Army Command to 2030

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Army Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

2015 saw another SDSR and yet another change in the structure of the British Army. It seems at times that Army Command is undergoing a state of permanent revolution as a new structure is introduced when the previous restructuring is only half-way along! Nevertheless, the orders for 589 Ajax Specialised Vehicles and 523 Boxer Mechanised Infantry Vehicles show that some progress is finally being made.

However, even including these two orders, progress in ordering new equipment has been very slow. As of March 2020 there was still a total of £11.9 billion in Uncommitted Equipment Procurement to be ordrered up to 2029/30.

Army 2020 to Army Refine to Integrated Review

Under the Army 2020 force structure regular forces were to be capped at 82,000 with a target of 30,000 reserves. With Army Refine the regular Army is not supposed to go below 82,000 and the target for the reserves has been increased to 35,000. However, this marginal improvement is partly offset by the loss of one of the three remaining Armoured Regiments and one Royal Artillery Regiment with accompanying reductions in the number of Challenger 2 main battle tanks and AS-90 self-propelled guns.

The four-year Spending Review allows for a 5% increase in real spending on day-to-day expenditure, including personnel. For the Army that means an additional 4,000 full-time troops and 1,500 reservists. A total of 2,500 full-time personnel should be allocated to a re-established 102 Logistic Brigade and assigned to restore the mobility, flexibility and effectiveness of the 1st (UK) Division. The remaining 1,500 full-time soldiers could be assigned to the five Specialised Infantry Battalions and so bring them back up to full operational strength. The 1,500 reservists should mostly be assigned to three new Royal Artillery Regiments that would increase the close fires support for 1st (UK) Division.

Strategy and the Reaction Force

In light of the growing assertiveness of Russia the whole strategy and structure of Land Forces needs to be re-examined to assess whether it is still relevant to the possible threats that could be faced over the next decade.

The major lesson to be learnt from the last few years is that Army Command needs to be highly adaptable and flexible as threats can change very quickly. Often more quickly than new equipment can be ordered and brought into service.

Land forces could be required to do anything from deterring peer level threats in the Arctic to the Mediterranean against sophisticated armoured forces; to operating in the mountains, deserts, or jungles of developing countries anywhere on the globe.

There needs to be a range of equipment for both specialised and general forces that can operate in sufficient numbers in an effective and timely manner. Each deployed unit needs the latest relevant equipment to operate in each required environment and the numbers on the ground to do the job.

For a start that means each Brigade in the Reaction Force and 3 Commando consisting of at least five Regiments/Battalions and having sufficient dedicated support units.

Army Command needs to be realistic in how it manages the readiness of its forces. Having half of the Reaction Force at high readiness is not sustainable in the long-run. Instead, it should return to a more endurable system of rotation where one-third of units are maintained at high readiness.

One of the first consequences of this change in rotation, and the need to deter a more assertive Russia, is that the frontline Challenger 2 force should be maintained at a level of three Armoured Regiments. As this would necessitate increasing the number of Royal Armoured Corps Regiments the additional personnel would have to be found by disbanding one regular Light Role Infantry Battalion from the Adaptable Force.

Frontline forces need to have adequate support from mobile artillery and ground based air defences. Each Reaction Force Brigade needs support from a minimum of two Artillery Regiments. This level of commitment requires an additional Royal Artillery Regiment, which could be made up of the recently disbanded three AS-90 Batteries. To ensure much needed improved air defences requires an additional Royal Artillery Regiment. These increases would necessitate disbanding a second regular Light Role Infantry Battalion.

Applying these changes to the Reaction Force results in:

1 and 2 Strike Brigades – consisting of two Ajax Armoured Regiments, two Ajax Armoured Cavalry Regiments and six Boxer Mechanised Infantry Battalions (two reserve); with support from two GMLRS Artillery Regiments (one reserve) and two Howitzer Artillery Regiments (one reserve) plus two Sky Sabre air defence Batteries

3 Commando Brigade – made up of one Patrol Group, one Armoured Support Group, two Commandos, four Royal Marine Reserve units and one Marine Support Infantry Battalion (reserve); with support from two Howitzer Artillery Regiments (one reserve) plus one Sky Sabre Battery

12 and 20 Armoured Infantry Brigades – consisting of three Challenger Armoured Regiments plus one Challenger Armoured Yeomanry Regiment (reserve) and six Warrior Armoured Infantry Battalions (two reserve); with support from three AS-90 Artillery Regiments and one Howitzer Artillery Regiment (reserve) plus two Sky Sabre Batteries

16 Air Assault Brigade – made up of three Parachute Battalions (one reserve) and two Air Mobile Infantry Battalions (one reserve); with support from two Howitzer Artillery Regiments (one Regiment and one Battery reserve) plus one Sky Sabre Battery.

Compared to Army Refine the Reaction Force should be increased by one Challenger Armoured Regiment (the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment), one reserve Marine Support Infantry Battalion, one reserve Air Mobile Infantry Battalion, one AS-90 Artillery Regiment and one Sky Sabre Artillery Regiment.
Challenger 3.jpg
Challenger 3 should have a new gun, Brimstone launchers and improved defensive capabilities.

Army Refine added four reserve Infantry Battalions to the Armoured Infantry Brigades. Under the proposals here two of them would move to the Strike Brigades and operate the Boxer Mechanised Infantry Vehicle while the remaining two would operate the upgraded Warrior 2.

Other changes should include re-rolling the recently established fourth Sabre Squadron of the Wessex Armoured Yeomanry Regiment as reconnaissance and ISTAR Troops to ensure that this reserve Regiment has the same structure as the three Challenger Armoured Regiments.

The new reserve Marine Support Infantry Battalion should be re-equipped with the Future/All-Terrain Vehicle to ensure commonality with the rest of 3 Commando Brigade. Due to its geographical proximity this could be 6th Battalion The Rifles, which is based in Exeter.

Similarly, the new reserve Air Mobile Infantry Battalion should be re-equipped with Jackal 2 and Coyote to ensure compatibility with 16 Air Assault Brigade. Again due to its geographical proximity this could be 3rd Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment, based in Bury St. Edmunds.

The Joint Rapid Reaction Force

A key objective of the enlarged Reaction Force would be the ability to maintain sufficient forces to be able to deploy a Brigade-strong Joint Rapid Reaction Force at all times. This should consist of five regular Regiments/Battalions selected out of a total of seven held at high readiness from:
- A Strike Force of four Regiments/Battalions rotating annually between the four Ajax Regiments, four Warrior Armoured Infantry Battalions and four Boxer Mechanised Infantry Battalions
- A Lead Commando Unit made up of a Battalion strength unit provided from 3 Commando Brigade
- A Lead Armoured Regiment rotating between the three Challenger Armoured Regiments and
- An Air Assault Task Force of one Battalion rotating between two Para Battalions and one Air Mobile Infantry Battalion.

Fire support should be provided by five Artillery Batteries, out of a total of seven held at high readiness, made up from one GMLRS Battery, three AS-90 self-propelled gun Batteries and three Howitzer Batteries. Air defence should be provided by two Sky Sabre Batteries. Helicopter attack and reconnaissance should be provided by up to five Flights of Apache AH2 and one Squadron of Wildcat AH1.

If further escalation is required fifteen Regiments/Battalions, out of the twenty one regular units that are part of the Reaction Force and 3 Commando Brigade, should be deployed. In addition, up to seven Artillery Regiments, six Sky Sabre Batteries, five Apache AH2 Squadrons and three Wildcat AH1 Squadrons should be deployed in support.

This would bring the Joint Rapid Reaction Force up to Division strength. In the field this Division would be supplied and rely on the dedicated support of 101 Logistic Brigade.

A More Adaptable Force

The increased size of the Reaction Force would leave an Adaptable Force consisting of 35 Regiments/Battalions and Specialised units. This is a total of four fewer than in Army Refine and ten fewer than under Army 2020.

Under these plans the Adaptable Force would be left with three Cavalry Regiments, three Yeomanry Regiments (all reserve), 24 Infantry Battalions (nine reserve) and five Specialised Infantry Battalions.

Under Army 2020, the Adaptable Force was led by a Divisional HQ, seven Brigade HQs and HQ London District. In Army Refine the number of Brigade HQs was initially reduced by one but a new HQ was established for the Specialised Infantry Group.

This is still too top heavy a structure in a time of challenging budgets. Slimming down the number of HQs to five is more than justified and was recognised in the Field Army re-organisation of August 2019.

The new Adaptable Force should be organised into:
- HQ 1st (UK) Division
- HQ 11 Infantry Brigade incorporating London District, the Specialised Infantry Group and taking on the role of the Shadow HQ 2nd (UK) Division
- HQ 4 Infantry Brigade incorporating 42 Infantry Brigade
- HQ 7 Infantry Brigade incorporating 160 Infantry Brigade and
- HQ 51 Infantry Brigade incorporating 38 Infantry Brigade.

One of the major roles for the Adaptable Force is to provide enduring stabilisation at Brigade level over the longer term. However, with a higher threat level in Europe and fewer numbers in the Army it needs to be recognised that providing anything more than a Brigade for any length of time would stretch resources too thinly.

Even this reduced Adaptable Force would be capable of deploying five regular Infantry Battalions, one Specialised Infantry Battalion and one Cavalry Regiment (around 4,000 frontline troops) on the third, fourth and fifth roulements of a long-term deployment. To maximise their effectiveness all regular Adaptable Force units should be available to be sent on these deployments regardless of whether their duties also include ceremonial responsibilities or overseas postings in Cyprus, Brunei, or the Falklands.

This level of deployment should be supported by a re-established 102 Logistic Brigade.

There remain challenges about recruiting the necessary number of reservists to meet Land Joint Force 2025 targets. Part of the reason for this is the potential requirement to support lengthy overseas deployments. This concern should be addressed by making it clear that reservists will only be deployed in exceptional circumstances. On occasions, when a surge in numbers is required, half of the nine reserve Infantry Battalions and three Yeomanry Regiments (a further 2,500 troops) could be deployed. Then, at the conclusion of this first deployment, the other half of the reserve units could be deployed for one further period.

Another major role is to be capable of engaging with peer level adversaries. This has become more significant as a result of Russia’s growing assertiveness. Three Infantry Brigades need to be able to combine with the five Reaction Force Brigades and 3 Commando Brigade to form a total of three Divisions that are available for deployment anywhere within the NATO alliance.

To meet this commitment requires changes to both the training regime and equipment of the Adaptable Force so that units can perform two distinct roles – either enduring stabilisation or peer level engagement.

For the three Adaptable Cavalry Regiments this requires training with both Jackal 2, as at present, but also Scimitar 2, after it is replaced in the Reaction Force by Ajax.

For the three Adaptable Yeomanry Regiments training should either be with RWMIK or Challenger 2 main battle tanks brought back out of storage.

The 24 Infantry Battalions and five Specialised Infantry Battalions would have access to a pool of vehicles. In the light protected mobility role this would initially consist of Foxhound, RWMIK and Husky. For peer level engagement this would be based on the veteran Bulldog.

By 2030, the aim should be for these pooled vehicles to have been replaced by a combination of Boxer Mechanised Infantry Vehicles (MIV), Multi Role Vehicle-Protected (MRV-P) Troop Carrying Vehicles (TCV), Future Protected Battlefield Ambulances (FPBA) and Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).

Tracked Armour

An essential part of the Army’s increased flexibility and its response to Russia’s growing assertiveness is the ability to deploy its full remaining force of 299 Challenger main battle tanks. The four Challenger Regiments of the 3rd (UK) Division should each be equipped with 56 Challenger while the 1st (UK) Division’s three Adaptable Yeomanry Regiments should each be allocated 25 Challenger.

As transport of heavy main battle tanks is time consuming 56 of them should be forward based in climate control storage at Monchengladbach in Germany. The personnel of the Lead Armoured Regiment would be flown to them in a period of high tension.

The whole Challenger force should go through a Life Extension Programme designed to maintain their capability and deal with obsolescence issues until at least 2035. This should include a new Rheinmetall L55 120mm smoothbore gun, the addition of four Brimstone 3C anti-tank guided weapons launchers plus a range of improvements to targeting and defensive capabilities. The upgraded tank will be known as the Challenger 3.
Ajax IFV.jpg
Ajax Specialised Vehicles will significantly enhance battlefield ISTAR and provide medium armour.

The most significant new piece of tracked equipment, currently entering service, is the Ajax family of specialist reconnaissance vehicles. Out of 589 due to be received by 2025 a total of 245 Ajax IFV come with a powerful CTA 40mm cannon and a further 204 Ares PMRS and Athena C2 vehicles should have the Javelin equipped version of the Protector Remote Weapons System.

Ajax is equipping two Medium Armoured Regiments and two Armoured Cavalry Regiments as well as the Armoured Reconnaissance Troops and Platoons of the 3rd (UK) Division. These vehicles will provide the firepower and mobility of the new Strike Brigades.

A significant modernisation is planned for the Warrior armoured vehicle. 380 are currently planned to be upgraded as part of the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme, of which 245 IFV variants are meant to be fitted with the CTA 40mm cannon and 74 C2 variants should have the Javelin equipped version of the Protector RWS.

This is enough to equip six Armoured Infantry Battalions (two reserve) in 12 and 20 Armoured Infantry Brigades.
Warrior 2.jpg
An upgraded Warrior IFV will provide vital support to the Challenger 3.

There is a clear requirement for a dedicated Guided Missile variant of the Warrior to be armed with four Brimstone 3C anti-tank guided weapons launchers. The ATGW Warrior would share a datalink with UAVs, helicopters, and Ajax vehicles to enable them to engage even the most powerful main battle tanks at distances beyond their offensive range. A total of 130 of these could equip the Guided Troops and Anti-Tank Platoons in armoured units plus a further 96 could be introduced if they also equipped the Anti-Tank Platoons in the Adaptable Force.

After its replacement in the Reaction Force there is still a useful role for 108 Scimitar 2 to equip the Adaptable Force’s three Cavalry Regiments. This is approximately half of the current total available so, despite their age, the retired vehicles could be used to supply spare parts to maintain the active vehicles for many years to come.

The Royal Marines need to order up to 283 Future/All-Terrain Vehicles (F/ATV) as their standard light armoured vehicle. These will enter service in the early 2020s and would also equip the new Marine Support Infantry Battalion.

Wheeled Armour

Since SDSR 2015 the most important procurement decision has been to rejoin the Boxer multi-role armoured vehicle programme. Army Command has placed an order for 523 to meet its initial Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) requirements by 2025. Of these, 357 should come armed with the Javelin equipped version of the Protector Remote Weapons System.

This is enough to equip six Mechanised Infantry Battalions (two reserve) in 1 and 2 Strike Brigades.
Boxer AFV.jpg
Boxer has been selected to meet the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle requirement.

Army Command has expressed an interest in a major follow-up order of up to 1,000 vehicles which could bring the total in service under Army Refine to over 1,500. These would be supplied between 2026 and 2030. This would create a large enough pool of vehicles to equip all of the regular Infantry Battalions in the Adaptable Force.

If the follow-up order were to be increased further to 1,190 vehicles there would be sufficient numbers to equip both the regular and reserve Infantry Battalions of the Adaptable Force. This would increase the total Boxer order to 1,713. Of these, 1,365 could be armed with the Javelin equipped Protector RWS and 76 could be a specialist Heavy Mortar variant.

Protected Vehicles

By 2030 the Army has a potential requirement to replace the Jackal 2, Coyote and Snatch Land Rover light patrol vehicles plus the Foxhound, RWMIK and Husky light protected mobility vehicles and Ridgback ambulance through the Multi Role Vehicle–Protected (MRV-P) programme.

This includes a 6x6 wheeled Troop Carrying Vehicle (TCV) and Future Protected Battlefield Ambulance (FPBA) plus a 4x4 wheeled Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV).

A two-way contest is currently taking place for the TCV and FPBA requirement between the Bushmaster and Eagle protected mobility vehicles. This could be for an order of up to 819 vehicles.

An initial order is being negotiated for 908 JLTV with an option to purchase up to 2,747 JLTV in total, which would enable the replacement of a considerable number of older Land Rovers.

Royal Artillery

The Royal Artillery is being thoroughly modernised through the Close Support Fires Programme.

This should include giving the 35 GMLRS rocket launchers an updated batch of 1,680 Alternative-Warhead rockets to maintain their full effectiveness and increase their range. These rocket launchers are concentrated in support of the Strike Brigades.

Ensuring each Brigade of the Reaction Force and 3 Commando have the support of two Artillery Regiments would require three additional Batteries. This could be achieved by bringing 18 AS-90 self-propelled guns back out of storage to equip a new Royal Artillery Regiment. To keep the AS-90 in service well into the 2030s its gun should be upgraded with a 52-calibre barrel to extend its range. These guns are concentrated in support of the Armoured Infantry Brigades.
ARCHER Howitzer.jpg
BAE Systems ARCHER would be an ideal addition for the Royal Artillery.

With mobility, an extended range, greater firepower, and air mobility all being key requirements for the Reaction Force the L118 light gun should be replaced by a new self-propelled 155mm Howitzer, such as BAE Systems ARCHER.

Close fires support also needs to be restored to the Adaptable Force with three new Royal Artillery Regiments (all reserve) established of 18 self-propelled 155mm Howitzers.

The Royal Artillery is introducing the Sky Sabre ground based air defence system, utilising the Common Anti-air Modular Missile (CAMM), to replace the Rapier. This will provide a considerable increase in capability. Under Army Refine there will be four Batteries of six vehicles giving a total of 24 vehicles. These will be complemented by seven Batteries (three reserve) each of eight Stormer Starstreak HVM vehicles for a total of eleven air defence Batteries with 80 vehicles.

This is an insufficient number to defend three Divisions plus both forward and UK airbases. As a minimum each Brigade needs one Battery and a further five are required to defend major airbases. This gives a total requirement of fourteen Batteries instead of the current eleven and would require the creation of a second new Royal Artillery Regiment.

Instead of specialising with one type of missile in each Battery a layered air defence would be more effective. This should consist of a mix of CAMM-ER, CAMM and Starstreak HVM. Each Battery should be equipped with one CAMM-ER vehicle and two CAMM vehicles carrying twelve missiles plus four Starstreak vehicles with twenty missiles.

Basing

The programme outlined in A Better Defence Estate, November 2016 is resulting in a major rationalisation of bases with a concentration of units supporting the Strike Brigades around Catterick, the Royal Marines in Plymouth/Torpoint, the Armoured Infantry Brigades on Salisbury Plain and the Air Assault Brigade near Colchester. This process will culminate with the Royal Logistic Corps being restructured in 2028-31.

Recently it has been announced that over 200 personnel will remain in Germany beyond 2019. In addition, the Army will retain use of the Sennelager training area and the Monchengladbach storage facilities.

Conclusion

In total, there are eighteen proposals here to be considered as part of the Integrated Review, two of which have already been agreed since SDSR15.

Those that are essential include:
• maintaining a third Challenger Armoured Regiment and disbanding a regular Light Role Infantry Battalion
• establishing a new AS-90 Royal Artillery Regiment, setting up 14 Sky Sabre Ground Based Air Defence Batteries and disbanding a second Light Role Infantry Battalion
• re-establishing 102 Logistic Brigade and setting up three new reserve Royal Artillery Regiments
• upgrading 299 Challenger main battle tanks with a 120mm smoothbore gun, four Brimstone 3C anti-tank guided weapons launchers plus improved targeting and defensive measures
• upgrading an additional 265 Warriors including 226 in a dedicated ATGW version
• ordering a total of 283 Future/All-Terrain Vehicles
• introducing up to 1,713 Boxer Mechanised Infantry Vehicles by 2030
• ordering 819 Troop Carrying Vehicles and Future Protected Battlefield Ambulances by 2030
• purchasing up to 2,747 Joint Light Tactical Vehicles
• introducing 180 self-propelled 155mm Howitzers and
• ordering 350 CAMM-ER area air defence missiles and an additional 100 CAMM.

Those that are desirable include:
• creating a a reserve Marine Support Battalion, a reserve Air Mobile Infantry Battalion and disbanding two reserve Light Role Battalions
• bringing the five Specialised Infantry Battalions up to full strength
• introducing 1,680 long-range Alternative-Warhead rockets for GMLRS and
• maintaining a forward training base at Sennelager in Germany (announced September 2018).

And those that are optional include:
• reducing the number of senior Headquarters in the 1st (UK) Division to five (achieved in the Field Army re-organisation of August 2019)
• maintaining 108 Scimitar 2 and
• upgrading the AS-90 self-propelled gun with a new 52-calibre barrel.


See Appendix 1a: Land Joint Force 2025 for details of units and equipment based on SDSR15 together with the extra proposals contained here and how this changes by 2031 in Appendix 1b: Land Joint Force 2030.

ORBAT in 2025-30:
• 3 Challenger Armoured Regiments plus 1 Armoured Yeomanry Regiment (reserve)
• 6 Warrior Armoured Infantry Battalions (2 reserve)
• 2 Ajax Armoured Regiments
• 2 Ajax Armoured Cavalry Regiments
• 6 Boxer Mechanised Infantry Battalions (2 reserve)
• Special Forces
• 3 Parachute Battalions (1 reserve)
• 2 Air Mobile Infantry Battalions (1 reserve)
• 1 Commando Brigade Patrol Group
• 1 Commando Armoured Support Group
• 2 Commandos
• 4 RM Reserve units (all reserve)
• 1 Marine Support Infantry Battalion (reserve)
• 3 Adaptable Cavalry Regiments
• 3 Adaptable Yeomanry Regiments (all reserve)
• 24 Infantry Battalions (9 reserve)
• 5 Specialised Infantry Battalions
• 2 GMLRS Artillery Regiments (1 reserve)
• 3 AS-90 Artillery Regiments
• 10 Howitzer Artillery Regiments (6 reserve)
• 14 Sky Sabre Batteries (3 reserve)

• 299 Challenger 3
• 589 Ajax SV
• 532 up to 645 Warrior 2
• 108 Scimitar 2
• 283 F/ATV
• 99 Viking ATAV
• 523 up to 1,713 Boxer MIV
• 870 Bulldog, OSD 2030
• 750 TCV and 69 FPBA
• 908 up to 2,747 JLTV
• 435 Jackal 2 and 68 Coyote, OSD 2030
• 396 Foxhound, OSD 2030
• 360 RWMIK, OSD 2025
• 312 Husky, OSD 2025
• 395 Panther
• 64 Ridgback ambulances, OSD 2025
• 35 GMLRS rocket launchers
• 72 AS-90 self-propelled guns
• 180 155mm self-propelled Howitzers
• 14 CAMM-ER vehicles
• 28 CAMM vehicles
• 56 Starstreak vehicles
• 2.950 to 3,480 Brimstone 3A and 3B
• 3,450 to 4,200 Brimstone 3C
• 560 Martlet
• 9,000 Javelin ATGW
• 350 CAMM-ER
• 700 CAMM and
• 3,000 Starstreak HVM.
Land Joint Force 2025.jpg
Land Joint Force 2030.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

AndyC wrote: a state of permanent revolution as a new structure is introduced when the previous restructuring is only half way along!
Hi Andy, v much agreed. And so delighted that you can find the time and energy for these overviews. Or should I call them "suggested tweaks"?
AndyC wrote:to be formed into a Reaction Force consisting of 19 Regiments/Battalions, an Adaptable Force of 42 Battalions/Regiments and Force Troop Command.
the last mentioned equating to an army on its own, in excess of 30k troops.
AndyC wrote:Air Assault Brigade, two Armoured Brigades and two Strike Brigades. This gives a total of 25 Regiments/Battalions capable of being the core of a deployable expeditionary force of up to 50,000.
AndyC wrote:The two Armoured Brigades should have between them four Armoured Regiments (three regular, one reserve), two Armoured Cavalry Regiments and four Armoured Infantry Battalions.

here, not sure about the facts and the aspiration? The reserve one provides crews (4 times 56 is not far off the 217 tank total, though).
- two or three regular? Havent seen it confirmed either way

The two Strike Brigades should have four Armoured Cavalry Regiments, two Armoured Infantry Battalions and four Mechanised Infantry Battalions.
-here the "should" is clear and loud.
- move the two AI bns to the previous category (4 plus 4 far too parsimonious for my liking)
AndyC wrote:three would be reserve Light Cavalry Regiments
- yes, the best possible use of the "Afghan left-overs"
- ie. the UORs that may or may not have applicability, depending on where and how the battle field forms
AndyC wrote: the disbandment of one of the two Logistics Brigades which will also result in the re-allocation of some troops.
- a fact, but bad news... can only deploy to one theatre at a time (the potential adversary will know this!)
AndyC wrote:potential requirement to support lengthy overseas deployments. This concern should be addressed by making it clear that reservists will only be deployed in exceptional circumstances.
- it has been, very clear words have been said (whether they have made it to the contract that the empoyers will also have to sign... a different matter)

Let me read on... into the specifics (about kit) that you are making points about
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)

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:here, not sure about the facts and the aspiration? The reserve one provides crews (4 times 56 is not far off the 217 tank total, though).
- two or three regular? Havent seen it confirmed either way
This bit (comment) got left inside the quotes; therefore edited it into italics - just to stand out from your text
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)

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

As for the tracked inventory:
AndyC wrote: the Warrior. 380 vehicles are being upgraded as part of the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme of which 252 should be fitted with a new powerful 40mm cannon. An initial 108 could be converted into an Armoured Battlefield Support Vehicle to include an APC for the six Armoured Infantry Battalions and an armoured ambulance for armoured units of the Reaction Force.
- that is all sensible and do-able
-- going up from 215 to 252 of the turreted
-- 108 would cover the 65 voiced (aspirationally) so far, and the 43 would then be the ambulances? Why convert old ones (different height required) when new ones (on Ajax chassis/ as part of that family) would be more straight-forward?
AndyC wrote: enable them to engage even the most powerful main battle tanks at distances beyond their offensive range.
- I wonder where you would find such engagement ranges... are we planning a new war in a desert?
AndyC wrote:The Royal Marines are also in the process of ordering 230 Future/All-Terrain Vehicles (F/ATV) as their standard light armoured vehicle and this will enter service in 2021.
- they have their Vikings (back from refurb); the others would be the log vehicles... good to hear if 230 will get confirmed as the number
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)

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

Hi Andy, v much agreed. And so delighted that you can find the time and energy for these overviews. Or should I call them "suggested tweaks"?
Yes, that's spot on. I'm trying to provide an overview of the facts, look how we could make the most of our current equipment and structures and suggest courses of action or "tweaks" that are affordable, realistic and yet might make a bit of a difference for the better.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:here, not sure about the facts and the aspiration? The reserve one provides crews (4 times 56 is not far off the 227 tank total, though).
That's because I'm not sure myself. Sometimes Army documents specifically say providing additional crews, sometimes though it's not so clear. The Wessex Yeomanry certainly can provide crews but there are also 'spare' Challenger 2s at Bovington that they could use. There are also a few 'spares' in Canada at BATUS but it would take a while to get them deployed anywhere useful in a crisis. So I'm coming to the conclusion that the reserve Armoured Regiment could only be deployed in a national emergency and not for anything less.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by bobp »

Enjoyed the review, how do you see the Army support vehicles such as Land Rover being replaced, yes I know they are not front line anymore but they still serve a purpose.

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

I would suggest the aim of land 2030
should focus on building up to having 3 square armoured Brigades. Removing the Mechanised bns and re rolling the Brigade recce regts as Challenger regiments. with armoured artillery support (AS90 upgrade) and MLRS regt along with Light AD and AD regt

The 3 mechanised Bns should concentrate to form the first Mechanised brigade with light protected infantry Bns being re-roled to form 2 further mechanised Brigades. With the 3 light cavalry regiments re rolling to a New medium type tank maybe Ajax/120mm (like the cv90/120) backed with 3 Upgraded AS90 regts an MLRS regt a light AD regt and AD regt

and creating 2 divisional recce cavalry regiments

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by shark bait »

marktigger wrote:I would suggest the aim of land 2030
should focus on building up to having 3 square armoured Brigades.
I would leave it at that, plus the Air Assault Brigade.

Create three very well supported armoured brigade's and cancel the rest, rebuilding some of the losses through an increased and independent Marines.

There's too much happening, too many conflicts, with not enough focus or funding and the Army is changing direction every few years, driving it's self into a right shit state. Cut it down, create focus, and deliver a robust, fully supported, armoured force.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

shark bait wrote: There's too much happening, too many conflicts, with not enough focus or funding and the Army is changing direction every few years, driving it's self into a right shit state. Cut it down, create focus, and deliver a robust, fully supported, armoured force.
thats why i would take it a step back. Loosing all the different types of infantry and armour concentrate on re building to 3 divisions

1 light
1 medium
1 heavy

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by shark bait »

sounds highly reasonable.

I think similar to my suggestion creating;
  • 1 air mobile division
  • 1 division of strike brigade's
  • 1 division of heavy armour
The difference is I see similarities between the objectives of the Marines and the strike brigade's, and there may be benefits to merging them into a single common force.
@LandSharkUK

Frenchie
Member
Posts: 619
Joined: 07 Nov 2016, 15:01
France

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by Frenchie »

With the 512 guns 40mm CTA ordered, there are the necessary equipment to form a armoured brigade with three armoured infantry battalions equipped each of 57 Warrior and Ajax used as IFVs, with a regiment of 56 Challenger 2, multiplied by three brigades to form a real armoured division.
Of course it will be necessary to replace the Ajax used as IFVs by recce vehicles more adapted, less heavy and cheaper.
It will be a great source of economy.

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

I would keep the marines out of the Army equation so the light division would have the Air assualt brigade, and 2 light role infantry Brigades structured round 3 light role inf bns, light artillery (towed by unprotected vehicles) . Nothing in those brigades would be over the under slung load capacity of a Chinook or wouldn't fit in an A400m. The "Light Division" would also have 2 bns from the army reserve of "Support" infantry these bns would be structured round 2 heavy support companies with 120mm mortar, LRATGW, AGL and heavy Machine Gun platoons and 2 manouver support companies with 3 carrier platoon (with mine protected vehicles) and an assualt pioneer platoon.

3cdo brigade would get their 3rd field gun battery back. They would also get a dedicated Apache Squadron

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

the ability to put a light , strike or armoured Brigade on the ground is one thing the ability to sustain taht level of operations over a prolonged period (as we have found out) is something else. We already knew allot of this from UN ops and Op Banner where periodically non infantry units (usually) artillery would have to do Infantry tours to make up for the shortfall in Infantry bns. That has never been properly corrected. There does in the regular and to some extent in the reserve forces need to be some slack.

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by shark bait »

I like those thoughts on your "light division", it all sounds thoroughly reasonable.

With my suggestion of merging the Marines, I was referring to merging with the Strike Brigade's, not the light formations, which is a bit of a departure from where they are now.

I think that makes sense, the UK need a reappraisal of its amphibious capabilities because at the the moment it doesn't quite work. At the same time the army is busy creating a new expeditionary army that will rely on the sea for its mobility. I would ask the question can our two expeditionary forces be joined?
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

shark bait wrote:reappraisal of its amphibious capabilities because at the the moment it doesn't quite work
Why does it not work (forgetting about the gap 2018 to abt 2020)?
- the RM just binned their expeditionary vehicles (OK, they were just the pax in the back) and got their amph. Vikings back, better than new
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)

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by shark bait »

The structure for the presence the day Royal Marines came from different time, with assumptions that are different to what we have now. It's led to a few conflicts which makes them inefficient. plus there are affordability questions.

Their only ever going to attempt an uncontested lsnding, so are big specialist LPD's and big slow specialist LCU's the most effective way to do that?

I would ask the same question about moving landings over the horizon? Are they equipped to do that effectively?

Is is more effective to leverage commercial shipping?

How does carrier strike and vertical manoeuvre's from the carrier's fit in?

Are their vehicles still for for purpose?
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by shark bait »

The structure for the presence the day Royal Marines came from different time, with assumptions that are different to what we have now. It's led to a few conflicts which makes them inefficient. plus there are affordability questions.

Their only ever going to attempt an uncontested lsnding, so are big specialist LPD's and big slow specialist LCU's the most effective way to do that?

I would ask the same question about moving landings over the horizon? Are they equipped to do that effectively?

Is is more effective to leverage commercial shipping?

How does carrier strike and vertical manoeuvre's from the carrier's fit in?

Are their vehicles still for for purpose?

I'm not satisfied they are set up to be truly effective. They look very old fashioned when comparing to their American or French counterparts.
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

shark bait wrote: big slow specialist LCU's the most effective way to do that?

I would ask the same question about moving landings over the horizon? Are they equipped to do that effectively?

Is is more effective to leverage commercial shipping?

How does carrier strike and vertical manoeuvre's from the carrier's fit in?

Are their vehicles still for for purpose?
V good questions
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)

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

shark bait even the USMC aren't keen on opposed landings! the russians will because they will just trade lives for ground in huge numbers. Unless there is a mojor shift of world position the likes of Normandy isn't going to happen again.
I would Suggest the Royal marines have enough to conduct a medium sized independent operation. Though would suggest they are a bit light in terms of Artillery, GBAD, and Apache.
Moving to a more over the horizon approach is happening with Merlin and the capability to carry chinook if the CVF's are close enough. Which is why we need the replacements for Albion & Bulwark to have capable flight decks, hangers and well docks.
LCU yes is a slow moving asset for an assualt there are faster ones out ther look at the American and russian hovercraft and the Fast craft that the british did develop and not adopt and the french have. They are better at moving large ammounts and heavier stores ashore. Remember the Marined needed challengers on the Al Faw they can't be slung under a chinook neither can Ajax. so they need a method of getting them ashore without a harbour. Same with CLR trucks. and having seen the aftermath pictures of a lift going wrong from a Commando RAP and the impacts it caused on the operational effectiveness of that commando underslinging some assets is a high risk business!

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

shark bait wrote:

Is is more effective to leverage commercial shipping?

Part of the thinking of the John Knott 1981 defence review that the Royal marines could be deployed by cross channel ferry!

Atlantic Convoyer faired so well a year later as did the Sir galahad (effectively a RoRo ferry)

I certainly agree the amphibious fleet needs modernisation the LPD is now at the end of its concept life and it needs to be replaced by more flexible vessels The French, Spannish, Russians, Australians and the Americans all recognised this with the LHD/LPH. But you need both the ability to deliver the assualt force by air and sea. So we need vessels that can carry landing craft and helicopters. across the whole RN & RFA Fleet

so i's like to see 3 Juan Carlos I LHD to replace Ocean, Albion, Bulwark one for one. and 6 LPD(A) MkII for the RFA modelled more on the Rotterdam/Gallicia class with hanger. And a LHD(A) to replace Argus in PCRS, Avation training/support ship role. The Point class are great vessels to add stores/vehicle transport and they should be retainied and expended back to the original plan.

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

marktigger wrote: the Marine[d]s needed challengers on the Al Faw they can't be slung under a chinook neither can Ajax. so they need a method of getting them ashore without a harbour
A bridge?... 7 of them would be the max by any other means (is it 10 LCU total, a couple for ambulances and arty rounds... the number halved when the fabled 777 comes on-line)
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)

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

Re: Land Command to 2030

Post by marktigger »

The Chelley's did crooss the euphraties on M3 bridges and ferries from the main armoured assualt from Kuwait. However future ops may not have that flexibility and we may have to land them from a ship over a beach.
For the logistic build up post landing the LCU and Mexefloats can move larger ammounts of stores more efficiently(even short open sea transits in case of LCU) than helicopters which will be in short supply. Given at the height of the falklands we had 72 lift helicopters in the faklands and they still struggled to move stores and troops. An expeditionaly harbour would be ideal however to expensive and specialised and would probably have a very narrow set of criteria it could be used over both tactical and geographic. Landing over a beach is much more flexible and simpler to deploy. I agree 10 LCU, another dozen or so LCVP and half dozen mexefloats isn't enough. which is why I would contend expanding the landing fleet
3 LPH would have 4 LCU (fast) and 4 LCVP so thats 12 of each
6 LPD(A) mkII would have 2 LCU and 2 LCVP and 2 mexefloat so thats so there's another 12 of each
6 point class could carry 2 meve floats each so there's 12 mexefloats as well

then you have the LPH(A) which could bring another 4 LCU, 4 LCVP to a party.

the LCU and MExe can carry all the stores from ship to shore as long as on the shore there is sufficient MHE to move it. to the dumps.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Army Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

The assessment below is based on the MoD’s defence equipment plan 2019 which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -plan-2019


Army Command Top Level Budget 2019-29 - £14.75 billion in Uncommitted Equipment Procurement

Consolidating the budgets for Land Equipment and Land Helicopters.

£7.31 billion included under SDSR15 but not under contract at March 2019:
• £2.8 billion for an initial order of 523 Boxer MIV – development cost £550 million plus unit cost €5 million; £/€ rate 1.16 in November 2019
• £1.3 billion on providing a new main gun, four Brimstone 3C anti-tank guided weapons launchers plus improved targeting and defensive measures for 227 Challenger 3 in their Life Extension Programme – unit cost £5.75 million
• £1.14 billion outstanding on the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme – unit cost £3 million
• £800 million for an order of 2,747 JLTV – U$1.035 billion; £/U$ rate 1.30 in July 2017
• £440 million at a rate of £110 million per year from 2025/26-2028/29 for a total order of 664 TCV and FPBA – unit cost £1 million
• £350 million on 100 Heavy Equipment Transporters – unit cost U$4.5 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £280 million for a total of 283 F/ATV and
• £200 million for 350 Wheeled Tankers – unit cost U$ 750k; £/U$ rate 1.30.

£5.56 billion for essential extras:
• £3.25 billion at a rate of an additional 240 Boxer MIV per annum for five years from 2026/27-2030/31 – unit cost €5 million; £/€ rate 1.10
• £800 million for 265 extra Warrior upgrades including 226 anti-tank guided weapons equipped Warriors – unit cost £3 million
• £540 million for 126 155mm self-propelled Howitzers – unit cost U$5.6 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £420 million on refurbishing the remaining 13 WAH-64D to AH-64E standard including £20 million on integrating Brimstone 3B – unit cost U$40 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £410 million on expanding the Life Extension Programme to include 72 Challenger MBTs currently held in storage
• £100 million to integrate Brimstone 3B and Martlet on to Wildcat AH1 – unit cost £1.5 million per missile and
• £35 million for top-up order of 400 Hellfire missiles.

£300 million of desirable and optional extras:
• £155 million for 1,680 Alternative-Warhead rockets for GMLRS – unit cost U$120k; £/U$ rate 1.30 and
• £145 million for a new 52-calibre barrel for 72 AS-90.

Army Command TLB spending totals £13.16 billion - £1.59 billion surplus.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Army Command to 2032

Post by AndyC »

So, why if there's a surplus is procurement so difficult for Army Command?

Partially it's because the Army keeps changing its structure and can't settle on its goals. Should it be prioritising the upgrading of Challenger/Warrior to be credible against Russia or Ajax/Boxer to be a bit more nimble and easily deployable?

While the Army dithers, Air and Navy Commands have gotten on and ordered plenty of new equipment. Even to the extent that buying the E-7 Wedgetail has taken Air Command over budget and isn't funded!

On top of this the MoD changed its approach to agreeing its spending plans which cut its budget totals by £7.6 billion from 2020/21 to 2024/25.

This has delayed all of the Army's plans.

Post Reply