Page 91 of 113

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 07 Mar 2022, 19:24
by ArmChairCivvy
mr.fred wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 18:27APS emit
yes, bad
mr.fred wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 18:27 are generally only good for two shots
from what source does this derive from?
mr.fred wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 18:27 An extra 10t of armour that keeps out most RPGs, auto cannon or cluster munitions might have more value than an APS that is wiped off the vehicle in the first artillery concentration
V valuable point... but also goes for the optics (the gunner's sight is/ used to be in a well armoured box, though)

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 07 Mar 2022, 20:34
by mr.fred
ArmChairCivvy wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 19:24 from what source does this derive from?
Only two shots per launcher and only one launcher per side.
I did see an article on APS that figured that the probability of the system surviving the fragments of more than two intercepts was getting too low to be worth it. I think it was on Twitter, but the new twitter limits stop me searching through the usual suspects.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 07 Mar 2022, 20:40
by ArmChairCivvy
mr.fred wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 20:34 he probability of the system surviving the fragments of more than two intercepts was getting too low to be worth it.
Ohh, I get it. Its own intercept splinters, as they will be so close by. Not even factoring in the splinters for the opposing side (other, like artillery or autocannon) fire.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 07 Mar 2022, 20:52
by mr.fred
ArmChairCivvy wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 20:40
mr.fred wrote: 07 Mar 2022, 20:34 he probability of the system surviving the fragments of more than two intercepts was getting too low to be worth it.
Ohh, I get it. Its own intercept splinters, as they will be so close by. Not even factoring in the splinters for the opposing side (other, like artillery or autocannon) fire.
Mostly fragments from the incoming projectile which will not lose their momentum as a result of the explosion.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Mar 2022, 01:37
by Lord Jim
With TI I meant Thermal Imaging, but multi spectral would be more accurate.

Regarding splinter etc. Don't the law of physics apply? ATGWs and even RPGs do not travel that fast and when subject to an opposing force i.e. the interceptor from the APS surely their velocity is going to be negatively affected with some being redirected as a result of the doming together of the inbound and outbound projectiles. Also surely one benefit of the various APS is to protect the vehicle carrying it from initial enemy fire so that it can react. Ajax will have inbound fire detection hardware that will allow the gunner to slew onto the direct the enemy fire is coming from pretty quickly with Smoke Dischargers being fired even quicker allowing the vehicle to try to manoeuvre evade further attacks. 40mm HE rounds landing in your general location will certainly make aiming for the second shot much harder, that is if you can still see the target. Will an APS always protect a vehicle, no, but it will increase its chances of survival in my opinion.

As for always being fitted, well that depends on what level of readiness out forces are to have in the future. If they remain at the level they have been for the past decade or so then we only need to have the vehicles FFBNW, with the APS being part of the TES. If we intend to have a Brigade available at high readiness, whichever of our two Heavy BCTs is at this level of readiness needs to have its vehicles fitted with APS along with other consumables etc. I have a feeling that despite the Defence Secretary saying that we intend to improve the readiness of our forces to partly compensate for reductions in numbers, the level of training, spares and ammunition required has not bee thought through or properly funded yet.

However, besides the fitting of an APS, Boxer is a very well protected platform for its type, and is only beaten by vehicles far more expensive to buy, operate and maintain and deploy.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Mar 2022, 07:28
by mr.fred
Lord Jim wrote: 08 Mar 2022, 01:37 Regarding splinter etc. Don't the law of physics apply? ATGWs and even RPGs do not travel that fast and when subject to an opposing force i.e. the interceptor from the APS surely their velocity is going to be negatively affected with some being redirected as a result of the doming together of the inbound and outbound projectiles. Also surely one benefit of the various APS is to protect the vehicle carrying it from initial enemy fire so that it can react. Ajax will have inbound fire detection hardware that will allow the gunner to slew onto the direct the enemy fire is coming from pretty quickly with Smoke Dischargers being fired even quicker allowing the vehicle to try to manoeuvre evade further attacks. 40mm HE rounds landing in your general location will certainly make aiming for the second shot much harder, that is if you can still see the target. Will an APS always protect a vehicle, no, but it will increase its chances of survival in my opinion.
Yes, laws of physics apply, that’s why it’s a problem. The interceptor doesn’t hit the target directly and a couple of hundred metres per second is still quite quick even if you don’t factor in an explosion. Look at how aircraft shot down by missiles carry on going.
Battlefields aren’t a series of one-on-one engagements and a second shot doesn’t have to come from the same shooter, at the same time or place.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Mar 2022, 03:31
by Lord Jim
That makes sense, but it would also make sense for optics to be given some protection against splinters etc. Mind you one of the advertised advantaged of the then new AHEAD style ammunition was that though it could not penetrate the armour of a Main Battle Tank it could destroy the vehicles optics gaining a mission kill. So I suppose it will partially depend on where the attack comes from, frontally with threaten optics stc. but form the flank maybe less so.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 10 Mar 2022, 00:36
by Lord Jim
Nice PR Video on Boxer to remind everyone of its make up and capabilities. Not to keen on the title though.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Apr 2022, 15:50
by imperialman
100 extra Boxer vehicles for the British Army

Boxer armoured vehicle programme boosted to 623 vehicles as joint UK-Germany production begins in Telford, Stockport and Munich

"The British Army will receive 100 extra armoured Boxer vehicles, ensuring more vehicles reach the frontline faster and bolstering the programme to a total of 623, as the UK maintains defence ties with Germany, the Prime Minister has announced today. The modern digitalised armoured vehicles can be used to transport troops to the frontline and can be rapidly reconfigured to fulfil different roles on the battlefield."

Read more here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/100- ... itish-army

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Apr 2022, 16:47
by bobp
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/100- ... itish-army


No word as to what types, or the cost of the extra vehicles.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Apr 2022, 17:57
by mr.fred
bobp wrote: 08 Apr 2022, 16:47 No word as to what types, or the cost of the extra vehicles.
Indeed. Specifically:
The cost of the additional vehicles will not be published for commercially sensitive reasons.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 08 Apr 2022, 19:36
by bobp
With no perceived increase in defence spending, who is paying?

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 00:57
by Lord Jim
It appears they are increasing the initial production run in Germany together with speeding up the establishment of the UK production lines. They have either quietly added additional new funding to the programme or have rejigged the equipment programme to free up money sooner, possibly delaying other programmes. However the funding has been achieved it is very good news for the Army. I just hope at least some of these new vehicles are of variants that have been identified as been needed to establish viable Infantry Battalions under the Future Soldier Programme.

Now they just heed to accelerate the precision fires programmes and increase the Sky Sabre order.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 09:08
by bobp
Without a doubt the ability to shoot down drones should be a priority, and also some with a 30mm cannon equipped turret.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 09:31
by SD67
Lord Jim wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 00:57 It appears they are increasing the initial production run in Germany together with speeding up the establishment of the UK production lines. They have either quietly added additional new funding to the programme or have rejigged the equipment programme to free up money sooner, possibly delaying other programmes. However the funding has been achieved it is very good news for the Army. I just hope at least some of these new vehicles are of variants that have been identified as been needed to establish viable Infantry Battalions under the Future Soldier Programme.

Now they just heed to accelerate the precision fires programmes and increase the Sky Sabre order.
I’m pretty sure there’s no cash payments going out to Ajax right now, prepayments we’re made in previous years.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 13:17
by Cooper
bobp wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 09:08 Without a doubt the ability to shoot down drones should be a priority, and also some with a 30mm cannon equipped turret.
Trouble is, by the time you've spotted the little buggers, its too late, your co-ordinates are already in the enemy's targeting computer.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 13:35
by mr.fred
Cooper wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 13:17
bobp wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 09:08 Without a doubt the ability to shoot down drones should be a priority, and also some with a 30mm cannon equipped turret.
Trouble is, by the time you've spotted the little buggers, its too late, your co-ordinates are already in the enemy's targeting computer.
Worth a go, at the very least you'll stop them correcting any fire, adjusting for your movement, laser designating anything or performing a direct attack.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 15:14
by Tempest414
bobp wrote: 08 Apr 2022, 19:36 With no perceived increase in defence spending, who is paying?
There is the 24 billion over 3 years uplift which starts this year

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 15:52
by Luke jones
bobp wrote: 08 Apr 2022, 19:36 With no perceived increase in defence spending, who is paying?
Warrior isn't going ahead so that money should be there in theory.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 16:18
by RunningStrong
Whilst there's no detail on this, perhaps MoD are being smart and investing in driver modules with more mission modules to follow at later dates. Perhaps that's an additional optioned price when we know the shape of the required variants.
Cooper wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 13:17
bobp wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 09:08 Without a doubt the ability to shoot down drones should be a priority, and also some with a 30mm cannon equipped turret.
Trouble is, by the time you've spotted the little buggers, its too late, your co-ordinates are already in the enemy's targeting computer.
Not really. Small and medium UAVs haven't got particularly good sensors on them. And their ability to provide specific grids is difficult without a LRF (emitter)nor directly over a target. They obviously have their uses, but not to be overstated!

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 16:32
by mr.fred
The other thing you achieve by shooting down a drone is you stop it reporting anything it hasn’t seen yet. If it spots the counter recce screen first that’s one thing, spotting the main force, logistics lines, HQ, artillery etc.? that’s worse.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 16:50
by sol
bobp wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 09:08 Without a doubt the ability to shoot down drones should be a priority, and also some with a 30mm cannon equipped turret.
Why not both



It can even carry a Javalin.


Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 18:56
by bobp
The RWS posted above seems to have a lot of exposed parts, and ammunition that could easily get damaged. Much preferred by me at least would be a protected version in a turret. With regard to the Boxer increase in numbers, it appears that the Army are sending a large Quantity of Mastiff to Ukraine.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 09 Apr 2022, 20:57
by RunningStrong
bobp wrote: 09 Apr 2022, 18:56 The RWS posted above seems to have a lot of exposed parts, and ammunition that could easily get damaged. Much preferred by me at least would be a protected version in a turret. With regard to the Boxer increase in numbers, it appears that the Army are sending a large Quantity of Mastiff to Ukraine.
I don't disagree, but so is nearly every RWS, including the Kongsberg offerings in use today.

To what extent you protect it from small arms and splinters greatly increases the weight.

Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)

Posted: 10 Apr 2022, 02:07
by Lord Jim
I cannot see many of the enclosed RWS having much protection against anything beyond poor weather and small arms. Not being enclosed means you save weight and it is easier or maintain the weapon system, though this entails being out of the vehicle.

At present it looks like the British Army is doubling down on the Boxer, and is set to become the biggest user of the platform. With the wealth of data from the research Rheinmetall has done on alternative weapons fits and Mission Module, mostly off its own bat, we will be spoilt for choice if and when we decide we need new variants. If Ajax fails, is cut back, or it is decided to reinstate the Regimental Recce units, the CRV variant of the Boxer is an obvious starting point to make up the shortfall and/or take on the various roles.

Though not originally a fan, I now would like to see the British Army operating the Boxer RCH155. Its ability to carry out fire missions on the move is very impressive as is its ability to, when stationary, carry out MRSI fire missions is a very short time with out needing stabilisers. I am sure Rheinmetall could easily develop an Ammunition Handling version to pair up with the RCH155 is asked to, or they might already have one on the books so to speak.