AJAX - the ‘NOT the CR2 upgrade’ thread

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Bit of CR3:

AB96AA2E-CA54-444F-A070-B3319D8BE9D3.jpeg
50374AAB-EA15-4D5A-9AF4-E0E126E0A040.jpeg
F30751EB-3155-4F83-90C0-C621DDE687BB.jpeg
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
And….

D1009A91-B281-4C6F-A0E9-E473EF1E1B25.jpeg
63C07DAA-4B28-48BF-8033-21AB1B635980.jpeg
 
. . . This caught my eye. Having been involved with a these things when they were at the end of their Service lives, we were told they were going to a museum or land-fill........it seems they were bought and refurbished. Suprising as I was told by those that used them, they were horrible to be in and they were glad to get off them and into their little canoes or re-breathers!
View attachment 604909
@CH512O what was it, what is it supposed to be now ?!

Doesn't look like anything I recognise :( .
 
@CH512O what was it, what is it supposed to be now ?!

Doesn't look like anything I recognise :( .
So the SBS had 2 of these to do all weather insertions.
Pic below is actually in-service with Singapore SF but it’s best pic online to see detail.
D345FCE0-7825-45B9-BC64-75F7EC01035C.jpeg

They were built by Halmatic and were called Very Slender Vessels. They basically go through the waves at high speed.
One of my postings I was approached by Poole to store them until a decision was made to get rid. So we said no problem and 2 of them arrived on these trailers on the back of artic trucks. I was shown around them and were pretty impressive inside. We had them for nearly a year. In return the lads at Poole hosted us for a day. Presentation on stuff they do, shown around the replacement boat…
86D1501A-F7D0-4E97-978C-E536DDFA4290.jpeg

and a cabby out to Old Harry rock (out of Poole past posh Sandbanks) in one of their Fast Patrol Boats….
D65DD208-C60B-4A0B-BB6B-11DA9CA86B05.jpeg

As a amateur powerboater myself I was in my element. The only time I have come out of Poole Harbour at a speed that the Police and Harbour Authority’s would have you in front of the beak.
Having since posted comment earlier about the VSV’s I looked into them further they did indeed end up in a scrap yard local to Poole stripped but may of been bought by this company or they sourced others.
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
Since it's depending on rocket-assisted ammunition to match the Light Gun's range, that's got a noticeable downside in both payload and accuracy.

but all artillery duels are not fought with the respective artillery at their maximum possible ranges…
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
And as has been pointed out in the past, the increase in size of the logistics footprint when going from 105 to 155mm is not to be sniffed at.

and yet in Afghanistan, there we were, asking the neighbours with 155mm guns to smite things for us….
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
but all artillery duels are not fought with the respective artillery at their maximum possible ranges…

Indeed - if you're outranged, you can compensate with mobility, protection and excellent ISTAR, if your opponent is reasonably obliging. See the artillery raids against Iraqi forces during 1991, for instance, where SP guns were able to approach discreetly, lure the longer-ranged yet static Iraqi artillery into firing, then smite them with great vigour.

If you don't have mobility and protection (because you're "fighting light") then you need range and ISTAR to survive (which ties into accuracy and lethality: if you need to fire more rounds because your RAP projectiles have less payload and less precision, you're giving the enemy CB sensors much more chance to make the sky fall in on your gridsquare)

If you're doctrinally committed to dispersed operations, then either your artillery range limits how far you can actually disperse, or you accept that your scattered forces are on their own without support (good luck with that...)

So, under what relevant circumstances does short range look like an advantage?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Indeed - if you're outranged, you can compensate with mobility, protection and excellent ISTAR, if your opponent is reasonably obliging. See the artillery raids against Iraqi forces during 1991, for instance, where SP guns were able to approach discreetly, lure the longer-ranged yet static Iraqi artillery into firing, then smite them with great vigour.

If you don't have mobility and protection (because you're "fighting light") then you need range and ISTAR to survive (which ties into accuracy and lethality: if you need to fire more rounds because your RAP projectiles have less payload and less precision, you're giving the enemy CB sensors much more chance to make the sky fall in on your gridsquare)

If you're doctrinally committed to dispersed operations, then either your artillery range limits how far you can actually disperse, or you accept that your scattered forces are on their own without support (good luck with that...)

So, under what relevant circumstances does short range look like an advantage?
Don't worry - it's all going to be alright:

 
and yet in Afghanistan, there we were, asking the neighbours with 155mm guns to smite things for us….

Asking specifically for 155
Or asking for 155 as 105 didnt hve the range
Or Asking for more Artlllery support in general
Or as part of a coalition operation the neighbours guns were better positioned/ allocated / availible.

I only ask because Theres a big difference between obliged to use 155 as 105 couldnt do the job and used what was availible which happenned to be 155
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Asking specifically for 155
Or asking for 155 as 105 didnt hve the range
Or Asking for more Artlllery support in general
Or as part of a coalition operation the neighbours guns were better positioned/ allocated / availible.

I only ask because Theres a big difference between obliged to use 155 as 105 couldnt do the job and used what was availible which happenned to be 155
I think people easily forget it was a coalition effort - why bring your own 155mm if an ally is willing and able to bring theirs?
 
@Listy shared this with me:

Lots of mention of data/connectivity, LOTS of mention of aerial assets, some mention of maritime. No mention of ground assets.

Because words like aerial, battlespace, data, carriers, connectivity put the message across that we are getting all hi-tech and soon we can “fight the war with UAV’s and robots”.
Funnily though, all the above words meant absolutely crap all to the “Insert Inf Unit“ soldier in 20XXwho pulled on his Osprey, ECM, Vallon and rifle to walk down a known IED laden patrol route to look for an adversary that does not wear easily identifiable uniform.
It seems we are changing our way but the enemy remains the same. Delete Afghan by the way, insert Mali before anyone shouts “Afghanistan is so old skool!
We actually had UAV‘S, connectivity (sometimes), aerial etc back then and the end result???
 
Last edited:

bob231

War Hero
Ask the Aussies if they’d give us a couple for trials, independent suspension, rubber tracks, brilliant. According to the blurb, you can hold a conversation with others in the back!
Ive often wondered why rubber tracks haven’t been used up to now!
Soucy were showing off some rather nice and apparently field-tested rubber tracks at DSEI.

Suspect the answer has been the Logs problem and making mean time to failure/combat robustness sufficient to justify replacing steel track.

ETA: the ex-RAC chap on the stand said that the Warrior track on display (photo on previous page) had done 5000 km and had yet to reach wear limits. Possibly 5000 mi; I had found some free beer by that point.

My own impression of AJAX - from a very ignorant background - was of enormous size. Especially compared to CR3, which felt weird. I understand the requirements argument but it's a seriously big beast, which must limit it even where the enemy is reliant on Mk I eyeball?

Separately and relating to the drones discussion a few pages back, it does feel like we're looking at some fundamental shifts in how we do business. Some of the RN PODS stuff looked quite clever when combined with EPLS to deploy massed drones and drone control for whatever purpose; that same drone can do some routine and mundane shipboard tasks almost infinitely faster, safer and cheaper. I'm not convinced that they are a panacea but I do definitely expect to see changes.
 
Last edited:

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
I suppose the immediate counter is, what if you need the capability and haven’t got it?

We seem to be abdicating too many capabilities.
Perhaps, I was just making the point that having our own 155mm there would have been more costly etc when others were on the task org to deliver those capabilities.
 

TamH70

MIA
Little way back in the thread, we got onto resupply. Aussies have retired their Tilly’s and upcycled some of their M113 to M113as4View attachment 605262

Glad to see that the Ockers have got their priorities sorted. Though I do note the missing of the third "B". That for "beer".
 

Latest Threads

Top