FRES 2: The Revenge aka MIV

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I think that's a tad unfair, most of the gaping equipment gaps are starting to be closed and even if strike is a dud the vehicles can be used productively elsewhere (Ajax > Scimitar recce role, Boxer > Mech units). Rome wasn't built in a day.

The only thing that isn't in the pipeline is something to replace 432 in close battlefield support roles (if indeed it needs replacing and not just removed from the orbat).
It's not at all.

There are some serious gaps in STRIKE. I'd start with sufficient logistical support and go from there to the fact that our interpretation of it is thin on the ground by comparison with other countries' versions - as the article shared by @smallbrownprivates relates.

As to the gaps - as @smallbrownprivates also notes, get used to them post-Covid-19.
 

Majorpain

War Hero
It's not at all.

There are some serious gaps in STRIKE. I'd start with sufficient logistical support and go from there to the fact that our interpretation of it is thin on the ground by comparison with other countries' versions - as the article shared by @smallbrownprivates relates.

As to the gaps - as @smallbrownprivates also notes, get used to them post-Covid-19.
I did read (and enjoy) Gabrielle's article today, I completely agree that Strike currently looks like it has more holes than Swiss cheese, but at the very least the Army is not fighting the last war and actually trying something new. As i said it could be reverted to something more traditional without much time and effort so it really doesn't bother me in that regard.

I would be careful predicting whats going to happen to budgets Post-Covid 19, the exact opposite might happen to what you expect!
 

NemoIII

War Hero
I would be careful predicting whats going to happen to budgets Post-Covid 19, the exact opposite might happen to what you expect!
Hopefully a proper SDSR that looks into the capabilities of the MOD. However I expect nothing more than Capbadge politics over actual output.
 
I did read (and enjoy) Gabrielle's article today, I completely agree that Strike currently looks like it has more holes than Swiss cheese, but at the very least the Army is not fighting the last war and actually trying something new. As i said it could be reverted to something more traditional without much time and effort so it really doesn't bother me in that regard.

I would be careful predicting whats going to happen to budgets Post-Covid 19, the exact opposite might happen to what you expect!
Said elsewhere; that depends on which way one pivots.
A. Continental/Europe/NATO/eFP against a Russia lashing out post fossil fuel/CV19 depression. Good for Army
B. Indian Ocean & SCS/US/part of a great power coalition stand off with China. Good for Navy.

My hunch is B, as if new trade ( and it's linked tax revenues) has to come from somewhere new to replace that huge amounts of dosh used in the last 9 weeks, that somewhere isn't likely to be Europe.

We'll likely try and do both and probably be shown lacking in short order
 
Said elsewhere; that depends on which way one pivots.
A. Continental/Europe/NATO/eFP against a Russia lashing out post fossil fuel/CV19 depression. Good for Army
B. Indian Ocean & SCS/US/part of a great power coalition stand off with China. Good for Navy.

My hunch is B, as if new trade ( and it's linked tax revenues) has to come from somewhere new to replace that huge amounts of dosh used in the last 9 weeks, that somewhere isn't likely to be Europe.

We'll likely try and do both and probably be shown lacking in short order
the new Cold War is with China, and the Army has missed that boat.

big cuts ahead for the Army. They will soon enough talk about the ‘good old days’ when they had 85,000 men.
 

NemoIII

War Hero
the new Cold War is with China, and the Army has missed that boat.

big cuts ahead for the Army. They will soon enough talk about the ‘good old days’ when they had 85,000 men.
But, but... what about the traditions?

Surely the cuts will have to come from the corps?

*Sarcasm*

Guarantee they cut a bigger proportion of CS/CSS than they do Combat Arms. Ignoring the fact we haven't got enough CS/CSS to start with.
 
 
 
 
There's much more to this than the two sides are talking about, and the news story actually skirts around a lot of the background. There's a thread somewhere on all of this.

The saga began when Canada made a routine press release expressing concern about the fate of certain Saudi Arabian human rights activists who had relatives in Canada. The latter fact was what gave Canada a particular interest in the situation.

The Saudis had been taking flack from a number of countries over their human rights record, and thought that this was a good opportunity to hit back by making an "example" out of Canada. However, they found that Canada had very limited trade with them, and so Saudi "sanctions" were toothless. Ultimately, the Saudis were made to look foolish because Canada just ignored them.

One of the few serious business contracts the Saudis had with Canada was an arms deal worth about $15 billion. The Saudis still wanted the arms however, so they weren't about to cancel the contract.

The present government in Ottawa will talk a fine line about the environment and human rights, but those principles don't extend to actually getting in the way of businesses making money exporting oil or arms. The environmentalists and human rights activists consider the Liberals to be more mercenary than the Conservatives in this regards. Trudeau is one of the most cynically hypocritical PMs in many years. Don't take that as a criticism by the way, I'm all in favour of cynical hypocrisy when it comes to exporting oil and arms, as there's a lot of money to be made there. However, this meant that Ottawa had no reason to want to cancel the contract either.

Then a series of vague news stories starting seeping out of Ottawa which seemed to indicate that the Saudis had come up with a brilliant plan. The Saudis were apparently still taking delivery of the arms, but had stopped paying for them. The government of Canada had guaranteed the exports, so it was the taxpayers rather than GD who were on the hook if the Saudis didn't pay.

More vague news stories were unclear as to whether GD stopped further delivery once the Saudis had got sufficiently in arrears that they were reaching the limit of GD's insurance coverage. The current story however indicates that Ottawa stopped signing export permits.

Then a few weeks ago there was an announcement that the Saudis had gotten over their fit of pique and were friends with Canada again. This may have been connected with the Saudis getting cold feet once they realised that their friends and protectors the Americans were distracted by their internal problems with COVID-19.

The current "transparency" in the renegotiated contract doesn't amount to anything substantial. I'm not surprised at this outcome. Canada had no interest in having a dispute with Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis had only been holding out on patching up differences because they were afraid of being seen to lose face. With the news being dominated by COVID-19, someone in the Saudi Arabian foreign ministry apparently decided to not waste a good crisis and it was time to put the issue to bed.

There was another arms contract with another Canadian company for a different sort of armoured vehicle which were used by the Saudi internal security forces. Complaints by human rights groups about how the vehicles were being used to suppress human rights, or more accurately, to put down Shias kicking off in eastern Saudi Arabia, were "investigated" by Ottawa who said "nothing to see here" and swept it under the rug. There's a pretty big pile building up there.
 
But, but... what about the traditions?
that would be the ‘traditions’ that were magic’d out of thin air when the 87th Regiment of Foot was renamed the 1st Loamshires back in the 1880’s?

still waiting for any Army General to explain why late shoo ins with numbers like the Parachute Regiment seem to manage just fine with a number and a lack of centuries of faux ‘tradition’.
 
Last edited:
That blog post is very good.
What's currently quite amusing is that Nicholas Drummond's website uklandpower that wouldn't publish the article critical of STRIKE has now pushed out a puff piece with full superlatives on the historical imperatives of why boxer must have a cockerill DF turret and be called a tank destroyer/infantry assault gun.

It's all to do with what the Roman Legions did apparently!

 
What's currently quite amusing is that Nicholas Drummond's website uklandpower that wouldn't publish the article critical of STRIKE has now pushed out a puff piece with full superlatives on the historical imperatives of why boxer must have a cockerill DF turret and be called a tank destroyer/infantry assault gun.

It's all to do with what the Roman Legions did apparently!

Utter bollocks.
 
It's rewriting history to justify having some infantry carriers fitted with a gun capable of neutralising strongpoints.
This is something that, post WW2, has usually been done by tanks, close support artillery in direct fire, or by air support.
Giving the infantry some bigger guns adds to the training and maintenance costs, but does not make up for a lack of tanks.
Pretending that a Boxer with a gun capable of neutralising strongpoints adds to capability completely misses the point that it's only deemed necessary by the lack of capability in tank numbers.
 

Latest Threads

Top