Re-arming the UK: What equipment? and how much?

 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1965384860899684523
View: https://x.com/RAeSTimR/status/1965384860899684523


https://twitter.com/x/status/1965383995065315746
View: https://x.com/RAeSTimR/status/1965383995065315746

www.upstartsmedia.com

Inside The Stealthy European Defense Tech Startup Raising $100 Million

Defense tech startup Cambridge Aerospace has quietly raised multiple funding rounds to build products including the Skyhammer and Starhammer missiles. Upstarts has the first look at its funding history and plans.
www.upstartsmedia.com www.upstartsmedia.com
www.calibredefence.co.uk

DSEI UK 2025: Cambridge Aerospace to present air defence solutions

Cambridge Aerospace will be using DSEI UK 2025 to emerge from stealth mode and present its air defence systems; Skyhammer and Starhammer.
www.calibredefence.co.uk www.calibredefence.co.uk

They have 4 products and have raised a load of money...

Skyhammer Anti UAS and Cruise missile drone
Starhammer - SAM, possibly for C-RAM
Nightstar - Rocket Motor
Looking Glass - ....no idea...
 
timmymagic said:
UK to join CAVS programme....the Patria 6 x 6 will be up-armoured for UK needs.

...
https://twitter.com/x/status/1965405665855504517
View: https://x.com/TotherChris/status/1965405665855504517
Click to expand...

Is it just me or does sacrificing amphibious capability for a modest increase in armour protection not smack of GWOT-era thinking? Are British planners still anticipating 'sandy places' despite the advent of JEF and NATO deployments like Estonia?

This leaves me wondering, does anyone at the MoD actually read field reports from eFP forces deployed under OP Cabrit? Wetlands cover about 6-7% of Estonia's territory. That figure is often exaggerated but Estonia is still an operating environment where an amphibious capability would trump whatever limited up-armouring that the Patria CAVS 6x6 could handle.

In effect, the MoD seems to be trying to turn CAVS back into the Patria AMV from which its drivetrain was derived. If that is the case, better to pony up for the heavier vehicle (and accept that the AMV requires those extra wheels for a reasonable ground pressure). That would give the British Army's new APC STANAG Level 4 protection (with add-on armour for Level 5) without any need to sacrifice its amphibious drive.

Joining a multi-national programme only to insist upon fundamental changes is unlikely to be a recipe for success. Alternatively, the MoD could just acknowledge that the CAVS truly is a 'battle-taxi' - not a better-protected IFV - and employ the new vehicles as originally intended. [/buttinsky]
 
Apophenia said:
Is it just me or does sacrificing amphibious capability for a modest increase in armour protection not smack of GWOT-era thinking? Are British planners still anticipating 'sandy places' despite the advent of JEF and NATO deployments like Estonia?

This leaves me wondering, does anyone at the MoD actually read field reports from eFP forces deployed under OP Cabrit? Wetlands cover about 6-7% of Estonia's territory. That figure is often exaggerated but Estonia is still an operating environment where an amphibious capability would trump whatever limited up-armouring that the Patria CAVS 6x6 could handle.

In effect, the MoD seems to be trying to turn CAVS back into the Patria AMV from which its drivetrain was derived. If that is the case, better to pony up for the heavier vehicle (and accept that the AMV requires those extra wheels for a reasonable ground pressure). That would give the British Army's new APC STANAG Level 4 protection (with add-on armour for Level 5) without any need to sacrifice its amphibious drive.

Joining a multi-national programme only to insist upon fundamental changes is unlikely to be a recipe for success. Alternatively, the MoD could just acknowledge that the CAVS truly is a 'battle-taxi' - not a better-protected IFV - and employ the new vehicles as originally intended. [/buttinsky]
Click to expand...

2 versions of CAV's are available. One with Amphibious capability is armoured to STANAG 2, the other is STANAG 4 but without amphibious capability. So the Army isn't asking for a new variant to be developed for them.

Personally I think the Army are right...the Russian's are full of criticism for their vehicles light armour schemes as a result of amphibious design requirements, which they say have zero actual real world utility.

Worth remembering that UK is aiming to replace the likes of Mastiff, Ridgeback and Wolfhound with CAVS....and those are heavily armoured vehicles...
 
Last edited:
timmymagic said:
2 versions of CAV's are available. One with Amphibious capability is armoured to STANAG 2, the other is STANAG 4 but without amphibious capability. So the Army isn't asking for a new variant to be developed for them.

Personally I think the Army are right...the Russian's are full of criticism for their vehicles light armour schemes as a result of amphibious design requirements, which they say have zero actual real world utility.

Worth remembering that UK is aiming to replace the likes of Mastiff, Ridgeback and Wolfhound with CAVS....and those are heavily armoured vehicles...
Click to expand...

Thanks. I had not realised that the British Army CAVS would be PPV replacements rather than wheeled APCs.

As for the Russians, my impression was that those criticisms are primarily aimed at IFVs. The Soviet leaning to low-and-light for the BMP series wasn't just a compromise for amphibious abilities. It was in keeping with an overall concept choice (as echoed by the decidedly non-amphibious T-72 MBT).

Anyway, if the British Army is tailoring CAVS to take over roles fulfilled by the Mastiff, Ridgeback, and Wolfhound - rather than replicating their mine-resistant features - that means they are at least leaving the MRAP approach of the GWOT-era behind.
 
timmymagic said:
2 versions of CAV's are available. One with Amphibious capability is armoured to STANAG 2, the other is STANAG 4 but without amphibious capability. So the Army isn't asking for a new variant to be developed for them.

Personally I think the Army are right...the Russian's are full of criticism for their vehicles light armour schemes as a result of amphibious design requirements, which they say have zero actual real world utility.

Worth remembering that UK is aiming to replace the likes of Mastiff, Ridgeback and Wolfhound with CAVS....and those are heavily armoured vehicles...
Click to expand...
Also, IIRC, past British AFVs that possessed amphibious capabilities had had it removed by mid-life. Think CVR(T) family, Abbot, Fox, Stalwart, etc.

cheers,
Robin.
 
robunos said:
Also, IIRC, past British AFVs that possessed amphibious capabilities had had it removed by mid-life. Think CVR(T) family, Abbot, Fox, Stalwart, etc.
..
Click to expand...

That trend was true throughout NATO land forces. I'm questioning if it remains a good choice (with @timmymagic pointing to RU reactions to their earlier armour-for-amphib trade-offs).

Perhaps my previous mention of OP Cabrit overemphasised NATO's Eastern Flank and the MoD still do intend to focus on future BA deployments to 'sandy places'?
 
Some more details on the MGI Engineering Skyshark and Tigershark....seems rather serious, rather than a CGI based hustle....the prices are very good for the capability...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAuyEvm0adk


Skyshark - Kamikaze drone with 10-20kg payload, 250km range, 450 km/h speed - in flight test, with operational deployment in Ukraine shortly. Can't work out if its jet powered or Electric Ducted Fan. <£50k

Tigershark - First flight in the next month, 'affordable, scalable, long range strike' 300kg payload, 750km range at 750 km/h...the really interesting bit is the AI based guidance from Auterion.....and a new jet engine made by Alloyed in Oxford in the UK from additive manufacturing, the Argive A-1100. <£400k

mgidefence.co.uk

Official unveiling at DSEI - MGI Defence

Today, TigerShark makes its public debut at #DSEI2025. ExCeL London, 9–12 September Visit the MGI team to explore TigerShark’s performance, manufacturing roadmap, and export availability. A sovereign UK-built solution for affordable, scalable, long-range strike is here with Auterion Skynode-N...
mgidefence.co.uk mgidefence.co.uk

auterion.com

Company

Auterion is creating the connected operating system to enable the next significant evolution in computing
auterion.com auterion.com

Alloyed - Advanced Materials, Manufacturing & Metallurgy Experts

Alloyed delivers cutting-edge innovation in materials science, additive manufacturing, and advanced metallurgy. Explore our technologies and career opportunities.
alloyed.com alloyed.com

www.linkedin.com

Alloyed's Argive micro-turbine business: 100 days to first test, November shipment | Alloyed posted on the topic | LinkedIn

"It took just 100 days between a designer sitting down with a blank screen and the 1100N engine being ready for its first test, and it could be shipped in November" Alloyed's new micro-turbine business, Argive, are driving innovation in producing low-cost, high-performance jet engines at...
www.linkedin.com www.linkedin.com
 
timmymagic said:
... Skyshark - Kamikaze drone with 10-20kg payload, 250km range, 450 km/h speed - in flight test, with operational deployment in Ukraine shortly. Can't work out if its jet powered or Electric Ducted Fan...
Click to expand...

Some of the confusion stems from most images being of an earlier subscale prototype. But, according to Flight Global, it can be either powerplant (depending upon mission type).

To be available commercially from next month, the unmanned air system is being offered powered by Argive A300 gas turbine engines, or using HS125 electric ducted fans supplied by Greenjets.

MGI claims that the A300 provides “exceptional thrust-to-weight performance for tactical strike missions”, while the H125 is a “quiet, fully electric powertrain designed for low-signature missions”.
Click to expand...

www.flightglobal.com

MGI launches unmanned SkyShark as ‘one-way effector’

UK unmanned systems developer MGI Engineering has unveiled its SkyShark 'one-way effector', offering the lightweight type with a choice of two propulsion options.
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com
 
Apophenia said:
Some of the confusion stems from most images being of an earlier subscale prototype. But, according to Flight Global, it can be either powerplant (depending upon mission type).



www.flightglobal.com

MGI launches unmanned SkyShark as ‘one-way effector’

UK unmanned systems developer MGI Engineering has unveiled its SkyShark 'one-way effector', offering the lightweight type with a choice of two propulsion options.
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com
Click to expand...

Yes it appears to be long range via electric ducted fan, or higher speed via jet engine.

Haven't seen the jet engine mentioned before....so it appears Alloyed Argive have at least 2 different engines....the A300 and A1100.

And Greenjets is another UK company...

Hemlock 125

greenjets.com greenjets.com
 
timmymagic said:
Thinking about this...surely it would make sense that there are a number of standard 120mm mortar purchased alongside for training purposes at the least? They're cheap as chips so relying purely on the more expensive vehicle mounted hinged mortar can't be the only solution...
Click to expand...
Doesn't the UK already have 120mm mortars? Use those for training.

The hinged mortars are for actually fighting from.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Doesn't the UK already have 120mm mortars? Use those for training.

The hinged mortars are for actually fighting from.
Click to expand...

It does not. The move to 120mm mortars replaces their existing 81mm mortars in role.

And frankly, training on gear other than the stuff you plan to fight with is generally a bad idea.
 
TomS said:
And frankly, training on gear other than the stuff you plan to fight with is generally a bad idea.
Click to expand...

81mm will still be in use, but having an airportable 120mm would make a lot of sense. Cheap as chips as well.
 
If this doesn't piss you off I don't know what will....

- We developed Sentinel R.1 at huge cost....£850m for 5 aircraft and 8 ground stations.....adapting the Bombardier Global Express platform for use as a military platform, installing a very effective and advanced self protection suite and comms.....it entered service in 2008...and was, a mere 2 years later, announced as being retired once it was no longer required in Afghanistan because we were skint....events then took hold and Sentinel became a critical intelligence asset for multinational ops proving to be a brilliant platform in Afghanistan, Mali, Libya, Nigeria, Iraq and Syria...at one point the RAF was delivering over 60% of ALL effective intel to the coalition, primarily from Sentinel....then discarded it because an MLU was required (I don't believe that in the slightest as the AESA radar was less than 10 years old...)...the US Army picked up the airframes for a song....

- We bought E-7 at huge cost to replace our knackered E-3D, retired them without replacement....and now....E-7 is a disaster, 5 aircraft reduced to 3 due to cost but we're still buying 5 radars, massively late, NATO abandoning it, and likely to buy Globaleye...

- We let Nimrod R.1 capability end...then purchased RC-135 at huge cost...turns out RC-135 is incredibly expensive, and difficult, to keep in the air (who would have thunk that eh?, not as if we had had already had bad experience keeping a C-135 based platform in the air in the 21st century is it?).

- We've fudged VIP transport for decades, using poorly equipped tankers or leased civilian grade aircraft, without secure comms. Finally we painted a flag on the back of one of our precious 9 A330 MRTT and put some seats inside...and painted a flag on the tail of a leased A321 from Titan Airways....

- We spent £200m on 2 Dassault Falcon for VIP use....neither has a full self protection suite/comms or the size/range/speed of Global Express


All capabilities that could and should have been undertaken by Global Express based platforms....we had the lead and squandered it...

Just think what we could have done with a Global Express/Global 6000 based fleet......AEW, Ground Surveillance, ELINT/SIGINT, VIP, could have even had an MPA (not 100% convinced of that though...)

And now....you've guessed it....we're buying Global Express again....this time from the German's...

www.defenceeye.co.uk

RAF Looks To German Pegasus Spy Planes - Defence Eye

Britain is negotiating to buy a fleet of new signals/electronic intelligence (SIGINT/ELINT) gathering aircraft from the German defence electronics company Hensoldt, under the auspices of the Trinity House agreement. Defence Eye understands from well-placed sources that negotiations to buy...
www.defenceeye.co.uk www.defenceeye.co.uk

en.wikipedia.org

Hensoldt Pegasus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Sigh.
I always thought that retiring the Sentinels was a big mistake. Although it looks like this is not a for-like replacement given its an ELINT/SIGNIT platform and not a ground radar mapper.

E-7 is not a bad choice, we just needed to buy 5 airframes off the bat. I'm not too worried what NATO has. Their plans change like the wind anyway.

RC-135 was worth it given the likely secret electronic goodies onboard. As long as this Pegasus proposal has the right kit for the right ELINT/SIGNIT capabilities then its ok by me.
 
Hood said:
Sigh.
I always thought that retiring the Sentinels was a big mistake. Although it looks like this is not a for-like replacement given its an ELINT/SIGNIT platform and not a ground radar mapper.

E-7 is not a bad choice, we just needed to buy 5 airframes off the bat. I'm not too worried what NATO has. Their plans change like the wind anyway.

RC-135 was worth it given the likely secret electronic goodies onboard. As long as this Pegasus proposal has the right kit for the right ELINT/SIGNIT capabilities then its ok by me.
Click to expand...

Couple of good threads from Gabi....we might need to stand down on this.....or.....it might just be early days...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1989413373075743037
View: https://x.com/Gabriel64869839/status/1989413373075743037


https://twitter.com/x/status/1989645915830063354
View: https://x.com/Gabriel64869839/status/1989645915830063354
 
Good Gods!

Something serious is happening if true.
Rather a strategic shift could be underway.
 
Last edited:
I suppose that it had to happen sooner or later as the Rivet Joints are old aircraft anyway and need replacing sooner or later and it looks like the PEGASUS is going to be the aircraft that replaces them. Fingers and toes crossed that things proceed normally.
 
FighterJock said:
I suppose that it had to happen sooner or later as the Rivet Joints are old aircraft anyway and need replacing sooner or later and it looks like the PEGASUS is going to be the aircraft that replaces them. Fingers and toes crossed that things proceed normally.
Click to expand...
It seems to me like a P-8 or E-7 derivative would be better from a maintenance commonality perspective?
 
It all depends on what happens in 2028 and who gets into the White House at that time as to whether we go for a P-8 or E-7 derivative whatismoo, though I could still see it as an option especially if the USAF replace their Rivet Joints at that time as well.
 
If it works its a shoo in...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1990380006611312859
View: https://x.com/Gabriel64869839/status/1990380006611312859


www.ga-asi.com

GA-ASI and Saab Will Demonstrate AEW&C on MQ-9B in 2026

Following their announcement to bring Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability to the world’s leading Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) platform, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) and Saab will now team up to demonstrate the capability in the summer of 2026.
www.ga-asi.com
 
timmymagic said:
If it works its a shoo in...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1990380006611312859
View: https://x.com/Gabriel64869839/status/1990380006611312859


www.ga-asi.com

GA-ASI and Saab Will Demonstrate AEW&C on MQ-9B in 2026

Following their announcement to bring Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability to the world’s leading Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) platform, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) and Saab will now team up to demonstrate the capability in the summer of 2026.
www.ga-asi.com
Click to expand...
Can't fill the air battle management role, which is the issue with the USAF plans to ditch E-7 for sattelites or even E-2D. Being able to manage triple digit numbers of aircraft is really a key enabler for everyone with access to it.
 
whatismoo said:
Can't fill the air battle management role, which is the issue with the USAF plans to ditch E-7 for sattelites or even E-2D. Being able to manage triple digit numbers of aircraft is really a key enabler for everyone with access to it.
Click to expand...
Jokes on you, one needs triple digit fighters to profit from it.
 

Graeme Downie MP used Commons questions this morning to deliver remarks on nuclear work at Rosyth, accusing SNP figures of circulating misleading claims that risk undermining skilled job opportunities in his constituency.​

Click to expand...
ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Downie accuses SNP of fuelling ‘misinformation’ over Rosyth

Dunfermline and Dollar MP Graeme Downie used Commons questions this morning to deliver remarks on nuclear work at Rosyth, accusing SNP figures of circulating misleading claims that risk undermining skilled job opportunities in his constituency.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk ukdefencejournal.org.uk
 
Ajax on hold as 31 fall ill in major safety setback for Army's beleaguered £5.5bn AFV
James Wharton 25th November 2025 at 4:20pm
Ajax appears unable to shake off its troubles with yet more soldiers reportedly suffering vibration and hearing problems
Ajax appears unable to shake off its troubles with yet more soldiers reportedly suffering vibration and hearing problems
Ajax appears unable to shake off its troubles with yet more soldiers reportedly suffering vibration and hearing problems
The Army has halted all use of Ajax – a move sources are calling a major safety setback for the troubled programme.

It comes just days after the Ministry of Defence gave fresh assurances about the safety of the £5.5bn medium armoured vehicle, after BFBS Forces News revealed that three members of the Household Cavalry Regiment were facing medical discharge after working on the platform.

As first reported by The Times, the decision to ground the fleet was taken after 31 soldiers fell ill while deployed on Exercise Iron Fist on Salisbury Plain, having spent between 10 and 15 hours in the vehicles.

Exclusive: Soldiers facing medical discharge over Ajax injuries despite minister's safety claims
Ajax: The armoured reconnaissance vehicle that thinks it's a Tesla, not a Fiat Punto
Ajax: After years of rising costs, damage and delays, Army says it's ready to rumble
The MOD has confirmed that some of those soldiers are still being treated by healthcare professionals.

A source told BFBS Forces News that an urgent warning was issued across the Army on Monday, known as an Electronic Safety Notice, banning all use of the vehicle for the next fortnight while an investigation is carried out.

The Ajax programme has been beset with safety issues since trials began, causing an eight-year delay to the delivery programme.

However, just three weeks ago, Defence Readiness and Industry Minister Luke Pollard told reporters that earlier issues with noise and vibration levels – which had caused injuries both during and after the trials – had been fixed and Ajax was now safe.

Mr Pollard was speaking at an event to mark Ajax achieving its Initial Operating Capability (IOC) status, meaning the platform is now officially able to be used on operations.

The Ajax family will eventually be made up of 589 vehicles, with six variants
The Ajax family will eventually be made up of 589 vehicles, with six variants (Picture: MOD)
When asked to clarify the MOD's position on Ajax's safety record, the minister said the Government would not be awarding IOC status to "any platform that we did not think was safe for the men and women of our forces to use".

It is understood that the injuries sustained by the 31 individuals in this latest incident are noise- and vibration-related, causing personnel to vomit and shake uncontrollably.

It is on Mr Pollard's orders that personnel are now being told to stop using the vehicle.

In all, the Army will take delivery of 589 Ajax and variant vehicles by 2030. The platform is expected to remain in service for several decades.

In a lengthy statement, the MOD said safety was its priority, and that out of an abundance of caution, the Army was pausing all use of Ajax for training for two weeks while a safety investigation is carried out.
Click to expand...
£38 billion is the real figure plowed into this project from it's origin.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom