Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by marktigger »

RA also operate warrior but yes could see it. but does warthog have the performance/protection to move with a battlegroup. interesting swingfire started life in the RA then moved to the RAC

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by marktigger »

Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:could the spike ER systems be moved into some of them? or will they go from M113 to scout
The SPIKE NLOS / Exactor is no longer vehicle mounted in british use. It is mounted on a tiny wheeled trailer, easy to move (including by helicopter) and to conceal.

Image
for the role it was used in that mounting makes sense Point defence counter mortar/IED but for more conventional warfare this is a bit (understatement) inflexible

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Gabriele »

marktigger wrote:
Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:could the spike ER systems be moved into some of them? or will they go from M113 to scout
The SPIKE NLOS / Exactor is no longer vehicle mounted in british use. It is mounted on a tiny wheeled trailer, easy to move (including by helicopter) and to conceal.

Image
for the role it was used in that mounting makes sense Point defence counter mortar/IED but for more conventional warfare this is a bit (understatement) inflexible
It would be better if there was (also) an AFV-borne variant, but this trailer-mounted launcher is all but inflexible. Quite the opposite. It can be quickly moved around the battlefield, easily concealed, and operated with the computer "boxes" a fair distance away from the launcher. In its way, it is both more flexible and more survivable than a vehicle-launcher.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by marktigger »

Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:
Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:could the spike ER systems be moved into some of them? or will they go from M113 to scout
The SPIKE NLOS / Exactor is no longer vehicle mounted in british use. It is mounted on a tiny wheeled trailer, easy to move (including by helicopter) and to conceal.

Image
for the role it was used in that mounting makes sense Point defence counter mortar/IED but for more conventional warfare this is a bit (understatement) inflexible
It would be better if there was (also) an AFV-borne variant, but this trailer-mounted launcher is all but inflexible. Quite the opposite. It can be quickly moved around the battlefield, easily concealed, and operated with the computer "boxes" a fair distance away from the launcher. In its way, it is both more flexible and more survivable than a vehicle-launcher.
yes and its deployment and support takes time mobile integrated platforms are a better option but the trailers could be useful in the mix.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

Armchaircivvy made an interesting point about warthog equiped with a trailer
ArmChairCivvy wrote:Warthog being heavier than Viking, may be not chinook luggable (even in two bits), but definitely can be airlanded, and after that a "go-anywhere" platform.

Halfway through this
http://defense-update.com/products/b/bronco_191208.html
there is a photo of the 3-part combo that I had in mind for use with Exactor.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

marktigger wrote:RA also operate warrior but yes could see it. but does warthog have the performance/protection to move with a battlegroup. interesting swingfire started life in the RA then moved to the RAC
I would think so, It is quite heavy but reasonably fast and can go anywhere. Can be carried by Chinook, but needs to be uncoupled.
Your right, its had an interesting life, now destined for UAV support what ever that means
@LandSharkUK

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by RetroSicotte »

I believe some of them may indeed still be mounted on their M113's. It wasn't long ago we saw this:;

Image

So some may still be mounted up.

Course, they'd make more sense on a Warrior ABSV (See what I did there, thread? ;) ) but I full agree with Gabe about the absolute logistical lightness and deployability of a simple trailer mount. When you consider the thing has 26km of reach, the need for an immediate tactical vehicle mount is substantially less pressing. It's a darn artillery piece more than an ATGM.

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:
Gabriele wrote:
marktigger wrote:could the spike ER systems be moved into some of them? or will they go from M113 to scout
The SPIKE NLOS / Exactor is no longer vehicle mounted in british use. It is mounted on a tiny wheeled trailer, easy to move (including by helicopter) and to conceal.

Image
for the role it was used in that mounting makes sense Point defence counter mortar/IED but for more conventional warfare this is a bit (understatement) inflexible
It would be better if there was (also) an AFV-borne variant, but this trailer-mounted launcher is all but inflexible. Quite the opposite. It can be quickly moved around the battlefield, easily concealed, and operated with the computer "boxes" a fair distance away from the launcher. In its way, it is both more flexible and more survivable than a vehicle-launcher.
The ultimate Nebelwerfer ;)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Nebelwerfer = an area saturation weapon
- a bit like MLRS started its life as a map grid removal service
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)

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Wrekin762 »

Couple of photos of the WCSP on show at DSEI:

Image

Image

Looks like some work has gone in to the hull as well (APU area on the front right of the vehicle) though the Desert Warrior and the hull that BAE used to demonstrate ABSV and their recent mortar carrier were similar. So I guess it may just be a result of where Lockheed sourced the hull for this demonstrator from.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by RetroSicotte »

That is one beast of a turret.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

can any one clarify how many warriors are being upgraded and to what variant?
Is it just 250 receiving the new CTA 40mm cannon?

One figure I seen 650 are being upgraded, but to what standard if they don't have a turret?
Another figure I've seen is 380, but again there aren't enough turrets to go around.
I've lost track of what's going on (pun :D )
@LandSharkUK

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Wrekin762 »

Well the UK has ordered 515 40mm Cased Telescopic Cannons.

245 of those are earmarked for AJAX, so that that leaves 270 to be used for Warrior or for spares.

380 Warriors are being upgraded under WCSP but that number includes things like fitting the new electronic architecture and modular armour package to variants that aren't Infantry Section Vehicles with CTAS.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

Wrekin762 wrote:Well the UK has ordered 515 40mm Cased Telescopic Cannons.

245 of those are earmarked for AJAX, so that that leaves 270 to be used for Warrior or for spares.

380 Warriors are being upgraded under WCSP but that number includes things like fitting the new electronic architecture and modular armour package to variants that aren't Infantry Section Vehicles with CTAS.
Thanks, do we know what the other 130 warriors are ?
What about the 400 that aren't part of the program?
@LandSharkUK

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Wrekin762 »

shark bait wrote:What about the 400 that aren't part of the program?
There are only 565 in the "affordable fleet" according to the NAO report a couple of years ago:
The current affordable fleet is 565 vehicles including 445 currently planned to be upgraded to Warrior
Capability Sustainment Programme which includes the intent to upgrade 65 to Armoured Battlefield
Support Vehicle.
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... sheets.pdf

It says 65 are to be upgraded under ABSV, but to my knowledge the exact details of ABSV haven't been hammered out yet so there is no current commitment to carry out the work from LM, BAE or anyone else.

445 - 65 = 380 which was the total number of vehicles that Lockheed Martin are currently committed to upgrading under WCSP. We know this will include somewhere in the region of 240-270 CTAS turreted Warriors (we'll use your guess of 250 for the sake of simplicity). The remaining ~130 from that 380 will consist of upgrades to FV512, FV513, FV514 etc. - i.e. the vehicles that weren't previously armed with Rarden, and are not being reconfigured to new ABSV roles.

That leaves ~120 vehicles on the books that will be stored, cannibalised or disposed of.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

Wrekin762 wrote: http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... sheets.pdf

It says 65 are to be upgraded under ABSV, but to my knowledge the exact details of ABSV haven't been hammered out yet so there is no current commitment to carry out the work from LM, BAE or anyone else.

445 - 65 = 380 which was the total number of vehicles that Lockheed Martin are currently committed to upgrading under WCSP. We know this will include somewhere in the region of 240-270 CTAS turreted Warriors (we'll use your guess of 250 for the sake of simplicity). The remaining ~130 from that 380 will consist of upgrades to FV512, FV513, FV514 etc. - i.e. the vehicles that weren't previously armed with Rarden, and are not being reconfigured to new ABSV roles.

That leaves ~120 vehicles on the books that will be stored, cannibalised or disposed of.
Thanks for the clarification, I've seen so many different figures thrown around.
Your right ABSV is one of those shady no money projects at the moment.
@LandSharkUK

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Wrekin762 »

Jane's is saying 285 with the new turret, so that's 15 more than I had estimated from the number of CT cannons purchased:

Long-life Warrior

Image
Lockheed Martin UK (Stand S8-210) is showing the latest version of its demonstrator vehicle from the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP), which it is developing under a contract awarded in November 2011 by the UK Defence Equipment & Support Organisation.

Alan Lines, vice-president and managing director of the Lockheed Martin UK Ampthill sites, told the DSEI Daily: ‘‘We continue to make excellent progress with this important programme that will be the key to the Army’s future armoured fighting vehicle capability.

Our successful firing trials earlier this year demonstrated the accuracy and lethality of the new-generation Warrior, designed and manufactured in the UK.’’

WCSP aims to extend the life of the BAE Systems Combat Vehicles UK Warrior infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) out to 2035-40 and to provide the British Army with a step change in capability over the currently deployed Warrior IFV. WCSP includes the Warrior Fightability & Lethality Improvement Programme, Warrior Enhanced Electronic Architecture and Warrior Modular Protection System (WMPS).

It is expected that 380 Warrior IFVs and variants will be upgraded through WCSP, with some 285 fitted with the new turret. All the specialised variants are fitted with a one-man 7.62mm machine gun turret. The current Warrior turret is armed with an unstabilised and slow-firing 30mm RARDEN cannon, which will be replaced by a brand-new turret designed by Lockheed Martin UK, armed with a fully stabilised 40mm Case Telescoped Cannon and 7.62mm coaxial machine gun. To reduce through-life costs, this new turret uses subsystems from the turret developed for the Scout SV under contract to General Dynamics UK.

WMPS is essentially a new hull mounting system to which the user can rapidly attach various armour solutions depending on where the vehicle is to be deployed and the threat it is expected to meet.

Lockheed Martin is to supply 12 WCSP demonstrator vehicles under the contract: nine section vehicles (including two section command) and single examples of command, repair and recovery variants.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

Wrekin762 wrote:Jane's is saying 285 with the new turret, so that's 15 more than I had estimated from the number of CT cannons purchased:
This is exactly what I mean by confused figures, even from reputable sources.

245 for scout
285 for warrior

530 total needed from an order of 515. Who's messing up their numbers?

I assume there will also be some static cannons for testing and training, where would they come from.
@LandSharkUK

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by marktigger »

further buy when someone realises the cock up or some refurbished trials weapons?

does the Warrior Artillery OPV have a cannon and have those vehicles been taken out to the numbers?

Pymes75
Member
Posts: 279
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:17
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Pymes75 »

marktigger wrote:further buy when someone realises the cock up or some refurbished trials weapons?

does the Warrior Artillery OPV have a cannon and have those vehicles been taken out to the numbers?
IIRC, Warrior OPV is being replaced by Ajax Joint Fire Control (JFC) variants of which there will be 23. They will be turreted so I assume will have the canon.

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

Conveniently 15 barrels was the number that was ordered to serve as testbeds for the trials phase IIRC - though i have a feeling they are probably worn out and no longer fit for service, no?

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

~UNiOnJaCk~ wrote:Conveniently 15 barrels was the number that was ordered to serve as testbeds for the trials phase IIRC - though i have a feeling they are probably worn out and no longer fit for service, no?
Very convenient! refurbs to save money perhaps.
@LandSharkUK

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

shark bait wrote:
~UNiOnJaCk~ wrote:Conveniently 15 barrels was the number that was ordered to serve as testbeds for the trials phase IIRC - though i have a feeling they are probably worn out and no longer fit for service, no?
Very convenient! refurbs to save money perhaps.
I dunno, tbh. I think they must be pretty knackered by now. I might be wrong on the number of barrels used in the testing phase as it is however.

Edited to include link: http://www.w54.biz/archive/index.php/t-2445.html

(16 Cannons and 32 Barrels)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by shark bait »

~UNiOnJaCk~ wrote: I dunno, tbh. I think they must be pretty knackered by now. I might be wrong on the number of barrels used in the testing phase as it is however.

Edited to include link: http://www.w54.biz/archive/index.php/t-2445.html

(16 Cannons and 32 Barrels)
I think its correct, I've defiantly seen similar figures elsewhere.

That link also says and additional MOD order for three more 40mm cannon and 48 barrels.
@LandSharkUK

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (Army)

Post by Wrekin762 »

Barrels get replaced a lot and don't last the life of the gun (Rarden's barrel is replaced after something like 3,500-4,000 rounds). So the testbed's CTC barrels getting shot-out isn't an issue - we'll always be buying more. The condition of the breach and ammunition transfer+handling system after the trials is more of an issue.

The disparity in Warrior turret numbers to guns ordered has a few possibilities:
  • The 285 turreted Warriors will continue to include some WR OPV/BCV type vehicles, with a new turret but still no gun. (though the Janes article doesn't seem to indicate this)
  • Either the Joint-Fires or Ground-Based Surveillance version of Ajax will be like its Warrior-based predecessor, and will be turreted but wont have a gun system (though I think it will, because the reason FV514/FV515 didn't have a gun isn't so much of an issue with Ajax's larger turret volume)
  • The 19 guns mentioned in the w54 article will be re-used and the "515 ordered" is entirely additional to that So we have 534 guns available.
  • Jane's made a typo when writing 285 Warrior turrets :D
I would think there needs to be a good number of spare guns in the system somewhere: So the 534 total for the next 7 years doesn't really seem like enough whatever way you stack it up against the 530 vehicles that are supposed to be getting turrets. It's all kind of confusing.

Ed:- Seems the 285 turrets quoted by Jane's might be a mistake:
Alan Lines, VP and MD of LMUK’s Ampthill site told Shephard there will be a further turret design acceptance after the trials that are due to be completed towards the end of 2017 that will authorise full-scale turret production.

‘An order exists for Warrior, it is just the execution of that,’ he said. The plan is to build 245 turreted Warriors out of a total of 380 upgraded warriors. Babcock is doing the hull work on the chassis, but it is the turret that provides the lethality capability.
but:
It is hoped that the MoD will decide to upgrade more than the 245 turrets planned. Edwards (Rick Edwards, executive VP for Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control) said they want to prove the upgrade and get more converted.
http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landw ... sp-builds/

Post Reply