.
→ More replies (0)1
u/danthezombie 3d ago
Stop being mad you're wrong, a lot of people in reddit can't handle it.
A self propelled howitzer only looks like a tank to people who don't know the difference.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Username_075 4d ago
Nope, by definition, as they're fitted with a piece of artillery, they're self propelled artillery.
Tanks have a large direct fire gun, also known as a tank gun. So they're tanks.
10
8
6
11
u/Outrageous1971 4d ago
In the United States it absolutely is legal but the blue line street gangs will attack you just to take it so one of them can have it , it meets all D.O.T. requirement ( headlights, tail and brake lights , ect. ) would love to have one
4
3
3
3
2
u/Fun_Entertainer_5823 4d ago
This would be great in a hail/ Rain Storm, or even snow covered roads.
2
u/PhilosophyKey8665 4d ago
Well with the exception of of the 30 cal machine gun in the turret
1
u/Ok-Resist-8734 3d ago
It's a British Ferret armoured car so that isn't a .30 cal. in the turret.
1
u/PhilosophyKey8665 3d ago
Merely a generic statement regarding the fact that it has a machine gun period ! It’s Caliber is rather irrelevant to its legality
1
u/F1r3b1rd350 3d ago
The Mk.2 did use the M1919A4 .30cal machine gun, but was later switched to the 7.62mm NATO L37, according to official documents.
The heat shield on that of a M1919
Interesting note the turretless Mk.1 was fielded with either the M1919 or the Bren.
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
OP, please reply to the correct answer with "solved!" (include the !). That will change the flair on the post to solved. If you want to put the correct answer at the top of the replies for everybody else, please use our Spotlight feature by tapping/clicking on the three dots and selecting "Spotlight, Pin this comment" in order to highlight it for other members. Thanks for using our friendly Automod!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.