British Army News and Discussion

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The German-French Future Tank program mentions the 130 mm gun and it is likely it will find its way into this project. Haven’t seen any interest from the US wrt to this gun as I assume there would be considerable cost to fit it to Abrams tanks. With so many projects on the go in the US, a new MBT is low on the priority list I would think.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Interestingly, while digging around for some info on the Cr2 LEP, I tripped over a couple of references to fitting the new 130mm cannon - seems a stretch as it's not in service anywhere yet but if it did happen, that would be pretty damn terrifying,


None of the articles looked solid enough to cite however :(
Hang on, isn't the new Rheinmetall 130 mm gun being tested using a Challenger 2 tank?

 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hang on, isn't the new Rheinmetall 130 mm gun being tested using a Challenger 2 tank?


Initially I thought it was a Leo 2 hull but I've taken my shoes off and counted the road wheels and yup, that's six wheels vs seven for a Leo.

So, I'm kinda walking back from my initial skepticism and thinking this is a cr2 hull with a new turret and the 130mm cannon. Shut up and take my money!
 

Terran

Well-Known Member

BBC (amongst others) reporting that Chally 2 upgrades could be binned along with Warrior Capability - It'd be odd given the fact that we're so close to finally pulling the trigger on an upgrade package for CR2. On the other hand, part of me is looking at Cr2 like a very expensive money pit - and that maybe we'd be better off ordering new build Leo 2's.

I definitely don't think losing heavy armour entirely is a great idea however.
If it pleases the Crown, I recommend that reading that report should be done like a shot of Tequila, with a squeeze of lime and large helping of salt.
IMHO Whitehall should tell any among them who helped advocate or write that article to “Bugger off”.
I quote Penny Mordaunt the Conservative Defense Secretary of the UK, the same individual whom is quoted as calling Challenger and Warrior as “Obsolete”.
The future may look very different in years to come, but meantime, while armour is relevant it must be capable, and we must be competitive. We have not been,
Source:Will the stars finally align to upgrade Britain’s ‘obsolete’ tanks?

The MOD of the UK like many other developed nations do need a “Royal Cyber Command” and a “Royal Space Corps“ make no mistake.
However those are support arms. To keep the lines of communication clear, to maintain surveillance on adversaries and ensure the security of the critical architecture of modern warfare. The kinetic capacity doesn’t yet exist beyond theoretical to be relevant enough to mean that Tanks and conventional forces are to be sold for scrap in exchange for keyboards and Satellite dishes. Even if they did. You would still be need to have some form of Boots on the ground. Unless you intend to try and hold control via “glassing” from orbit.

The modernization of Challanger 2 and Warrior is long over due but the MOD is known to have launched programs for such, the Tank demonstrator with the 130mm gun above, prototypes for improved power packs, upgraded sensors and Active protection systems.
The Warriors 40mm CT gun program with its own sensor and power pack upgrades.
Additionally there is the Ajax vehicle series. The Ajax isn’t to support the Boxer based “Strike Brigades” It’s as a armored reconnaissance vehicle for armored forces, It’s to serve with Warrior and Challanger 2s Tanks.
In light of the USMC’s Tank phase out it’s not impossible for such to happen. However it seems far less likely for a whole nation to abandon such vs a independent service.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
If it pleases the Crown, I recommend that reading that report should be done like a shot of Tequila, with a squeeze of lime and large helping of salt.
IMHO Whitehall should tell any among them who helped advocate or write that article to “Bugger off”.
I quote Penny Mordaunt the Conservative Defense Secretary of the UK, the same individual whom is quoted as calling Challenger and Warrior as “Obsolete”.
Source:Will the stars finally align to upgrade Britain’s ‘obsolete’ tanks?

The MOD of the UK like many other developed nations do need a “Royal Cyber Command” and a “Royal Space Corps“ make no mistake.
However those are support arms. To keep the lines of communication clear, to maintain surveillance on adversaries and ensure the security of the critical architecture of modern warfare. The kinetic capacity doesn’t yet exist beyond theoretical to be relevant enough to mean that Tanks and conventional forces are to be sold for scrap in exchange for keyboards and Satellite dishes. Even if they did. You would still be need to have some form of Boots on the ground. Unless you intend to try and hold control via “glassing” from orbit.

The modernization of Challanger 2 and Warrior is long over due but the MOD is known to have launched programs for such, the Tank demonstrator with the 130mm gun above, prototypes for improved power packs, upgraded sensors and Active protection systems.
The Warriors 40mm CT gun program with its own sensor and power pack upgrades.
Additionally there is the Ajax vehicle series. The Ajax isn’t to support the Boxer based “Strike Brigades” It’s as a armored reconnaissance vehicle for armored forces, It’s to serve with Warrior and Challanger 2s Tanks.
In light of the USMC’s Tank phase out it’s not impossible for such to happen. However it seems far less likely for a whole nation to abandon such vs a independent service.
Never underestimate the stupidity of pollies. Just prior to Canadian involvement in Afghanistan the Canadian army was thinking 105mm gun turrets for LAVs and phasing out their Leo 1s. The Leo 1s made it to Afghanistan where it was quickly realized they needed to be replaced with Leo 2s due to heat and support issues.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Never underestimate the stupidity of pollies. Just prior to Canadian involvement in Afghanistan the Canadian army was thinking 105mm gun turrets for LAVs and phasing out their Leo 1s. The Leo 1s made it to Afghanistan where it was quickly realized they needed to be replaced with Leo 2s due to heat and support issues.

I'm definitely taking this as part of a wider set of defence scare stories- today we had a breaking story about type 26 orders would be cut to 5 for instance. Tomorrow I predict rumours that the Ghurkas will be scrapped and the Red Arrows will be disbanded.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I'm definitely taking this as part of a wider set of defence scare stories- today we had a breaking story about type 26 orders would be cut to 5 for instance. Tomorrow I predict rumours that the Ghurkas will be scrapped and the Red Arrows will be disbanded.
Well at least there is alcohol if any of these rumours prove to be true.;)
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
On the positive side, it does look like CR2 LEP is a bit more advanced than I'd realised - if there's a CR2 with a shiny new turret, autoloader and 130mm cannon moving around, that is encouraging.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I'm definitely taking this as part of a wider set of defence scare stories- today we had a breaking story about type 26 orders would be cut to 5 for instance. Tomorrow I predict rumours that the Ghurkas will be scrapped and the Red Arrows will be disbanded.
Aren't they standard rumours, sitting in a file on every gutter journalist's computer ready to be dragged & dropped every time there's talk of armed forces spending cuts or reviews?
 

Terran

Well-Known Member
Aren't they standard rumours, sitting in a file on every gutter journalist's computer ready to be dragged & dropped every time there's talk of armed forces spending cuts or reviews?
That and the belief by many that vehicles like Stryker are replacements for heavier armored vehicles. With the Strike brigades concept coming to the British army being adopted and patterned along similar lines to the US Stryker brigades the same misconception appears. That a vehicle meant to Motorize Infantry units is a match to a vehicle intended to operate as armored regiments.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Aren't they standard rumours, sitting in a file on every gutter journalist's computer ready to be dragged & dropped every time there's talk of armed forces spending cuts or reviews?

Definitely.Just select template, ah, here we are, carrier to be sold to India..click... Etc.

Pointless getting too worked up, let's see what horrors await.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It looks like that before this new review was even done that the British Army, "by 2025 it would only be able to field a combat division consisting of just a single maneuver brigade and an interim maneuver support brigade." That's pretty stark, and both the Army & MOD admit that the delay is because not enough cash has been made available to modernise the armoured forces.

"If you are the chief of staff of the U.S. Army, which still retains considerable heavy forces, you are going to really wonder how much the British Army is a warfighting army, "said Ben Barry, senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London.

“The Army was mandated [in the 2015 review] to deliver two armored infantry brigades, whereas they are now saying they can only generate one. They have enough vehicles for three infantry armored brigades, but my very strong suspicion is they haven’t been spending money on spares. If they haven’t got sufficient spare parts they will only risk sending one brigade on operations,” said Barry.
He then went on to say that the Army hasn't held a regular brigade sized exercise for years.

She's a pretty a pretty poor picture and the analysts don't hold out any hope for the Army in the upcoming review.
 

Terran

Well-Known Member
The fledgling strike brigade. A mix of mostly Ajax vehicles with whatever few Boxers the UK has until 2030.
 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
So an entire brigade to call in artillery and air strikes? Yeah, no reason to keep this above company and HQ level. Should be organic to every brigade.
Unless again I'm misunderstanding the purpose.
 

FoxtrotRomeo999

Active Member
So an entire brigade to call in artillery and air strikes? Yeah, no reason to keep this above company and HQ level. Should be organic to every brigade.
Unless again I'm misunderstanding the purpose.
From reading the article, it sounds like the manoeuvre support brigade is a mechanized brigade with no tanks. I assume all brigades would have the support capabilities you are thinking of.
 
Top