CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

It's also a good way to almost guarantee repeat customers, send an old hull in, get a new upgraded one back.
It's actually what the USA does for it's own troops, they backload old & outdated eqpt and fix & upgrade & apply latest Mods then return them to troops rotating the fleet as you go.

We looked at their place in Luxemborg during the initial phase of WFM TFSU(G) and all were very impressed, no budget to do that of course.
 
It's "medium armour" according to the "Strike Handbook", with the same mission (destruction of the enemy by offensive action) and roles (shock action, overwatch, close combat in conjunction with infantry...) as Challenger 2...

That doesn't make it a tank, it just means folk are being told to use it as one...
I know it was in relation to the journo comment
 
It's actually what the USA does for it's own troops, they backload old & outdated eqpt and fix & upgrade & apply latest Mods then return them to troops rotating the fleet as you go.

We looked at their place in Luxemborg during the initial phase of WFM TFSU(G) and all were very impressed, no budget to do that of course.

Key word being upgrade
 
It's "medium armour" according to the "Strike Handbook", with the same mission (destruction of the enemy by offensive action) and roles (shock action, overwatch, close combat in conjunction with infantry...) as Challenger 2...

That doesn't make it a tank, it just means folk are being told to use it as one...

As has been pointed out on the Ajax thread, it actually appears to have quite a lot of armour for its type, and the 40mm is quite a deadly piece of kit. With the sensors she's carrying she'd be quite lethal agaisnt her intended opponents. So against 3rd world enemies (which I believe the Strike concept was meant to face off against) it does appear to be able to act as a tank. So not as entirely stupid as many make it sound.

Of course, you may have many many concerns and questions about 'Strike', and from an AFV design point the 'tank' requirements may have buggered the 'recce' part of the requirements. But the logic is sound, it just seems implementation is a bit fouled. Physics tends to do that to tank designs, especially ones that are a bit ill defined or try to spread themselves too widely.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
As has been pointed out on the Ajax thread, it actually appears to have quite a lot of armour for its type, and the 40mm is quite a deadly piece of kit. With the sensors she's carrying she'd be quite lethal agaisnt her intended opponents. So against 3rd world enemies (which I believe the Strike concept was meant to face off against) it does appear to be able to act as a tank. So not as entirely stupid as many make it sound.

Of course, you may have many many concerns and questions about 'Strike', and from an AFV design point the 'tank' requirements may have buggered the 'recce' part of the requirements. But the logic is sound, it just seems implementation is a bit fouled. Physics tends to do that to tank designs, especially ones that are a bit ill defined or try to spread themselves too widely.
Strike is dead, is it not?
 
Strike is dead, is it not?

No clue. Not my area. Maybe someone can tell me what Strike is?
But I can see how it all came about quite easily, and on paper where you get to ignore physics it makes a lot of sense.

But hopefully Ajax will be and Ex-AFV, with its tracks nailed to the ground (likely the only ay you can keep the hull parts togetehr... honking great big nails).
 

Majorpain

War Hero
Christ, people must be going in to work and not know what they're doing from day to day.

What a cake and árse party.
Unfortunately that's what happens when you bet a large % of procurement funds on a vehicle that ends up having serious problems. The basic structure of future soldier (Heavy, Mech, Light) is pretty sound, its just needs some tinkering to get the best out of it, especially logistics side which has been neglected for last 20 years.

Nothing wrong with experimentation and getting feedback off the troops.
 
Last edited:

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Unfortunately that's what happens when you bet a large % of procurement funds on a vehicle that ends up having serious problems. The basic structure of future soldier (Heavy, Mech, Light) is pretty sound, its just needs some tinkering to get the best out of it, especially logistics side which has been neglected for last 20 years.

Nothing wrong with experimentation and getting feedback off the troops.
Yes, but several decades of it?!
 
Nothing wrong with experimentation and getting feedback off the troops.
True enough, but how much is really being done and getting fed back into procurement?
Strike could have been tested with Mastiff. If it’s too heavy/insufficiently mobile take the armour packs off to simulate a more capable vehicle.
Ajax is condemned for its size, but that could have been tested by mocking up a few Warriors and running recce roles with those.

Were either of these experiments actually done?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
True enough, but how much is really being done and getting fed back into procurement?
Strike could have been tested with Mastiff. If it’s too heavy/insufficiently mobile take the armour packs off to simulate a more capable vehicle.
Ajax is condemned for its size, but that could have been tested by mocking up a few Warriors and running recce roles with those.

Were either of these experiments actually done?
Strike was little more than a cobbled-together 'What the hell can we do next?' concept. Light-and-agile-and-everything has given us... Rangers.

Was there even time to test a concept that existed briefly on paper/PowerPoint?
 
Strike was little more than a cobbled-together 'What the hell can we do next?' concept. Light-and-agile-and-everything has given us... Rangers.

Was there even time to test a concept that existed briefly on paper/PowerPoint?

Strike Bdes were a viable strategy (in addition to Armd Inf Bdes), battle proven by other countries over years.

Strike to allow divisional manoeuvre was questionable.

Where Strike fell down is they had to get Ajax. Why were they getting Ajax - because it was already planned!. They were already planned because of the Armd Bdes, when the Armd Bdes became Armd Inf Bdes they no longer needed the same quantity of Ajax….. hence Ajax to “enable” Strike.

Of course, by Ajax “enabling” Strike (due to being tracked), the Strike Bdes couldn’t actually do Strike as MIV would be outgunned and the Ajax couldn’t keep up in strategic or operational manoeuvre.

Fast forward to ABCTs, MIV will remain outgunned (as an APC with a GMG/HMG) and will not have the level of tactical manoeuvre of CR3 or Ajax.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Strike Bdes were a viable strategy (in addition to Armd Inf Bdes), battle proven by other countries over years.

Strike to allow divisional manoeuvre was questionable.

Where Strike fell down is they had to get Ajax. Why were they getting Ajax - because it was already planned!. They were already planned because of the Armd Bdes, when the Armd Bdes became Armd Inf Bdes they no longer needed the same quantity of Ajax….. hence Ajax to “enable” Strike.

Of course, by Ajax “enabling” Strike (due to being tracked), the Strike Bdes couldn’t actually do Strike as MIV would be outgunned and the Ajax couldn’t keep up in strategic or operational manoeuvre.

Fast forward to ABCTs, MIV will remain outgunned (as an APC with a GMG/HMG) and will not have the level of tactical manoeuvre of CR3 or Ajax.
Yes, but our Strike was rather lighter than, say, the US interpretation.

That was even before you got to what we do with Ajax.

We're a mess. But that's not news.
 

Majorpain

War Hero
Yes, but several decades of it?!
In 20 years will ground UAV's still look like this?
1642162194248.png

Or will they look like this?
1642162162487.png
 

potter

Old-Salt
Yes, but our Strike was rather lighter than, say, the US interpretation.

That was even before you got to what we do with Ajax.

We're a mess. But that's not news.
Of course, one way to hide a mess is to cover it with a description that could mean anything to anybody.

In a completely unrelated question, can anyone explain what a "Deep Recce Strike BCT" is?
 

Latest Threads

Top