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.
mr.fred
Member
Posts: 782
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby mr.fred » 14 Jul 2019, 14:10

Voldemort wrote:But why? What is the situation where one of many hand held rockets/missiles or indirect fire won't do the job? A miniscule niche I say.

Perhaps, people seem keen on having it, to the extent of suggesting dedicated MBT variants for it.
Targets beyond 600m or so, or that require many shots to destroy take it outside the ready capability of shoulder launched weapons. Point targets or ones that need to be engaged quickly work against indirect assets.

andrew98
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:28
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby andrew98 » 14 Jul 2019, 14:53

Should not read ukdf after a liquid lunch :sick:
whilst listening music on random :thumbdown: , so to the tune of Chuck Berry's No particular place to go:

Riding along in a boxer mobile,
my oppo beside me at the wheel,
we got shot at the range of a mile,
the incoming running wild,
shoutin' and hollerin' no cover to take,
the nemo beside me lit them up!

P. S. Don't worry, I'll never do this again!

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1679
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Jake1992 » 08 Sep 2019, 18:57

Now this is what we need on our boxers, it’d not only give your heavy and medium formations what they need but really give the strike brigades part of punch needed.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/mbda-sh ... no_cache=1

Simon82
Member
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 May 2015, 20:35

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Simon82 » 08 Sep 2019, 19:22

Jake1992 wrote:
Now this is what we need on our boxers, it’d not only give your heavy and medium formations what they need but really give the strike brigades part of punch needed.


A Brimstone armed overwatch vehicle would certainly be a sensible addition to the U.K. armed vehicle fleet and certainly be a bit of a leveller in any confrontation against massed enemy armoured formations in the Baltic States.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Lord Jim » 08 Sep 2019, 20:20

IF it is possible to have the exact same (or only a software difference) version of Brimstone across Fast Jet, Helicopter and ground launched then it should be a no brainer. Even better would be a modular launcher that could also have launch cells for NLOS. Priority should go to the Mechanised Infantry Battalions with each having between eight to ten. These would be used to cover the dispersed manoeuvre groups.

I still like the approach given in that previously quoted paper where each company is broken down into three manoeuvre groups that include IFV, 120mm Mortar, APC and SPAA/fire support version, so that each group is a balance force allowing each company to operate in a dispersed manner. With the Armoured Cavalry Regiment in its Ajax deployed as a screen to the front, identifying the location and direction of travel, supported also by over watch variants with the same launcher turret for Brimstone/NLOS. In case people wonder the difference between the IFV and the SPAA/Fire Support Variants would be the former would be armed with the CTS40 whereas the latter would have a auto cannon with a high rate of fire of between 30 and 40mm in size together with improved sensors to detect UAVs and helicopters. The APC and other variants would have a RWS with either a 12.7mm gun or 40mm AGL, with the APC also having a launcher for Javelin attached to the RWS. Of course the Brigade Commanders big stick would be one or more batteries of GMLRS/HIMARS launchers and possibly a 155mm SP platform.

I shall now step down form my Pulpit as this is a topic I am slightly repetitive when discussing the above. At least the British Army seems to be almost on the same page, realising that the initial organisation for the Strike Brigades is the "Budge" version and only really gets the platforms into service. They realise that further work is needed to establish the operations doctrine and what additional capabilities the formation needs to be effective.

mr.fred
Member
Posts: 782
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby mr.fred » 08 Sep 2019, 21:33

I kind of figured that the plan to make a platoon a combined arms battlegroup was bananas.
I might go so far as mixing in IFVs to the platoon, but artillery and SPAA? Commanding that to get the best out of all elements would be challenging. Making the IFV and the SPAA different would be a costly way of doing things. At most i’d give the IFV an appliqué scanning sensor like ADAD but beyond that i would expect the weapon and firecontrol to be up to the job.

I see nothing wrong with platoons in the support company with sections detached to the infantry companies as required, or concentrated as necessary.

A battery of ground launched Brimstone on Boxer would be a useful asset at battalion level. Any higher and the range is a bit short.
In replacement to the ATGW platoon or as an addition to isn’t immediately obvious. Possibly moving the man-portable ATGW to the companies would make room in the support company?

I note that the September issue of Desider magazine ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ine-v3.pdf ) has a bit on testing the Boxer.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Lord Jim » 09 Sep 2019, 01:01

I believe the thinking behind the Company organisation is aimed squarely at the dispersed operating principal, taken to a level far exceeding what is practiced to day within Armoured Infantry formations. Now whether all the components are permanently organised within each company or Battalion level assets are dispersed amongst each company which intern organises three combined arms operating groups has not been made clear, though I agree this is probably more likely than the multi armed companies.

The reason for the different weapon system in the SPAA platform compared to the IFV is that the CTA40 has a relatively low rate of fire compared to other weapons of the 30mm and 35mm varieties. Against either fast moving targets or those only visible for very short periods of time a higher rate of fire might be preferred. Of course if a fusing systems along the lines of AHEAD type we used together with the CTA40 as well as the appropriate sensor package, then using the CTA40 would meet the need, but surely such a weapon systems would also be substantially different form he CTA40 installed on the IFV variant.

The infantry Companies within the Battalion would operate a mix of CTA40 equipped and HMG/AGL equipped platforms with both equipped with Javelin-ER on the respective turret/RWS. The ratio would be 1:2 and in addition to infantry each group would also have a section Engineers mounted in a APC variant. Finally there would be a Joint Fires platform within each Group

The Mortar in each Group would be 120mm in size and could be anything from turret mounts, breech loading to a simple rear mounter weapon firing through the overhead hatch.

The idea is that a Mechanised Battalion would devolve into nine operation groups supported by an HQ which would have access the Battalion fire support asset which would be a Battery of up to eight vehicles mounting NLOS and or Brimstone. Beyond that we have Brigade support assets which would be available down to the Operation Groups, such as ISTAR platforms and HIMARS.

The way the "Strike" Brigades will need to be deployed and used will be unlike any existing formation so existing doctrine will be difficult to apply, something the Army appreciates and is already working on. Where as now we break a Brigade down into Battalion sized battlegroups with for example an Armoured Infantry Company being supported by a Squadron of Tanks, with these intermingled when deployed along a given frontage, in the case of the Mechanised Brigades it will be the individual Battalions/Regiments that will be broken down, with little or no intermixing of Boxer and Ajax equipped units. As stated above, these units will operate differently and have distinctly different roles, playing to each's strengths.

It has been stated that if the Army tries to apply existing doctrines to the Mechanised Brigades the formation will simply not work and neither will it be fit for purpose. The Army appreciates this which is why the formation of these Brigades has slowed and that there will be a gap between the creation of the first and second even is vehicles continue to be delivered. The initial advertised organisation appears now to be a quick and simple one to meet the needs of the SDSR, whilst now more detailed work is being done to ensure the formation are able to effectively carry out roles the Army wishes them to.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1679
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Jake1992 » 09 Sep 2019, 10:26

Carrying on from yesterday’s post it’s being reported now that MBDA are showing off an unmanned version carrying 6 brimstone each.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/dsei-20 ... d-vehicle/

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 1679
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Jake1992 » 14 Sep 2019, 23:00

Do we know yet for sure what variants are being ordered and what are just maybes ?

To me it needs to be wide ranging for the strike brigades to work, something like this in varying numbers.
- APC
- Command & Control
- Reece
- IFV
- Recover & Repair
- Logistics
- 120mm Mortar
- Anti Tank
- 155mm SPA
- 120mm Direct Fire Support
- Bridge Layer
- ( Maybe ) CAMM

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Lord Jim » 15 Sep 2019, 00:57

At present only four variants of the Boxer are confirmed;

APC
Command
Recovery and Repair
Ambulance.

In addition there will be a small number of driver training vehicles. However the Army has already admitted that additional variants will be needed for the Mechanised Brigades to be equipped properly for the job and this is one of the core reasons for the trials, to work out how the Boxer and Ajax units are to be used and what they need to be effective both at Battalion and Brigade level.

There is far greater scope for the Boxer than just serving in the Mechanised Infantry Regiments. It is likely to replace the FV432 variants still in service throughout the British Army, as well as some of carrier out by the CVR(T). In addition with the Warrior BASV in limbo it seems, we could see both Armoured and Mechanised Infantry using the same Mortar Carrier for example.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 1458
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby SW1 » 06 Oct 2019, 12:29

We selected boxer for the second time in March 2018 the same month as Australia did. I read the Australian army has taken delivery of the first vehicles in the last week or so. Any ideas when ours will be appearing?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Lord Jim » 06 Oct 2019, 18:05

like all current procurement programmes and especially those of the Army, it is progressing artificially slowly as funding is restricted to the cast offs of the other services major programmes. The shopping list of essential new kit the Army needs to remain capable of conducting peer level warfare is continuing to grow and if anything were to happen in the next few years we would still be going into action with armoured vehicles nearly seventy years old!

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

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 06 Oct 2019, 22:12

mr.fred wrote:I might go so far as mixing in IFVs to the platoon

Is this someone signing up :D to my "long-running campaign" of having one in four Boxer as an IFV/ fire support vehicle, whereas the other three act as APCs (as planned)?

mr.fred
Member
Posts: 782
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby mr.fred » 06 Oct 2019, 22:24

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
mr.fred wrote:I might go so far as mixing in IFVs to the platoon

Is this someone signing up :D to my "long-running campaign" of having one in four Boxer as an IFV/ fire support vehicle, whereas the other three act as APCs (as planned)?

I'd consider it before the all-arms battlegroup in a platoon, certainly.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4285
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Lord Jim » 09 Oct 2019, 03:41

I know many do not like the organisation of the Mechanised Infantry Battalions that consists of permanent Platoon level battle groups, so here is a Battalion structure that allow such formation to be formed if and when needed.

Battalion HQ, with;
2x Boxer Command (HMG, Javelin)

Recce Section, with;
4x Boxer IFV (CTA40, 2-4 Javelin)

Mortar Company with;
3 Batteries each with;
3x Boxer SP Mortar (BAe/SAAB Dual 120mm mortar Turret)

3 Companies, each with;
Company HQ;
1x Boxer Command (HMG, Javelin)
2x Boxer ARV (MG)
1x Boxer Joint Fires (MG)

Air Defence Section, with;
3x Boxer DSAA (Air Defence turret with CTA40 or alternative cannon plus IRST)

3 Platoons, each with;
Platoon HQ, with;
Boxer HQ (HMG, Javelin)
Boxer AEV (MG)
3 Platoons, each with;
1x Boxer IFV (CTA40, 2-4 Javelin)
3x Boxer APC (HMG, Javelin)

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4229
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Ron5 » 09 Oct 2019, 17:13

Lord Jim wrote:I know many do not like the organisation of the Mechanised Infantry Battalions that consists of permanent Platoon level battle groups, so here is a Battalion structure that allow such formation to be formed if and when needed.

Battalion HQ, with;
2x Boxer Command (HMG, Javelin)

Recce Section, with;
4x Boxer IFV (CTA40, 2-4 Javelin)

Mortar Company with;
3 Batteries each with;
3x Boxer SP Mortar (BAe/SAAB Dual 120mm mortar Turret)

3 Companies, each with;
Company HQ;
1x Boxer Command (HMG, Javelin)
2x Boxer ARV (MG)
1x Boxer Joint Fires (MG)

Air Defence Section, with;
3x Boxer DSAA (Air Defence turret with CTA40 or alternative cannon plus IRST)

3 Platoons, each with;
Platoon HQ, with;
Boxer HQ (HMG, Javelin)
Boxer AEV (MG)
3 Platoons, each with;
1x Boxer IFV (CTA40, 2-4 Javelin)
3x Boxer APC (HMG, Javelin)


I know diddly about army organization, do those that do think Jim's proposal is reasonable?

andrew98
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:28
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby andrew98 » 10 Oct 2019, 03:39

Personally I quite like the look of the M230LF, ammo commonality with apache, more hitting power than .50 cal.
https://www.kongsberg.com/kda/products/ ... -rws-lw30/
In a remote turret with 8 dismounts. Optional 7.62mm MG and optional Javelin anti-tank missile gives a good balance of firepower.

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

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 10 Oct 2019, 07:46

andrew98 wrote:and optional Javelin anti-tank missile gives a good balance of firepower.

see the back cover https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... ine-v3.pdf

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1894
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Caribbean » 10 Oct 2019, 08:27

Not really on topic, I know, but it's often occurred to me that the M230LF (with or without Javelin), mounted on the heavy weapons variant of the JLTV (or whatever is finally selected) might make a useful addition to a light role infantry battallion, either in the recce or the fire support sections (or both). An APDS 30mm Aden round (if one doesn't already exist) would improve it's capability against light armour as well.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 292
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby RunningStrong » 10 Oct 2019, 09:07

Caribbean wrote:Not really on topic, I know, but it's often occurred to me that the M230LF (with or without Javelin), mounted on the heavy weapons variant of the JLTV (or whatever is finally selected) might make a useful addition to a light role infantry battallion, either in the recce or the fire support sections (or both). An APDS 30mm Aden round (if one doesn't already exist) would improve it's capability against light armour as well.

How would you manage it with a mixed ammunition feed? Will it take a dual feed?

Personally, I'd rather see the effort go into an unmanned CT40 weapon station, loaded with programmable Airbursting rounds it would provide superior fire power and ammunition commonality with the AI (be that WCSP or a MIV turret variant).

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1894
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Caribbean » 10 Oct 2019, 11:42

RunningStrong wrote:Personally, I'd rather see the effort go into an unmanned CT40 weapon station, loaded with programmable Airbursting rounds it would provide superior fire power and ammunition commonality with the AI (be that WCSP or a MIV turret variant).

I would have thought that a CT40, even in an unmanned turret, would be a bit too much for a light vehicle like the JLTV. If we were to develop a new (wheeled) light armoured vehicle, then I would agree, but the M230 would appear to be about the limit of what a JLTV can carry (even then, it's a relatively low power 30mm round, in a lightweight gun, designed for the Apache helicopter).

Not sure about the dual feed, but is it essential?
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 292
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby RunningStrong » 10 Oct 2019, 15:56

Caribbean wrote:
RunningStrong wrote:Personally, I'd rather see the effort go into an unmanned CT40 weapon station, loaded with programmable Airbursting rounds it would provide superior fire power and ammunition commonality with the AI (be that WCSP or a MIV turret variant).

I would have thought that a CT40, even in an unmanned turret, would be a bit too much for a light vehicle like the JLTV. If we were to develop a new (wheeled) light armoured vehicle, then I would agree, but the M230 would appear to be about the limit of what a JLTV can carry (even then, it's a relatively low power 30mm round, in a lightweight gun, designed for the Apache helicopter).

Not sure about the dual feed, but is it essential?

Dual feed is essential if you're intending to equip an infantry vehicle with HE and AP rounds.

andrew98
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:28
Location: United Kingdom

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby andrew98 » 10 Oct 2019, 16:52

What about HEDP I reference to the M230LF?
Same as apache uses, high explosive dual purpose.
M789 round has 25mm RHA penetration at 50 degrees at 500 metres.
Enough against light vehicles, and mission kill against apc/ifv's?

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1894
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Caribbean » 10 Oct 2019, 17:53

RunningStrong wrote:Dual feed is essential if you're intending to equip an infantry vehicle with HE and AP rounds.

Sorry- should have been a bit clearer - do you need to equip a single vehicle with both? I guess it would depend on circumstances. I can see the HE being the "normal" round, with AP being loaded (not necessarily on all vehicles) when needed.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4229
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: British Army Future Wheeled APC

Postby Ron5 » 10 Oct 2019, 18:37



Return to “British Army”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests