FRES Programme - British Army

[swerve]

If anything we might see Warrior turret upgrades cancelled. By the time ASCOD SV Scout finally enters service, Warrior numbers will most likely have been reduced as the military moves towards a lighter deployable tracked vehicle approach. Why not then simply keep the ASCOD line open and replace the current UK AFV fleet with the orginal ASCOD AFV fitted with the new 40mm cannon?

Because we're cutting expenditure, & the MoD calculates that it'd be cheaper to keep the Warriors & update them than retire them early & buy new.

We have a fleet of FV432 APCs, recently upgraded to Bulldog configuration. They'll need replacing before the Warriors, but the combination will supply all our needs for quite a while. We're already reducing numbers, by not upgrading all the FV432s, & retiring the non-upgraded examples.

BTW, I thought experience in Iraq had demonstrated the need for heavy, well-armoured AFVs.

So let's roll it over and continue production standardising the whole UK AFV fleet around a single platform (C&C, mortar carrier, AT etc.

We're not discussing the whole UK AFV fleet. We're going to operate a mix, whatever happens. The argument for scrapping Warrior early (& that's what you're proposing shouldn't be based on a feeling that it'd be nice to have a neat list of AFV types, but on cost & effectiveness.

 

[riksavage]

Because we're cutting expenditure, & the MoD calculates that it'd be cheaper to keep the Warriors & update them than retire them early & buy new.

We have a fleet of FV432 APCs, recently upgraded to Bulldog configuration. They'll need replacing before the Warriors, but the combination will supply all our needs for quite a while. We're already reducing numbers, by not upgrading all the FV432s, & retiring the non-upgraded examples.

BTW, I thought experience in Iraq had demonstrated the need for heavy, well-armoured AFVs.


We're not discussing the whole UK AFV fleet. We're going to operate a mix, whatever happens. The argument for scrapping Warrior early (& that's what you're proposing shouldn't be based on a feeling that it'd be nice to have a neat list of AFV types, but on cost & effectiveness.

Agreed, but we are not talking about introducing ASCOD SV until 2015+. We could cancel the Warrior upgrade and battle on with the exisitng turret until the ASCOD SV batch is completed then just opt for a complete replacement AFV, strip out Bowman and retro fit to the new 40mm ASCOD AFV version. They were going to get the same turret anyway and I suspect by +2015 most Warrior chassis based on current usage will be way past their sell by date. GD might offer a great deal to keep the line open. Having a common hull/engine/turret saves on through life costs.

 

[swerve]

Yes, having a common turret/engine etc saves on support costs, but we're never going to get everything exactly the same. At the rate we're replacing stuff, we'll be upgrading the first batch of ASCOD before the last are delivered, & delivering them fast enough to get round that problem would be very costly up front (what we're keen to avoid), & then leave us with a rapid wind-down of production capability (highly undesirable).

The FV432s have already lasted twice as long as the Warriors will have done by 2015, & several hundred have just been upgraded to keep them in service for a while longer. The newest Warriors are newer than some CV90s.

 

[Toby]

im not sure they will get built especialy for 2015 the warrior will be upgraded but the future cuts on the armed forces and liam fox prefers the navy so the army and raf will bear the brunt of the cuts ( army in afghan will be fine) and a friend who was just in london has told me that there are expected 40 percent cuts on departments. although im not sure if this accounts for defence there will still be defence cuts and i think this is one of the first things that will be shelved.

 

[citizen578]

im not sure they will get built especialy for 2015 the warrior will be upgraded but the future cuts on the armed forces and liam fox prefers the navy so the army and raf will bear the brunt of the cuts ( army in afghan will be fine) and a friend who was just in london has told me that there are expected 40 percent cuts on departments. although im not sure if this accounts for defence there will still be defence cuts and i think this is one of the first things that will be shelved.

The Scimitar needs replaceing urgently. There is no way it will be shelved.

Your friend needs to pay closer attention to the news reports.
BBC News - Minister plays down 40% departmental cuts planning

40% Cuts were never expected. For defence, the number that has repeatedly been thrown around is %10, which was to a certain extent confirmed by the announcements. Defence will not take as big a hit as other departments, and from what I'm told, the most likely scenario is a %10 cut, or a freeze (which would mean ~11% cut in real terms over the course of this government).
As ever, just wait and see.

 

[riksavage]

Attached is a link to GD's ASCOD SV presentation video. One accepts it is company propaganda, but the finished item does look to provide a step-change in fire-power, surveillance and protection. The existing CRVT's have been a real boon in A-Stan at both brigade and battalion level, however they have reached the end of thier life, the new 40mm armed ASCOD brings the firepower of existing 50mm weapons systems, a true light tank capable of supporting troops up close and personnel against soft and hard targets. Plenty of space to carry a Javelin firing post and rounds should the need arise also.

General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited ASCOD SV

Hopefully the Government in the forthcoming SDR will see sense and extend the programme and role out the full range of variants to slowly replace the existing UK armoured fleet instead of the originally planned upgrades (Warrior). With the anticipated draw down and mothballing of heavy armoured forces (Chally II, AS90, MLRS etc), having a medium equipped force (ASCOD SV, AFV, C&C, Direct Fire and Eng) would deliver a cutting edge deployable tracked vehicle package (C17 & A400) and save huge costs in maintenance, through-life-costs and supply chain.

The UOR system has delivered enough wheeled MRAP's for use on roads and tracks in A-Stan, we now need a go anywhere tracked vehicle to provide an effective recce screen and local direct fire support.

 

[MrQuintus]

Attached is a link to GD's ASCOD SV presentation video. One accepts it is company propaganda, but the finished item does look to provide a step-change in fire-power, surveillance and protection. The existing CRVT's have been a real boon in A-Stan at both brigade and battalion level, however they have reached the end of thier life, the new 40mm armed ASCOD brings the firepower of existing 50mm weapons systems, a true light tank capable of supporting troops up close and personnel against soft and hard targets. Plenty of space to carry a Javelin firing post and rounds should the need arise also.

General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited ASCOD SV

Hopefully the Government in the forthcoming SDR will see sense and extend the programme and role out the full range of variants to slowly replace the existing UK armoured fleet instead of the originally planned upgrades (Warrior). With the anticipated draw down and mothballing of heavy armoured forces (Chally II, AS90, MLRS etc), having a medium equipped force (ASCOD SV, AFV, C&C, Direct Fire and Eng) would deliver a cutting edge deployable tracked vehicle package (C17 & A400) and save huge costs in maintenance, through-life-costs and supply chain.

The UOR system has delivered enough wheeled MRAP's for use on roads and tracks in A-Stan, we now need a go anywhere tracked vehicle to provide an effective recce screen and local direct fire support.

I don't understand why everyone thinks that AS90, C2 and GMLRS are under threat, we've already cut our heavy armour spearhead down about as low as it can go, I could perhaps see MLRS migrating to the ASCOD chassis (sometning similar to the DONAR vehicle), but the AS90 is the only 155mm arty we have in service and is damn useful, and since the MOD is trying to move to an all 155mm armed forces it would make no sense to cull it when it is already bought and paid for.

 

[riksavage]

I don't understand why everyone thinks that AS90, C2 and GMLRS are under threat, we've already cut our heavy armour spearhead down about as low as it can go, I could perhaps see MLRS migrating to the ASCOD chassis (sometning similar to the DONAR vehicle), but the AS90 is the only 155mm arty we have in service and is damn useful, and since the MOD is trying to move to an all 155mm armed forces it would make no sense to cull it when it is already bought and paid for.

What I believe will happen is the number of active heavy regiments will be reduced with kit mothballed. Former heavy tank/artillery regiments will be re-rolled to MARP and on to medium tracked systems (as FRES grows). Royal Tank Regiment personnel have already be assigned to crewing the new range of MARP vehicles, leaving the infantry to focus on dismounted operations.

Chally, MLRS, AS90 hulls not used will be glad-rapped for use as wear and tear / combat replacements. The UK military traditionally operated a heavy box division in Germany 3 x AS90/MLRS, 3 x Chally, 3 x Armoured Infantry Regiments plus engineering/ sigs/HQ support. This could be reduced to Brigade level, 1 x AS90/MLRS, 1 x Chally, 1 x Armoured Infantry et al plus full depot training support and spare chassis should they need to once more regenerate a full heavy division. With the demise of Soviet Russia and the rising number of failed states outside Europe, the UK needs more flexible and deployable assets, not a heavy div sitting in Germany.

Such moves will allow the UK land elements to focus more on easily deployable counter-insurgency / strategic raiding supported by FRES, light guns and increased ISTAR assets in the form of UCAV/UAV, all backed up by more helo lift and Apache.

 

[Waylander]

The problem is, that one will not be able to send the whole heavy brigade to a hotspot. Just so many of them will be available at any given time especially if the commitment is a longer one. By having a heavy division one can make sure that the UK is able to send a brigade+ sized battlegroup to where it is needed. Having just one heavy active brigade may very well mean that one is only able to send a heavy battalion+ sized task force to a potential hotspot.

With OIF being a recent example I don't think the UK wants to go down that route (or better to say I don't think it would be wise).

 

[riksavage]

The problem is, that one will not be able to send the whole heavy brigade to a hotspot. Just so many of them will be available at any given time especially if the commitment is a longer one. By having a heavy division one can make sure that the UK is able to send a brigade+ sized battlegroup to where it is needed. Having just one heavy active brigade may very well mean that one is only able to send a heavy battalion+ sized task force to a potential hotspot.

With OIF being a recent example I don't think the UK wants to go down that route (or better to say I don't think it would be wise).

Depends on ongoing operations, with a divisional strength of assets rotating through A-Stan, the UK could only manage to send an armoured battle group to another theatre of operations built around a single tank battalion supported by an armoured infantry battalion, MLRS/AS90 formation (say two batteries of each), plus HQ, armoured engineering, REME, sigs etc., and still allow for rotation over a protracted period. The above could be complemented by additional armoured recce formations and an Apache / Lynx anti-tank/recce element. The factor here is not material but man-power and the need to maintain an 18 month cycle (six months operations, twelve months courses/leave/ general training followed by six months specific pre-deployment training).

The UK simply does not have the resources to commit a full box div based on existing commitments when the current demand is for light/medium units.

 

[Waylander]

Do you think the UK would be able to send a battlegroup as proposed by when it only has one heavy standing brigade? Sending a full bn of armour and mech inf + supporting assets would mean that you send the whole of your active heavy forces. This is not going to be possible.

So with one heavy brigade it comes down to a bn+ sized (max.) unit with supporting assets.
Not what I would call sufficient if the UK ever wants to be able to do an OIF like operation again.

 

[MrQuintus]

Do you think the UK would be able to send a battlegroup as proposed by when it only has one heavy standing brigade? Sending a full bn of armour and mech inf + supporting assets would mean that you send the whole of your active heavy forces. This is not going to be possible.

So with one heavy brigade it comes down to a bn+ sized (max.) unit with supporting assets.
Not what I would call sufficient if the UK ever wants to be able to do an OIF like operation again.

It all depends on how the restructure is structured, we could quite easily see the Armed forces (army and airforce) restructured into 4 deployable units (to allow the 6 on 18 off pace) plus SF (and SFSG) and then the Royal Marines and FAA as additionally deployable elements

 

[Waylander]

Right but that wouldn't make the UK able to deploy a heavy task force like they did in OIF to kick in the door. You can't deploy a heavy brigade if the only heavy unit you have is one brigade strong.

 

[SARC]

Right but that wouldn't make the UK able to deploy a heavy task force like they did in OIF to kick in the door. You can't deploy a heavy brigade if the only heavy unit you have is one brigade strong.

Waylander, perhaps Germany could add a few Brigades for our mutual defence?

 

[riksavage]

Taking into consideration the UK's inevitable withdrawal from Germany (anticipated loss of a heavy armoured brigade) and realignment to a more agile deployable force making use of the latest technology (UCAV's) and incorporating lessons learnt from Iraq/A-Stan (increasing battalion sizes from a 600 to 750 head count), the reduction in heavy armour is inevitable. The old BAOR concept is long dead as a result of the demise of the Soviet Union and arrival of new Eastern NATO members. Poland should be able to step-up and fill the void left by the departing UK garrison. If you look at all the shooting wars the UK has got in since WWII, most have involved light/medium forces, the only exception being GWI & II.

If the UK focuses on home defence and expeditionary warfare built around the QE's then heavy tracked weapons will make way for medium tracked systems supplemented by wheeled MRAP's. The one lesson taken from A-Stan by the British is a wheeled FRES is no longer an option, it has to be tracked. Hopefully the new FRES SV will evolve in limited numbers providing recce, in-direct and direct-fire support to limited numbers of upgraded infantry carrying Warriors. Heavy armour / MLRS & AS90 will be reduced to a single heavy brigade, the spare infantry/artillery/armoured regiments will be amalgamated or re-rolled to light/medium force assets capable of being deployed by the operational ARG or C17/A400 strategic lift.

A medium force, assuming direct/in-direct fire capabilities are embedded, could be deployed to a GWI & II scenario if supported by Apache. The latter represents the primary tank killer, the former the primary means of holding ground. A FRES 105mm or 120mm armed platform ticks all the boxes if operating in conjunction with Apache and CAS (hopefully F35B).

The UK will specialise, no longer try and be all things to all men.

 

[riksavage]

The UK has just invested in upgraded (engine, transmission, suspension, armour) Spartan hulls and incorporated a Scimitar turrets naming it CVRT II. Cost a mere 30 million for 58 vehicle upgrades, some already operational in Afghanistan. The new vehicle provides the same off road ability as CVRT I but with more comfort and space.

Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | Up-armoured vehicles begin Afghanistan operations

When you look at the FRES SV and associated costs for the demo vehicles alone, the UK could have simply built a recce regiments quota of upgraded Spartan hulls and fitted them with either the new Warrior 40mm stabalised turret, the one proposed for FRES SV or even a LAV turret? Job done at a fraction of the cost. Incorporate Super Bainite armour and you end up with vehicle which remains current, is known to the army (training/maintenance) and can be produced in the UK now rather than waiting until the next decade.

 

[swerve]

Yep. That's the scout requirement sorted.

And while not doing that, but pressing on with the FRES-SV, we're set to scrap lots of Warriors for lack of money to upgrade them, when some could be upgraded to heavy recce vehicles for anywhere that Scimitar II is too light for, at a fraction of the cost of FRES-SV, & between 'em meet our needs for many years to come.

 

[riksavage]

Yep. That's the scout requirement sorted.

And while not doing that, but pressing on with the FRES-SV, we're set to scrap lots of Warriors for lack of money to upgrade them, when some could be upgraded to heavy recce vehicles for anywhere that Scimitar II is too light for, at a fraction of the cost of FRES-SV, & between 'em meet our needs for many years to come.

The argument against upgraded Warrior being used as a force recce asset was one of weight, which is crazy considering the final fully up-armoured FRES SV will end up about the same. Plus the US use Bradley as a force recce asset and don't have a problem.

The new multi-role deployable brigade structure (not including 3 Commando and 16AA) comprising Challenger II, Warrior and FRES SV will have to be scaled based on restrictive budgets. I can see two being kept at high readiness with a full compliment of armour/artillery/engineering assets and the other three having a 'B' level equipment scales allowing them to remain current (enough vehicles for training), allowing them to step-up and replace the man-power of what ever fully deployed brigade is on active service utilising what ever kit is deployed in theatre. The UK still has a sizable contingent of up-armoured and fully refurbished bulldogs, these are practically brand new and could be used to offset the lack of upgraded Warriors in 'b' scale battalions.

Also what is the UK going to do with all those nearly new Warthogs post 2015? The RM are happy with Viking and plan to buy more MKII's. They could transfer them to the Falklands garrison, ideal for use there and would provide the Island's with an APC capable of going anywhere in support of the resident infantry unit/local defense force. Now the decision to drill for oil is practically a done deal commitment to the islands defence will need upgrading to keep the sabre rattlers quiet.

 

[StobieWan]

Well, the Warrior improvement program just got the green light:

BBC News - £1bn upgrade for British army's Warrior vehicles


So, that's your stabilised 40 CTA armed turret and armour updates. Good news of sorts I think


Ian

 

[riksavage]

Well, the Warrior improvement program just got the green light:

BBC News - £1bn upgrade for British army's Warrior vehicles


So, that's your stabilised 40 CTA armed turret and armour updates. Good news of sorts I think


Ian

Very good news, LM now have both the FRES SV and the Warrior upgrade in the bag. So far they have delivered on all ahead of schedule within budget.

To me this is the most important contract, simply because Warrior is so versatile and is seen in more operational theatres than any other tracked vehicle currently in UK service (Afghanistan, Iraq, GWI, Bosnia). The new 40mm has three times the hitting power of the old RARDEN and in the airburst mode will provide excellent anti-personnel firepower in the asymmetrical environment.

The question is will FRES SV be binned and they simply mount the upgraded turret on a CVRT Mrk II new build chassis? This would throw BAE a consolatory bone as they are building the new larger Mrk II chassis fitted with RARDEN for Afghanistan right now, add the LM turret and you have a pretty sound recce vehicle (already with upgraded powertrain, suspension, thermal images) with the tooling to build already in place across the UK, this would be cheaper than buying ASCOD. Plus crew transition training would be easier beacuse the vehicle is already a known entity at Bovington.