British Army Discussions and Updates

[Pingu]

I wonder if the FRES' weight creeping up to 30 tonnes will make it less deployable. I assume the "C-130 carriable" requirement has been dropped but fortunately, procurement of the A400M could arguably put the UK at an advantage over the US who are presumably struggling with Stryker-C-130 carriage and so have to resort to C-17s. However, I wonder whether the FRES weight increase will reduce the amount of FRES vehicles and support carriable by each A400M.

I noticed only recently that there is an extra part of the FRES program which requires a reconnaisance version. This will presumably be an another vehicle which decreases commonalilty, which surely increases costs. Would it not be better to have the entire FRES program tracked?

 

[peterAustralia]

hi

As a non-expert here is my opinion. Lots and lots of armies are buying heavy 8x8 armored vehicles. So one would hope that they know what they are doing. So the British have ordered another 8x8.. would hope they know what they are doing.

One vehicle that is getting old is the scimitar/scorpion family of vehicles. The Scimitar weighs 7.8tonnes. It seems strange to replace an 8 ton vehicle with a 30 tonne vehicle. As good as the Piranha V will be, I doubt that a 30 tonne wheeled vehicle will go the places where an 8tonne tracked vehicle will go.

I would like to see a light tracked vehicle to replace the Scimitar. As to weight, around 14 tonnes makes a lot of sense, logically a lot more armour that the 8 tonne scimitar (new vehicle could have protection against 14.5mm - see Stormer 30 from Alvis). Additionally staying well below 20 tonnes allows easy transportation with the C130.

I am a fan of a series of websites that refer to the M113 as the Gavin. These series of websites are no doubt very biased. However they do remark that a tracked vehicle can devote a higher proportion of it's weight to armour as can a wheeled vehicle. The websites remark on the good performance of the M113 in the Invasion of Iraq, despite it being an old design. It has performed way way way better than the Hummer.. but I am getting off topic.. my apologies.

Building a new M113, or similar, with modern technology, new engines etc, spaced armour, would produce a very acceptable vehicle in my opinion, and still light enough to be carried in a C130.

n peter evans

 

[Waylander]

Aaaaah, heretic. :shudder

Never ever use Sparky's Gavin websites as a reference in a serious discussion about combat vehicles.
What he writes is absolutely rubbish and far away of reality.

Nevertheless I agree that a small new successor for the scimitar/scorpion familiy sounds like a good idea as the British army seems to like their little workhorses.

Wheeled vehicles made alot of progress during the last years but I just can't see why one even needs to decide wether to use wheeled vehicles or tracked vehicles for the whole fleet.
One needs to make a decision wether to go with wheels or tracks for every vehicle as both systems clearly have advantages which make them suitable for different roles.

 

[Pingu]

I'm not an expert on armoured vehicles and so would like to ask why there seems to be more importance on the recce version being tracked. Is mobility more important in a recce vehicle than a utility vehicle? Would the lower noise level (something, which has proven advantagous with the stryker) be useful in the recce role?

Although I do have to agree that a large vehicle is not needed for the recce role and a lighter, lower profile is more important, which would also hold with it lower cost and more mobility. It almost seems as though the replacement for the scimitar/scorpion family should be a seperate program from FRES as its requirements are very different. The only advantages of bundling the recce version into the FRES program seems to be a common network and base vehicle.

 

[swerve]

...
I am a fan of a series of websites that refer to the M113 as the Gavin. These series of websites are no doubt very biased. ...
n peter evans

These websites are the creation of Mike Sparks, AKA Sparky. The positive feedback on his websites is mostly self-generated. He has many internet personae. Sparky is probably mentally ill, & is certainly a most unpleasant person, a liar, and a buffoon. BTW, he invented the "Gavin" nickname for the M113. Please don't use it, as you'll offend US soldiers who have served on M113s.

See this for more information -
http://home.comcast.net/~genericdad/m113gavin.html

And for an example of his behaviour -
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002813.html
BTW, "Tankguy" in that discussion is what he says he is. Calls himself mikegolf on Tanknet. Note how Sparky heaps abuse & obscenities on a real soldier, in a dangerous place, who has real experience of armour, for having the temerity to question the all-knowing Sparky.

 

[Grand Danois]

See this for more information -
http://home.comcast.net/~genericdad/m113gavin.html

Hahahaha! The "Gavin concepts" at the bottom of the page is a must see.

 

[swerve]

Hahahaha! The "Gavin concepts" at the bottom of the page is a must see.

Lovely, aren't they? Trouble is, Sparky might take them seriously.

 

[kato]

Actually, seeing that pic of the "Arisgator" always reminds me of the "real version" - the French AMX Mk F3, open-body 155mm gun on a AMX-13 chassis.
Except the gun on the F3 looks even bigger.

 

[Pingu]

I have just read that the FRES will consist of five vehicle families: Utility, reconnaissance, medium armour, manoeuvre support and basic capability utility vehicles.

Could anyone clarify what "medium armour" "maneuvere support" and "basic capability utilty" roles entail and how they will differ to the utility variant?

Also, where does the Land Rover fit into all of this? AFAIK, the British Army has Land Rover Wolfs and Snatches. To what extent are these being replaced by Mastiffs, Panthers, Jackals and Vectors? I understand that many of these vehicles have been procured recently but wonder whether they are seen as replacements to the Land Rovers, especially since money seems to be being spent on Land Rovers still (WMIKs etc).

 

[riksavage]

The Panther with replace a number of LandRover variants and with the introduction of Mastiff, Vector and Jackal etc., we will slowly see many existing LandRover models retired.

The following updated site provides a good overview of new and existing vehicles coming online.

http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/equipment.aspx

 

[mutts]

Hey all, just a general question.
Is every member of the Special Forces Support Group parachute trained?
I mean the Royal Marine members in particular, although at the moment I'm under the impression that the SFSG is 1 PARA, but when it is the 'mulit-service' unit it was supposed to be, will all members be para trained?

Well the thing is, is that the SFSG isn't a normal unit, it contains more then just Paras/RM's and RAF 2 SQN guys, now the 4 strike companies are all para trained but there are other componants, there is a a CBRN unit trained and equipped to help out both military and civilian tasks and a few other bit's and pieces.

 

[lordjim]

Whilst there are many programmes underway to provide the Army with the kit it need for operations in Iraq and Afganistan, and replace kit that is out of date or worn out, I can see little being delivered in the near future except for UORs. These are a double edged sword for the army as whilst they provide kit faster, no real support systems are put in place and there use after the Operations are finished is not certain.

A lot of the kit brought for Iraq and Afganistan will be sold of when these operation begin the draw down. There simply will not be enough money to support these and fund mainstrean programmes like FRES.

Speaking of FRES, I can see this programme being left to simmer for years. The MOD will not take an off the shelf vehicle to meet the requirements and capability creep is already begining. Also FRES will be too much of a compromise. If you want an armoured transport for peacekeeping/enforcement, the current Mastiff etc are more than adequate. If you want a battle taxi, a simple robust tracked vehicle like the M113 or FV432 or even the Viking are better than a wheeled alternative.

What the Army needs are upgrades to the Challenger II and Warrior to be fast tracked. Upgraded FV432s to fill the support roles such as mortar carrier, ambulance, command and Anti-tank overwatch. Warriors could be modified to carry out the Recce role, especially with the excellent 40mm cannon planned. Light weight artillery should also be on the shopping list. The 105 LG is good but the cancelled Light MLRS and Light 155mm are needed for their extra firepower and deployability, needed by our light rapid deployment units such as the Marines and Paras. If guided rounds are purchaced it will also give the Artillery a precision strike capability. A number of Heavy MLRS launchers are being upgraded to fire the guided variant of the MLSR rocket but this sytem is too heavy for quick deployment.

The Army needs more Apache gunships to at least form a third regiment and even more important it needs helicopters to replace the Lynx and Gazelle. For the Lynx the obvious choice is the UH-60L Blackhawk or the AW-149. Both of these would provide the army with improved airmobility leaving the larger Chinook and Merlin to move equipment and supplies. To compliment these the purchase of a number of EC-635 light utility helicopters would provide a more flexible platform for Observation/Recce/light attack more suited to peacekeeping than the Apache.

The above will do for starters but even that is wishful thinking I am sure.

 

[riksavage]

The light MLRS is still on track, only the 155mm has been cancelled. The new MLRS guided '70km' sniper round has proved very successful in Afghanistan when used in conjunction with UK/US Predator UAV's. The new light version will fire the same round.

 

[Super Nimrod]

When they say 'Light' is it mounted on the back of one of the new Man trucks that we are buying several thousand of ? Also is it just a plain MLRS or a GMLRS ?

 

[riksavage]

Six round launcher (instead of 12 currently fitted to tracked version) mounted on a wheeled armoured chassis (MARP). Supacat was the orginal plan, but it can't take the weight of additional armour, so not too sure what the alternative option is. It will fire the same rounds as the current MLRS.

 

[FluffyThoughts]

BAe signs £2-3 billion 15-year ammunition supply deal

Obviously the MoD realise that foreign suppliers cannot be trusted on either quality or delivery, but I have one further question. Is this the end of the Challenger II experiment with the German smooth-bore cannon?

It also includes mortar bombs, tank, artillery and naval gun shells, but not weapons such as guided missiles.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7573160.stm

 

[ASFC]

No, if you read the Defensenews.com article, the BAE deal covers 80% of UK supply, and part of the remaining 20% covers contracts with Rheinmetall and Chemring-so I presume the 155mm experiment is still ongoing.

 

[eckherl]

Obviously the MoD realise that foreign suppliers cannot be trusted on either quality or delivery, but I have one further question. Is this the end of the Challenger II experiment with the German smooth-bore cannon?



Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7573160.stm

Could be inregards to the L55, Janes defense weekly is stating that UK pulled the plug on project due to costs, I would still take all this with a grain of salt though.

 

[overlander]

Please somebody could say the number of Challengers MBT in active service in the British army ?? Thanks for the answer.

 

[outsider]

Please somebody could say the number of Challengers MBT in active service in the British army ?? Thanks for the answer.

Not very many, I'm afraid - 385 Challenger 2's. Although there have been media reports (not sure how true, but I wouldn't be surprised) that one third of them are not operational due to shortages of spare parts. The original intention was to order 800 Challenger 2, but this was reduced to 385 as part of defence cuts.

This labour goverment sold the UK's inventory of Challenger 1's (approx 400) to Jordan.