FRES Programme - British Army

[StobieWan]

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.

Exactly - we have lots of Warrior and they work. More buffs, more firepower, everyone's a winner. It's ridiculous that as much money has been spent on FRES so far as this will cost. CVRTII with the CTA? Yeah, put me down for some of that. FRES SV appears to weigh as much all up as an early T-72 might - ie, a lot.

The recent trend of vehicle updates being executed in a timely fashion, on budget and delivering satisfactory performance is most welcome.

 

[swerve]

Yet another reason for binning FRES-SV scout.

IIRC the Warrior update programme has been reduced in numbers to the point where there will be enough spare vehicles to cover the expected numbers of FRES-SV scouts to be bought.

The scope for binning the FRES SV scout variant in favour of a recce Warrior is obvious. Same production line as the IFV upgrades, same turret. Should save a fortune. The army gets the heavy recce it wants, at lower cost & with commonality with its IFVs. LM now has the whole deal, so won't be too unhappy, & since its turret is now the standard, will get to make any we want for fitting to other hulls, e.g. CVRT II.

 

[riksavage]

Yet another reason for binning FRES-SV scout.

IIRC the Warrior update programme has been reduced in numbers to the point where there will be enough spare vehicles to cover the expected numbers of FRES-SV scouts to be bought.

The scope for binning the FRES SV scout variant in favour of a recce Warrior is obvious. Same production line as the IFV upgrades, same turret. Should save a fortune. The army gets the heavy recce it wants, at lower cost & with commonality with its IFVs. LM now has the whole deal, so won't be too unhappy, & since its turret is now the standard, will get to make any we want for fitting to other hulls, e.g. CVRT II.

Not sure the turret is standard, Warrior is a rebuild and uparmouring of the existing unit, FRES SV was a new design. The critical issue is the size of the turret ring, I understand ASCOD is larger than Warrior. So you could use remodeled Warrior turrets on a CVRT Mrk II, but not the new build one destined for ASCOD as far as understand.

Spare Warrior hulls not designated for turret upgrades will be converted to ambulance, command and mortar carriers, so I doubt there will be enough spare to equip all the armoured recce formations, that leaves ASCOD or a possible cheaper CVRT Mrk II fitted with upgraded Warrior turrets (removed from those designated as ambulance, command and mortar carriers). What becomes of the bulldogs is another question, plus the 100 odd Warthogs when they return from Afghanistan. RM doesn't want the latter (too big), maybe useful for Army light gun artillery regiments or converted to 120mm mortar carriers (gets my vote).

 

[Pingu]

Some very good points made here and I agree.

I think the FRES programme has lost sight of what it is supposed to be. I cannot understand why the requirement to replace a 10t light recce vehicle has resulted in a 35t vehicle. The CVRT is designed to be a light, nimble armoured vehicle and is perfect for the role it does. The FRES Scout has effectively just become another IFV and so as has been suggested in this thread, why not just bin it and upgrade all Warriors in the fleet.

Worse still, to procure a vehicle that is not transportable by the A400M is a crime. initially the US had very ambitious plans with the now cancelled FCS vehicles to be transported by C-130s but that was soon found to be too ambitious. The A400M however, gave the UK extra scope to realistically make a deployable yet well protected vehicle and somehow, FRES Scout has grown beyond this.

It begs the question whether it is really neccesary for a recce vehicle to be 35t in order to offer significant protection. Is it possible for something perhaps just slightly bigger than the CVRT to offer sufficent IED/Mine protection? The vehicle does not necessarily have to be capacious as it is not an IFV as FRES-SV has stupidly become, so any extra mass of the vehicle should be formed from extra armour rather than just a bigger vehicle.

Personally, I think that FRES in its current form needs to be scrapped as a project. Vehicles should be introduced incrementally while maintaining a strict over-arching standard of commonality and this is perhaps already in place with the common vehicle architecture (CVA) concept.

I think the best solution for now would be to make do with upgraded Warriors by upgrading all of the current fleet. This would save a substantial amount of money and allow time to wait until emerging technologies are developed that ease the problem that make mobility, protection and transportability so hard to find together. In doing so, we could replace the CVRT with something that looks more like a CVRT, which should be idea.

As for everything else, such is Warthog, Viking, Saxon, Bulldog, Mastiff etc, the UK seriously needs to reduce the vehicle types because the number has become rediculous. Personally, I wonder whether an articulated vehicle similar to the warthog would make a suitable replacement for all of the above vehicles. Depressing as it sounds, an IED strike would be less servere as one part of the vehicle would take the brunt whereas the other, not so much. Perhaps more protection could be focussed onto the front section of the vehicle while saving weight on the rear section. Maybe even have a completely common front section and by common, I mean identical while having a role specific rear module, that could include recce, artillery, APC etc.

 

[Armoured Recce]

I appreciate Pingu's statement above and find myself agreeing ......

Having served in an Armoured Recce role in the Canadian Armoured Corps I have disagreed with the role shifts that I have seen occuring in the CF's and apparently within the UK as well.

At one point the Armoured Recce role was heavily defined and the tactics employed by the CF were in absolute agreement with the British model. Fast, lightly armoured / armed small tracked vehicles operating in small troops. The USA has traditionally employed a Recon by force system..employing larger numbers of and more hevily armoured and armed vehicles......the whole "sneak and peek" vs. the "when we get shot at" theories......

In the CF we had employed the "Lynx" system based on the m113...as did Belgium...aluminum armour, lightly armed with a .50 HMG and then a C5 7.62 MG...a three man crew and relied on visual identification through rapid deployment and cautious dismounted patroling...the UK employed the Scimitar in a very simular manner.

Canadian thought changed and the attitude of "heavy Armour" started to dwindle, reducing the operational need for the smaller , lighter quick "recce" vehicles...as the Lynx was releaved of duty and replaced with the wheeled and much taller ( silouette) wheeled "Coyote" series of the 8x8 LAV II family the reliance on technology increased signifigantly...Radar, Thermal /NV telescoping cameras etc....the basic function of the "recce" changed......and the foreseen "Need" of even heavy Armour (Leopard 1's) faced serious questions....being foreseen to be replaced by the LAV series ( even after the dismal "success" of the previous AVGP series 6x6's ( Cougar, Grizzly and Husky)

Operational needs found in Afgan. really hit home and Canada has acquired some 120 leopard 2's in various versions from Germany and the Dutch ( Used for sure...BUT a HUGE step up in our abilities). I foresee that the experiences in Afganistan will also highlight the inifectiveness of the LAV II's for their " intended" roles......what I can see is going to be a resergence in small fast , more heavily armed TRACKED vehicles to actually take up the role of Armoured Recce again.....

I have serious doubts about the entire concept ( from any country) to simply use "role variants" of any one vehicle to accomplish effectively specific tasks...... regardless of how good they may be at another role.......

I see the ASCOD and the Warriors as being unsuitable for the Recce role as they are both far to large, incorperate an abundance of space that is uneccessary for the recce role.....and simply present far to large a "Target", both literally as well as radar etc......

I believe having done Armoured Recce for years is that a "simular" concept to the Scimitar/Scorpion that incorperates all the newer tech. without all the bulk and size would stand the tests in a far superior manner than what is currently being offered.....

Granted, I am NOT an expert nor do I spend all my time "analyzing" papers and stats....I 'm simply a retired "Zipper head" Armoured Crewman that drove around DOING Armoured Recce...so perhaps I'm a dinosaur....BUT when it comes to actually seeing some of these short comings ( and I hear alot from deployed friends in Afganistan...all home now..thankfully) in the "new way " of thinking......makes one wonder who actaully designs and "studies" these things..cause it sure isn't the troops that need to use them.........

well all that said.....I hope more level heads prevail......in the UK anyway and maybe see a new generation of Scimitar / Sabre concept developed and employed.......and stop "shoe horning" designs into fitting ( poorly) too many roles.....

Bless the Armoured Recce.."the glory of 18 seconds"...some may understand that.....lol