Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

[Timmymagic]

Is it just me but in the attached video is that a Warrior at the 1.15 mark...



And in the picture here...

http://www.rada.com/capabilities/land-r ... -menu.html

Seems strange to use a Warrior in the graphics...

[marktigger]

hmmm put more Active electronic systems on the vehicles make them easier to detect!

[PAUL MARSAY]

if we decided to upgrade all warriors how many have we got that actually could be upgraded .

[Timmymagic]

if we decided to upgrade all warriors how many have we got that actually could be upgraded .

We are upgrading them as part of the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme. I think the number of vehicles to be upgrade is around 250. Over half the fleet won't get upgraded.

[shark bait]

380 are to be upgraded as part of WCSP programme, of which 280 will receive a new turret.

A bunch more will (hopefully) be upgraded as part of the ABSV programme. At one point 550 were slated to be upgraded in total so that may or may not give clues to ABSV numbers and the total available and suitable for upgrade.

[ArmChairCivvy]

380 are to be upgraded as part of WCSP programme, of which 280 will receive a new turret.

A bunch more will (hopefully) be upgraded as part of the ABSV programme.

Yeap, the 500-600 were to receive the mechanical and electrical updates, and the turreted number was 320+. ABSV (never funded, so far) I have seen mentioned at something like 85.
- so call it 280+85, and what does that leave for specialist roles (550 - ?)
- common logistics trail and REME at least, within fielded units (oops, why did all the AJAX get allocated to somewhere else?)

That is all v good (namely, much better than ever since the sandbox wars "intervened"... all v relative), but now we can calculate about the future of AI in the overall force structure: 280 (minus the ones needed in Alberta for training)/ 14 = number of base manoeuvre units to combine with/ in combined arms
- so that's less than twenty
- assume the three operational Ch2 rgmnts (x 54-58), each yielding 3 manouvre units (9, before the number three is officially altered)
- so, 2 AI to every tank unit (quite a universal formula, especially as you have to have some infantry available for other things than just riding with tanks)

Someone could look up the AS90 batteries and the GMLRS (across regular and reserve rgmnts) and see if such "battle groups" could all be furnished with at least some artillery, be it tube or rocket (preferably both!).

[SKB]

[mr.fred]

The video's interesting in parts (much like the curate's egg)
The comments below it... let's just say that the ignorance burns me and leave it at that.

[RetroSicotte]

Well, it is youtube.

[Lord Jim]

So if we are retaining 4 Armoured Infantry Battalions then we need up front 228 Turreted Warrior Mod., 84 FV432 replacements and 32 CVR(T) replacements. To this we need to add replacement vehicles to be stored to cover maintenance programmes and such like. So it looks like we have the actual numbers for the IFV requirements but are the Recce Platoons being scrapped?

[ArmChairCivvy]

we need up front 228 Turreted Warrior Mod., 84 FV432 replacements and 32 CVR(T) replacements.

So it has become 4 now? Would follow from the order of battle (conversion of one more still to be announced?).
- and recce is an unnecessary luxury? Or, we mix in Ajax into a Warrior based formation?
- BTW, I would not be opposed at all to having something stealthier/ faster/ lighter to do the sneaky-beaky bit and then the MBTs cum Warriors following with "recce by force" when necessary

[ArmChairCivvy]

380 are to be upgraded as part of WCSP programme, of which 280 will receive a new turret.

I bought that earlier, but that makes for too many "mockup" turrets, or rather guns in them. Taking away the guns for testing, and for Ajax, there will be only 215 for fitting into Warriors.
- more can be bought (but when did that last happen?)

[Gabriele]

40mm CTA purchase:

245 Warrior with 40mm gun
245 Ajax with gun
25 guns for test and trials and development

total 515 systems purchased.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Thx, 280 minus 245 sounds much more plausible.

Is the difference all Joint Fires or whatever the arty version is called?

[Gabriele]

FV514, FV524 with the upgrade. Not clear though if said upgrade will actually upgrade anything of the Royal Artillery's specific mission fit, since that is a separate strand of the programme. Hopefully the RA has the budget and has put together its plan to embody the modifications. Experimentation was ongoing in 2010, but don't know what the status of play is.

FV522, FV523 (repair and recovery variants) and FV524 make up the balance in addition to FV520 and F521 (Section and Infantry Command, the ones with the gun).

The MOD has reserved the denominations FV525 for ambulance variant and FV526 APC variant (sub-variants to include mortar carrier and command support etcetera), in the hope that ABSV will actually progress one day.

The Recce Platoon should get Ajax to replace Scimitar. Unless Army 2020 Refine fucks up this too.

[RetroSicotte]

First I've heard of a Warrior "APC".

The numbers of ABSV would be so crucial to offsetting how few vehicles there are. If 380 Warriors are being upgrades, that leaves a good other 300 or so they can play with for various roles in being converted to ABSV. (As I highly doubt we'll see newbuilds)

Reminds me of the "Turretless Bradley" idea.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Experimentation was ongoing in 2010, but don't know what the status of play is.

I think that was reported in the Gunner, in quite some detail, but in general terms the outcome was that to do Joint Fires properly it was to be a pair of Warriors or a wholly new vehicle.

FV524 make up the balance in addition to FV520 and F521 (Section and Infantry Command, the ones with the gun).

- ahhh, the latter two have faded from my memory (or, are they, both or one of them on the "wish" list?)

[Gabriele]

The numbers of ABSV would be so crucial to offsetting how few vehicles there are. If 380 Warriors are being upgrades, that leaves a good other 300 or so they can play with for various roles in being converted to ABSV. (As I highly doubt we'll see newbuilds)

That's what ABSV has been since 2005. Purchasing wholly new vehicles was never really going to be an option. Unfortunately, even Warrior conversions never seem to get the funding and go ahead.

I think that was reported in the Gunner, in quite some detail, but in general terms the outcome was that to do Joint Fires properly it was to be a pair of Warriors or a wholly new vehicle.

Not quite. Initially, the requirement for a Joint Fires vehicle was tentatively given as something carrying a full six-man Fire Support Team. That would have indeed required 2 Warrior (and two Ajax). The two-vehicle solution was, of course, too expensive and also too overly complicated, as radio use increased exponentially as the two halves of the team tried to work together.
Adding an additional sensor head for simultaneous direction of artillery and air attacks was the eventual approach taken, even if the number of men carried could not be expanded.
23 Joint Fires sub-variants of Ajax are also on order.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Adding an additional sensor head for simultaneous direction of artillery and air attacks was the eventual approach taken, even if the number of men carried could not be expanded.
23 Joint Fires sub-variants of Ajax are also on order.

So the kit is roughly the same, and each team uses the same chassis as the formations (predominantly) that they are supporting... is that the gist?

[Gabriele]

That was how it was meant to work.

[Lord Jim]

What actual roles will the Warrior ABSV undertake, how many are actually fully funded and what is the programme timetable?

[Lord Jim]

All Armoured and Armoured Infantry Regiments/Battalions have had integral recce form the beginning of time so hardly a luxury. Used to be Scorpion and Scimitar respectively then all Scimitar. What is wrong with having Ajax Recce in Warrior and CA2 units? I would rather have them there than in all Ajax units! They already have multiple platforms on the roster. Yes a smaller lighter platform such as the Fennek for Close Recce would be nice but no funding I can see and we have all the Ajax we can ever use on order.

[shark bait]

I've always wondered, was a warrior upgrade ever considered for REECE instead of Ajax?

[Frenchie]

It would have been more economical and more relevant to upgrade 650 Warrior and buy Fennek recce, than to develop this family of Ajax vehicles.

[ArmChairCivvy]

more relevant to upgrade 650 Warrior and buy Fennek recce, than to develop this family of Ajax vehicles.

Frenchie, I wonder what is the difference in survivability? Despite both being billed as AFVs (Warrior being an IFV). the difference is that a recce wagon sometimes will have to drive into contact (may be just to make a hasty getaway), whereas the real weapon of an IFV is the infantry it dismounts (and when driving into contact, they will be in the tow of "heavies")
- I have seen the protection stats for the Austrian predecessor of Ajax (it being so old and hoping, at the time, for exports)
- when thinking about the leaps in the protection for MBTs over the same time period, those leaps have been massive and the materials technology is available for other families of AFVs (and perhaps partly explaining the sky-high unit price for an Ajax)