UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Search found 323 matches

Go to advanced search

by whitelancer
14 Jun 2019, 21:51
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]
Replies: 5881
Views: 239666
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 31 General Purpose Frigate [News Only]

Looks nice enough but not much in the way of offensive capability.
by whitelancer
02 Jun 2019, 22:13
Forum: British Army
Topic: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Replies: 1236
Views: 58621
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

The question is what is Boxer their to do? If we look at its predecessor, if one can call it that, Saxon was designed to carry an infantry section and its equipment and self deploy from the UK to Germany to reinforce BAOR. Once their it provided a degree of protected mobility, though not in the dire...
by whitelancer
27 May 2019, 16:57
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

NOMEX was issued many years ago to a small number of personnel, never progressed any further as far as I am aware. Cost I expect. The use of pure cotton would be a step forward, but they do seem to like to use artificial fibres, probable for durability. At one time they were pure artificial fires, p...
by whitelancer
27 May 2019, 09:53
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

Selling off or closing down the various Research and Development Establishments was very much a false economy. The MOD lost an enormous amount of knowledge, experience and expertise in many areas, not to mention the physical infrastructure.
by whitelancer
27 May 2019, 02:10
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

Even if WFM was not a thing, would a sub unit take all its tanks to Castlemartin ranges for training? While accountant bashing is fun, it doesn’t change the fact that a pound spent on one thing is a pound not spent on something else. Well these days who can say. What I will say is that in the past ...
by whitelancer
26 May 2019, 17:44
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

I wholeheartedly disagree. Whole Fleet Management is not the reason for sloppy drills, failure to follow authorisation procedures and failure to maintain the safe configuration of the platform. It may have hidden one of these failings, but it is not the cause of it, nor does it mitigate in anyway t...
by whitelancer
26 May 2019, 13:29
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

And for those who are interested, here’s a good thread on the findings of the investigation into the live fire exercise incident on the CR2 in 2017 at Castkemartin with the link to the official report below that Having just read through the report it seems it was an accident waiting to happen, I wo...
by whitelancer
04 May 2019, 23:21
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

Historically, how much combined arms have been present in brigade formations? Going back to the Second World War, brigades were generally homogeneous unit types and supporting arms came from division. If we go back to BAOR the Divisions supplied Combat Support and Combat Service Support, to the bri...
by whitelancer
01 May 2019, 00:39
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

As its a subject I know a little about I thought it worth giving my opinion. But as you say one of the prime purposes of the update is to improve the fire control and sighting system not doing so would make the whole project rather pointless .
by whitelancer
30 Apr 2019, 22:02
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Tide Class Tankers (MARS) (RFA)
Replies: 716
Views: 52812
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Tide Class Tankers (MARS) (RFA)

The DE&S site states 26.8 knots. If true that would be welcome as the best place for your support ships are with those they are supporting, which means they need to keep up. Their are no front lines at sea so you cant send your support ships somewhere "safe" without escorts, which we h...
by whitelancer
30 Apr 2019, 20:03
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

Though a new FCS is desirable, I see no reason you would need a new FCS just from changing the gun. A certain amount of reprograming yes, a completely new system no.
by whitelancer
22 Apr 2019, 23:38
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

All I was pointing out was that reducing the number of MBTs and Armoured Regiments makes it easier to dispense with the capability entirely. Whether this happens we will have to wait and see. What I am sure of is that their will be those that are asking whether the costs of maintaining just two Armo...
by whitelancer
22 Apr 2019, 19:28
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

RunningStrong wrote:Gap'ing the heavy armour capability so that we can ultimately invest a better solution?


I certainly wasn't suggesting that. Recreating a lost capability would be expensive and time consuming. If the heavy Armour capability goes it is unlikely return short of a major war.
by whitelancer
22 Apr 2019, 00:55
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

I wouldn't count your chickens, or tanks in this case. Reducing to just 2 Regiments just makes it easier to bin them completely. You only have to look at what happened to the Harrier to see the way this is going.
by whitelancer
21 Apr 2019, 15:20
Forum: British Army
Topic: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Replies: 1427
Views: 74631
Location: United Kingdom

Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)

As 56 are required by each Regiment for a total of 112 that would leave just 36 for training and sustainment. So no 3rd Regiment, at best the Yeomanry will provide a limited battle causality replacement capability. It is hardly a surprise though given the announcement some time ago that the number o...
by whitelancer
16 Apr 2019, 22:39
Forum: British Army
Topic: Section infantry weapons
Replies: 811
Views: 42728
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Section infantry weapons

I would like to see a golf bag approach being taken into use. Couldn't agree more. Whatever the choice of weapon's allocated to sections, companies and battalions, it cannot suite all situations. What's required is greater flexibility in choice of weapon's and their relative numbers, depending on t...
by whitelancer
11 Dec 2018, 21:48
Forum: British Army
Topic: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Replies: 455
Views: 29838
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)

mr.fred wrote:You guys don’t look very hard:


Thanks. Exactly the video I was thinking about.
by whitelancer
11 Dec 2018, 20:14
Forum: British Army
Topic: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Replies: 455
Views: 29838
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)

New news!I think that Warrior 2 must be stealthy, as it seems quite good at staying off the radar. https://www.janes.com/article/85073/war ... ing-trials Haven't their been videos of Warrior engaged in manned firing trials already? I did look for the videos but they appear to have been taken down! ...
by whitelancer
07 Dec 2018, 21:42
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Replies: 9934
Views: 597579
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

SVRL commentary .. BAE Systems F-35 STOVL test pilot Peter Wilson on 13 October became the first ITF pilot to recover to Queen Elizabeth using the SRVL manoeuvre. He had previously flown over 2,000 simulated recoveries using a full-motion simulator at the company's ship/air integration facility in ...
by whitelancer
03 Dec 2018, 21:16
Forum: British Army
Topic: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Replies: 455
Views: 29838
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)

Lord Jim wrote:Well that's one way to get around the manning shortages. Would it work for a T-23?

Remote operation is not going to reduce personnel requirements, that would need autonomous operation.
by whitelancer
19 Nov 2018, 23:51
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion
Replies: 9934
Views: 597579
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

I suspect they have concentrated on vertical landings to achieve initial operational capability. As far as SRVL is concerned they will have barely done more than tested the water. It will take a large number of landings in various conditions to find the acceptable limits under which SRVL can be used...
by whitelancer
18 Nov 2018, 10:24
Forum: Royal Air Force
Topic: Boeing E-3D Sentry AEW.1 (AWACS) (RAF)
Replies: 384
Views: 27879
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-3D Sentry AEW.1 (AWACS) (RAF)

Booms will be expensive to fit , expensive to operate and expensive to maintain. Fitting probes to the aircraft that need them should be much easier and cheaper with much lower operating and maintenance costs and money talks. Neither option appears very likely to me.
by whitelancer
11 Nov 2018, 15:42
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)
Replies: 259
Views: 16220
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

Repulse wrote: but we cannot afford everything and a large scale army intervention capability is not one of them.


Yet the MOD has consistently announced their desire to be able to deploy a full division!
by whitelancer
10 Nov 2018, 21:44
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)
Replies: 259
Views: 16220
Location: United Kingdom

Re: RFA Argus (Casualty Receiving Ship / Aviation Training Ship) (RFA)

So a Role 3 field hospital, like in Bastion and RFA Argus, is set up to provide a wide range of life saving medical interventions, supported by a quite small number of intensive care beds. There is then a steady flow of patients back to the UK to keep these facilities open for new casualties. In fa...
by whitelancer
06 Nov 2018, 20:46
Forum: Royal Navy
Topic: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]
Replies: 632
Views: 43872
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Type 23 Frigate (Duke Class) (RN) [News Only]

What is included in the quoted figures? Is it the cost of the VLS, software and electronics? I doubt if the cost of the missiles is included. The discrepancy in cost could simply reflect the need to remove the Seawolf elements on T23 and fit those for Seacepter, rather than install them at build.

Go to advanced search

 

 

cron