This is a discussion on FRES Programme - British Army within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Do you think the UK would be able to send a battlegroup as proposed by when it only has one ...
Do you think the UK would be able to send a battlegroup as proposed by when it only has one heavy standing brigade? Sending a full bn of armour and mech inf + supporting assets would mean that you send the whole of your active heavy forces. This is not going to be possible.
So with one heavy brigade it comes down to a bn+ sized (max.) unit with supporting assets.
Not what I would call sufficient if the UK ever wants to be able to do an OIF like operation again.
Do you think the UK would be able to send a battlegroup as proposed by when it only has one heavy standing brigade? Sending a full bn of armour and mech inf + supporting assets would mean that you send the whole of your active heavy forces. This is not going to be possible.
So with one heavy brigade it comes down to a bn+ sized (max.) unit with supporting assets.
Not what I would call sufficient if the UK ever wants to be able to do an OIF like operation again.
It all depends on how the restructure is structured, we could quite easily see the Armed forces (army and airforce) restructured into 4 deployable units (to allow the 6 on 18 off pace) plus SF (and SFSG) and then the Royal Marines and FAA as additionally deployable elements
Right but that wouldn't make the UK able to deploy a heavy task force like they did in OIF to kick in the door. You can't deploy a heavy brigade if the only heavy unit you have is one brigade strong.
Right but that wouldn't make the UK able to deploy a heavy task force like they did in OIF to kick in the door. You can't deploy a heavy brigade if the only heavy unit you have is one brigade strong.
Waylander, perhaps Germany could add a few Brigades for our mutual defence?
Taking into consideration the UK's inevitable withdrawal from Germany (anticipated loss of a heavy armoured brigade) and realignment to a more agile deployable force making use of the latest technology (UCAV's) and incorporating lessons learnt from Iraq/A-Stan (increasing battalion sizes from a 600 to 750 head count), the reduction in heavy armour is inevitable. The old BAOR concept is long dead as a result of the demise of the Soviet Union and arrival of new Eastern NATO members. Poland should be able to step-up and fill the void left by the departing UK garrison. If you look at all the shooting wars the UK has got in since WWII, most have involved light/medium forces, the only exception being GWI & II.
If the UK focuses on home defence and expeditionary warfare built around the QE's then heavy tracked weapons will make way for medium tracked systems supplemented by wheeled MRAP's. The one lesson taken from A-Stan by the British is a wheeled FRES is no longer an option, it has to be tracked. Hopefully the new FRES SV will evolve in limited numbers providing recce, in-direct and direct-fire support to limited numbers of upgraded infantry carrying Warriors. Heavy armour / MLRS & AS90 will be reduced to a single heavy brigade, the spare infantry/artillery/armoured regiments will be amalgamated or re-rolled to light/medium force assets capable of being deployed by the operational ARG or C17/A400 strategic lift.
A medium force, assuming direct/in-direct fire capabilities are embedded, could be deployed to a GWI & II scenario if supported by Apache. The latter represents the primary tank killer, the former the primary means of holding ground. A FRES 105mm or 120mm armed platform ticks all the boxes if operating in conjunction with Apache and CAS (hopefully F35B).
The UK will specialise, no longer try and be all things to all men.
The UK has just invested in upgraded (engine, transmission, suspension, armour) Spartan hulls and incorporated a Scimitar turrets naming it CVRT II. Cost a mere 30 million for 58 vehicle upgrades, some already operational in Afghanistan. The new vehicle provides the same off road ability as CVRT I but with more comfort and space.
When you look at the FRES SV and associated costs for the demo vehicles alone, the UK could have simply built a recce regiments quota of upgraded Spartan hulls and fitted them with either the new Warrior 40mm stabalised turret, the one proposed for FRES SV or even a LAV turret? Job done at a fraction of the cost. Incorporate Super Bainite armour and you end up with vehicle which remains current, is known to the army (training/maintenance) and can be produced in the UK now rather than waiting until the next decade.
And while not doing that, but pressing on with the FRES-SV, we're set to scrap lots of Warriors for lack of money to upgrade them, when some could be upgraded to heavy recce vehicles for anywhere that Scimitar II is too light for, at a fraction of the cost of FRES-SV, & between 'em meet our needs for many years to come.
And while not doing that, but pressing on with the FRES-SV, we're set to scrap lots of Warriors for lack of money to upgrade them, when some could be upgraded to heavy recce vehicles for anywhere that Scimitar II is too light for, at a fraction of the cost of FRES-SV, & between 'em meet our needs for many years to come.
The argument against upgraded Warrior being used as a force recce asset was one of weight, which is crazy considering the final fully up-armoured FRES SV will end up about the same. Plus the US use Bradley as a force recce asset and don't have a problem.
The new multi-role deployable brigade structure (not including 3 Commando and 16AA) comprising Challenger II, Warrior and FRES SV will have to be scaled based on restrictive budgets. I can see two being kept at high readiness with a full compliment of armour/artillery/engineering assets and the other three having a 'B' level equipment scales allowing them to remain current (enough vehicles for training), allowing them to step-up and replace the man-power of what ever fully deployed brigade is on active service utilising what ever kit is deployed in theatre. The UK still has a sizable contingent of up-armoured and fully refurbished bulldogs, these are practically brand new and could be used to offset the lack of upgraded Warriors in 'b' scale battalions.
Also what is the UK going to do with all those nearly new Warthogs post 2015? The RM are happy with Viking and plan to buy more MKII's. They could transfer them to the Falklands garrison, ideal for use there and would provide the Island's with an APC capable of going anywhere in support of the resident infantry unit/local defense force. Now the decision to drill for oil is practically a done deal commitment to the islands defence will need upgrading to keep the sabre rattlers quiet.
So, that's your stabilised 40 CTA armed turret and armour updates. Good news of sorts I think
Ian
Very good news, LM now have both the FRES SV and the Warrior upgrade in the bag. So far they have delivered on all ahead of schedule within budget.
To me this is the most important contract, simply because Warrior is so versatile and is seen in more operational theatres than any other tracked vehicle currently in UK service (Afghanistan, Iraq, GWI, Bosnia). The new 40mm has three times the hitting power of the old RARDEN and in the airburst mode will provide excellent anti-personnel firepower in the asymmetrical environment.
The question is will FRES SV be binned and they simply mount the upgraded turret on a CVRT Mrk II new build chassis? This would throw BAE a consolatory bone as they are building the new larger Mrk II chassis fitted with RARDEN for Afghanistan right now, add the LM turret and you have a pretty sound recce vehicle (already with upgraded powertrain, suspension, thermal images) with the tooling to build already in place across the UK, this would be cheaper than buying ASCOD. Plus crew transition training would be easier beacuse the vehicle is already a known entity at Bovington.
Very good news, LM now have both the FRES SV and the Warrior upgrade in the bag. So far they have delivered on all ahead of schedule within budget.
To me this is the most important contract, simply because Warrior is so versatile and is seen in more operational theatres than any other tracked vehicle currently in UK service (Afghanistan, Iraq, GWI, Bosnia). The new 40mm has three times the hitting power of the old RARDEN and in the airburst mode will provide excellent anti-personnel firepower in the asymmetrical environment.
The question is will FRES SV be binned and they simply mount the upgraded turret on a CVRT Mrk II new build chassis? This would throw BAE a consolatory bone as they are building the new larger Mrk II chassis fitted with RARDEN for Afghanistan right now, add the LM turret and you have a pretty sound recce vehicle (already with upgraded powertrain, suspension, thermal images) with the tooling to build already in place across the UK, this would be cheaper than buying ASCOD. Plus crew transition training would be easier beacuse the vehicle is already a known entity at Bovington.
Exactly - we have lots of Warrior and they work. More buffs, more firepower, everyone's a winner. It's ridiculous that as much money has been spent on FRES so far as this will cost. CVRTII with the CTA? Yeah, put me down for some of that. FRES SV appears to weigh as much all up as an early T-72 might - ie, a lot.
The recent trend of vehicle updates being executed in a timely fashion, on budget and delivering satisfactory performance is most welcome.
IIRC the Warrior update programme has been reduced in numbers to the point where there will be enough spare vehicles to cover the expected numbers of FRES-SV scouts to be bought.
The scope for binning the FRES SV scout variant in favour of a recce Warrior is obvious. Same production line as the IFV upgrades, same turret. Should save a fortune. The army gets the heavy recce it wants, at lower cost & with commonality with its IFVs. LM now has the whole deal, so won't be too unhappy, & since its turret is now the standard, will get to make any we want for fitting to other hulls, e.g. CVRT II.
IIRC the Warrior update programme has been reduced in numbers to the point where there will be enough spare vehicles to cover the expected numbers of FRES-SV scouts to be bought.
The scope for binning the FRES SV scout variant in favour of a recce Warrior is obvious. Same production line as the IFV upgrades, same turret. Should save a fortune. The army gets the heavy recce it wants, at lower cost & with commonality with its IFVs. LM now has the whole deal, so won't be too unhappy, & since its turret is now the standard, will get to make any we want for fitting to other hulls, e.g. CVRT II.
Not sure the turret is standard, Warrior is a rebuild and uparmouring of the existing unit, FRES SV was a new design. The critical issue is the size of the turret ring, I understand ASCOD is larger than Warrior. So you could use remodeled Warrior turrets on a CVRT Mrk II, but not the new build one destined for ASCOD as far as understand.
Spare Warrior hulls not designated for turret upgrades will be converted to ambulance, command and mortar carriers, so I doubt there will be enough spare to equip all the armoured recce formations, that leaves ASCOD or a possible cheaper CVRT Mrk II fitted with upgraded Warrior turrets (removed from those designated as ambulance, command and mortar carriers). What becomes of the bulldogs is another question, plus the 100 odd Warthogs when they return from Afghanistan. RM doesn't want the latter (too big), maybe useful for Army light gun artillery regiments or converted to 120mm mortar carriers (gets my vote).
I think the FRES programme has lost sight of what it is supposed to be. I cannot understand why the requirement to replace a 10t light recce vehicle has resulted in a 35t vehicle. The CVRT is designed to be a light, nimble armoured vehicle and is perfect for the role it does. The FRES Scout has effectively just become another IFV and so as has been suggested in this thread, why not just bin it and upgrade all Warriors in the fleet.
Worse still, to procure a vehicle that is not transportable by the A400M is a crime. initially the US had very ambitious plans with the now cancelled FCS vehicles to be transported by C-130s but that was soon found to be too ambitious. The A400M however, gave the UK extra scope to realistically make a deployable yet well protected vehicle and somehow, FRES Scout has grown beyond this.
It begs the question whether it is really neccesary for a recce vehicle to be 35t in order to offer significant protection. Is it possible for something perhaps just slightly bigger than the CVRT to offer sufficent IED/Mine protection? The vehicle does not necessarily have to be capacious as it is not an IFV as FRES-SV has stupidly become, so any extra mass of the vehicle should be formed from extra armour rather than just a bigger vehicle.
Personally, I think that FRES in its current form needs to be scrapped as a project. Vehicles should be introduced incrementally while maintaining a strict over-arching standard of commonality and this is perhaps already in place with the common vehicle architecture (CVA) concept.
I think the best solution for now would be to make do with upgraded Warriors by upgrading all of the current fleet. This would save a substantial amount of money and allow time to wait until emerging technologies are developed that ease the problem that make mobility, protection and transportability so hard to find together. In doing so, we could replace the CVRT with something that looks more like a CVRT, which should be idea.
As for everything else, such is Warthog, Viking, Saxon, Bulldog, Mastiff etc, the UK seriously needs to reduce the vehicle types because the number has become rediculous. Personally, I wonder whether an articulated vehicle similar to the warthog would make a suitable replacement for all of the above vehicles. Depressing as it sounds, an IED strike would be less servere as one part of the vehicle would take the brunt whereas the other, not so much. Perhaps more protection could be focussed onto the front section of the vehicle while saving weight on the rear section. Maybe even have a completely common front section and by common, I mean identical while having a role specific rear module, that could include recce, artillery, APC etc.
