UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 14 May 2020, 18:34

Lord Jim wrote: though I do not think we will be buying the new Defender
A little bit of trivia: before Iraq kicked off in a way that called for MRAPs, the MoD had already announced the intention to buy 3000-ish G-wagens
- of course protection wise that would not have been much of a step up (on those vehicles needing the armour kit) so the idea quickly sailed away and over the horizon

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 295
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby RunningStrong » 15 May 2020, 08:05

Lord Jim wrote:Plus there is no need to replace all the existing 4x4s as they can still do a respectful job in and arounds bases in the US, in much the same way we can keep using the good old Land Rovers, though I do not think we will be buying the new Defender to replace them when they are finally worn out beyond repair..

In the simple utility vehicle respect (i.e. not militarised) they have largely been replaced by hired Mitsubishi L200s.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 15 May 2020, 09:29

Interesting, is that the British or US Military?

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 295
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby RunningStrong » 15 May 2020, 15:37

Lord Jim wrote:Interesting, is that the British or US Military?

British. Much like farmers, the British army has realised a Japanese pickup truck offers a lot more benefits than the expense of a Land Rover.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 15 May 2020, 16:45

The Dutch went all in with Volkswagen's toughie pickup, maintenance is also in the deal.

The protection that can added to these sorts of rides is limited; but the money saved gets more Boxers to jobs where their level of protection is needed

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 17 May 2020, 13:35

Haven't the French gone down a similar route, with two main variants, one basically a toughened civilian vehicle and then a version of the same platform that can be up armoured if needed.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 24 Jun 2020, 10:08

From a doc on the T26 thread, as to what decisions (and the costing of alternative approaches; they seem to like facts a priori - a commendable thing that is) within procurement are considered business critical in these times when not everything can be pursued as planned:

"could indicate that it's decision time getting nearer as to in what quantities to order more MIVs... as the first order will be pretty much fully absorbed just by the 4 inf. bns and 2 eng. rgmnts needed to have the strike bdes stood up
"DE&S Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) Procurement & Commercial Cost model to support MG submission"


https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... april-2020[/quote]"

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 24 Jun 2020, 11:35

Isn't the first order for around 500, so with each Mechanised Infantry Battalion needing around 75 that should leave between 150 and 200 Boxer for other units.

I do see the Boxer becoming probably the key AFV in the Army's inventory with regards to numbers and I can see its procurement being one of multiple order of a long period of time, well into the 2030s. This may come at the expense of investment in the Army's heavy units, though the key component within these that maybe retained would be the Challenger 2s, whereas other platforms such as the Warrior could have their roles carrier out by a variant of the Boxer if needed.

The Army's equipment plan could, in all likelihood become something of a train wreck if the economic downturn has a seriously adverse effect on the defence budget and especially the equipment plan. This couldn't happen at a worse time, when multiple Army programmes are all in need of funding in order to replace or modernise the majority of the Army's AFV fleet. If the Army tries to keep all its programmes going, it will result in both delays and reduced numbers, both of which the Army can ill afford if it wants to regain its ability to be able to fight a peer level conflict.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 24 Jun 2020, 12:12

Lord Jim wrote:that should leave between 150

yes, two more rgmnts (the engineers) 2 x 75
Lord Jim wrote:equipment plan could, in all likelihood become something of a train wreck if the economic downturn has a seriously adverse effect on the defence budget
Not news to you or me, but some other threads/ some contributors on them seem to believe in "economic levitation". I went onto a levitating train in the mid 80s, in the Tsukuba Expo, but that is how far belief alone carries me
Lord Jim wrote:This couldn't happen at a worse time
as you say, the army is attempting a major recapitalisation of its AFV fleets; last time that happened was... in the mid 80s :D

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 25 Jun 2020, 00:17

I also fear there are some in high places within the MoD and Army in particular who seem to have gotten the revolutionary bug once again, as happened when FRES originally raised its head. They are looking at capabilities and doctrines that require technologies that in some cases have only just begun to be developed. They seem to believe that the current recapitalisation as part of Army 2020+ is on track and will deliver what is needed by the Army in the near term and so have moved their attention to the far future beyond 2040. In reality these programmes as they stand will deliver an Army ill equipped to fight a modern peer level conflict and lack the mass to sustain it.

The Boxer is a very good platform, some might say too good for what the Army intends, but after deciding to create the "Strike" Brigades, they are intending the Boxers to be mainly basic wheeled APCs with little firepower except that of the old trusty .50 Cal HMG. The formation will rely on dismounted infantry units whose support weapons will also be dismounted including ATGW and Mortars. This alone goes against the idea of highly mobile formations able to engage and disengage at will against a peer opponent.

Though the Army has identified that these units will require substantial indirect fire support, these aspiration are not properly funded and their size and scope is insufficient.

With the right combination of variants the Strike Brigades could almost be a blueprint for all western medium forces, but the Army has wasted this opportunity. It could of had a blank canvas to work with but instead decided to turn the formations into a melting pot of platforms it didn't know how to use or those that were searching for a new role e.g. Ajax.

To these woes we must, as mentioned up thread take into account the squeeze that will inevitably fall on the Defence Budget as a result of the economic downturn resulting from the ongoing pandemic and we could see the Army having even more teeth pulled and capabilities lost or postponed to a future date, where those in high places we see them as yesterday ideas, cancel them altogether whilst looking to systems that would not be out of place in a Buck Rogers movie.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 25 Jun 2020, 04:49

Lord Jim wrote:with little firepower except that of the old trusty .50 Cal HMG

- old crusty?

Lord Jim wrote:take into account the squeeze that will inevitably fall on the Defence Budget as a result of the economic downturn resulting from the ongoing pandemic and we could see the Army having even more teeth pulled and capabilities lost or postponed


- where was Brexit in that :lol: ?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 25 Jun 2020, 22:33

With BREXIT I hoped we might just manage to maintain to Status Quo, but with all that has happened since the year started I am more concerned about things going "Down, down". :D

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 6346
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Location: England

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby SKB » 25 Jun 2020, 23:42

Lord Jim wrote:Status Quo.... "Down, down". :D

:mrgreen:

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4295
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Lord Jim » 30 Jun 2020, 17:21


User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 30 Jun 2020, 21:06

Lord Jim wrote:All I want for Christmas is.......
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... 552-mm-gun


Well, put down the advance, quick, and Shephard says you'll stand a good chance:
"Italian 3.0 Centauro II procurement remains unfinalised

As the Italian MoD and the Iveco-Oto Melara (CIO) consortium continue negotiations, details remain undefined of a plan to acquire 40 8×8 Centauro II armoured vehicles"

Tom8
Junior Member
Posts: 7
Joined: 15 Feb 2020, 07:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby Tom8 » 08 Jul 2020, 15:07

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Lord Jim wrote:All I want for Christmas is.......
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... 552-mm-gun


Well, put down the advance, quick, and Shephard says you'll stand a good chance:
"Italian 3.0 Centauro II procurement remains unfinalised

As the Italian MoD and the Iveco-Oto Melara (CIO) consortium continue negotiations, details remain undefined of a plan to acquire 40 8×8 Centauro II armoured vehicles"


I imagine the 40 will be used to equip the two squadrons needed for their two New Freccia brigades.

To equip the rest of their recognisance regiments they will need another 6-7 squadrons worth.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 1835
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Postby bobp » 13 Jul 2020, 16:28



Thought this was useful to show different variations


Return to “British Army”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests