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.

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
The point of armoured recce is to provide as close as possible to the old cavalry experience to the posh nobs of the Blues & Royals, and that’s it. Everyone knows it. All of it could be deleted with no loss in warfighting capability. If there are choices to be made it should be first on the chopping block to free up cash and manpower for something actually useful.
I won't bother replying, not least because in these challenging times I would not want to be the one to allow facts to penetrate your prejudiced and ill-informed defence mechanisms.

But it your really want to find something to delete why not light role infantry?
 

Bob65

War Hero
But it your really want to find something to delete why not light role infantry?

I would certainly merge the 5 under-strength Guards regiments into a single regiment called simply The Guards with 3 full strength battalions. And merge all the SPIB “battalions”, they can deploy as half-battalions perfectly well without artificially inflating battalion numbers. And there’s no reason The Rifles should be any larger than say PWRR. That do you for starters?
 
I won't bother replying, not least because in these challenging times I would not want to be the one to allow facts to penetrate your prejudiced and ill-informed defence mechanisms.

But it your really want to find something to delete why not light role infantry?

Id argue reduce - but not delete
3 For 16 Bde 2 for 3CDO brigade** 2 Ceremonial and another 5 or 6 pooled into a large inf bde to do odd jobs Like FI - Belize Cyprus etc - So around 22 Battalions in total Vs the current 30 with 22 Light role



** - Because if its going to keep the Arty Eng etc whilst the booties themselves specialise in raiding then it makes sense to assighn LR Inf and use it as a Mountain / Arctic /Amphib.
 
I won't bother replying, not least because in these challenging times I would not want to be the one to allow facts to penetrate your prejudiced and ill-informed defence mechanisms.

But it your really want to find something to delete why not light role infantry?

Light role inf are your BCRs for when 1SG have a bad day in their Mastiffs...
 

gafkiwi

War Hero
Spot on.
For sure the mast is going to have to carry a seasonable payload, as you pointed out. IT should be possible prodesign captive drone able to do that, although of course that's going to chew through power, meaning more batteries or small genny running much of time..
Whatever heignty you pickfor the moas, the laws of Sod and Murphy will get in way. IT's going to have, I think, 3 main roles.
(1) Long term OP. What CVR(T) would have t do dismounted from wood edge or in barn roof, an elevated sensor would enable the vehicle to do from deeper in woods or inside/next to barn.
(2) Turret down viewing prior to crossing bound. As you say, full extension not required. Likely to be useful on FIBUA too
(3) Increasing eyes available and covering other arcs while on move from low position. Luchs had a 2nd driver facing rear - for recce the enemy is 360 degrees

Don't see that enabling a very rapid retraction is much of an engineering challenge. Suspect it would have to be gimballed in hull to enable lofty views - adds cost (more sensors) but probs massively increases utility.
The Mast mounted system on the Fennek seems to be pretty effective. Deploys and drops with reasonable speed and looks to have reasonable height for what it is. The mast head can also be dismounted and deployed remotely if required. It would make sense for such a vehicle to also have a smaller drone for individual/troop security/recce tasks but operating under a wider manned/drone ISTAR umbrella with the higher level capabilities. If the mast had the ability to mark or designate targets for the likes of long range ATGW's it would mean the vehicles for the most part could have anti armor protection from a weapon system held at troop or higher level.
 
Last edited:

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
Light role inf are your BCRs for when 1SG have a bad day in their Mastiffs...
OR bulldogs - but as they're Lt Role they are unfamiliar with working at pace of lumbering 432. And why reinforce failure?
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
I would certainly merge the 5 under-strength Guards regiments into a single regiment called simply The Guards with 3 full strength battalions. And merge all the SPIB “battalions”, they can deploy as half-battalions perfectly well without artificially inflating battalion numbers. And there’s no reason The Rifles should be any larger than say PWRR. That do you for starters?
I think my preferred option would be:
(1) Pair all Boxer and WR Bns (i.e. 2 Bns share same kit and role - thus generating the ability to sustain lengthy deployments). (doing same for RAC makes sense too. (NOTE NOT the HQs, they get trickle posted for continuity)
(2) Up the Boxer buy to max possible, and put any spare in that. again paired. This would include Boxering the public duties Bns
(3) Look really hard at the need for Para, with ball in their court to prove that "air assault" is actually (a) viable and (b) something that they are scaled to do.
(4) Some of the leftover when £ constraint limits extra Boxer could, I suppose, be kept as inf to dig in and die - cf the " Inf Div war role. Although I suspect the ammo scales and defence stores required would stretch definition of "light" to places it don'r belong.

I would also start PR bombardment asking whether Army is big enough etc... and resolve the problem of the reserves. That I think might yield roles for the county cap badges ( I would dismember the big regiments and go back to counties/ two counties)
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Git. It took 20 second's to load the tweet, so I was getting ready to grab my archive files...

Well played.

562-5627447_grin-smiley-clipart-best-ecstatic-emoji-png-download.png
 
The Mast mounted system on the Fennek seems to be pretty effective. Deploys and drops with reasonable speed and looks to have reasonable height for what it is. The mast head can also be dismounted and deployed remotely if required. It would make sense for such a vehicle to also have a smaller drone for individual/troop security/recce tasks but operating under a wider manned/drone ISTAR umbrella with the higher level capabilities. If the mast had the ability to mark or designate targets for the likes of long range ATGW's it would mean the vehicles for the most part could have anti armor protection from a weapon system held at troop or higher level.

yes, but can it fight previous generations MBTs as Ajax is touted to be able to?
 

gafkiwi

War Hero
yes, but can it fight previous generations MBTs as Ajax is touted to be able to?
The post doesn't have anything to do with AJAX or its perceived capabilities. It just discussing the fact there are some reasonably flexible compact mast mounted electro/optic systems, nothing more.
 
The post doesn't have anything to do with AJAX or its perceived capabilities. It just discussing the fact there are some reasonably flexible compact mast mounted electro/optic systems, nothing more.

we will not bother with Optronic masts, too technical, died a death with TRACER, the only answer they want to hear is ‘tank’.

1992..... were still ‘to be determined’

Dr. David Clark : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent progress has been made on the planned procurement of a new range of light armoured vehicles ; and if he will make a statement.


Mr. Aitken : Our future light armoured vehicle programme is still in its early stages. Feasibility studies are currently being carried out by three consortia for a new tactical reconnaissance armoured combat vehicle– TRACER. Our requirements and procurement strategies for other future vehicles have yet to be determined.
 
I think my preferred option would be:
(1) Pair all Boxer and WR Bns (i.e. 2 Bns share same kit and role - thus generating the ability to sustain lengthy deployments). (doing same for RAC makes sense too. (NOTE NOT the HQs, they get trickle posted for continuity)
(2) Up the Boxer buy to max possible, and put any spare in that. again paired. This would include Boxering the public duties Bns
(3) Look really hard at the need for Para, with ball in their court to prove that "air assault" is actually (a) viable and (b) something that they are scaled to do.
(4) Some of the leftover when £ constraint limits extra Boxer could, I suppose, be kept as inf to dig in and die - cf the " Inf Div war role. Although I suspect the ammo scales and defence stores required would stretch definition of "light" to places it don'r belong.

I would also start PR bombardment asking whether Army is big enough etc... and resolve the problem of the reserves. That I think might yield roles for the county cap badges ( I would dismember the big regiments and go back to counties/ two counties)

but the money into giving the combat forces (2 Armd Inf Bdes, 2 Strike Bdes and Air Aslts Bde) what they need and if that means cutting the non-essential so be it
 
but the money into giving the combat forces (2 Armd Inf Bdes, 2 Strike Bdes and Air Aslts Bde) what they need and if that means cutting the non-essential so be it

Armoured? Why? To what purpose?
Strike Brigades? Time for the foolish idea to die a death before it dies a death on a battlefield
Air Assault? There’s the badger.... if you can’t deploy forces in real time, they’re just window dressing.

but no, the Arny seems determined at all costs, to rebuild the forces needed to refight WW3 - lots of tanks and tracked APCs - against the Russian in northern europe.
 
Armoured? Why? To what purpose?
Strike Brigades? Time for the foolish idea to die a death before it dies a death on a battlefield
Air Assault? There’s the badger.... if you can’t deploy forces in real time, they’re just window dressing.

but no, the Arny seems determined at all costs, to rebuild the forces needed to refight WW3 - lots of tanks and tracked APCs - against the Russian in northern europe.

How are air assault forces going to employ that autoloader you kept going on about?
 

Latest Threads

Top