Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

Well thats 0 , 1, 2 and 4 seats in the rear quoted**


**Assuming 3 dismounts refferred to 1 of the turret crew dismounting
Don't confuse the different variants Ares can carry 4 who can be dismounted but not in the Armd Inf sense of the word. We are on track to receive 93 of these and the vehicles delivered to HCR so far are Ares.
 
Don't confuse the different variants Ares can carry 4 who can be dismounted but not in the Armd Inf sense of the word. We are on track to receive 93 of these and the vehicles delivered to HCR so far are Ares.

It was clearly stated as 4 Dismounts in AJAX - bit yes Its possible here AJAX was Ares and that does make sense
 
It was clearly stated as 4 Dismounts in AJAX - bit yes Its possible here AJAX was Ares and that does make sense

It doesn’t help that AJAX refers both to the family of vehicles, and the specific turreted variant.

But to be absolutely clear, you won’t get three in the back of the turreted one - I think there is a single jump seat for an operator (which I don’t think is part of the default manning plan) and that’s it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It doesn’t help that AJAX refers both to the family of vehicles, and the specific turreted variant.

But to be absolutely clear, you won’t get three in the back of the turreted one - I think there is a single jump seat for an operator (which I don’t think is part of the default manning plan) and that’s it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Question
Had they gone with a smaller turret ring* could they dispense with ARES in the Recce SQNS** by distributing the dismounts and associated equipment beween AJAX hulls. Or is there a reason ( other than no space in scimitar) the dismounted teams have there own troop on each sqn.




*Accepting the DF would need a bespoke hull top

**Not the Javelin teams ones thats differrent
 
Question
Had they gone with a smaller turret ring* could they dispense with ARES in the Recce SQNS** by distributing the dismounts and associated equipment beween AJAX hulls. Or is there a reason ( other than no space in scimitar) the dismounted teams have there own troop on each sqn.




*Accepting the DF would need a bespoke hull top

**Not the Javelin teams ones thats differrent

Not sure, but I’m pretty sure it could have been designed that way - although smaller turret ring wouldn’t have been the only change (or non-change I suppose) required.

I’m guessing it was assumed that our doctrine of using separate Sp Tps (as we did with CVR(T)) was assesses to be the best - it gives you a lot more flexibility to coalesce or disperse your support troopers to suit different tasks, and they have a tendency to want to lug some specialist kit with them.

Oh, and they also smell bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
Not sure, but I’m pretty sure it could have been designed that way - although smaller turret ring wouldn’t have been the only change (or non-change I suppose) required.

I’m guessing it was assumed that our doctrine of using separate Sp Tps (as we did with CVR(T)) was assesses to be the best - it gives you a lot more flexibility to coalesce or disperse your support troopers to suit different tasks, and they have a tendency to want to lug some specialist kit with them.

Oh, and they also smell bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Can't see that, even now, deleting big turrent and replacing it with flat plate or smaller turret would be a huge engineering challenge. Of course, the problem would be "Wtih what?" - see numberous previous threads.

Fragrant support troop is an interesting one. Original purpose was for them to mount night OPs while sabre troops rested (back in the days when night fighting was a challenge). Metamorphosed into assault pioneer types - which is fine until you consider the amount of stuff (mines, chainsaws, RCKs, explosives etc) they required and the small volume of Spartan. Especially if filled wiht the reservists who were supposed to turn up on promulgation of Queen's Order 2 (=mobilisation for Armageddon). Hence tendency of Spartan to have bloody great cage on roof. We looked a trailers when I was in Wolfenbuttel, but I can't recall that getting sorted before the wall came down.

At formation level then the problem with Sp Tp was getting it to where it was needed. Sqn frontage some 10km or more. Sp Tp moving in two 2 vehicle sections. Still has at least 5 km to move.

Has anyone asked me, an extra bod in back of a recce vehicle is a huge boon. Otherwise the commander is swanning about alone when dismounted to have a look round a corner. Also v useful to have someone watching rear (a la Luchs) with extra skills (and, in modern world I would argue) with a Javelin for opportunity targets. And of course if working as 2 vehicle sections the extra men bringing total to 8 would have massive boon on fatigue management.

Not sure that Sp Tp is actually that valuable. Sure in defence a few early, minor demolitions and (possibly) a dismounted ambush. In advance less benefit. (This may well be recce heresy, so if you do object please come back with evidence of what you can actually do with a Sp Tp, as opposed to what you could do with the bodies/kit/ability dispersed to every troop).
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Not sure, but I’m pretty sure it could have been designed that way - although smaller turret ring wouldn’t have been the only change (or non-change I suppose) required.

I’m guessing it was assumed that our doctrine of using separate Sp Tps (as we did with CVR(T)) was assesses to be the best - it gives you a lot more flexibility to coalesce or disperse your support troopers to suit different tasks, and they have a tendency to want to lug some specialist kit with them.

Oh, and they also smell bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can't beat a Humber Pig - Driver, Commander, two top cover sentries, 4 man team, dog handler, dog, two RUC coppers and a couple of civvy cleaners....
 
You can't beat a Humber Pig - Driver, Commander, two top cover sentries, 4 man team, dog handler, dog, two RUC coppers and a couple of civvy cleaners....
With Brimstone?
 
Drat! Foiled! It seems you can only raise issues with him if you live in his constituency.

Any Arrsers live in Bournemouth?
You can, SHOULD, write to him in his capacity as Committee Member, via/through your own MP.

Your own MP will be pleased to know someone knows who he is, and in submitting your letter upwards with his "endorsement", should ensure you receive back, a considered, comprehensive, reply.

Works for me anyway ;) .
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
Thread drift (before we do another lap of Brimstone, Wheels/tracts and WTF is the point of anti armour weapon on IFV).

A propos of elevating masts, their general desirability and notable absence from AJAX I think there may well be a simple and cheap(ish) retrofit option now available and that would make Mr Cummings happy.

Idea is a "tethered drone". i.e. a quad-rotor or similar flying at the end of a cable. The cable delivers power (from vehicle batteries) and receives sensor output. AI and all that bollox so it can fly itself above vehicle looking the other side of the hill / woods/ building etc. 15m would probs be enough.

Sensors I envisage being attached:
  • x1 and x8+ day TV
  • Ditto Thermal
  • Compass (so it and viewer know which way it's looking)
Not sure if they need stabilisiing - would have thought cheaper and easier to use software to sort image. So guess weight of drone some 5-10 kg, which seems doable.

Sits on turret when parked. Connected to internals through single socket through armour and thence to viewing screen.

If you wanted to get all gucci you would add laser designation - but I suspect stabilisation would be a major problem/cost.
 
Don’t be silly.

You can’t give Brimstone to civvy cleaners...

Weeeeell you say that, but...



And as Malkara wasted out we looked at sticking Swingfire on it. Originally it was to have four tubes on the back of it as well. Then we saw the bill for that, and the Treasury shit so many bricks they managed to build an entire housing estate. Then out came the 'Gap Hammer' and we lost the capacity until Swingfire appeared in service, about eight years later.
Of course this was actually the right thing to do in this case, as if we'd gone with the upgrade, then Swingfire wasn't ready so we'd have paid to upgrade the vehicle, but retired the launcher before the missile entered service.

Obviously Orange William should have filled the gap, but OW sort of fills me with a weird combination of 'That is f'kin awesome!' and 'What were they thinking?!'
 
You can't beat a Humber Pig - Driver, Commander, two top cover sentries, 4 man team, dog handler, dog, two RUC coppers and a couple of civvy cleaners....
Obviously Orange William should have filled the gap, but OW sort of fills me with a weird combination of 'That is f'kin awesome!' and 'What were they thinking?!'

Cant help but think that name would have gone down a treat fitted to the above
 
Can't see that, even now, deleting big turrent and replacing it with flat plate or smaller turret would be a huge engineering challenge. Of course, the problem would be "Wtih what?" - see numberous previous threads.

Fragrant support troop is an interesting one. Original purpose was for them to mount night OPs while sabre troops rested (back in the days when night fighting was a challenge). Metamorphosed into assault pioneer types - which is fine until you consider the amount of stuff (mines, chainsaws, RCKs, explosives etc) they required and the small volume of Spartan. Especially if filled wiht the reservists who were supposed to turn up on promulgation of Queen's Order 2 (=mobilisation for Armageddon). Hence tendency of Spartan to have bloody great cage on roof. We looked a trailers when I was in Wolfenbuttel, but I can't recall that getting sorted before the wall came down.

At formation level then the problem with Sp Tp was getting it to where it was needed. Sqn frontage some 10km or more. Sp Tp moving in two 2 vehicle sections. Still has at least 5 km to move.

Has anyone asked me, an extra bod in back of a recce vehicle is a huge boon. Otherwise the commander is swanning about alone when dismounted to have a look round a corner. Also v useful to have someone watching rear (a la Luchs) with extra skills (and, in modern world I would argue) with a Javelin for opportunity targets. And of course if working as 2 vehicle sections the extra men bringing total to 8 would have massive boon on fatigue management.

Not sure that Sp Tp is actually that valuable. Sure in defence a few early, minor demolitions and (possibly) a dismounted ambush. In advance less benefit. (This may well be recce heresy, so if you do object please come back with evidence of what you can actually do with a Sp Tp, as opposed to what you could do with the bodies/kit/ability dispersed to every troop).

I think there is value in both approaches, and they’re not mutually exclusive. I expect we’ll find having at least one in the back of AJAX will become non-negotiable when we really get to grips with how much workload is required in that vehicle.

I think Sp Tp does still have its place - the advent of AJAX means that recce by stealth is probably a thing of the past, and I would expect to see it used a bit more like US Cav Sqns (albeit without integrated ATGM...). That probably means lots of little ‘economy of force’ ops, whereby the Armd Cav might be expected to quickly seize and hold bits of ground for short periods of time - in which case being able to quickly drop off a Tp’s worth of dismounts with LAW, ATGM and snipers (whilst AJAX rattles itself into a favourable position of overwatch) would be invaluable. At this point, I’d highlight the experience of Inf Div recce regiments in WW2, in which the assault troops where thought to be invaluable in the typical tasks the regiments undertook (which more often than not, wasn’t actually recce) - indeed one CO of an Armd Recce Regiment (the type equipped with medium tanks) bemoaned the lack of such in his ORBAT, and the South Albertas could have really done with that sort of capability at Falaise.

Thinking ahead, there’s probably other tasks you might want Sp Tp to undertake - UxV operators maybe - in the future, so having a bunch of goons who aren’t wedded to their big expensive turreted box might be very handy.


Finally, I think this brings up a wider point:

When was the last time the RAC actually revisited its tactics - especially in recce? Apart from a brief aberration during HERRICK (when BRF Sqns we’re incorporated into the ORBAT), it’s been essentially unchanged since the seventies. AJAX will force a change - but as a mitigation, not by deliberate design. There have been countless papers written by nations who’ve had to employ recce in genuine warfighting ops (via the experience of 3ID on the road to Baghdad), which we seem to have studiously ignored. Likewise, some great work was done was Dstl about 10 years ago, which got at many of the questions being asked today by using real operational data and historical analysis, but I’ll bet that report is languishing on an electronic shelf somewhere, simply because it isn’t fashionable to do a literature review these days - not if you want to be known as an ‘innovator’ anyway...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Can't see that, even now, deleting big turrent and replacing it with flat plate or smaller turret would be a huge engineering challenge. Of course, the problem would be "Wtih what?" - see numberous previous threads.

Fragrant support troop is an interesting one. Original purpose was for them to mount night OPs while sabre troops rested (back in the days when night fighting was a challenge). Metamorphosed into assault pioneer types - which is fine until you consider the amount of stuff (mines, chainsaws, RCKs, explosives etc) they required and the small volume of Spartan. Especially if filled wiht the reservists who were supposed to turn up on promulgation of Queen's Order 2 (=mobilisation for Armageddon). Hence tendency of Spartan to have bloody great cage on roof. We looked a trailers when I was in Wolfenbuttel, but I can't recall that getting sorted before the wall came down.

At formation level then the problem with Sp Tp was getting it to where it was needed. Sqn frontage some 10km or more. Sp Tp moving in two 2 vehicle sections. Still has at least 5 km to move.

Has anyone asked me, an extra bod in back of a recce vehicle is a huge boon. Otherwise the commander is swanning about alone when dismounted to have a look round a corner. Also v useful to have someone watching rear (a la Luchs) with extra skills (and, in modern world I would argue) with a Javelin for opportunity targets. And of course if working as 2 vehicle sections the extra men bringing total to 8 would have massive boon on fatigue management.

Not sure that Sp Tp is actually that valuable. Sure in defence a few early, minor demolitions and (possibly) a dismounted ambush. In advance less benefit. (This may well be recce heresy, so if you do object please come back with evidence of what you can actually do with a Sp Tp, as opposed to what you could do with the bodies/kit/ability dispersed to every troop).


We played with a 5 vehicle javelin screen a few years ago. Every spartan had 2 guys in the back with 3 missiles and we would kick them out for a snap shot or we would set up a screen. Seemed to work really well then someone else came In and it was all change again. 5 guys living off a spartan was emotional.

04370107-8d53-4a37-a29d-f5d9f55f93b7.jpg
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
I think on that one the correct response would be:
”The current operational capability of the British Army is not the sort of thing that should be discussed in a publicly broadcast meeting. I will arrange to have the information passed to the minister through proper channels after the meeting.”
Not sure I agree - it smacks of obfuscation. Any FSB chap hanging around The Ram can earwig conversations about vehicle serviceability whilst on his way to photograph Salisbury Cathedral so I don't think fleet numbers are super-classified.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
Likewise, some great work was done was Dstl about 10 years ago, which got at many of the questions being asked today by using real operational data and historical analysis, but I’ll bet that report is languishing on an electronic shelf somewhere, simply because it isn’t fashionable to do a literature review these days - not if you want to be known as an ‘innovator’ anyway...

A friend and former colleague at Dstl (he's still there, I left for greener pastures) is conducting a comprehensive literature review of what's been written in his field over the last quarter-century.

From the reactions some evinced within his organisation, he'll need to be walking around in sackcloth and ashes, ringing a bell while intoning "Unclean! Unclean!"

Apparently it's just not done to ask "has anyone looked at this question before?"
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
With Brimstone?
I think I can guarantee that two West Belfast civvy cleaners can cause more damage and spread more fear than Brimstone....
 


Don't worry, its a 'compact' turret...

It's often said there are no new ideas.

Spartan MCT always got killed off quickly in wargames - having a light armoured vehicle sat statically a maximum of 1,950m from red tanks whilst it conducted a MCLOS engagement (which is usually a minimum of 15-20 seconds from launch) tended not to be a recipe for longevity...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Latest Threads

Top