Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

[Ron5]

Three recent parliamentary replies:

15 June 2021

As at the end of May 2021, General Dynamics has completed 263 hulls. 58 turrets have been manufactured under a sub-contract with Lockheed Martin. A total of 107 vehicles have been produced.

14 June 2021

As preparation activity for the Capability Drop 1 vehicles at the end of 2019, some soldiers were invited to do pre-trials training on prototype variants. Whilst the on-board sensors did not register any issues subsequently there were anecdotal reports of vibration.

A small number of soldiers engaged in Entry Qualification Trials reported noise and vibration characteristics in July 2020 and in September 2020 a medical staff report raised possibility of noise injuries. As a result, the Authority commissioned in-ear assessments through the Army environmental health team. Evidence from this led to the immediate stop of all dynamic vehicle training on 6 November 2020.

The Authority has subsequently commissioned independent trials with Millbrook Proving Ground to provide an independent assessment of the vibration data provided by General Dynamics which we expect to report in late July 2021.

14 June 2021

There are five capability drops (0,1,2,3,4). Capability Drop 4 will be the final build standard and all vehicles will be retrofitted to this standard.

Drop 0 is complete with an on-going rolling programme from Drop 1 through to Drop 4. Drop 1 commenced mid 2020 with Drop 4 currently planned to complete by the end of 2024. The Ajax delivery schedules are currently being reviewed by the Ministry of Defence and GDLS-UK.

Unconfirmed picture of an Ajax passenger

[Ron5]

14 June 2021

As preparation activity for the Capability Drop 1 vehicles at the end of 2019, some soldiers were invited to do pre-trials training on prototype variants. Whilst the on-board sensors did not register any issues subsequently there were anecdotal reports of vibration.

A small number of soldiers engaged in Entry Qualification Trials reported noise and vibration characteristics in July 2020 and in September 2020 a medical staff report raised possibility of noise injuries. As a result, the Authority commissioned in-ear assessments through the Army environmental health team. Evidence from this led to the immediate stop of all dynamic vehicle training on 6 November 2020.

The Authority has subsequently commissioned independent trials with Millbrook Proving Ground to provide an independent assessment of the vibration data provided by General Dynamics which we expect to report in late July 2021.

There's some questions concerning the above ministerial answer that need answering. Tusa's story is confirmed by Jon Hawkes from Jane's.

What shall we speak about today? Shall we have another run on Ajax..? Why not! Well, take this PQ: it says that the Army Ajax trials team first reported vibration/noise issues in 2019, possibly late-2019...

Ok, maybe... However, after series a long chats with close to a dozen defence hacks, we have compared notebooks from over the past decade and come to a commonly agreed position/understanding: the first evidence of noise'/vibration came to light at...

...or just after the 2017 DSEI defence show. Now, we have "opened our kimonos here with each other (stop sniggering in the cheap seats!), and compared sources, to make sure that we have not been told the same thing by the same person.

No: we have sources from GD (yes: they leaked...), Lockheed Martin Ampthill, several independent engineering contractors involved in both devt and testing, members of ATDU, Land Command, DE&S, and MoD Main Building.

The story is pretty standard: there is serious vibration, so bad that electronics were being shaken to bits, and so bad that the stabilisation system couldn't work while firing on the move. And the vibration as accompanied by high levels of noise.

One involved in the trials told me that his head tended to ring after he had been driving the vehicle, substantially more than if he was driving, say CR2 or Warrior. Another said that you could hear Ajax from miles away, more tan other AFVs.

OK, so what? Well, why would a large part of the Ajax community have been reporting vibration/noise issues over Ajax 2-2 1/2yrs before the MoD say that they actually knew about this?

There is absolutely no evidence that the noise/vibration issue "appeared" from nowhere in 2019 - far from it. Indeed, the IPA report, as well as Jeremy Quin either state, or suggest that these issues were there long before - but somehow had been not noticed/revealed.

So, why were they not ID'd, queried, and then addressed? To "be fair", GD was trying to address them, as was LM, who make the turret - with a degree of squabbling between the two. But it is the seeming lack of inquisitiveness from the Army/DE&S/MoD that interests me.

What, don't major programmes such as Ajax have quarterly, or bi-annual reviews? Isn't there an actual DE&S project manager? Isn't there an Army PM? Isn't there a Senior Responsible Officer? How can a slack handful of specialist defence hacks get to know about this, years before?

Which leads one to several conclusions. Either there was mismanagement of the programme, with no-one managing it actively - the IPA report points at several possible examples of this, so it cannot be entirely ruled out...

Or data/evidence didn't reach the relevant authorities. Again, the IPA report notes that GD's "understanding" of the noise/vibration issue seems pretty different from that of the MoD/DE&S, and the MinDP also referenced this difference of "understanding".

Or what if the data was supplied, but simply was not read? Or what if the data was read, but was regarded as being "unhelpful" to the programme, and so was buried?

To summarise: there were known issues about noise/vibration with Ajax which were reported to defence hacks in September 2017. These issues were regarded as being severe, and causing significant issues to the programme, not last to turret/gun stabilisation.

At this time, noise was mentioned, but not as causing "life changing" injuries, as now seems to be the case. But it was seen as an issue.

So how does it now seem to be the case that these were only "recognised" in 2019?

Here endeth the lesson...

[ArmChairCivvy]

the seeming lack of inquisitiveness

None of that here ... but not many sources (should be a day job, may be, with an expenses account to pick up bar tabs?)

[Ron5]

Same subject from Harry Lye ..
https://www.army-technology.com/feature ... tent=Image

[Lord Jim]

So could the constant blaming of Government furnished equipment, such as the CT40 being the cause of the delays to the programme been a convenient Red Herring the MoD were happy to live with? Did its project Managers and Budget Holders just keep quiet an hope that both LM and GD would get things sorted? Whatever, Ajax might be too big to actually fail, but it must be the last time such a thing happens across the MoD as all Governmental departments. Managers who have even moved on Military or Civilian must be held to account if programme do not meet their targets.

We complain about underinvestment in the military but how can it be justified if this carries on. No money above the initial contract amount must be spent on Ajax. If the Army gets less so what, fill in the gaps with Boxer. As long as we at least get two Regiments worth the Army will cope.

[Ron5]

From the Financial Times ..

Helen Warrell in London June 15 2021

The UK Ministry of Defence was alerted to problems with its Ajax armoured vehicle programme 11 months before it suspended trials over fears the vehicles were causing injuries to troops, a minister has admitted.

Experts say the problems surrounding the Ajax are so serious the government should consider cancelling the £5.5bn deal to buy 589 of the vehicles, which are expected to increase battlefield surveillance using high-tech digital sensors, and replace them with a smaller alternative.

The MoD ordered the vehicles from US contractor General Dynamics in 2014. But the project has been beset by noise and excessive vibration, prompting a four-month suspension of military personnel training with the tank in November last year.

Responding to a parliamentary question, defence procurement minister Jeremy Quin said this week that soldiers had first reported vibration problems during trials on prototypes at the “end of 2019”.

Further noise and vibration issues were reported in July 2020 and in September a report by medical staff “raised the possibility of noise injuries,” Quin said in a statement. As a result, the MoD commissioned “in-ear assessments” and trials on the Ajax programme were suspended on November 6.

The MoD has already spent nearly £3.5bn on the vehicles and 14 have been delivered. Current testing restrictions limit the time spent in them to 90 minutes and mandate a maximum speed of 20mph. A leaked report by the Infrastructure Project Authority, which reports to the Cabinet Office, warned that “successful delivery of the programme to time, cost and quality appears to be unachievable”.

“There are major issues which, at this stage, do not appear to be manageable or resolvable within the current business case,” the report added.

Ben Wallace, defence secretary, told the Financial Times on Tuesday that he had commissioned “more work” into how the programme could be rectified and said he had met army personnel twice in the past two weeks to discuss the issue.

“I think that what’s important . . . is that I satisfy myself that [the project] I’ve inherited is fixable, and that we protect the interests of the men and women we are going to put in the back of this thing,” he said, adding that any costs for solving the problems would be met by the contractor.

However, Tobias Ellwood, the Conservative MP who chairs the House of Commons defence select committee, raised more fundamental concerns: at 43 tonnes, the Ajax is too heavy to be carried by RAF aircraft, which he described as a “strategic error”.

“In my view it is coming to that point where we should consider cancelling [Ajax] and look into procuring a far smaller vehicle,” Ellwood said. “There’s no doubt that the equipment on it is state of the art, but unfortunately it’s very expensive, very heavy and the noise that it makes is phenomenal.”

The vehicles were due to become fully operational at the end of this month, but this is now expected to be delayed until September.

Ministers announced earlier this year that the planned upgrade to Warrior infantry fighting vehicles would be cancelled and a third of the army’s Challenger II tanks axed as part of a sweeping digital modernisation programme. Uncertainty and delays over Ajax will potentially create a gap in land warfare capability.

Francis Tusa, editor of Defence Analysis, said the implications were serious. “If the Ajax programme collapses — and there’s every chance that it will — then that’s a stake in the heart of the British army, and it will be out of high-end warfighting for five to eight years while they stand up a replacement,” Tusa said. “The UK will have to write a sick note to Nato explaining the problem.”

The MoD said the army had taken “immediate steps” to mitigate the risk to hearing damage after “a small number of soldiers engaged in Ajax trials reported noise issues”. Protective measures include reducing crew time in the vehicle and providing improved hearing protection.

“When investigations found definitive concerns, trials were halted,” the spokesman added.

General Dynamics said a “small number of remaining issues” were being “reviewed and closed out” in partnership with the British army and the MoD.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Facing problems and then canceling is a stupid way to go. Technological issue can be solve with money and time. If I were to advice, jut fix the price, reduce the number (blaming GDLS, so no penalty on UKMOD other than lesser number), wait 1 year, and just proceed. Luckily (or not), British Army do not need ~500 Ajax anymore. 300 will do. If 300 delivered with the cost of original 500, it is just a a 66% cost rise. Bad, very bad, but much better than getting nothing.

Air lifting IFVs? Stupid idea. Very very very inefficient. No matter how lightweight it will be, IFVs will still be ~30 tonnes order. Lifting a single IFV vs a full company of Commando. Which will be urgently needed in the initial phase of the war? Surly the latter.
Send these heavy equipment by ship. A Point class can carry dozens of IFVs with full logistic support for them. (Or better preposition a company of it in a warehouse. Airlifting a company of IFV needs huge sorties. It is not only the vehicles, there must be a full set of support gears. In short, impractical. )

[mr.fred]

And once again “experts” prove that they don’t know what Gross Vehicle Weight means.

[RunningStrong]

And once again “experts” prove that they don’t know what Gross Vehicle Weight means.

It's pretty funny reading the combined thoughts of journalists and politicians trying to make technical comments and missing the mark. Further proving you don't need to have a clue what you're talking about as long as you can bluff it.

[Luke jones]

And once again “experts” prove that they don’t know what Gross Vehicle Weight means.

It's pretty funny reading the combined thoughts of journalists and politicians trying to make technical comments and missing the mark. Further proving you don't need to have a clue what you're talking about as long as you can bluff it.

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Its not a recce vehicle, its a clown car. A
3.5 billion pound clown car

[mr.fred]

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

[RunningStrong]

And once again “experts” prove that they don’t know what Gross Vehicle Weight means.

It's pretty funny reading the combined thoughts of journalists and politicians trying to make technical comments and missing the mark. Further proving you don't need to have a clue what you're talking about as long as you can bluff it.

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Its not a recce vehicle, its a clown car. A
3.5 billion pound clown car

You've obviously never been within a mile of it then.


It's the exact opposite of a clown car. It's massive and you can hardly fit inside it.

[Luke jones]

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

Seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the people who are involved in this programme dont know what they are doing either.

Does it?
How wide are you casting that net?

Yes.

Sounds like we are going to need a very large net.

[mr.fred]

Yes.

Sounds like we are going to need a very large net.

Have you heard about the Dunning-Kruger effect?

[Lord Jim]

I get the impression Mr Elwood is a great believer in the expeditionary idea, but given the emphasis the Command Paper put on this type of operation who would blame him. We are back in the 1990s but with an even smaller Army and less kit to operate with and the new kit promised is ten years or more away if they can get it to work!

Tell GD they have a year to fix the damn thing but they are not getting a single penny above the original contract. The MoD will be will to accept no less than two Regiments worth of FOC level vehicles and they can either accept this situation or the Contract is void as they have failed to deliver what was signed for. At least I hope the MoD's commercial branch didn't give GD an open ended cheque to deliver the whole 500 whatever the cost!

This and the Army now reconsidering the whole MRV(P) strategy, re-evaluating how many, what type and what size they need to the Army post Integrated review? Strange how the MRV(P) hardly appeared in the Command Paper if at all isn't it.

We had better keep our eyes on Rheinmetall, for they are a great hope for the future of AFV production in the UK, GD won't get e second chance after Ajax, and LM may just call it quits after losing the Warriors Turret contract and now Ajax is up the swanny. I have full confidence in them getting Boxer into service on time, even if they have to extend the production from the line in Germany. Challenger 3 though we are back to WCSP territory possibly, mating a new turret on an old body. I wonder if we still might decide to reduce the rick and purchase the same number or slightly less Leopard 2A7Vs?

I strongly feel the recent Review should have concentrated on fixing the issues that existed now and focus more short term with regards to the Army. The new money etc. should first have been concentrated on what could be fixed by the next review, like getting Boxer into service faster with at least two Battalions formed by that time. Choosing new Artillery systems to equip at least half the Army's Regiments with new more deployable 155mm Guns and HIMARS. It is the planned expeditionary forces that need the new support, troops in Europe can rely on allied systems in the meantime. Oh and GD are to deliver and wrap up the Ajax contract by 2025 as well!

[Ron5]

Yes.

Sounds like we are going to need a very large net.

Have you heard about the Dunning-Kruger effect?

Seems unnecessarily rude to the folks in the Army & MoD.

[mr.fred]

Seems unnecessarily rude to the folks in the Army & MoD.

I think it is something all should be aware of, for a variety of reasons.

[Ron5]

[Lord Jim]

Ok lets buy two Battalions worth please and while we are at it let's get some of these to support them.

Should fit right in with the new digital force, and not just the 155mm SPG.

[mr.fred]

Ok lets buy two Battalions worth please and while we are at it let's get some of these to support them.
Should fit right in with the new digital force, and not just the 155mm SPG.

Sure, you got the cash?

[Caribbean]

could the ABSV come back to replace the Bulldog in support roles? CVR(T) Mk2 seems to have been both cheap and effective.

CVRT Mk2 was heavier than the below

the Stormer 30, in 1997. Stormer hull, Otobreda turret, 30mm Bushmaster plus 2 x TOW launchers, overall weight around 13 tonnes vs. 8 tonnes for the CVR(T)

and not very well protected
... anyway, they were not bad AFVs, against a non-peer; so where are they now

Sorry - only just picked up on this reply.

CVR(T) Mk 2 was based on new-build Spartan APC hulls. They had a base weight of c. 9 tonnes and a maximum weight of 12.25 tonnes. As far as I am aware, they are still in service, but stand to be corrected.

The Stormer 30 is based on the larger Stormer hull, which has a base weight of 12.7t, so potentially 15-16t max. Probably still too light, but I suspect BAE would still be able to churn them out if needed

[Tempest414]

So the British armoured battle group is working up in Germany lead by 20th armoured brigade with challenger 2's to take over the lead of NATO group along with the French

So right now the UK has

1 x Carrier strike group deployed (Global )
1 x LRG deployed ( Baltic )
1 x Armoured battle group deployed ( Baltic ) 20th armoured
1 x Light mech Battle group deployed ( Romania ) 3 Rilfes

[Lord Jim]

Is the RAF on cool down? I would say the Army and Navy are pretty much committed and only available for non elective operations. Still quite a dispersed presence to back up our ExPed. credentials.

[Tempest414]

Is the RAF on cool down? I would say the Army and Navy are pretty much committed and only available for non elective operations. Still quite a dispersed presence to back up our ExPed. credentials.

No not really they have jets on the Carrier in Romania and Cyprus plus the Falklands

[Tempest414]

There is a good video of the Armoured battle group on youtube