Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

News and discussion threads concerning defence personnel and their units.
J. Tattersall

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Interesting article in the Wavell Room https://wavellroom.com/2020/01/07/strik ... apability/

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

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Very readable, clearly listing the aims and the essential 'ingredients'.

The author cannot help it that so many of these things are in future tense, and even stuff with agreed dates, like Morpheus starting to roll out in 2023, sets us 10 years behind Israel and 5 years behind the first Finnish brigade being kitted out with software-defined radios with self-configuring hierarchies of networks... you can't knock the central node out :thumbup: .
- heaven knows what Israel spends (% of GDP) on defence, when you include the US military assistance which alone, each year, could buy a QEC, but as for the other mentioned country they have been spending, until recently, just 1.6%
- so even though the essential ingredients listed in the article are many, 'first things' must come first (ehmm: long-range fires?)
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)

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

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by Lord Jim »

Well I told you so, I like it when someone else has the same view on things as myself (Feeling smug) :D

J. Tattersall

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by J. Tattersall »

New article in European Security & Defence on equipping the UK's Strike Brigades https://euro-sd.com/2020/06/allgemein/1 ... -brigades/

While Strike is often controversial on blogs and other fora the pattern of opinion amongst professional military and defence analysts appears broadly supportive, albeit not uncritical of certain aspects. Whether the experts have got it right or wrong only time will tell.

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

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by Lord Jim »

As with many articles written about the Army's "Strike" concept, this is supportive of the theory behind it but raises numerous serious concerns about how the Army is implementing the new units. It points out that some of the most important assumptions made by the Army regarding how "Strike" will operate are on shaky ground to say the least. It shows the Army is overly optimistic about the capabilities that the Brigades will have and more importantly highlights many capabilities the Brigades are going to lack if organised as currently planned. The key capability needed for "Strike" to be viable, Supporting Fires, may well not be available to the Brigades until nearly a decade after the Brigades are stood up. The Mobile Fires Platform or MFP programme is not due to be in full service until 2032 at the earliest and knowing how procurement programmes have a habit of slipping it could be almost the middle of the next decade.

The article also highlight that the Army is likely to have to make a real choice between its new "Strike" Brigades and re equipping its Armoured Infantry Brigades whose equipment is, with a few exceptions, obsolete, worn out or both. Current funding makes it impossible to equip both types of formation effectively to make them truly viable in a future peer level conflict, but that is what the Army seems determined to try and do, with the result none will be up to the task.

I am a fan of both the "Strike" concept and the Boxer AFV (Believe it or not) and wish to see the Army take both to their full potential. AS for the Armoured Infantry Formations, as I have repeatedly stated the only platform form them we should actually retain is the Challenger 2, possibly linking them with a similar number of Ajax variants to form a single Armoured Cavalry Brigade, that would be able to support the "Strike" Brigades providing heavier fire support when they finally arrive in theatre.

As it stands the "Strike" concept is being built on sand foundations, which does not bode well for the Army and especially the men and women who will serve in these units if they ever have to go to war.

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

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

J. Tattersall wrote: Whether the experts
... who needs ;) experts?
Lord Jim wrote: Supporting Fires, may well not be available to the Brigades until nearly a decade after the Brigades are stood up.
+
Lord Jim wrote:MFP programme is not due to be in full service until 2032 at the earliest
Well, a very substantial point, but
1. We have a review (re-prioritisation?... not a paper review) on the go, and
2. what I last read about the new US piece, the most complicated upgrade ( the breech art of it) is well on its way. Defenworld.com writes (10 March, 2020)
"The US Army’s Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) fired rocket-assisted 155mm round and an Excalibur precision-guided round out to 65km, which is twice as far as traditional 155mm artillery.

The test firing, carried out last Friday is intended to enable fielding the ERCA's systems to the US Army’s combat battalion in 2023, Military.com reported.

For the first phase of the ERCA program, BAE Systems is contracted to build the 18 ERCA systems that will be fielded in 2023."
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)

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

Re: Strike Brigades (SDSR 15)

Post by Lord Jim »

A lot is going to rest on what comes out of the integrated review, but with what has happened over the last six or so months, I cannot see the Army getting any additional funding for anything but Cyber.

Isn't the US Army's ERCA programme based on the M109A7 which used an upgraded Turret from the M109A6 Paladin, a new Rifle and the hull of the M2 Bradley. Our MFP Programme has stated only that the minimum range required is in excess of 30km and given that funding will remain tight unless other programmes are effectively cancelled, I would say we are looking at systems already demonstrated on wheeled chassis with a range of around 45km. Ww also must look at obtaining HIMARS to replace our existing M270 GMLRS, remembering that only the regular RA Regiment is equipped with this system, with the Reserve Regiment still using the older MLRS variant.

The only way I can see the two "Strike" Brigades being fully equipped with all the required variants of the Boxer and (unfortunately) Ajax is for the majority of the programmes aimed at recapitalising the two Armoured Infantry Brigades being cancelled and possibly one of the Brigades being struck off. I doubt any funding will be made available for transfer to the Army from either the RN or RAF as they have their own pressures.

The best I believe we can hope for is for a decent framework to be established with the first "Strike" Brigade, then a pause for the unit to be tested, evaluated, lessons learned and essential capability gaps recognised, so that these can be included in to the second Brigade as well as back fitted to the first Brigade.

One outcome that may be possible would be for the "Strike" Brigades to the reorganised so that the number of Ajax regiments is reduced to one and the number of Boxer Regiments increased to three, with the two surplus Ajax regiment being shifted to the Armoured Infantry Brigades. This would also result in the total number of Ajax being purchased would be reduced by about a third as Boxers would be used in many of the support roles originally intended for the Ajax like that of Command vehicles and Joint Fires Platforms. This would only require a small increase in the existing order for the Boxer, but funding will need to be found for the additional variants, which are going to be needed to make the Brigades viable combat formation in any future peer level conflict.

Post Reply