AJAX - the ‘NOT the CR2 upgrade’ thread

It was a serious question - you bang on about stationing troops on Russia's doorstep all the time.
I would be very interested to read of other suggestions as to where, we should deploy - pre-position - what armour we do have, as a strategic deterrent to Moscow’s conventional land forces ?!
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
I'm asking about risk, not deployability.

Carriers can sink remarkably rapidly too.

A Carrier Strike Group would be an extremely difficult nut even for a peer adversary to crack..

A Strike Brigade? It would struggle against a well equipped African Warlord.
 
A Strike Brigade? It would struggle against a well equipped African Warlord.

Without getting into an argument about the ifs whys and wherefores - isnt this a moot point since there are no strike brigades - they have gone the way of the norwegian blue
 
RT for 'news'?

Really?

Yes . . . really !!

I did NOT say that I accept what RT publish, but recognising it as PROPAGANDA, it is a useful tool, providing as it does an insight into the opposition's mind-set.

The same with Aljazeera. Accept it for what it is, and it/they both, provided a more rounded view on world events, than is IGNORED by the BBC/MSM :( .
 
Last edited:

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
Without getting into an argument about the ifs whys and wherefores - isnt this a moot point since there are no strike brigades - they have gone the way of the norwegian blue

or whatever they are being called this week.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
It's flawed, dangerous and not for for purpose, both the RN and RAF have had capabilities cut on the altar of supporting the Army on Telic and Herrick.
Now rangers are the solution.
But is is not being challenged by anyone credible in any credible forums.

We can bump our gums/tap keyboards here but the level of debate in the mainstream is non-existent.
 
But is is not being challenged by anyone credible in any credible forums.

We can bump our gums/tap keyboards here but the level of debate in the mainstream is non-existent.
Oye !! " . . . not being challenged by anyone credible in any credible forums" . . . I resemble that remark !! ;) .

I thought we were all contributing something "very useful" posting on ARRSE :) .

Now - you tell us - that the HoC, MoD, No10, and MSM, do NOT have people monitoring ARRSE ?! :( .
 
Last edited:
And why is this the case? A near fatal obsession with light role infantry, SF and becoming enmeshed in difficult counter-insurgencies that divert, funding, expertise and career opportunities. The AI role is not inculcated in the Infantry as it was back in the day (as 'mechanised') because those who are now commanding battalions and brigades have little or no experience of it - they are all TELIC/HERRICK types.
Roll your memory back to the 1990s. It's the "end of history". Communism has been defeated and the Soviet Union is no more. The West has won and there no longer exist any major competitors for world power. If the army is to have any future at all, it will be fighting insurgents and terrorists in distant minor third world countries. Those who insisted that there was still a role for heavy armour were dinosaurs obsessed with a world that no longer existed.

So, the army adapted to the new future. Heavy armour was de-emphasised, light infantry were given a more prominent role, and the "dinosaurs" who had built their careers on heavy armour were sidelined. The army then went on to fight in endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq so the UK government could earn brownie points with the Americans.

Roll forward to 10 or so years ago. Afghanistan and Iraq are turning into quagmires, but the UK aren't ready to pull out completely yet because that would affect relations with the Americans. Russia however are getting back on their feet and rebuilding their army.

Roll forward a few more years. Afghanistan and Iraq are unquestionably a disaster and the rush to the exits starts. This however has to be dressed up as not a defeat, but as a forward march to a new opponent, Russia. New marching orders come down to the army from cabinet to prepare for a new mission in eastern Europe. That requires new equipment, and the "dinosaurs" of heavy armour are back in fashion.

Roll forward again. Brexit has happened. Thoughts in London start to turn to the wider world outside of Europe and Britain's place in it. A realisation may be beginning to dawn in London that there can be no more than a token defence of eastern Europe from Russia without the whole hearted involvement of the Germans, and the Germans are doing very little. With that in mind, Europe is seen as important, but perhaps not as important as thought a few years earlier. Meanwhile, Washington are obsessed with the growing influence of China and how to counter them in Asia and Africa. London begins to think that the way to win favour with the Americans is to be able to do more in those areas. Failing that, Britain can work on building influence for itself in the Far East with the goal of finding a foothold for itself in the new centre of the global economy. Perhaps too much emphasis was being placed on heavy armour for eastern Europe and a different balance needs to be struck. CR3 sounds like a safe bet, but is that Ajax project really that useful if it can't deploy in Africa?

Etc.

War is the continuation of diplomacy by other means. The army has been the primary tool for conducting UK armed foreign policy for the past few decades. That foreign policy has changed radically several times over the past couple of decades. Why on earth would anyone have expected the army to remain the same during that time?

This doesn't excuse the procurement problems with Ajax, but you will never solve the actual procurement problems if you insist on going up the blind alley of thinking the problems lie with the army changing to suit changing government policy. The real problems more likely lie within weaknesses in MoD development and procurement structures.
 

Himmler74

On ROPS
On ROPs
But is is not being challenged by anyone credible in any credible forums.

We can bump our gums/tap keyboards here but the level of debate in the mainstream is non-existent.
It's going to ng to happen, the “headsheds” think a light role, heavy “green beret” style force is the future. Have they looked at the last 70+ years and thought ok, we will bet the future of the Rmy on a fast deployable, dynamic force to counter the rising threats in Africa, central America, (isis and AQ, are heavily involved and cooperating with the cartels), to be the future force projection along side 16aa, 3cdo and SF?

If the answer is yes, where is the investment in deep penetration airframes for deployment and recovery? The medical, signal, logistical support for those type of ops, to be honest the army might have got this right, but didn't think it through. After all russia and china are not going to do anything that would invoke article 5, as we would turn them into glass, however hybrid warfare is on the increase.

So if this the future path, let's see the army equip itself with boxer and cr3, decent heavy fires, which its getting, extra investment in P8’s, a real fit for purpose tier 1 JPR capability, a funded, SF Aviation capability, MH47, MC130, AC130 etc.
Instead of new uniforms and new rifles.
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
A Carrier Strike Group would be an extremely difficult nut even for a peer adversary to crack..

A Strike Brigade? It would struggle against a well equipped African Warlord.
Your first comment is debatable, your second is your normal fantasy narrative.

**** off back to Moscow, or Falmouth, whichever is furthest.
 
or whatever they are being called this week.
No theyve proper gone
We now have light infantry brigades 2 of for chasing guerrilas round deserts / UN peace keeping ops
and 2 Either Almost armoured infantry or almost mechinised (missing IFV) Brigades

The whole strike idea has snuffed it
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
No theyve proper gone
We now have light infantry brigades 2 of for chasing guerrilas round deserts / UN peace keeping ops
and 2 Either Almost armoured infantry or almost mechinised (missing IFV) Brigades

The whole strike idea has snuffed it

Land simply hasn’t any idea what it’s purpose is or what it wants to be.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Oye !! " . . . not being challenged by anyone credible in any credible forums" . . . I resemble that remark !! ;) .

I thought we were all contributing something "very useful" posting on ARRSE :) .

Now - you tell us - that the HoC, MoD, No10, and MSM, do NOT have people monitoring ARRSE ?! :( .
Realistically, the glaring deficiencies if not to say downright mistakes of the last árse-covering exercise defence review have been picked apart several times on here.

Have you seen any VSOs reverse any of their vainglorious and wrong-footed decisions?

Have you seen or heard any politicians say, "Hang on, are you really sure...?"

Have you even seen any of the press do the same - based on anything written here?

The Defence Select Committee is locked in a 'Yebbut Brimstone' loop and demonstrating every time it sits the limitations of the people who sit on it. Many of the things that they have been told in recent weeks and months should not be in any way news to anyone in any way competent.

Ajax is only being picked to bits because it's a juicy failure. A £5bn fùck-up is great selling copy. Any halfway decent defence correspondent on a national daily should have known about Ajax and where it was months and years ago. And at the point that the MOD issues yet another "Nothing to see here" response they should be prepared to push back bloody hard with a "Yes there really is" instead of just being supine.

"Vibration is normal in an AFV"? Fück off, frankly.

I think that there have been some very useful posts here on ARRSE. But observe the screaming silence.
 
"Vibration is normal in an AFV"? Fück off, frankly.
Except it absolutely is. The only vehicle worse than a tracked AFV is a helicopter and at least those have the decency to keep their worst vibrations restricted to particular frequency bands.
Most AFVs in service have controls in place to mitigate the impact of the vibration on the crews, so possible injuries resulting from vibration isn’t good and shouldn’t be accepted, but if it can be dealt with it then it isn’t a problem worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Except it absolutely is. The only vehicle worse than a tracked AFV is a helicopter and at least those have the decency to keep their worst vibrations restricted to particular frequency bands.
Most AFVs in service have controls in place to mitigate the impact of the vibration on the crews, so possible injuries resulting from vibration isn’t good and shouldn’t be accepted, but if it can be dealt with it then it isn’t a problem worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Okay. It is. I agree.

My point is that the issues with Ajax are apparently severe. A blithe, "this is not unusual" response deserves a kicking. As you note, other designs manage to mitigate the issue(s).

But it's not just vibration, is it? It's build quality/consistency and myriad other issues, none trivial.

Down-select on this vehicle was in 2010.

*checks calendar*
 

Himmler74

On ROPS
On ROPs
Okay. It is. I agree.

My point is that the issues with Ajax are apparently severe. A blithe, "this is not unusual" response deserves a kicking. As you note, other designs manage to mitigate the issue(s).

But it's not just vibration, is it? It's build quality/consistency and myriad other issues, none trivial.

Down-select on this vehicle was in 2010.

*checks calendar*
When was the last time you were in a tracked vehicle?
 
I'm not sure I can draw a line between that and a Carrier Strike Group either - are we going to risk our shiny flat tops in the South China Sea and if we are, then what's the difference between that and the Suwalki Gap?
As much as i think we should support/be seen to support Australia,it really is time for someone to say, 'you know what,give us 1 job to do and do it well.' end of.
 

Latest Threads

Top