Army 2020 Refine

[mr.fred]

with the Warrior upgrade CANCELLED, but the turrets placed in storage

Which turrets would those be then, if you've "CANCELLED" the programme?

APC Specialist Vehicle is called "Ares" I think.

It would be nice to see a more rounded Specialist Vehicle family.

[abc123]

Army 2020 Refine is a pile of crap, and the "announcement" is a crime in itself: Carter posted a two minutes video on Twitter and then went on fucking holiday and people across the army are left scratching their heads looking at incomplete reports and trying to figure out what it means for their units.

The COs of 3 RHA and 4 RA didn't get the memo about losing guns. They have written in the past few days about "retaining current capabilities" and "growing a little" with a new medium gun by 2025.
The new medium gun also appears in the letter from the 1st Artillery Brigade commander.

Now this report comes out. Other COs are still silent, some have literally written "i'm still looking into this, i don't know".
This is disrespectful and amateurish to indescribable levels.

And that surprises you?

But yeah, man would expect that top UK general knows the difference between Ajax and tank?

[abc123]

You may want to refer to the RA thread where this kind of arrangement (and its rationale) was explained just days ago; in fact, here too, just a couple of pages back:
"It all (for me) points to two "good old DAG-like" capabilities being formed, with some double-hatting between them (and close support being the main theme elsewhere in the RA):
- one for divisional-level manouevre in a hot (but short) war by a heavy(-ish) division
- one for modern expeditionary force of a "divisional composition"["]

Logs, arty, AD.Even MP, all added in as cherries on top, but the "cake" must be layered first.

And this is not the two and a half wars strategy, but rather only one or the other can be committed with full support. The other one partially, to hold the fort. Or deal with a minor contingency or be part of a wider, beefed-up deterrent

Man, just say it: "We don't have the money" and I will understand it, but do not try to sell me that noncences with cherries and cakes...

This can be only described as "capability to fight 0,5 wars".

[Lord Jim]

Manufacture the turrets that would be for the Warrior if they have already been funded and place those in storage whilst keeping the Warriors as is. If they are not funded then it isn't an issue. then again I am not up to speed on the WCIP but it seems to have slowed to an almost imperceptible crawl. I know all the variants have their own name I just found it easier to refer to them all as Ajax with a variant designation.

[mr.fred]

Latest I can find on WCSP:
http://www.janes.com/article/63575/dvd- ... -next-year
So you've got a dozen or so pre-production turrets and a similar number of modified vehicles.

I would note that leaving Warrior as is would mean that you are stuck with an increasingly obsolescent platform. If you thought Challenger 2 was bad...

[ArmChairCivvy]

ABSV numbers have often been mentioned as 65, so
"It is expected that 380 WCSP will be supplied of which 245 will have the new turret armed with the 40 mm CTAS"
245 plus 65 would leave 70 as Command, support and AO variants
... if the ABSV numbers are within the total, and not to be added on top (once funded)

[mr.fred]

ACC,
ABSV is a separate project and I've seen more than a couple of claims that it's dead.
The Warrior Command variant is turreted, so those would come out of the 245 number.
Likewise the artillery observation vehicle, though that doesn't have a cannon, so it might not count.
1/3 of the total for non-turreted vehicles seems like a lot.

[Gabriele]

There will be guns in 3 RHA and 4 RA and STRIKE 155 is a funded programme, 3 RHA reaffirms. Apparently Jane's got it wrong at the briefing. There were, indeed, several things that did not sound right, as i had written. Some clashing announcements and stuff.

Updated with latest: http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot ... -than.html

Also, some clarity about London Regiment transition and a little boost to the reserve tank regiment. Does not make up for the lost MBTs, but better than nothing at all...

[ArmChairCivvy]

ABSV is a separate project and I've seen more than a couple of claims that it's dead
&&&&&&&&&&&
The Warrior Command variant is turreted, so those would come out of the 245 number.
Likewise the artillery observation vehicle, though that doesn't have a cannon, so it might not count.

Yeah, and the number (65) just keeps bouncing back.

V good information, the rest of the post, in this Kremlinology that we have to exercise with our own MoD.... I used to put all my effort in the opposition (they were even more secretive, at the time... whereas now even prototypes are paraded and thousands will roll off the production line, the year after)

[dmereifield]

There will be guns in 3 RHA and 4 RA and STRIKE 155 is a funded programme, 3 RHA reaffirms. Apparently Jane's got it wrong at the briefing. There were, indeed, several things that did not sound right, as i had written. Some clashing announcements and stuff.

Updated with latest: http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot ... -than.html

Also, some clarity about London Regiment transition and a little boost to the reserve tank regiment. Does not make up for the lost MBTs, but better than nothing at all...

Thanks for the updates Gabriele, I have enjoyed reading your blog. I suspect such info is not yet available, but do you know any details of the strike 155 programme - e.g. how many guns are anticipated to be purchased, what the programme budget is and when announcements for tender etc will be released? Failing hard details, any educated guesses would be gratefully received. Lastly, you mention the M777 as a candidate, which I beleive is (partly) manufactured in the UK (?), do you know the rough cost per unit?

Many thanks

[ArmChairCivvy]

How many & how much

me interested, too

[Gabriele]

Too early to say much more than i what i already said about Strike 155. We'll see.

I can just say that two regiments means at least 36 systems, ideally 48 (batteries of 6 guns are now the norm, but wartime batteries are supposed to have 8), plus some for training and margin. This is, of course, using common sense and sticking to the standards. There is no guarrantee the MOD would show sense nor stick to standards.

I'm not sure what an M777 purchase could cost, either. That as always depends on what the purchase includes.

[dmereifield]

Too early to say much more than i what i already said about Strike 155. We'll see.

I can just say that two regiments means at least 36 systems, ideally 48 (batteries of 6 guns are now the norm, but wartime batteries are supposed to have 8), plus some for training and margin. This is, of course, using common sense and sticking to the standards. There is no guarrantee the MOD would show sense nor stick to standards.

I'm not sure what an M777 purchase could cost, either. That as always depends on what the purchase includes.

Thanks. For clarification, when (if) the 155mm come into service, are they to replace or augment the L118's?

[Gabriele]

Replace them in two regiments. Replacement of L118 in 7 RHA, 29 Commando and reserve is another, as yet non started, story.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Replacement of L118 in 7 RHA, 29 Commando and reserve is another, as yet non started, story.

Ie. everything else than the 2 plus 2 bdes, with 3 x tracked (AS90 Rgmnts; will the number remain at 3? It is likely, I'd say) and 2 wheeled ( Rgmnts with new kit?)
- sharing longer ranged precision fires
- and the MLRS outfit better get back to the area fires business , too (easily done by pointing the elements manned from reserves to this, with some new munitions to be purchased... cough-cough: AW)

[RetroSicotte]

Would not be surprised to see it drop from 100+ guns to only around 50 then.

Just as 50 GMLRS went to 35.

Just as 189 AS-90's went to 80ish.

It's a tough call. M777 supports British industry and that will definitely favour to me, and it gives a howitzer that is already proven with various guided shells, which can be airlifted much the same as the L118. It's the perfect field gun replacement.

But what I'm increasingly suspecting is they aim to replace L118 and the AS-90 (Some 200 guns, with armour and airlift ability between them) with around 50ish wheeled howitzers and then call it a day to somehow trumpet that as a "capability increase".

[dmereifield]

Thanks for the answers, hopefully you're wrong RS

[Gabriele]

A further AS90 cut from the current 89 pieces is a given, with one regiment going. At the same rate of guns per regiment as now, the fleet could easily drop to 59 / 60, if not go even lower.

[ArmChairCivvy]

can be airlifted much the same as the L118. It's the perfect field gun replacement.

I thought the weight was 4 times? have you seen the number of grunts needed just to turn it (and the Marines, on avg, are not small guys)?

Calculate how many 155 mm shells to a ton lifted, vs the number of 105 mm that goes into it

[Gabriele]

can be airlifted much the same as the L118. It's the perfect field gun replacement.

I thought the weight was 4 times? have you seen the number of grunts needed just to turn it (and the Marines, on avg, are not small guys)?

Calculate how many 155 mm shells to a ton lifted, vs the number of 105 mm that goes into it

But 155 comes with every sort of firepower advantage. Want also something highly mobile and very light? Do what everyone has already done: couple some 120mm mortars to lightweight 155mm howitzers.

[abc123]

How many & how much

me interested, too

Probably nothing, as usual.

[mr.fred]

But 155 comes with every sort of firepower advantage.

Yep. Greater logistics strain, larger danger area, harder to move so more likely to be knocked out by counter battery fire. All those superb advantages.

Want also something highly mobile and very light? Do what everyone has already done: couple some 120mm mortars to lightweight 155mm howitzers.

Fantastic! Carrying two guns with more than double the logistics strain is just what light forces need.

[ArmChairCivvy]

something highly mobile and very light? Do what everyone has already done: couple some 120mm mortars to lightweight 155mm howitzers.

All for it, but "couple" is the wrong expression (for reasons that mr. fred suggests). Yes, there sould be some of both at the BG level, at least.

An 81mm mortar has survived because it (and sufficient rounds for it) are still mobile with infantry; 120 mm is practically artillery
- also, consider that for suppressing fires (a mortar isn't, or at least used not to be, exactly a precision weapon) the splinter effect of a ton of 81 mm rounds is four times as many as from a ton of 120 mm rounds - even leaving the logs constraints aside, as suppression needs as many rounds as possible for the duration of X
... still awaiting the answer on the arty side of things: how many times more rounds of 105 vs 155 mm to a ton?

[Gabriele]

Yep. Greater logistics strain, larger danger area, harder to move so more likely to be knocked out by counter battery fire. All those superb advantages.

You are right of course, much better to open fire when 10 km or more into the range of the opposition's artillery battery, and fire smaller and less lethal rounds, and without access to the vast variety of ER and special-payload ammunition available for the 155mm.
A real bargain if you are seeking the fastest way to lose an artillery clash.

[marktigger]

the last 155mm gun the RA was trialing was CAESAR not M777