Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Not impressed at all, seems another case of the Army trying to ram a square peg into a round hole. I am assuming Area will be the platform used by the Anti Tank Squadron complimented by Spartans until numbers of the former are built up. I can see this being a case where the Army through its Trials units works out what needs to be dome to get the new Recce Regiments fully capable and the report gathers dust in some senior officers safe as the Army concentrates on more sexy programme using future tech that is still in the definition stage adn will be past 2030.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Yeah I read that as all AJAX variants will fill the various roles.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
In many cases it is simple same vehicle different role with very minor changes. An example might be stowage racks for Javelin in the Area allocated to the Anti-Tank Squadron. They could also allocate a vehicle for MANPADS, simple stowing Starstreak/LMM rounds together with a couple of control units and a Pedestal Stand stored on the outside for when needed.
As I said I am not impressed. What should have been done and it shouldn't have cost much more was to replace the CVR(T) Family (Scorpion exempted) with Ajax variants including a Striker replacement. Use the same organisation and you have a viable and effective unit. Even better if a Bridgelayer or two was held at Regimental HQ or better yet, an Engineering Troop with these and a Terrier Combat Engineering Tractor.
We are expecting these units to go out and find, identify and fix enemy units to allow Joint Fires platforms to call down Hell on them. With the limited firepower on the actual Ajax, it need an overwatch Fairy Godfather to allow them to break contact if they get in hot water. The Javelin teams should co-operate with the Ajax in joint formations, and ideally the RWS on the Ares should have a Javelin mounted or at least the option to. But it is not an overwatch weapon with the capability needed.
The ideal and existent weapon we could use is Spike-ER2. It is the only true 5th Generation ATGW out there, and is the only one networked, so an Ajax up front could take control of a missile fired from ten plus miles back. It can also be fired on the move with a lock on after launch capability with its man i the loop capability. Yes post ten Km it relies on a datalink but this is secure, or at least as well as any datalink can really be. SF in the area could also be in the loop so to speak as could UAS or Wildcat helicopters. Such a weapon system would be another layer and compliment both Javelin and a longer Precision strike missile like Brimstone, but as mentioned neither of these are networked at present.
Just a few ideas.
As I said I am not impressed. What should have been done and it shouldn't have cost much more was to replace the CVR(T) Family (Scorpion exempted) with Ajax variants including a Striker replacement. Use the same organisation and you have a viable and effective unit. Even better if a Bridgelayer or two was held at Regimental HQ or better yet, an Engineering Troop with these and a Terrier Combat Engineering Tractor.
We are expecting these units to go out and find, identify and fix enemy units to allow Joint Fires platforms to call down Hell on them. With the limited firepower on the actual Ajax, it need an overwatch Fairy Godfather to allow them to break contact if they get in hot water. The Javelin teams should co-operate with the Ajax in joint formations, and ideally the RWS on the Ares should have a Javelin mounted or at least the option to. But it is not an overwatch weapon with the capability needed.
The ideal and existent weapon we could use is Spike-ER2. It is the only true 5th Generation ATGW out there, and is the only one networked, so an Ajax up front could take control of a missile fired from ten plus miles back. It can also be fired on the move with a lock on after launch capability with its man i the loop capability. Yes post ten Km it relies on a datalink but this is secure, or at least as well as any datalink can really be. SF in the area could also be in the loop so to speak as could UAS or Wildcat helicopters. Such a weapon system would be another layer and compliment both Javelin and a longer Precision strike missile like Brimstone, but as mentioned neither of these are networked at present.
Just a few ideas.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
This is true of the turreted AJAX variants too.Lord Jim wrote: ↑07 May 2022, 23:49 In many cases it is simple same vehicle different role with very minor changes. An example might be stowage racks for Javelin in the Area allocated to the Anti-Tank Squadron. They could also allocate a vehicle for MANPADS, simple stowing Starstreak/LMM rounds together with a couple of control units and a Pedestal Stand stored on the outside for when needed.
Pearson's have demonstrated a bridge laying kit in Ares, it looks very bolt-on.Lord Jim wrote: ↑07 May 2022, 23:49 As I said I am not impressed. What should have been done and it shouldn't have cost much more was to replace the CVR(T) Family (Scorpion exempted) with Ajax variants including a Striker replacement. Use the same organisation and you have a viable and effective unit. Even better if a Bridgelayer or two was held at Regimental HQ or better yet, an Engineering Troop with these and a Terrier Combat Engineering Tractor.
As AJAX never received the follow on orders for RB2 it's been clear for 5 years now that there are gaps in the CVR(T) family replacement that won't be met by AJAX variants.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5616
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Storey of two programs the army is not happy with Ajax and could still bin it where they seem to be in a good place with Boxer with 600+ on order over two lots and now in talks for 400 more in lot 3 to make it 1000
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
2 heavy brigades and a an artillery brigade and were thinking of ordering another 400 boxer. Something doesn’t add up there at this rate there will be 1700 heavy armoured vehicles in order for those brigades.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5616
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
That would depend on what Boxer if we say the 400 was split into 100 x 155mm SP guns , 90 x Over watch , 90 x Air defence , 120 others
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Sorry, remind me when the FRES UV Trials of Truth were, and who won?Tempest414 wrote: ↑08 May 2022, 10:03 Storey of two programs the army is not happy with Ajax and could still bin it where they seem to be in a good place with Boxer with 600+ on order over two lots and now in talks for 400 more in lot 3 to make it 1000
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Could it be that the Army now sees Boxer as the platform to replace the FV432 variants across all it formations as well as remaining CVR(T) that are not in the Recce Regiments. If so do we think they may have decided to use Boxer instead of the MRV(P) phase 2 in units such as Signals and EW. They can always find a job for Boxer because of its modularity so ordering extra now hedges things against Ajax being canned or the number delivered reduced to prevent any additional money being spent on that programme. If the answer is yes then I am all for it. Even more so if they end up giving each of the planned Light BCT a Boxer Battalion as it core. The French found using the VBCI very useful in backing up its lighter platforms in Mali for example.
Overall interesting how Boxer is in the headlines repeatedly yet there as been little reporting or briefings on Ajax these past few months. IF we wanted a quick fix for Ajax quietly slipping away, equipping a number of Boxers with the same Israeli unmanned RWS/Turret as those used by Lithuania would give us a proven CRV off the shelf bar radios. Taking on the Spike-LR2 would also be a good start, so Recce platforms first then a dozen or so for each Mechanised Infantry Battalion, forming a Recce/Cavalry Squadron replacing the existing Scimitars, and by coincidence also covering the Battalion anti Tank role still being able to carry dismounts.
For once I feel the glass may be half full, shock and horror
Overall interesting how Boxer is in the headlines repeatedly yet there as been little reporting or briefings on Ajax these past few months. IF we wanted a quick fix for Ajax quietly slipping away, equipping a number of Boxers with the same Israeli unmanned RWS/Turret as those used by Lithuania would give us a proven CRV off the shelf bar radios. Taking on the Spike-LR2 would also be a good start, so Recce platforms first then a dozen or so for each Mechanised Infantry Battalion, forming a Recce/Cavalry Squadron replacing the existing Scimitars, and by coincidence also covering the Battalion anti Tank role still being able to carry dismounts.
For once I feel the glass may be half full, shock and horror
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
In meantime the usual suspects meaning GDELS ASCOD II, Rehinmetall Lynx KF41 and Bae Systems CV90 are going again head to head for the Slovakian Ifv replacement tender Here the Lynx K41 with that Tetris camo (who designed that ).
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Whatever happened to that funky camo we saw a Challenger 2 in a while back?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
That CR2 was a somewhat "unauthorised" modification so I'm guessing the cammo was just a generic urban digital cammo.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Shame it wasn't an offical trial, looked great though unless it was a wrap it would be a bugger to paint on one vehicle let alone hundreds.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Given the fate of the Russian Battalion Tactical Group that was destroyed whilst trying to cross a relatively minor river, does anyone not see th need for the Ajax equipped Recce Regiments not having an integral Bridging capability through a Bridgelayer either on the Ajax chassis or on that of Boxer to have a common vehicle in both the Recce Regiments and Mechanised Infantry Battalions.
- These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
GD and Pearson's demonstrated AJAX bridging a couple of years ago.Lord Jim wrote: ↑14 May 2022, 16:08 Given the fate of the Russian Battalion Tactical Group that was destroyed whilst trying to cross a relatively minor river, does anyone not see th need for the Ajax equipped Recce Regiments not having an integral Bridging capability through a Bridgelayer either on the Ajax chassis or on that of Boxer to have a common vehicle in both the Recce Regiments and Mechanised Infantry Battalions.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Yep so one it out there if the MoD realise the actual need for one. The Precision Deep Fires BCT (or whatever name it has this week) needs to have dedicated engineering and especially bridge laying equipment. The current Titan AVLB is really to slow and heavy to operate with the Ajax equipped Recce Regiments and the M3 Amphibious Ferries are too few at present, though additional vehicles are being looked at with the Bundeswehr.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Has been any movement on that variant of the Ajax with Brimstone III missile in suppose Tank destroyer role
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
What would be point of talking about new Ajax orders until either all the issues on Ajax vehicle are fixed and it start actually entering the service or being scraped and replaced with something else (probably not gonna happen). Sure there is a need for such capability but considering everything that is happening with the Ajax, it is questionable would the Army even want to go with further others or should look into something else instead.
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
At present we would do better to have Rheinmetall look at a Overwatch module for Boxer for use in the five Mechanised Infantry Battalions. We can then decide whether to use this with the Ajax equipped Recce Regiments or develop a variant of the Ajax for the role in these units.
- These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Or mount them in the back of a MAN modularised container at a fraction of the price. If Brimstone is launched NLOS from 20km away does it need to be on a boxer chassis.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Then ground-launched Brimstone would need a significant increase in range because MAN trucks shouldn't be loitering that close to the front line (if that's even clearly defined).
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Seems like Slovakia could go with CV9030 as a replacement for its old BMPs. What is interesting that ASCOD, which ended third, had problems with vibrations and noise.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
There's no other choice as the order quantities will put 'us' towards the end of this decade - as in replacing the by now, and then, ancient platforms
Terrier is of course a much lighter platform than the bridging assets we have. But out of interest: have neither been distributed 'down'? Yes, HETs and all that, to get them to where they are needed, but what is the 'state of play'?
Israel nix'ed the US request to send Spikes (form European armories) to Ukraine. What is yr opinion on that? And depending on the opinion, should we perhaps stop this masquerading of Israeli weapons as 'euro' somethings?
No wonder... as they did the same with Warriors. The actual deliveries having been to Malesia and Indonesia, on Stormer chasses.RunningStrong wrote: ↑08 May 2022, 03:45 Pearson's have demonstrated a bridge laying kit in Ares, it looks very bolt-on.
Totally out of the 'blue' ie. not exactly part of this thread but the British military intel, in their briefings, counted this as one of the many VDV failings.
- sounds strange, putting parachutists on pontoon bridges? Or may be the other units said 'no' and the Preorian Guard' had to be called upon?
Not a bad idea. BTW, where does the '5' in that derive from? I am not surprised as such, as an addendum to be superimposed to previous addenda keep rolling out of the Army press
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)
Re: Ajax Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
If you are asking about where 5 mechanised battalions came from "Future Soldier" reform
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_So ... tish_Army)