British Army Equipment.

J

JohnR

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
8 September 2006
Messages
796
Reaction score
321
A few questions about the equipment of the British Army:

I have read on Wiki that the Army is to dispose of it's entire fleet of Panther CLV? Why is this, I have read that it's cramped when fitted with BOWMAN? What will it's replacement be, the JLSTV?

How many Sky Sabre systems are being acquired and will the RAF regiment being equipped with it?, What do you gents think of it, I though it was cumbersome when I though it was just mounted on 1 MAN 8x8 truck, but I saw a video detailed the entire system; which is three vehicles, the MAN 8x8, a MAN 4x4 and an RB truck - which I thought had been withdrawn? Would it have been better if it was on a tracked chassis?

What's happening regarding the Ajax family, have the production problems been resolved?

What's happening regarding the refurbishment of the Warrior and the Challenger?

If the US army adopts the new 6.8mm ammo and the .338 round for GPMG's do you think the British army follow suit or wait until the out of service date of 2035 (I believe)?

Will the 105mm light gun be ultimately replaced by the M777?

Look forward to you reponses.

Regards.
 
UK launches MLRS project

The project, the launch of which followed an agreement with the US Department of Defence, will begin next year with the installation of improved armoured cabs on the first of 44 launcher vehicles, the British Army announced on its website on 31 March.

In addition, upgraded automotive and launch mechanism components will be installed at the US Army’s Red River Depot in Texas and Lockheed Martin’s facility in Camden, Arkansas.

“The upgrades will ensure that the army’s land deep fires capability remains strong for the next three decades and that the British Army has the technological capability to quickly meet the threats of today and tomorrow,” the British Army said. “The upgrades will keep the equipment in service until 2050.”

The British Army also aims to fit UK-specific systems to its improved launchers, including composite rubber tracks, a vehicle camera and radar system.

“The 44 updated launchers will also be able to fire the US Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), which has a range of 499 km and is expected in service from 2024,” said the announcement. The PrSM is the proposed replacement for the US MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). “These weapons will place the British Army at the cutting edge of global deep fires capability, ready to respond to long-range air defence and missile threats presented by hostile actors.”

The British Army said the Extended-Range Guided MLRS, which will extend its reach to 150 km, should be in Royal Artillery service by 2025.

UK launches MLRS project

The United Kingdom has launched a five-year programme to upgrade the British Army’s M270 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS).
www.janes.com

what kind of radar?
 
Based on the combination with vehicle cameras, I suspect it's a collision avoidance radar like you see in cars.
 

Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land has been awarded the UK MoD contract to upgrade 148 British Army Challenger 3 main battle tanks.
The programme will make significant enhancements to the vehicle and provide the British Army with a world-class capability, made in the UK.
The upgraded Challenger 3 tanks will be network-enabled, digital main battle tanks with state-of-the-art lethality, upgraded survivability and world-class surveillance and target acquisition capabilities.

This solution provides significant growth potential in all main battle tank key capability areas with the new physical, electronic and electrical architecture.
The contract is valued at £800m and the programme will commence in 2021 with an expected in-service date of 2027.

UK awards Challenger 3 upgrade contract | Shephard

Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land sign £800m contract with UK MoD to upgrade Challenger 3 main battle tanks.
www.shephardmedia.com
 
Reporting about this upgrade sends me into deepest vicarious embarrassment. "Most letal tank in the Europe!", "World class capabilities engineered and produced in UK!" - and it's literally a german-made turret with german-made gun, barely removing shameful obsolescence of vehicle. And still all british-made details that stay within tank are mediocre to subpar. And THIS is gonna be fielded by 2027...
 
It is quite debatable whether this bare-bones (at best) upgrade deserves such a grandiose redesignation .
 
Don't be so ridiculous the pair of you. The updates will make CR3 the finest tank in western armories. Best gun, best ammo, best sensors, best armor, best cross country mobility. Jury is out on the new combat system and yet to be selected APS but no reason to think those won't be BoB also.
 
Grey Havoc said:
It is quite debatable whether this bare-bones (at best) upgrade deserves such a grandiose redesignation .
Click to expand...
Well, no, it is by far not bare-bones. Whole new turret with so much needed new gun is BIG change. Problem is - it is not change from good to great. It is change from shit to adequate.
 
"Shit to adequate"? What do you base that on please. Knocking something for the sake of doing so is hardly an academic actrion so please point out how it was so bad and how it is in your words just "Adequate" now.
 
Foo Fighter said:
"Shit to adequate"? What do you base that on please. Knocking something for the sake of doing so is hardly an academic actrion so please point out how it was so bad and how it is in your words just "Adequate" now.
Click to expand...
Why it was bad - adequate but long outdated armor with bad layout, bad mobility, poor FCS by today standarts, really poor cannon with bad ammo choice.

Why it is adequate - renewed turret with more than possibly changed composition but lack of significant LoS and mass growth indicates that there won't be anything groundbreaking in terms of turret armor. Hull armor is not changed whatsoever - poor composition with VERY bad layout. Changing filler won't change much.
Adequate to bad mobility: unreasonably overweight while having weaker engine than contemporaries. Weight won't be dropped and engine improvement is only under consideration. IF it will go trough - it won't be that much worse than contemporaries, but won't have any real advantage over them, since nothing groundbreaking in transmission is planned and suspension will stay the same. If it won't - you can guess.
Good firepower: only (OTOH arguably most important) part for which this upgrade can be praised. Good cannon, same as on latest Leo 2A7V being fielded by Danes and planned to be fielded by Qataris ect and which gonna be fielded by Germany itself in upcoming months. Ammunition is a pesky question since it is not known which exactly they will export. Will it be DM63A1? KE2020Neo? Even M829A4 is considered. What is known for sure - ammunition will be exported and sure as hell won't be designed by Britain itself. So nothing groundbreaking here too - at best comparable with countries-suppliers. FCS is quite great but again - not "most good" ect. Will use 3 gen thermals, based on Cat-MP, so comparable to low end german Attica and worse than high end Attica. Not bad by any means but have superior options even today.
And most importantly over everything mentioned here: tank is gonna properly appear only in 2027 and fully fielded by 2030. For comparison 2030 is expected year of fielding Rh130 cannon on german Leos. So, even while being adequate today, tank might not be by the time it will be fielded.

I am not bashing current upgrade per se, mind you. It is much needed and quite respectable upgrade for tank that was in absolutely urgent need of it. My problems are with reporting tones about it: being called "All british" when 90% of improvements are not british designed and made and being called "Most lethal" when it's not by even current day, let alone whole decate down the pipe when it will reach FOC.
 
Can anyone explain if there are advantages to using the half a century old 105mm light gun instead of new M777s like Aus,Can,Ind,USA and now Ukraine?
This is as bad as the old days of Abbot 105mm and ancient 5.5 guns.
 
uk 75 said:
Can anyone explain if there are advantages to using the half a century old 105mm light gun instead of new M777s like Aus,Can,Ind,USA and now Ukraine?
Click to expand...
Cheap and already in service? A few decades worth of 105mm ammo (specific for the L118) built up and requires two less crew could be additional indicators for their continued use.
 
uk 75 said:
Can anyone explain if there are advantages to using the half a century old 105mm light gun instead of new M777s like Aus,Can,Ind,USA and now Ukraine?
This is as bad as the old days of Abbot 105mm and ancient 5.5 guns.
Click to expand...

The Light Gun is much more transportable than even the M777. And the ammo even more so.

It's not like the BA didn't have a towed 155mm for a couple of decades (FH-70). It was phased out in favor of an all-SP 155mm force, with the Light Gun retained because it was much better for supporting rapid deployment forces.

Light Gun is supposed to leave service.in 2030, so they may well adopt some sort of lightweight 155mm gun, but there are other options.

www.thinkdefence.co.uk

The L118 105mm Light Gun Replacement - Think Defence

The 105 mm L118 Light Gun has been in service with the British Army since 1974 and has been used continually since.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk www.thinkdefence.co.uk
 
Last edited:
Will the new Puma replacement be able to carry an underslung 105mm? If not and Chinook or Merlin is needed then the 155mm may become a more useful choice.
 
uk 75 said:
Will the new Puma replacement be able to carry an underslung 105mm? If not and Chinook or Merlin is needed then the 155mm may become a more useful choice.
Click to expand...

Almost certainly yes for 105mm -- Light Gun is ~4 tons, well within the sling load of the candidates where I can find a number.

Heck, the Black Hawk options can even sling load an XM-777 155mm gun at a hair under 10 tons.
 
uk 75 said:
Can anyone explain if there are advantages to using the half a century old 105mm light gun instead of new M777s like Aus,Can,Ind,USA and now Ukraine?
This is as bad as the old days of Abbot 105mm and ancient 5.5 guns.
Click to expand...
Think Defense has done a long, and as usual thoughtful and insightful piece, on The L118 105mm Light Gun Replacement.
 
What is left of my regiment has been on warning to transition to Ajax for some years now but last time I spoke the opinion was that it would never happen. This will likely impact to Challenger 3 or require more to be produced. As per usual, watch some space, just not sure which.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom