The future form of the Army

[Timmymagic]

My thinking behind LMM on some Warriors is it is a good cheap all rounder I maybe wrong but I think I saw somewhere it was about £3000 per round and is useful against light and medium armour , UAV's and Helicopters so maybe half the Warriors could be fitted with ATGW's and the other half with LMM giving them good all round cover.

Not sure where you've seen that figure...but LMM is not cheap.

The cheapest Western PGM's are c$20-25k a pop. APKWS, M1156 PGK and JDAM. The production volumes for those are absolutely colossal. And that figure appears to be a hard floor for any Western PGM.

If LMM has left the factory at less than £40,000 per missile I'd be impressed and very surprised...but I also wouldn't be surprised to find out it cost twice that figure..

Never seen an LMM cost myself out in the wild, but the contract was for c1,000 missiles, which is worth remembering when everyone is proposing sticking them on everything. When you see a picture of a Wildcat with 20 loaded on its wings its carrying 2% of the entire production run...stick 60 LMM on a Type 23 (5 for each DS-30 mount and 20 for the Wildcat plus one full reload for each platform) and you've got 6% of our entire holding in one location. We've got over 4,000 Hellfire in stock at present...LMM/Martlet is niche.

The Royal Marines did use the triple mount to launch Martlet at an aerial target recently, so it is backwards compatible on the pedestal mount and shoulder mount (although I'm not sure if we actually hold any of those). It will allegedly take light armour and medium armour out. But its worth questioning what they mean by 'medium'. The other variants are not funded at present so single stage motors, IIR or SAL seekers and other warheads are not available and truth be told are unlikely to be ever.

So add together no fire and forget, no tandem warhead, can't be guided by other platforms/users, direct fire only and with a similar cost to MMP and I suspects its a bad idea to try and use it for anything but the uses we've found for it to date. Its perfectly decent for those roles.

[Tempest414]

As I said happy to be wrong it was more a case of seeing what we had in the toy box and if it could be used else where

[Lord Jim]

From what I have rad, the Starstreak is quiet effective against light armour any way, but if we end up extending our stocks of LMM then maybe giving each Starstreak unit a very limited number for emergency use, kind of like how the 105mm Abbots had a few HEAH rounds in the turret, could be an idea.

Ok back to my 2x2 proposal. I have covered the more conventional one so now the one I actually prefer but will probably incite the most reaction. First of it would involve the cancellation of both the Warrior CIP and Ajax production contracts, which should give everyone a good idea of where I am going to be heading with this. I propose that we double down on the Boxer as our primary platform. It has the best protection of any wheeled AFV and matched most medium tracked ones. it has lower operating costs and has equal tactical and far superior theatre mobility and can be given at least equal firepower. It is also superior for warfare below peer level, which is a factor that we must take into account going forward, and increasing the number of units equipped with it allows a greater pool from which to deploy units and reduces overall maintenance and training costs even further, plus the number purchased should reduce the units cost. In addition the numbers purchased could make the Telford plant thee default production site for all Boxers export orders and even follow on orders form existing users such as the German Army.

Like the first option I would reorganise the Challenger 2 Regiments into four instead of the existing three. Each Brigade would than include a Cavalry/Recce Regiments organised like those that were listed as equipped with the Ajax family but instead using the Boxer Recce version I proposed for use in the Recce Platoons of the Mechanised Infantry Battalions, with other Boxer variants replacing the relevant Ajax family members.

The Brigade would then be completed by the addition of two Mechanised Infantry Battalions exactly the same as proposed in the Mechanised Brigades. AS mentioned in the proposal for the Mechanised Brigades, using the Boxer will allow the Army to return to the us of eight dismounts per vehicle, which increases the Infantry content of these two Armoured Brigades, compared to the existing Armoured Infantry.

With this the Army retains two Brigades that are the equivalent in nearly every area as a more traditional Armoured Infantry Brigade, but are for more flexible whilst retaining the punch of two Challenger 2 Regiments per Brigade. Needed HETs to only transport these and the heavy equipment of the Royal Engineers support units placed only a fraction of the burden on the Logistic units that support the Brigades, and the number of support units can also be reduced again reducing the tail of each Brigade.

So that is the second proposal for a 2+2 organisation for the Army. I see it as a half way house between my original re-organisation proposed of three Mechanised Infantry Brigades and one Armoured Cavalry Brigade, and the first 2 + 2 proposal of two more or less Traditional Armoured Infantry Brigades and two Mechanised Infantry Brigades. All these proposals realise that the Army is going to have to recapitalised its entire AFV fleet over the next ten years, through either major modification programmes or the purchase of new equipment. Without doing so it will atrophy into a hollowed out home defence force with attach special forces, able to deploy a division of worn out, outdated and obsolete equipment that has a far higher probability of getting its crews and other personnel killed or wounded if forced to engages a peer opponent at the behest of our Government at the time.

[RetroSicotte]

Worth noting that while Starstreak can target ground units, it will struggle to really deal damage to things any heavier than maybe 30mm resistant. Each dart is said to have "40mm round" type impact. Given the date of that statement, 40mm APFSDS rounds then, and how Starstreak's darts aren't individually as potent as a full on APFSDS (since it needs a fragmentation component) a good estimate is that Starstreak is likely capable of harming things from STANAG 4 and down.

Useful, but you wouldn't want to rely on it, given autocannons fighting that range are hitting constantly to punch through in varied areas. Starstreak doesn't do that. Much better considered something that can target very light vehicles. Not IFVs/APCs.

[ArmChairCivvy]

If we had the whole of a strike bde embark on a 2000 km road march, would the current transporter fleet ( 89 HET and 77 LET) be able to take all the tracked vehicles? Throw in some AS90s, GMLRS launchers and AD Stormers as their replacements are years away (and as for the rocketry, if a bde is sent, surely the division will follow... so divisional fires rather be 'there' early than late
- whereas at least the HET part of the outsourcing contract is up for renewal before the first strike bde will be stood up
- hence the question might soon be topical?

[Lord Jim]

hrow in some AS90s, GMLRS launchers and AD Stormers

These should be replaced sooner rather than later. The AS-90 will probably be replaced in at least one regiment by a wheeled 155mm 5sCal. system aimed at supporting the "Strike Brigade, and as I have repeatedly advocated, we need at least one regiment of HIMARS for the same reason. The remaining AS-90 regiment and existing GMLRS Regiment should be re equipped in a similar manner as soon as possible after that. As for Starstreak, it shouldn't be too hard to do a Mission Module for the Boxer to house the launcher currently used on the Stormer HVM, and this should be able to carry additional ammunition as well. All of this should limit the need for Transporter to the Challenger 2s and the Armoured equipment of the Royal Engineers in one proposals, or these together with all the Ajax and Warriors in the other. This was the reason I proposed canning these in proposal B because of the Logistical tail this brings with it. Needing over 120 HETs just to move the Challenger2s and RE vehicles for one of the brigades from option 2 is a major undertaking as will their maintenance to keep them moving. Needing at least the same number again or double that if using METS to move the Warriors and Ajax form a option 1 Armoured Infantry Brigade is even worse. Armoured infantry were viable in my eyes when they were forward deployed in Germany and only had to move a short distance to get into their wartime positions as the enemy crossed the inter German Border. Having to ship formations hundreds of miles form the UK to eastern Poland is a major operation. It would be interest to see if we actually held an exercise to shift an entire reinforced Armoured Infantry Brigade from the UK to there, how easily we could do it and how long it would take, especially if the actual units were not chosen and notified until the last minute to simulate a crisis?

Well as I have stated, if the UK wants viable heavy and medium combat formations the MoD and Treasury are going to have to pull their collective heads out of their backsides and realise that substantial additional funding needs to be directed to the Army, and this needs to be new money not taken from else where in the MoD's budget. The Army has some uncommitted funding as was highlighted elsewhere, but with the entire AFV fleet requiring recapitalisation by either major modification programmes or the purchase of new equipment, and this needs to be started now, not in the next Ten Year Plan. Until then the Army's Armoured Infantry and planned "Strike" Brigades are not really viable, no matter how dedicated the troops actually. Their "Can do" attitude does help when you are out gunned, out numbered, the enemy has better kit and air power cannot be counted on.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Needing over 120 HETs just to move the Challenger2s and RE vehicles

Well, we don't have that many, hence I was trying to apply the number we have to a fully rounded strike bde:
"Kellogg Brown and Root, Deutsche Bank and the Oshkosh Truck Corporation, alias the FASTTRAX consortium was awarded the £290m whole-life-cost contract for 92 tractor trucks, 89 King GTS 110/7 semi-trailers along with three Tru-Hitch recovery systems and also staff to operate them as Sponsored Reserves "
- which contract after 20 yrs needs to be reviewed in the next year
- there's the supply, but what are the demand scenarios

[Lord Jim]

The current planned "Strike" Brigades Are going to need around 75 METS, or half that number if HETS are used for each Ajax equipped Recce Regiment. The 89 new HET combos should be enough to cover a single Strike Brigade as well as a number of its support units such as an Tracked 155mm Artillery Battery , Combat Engineering Support Vehicles and so on. As for one of the planned Armoured Infantry Brigades, well they would be doing at least two round trips to move one from Barracked to Poland for example, probably three.

Every track vehicle in a Brigade is going to need either a HET, share one or a MET to allow it to be moved from barracks, across the channel and into theatre. This is where a reorganised "Strike"/Mechanised Brigade comes into play, it basically needs zero. The HETs covered by the new contract should be able to move the two Armoured Regiments, or at least the majority of their equipment with contract hired METs supplementing them in one go, with the rest of the Heavy Mechanised Infantry Brigade self deploying, if my second proposal was selected, hypothetically. The advantages just in transportation requirements just to get the units into theatre are obvious. Of course the Pints could sail into the Baltic and unload in Riga or Tallinn, so you would only need the Transports in the UK to get the tracked AFVs to the docks but would that be such a good idea if things were getting hot and trigger fingers twitchy. Could a "Mistake occur where a Point was hit and sunk by a AShM fired in "Error"?

[Ron5]

Firstly, wouldn't the army transporters be reinforced with vehicles taken up from trade?

Secondly, isn't this idea of a mad dash by the small amount of UK armor across Europe to fight the Russians rather far fetched? Is there any basis for thinking this is the UK's plan if the Russians invade? I very much doubt it. The withdrawal of the BA from Germany surely meant the end of such notions.

Thirdly, the same goes for Strike, I can't see them straying much from home in that scenario.

Yes I know there have been exercises but they have value even if.

[ArmChairCivvy]

The withdrawal of the BA from Germany surely meant the end of such notions.

So our biggest air-con carpark (for AFVs) is only kept (there) for not needing to replace it rather than using it as a halfway house?
- plenty of road left, even counting from there... so the HET question remains

[jedibeeftrix]

Of course the Pints could sail into the Baltic and unload in Riga or Tallinn, so you would only need the Transports in the UK to get the tracked AFVs to the docks

Of course, it doesn't need stating that it would be absurd to build a whole new concept of army expeditionary warfare around the 'strike' concept, but then structure it such that it can only ever work effectively in the single mission of a mad-dash across the 1st class transport infrastructure of allied northern europe...

Which is precisely why I'm with you on your option #2.

[SW1]

I assume this proposal to move points all the way to a dock in Latvia would need to occur long before a situation went hot?

I think anything moving that far into the Baltic once Russia starting a shooting war would most likely be about as logical as sending POW and repulse to take on the might of the Japanese navy!

I would suggest if they were deploying to counter a Russian move west you options would likely be restricted to ports west of the Denmark straight.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Reading up on Strike two things seem to come clear (I say seem as sources are so scattered):
1. Looks like the SEG will stay when the 1st Strike Bde will be stood up
... a nucleus for the 2nd one?
2. Establishment strengths for subunits seem to go slightly up, with two exceptions:
armour to recce, and
logs (well, a smaller footprint at the bde level has been claimed all along)

[Timmymagic]

From what I have rad, the Starstreak is quiet effective against light armour any way, but if we end up extending our stocks of LMM then maybe giving each Starstreak unit a very limited number for emergency use, kind of like how the 105mm Abbots had a few HEAH rounds in the turret, could be an idea.

This may well be the intention anyway as Martlet will be far more effective against UAV's due to its proximity fuse. Starstreak with its 3 darts relies on a direct hit.

Worth noting that while Starstreak can target ground units, it will struggle to really deal damage to things any heavier than maybe 30mm resistant. Each dart is said to have "40mm round" type impact.

The '40mm' bit refers to the size of the bursting charge inside each dart which is roughly the same size as the one carried in a 40mm Bofors shell. Remember the Starstreak Darts explode and fragment once penetrating an aircraft (or armoured vehicles) skin.

[Lord Jim]

Secondly, isn't this idea of a mad dash by the small amount of UK armor across Europe to fight the Russians rather far fetched?

As far as "Strike" goes that is exactly its NATO role, to rapid self deploy a initial Brigade from the UK to NATO's eastern border, though whoever wrote the PR for the doctrine wasn't told that half the Brigade needed to be carried by transporters. As for Transports, so you need between 35 and 40 HETs to move an Ajax Regiment or around 80 METs or their civilian equivalent. That is a lot of civilian vehicles to gather up unless they are already under contract to be available in wartime. And it is the notice period that is important here. If, as many experts believe, any future conflict would be a "Come as you are" for the conventional fight, how soon before the Article 5 threshold is crossed do you start calling up assets like civilian contractors? Would Politicians see that as too provocative?

Ideally we would move some of the Challenger 2's and other heavy AFVs to new storage site further east, a similar distance from the possible frontline as was the case with the inter German border during the Cold War. The "Strike" Brigades are going to be our expeditionary units together with 16 Air Assault and 3 Commando so allocating the Armoured Infantry to Eastern Europe makes more sense as does prepositioning at lest a Brigade's worth of equipment their. This means revisiting the idea of returning units to the UK to a certain degree, say having a reinforced Regimental Battle Group stationed at a site with the rest of the Brigade flown in.

[Ron5]

Secondly, isn't this idea of a mad dash by the small amount of UK armor across Europe to fight the Russians rather far fetched?

As far as "Strike" goes that is exactly its NATO role, to rapid self deploy a initial Brigade from the UK to NATO's eastern border, though whoever wrote the PR for the doctrine wasn't told that half the Brigade needed to be carried by transporters. As for Transports, so you need between 35 and 40 HETs to move an Ajax Regiment or around 80 METs or their civilian equivalent. That is a lot of civilian vehicles to gather up unless they are already under contract to be available in wartime. And it is the notice period that is important here. If, as many experts believe, any future conflict would be a "Come as you are" for the conventional fight, how soon before the Article 5 threshold is crossed do you start calling up assets like civilian contractors? Would Politicians see that as too provocative?

Ideally we would move some of the Challenger 2's and other heavy AFVs to new storage site further east, a similar distance from the possible frontline as was the case with the inter German border during the Cold War. The "Strike" Brigades are going to be our expeditionary units together with 16 Air Assault and 3 Commando so allocating the Armoured Infantry to Eastern Europe makes more sense as does prepositioning at lest a Brigade's worth of equipment their. This means revisiting the idea of returning units to the UK to a certain degree, say having a reinforced Regimental Battle Group stationed at a site with the rest of the Brigade flown in.

Color me extremely dubious

[ArmChairCivvy]

The puzzle within which a strike bde and an AI bde (with prepositioned heavy equipment) would fit is exemplified by the revamped chain of command. It now starts with the MND(ivision) NE in Elblag, Poland; then goes to Multinational Corps Northeast in Szczecin, Poland; then to NATO's Allied Command Joint Forces in Brunssum, Netherlands; and then to the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe in Belgium.
- separate from the above, the U.S. Army's 1st Infantry Division headquarters in Poznan, Poland, opened on October 4, 2019.
- would hardly have happened without other nations committing to the MND (in which belongs also the US- led EFP BG in Poland, just like the other three BGs)

[Ron5]

Will the French send their panzers?

[Lord Jim]

Color me extremely dubious

I actually agree, the theory doesn't really match reality especially with the woeful make up of both the AI and Mech Inf. Brigades as currently planned. What we will end up sending is a group of units that are under equipped, undermanned and lacking essential capabilities that our allies may not be able to donate as they would likely have their hands full. Even landing the tracked equipment in Hamburg for example still leave a major road march by a very large number of HETs and METs that would be impossible to hide form an opponent and be very vulnerable at bottlenecks such as river crossing as the number of bridges able to take the weigh of the Transports would be limited. At least the "Medium" AFVs have more options as to the routes they could choose.

This is why in my favoured my proposals have limited the tracked component of each formation, to allow for a more rapid deployment and a reduced logistical tail. As for the long distance route march by vehicles such as Boxer under their own power just look at the requirements laid down for the new Precision Fires Platform and the minimum distances it must be able to travel under its own steam.

[RetroSicotte]

The '40mm' bit refers to the size of the bursting charge inside each dart which is roughly the same size as the one carried in a 40mm Bofors shell. Remember the Starstreak Darts explode and fragment once penetrating an aircraft (or armoured vehicles) skin.

Bofors APFSDS do not have any internal charge, hence their penetration. The ones with HE within barely penetrate anything armour wise.

Starstreak has a decent chance to punch through lighter, older vehicles. But ti's sometimes misreported as being a modern AT capable weapon of modern IFVs and suchlike. Which isn't really the case. Anything that can resist modern 30mm and up isn't going to care. But if you spot an old MT-LB, BMP-1 etc...then let fly and ruin its day.

[Timmymagic]

Bofors APFSDS do not have any internal charge, hence their penetration. The ones with HE within barely penetrate anything armour wise.

The '40mm' bit mentioned about Starstreak only refers to their explosive impact on an aerial target following a hit (in addition to the energy the kinetic impact will impart). The bursting charge is fused to explode inside the penetrated space. But it is also a Tungsten dart, designed to penetrate armour. And its going to deliver close to double the amount of KE to a target compared to a Bofors 40mm HE round (at least 880,000J opposed to c450,000J) in addition to that KE. To note a 20mm M61 Vulcan round delivers 200,000J and a GAU-8 round delivers 300,000J. Thats based on a m4.0 Starstreak figure, there have been claims that its more like m5.0. That would increase the KE to 1.3m Joules.
Add in there are 3 closely spaced darts on their way and that will cream most IFV armour out there....there might be a few exceptionally heavily armoured IFV's that could stop that on the frontal aspect, but they'll be hurt bad.

[The Armchair Soldier]

Topic moved into General Discussion as it's not strictly equipment related.

[RetroSicotte]

The '40mm' bit mentioned about Starstreak only refers to their explosive impact on an aerial target following a hit (in addition to the energy the kinetic impact will impart). The bursting charge is fused to explode inside the penetrated space. But it is also a Tungsten dart, designed to penetrate armour. And its going to deliver close to double the amount of KE to a target compared to a Bofors 40mm HE round (at least 880,000J opposed to c450,000J) in addition to that KE. To note a 20mm M61 Vulcan round delivers 200,000J and a GAU-8 round delivers 300,000J. Thats based on a m4.0 Starstreak figure, there have been claims that its more like m5.0. That would increase the KE to 1.3m Joules.
Add in there are 3 closely spaced darts on their way and that will cream most IFV armour out there....there might be a few exceptionally heavily armoured IFV's that could stop that on the frontal aspect, but they'll be hurt bad.

40mm Bofors HE rounds are not fired at armoured targets. They are not designed for that. They can barely harm armour at all. These are not the ones to be comparing to.

40mm MkIII APFSDS rounds are known to penetrate around 170mm of armour. They are inert hunks of metal, darts just like the ones out of MBT guns. There is no HE component. Their darts are significantly more powerful than the Starstreak ones, being both much larger, heavier, moving at pretty much the same muzzle velocity.

At the time Starstreak was made, you're likely looking at the MkI M-1 APFSDS round by contrast, which is closer in comparison. However that older APFSDS round is still a complete Sabot. It's all metal, and thus carries more penetrating force than something the same size but gives up weight and mass for an HE component within the round.

Simply put, it is impossible for the Starstreak darts to outperform anything but older 40mm APFSDS rounds for armour penetration. A piece of metal travelling at the same speed, but with less mass behind it, cannot scientifically contain more KE. The HE rounds from the Bofors barely penetrate anything, since they're meant for non-armoured targets only, like trucks, or airbursting over cover, they are not the comparison here.

Thus we know what Starstreak cannot feasibly reach in terms of armour penetration. Since modern 30mm APFSDS rounds (which are what most modern IFVs are rated against) are known to be about the performance of older 40mm APFSDS rounds, we know that Starstreak will not penetrate them. It's for use against light armour only. Things that top out at 14.5mm or 20mm resistance, those things it'll happily perforate. But expecting it to go out and penetrate an uparmoured BMP-3 or suchlike is suicide.

The darts also fly around a meter to a meter and a half apart from each other, in order to give a wided reach for catching aircraft. They don't land closely packed at all.

[ArmChairCivvy]

an uparmoured BMP-3

these turning up in numbers put an end to using 23 mm AA guns against ground targets
- until then the practice was to have 2 HE for each armour piercing round in the feed sequence so whether the folks in the OpFor APC dismounted or not... job done any) way

A more general topic is that as there might be a come back of more fast firing autocannons (of smaller calibres) to deal with UAVs, then the utility of them in any other use will automatically pop up (again)

[RetroSicotte]

these turning up in numbers put an end to using 23 mm AA guns against ground targets
- until then the practice was to have 2 HE for each armour piercing round in the feed sequence so whether the folks in the OpFor APC dismounted or not... job done any) way

A more general topic is that as there might be a come back of more fast firing autocannons (of smaller calibres) to deal with UAVs, then the utility of them in any other use will automatically pop up (again)

Already has, to some extent! US, Russia, and China have all been creating new versions targeted at just that. No doubt the Italians are taking another look at the Draco again. The Swedes have been keeping their SPAA versions of the CV90 readied for it too. (I adore those things.)

There's also that RAPIDFire CT40 version. Might be a nice tieover till a proper under armour version is taken in. Personally I'd look into doing what the Swedes did. Strap a radar to an Ajax and line up the CT.