Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

The sensors on Ajax are world class there is no doubt, but I have issues with both the number being bought and the number of variants. The numbers ordered were fine when we needed/wanted three or four Recce Regiments, but do we really need that many. at present I think two are being allocated to the Recce/Deep Strike BCT. Their job I believe is to put out a screen to identify where the enemy is and help direct fir onto them. But is it? When talking about the Recce/Deep Fires BCT the MoD constantly refers to the ideas of striking the enemy 100s of miles behind the frontline and holding the enemy at a distance. This is why we are aiming to buy the US Army's new Precision Strike Missile for the M270 GMLRS, but somehow I cannot see the Army having Ajax operating hundreds of miles in the enemy's rear areas.

There is also mention of the Recce/Deep Strike BCT also containing the Army's only two Artillery Regiments equipped with self propelled tube artillery, namely the successor to the AS-90. These would make more sense being cued by the Ajax but these Regiments are also supposed to provide indirect precision fore for the Heavy BCTs, and they cannot be in two places at once.

As for firepower, well yes the CT40 40mm Autocannon is a great improvement over the 30mm Rarden, but it needed to be as possible opposition AFVs have improved armour protection, but they also have improved firepower as well, meaning they could engage the Ajax before the Ajax can return fire. This of course excludes the possibility of the Ajax meeting a hostile Main Battle tank, the main gun for which would easily punch through the Ajax's armour, and against which the ct40 will have little effect at almost any range. At present the Recce Regiments have no overwatch platforms like the existing Regiments used to have with the Striker/Swingfire combo. There was supposed to be one but it went as a cost cutting measure. Well it needs to be reinstated again as a matter of urgency as well as the other Ajax variants cancelled. In fact additional variants like a Bridge Layer and Air Defence should also be a priority, to ensure the Regiments freedom of movement in theatre. The currently plans organisation of the Ajax Refoments might have been fine for combat against second or third tier opposition but is certainly not fit for purpose against any Peer opposition.

And now we move to the Recce Regiments in the Heavy BCTs, Why? Well in my opinion it is simply because we needed some place to put them. Their presence is partially justified as current plans are for none of the Armoured or Mechanised Infantry units to have integral Recce formations, as used to be standard. On top of that the intension seems to be to operate many of the Ajax as Light Tanks to support the Boxers which at present are only armed with a machine gun. Surely the Heavy BCTs would be better served with a third Infantry Battalions and having some of the Boxers up gunned?

As far as I am concerned the main reason Ajax is still on the card is its capability as a networked platform/ In terms of firepower and protection it would have made a great replacement for the CVR(R) family in the early 1990s, but for now it is under armed and really too big to move stealthily around gaining info without being spotted. At a push I would still buy enough for Two Regiment's in the Recce/Deep Strike BCT and for Recce Squadrons in three Armoured Regiments, which would replace one of the four existing Tank Squadrons in each Armoured Regiment. Tis either gives the army a reserv Armoured unit or the core of a third Heavy BCT.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
wargame_insomniac

TSharpe28
Member
Posts: 80
Joined: 25 Feb 2022, 04:22
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by TSharpe28 »

Those controlling Ajax.

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -15/140389

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -15/140387

The structure of the Ajax Programme Management Office follows the Project Delivery Framework for Project Delivery Professionals in Government set out at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 3/PDCF.pdf(opens in a new tab).
The Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) holds the Chartered Project Professional qualification (ChPP) and is a graduate of the Major Projects Leadership Academy.
The team consists of both Military and civilian staff. Individuals are recruited on the basis of their experience as well as formal qualifications. The SRO is taking steps to ensure that the team is appropriately structured and resourced to deliver the programme.
A breakdown of the roles within the Ajax Programme Management Office can be found in the table below:
Role
Senior Responsible Owner
SRO Chief of Staff
SRO Personal Assistant
Programme Director
Approvals and Assurance Head
Programme Delivery Manager
Programme Controls Manager
RAIDO Lead
Planning and Schedule Lead
Schedule Support
Stakeholder and Communications Lead
Information and Reporting Lead
Sustain and Support
Fielding Manager
Training and Doctrine
Lethality

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -15/140388

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -15/140402
Details of the personnel occupying positions within the Programme Management Office for the Ajax Programme are not released as they are individuals holding appointments below 1*.
Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) details can be found below.
Since the Main Gate Business Case baseline approval in 2014 there have been four Senior Responsible Owners for the Armoured Cavalry 25 (AC25) programme.
Prior to this, from 2010 (when Main Gate Business Case 1 was signed) to 2013, there were a further two SROs. This was when Ajax was part of firstly the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) programme and then the wider Mounted
Close Combat (MCC) portfolio.
October 2021 - Current Dr David Marsh (SRO AC25)
April 2019 – October 2021 Major General Simon Hamilton (SRO AC25)
November 2015 – April 2019 Major General Mark Gaunt (SRO AC25)
October 2013 – November 2015 Major General Nick Pope (SRO MCC and then SRO AC25)
November 2011 - October 2013 Maj Gen Bruce Brealey (SRO MCC)
November 2008 – November 2011 Brig Mike Riddell-Webster (SRO FRES then SRO MCC)

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by jonas »


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by SW1 »


mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

2030? Talk about a setting a low bar.

Luke jones
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Jan 2016, 11:13

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Luke jones »

The whole programme is a total farce.
Absolutely disgraceful.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

So what are we going to do in the meantime. The use of Warrior as an interim platform was suggested but that is due to leave service when Boxer arrives. We could order a new platform had probably have it in service sooner, the replacement of the CVR(T) is supposed to be a priority isn't it?

BB85
Member
Posts: 218
Joined: 09 Sep 2021, 20:17
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by BB85 »

That date can't be serious. It was meant to be in service last year and they are just going to knock is out 9 years. I thought 2025 was still taking the piss.

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by KiwiMuzz »

Lord Jim wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 19:39 So what are we going to do in the meantime. The use of Warrior as an interim platform was suggested but that is due to leave service when Boxer arrives. We could order a new platform had probably have it in service sooner, the replacement of the CVR(T) is supposed to be a priority isn't it?
Well, it certainly has been for the last thirty years :lol:

BB85
Member
Posts: 218
Joined: 09 Sep 2021, 20:17
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by BB85 »

If he uses the words cautiously optimistic and 2030 in the same sentence he exemplifies everything that is wrong with the program to begin with.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by SW1 »

Apparently General dynamic has proposed a number of mitigations around new seats, controller isolators and headsets which is being tested to see if they meet the vibration and noise requirements. If the mitigations don’t work they will need to redesign components they say they won’t know until later this year so have no idea how long it will take. They said they have low confidence in the 2025 date, Ajax was supposed to enter service in 2017 apparently warrior will fill the gap with the armoured brigade combat teams.

Committee weren’t particularly happy with bowman and Morpheus either and it’s integration with Ajax.

sol
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by sol »

Lord Jim wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 19:39 So what are we going to do in the meantime. The use of Warrior as an interim platform was suggested but that is due to leave service when Boxer arrives. We could order a new platform had probably have it in service sooner, the replacement of the CVR(T) is supposed to be a priority isn't it?
Seem like Warrior will have to fill a gap, and while it will be replaced in Armoured Infantry battalions once Boxer arrives, Armoured Cavalry will have to stick with it for quite longer. And they are just starting with their training on it.


bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by bobp »

SW1 wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 16:13
Nice to see that due to the war in the Ukraine any defence of the realm is a very low priority, and that according to Mr Sunak no extra pennies will be spent on defence.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by SW1 »

bobp wrote: 31 Mar 2022, 09:00
SW1 wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 16:13
Nice to see that due to the war in the Ukraine any defence of the realm is a very low priority, and that according to Mr Sunak no extra pennies will be spent on defence.
Yeah but if takes them 20 plus years and several billion quid to get a vehicle originally billed as an off the shelf modification in to service he probably has a point.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
Lord Jim

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

IF they are not going to get Ajax into service before 2030, they had better get the additional variant that are seen to be needed to make the Heavy Cavalry Regiments valid formations. They need a Overwatch platform as well as a Bridgelayer as a priority and bare minimum. I would say that there is a need for a Combat Engineering variant as well, but Terriers could be attached to the Regiments as an alternative. The MoD should have a strong negotiating position for these new variants, basically stating the position that if they are not made available for a reasonable price the whole programme id cancelled.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
Dahedd

KiwiMuzz
Member
Posts: 58
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 06:20
New Zealand

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by KiwiMuzz »

sol wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 22:23
Lord Jim wrote: 30 Mar 2022, 19:39 So what are we going to do in the meantime. The use of Warrior as an interim platform was suggested but that is due to leave service when Boxer arrives. We could order a new platform had probably have it in service sooner, the replacement of the CVR(T) is supposed to be a priority isn't it?
Seem like Warrior will have to fill a gap, and while it will be replaced in Armoured Infantry battalions once Boxer arrives, Armoured Cavalry will have to stick with it for quite longer. And they are just starting with their training on it.

Sooo, we have Warrior transitioning to a role for which it was not designed, to be replaced by a vehicle performing a role for which it was not intended. What could possibly go wrong? Will be unsurprised to see Challenger 3 being issued to the Royal Army Medical Corps :crazy:

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

It might be an idea to install Javelin launch posts on the Warrior like they did with Milan for the 1st Gulf War. OK it is fired by a crew member out of the turret but it gives the platform far greater firepower that its existing Rarden .

RunningStrong
Senior Member
Posts: 1304
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-60987472

Sixty jobs could be lost at the General Dynamics factories in Merthyr Tydfil and Oakdale.

800 people work across the two sites assembling the new Ajax vehicles for the British Army.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Looks to me to be a shot across the MoD's bows to highlight the additional jobs that will be lost if Ajax is cancelled, further politicising the programme.

jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by jonas »


Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

How old does a programme have to be to be classed as "Mature"? WE should be telling GDUK to delivery all 520+ Ajax variants full operationsal to the British Army no later than 2025 and for no more than the procurement contract states. Instead they appear to be desperate to retain the platform and are will go extend the delivery time to 2030. It may have been better to keep the Warrior CSP and bin Ajax in the IR.

sol
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by sol »

Seems like there might be some progress with vibration mitigation but still lot of issues with noise


Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Interesting that new dual layer headsets are to be procured starting later this year. Could it be that the noise issues are simply being alleviated by having a similar helmet to what GDUK were using?

sol
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: 01 Jul 2021, 09:11
Bosnia & Herzegovina

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by sol »

Not exactly a news about Ajax itself but still connected with it. In last couple of days, the Royal Dragoon Guards posted on their twitter account a new organization structure of the regiment.

Image

So basically, it will move from 4 recce squadrons and HQ squadrons, to 4 squadron structure
  • HQ Squadron
  • The Green Horse Squadron - recce squadron
  • The Black Horse Squadron - anti-tank squadron
  • The Blue Horse Squadron - fire support squadron


So, the Green Horse Squadron will be only one equipped with Ajax, although it will be increased from three to five troops. Of course, until Ajax arrive it will use Warriors instead.



The Black Horse Squadron will be equipped with Javalins and NLAWs. It is not specify which type of the vehicles it will use, just that it will
The Anti-Tank sqn will initially operate a combination of armoured vehicle variants, while they await Ajax's arrival.
Does it mean that it will also use turreted Ajax or, probably, other variants, like Ares, is left to be seen.



The Blue Horse Squadron will have four specialist troops: snipers, surveillance, assault (pioneers?) and command & communication.



Not sure if other three (four in future) armoured cavalry regiments will have same or similar structure. Also how many and of which type of Ajax platforms, would have. It looks interesting but some things could be improved. For example having Javalin as the primary AT weapon somehow does not look sufficient but I might be wrong. Also some anti-air/anti-drone capability would not hurt. Anyway interesting restructure of (all?) future recce regiment(s).

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

I can see this working well within the Armoured Cavalry units wonder if this kind of spit could work at company level for the Light Cavalry with a HQ troop , Recce troop , AT troop and a sniper troop

Post Reply