Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

[Lord Jim]

Well the industrial contributions do, as to be expected, put a positive spin on what capabilities the British Army will gain when their respective programmes actually deliver the hardware intended.

The Contributions form the independent sources all paint a picture that is pretty damning of where the British Army's AFV modernisation programme stands at present as well as its future plans. The gaps in essential capabilities, and a lack of depth in those that are currently planned. There are solutions but for these to be implemented the Army will need to seriously rethink its future form, dependant on the results of the ongoing Integrated Review, and unanimously they all agree that without additional funding and a greater focus, the Army will not be able to carry out the likely tasks it will be given. This will have the additional effects of reducing the UK's reputation both in NATO and on the wider global stage.

[BlueD954]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... wners-sros

See point 14 cannot cut and paste

[ArmChairCivvy]

See point 14 cannot cut and paste

14. You should note that an SRO should remain in place throughout the programme, or be replaced only when a distinct phase of delivery is completed. It is anticipated that you will remain SRO for Armoured Cavalry until an approved successor is in place. During your tenure it is expected that you will be responsible for achieving the following programme milestones, outcomes and/or benefits unless formally amended or replaced in agreement with the IAC:
a. Delivery of all maintainer training systems
b. AJAX In Service Date (ISD) achieved
c. AJAX Initial Operating Capability (IOC) achieved
d. Capability Drop 3 platforms delivered enabling operational capability The above milestones will all be completed by April 2022

Of note is that the original link includes not just Armoured Cavalry, but also armoured infantry (i.e Warrior... of which there is no trace!). But back to the Ajax points:
d. has been known as the old contract expires (what the new will entail is not known)
As for ISD and IOC, they are defined somewhere else. Could be a bn-sized unit (within the Strike Experimentation Unit)? E.g. for carrier air it was a carrier sailing with 12 jets (presumably RAF/ FAA)

[BlueD954]

More written evidence for the Defence Committee's Armoured Vehicle capability inquiry.

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/4 ... -evidence/

Many are from the companies - marketing arguments. Others provide nice critical arguments on Ajax and Warrior CSP and Challenger 2 LEP and the range of British Army quite outdated vehicles.

[ArmChairCivvy]

The MoD contribution includes a graph that evidently has been scanned rather than embedded into the pdf, but nevertheless the small print on it would indicates that the formations intended to get Boxer will only be fully 'filled' by 2032
- so the plans go well beyond what they are meant to do within the Strike Bde (2?) constructs?

WRONG! A couple of pages later:
"By 2025, the Army will be able to field a war-fighting division optimised for high intensity combat operations, consisting of a single Manoeuvre Brigade (Armoured Infantry) and an interim ManoeuvreSupport Brigade (from Strike and Light Infantry). The Interim Manoeuvre Support Brigade will be
---------(AVF0016)Written Evidence: HCDC InquiryProgress in delivering the British Army’s armoured vehicle capability------------
equipped with Ajax, the first Boxer (Mechanised Infantry) platforms and the in-service Protected Mobility vehicles. Boxer will be at full operating capability in the early 2030s allowing the remaining protected mobility vehicles to be replaced and the full Strike Brigade ambition to be achieved"

[BlueD954]

The MoD contribution includes a graph that evidently has been scanned rather than embedded into the pdf, but nevertheless the small print on it would indicates that the formations intended to get Boxer will only be fully 'filled' by 2032
- so the plans go well beyond what they are meant to do within the Strike Bde (2?) constructs?

WRONG! A couple of pages later:
"By 2025, the Army will be able to field a war-fighting division optimised for high intensity combat operations, consisting of a single Manoeuvre Brigade (Armoured Infantry) and an interim ManoeuvreSupport Brigade (from Strike and Light Infantry). The Interim Manoeuvre Support Brigade will be
---------(AVF0016)Written Evidence: HCDC InquiryProgress in delivering the British Army’s armoured vehicle capability------------
equipped with Ajax, the first Boxer (Mechanised Infantry) platforms and the in-service Protected Mobility vehicles. Boxer will be at full operating capability in the early 2030s allowing the remaining protected mobility vehicles to be replaced and the full Strike Brigade ambition to be achieved"

Armoured Infantry Brigade - with no clear land-based ISTAR platforms -- all AJAXs vehicles shifted to Strike Brigades. AI Division, trusting Warrior and Challenger can they match adversaries - not just Russia which is doubtful.

Strike Brigade - Assuming wheels and tracks works, will have to work on European roads and rails and match with limited air transport and again, can it match adversary vehicles and units.

Is the whole division limited to just NATO/European soil? The last few conflicts were in the Middle East and South Asia area. Can Ajax and the improved vehicles, including unknown replacement for Bullldog, Fuchs, Ambulances and other OSD vehicles, perform on desert and other terrain?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Strike Brigade - Assuming wheels and tracks works, will have to work on European roads

... emphasis on "roads" as the Ajax/ Boxer combo will be fully x-country mobile, but the retained protected mobility vehicles (Mastiffs mainly, to move whole bns?) less so.
- as for the MBT/ Warrior combo, 2026 appeared in the graphics for the latter (MBT go-ahead expected next month)... an interesting formulation about the two (see Warrior thread)

[BlueD954]

Strike Brigade - Assuming wheels and tracks works, will have to work on European roads

... emphasis on "roads" as the Ajax/ Boxer combo will be fully x-country mobile, but the retained protected mobility vehicles (Mastiffs mainly, to move whole bns?) less so.
- as for the MBT/ Warrior combo, 2026 appeared in the graphics for the latter (MBT go-ahead expected next month)... an interesting formulation about the two (see Warrior thread)

Basically by the time all these get upgrade and produced, the world would have changed so much they need to be upgraded again.

[Caribbean]

Armoured Infantry Brigade - with no clear land-based ISTAR platforms -- all AJAXs vehicles shifted to Strike Brigades.

Is that actually true, though. I know that the integral recce element will (probably) be removed, but the Armoured Brigades will still include a recce regiment, which will presumably be divvied up into the various battlegroups that are formed

[BlueD954]

Armoured Infantry Brigade - with no clear land-based ISTAR platforms -- all AJAXs vehicles shifted to Strike Brigades.

Is that actually true, though. I know that the integral recce element will (probably) be removed, but the Armoured Brigades will still include a recce regiment, which will presumably be divvied up into the various battlegroups that are formed

I dont know really. Most talk has been about STRIKE not AI units strcture vehicles etc

[ArmChairCivvy]

By 2025, the Army will be able to field a war-fighting division optimised for high intensity combat operations, consisting of a single Manoeuvre Brigade (Armoured Infantry) and an interim Manoeuvre Support Brigade (from Strike and Light Infantry).

Most talk has been about STRIKE not AI units

Until we get the full (3 bde) division, the answer about land-based ISTAR assets is evident in this interim support bde, thrown together from the Strike Experimentation Unit and some bns of infantry.
- not as hotchpotch as it sounds
- the Strike part to recce ahead; and also help to secure the flanks/ the rear with the PM infantry (called support as the PM vehicles are not expected to manoeuvre in the direct fire zone; although the infantry evidently will, but with much lesser reach)

[BlueD954]

By 2025, the Army will be able to field a war-fighting division optimised for high intensity combat operations, consisting of a single Manoeuvre Brigade (Armoured Infantry) and an interim Manoeuvre Support Brigade (from Strike and Light Infantry).

Most talk has been about STRIKE not AI units

Until we get the full (3 bde) division, the answer about land-based ISTAR assets is evident in this interim support bde, thrown together from the Strike Experimentation Unit and some bns of infantry.
- not as hotchpotch as it sounds
- the Strike part to recce ahead; and also help to secure the flanks/ the rear with the PM infantry (called support as the PM vehicles are not expected to manoeuvre in the direct fire zone; although the infantry evidently will, but with much lesser reach)

I thought PM vehicles were Foxhound and Jackal and the future MRV-P.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I thought PM vehicles were Foxhound and Jackal and the future MRV-P.

Indeed, though it stretches it a bit to call Jackal 'PM' if you have any 155mm shots falling around you, sending fragments aplenty around.

Army was intending to have two Strike Bdes stood up by 2026; now from their only 'days old' evidence it seems like they will only have a half one in 2025.
- expect Mastiffs to hang around for a couple of years more after that
- We had 3 bns riding in them (I expect there to be more vehicles, but some may do other things e.g. in the divisional 'theatre troop' formations, even though that name has been changed into something else - they will account for c. 40% of the manpower of any fielded division, large or small, in any case)
- and light infantry becomes exactly that when they are discharged from the back of a Mastiff. Protected only on their way to that point.

[Lord Jim]

Well the MoD report is full of good news with a sprinkling of spin, as well as pushing the truth. For example it states the Army has spent just over £3Bn on AFVs over the last twenty years and lists the vehicles procured. WRONG, few if any of the vehicles listed have been delivered at all, just a few Ajax support variants have reached units so far. At least it is honest enough to admit that the timetable has shifted significantly due to a lack of funding and that identified capability gaps are also unfunded.

The so called "War Fighting Division", that should exist by 2025 is a bit if a joke to be honest. One Armoured Infantry Brigade equipped with existing spec. Challenger 2s and possibly Warrior 2s and a Interim Manoeuvre Support Brigade equipped with some Boxers, but the bulk of its inventory mad up of current protected Vehicle stocks. However the Army is ridding itself of the vast majority of the PVs purchased under UORs for Iraq and Afghanistan, retaining only the Foxhound, Jackal 2 and Coyote, unless the Army's Army's Land Environment Fleet Optimisation Plan has been heavily revised.

And what of the much vaunted "Divisional Enablers", considered so vital for the Army the "Over Match" the opposition, though the later is highly unlikely except against the most poorly equipped forces. Well no where at present. Our only effective weapon system is the regiments worth of M270 GMLRS, as out AS-90s are outclassed in all areas by modern Peer systems and the 105mm Light gun is inthe same position. Our Air Defence its totally inadequate and although we have the beginnings of a credible EW/Cyber/ISTAR capability, this is a long way form being fully effective.

The result is the UK will not have a truly viable land component for its military strategy until the mid 2030s, by which time the playing field will have already moved on. The current AFV upgrade programme was aimed at reducing the gap between our capabilities and that of possible Peer opposition. With Joint Force 2025 the gap will probably be wider than ever, especially if funding is diverted to R&D for the next generation weapon systems slowing its progress further. Joint Force 2025 has become Joint Force 2035 and could even become Joint Force 2040 the way things stand.

[ArmChairCivvy]

WRONG, few if any of the vehicles listed have been delivered at all, just a few Ajax support variants have reached units so far.

Yes, double wrong as they nicely skirt around the £2bn spent on vehicles that were "brought to the core" and then disposed of in short order

identified capability gaps are [also] unfunded

It was nice to see that list, despite being just a list - not projects

Fleet Optimisation Plan has been heavily revised

... or just pushed to the right? Mastiff does not get a mention, but looks like being the mainstay for at least half a decade into the future. Whereas Husky's disposal has been confirmed - despite having been acquired for the reason that the other uparmoured trucks had grown so heavy that they could not get off road

Joint Force 2025 has become Joint Force 2035

If you consider that F2020 was looking like being delivered by 2024, then the gap has widened to double (in years; while unit counts must be forever shrinking)

Benefit of doubt? Could it be that in 2025 the other AI bde will already be under refit, i.e. converting to the new AFVs - and hence can't be counted in (as for the mini-division line up)

[Lord Jim]

Mastiff has been mentions as having its number reduced but with the revised timescales of the Army's re-equipment plan that could be pushed back as you said. If only we had stayed in the MRAV programme we would have had the Boxers almost a decade ago and wouldn't be constantly trying to work out how and where to use them. In fact if there was a positive response to their use in Afghanistan and Iraq the argument as to whether we should replace Warrior with a wheeled IFV based on the Boxer would be a much more interesting and eveidense based one, rather than one based on too many "What ifs".

[SW1]

[RunningStrong]

Apollo (repair) delivered.

[Lord Jim]

Wonderful, with the current plans the Army will receive less than 20 Ajax variants per year for the next five years. The fact that t=he Army and MoD have pushed all procurement programmes sharply to the right because funding isn't there sums up the whole mess our Military is in. So until 2025 at the very earliest our globally deployable ground forces are going to be Light Infantry, that is really going to deter the bad guys!

[ArmChairCivvy]

less than 20 Ajax variants per year

How many does it take to have a sqdrn up and running (ignoring what's required for training)?

[Lord Jim]

I believe each Squadron has three Troops of four vehicles.

[ArmChairCivvy]

three Troops of four vehicles.

As it is unclear what will happen with close recce in AI bdes, let's just assume that (when there will be enough of Ajax) they will get a sqdrn - at bde level.
- compare that with Fort Benning thoughts labelled as Cavalry Sqrdn 2025 (1 per BCT) and you have other types of platforms to cover long-range optical and sigint
- but you also have more emphasis on dismounting: "The 6x36 scout platoon provides six mounted platforms to deliver scouts onto the battlefield and enough dismounted scouts to establish four static observation posts (OPs) to conduct long-range surveillance operations."
- not to say that the Sqdrn HQ will hold sniper pairs to allocate to each platoon: IF infiltrating to such OP, to provide cover; IF the dismounts are providing flank security, to extend the reach against opposing infantry

All good thoughts... but then we come to the hunter-killer function (tanks, of various description) to provide overwatch and also to directly engage OpFor when an OP needs to ' clear out, on the double'
- a 40 mm -equipped Ajax would only be a half solution to that; the other half then?
- ATGWs aplenty and operated from under armour; or
- a 'MGS' on an Ajax hull*... here we are circumventing the discussion in the Boxer thread as to such platforms on wheels being any good, or not

------
* AKA the new US light tank

[whitelancer]

How many does it take to have a sqn up and running (ignoring what's required for training)?

Back in the 2000s a Recce Sqn had 27 CVR(T)s made up of 2 Sultans,12 Scimitar, 7 Spartans, 1 Sampson, 4 Striker and 1 Samaritan. I suspect the make up of A Recce Sqn based on Ajax will be similar using the appropriate Ajax variants. However the Medium Armd Sqns could well be different.
This may give some idea of what is intended.
Cant add an image unfortunately. However it showed a possible make up of a Medium Armd Sqn, very similar to the current Armd Sqns.
With a Sqn HQ with 2 Ajax, 2 Athena and I think a Boxer Ambulance, 4 Sabre Troops each with 4 Ajax, a GW Troop with 4 Ares and a Fitter Troop with 3 Apollo and 1 Atlas.

[ArmChairCivvy]

2 Sultans,12 Scimitar, 7 Spartans

Overwatch being subject to intense debate (including whether it will exist organically), suffice to say that makes for each vehicle with (few) dismounts two that will operate mounted all-thru.
- could be replicated, also going forward, if the job ' description' is to be continuously on the move and not do so much of e.g. flank security

Ability to fight for information (and disengage without being overwhelmed) as opposed to meeting the OpFor head-on where, in the latter, for each tank (in international comparison) there tend to be 1 or 2 IFVs/ APCs
- the received 'wisdom' is that infantry numbers have got too thin, but the idea is not to fight in 'fixed formations' so that view is somewhat spurious
- as we have seen, protected heavy mobility bns 'come and go' in our own orbats

[whitelancer]

Further to what I said above, I've done a few sums. If what I have said above holds each Recce Regiment would contain 3 Recce Sqns with a total of 36 Ajax. In comparison A Medium Armoured Regt would contain 3 Medium Armd Sqns each with 18 Ajax, plus a Recce Troop with 8 Ajax and 2 Ajax in RHQ for a total of 64 Ajax.
That comes to a total of 200 Ajax for the 2 Recce Regts and 2 Medium Armd Regts, leaving just 45 for training and sustainment. Which explains the lose of Close Recce Troops/Platoons in the Armoured Brigade(s).
As the Army is still experimenting with the Strike concept all the above could change, if it was ever accurate!