Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

would this another 500 Boxers pushed through quicker or just first 500 that are on order. If it is another 500 then around 150 will need to split between CVR and Mortar would also be nice if of the remaining 350 that 250 were IFV's

jedibeeftrix
Member
Posts: 360
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by jedibeeftrix »

dmereifield wrote: If the 500 Boxers were already planned, is that not just Warrior being canned without replacement? Or are we talking about 500 additional boxers on top of the originally planned 500?

Speeding up the procurement of the original batch by a year or two isn't really a replacement
Why are we assuming it is Boxer, rather than a reprofiling of the Ajax order to include a greater proprotion of Ares (in APC 8PAC format)?

Yes, it would be lovely to have IFV's rather than APC's, but surely this could be mitigated by returning to having a Formation Recce Regt again?

Then use those extra 240 CTA guns we bought for the WCSP contract and ask for them to be put in a boxer turret module...

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

jedibeeftrix wrote:Why are we assuming it is Boxer, rather than a reprofiling of the Ajax order to include a greater proprotion of Ares (in APC 8PAC format)?
Why are we assuming this is solid information rather than the usual pre-review leakfest.

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by marktigger »

end of the road for warrior. Boxer will be the future.

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 598
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Dahedd »

marktigger wrote:end of the road for warrior. Boxer will be the future.
Boxer should have been the future long before now. I believe you can thank Blair & Brown for that particular cock up.

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Dahedd wrote:
marktigger wrote:end of the road for warrior. Boxer will be the future.
Boxer should have been the future long before now. I believe you can thank Blair & Brown for that particular cock up.
11 years and still blaming Labour, pretty desperate that...

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

They allowed the rot to fully take hold after not funding the 1998 review, but successive Governments of all persuasions have not done anything to improve things since, including this one with the Integrated Review.

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 598
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Dahedd »

Not really.

It was July 2003 that the UK govt pulled us from the Boxer program. Bare in mind we were one of the three founders & correct me if I'm wrong all Boxers are right hand drive.

In July 2003 the PM was a certain Mr Blair with a certain Mr Brown holding the purse strings as Chancellor.

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Dahedd wrote:Not really.

It was July 2003 that the UK govt pulled us from the Boxer program. Bare in mind we were one of the three founders & correct me if I'm wrong all Boxers are right hand drive.

In July 2003 the PM was a certain Mr Blair with a certain Mr Brown holding the purse strings as Chancellor.
And 11 years ago the Tory government could have reversed that...

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4630
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by marktigger »

was there also not problems with the army needing vehicles for Afghan and Iraq at the times that was muddying the waters and a more immediate need for resources to be spent. Add in the drive to promote the Idea that "Light" was the way ahead.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

marktigger wrote:dd in the drive to promote the Idea that "Light" was the way ahead.
Problem there was the Army Brass couldn't decide what "Light" actually meant, especially as their mentors in the US Army couldn't square the circle either regarding weight and protection, especially after report of IEDs and there effect started coming in from Iraq and then Afghanistan.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

there was some speak about if Ajax was delayed or killed off that Warriors could be used as stop gap for the Recce units if so would fitting a RWS on a Warrior turret be

A) doable
B) cost affective
C) any good

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Tempest414 wrote:there was some speak about if Ajax was delayed or killed off that Warriors could be used as stop gap for the Recce units if so would fitting a RWS on a Warrior turret be

A) doable
B) cost affective
C) any good
My assumption is that if the answer to those was "YES" then we should have done it for Afghanistan.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

Tempest414 wrote:there was some speak about if Ajax was delayed or killed off that Warriors could be used as stop gap for the Recce units if so would fitting a RWS on a Warrior turret be

A) doable
B) cost affective
C) any good
On top of the turret or in place of the turret?
What size?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Why would you want to place a RWS on the turret of a Warrior. The optic on the Warrior probably need looking at. Weren't they updated a while back improving their night-time capability by adding an improved Thermal sight? Could a telescopic mast be added in the troop compartment, equipped with an EO turret and possibly a GSR? Installing that on a number of Warriors would give the platform an improved capability and shouldn't be too expensive or complicated to carry out. Have a terminal in the back to control the sensors on the mast and still carry say four dismounts for "Patrol" work. All this is only valid if Ajax is put to rest after the ongoing review and trials.

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Lord Jim wrote:Why would you want to place a RWS on the turret of a Warrior. The optic on the Warrior probably need looking at. Weren't they updated a while back improving their night-time capability by adding an improved Thermal sight?
Because the quickest way to improve the optic on the warrior would be to add it as part of a RWS. It wouldn't improve your gunnery, but would improve your recce performance.

BGTI was installed in 2007. But it's only available to the gunner, not the commander.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

Lord Jim wrote:Why would you want to place a RWS on the turret of a Warrior.
If you want a RWS at all there’s scant space for it, so it’s either as well as or in place of the turret.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

mr.fred wrote:On top of the turret or in place of the turret?
What size?
My thinking was on top of the turret
RunningStrong wrote:Because the quickest way to improve the optic on the warrior would be to add it as part of a RWS. It wouldn't improve your gunnery, but would improve your recce performance.
This was my thinking fitting say 40 or so Warrior under a UOR with a RWS for the recce role with the main reason being the 360 degree Optic's without having to move the main turret it could also allow some fire on the move capability if fitted with a 12.7 mm HMG

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Tempest414 wrote:
RunningStrong wrote:Because the quickest way to improve the optic on the warrior would be to add it as part of a RWS. It wouldn't improve your gunnery, but would improve your recce performance.
This was my thinking fitting say 40 or so Warrior under a UOR with a RWS for the recce role with the main reason being the 360 degree Optic's without having to move the main turret it could also allow some fire on the move capability if fitted with a 12.7 mm HMG
My only concern about that is whether as a UOR you could get the performance from a "bolt on" that would allow the information gained to be of real use.

For example, a good optic and LRF is only useful if you can translate that into a grid for high accuracy IDF, which is part of the warrior role in artillery units that AJAX would replace.

Given the use of warrior in Afghanistan and Iraq in urban areas, I'm surprised it hasn't been done sooner if it was possible.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3037
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Tempest414 »

RunningStrong wrote:
Tempest414 wrote:
RunningStrong wrote:Because the quickest way to improve the optic on the warrior would be to add it as part of a RWS. It wouldn't improve your gunnery, but would improve your recce performance.
This was my thinking fitting say 40 or so Warrior under a UOR with a RWS for the recce role with the main reason being the 360 degree Optic's without having to move the main turret it could also allow some fire on the move capability if fitted with a 12.7 mm HMG
My only concern about that is whether as a UOR you could get the performance from a "bolt on" that would allow the information gained to be of real use.

For example, a good optic and LRF is only useful if you can translate that into a grid for high accuracy IDF, which is part of the warrior role in artillery units that AJAX would replace.

Given the use of warrior in Afghanistan and Iraq in urban areas, I'm surprised it hasn't been done sooner if it was possible.
This is why I posed the question and this would only be a stop gap if Ajax was killed off or delayed longer term

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

Add one ruggedized Tablet with Google Maps and a decent radio to each vehicle or something similar would be the Army's solution.

RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 768
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by RunningStrong »

Lord Jim wrote:Add one ruggedized Tablet with Google Maps and a decent radio to each vehicle or something similar would be the Army's solution.
They already have Bowman P-BISA...

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6250
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Lord Jim »

I still think an EO mast possibly with GSR operated by an operator in the rear is the best way forward if we wanted a "Recce" Warrior. It could also still carry a Recce Patrol or a UAV operator and UAVs. The Commander would get a feed from a Hi Res sources and the Gunner would still have his old job. of money available then stick a couple of Javelins in an armoured box on the side of the turret to give the gunner something to deter heavier opposition Recce platforms at greater range.

Of course if Ajax gets sorted it also needs an ATGW on its turret, or an overwatch platform equipped with an NLOS type weapon system in every Regiment.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by mr.fred »

This popped up on Twitter

One wonders what the background for the figures presented are though.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Post by Ron5 »

mr.fred wrote: 04 Dec 2021, 13:06 One wonders what the background for the figures presented are though.
What do you mean?

Post Reply