FRES replace Challenger 2?

Discussion in 'RAC' started by LondonTankie, Jul 18, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. is it likely that this will happen in the future? i have been told by someone it is a posibility! what do you know?
  2. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    I'll be surprised if anything in the current FRES envelope can supply the firepower and armour required for the Challenger role.

    The only option I can see is that the MOD decides that MBT is not a required role anymore and hence those units currently in the MBT role will be kitted out with a FRES (or similar) with a bigger gun and some more armour as part of the 'growth' part of the FRES requirement.

    There are FRES sized vehicles with 120mm guns on then and some with enough armour, but don't think anything has both and has kept the weight low enough to be counted as FRES and not a MBT replacement.

  3. I wouldnt worry about that,at 16 id worry more about getting through phase one basic, though no doubt your experience of poncy officers :roll: will stand you in good stead
  4. I think FRES have enough to worry about without adding another variant onto the program, as far as the MoD are concerned FRES will come into service and there will still be Warrior and Challenger 2. There will more than likely be an upgrade to these fleets though.
  5. What is FRES?

    Been out of the loop for some time.
  6. Pie in the sky, Jam tomorrow, sort of thing. An excuse to 'study' lots and produce little, WRONG, nothing.

    Linky (1)

    (1) Search engines are over there --------> :wink:

  7. The One Size Fits All Concept.

    Just like Education, Health, and other things now in vogue in our public life.

    By the way, I believe the comment on the bottom of your submissions was attributable to TONKER, seek clarification from BWZ.
  8. You may well be right mate, it sound just like him.

    Dang I, Blast I, cassent go no faaster, youm knows I'm in zecond gear...
  9. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    It;s not quite a one size fits all, but originally the plan was that the vehicles should at least be fitted out with the same/similar kit to allow as much interoperability as possible. Although the way the MOD are handling the process this is probably goign to go out of the window as each of the 3 'vehicle' types will probably have a different integrator and so end up with different systems inplimented in different ways!!

    There will be several 'variants' of each 'vehicle', so Utility vehicle (which is the only vehicle with half a contract in place) will be made up of several varients covering the different roles, but all based on the same chassis/running gear. The logic being similar to that of the 43 variants (i.e. having everyone in the same vehicles, but different variants to enable the roles to be covered but if you have the option of robbing parts off one to get another going etc.)

  10. Anyone taking bets that the GDUK supplied vehicle will more than likely have problems installing the GDUK supplied BOWMAN :lol:
  11. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    This could be the interesting bit... if GDUK doesn't win the UVI contract, and say BAE do, the you would have BAE trying to integrate the GDUK Bowman system into a GDUK vehicle, without the benefit of any experience of having fitted the rest of the fleet with bowman....and that could be even funnier to watch.


  12. Nah, the contract is with GDUK to integrate BOWMAN into all vehicles, but from what's being said the Piranha V is looking favourite anyway.
  13. Yes,but it sounds more like, buying something that fits around (in a literal sense) Bowman, rather than Bowman being able to intergrate with whatever platform we end up with. Surely a better platform is desirable first, than any of the ancillary equipment fittings/placement etc?
  14. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    There is no contract currently for the Integration phase of FRES, the design of the electronics and suchlike is unknown, apart from defined bits (like BOWMAN having to included) so whoever is chosen as the Integrator will have to ensure that BOWMAN integrates with the rest of the electronic architecture, or have it as a standalone system installed by GDUK (which isn't the point of an integrated system). It won't be up to GDUK to modify BOWMAN to fit FRES it will be up to the FRES UVI to ensure that FRES can accept Bowman.

  15. What happens is that FRES will invite BATCIS (BOWMAN IPT) to meetings about the design of the new vehicles, BATCIS will be a stakeholder within the project, but they won't have anymore say than anyone else. Remember BOWMAN is just one part of the suite that needs to be fitted.

    What BATCIS can offer is advice on the vehicles being produced, such as 'by having the vehicle ready for BOWMAN it will save time, modifications and so on when it comes time for BATCIS to integrate it into the vehicle'.

    It's basic engineering practice, if IPT 'A' are purchasing a vehicle they will make sure they have other IPTs as stakeholders and work out the basic fit to minimise costly modifications, wasted time and reduction in space.