Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
That kind of modularity might or might not be a decisive advantage in developing new variants, but i don't think it has ever been actually used in the field. Swapping module still leaves you short of one vehicle, of one type or another. As for battle damage repair, i'd think that pretty often said damage will at best complicate a swap, if not make it unworkable until other repairs are carried out.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Their may not be a Def Stan that is absolutely specific to testing the modularity of an AFV, possibly because this is a fairly new field. However there are plenty of Def Stans for testing AFV that will have a bearing on this I am pretty sure and also there are the results of its use in service with eh German and Dutch Militaries and how they have adapted to the capability and what operating procedures they have adopted.
I am not saying the unique modularity of the Boxer is the be all and end all, and puts it above all other 8x8 and so we absolutely have to buy it. I like it and have sat in one. It has many good points but it is pricier than some of the completion. Should we buy it? I think so but it is not my decision. It is riskier than the completion, definitely no. You get what you pay for. Given how important the MIV is going to be for the British Army moving forward, we need to get the best platform we can afford in the numbers we require.
If we do buy boxer, one of the advantages of its modularity will be in sustaining the fleet. A number will always be in storage and rotated to reduce fatigue fleet wide. With the modular system you have the drive units available and when swapped can take the muddle to the vehicle going into storage. The robustness of the system means that a nodule hit can be replaced in theatre in a field workshop. Damage too great to permit this will probably have written off the entire platform.
People say how much cheaper the AMV etc. are compared to the Boxer but the boxer is built to UK requirements and t take UK specific equipment. How much will it cost to adapt the ANV to UK requirements and we will be adapting them as we always do. This will surely reduce the pricing differential to a certain degree.
In the end as long as we but the right vehicle for the job both I and the Army will be happy bunnies, though I am admittedly biased in favour of the Boxer and it puts smiles on the faces of the Germans who use it, then it must have something going for it.
I am not saying the unique modularity of the Boxer is the be all and end all, and puts it above all other 8x8 and so we absolutely have to buy it. I like it and have sat in one. It has many good points but it is pricier than some of the completion. Should we buy it? I think so but it is not my decision. It is riskier than the completion, definitely no. You get what you pay for. Given how important the MIV is going to be for the British Army moving forward, we need to get the best platform we can afford in the numbers we require.
If we do buy boxer, one of the advantages of its modularity will be in sustaining the fleet. A number will always be in storage and rotated to reduce fatigue fleet wide. With the modular system you have the drive units available and when swapped can take the muddle to the vehicle going into storage. The robustness of the system means that a nodule hit can be replaced in theatre in a field workshop. Damage too great to permit this will probably have written off the entire platform.
People say how much cheaper the AMV etc. are compared to the Boxer but the boxer is built to UK requirements and t take UK specific equipment. How much will it cost to adapt the ANV to UK requirements and we will be adapting them as we always do. This will surely reduce the pricing differential to a certain degree.
In the end as long as we but the right vehicle for the job both I and the Army will be happy bunnies, though I am admittedly biased in favour of the Boxer and it puts smiles on the faces of the Germans who use it, then it must have something going for it.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
A small video of the VBCI, if a British Army equipment officer visits the forum, I do not know
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Hopefully one of the few positive things to come out of the on going mini-review will be progress on the MIV programme. Fingers crossed we will also see a revision of the Ajax programme to make the programme more relevant to the Army's needs.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
I have nothing to sell, but just for information.
http://forcesoperations.com/en/an-apc-v ... -the-vbci/
http://forcesoperations.com/en/an-apc-v ... -the-vbci/
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
But does it come with a British Army boiling vessel inside or a standard French Army wine cooler?
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Paint me pessimistic, but they claim to have worked hard on UK equipment integration but all they've done is stick AeroGlow emergency lighting in and a Kongsberg Defender. That's not ground breaking is it?Frenchie wrote:I have nothing to sell, but just for information.
http://forcesoperations.com/en/an-apc-v ... -the-vbci/
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Not quite just that. The British Army's feedback on the original VBCI was that the protection was not adequate, the turning circle was too large and the engine was too difficult to access.RunningStrong wrote:Paint me pessimistic, but they claim to have worked hard on UK equipment integration but all they've done is stick AeroGlow emergency lighting in and a Kongsberg Defender. That's not ground breaking is it?Frenchie wrote:I have nothing to sell, but just for information.
http://forcesoperations.com/en/an-apc-v ... -the-vbci/
The upgraded VBCI being offered fixes specifically those issues as upgrades. That's what they'll be referring to.
-
Online
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Fair fair, that's a good commitment.RetroSicotte wrote:Not quite just that. The British Army's feedback on the original VBCI was that the protection was not adequate, the turning circle was too large and the engine was too difficult to access.RunningStrong wrote:Paint me pessimistic, but they claim to have worked hard on UK equipment integration but all they've done is stick AeroGlow emergency lighting in and a Kongsberg Defender. That's not ground breaking is it?Frenchie wrote:I have nothing to sell, but just for information.
http://forcesoperations.com/en/an-apc-v ... -the-vbci/
The upgraded VBCI being offered fixes specifically those issues as upgrades. That's what they'll be referring to.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Would that be VBCI 2? They showed a prototype with a 40mm turret, two anti-tank missles tubes and a remote 7.62. Can have extra armour bolted on if needed.RunningStrong wrote:The upgraded VBCI being offered fixes specifically those issues as upgrades. That's what they'll be referring to.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Yes, it can be fitted with add-on modular steel armor package or even titanium armor plates.benny14 wrote:Would that be VBCI 2? They showed a prototype with a 40mm turret, two anti-tank missles tubes and a remote 7.62. Can have extra armour bolted on if needed.RunningStrong wrote:The upgraded VBCI being offered fixes specifically those issues as upgrades. That's what they'll be referring to.
http://www.military-today.com/apc/vbci_2.htm
Regarding the turning circle, the VBCI can not rotate on the spot but the pilot can block either the 4 left or right wheels to reduce his turning radius. On the video we can see it at 1.06 minutes.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Take the above turret and install it on a Boxer and you have my preferred option, though I just wish they would get of their collective backsides and just order something. I am hoping this is one of the few silver linings of the ongoing mini review.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
It looks likely as Armoured Cavalry has a £6.8 bn allocation vs. AI 2.2 bn... and we are talking about two bdes each (even though not all cavalry will be in the Strike bdes).Lord Jim wrote: I just wish they would get of their collective backsides and just order something. I am hoping this is one of the few silver linings of the ongoing mini review.
- a matter of squeezing those two through the yearly budgets sieve (as we have seen from the AI item moving to the right, year after year)
- and the mini-review? Will it be mini!
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
That is essentially Ajax, though. Nothing of that has any connection with MIV. Not a single penny.It looks likely as Armoured Cavalry has a £6.8 bn
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... s-miv.html
"In January 2018 leading British companies in the defence sector; BAE Systems, Pearson Engineering and Thales UK have signed agreements with the ARTEC consortium as partners for the production of BOXER.
Should the armoured wheeled vehicle be selected as the British Army’s next generation Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV), at least 60% of BOXER’s value creation and 100% of final assembly will take place in Britain"
"In January 2018 leading British companies in the defence sector; BAE Systems, Pearson Engineering and Thales UK have signed agreements with the ARTEC consortium as partners for the production of BOXER.
Should the armoured wheeled vehicle be selected as the British Army’s next generation Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV), at least 60% of BOXER’s value creation and 100% of final assembly will take place in Britain"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4640
- Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
and more "high value" engineering job created in Germany and more production line jobs assembling the kits created in the UK really good day for British engineeringdmereifield wrote:http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... s-miv.html
"In January 2018 leading British companies in the defence sector; BAE Systems, Pearson Engineering and Thales UK have signed agreements with the ARTEC consortium as partners for the production of BOXER.
Should the armoured wheeled vehicle be selected as the British Army’s next generation Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV), at least 60% of BOXER’s value creation and 100% of final assembly will take place in Britain"
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Nothing that helps the German or other eu economy is in any way good for the UK.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
It seems that a fully British designed and built option isn't deemed to be suitable/available (?) so getting over half the value back into UK plc, and creating new jobs at the assembly site, is better than a kick in the teeth.....marktigger wrote:and more "high value" engineering job created in Germany and more production line jobs assembling the kits created in the UK really good day for British engineeringdmereifield wrote:http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... s-miv.html
"In January 2018 leading British companies in the defence sector; BAE Systems, Pearson Engineering and Thales UK have signed agreements with the ARTEC consortium as partners for the production of BOXER.
Should the armoured wheeled vehicle be selected as the British Army’s next generation Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV), at least 60% of BOXER’s value creation and 100% of final assembly will take place in Britain"
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
There will be no "full high end work in Britain" option.
It doesn't exist. The UK lost its land industry a long time ago. Too many contracts always looking elsewhere and ignoring the UK grown offers and endless designs that got shown off, then ignored in favour of cuts and short term UORs when it hit the fan due to said cuts.
It doesn't exist. The UK lost its land industry a long time ago. Too many contracts always looking elsewhere and ignoring the UK grown offers and endless designs that got shown off, then ignored in favour of cuts and short term UORs when it hit the fan due to said cuts.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
I think that the GD factory in Wales can assemble Piranha V, it's in its product presentation. GD does it for Romania, there is no reason not to do it in Wales. The Piranha V is an as good vehicle as the Boxer.
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
With most of the contenders for the MIV basically having the same capabilities, I would guess who wins will be decided by what else is brought to the table. Personally I hope the Boxer is successful as it is already a british spec vehicle in all but name, but the key is for the programme to move forward sooner than later.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
Yes. The Danes bought the std models, but Spain procured 5 to develop them further. They have been very tight-lipped about what is likely to come out - worthwhile to watch that space as it could happen any day (not Manana ).Frenchie wrote:The Piranha V is an as good vehicle as the Boxer.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC
I hope they suspend the project again and keep it on hold until the financial situation at the MOD has stabilised and more urgent matters dealt with.
This project is desirable but nothing more, there are already sufficient in service vehicles to partially fill any capability gap but other capability gaps in both services (Army and RN) which have nothing to fill them.
This project is desirable but nothing more, there are already sufficient in service vehicles to partially fill any capability gap but other capability gaps in both services (Army and RN) which have nothing to fill them.