Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5599
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
No we need to sort Ajax out and see it into service
The UOR's have played havoc with the Army more than any other service and has seen upgrade programs pushed back and back what was needed was for the Bulldog upgrade to take place from 2000 to 2005 followed by the Warrior and Challenger upgrade from 2006 to 2012 and and then Bulldog replaced from 2016 until now with Boxer this would have allowed CVR(T) to be replaced now as it is it has all come at once and the Army can't cope and don't have the money because it has been spent on the UOR fleet
The UOR's have played havoc with the Army more than any other service and has seen upgrade programs pushed back and back what was needed was for the Bulldog upgrade to take place from 2000 to 2005 followed by the Warrior and Challenger upgrade from 2006 to 2012 and and then Bulldog replaced from 2016 until now with Boxer this would have allowed CVR(T) to be replaced now as it is it has all come at once and the Army can't cope and don't have the money because it has been spent on the UOR fleet
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Cool, have you got the necessary £5bn?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
I don’t think I’ll find it down the back of my sofa.
I guess the Army will have to wait a little more for new vehicles, but they’ve soldiered on* so far with no issues from using obsolescent vehicles.
*geddit?
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Ok another possibility ,scrap the army except homeland defence ,say our contri
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Soz not Finnish typing on phone ,...say to NATO our contribution will be from now on navy ,air force and special forces cyber,space ,and if any money gets saved if gov doesn't nick it spend more on these
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Oh, ouch!Tempest414 wrote:the Bulldog upgrade to take place from 2000 to 2005 followed by the Warrior and Challenger upgrade from 2006 to 2012 and and then Bulldog replaced from 2016 until now with Boxer this would have allowed CVR(T) to be replaced now
Fat chancemr.fred wrote:they’ve soldiered on* so far with no issues from using obsolescent vehicles.
*geddit?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Do you know an OTS product with Bowman?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
What do we want? A fully integrated 21st century turret with sensor fusion and upto date C4I, or a steam gunnery turret that just looks the part?Lord Jim wrote: Regarding LM, I do not know what is the state of the Turret they have developed for the WCSP. If it is up to scratch then why not contract them to at least trial the turret on a Boxer Mission Module? Mind you if they had sorted out all the issues with the Warrior turret, it is surprising that they are issues remaining for the Ajax, or then again is the issue with the hull when the turret is fitted?
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
If what sort of 'radio' is fitted to a vehicle is the deciding factor as to its suitability then your procurement system is completely broken.RunningStrong wrote:Do you know an OTS product with Bowman?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
I am so sorry, @ tomuk, as you introduce good points onto the RN discussions, buttomuk wrote:If what sort of 'radio' is fitted to a vehicle is the deciding factor as to its suitability then your procurement system is completely broken.RunningStrong wrote:Do you know an OTS product with Bowman?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
... on this one you are completely out of your depth
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
You haven't a clue.tomuk wrote:If what sort of 'radio' is fitted to a vehicle is the deciding factor as to its suitability then your procurement system is completely broken.RunningStrong wrote:Do you know an OTS product with Bowman?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
Bowman/Morpheus isn't just a radio, it's a whole network of encrypted voice and data, combined with BISA, and mesh networking. It's a force multiplier and it's the backbone that integrates platforms like AJAX with indirect fires, with aerial assets and with naval assets too.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
If your procurement system buys a vehicle that cannot communicate with the rest of your army then I’d say that’s worse.tomuk wrote:If what sort of 'radio' is fitted to a vehicle is the deciding factor as to its suitability then your procurement system is completely broken.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
I know what Bowman/Morpheous is that is why I put radio in quotation marks. One would hope that such an 'open' system as Morpheus could be integrated into whatever vehicle was procured.RunningStrong wrote:You haven't a clue.tomuk wrote:If what sort of 'radio' is fitted to a vehicle is the deciding factor as to its suitability then your procurement system is completely broken.RunningStrong wrote:Do you know an OTS product with Bowman?inch wrote:Scrap program now ,buy off shelf , no alterations ,a few possibilities out there ,done
Bowman/Morpheus isn't just a radio, it's a whole network of encrypted voice and data, combined with BISA, and mesh networking. It's a force multiplier and it's the backbone that integrates platforms like AJAX with indirect fires, with aerial assets and with naval assets too.
More widely I appreciate it is not as straight forward as cancelling Ajax and buying something of the shelf. Hopefully GDLS/LM/MOD can sort it out.
It is unfortunate that Ajax (and all Army vehicle procurement) is in such a mess. You mentioned the potential loss of jobs in Wales if Ajax is cancelled while that would be difficult but this whole saga has already cost jobs. I was witness to the bankruptcy of an engineering firm whose a large part of their turnover was doing metal fabrication as subcontractor to GKN/Alvis Vickers/BAE/RBSL Telford. They couldn't hold out and are no longer here to take advantage of Boxer/Challenger 3 work.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Well if you want to integrate a bespoke UK capability then it's no longer OTS is it? Regardless of being 'open', there are still elements of SWAP, hull-turret channels and through-armour connections required to make such a system work. None of which have anything to do with it being part of EvO.tomuk wrote: I know what Bowman/Morpheous is that is why I put radio in quotation marks. One would hope that such an 'open' system as Morpheus could be integrated into whatever vehicle was procured.
But that's nothing to do with AJAX. They would have been contracted for work on CR2 and Terrier. If they went bust at the end of those contracts that's down to poor management.tomuk wrote: More widely I appreciate it is not as straight forward as cancelling Ajax and buying something of the shelf. Hopefully GDLS/LM/MOD can sort it out.
It is unfortunate that Ajax (and all Army vehicle procurement) is in such a mess. You mentioned the potential loss of jobs in Wales if Ajax is cancelled while that would be difficult this whole saga has already cost jobs. I was witness to the bankruptcy of an engineering firm whose a large part of their turnover was doing metal fabrication as subcontractor to GKN/Alvis Vickers/BAE/RBSL Telford. They couldn't hold out and are no longer here to take advantage of Boxer/Challenger 3 work.
And yes, cancelling AJAX would have far greater UK-wide job impacts than just Merthyr.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Ah the good old "Jobs creation scheme", run and paid for by the MoD to make the Government look good to the voters in deprived areas like south Wales.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
I know its a bit more complicated then the Wireless Set No. 19 which my grandad used in WWII but fitting a UK specific 'radio' shouldn't stop you procuring the vehicles/platforms you need. Does Boxer/CV90/Bradley/other armoured/turreted vehicles etc not have similar connections/channels for their country specific comms fits?RunningStrong wrote:Well if you want to integrate a bespoke UK capability then it's no longer OTS is it? Regardless of being 'open', there are still elements of SWAP, hull-turret channels and through-armour connections required to make such a system work. None of which have anything to do with it being part of EvO.tomuk wrote: I know what Bowman/Morpheous is that is why I put radio in quotation marks. One would hope that such an 'open' system as Morpheus could be integrated into whatever vehicle was procured.
With reference to job losses I'm sure the superb management at GDLS/LM will resolve the AJAX problems and no redundancies will be needed.RunningStrong wrote:They would have been contracted for work on CR2 and Terrier. If they went bust at the end of those contracts that's down to poor management.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Not necessarily. Because not all nations run their AFV fleet with the equivalent of a complex Bowman fit.tomuk wrote:I know its a bit more complicated then the Wireless Set No. 19 which my grandad used in WWII but fitting a UK specific 'radio' shouldn't stop you procuring the vehicles/platforms you need. Does Boxer/CV90/Bradley/other armoured/turreted vehicles etc not have similar connections/channels for their country specific comms fits?
Regardless, unless we adopt another nation's radio from and exiting CV90/Boxer/Bradley, it will not be OTS. Unless we buy BV206?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Seems good enough for the MOD to pay over the odds for ships and planes in England and Scotland.Lord Jim wrote:Ah the good old "Jobs creation scheme", run and paid for by the MoD to make the Government look good to the voters in deprived areas like south Wales.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
I know it might have seemed a throwaway remark about scrap army but should it be ? ,The mod can't seem to get things right in army top brass and mod equipment , always a total screw up .plus do we need an army as such ,EU can defend itself as far as I'm concerned ,our comical small contribution not a game changer on land ,and EU got land forces/men equipment and alot of them small or non existent naval forces , which is fine they don't need them ,but does this Island need the land forces ? ,not saying we should not contribute to defence of EU or NATO but only in air, naval, special forces, intelligence, cyber , nuclear umbrella etc ,so I'm really starting to think do we need an army and couldn't the cash be spent upgrading the other remaining needs and supplying more manpower to these ,then like the Ajax , warrior., challenger issues and the never ending or learning diabolical army decision makers become a mute point , personally I'd be happier with a uk land based ballistic missile defense system either land or sea based or both than a load of Ajax , warrior , challenger etc , cheers
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5599
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Yes I do believe the UK should have a Army it has severed Europe well across history for me we get lost in fades like now with BCT's I would prefer to see Battle groups formed these would start at Company level and go up to Division level with 4 types
Armoured
Heavy Mechanised
Light Mechanised ( Mobile Protected )
Air Assault
All of these would take a similar look at Company, Battalion and Brigade level battle groups with a
Recce group
Infantry group
Artillery group
Logistics group
So a Mechanised Battalion battle group would be centred around a Infantry Battalion with a Cavalry company and Artillery, Logistics support groups formed from the Brigade battle group which would be made up of
1 x Cavalry regiment
2 x Mech Infantry Battalions
1 x Aatillery support group ( Artillery , Air defence , UAV )
1 x Logistics suppot group ( RLC , RE , RAMC , REME , MP )
Armoured
Heavy Mechanised
Light Mechanised ( Mobile Protected )
Air Assault
All of these would take a similar look at Company, Battalion and Brigade level battle groups with a
Recce group
Infantry group
Artillery group
Logistics group
So a Mechanised Battalion battle group would be centred around a Infantry Battalion with a Cavalry company and Artillery, Logistics support groups formed from the Brigade battle group which would be made up of
1 x Cavalry regiment
2 x Mech Infantry Battalions
1 x Aatillery support group ( Artillery , Air defence , UAV )
1 x Logistics suppot group ( RLC , RE , RAMC , REME , MP )
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
If AJAX gets cancelled...
Does HMS Agincourt revert to previous?
Does HMS Agincourt revert to previous?
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5599
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Slang ... that I don't understand?RunningStrong wrote:being part of EvO.
A BCTTempest414 wrote:a Mechanised Battalion battle group would be centred around a Infantry Battalion with a Cavalry company and Artillery, Logistics support groups formed from the Brigade battle group which would be made up of
1 x Cavalry regiment
2 x Mech Infantry Battalions
1 x Aatillery support group ( Artillery , Air defence , UAV )
1 x Logistics suppot group ( RLC , RE , RAMC , REME , MP )
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
It's not slang.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Slang ... that I don't understand?RunningStrong wrote:being part of EvO.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/morpheus-pr ... or-defence
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
It kind of is.RunningStrong wrote:It's not slang.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/morpheus-pr ... or-defence
An opaque TLA that, to be frank, doesn’t make much more sense when expanded.
There is further expansion by adding missing terms here:
https://generaldynamics.uk.com/systems/ ... -open-evo/