Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

FRES 2: The Revenge aka MIV

The references to tracked armour breaking down more often than wheeled is frankly cobblers.
We had, in BAOR times, nothing wheeled that came near Chieftain/ Challenger 1 in terms of weight.

The breakpoint for "we could be on wheels or tracks" has moved up a bit - used to be in the 20-ton range, now moving upwards (30-ton or more, but I'd want to do some trials before I was sure of a 40-ton 8x8)

Below that... what was comparable mobility like for CVR(W) and CVR(T)? Would you move a Scimitar as fast and far on tracks, as you would a Fox? All the data I've seen suggests that even at equivalent tonnage, you get much more operational mobility (move 400 miles and see how long it takes to bring in the strays and breakdowns) on wheels than on tracks.
 
But where on earth are we expecting to ( have to) do a 400km road march?
Even in the case of the South Africans, I suspect their road moves were more to do with a lack of railways, rather than tracked armour breaking more often?

400km from any port ( or airport) on earth still leaves large swaythes of land unreachable.
And 400km is an awful lot of road to patrol and protect against interdiction.
 
But where on earth are we expecting to ( have to) do a 400km road march?

CGS says that's the whole point of the Strike Brigades, so I'm guessing Africa.

Who are we to doubt the wisdom of CGS?

Suggestions that it's a "me too! be relevant!" reaction to the French intervention in Mali are not to be voiced within earshot of AHQ Andover...
 
CGS says that's the whole point of the Strike Brigades, so I'm guessing Africa.

Who are we to doubt the wisdom of CGS?

Suggestions that it's a "me too! be relevant!" reaction to the French intervention in Mali are not to be voiced within earshot of AHQ Andover...
Africa is where we expect to be fighting AQ clones and similar though isn't it?
 
Didn't we effectively knacker German mobility after D day by smashing the railway lines, leaving roads as the main means of transport for him, putting his logs under great strain?
Could it happen to us now ? Would wheels then become a substantial part of offensive/defensive mobility effort ?
Just curious.
 
Look at the Marches the Stryker Bdes have done in Europe fairly regularly.
The UK army can't drive to war in the same way, it focuses more on trains and tank transporters for heavy stuff.
If you want depressing, watch the French drive back to home barracks from Salisbury plain, in small packets without flinching.

We are fixable with our current fleet, less so with MIV. Just because war in Europe isn't supposed to happen, doesn't mean preparing for aspects of it are wasted.
 
40 tonnes on wheels? That's a lorry isn't it?

Question left open: do I mean that of course it should work, driving them from Ireland to Turkey on a timetable works for civvies, or do I mean that it's a lorry, not an AFV?
 
I'm dubious about the capabilities of MIV and what it's intended purpose is.

I was dragged along to a wargaming MIV trial. Facing the imaginary Russians, we inititially lost by a margin then won when the odds were stacked in our favour.

When MIV battleground were facing the Russian shock army in one scenario, we won resolutely. Fantastic, however we won because we had imaginary apaches with us, an extensive minefield and literally every bloke was armed with a javelin. In that scenario, we may as well have used landrover. But the success was credited to MIV...

I'm armoured infantry. I want something that can fight a bmp3 on an equal footing. Or, I want something cheap and cheerful that gets me to the start line.

I think the MIV could be good. I just don't want it filling the gap where real armour should fill. Now where's my bloody warrior upgrade?!
 
Perhaps the plan is to put infantry into a 40ft container, on an artic.
That would come in about 35-40 tons, and be able to do up to 500km on a tank of diesel.

Not very armoured, though.
 
Last edited:
The bit with MIV that lots (like Owen) mention but tends to get overlooked is the comms and fires needed
It is presented as a network that spreads over a particular area, identifies and concentrates effects where needed.
It's armour and capabilities should allow it to do some stuff, but fundamentally if a big tank "boy" comes, it runs away. Some of the NTC exercises the US stryker brigades have done is quite iluminating, for example, keeping up with tanks is a challenge

Agreed, if one were less picky about casualties, a group of 4x4s with good comms could do the same
 
Agreed, if one were less picky about casualties, a group of 4x4s with good comms could do the same

Or a bunch of, ooh, M-151 MUTTs with TOW missile launchers. The US solution from 1980-something. Shoot, and scoot to the next hedge line.

It strikes me [sic] that a lot of this concept is being predicated on being able to call down fire. Great if you've assets enough to smite from on high/afar. However, the overwatch version of Ajax was cut for cost reasons (that's our much-vaunted 'medium' capability). We've also hollowed-out or overtly neglected our heavy artillery. How many upgraded Apaches will we be getting and where's that confirmation of orders for the rest of the F-35s? The bit that's missing is the organic capability.

It's a dangerous, even deluded game we're playing here. War's always dangerous, but we're contriving by ourselves to make it even more so.
 
The bit with MIV that lots (like Owen) mention but tends to get overlooked is the comms and fires needed
It is presented as a network that spreads over a particular area, identifies and concentrates effects where needed.
It's armour and capabilities should allow it to do some stuff, but fundamentally if a big tank "boy" comes, it runs away. Some of the NTC exercises the US stryker brigades have done is quite iluminating, for example, keeping up with tanks is a challenge

Agreed, if one were less picky about casualties, a group of 4x4s with good comms could do the same

It is telling to me that the Russians are using that sort of approach right now in Ukraine using a shedload of COTS; and their plans for the future are all about putting that kit on a MBT. That is, after all, what Armata is all about. Might not be as advanced as what we could do but they have something in place right now and are working on the next gen while all the British Army has is Powerpoint.
 
It is telling to me that the Russians are using that sort of approach right now in Ukraine using a shedload of COTS; and their plans for the future are all about putting that kit on a MBT. That is, after all, what Armata is all about. Might not be as advanced as what we could do but they have something in place right now and are working on the next gen while all the British Army has is Powerpoint.

Which approach, please? The network effect? Or upgraded MBTs?
 

New posts

Top