Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

[ArmChairCivvy]

LockMart in the background... everyone seems to love it!

[ArmChairCivvy]

Another picture of AMV with Warrior turret. This time with armored ATGM box.

Putting these three that are the standard offer here, for all to be found in the same place. Surely we would go with the same gun as on Ajax (were we to select AMV).
http://fighting-vehicles.com/patria-amv-xp/

[LordJim]

With our current procurement programmes for the Army in the state they are in I would be happier if all the work was done overseas is that meant it was done right. Ship building I can understand and aircraft sort of but we are out of the AFV business except for fitting out so no exports just job creation. Increase the size of the MoD's in house overhaul facilities and put all the work there.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Another picture of AMV with Warrior turret. This time with armored ATGM box.

Putting these three that are the standard offer here, for all to be found in the same place. Surely we would go with the same gun as on Ajax (were we to select AMV).
http://fighting-vehicles.com/patria-amv-xp/

Let me add the Saab Trackfire (appears on this vid on an AMV) even though the choice of a "vehicle test bed" may have been just incidental ... lots of AMVs kicking about in Sweden:

[LordJim]

Another example of a piece of kit that should be standard on most AFVs. The days of the manually operated weapon on an AFV should really be in the past. The benefits outweigh the costs but the will power simply is not there. At a minimum all Ajax, MIV and MRV(P) should be plumbed for a RWS with a lesser amount permanently fitted with one. Any platform going in to theatre should be so fitted as part of any TES.

[ArmChairCivvy]

The benefits outweigh the costs

On IFVs/ APCs the non-monetary one being that the number of dismounts is often unaffected (depending on how many ready rounds will be built into the design).

[mr.fred]

Another example of a piece of kit that should be standard on most AFVs. The days of the manually operated weapon on an AFV should really be in the past. The benefits outweigh the costs but the will power simply is not there. At a minimum all Ajax, MIV and MRV(P) should be plumbed for a RWS with a lesser amount permanently fitted with one. Any platform going in to theatre should be so fitted as part of any TES.

In the sense that most weapons can and should be servo controlled with a fire control system, yes.

Not in the sense that they should be remote from the crew. It makes sense for IFV and APC where you already have space in the hull for crew and fighting isn't your primary role, but less so for dedicated fighting platforms.

At the same time that vehicles should have a fitting for RWS, they should also have a fitting for pintel mounts and protection for them, along with the expectation to use them. Just in case and recognising that operating heads-out is of military utility as well.

[Tinman]

I predict no MIV for the foreseeable future, with the mini SDSR, more focus on MMA, MPA, T31.

[ArmChairCivvy]

more focus on MMA, MPA, T31

- littoral OPs & securing the Deterrent? Enhancing presence. coalition building and pre-emption?
-- overlaps in bold

[ArmChairCivvy]

Now I claim an extra pin label... or do I get to slap down some unrulies (the authority to)?

[LordJim]

MIV is actually a cheap programme compared to the big ticket RAF and RN programmes. Yes their will be changes in the "Mini" review, but I think these will be more along the lines of reduced numbers, longer lead times, removal of old equipment, than not proceeding with headline programmes of which the "Strike" Brigades was one. I think we will see an order for 20 to 30 in different variants to form a trials units which will also receive a number of Ajax. This isn't a bad idea and would allow the Army to be able to go to the Treasury later and say we need these variants and in this quantity because.... and had data to back this up rather than presenting a thesis/wish list.

[Spinflight]

Between remote gpmg, pintle mounted fifty or 40mm the former is by far the most impressive in terms of accuracy and firepower.

Strangely though also the least useful. The bod inside with a joystick doesn't really know what is going on, whereas with your head above the parapet you do.

Saying that once the fifty starts firing the operator won't hear all that much afterwards. Great fun of course...

I have no idea why we want an 8x8. Unless it was an 8x8 truck, those are actually useful.


Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

[ArmChairCivvy]

Unless it was an 8x8 truck, those are actually useful.

... and taking one for a spin is great fun:

The driver had his truck in the Paris-Dakar rally limited to 150 km/h as he only knows one way to drive: the pedal down
- it was a different truck, though

[Ron5]

Type 31 is 20 years away, the Treasury is looking for immediate savings.

[Frenchie]

From French source unverifiable the winner of the MIV program would be the Piranha 5, I can not say more, they will be produced in Wales.

[Smokey]

From French source unverifiable the winner of the MIV program would be the Piranha 5, I can not say more, they will be produced in Wales.

"Piranha V". The one that won it last time #facepalm

[Zealot]

From French source unverifiable the winner of the MIV program would be the Piranha 5, I can not say more, they will be produced in Wales.

Well that's honestly no surprise... P5 was designed for the British Army due to feedback GD received when we tested P4. GD have also unofficially stated that they could modify them to an "Ajax standard". It will quite literally be an Ajax with 8 wheels.

[Frenchie]

Heavier, it already weighs 30 tonnes, it is too heavy for Strike Brigades, if we can we agree on what is a Strike Brigade of course.

[ArmChairCivvy]

they could modify them to an "Ajax standard". It will quite literally be an Ajax with 8 wheels.

So from Stryker kevlar coffin to an Ajax on wheels... they sure have travelled a long way!

[LordJim]

I agree 30+ tons is a lot but given the desire to maximise the passive protection on any platform that wins the MIV programme as APS will only appear under a UOR, I think the Army would be willing to accept a platform of that weight as long as the power train can cope and mobility is not too adversely affected. We are going to have the MRV(P) as the lighter protected vehicle, probably the same level of protection as the VAB or TPz 1.

[Frenchie]

I think that the MIV should be assigned to the Armoured Infantry Brigades, the MRV-P should be assigned to the Strike Brigades, it would be smart, in my humble opinion of course.

[LordJim]

I actually agree with you Frenchie, I think the Warrior should be withdrawn and the MIV shouls tak its place, forming three Mechanised Brigades, each with 1 Armoured with Challenger 2, 3 Mechanised with MIV and an integral Artillery Regiment with a wheeled 155mm SP Gun. You could deploy the Brigade with or without the Armour, but unless sufficient variants of the MIV are procured the whole idea is a pile of Sh&$.

[Gabriele]

Why? Where does this obsession for wheels come from? History doesn't really encourage a rush in that direction. Results of previous use of "medium forces" are nowhere near that encouraging.

the MRV-P should be assigned to the Strike Brigades

The MRV-P is not a combat vehicle per se, but a way to give protected (level 2, normally) mobility to mostly everything of what moves on soft skinned vehicles outside the wire today. It replaces a load of land rovers, Pinzgauers and then Husky, RWMIK, Panther, possibly Jackal. MRV-P will be found in every brigade across the army. But it is not meant to provide the battle stead of a brigade per se. We are not talking about the same programme as today.

[LordJim]

Wheels appeal as in a nut shell they are cheaper both to buy and run. Protection levels are far greater then a decade or so ago and they provide a greater degree of mobility in many situation compared to tracked. Ideally you should nave a mix of both but the way budget are becoming to could become a case or either or and in this situation wheeled would probably win. The logistics of getting Tracked AFVs with a reasonable level of protection etc. anywhere is far greater than the equivalent wheeled platform. The firepower available to many wheeled platforms is sufficient to take on most likely threats and MBTs can still be deployed in support. Yes you retain these even with their large logistical foot print as unlike other tracked AFVs there really is not wheeled equivalent.

[Gabriele]

But Warrior is there, MIV is not. Purchasing MIV will never be as cheap as running what the army already has.