British Army News and Discussion

[RobWilliams]

Sounds about right, but with respect to seeing the Warthog in different roles other than UAS support in the RA then I'm not sure. The only public announcements made about bringing it into the core budget has been in that role.

But even then, i'm just imagining that's the exact nature of the vehicles use in the RA but could just as easily being just to lug around gear for their UAVs rather than operating the UAVs out of the back itself.

We got 100+ Warthogs all in all and considering when they were purchased we switched out all the Vikings in Afghan for Warthogs, there's something about it. One thing IIRC is that the Warthog can mount a 40mm grenade machine gun and the Viking can't, the pair both naturally can mount a GPMG/M2HB.

EDIT: That's handy, publication detailing exactly how many of each vehicle is being brought into the core budget

• 71 Coyote
• 325 Husky
• 441 Jackal
• 439 Mastiff
• 169 Ridgeback
• 60 Warthog

So presumably 30 allocated to each regiment, doesn't leave any worthwhile room for extra allocation elsewhere.

 

[bdique]

Hmm, guess without further details we won't know exactly how they will be used in conjuction with the UAVs other than as equipment transporters.

Agree on the point that the capabilities provided by the Warthog exceed the Viking. I've been in the Bronco (the original Warthog, if we can call it that) and the way it speeds up and down dirt tracks, absorbing bumps and ruts is quite a sight to behold. While all this is happening, the troops in the back don't quite feel the jarring effects of uneven ground, even while traveling at high speeds. (Sorry, I can't remember the exact speed it was going at. Probably around 50km/h?) Over that same stretch of road, I felt that the Bronco at that speed would be more comfortable than a Land Rover traveling at a slower speed.

To see the Warthog relegated to non-frontline combat duties is a little sad, honestly, but the truth is I don't see how the Warthog will fit in the BA's existing CONOPS. I am surprised that the 40mm GMG cannot be used on the Viking.

 

[Kampgruppe1970]

It is, there's a separate thread for Scottish Independence in another forum.


But yes, the SNP have little interest in defence - as do their core voters.

I wouldn't say that mate ... we are not interested in sending forces to the likes of Afghanistan or Iraq by in large these places are far flung for most Scots the core aim of the Scottish armed forces would be a Self Defence Force on a model of Japan but vastly smaller in scale for obvious reasons Scotland has a population of just over 5 million and Japan's is nearly 127 million. Currently Scottish Taxpayers contribute around £3.3 - £3.6 billion defence expenditure take away the costs of up keeping trident and roughly just below the £3 billion figure so it would roughly be a cut of around £300 - £400 million per year ... which would be inline with current UK spending cuts in defence ...

Please keep in mind "IF" we do vote yes (keep in mind current polls are around 41% for no and 27% yes and 32% undecided these are polls conducted by pro unionist based media and nobody really knows what the exact figures are) then independence day would be around the tail end of 2016 ... personally speaking the nationalist I know are serious about defence but we are not keen in projecting force in another countries unless it is UN peace keeping roles . Personally speaking the £2.5 billion is more like a base figure.
I would like to see our current contribution to remain the same at around the £3.3 - £3.6 billion mark and I would like to see us retain some heavy units challenger 2s, AS-90 and replace the L85A2 G36 ... the first 5 years after a UK break up would be hard for both sides as the respective economies would need to resettle.

if it is a no vote then this has been a fruitless debate but the debate would resurface again 10 - 15 years down the line and that is not good for anyone

 

[RobWilliams]

As has been pointed out, there is already a thread about this topic elsewhere. My reply will be in that thread, so lets draw a line under this topic in this thread please given it's called "British Army News and Discussion"

 

[KiwiRob]

EDIT: That's handy, publication detailing exactly how many of each vehicle is being brought into the core budget

• 71 Coyote
• 325 Husky
• 441 Jackal
• 439 Mastiff
• 169 Ridgeback
• 60 Warthog

So presumably 30 allocated to each regiment, doesn't leave any worthwhile room for extra allocation elsewhere.

What about the Foxhound and Panther?

 

[RobWilliams]

IIRC we've currently got 400 Foxhounds under order and under the Army 2020 plans Foxhound is to equip 6 light protected infantry battalions, each battalion containing 3 companies + 1 support company as part of the Adaptable Force.

I've got no idea about Panther

 

[STURM]

Apologies for getting off topic. Back in 1995 I visited the Para museum at Aldershot. The entrance was guarded by 2 squaddies with SA-80s and they had either green or black berets on but were definitely not Paras. At that time it never occured to me to ask them what unit they were from; I'm very curious as to what units would have been tasked to provide security at the Para museum?

 

[RobWilliams]

No idea man, this is the best info I could find

Beret - ARRSEpedia

The UK is a maelstrom of different colour berets for X unit depending if they completed X training or are seconded to X unit for a period of time, so as an outsider I couldn't actually say i'm afraid.

In other British Army news, they've decided they want AH-64E Apaches before the end of the decade

British Army wants AH-64E Apache before end of decade - IHS Jane's 360

The British Army Air Corps (AAC) expects to replace its current AgustaWestland-Boeing WAH-64D Apache Longbow AH.1 attack helicopter fleet with the latest-variant AH-64E (formerly AH-64D Block III) "by the end of the decade", a senior service official disclosed on 23 January.

...

In terms of numbers, Brig Sexton said that he does not expect any AH-64Es to be procured as one-for-one replacements for the Apaches currently in service (67 were purchased, with one lost on operations in Afghanistan), adding "but we don't need that". The most likely scenario will see the most costly systems on the current AH.1 aircraft - the M-TADS (targeting system), the fire control system, and the engines - being refitted into newly built airframes, with the equipment left over providing a ready-made pool of spares.

...

The MoD is currently undertaking a capability sustainment programme (CSP) to sustain the UK's attack helicopter capability out to 2040 and beyond, but has declined to say when it will report the findings of this study. The AH-64E is understood to be one of a number of options being considered, with others being the procurement of a new helicopter type altogether or even the scrapping of the capability.

AFAIK the reductions in Apache numbers (from 66 aircraft to keep 48 available) this is being reduced to ~50 aircraft to keep 39 available. New build airframes with key components pulled through is to be expected, presumably resulting in a WAH-64E.

The knowledge of a new type of aircraft being a consideration (being thorough) was interesting though, been thinking about the AH-1Z considering the naval applications our attack helicopters will be used for.

 

[StobieWan]

Interesting - hope it goes well, the Apache has defied it's critics since the moment it got into action.

 

[harryriedl]

Info from DID on the extremelly slow progress on the Warrior upgrade WCSP: Mid-Life Upgrade for Britain’s Warrior IFVs
Jan 28/14: PDR. Lockheed Martin UK completed its WCSP Preliminary Design Review the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP), following successful completion of a System Architecture Design Review (SADR). Sources: Lockheed Martin UK, “Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle Upgrade Gets Initial Design Approval”.

 

[RobWilliams]

More comment about the UK moving towards new build AH-64E Apaches for the Apache CSP.

AH-64E looking increasingly likely for UK - IHS Jane's 360

The expected situation is new build airframes - probably assembled by AgustaWestland in Yeovil - with as much usable kit as possible pulled through from the current fleet.

Chances are we'll be seeing a reduced fleet from 66 to around 50 too, at least that's the rumour.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=g_lru9On2u4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=e1A9me8jOlY

 

[Volkodav]

More comment about the UK moving towards new build AH-64E Apaches for the Apache CSP.

AH-64E looking increasingly likely for UK - IHS Jane's 360

The expected situation is new build airframes - probably assembled by AgustaWestland in Yeovil - with as much usable kit as possible pulled through from the current fleet.

Chances are we'll be seeing a reduced fleet from 66 to around 50 too, at least that's the rumour.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=g_lru9On2u4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=e1A9me8jOlY

I am so jealous, the Tiger is a good helicopter but........why oh why didn't we have a closer more realistic look at the real costs and real capabilities on offer and FMS the Apache?

The UK seems to be making some pretty smart decisions these days, cant wait to see photos of the new kit as it rolls out.

How is the FRES SV going at them moment, trial were scheduled for 2013 have they started, how are they progressing?

 

[the concerned]

if we didn't choose the apache what else could we have. I have always liked the gunship variant of the Blackhawk as it could provide sniper support aswell as troop movements .

 

[StobieWan]

The top competitor for the role was the Cobra AH1-W or some similar variant. Failing that, we'd have been looking at probably the Tiger. I think we picked the right platform.

 

[Volkodav]

The top competitor for the role was the Cobra AH1-W or some similar variant. Failing that, we'd have been looking at probably the Tiger. I think we picked the right platform.

Definitely, the AH-1W while a great machine is now being superseded by the Z and the Tiger was far more developmental than advertised, i.e. Australia examples are still not fully deployable with spares remaining a very big issue. A mate from the regiment concerned told me this and other things, including the French deployment to Afghanistan required a warehouse full of parts sufficient for over a dozen helos (based on contracted support levels) to support the handful of machines actually deployed.

Compare that to procurement success and the service the UK has gotten out of their Apaches!

 

[StobieWan]

There was a total sh1tstorm in the papers about the WAH-1 with accusations we'd have been better off buying the stock D model etc etc. They've confounded the critics in Aghanistan however

 

[the road runner]

I am so jealous, the Tiger is a good helicopter but........why oh why didn't we have a closer more realistic look at the real costs and real capabilities on offer and FMS the Apache?

I am starting to think we screwed the pooch on ARH helicopter decision.
After reading some of Gremlins comments on the Tiger thread on DT, you can start to see the benefit of choosing a US product with training ,spares and support.I am still in 2 minds on the Tiger.

The UK Apache really has proven itself ,flying off flat tops and delivering the goods.
The ACBA nations should really look into joint purchases of equipment IMHO.
The C-17 being a shining example

 

[RobWilliams]

How is the FRES SV going at them moment, trial were scheduled for 2013 have they started, how are they progressing?

The entire FRES program is a clusterf*ck in which I don't totally understand what's going on, but WRT FRES SV specifically IIRC there have been weight issues and apparently will only start being prevalent at the end of the decade.

One thing i've been throwing around recently is that considering that we're looking increasingly at the maritime threatre for our helicopters that would something like the AH-1Z suit our needs better?

 

[StobieWan]

FRES SV? Weight issues? A scout vehicle weighing as much as an early model T72? Wash your mouth out

FRES was the victim (in part at least) of circumstances - the program got started off right before the IED threat in theatre blossomed in the horrible way it did, and a lot of time and effort went on UOR vehicles to meet that threat. The specifications have changed several times and along the way a few twists and turns have sprang up.

The French are allegedly lending us some VBCI vehicles to trial, and have recently agreed to fit the same 40mm CTA cannon we're using in the Warrior CLIP program so you have to wonder if there's a deal in the air.

VBCI Wheeled Infantry Fighting Vehicle - Army Technology

 

[Volkodav]

Not sure, I understand the only reason the Zulu and Whiskey before it actually exist is because Congress wouldn't let the marines buy Apaches. Gremlin or Abe may know more on this but from a couple of things I have read over the years the USMC would have been perfectly happy with marinised Apaches and Blackhawks and the uprated Bells were very much the better than nothing option. Not bad helos but not as good as they could have had. Definitely think the Echo is the way to go you the UK, just hope you can maintain numbers.

Sort of interesting when you think about procurement and sustainment models, you imagine having common fleets across the services would be desirable but then again who knows with US Congressional parochialism.

Personally would have preferred seeing a mix of Apaches, Blackhawk Mikes, Seahawk Romeos and Sierras as well as Merlins in the ADF rather than the Tiger, MRH90, Blackhawk A mix we will have instead. Haven't forgotten the Chinook just left out mentioning it as it is a constant.