Just seen this, thought it was interesting
Plus, another video of Scimitar 2 (H/T Snafu)
Think DefenceUK Defence Issues and the odd container or two
Just seen this, thought it was interesting
Plus, another video of Scimitar 2 (H/T Snafu)
Hmmm, start of the vid it shows 4 variants, halfway through it mentions 6 variants and then at the end shows the 4 versions again. seems bridgelayer is now in file 13!
More i see of schimmy 2, more i like it!
All they need to do is replace the old turret with a remote controlled pod with a 30/40mm cannon and stabilised commander and gunner sights, and we have a long term CVR(T) replacement….
And it will have room for a couple of dismounts at least in the back, hopefully
dismounts? nah i’m ex REME i was thinking a microwave and a flatscreen TV (beat you to it TD ner ner ne na na) lol
‘Infantry Carrier SV’ an interesting rename of the block 1 ‘PMRS’ variant. Pushing for other roles already?
Good grief. CVR(T) 2. I joined the 16th/5th Lancers in Tidworth in 1985 as a Troop Leader with 2 Scimitar and 2 Scorpion in my Troop. Even then, the wagons were ancient – apparently as wide as they are as it was the width of a firebreak in a Malaysian rubber plantation, and that’s a conflict we fought in the 60s when I was in nappies. In 2002 as a SO2 staff officer I was working on the URs for FRES (I’m not to blame, I always wanted it to be a simple armour box with some gucci optics and a quick firing Marder type turret). 9 years later, my old wagon is given a paint job by BAE Systems and is in Afghanistan.
I hope they sorted out the electrical connection to the BV. Always dodgy.
Watching the first video I was getting flashbacks of Pentagon Wars… this is not a god thing.
Even Scimitars went in theater aboard An124… What the hell! All that money spent on C17s not to buy Russian, only to do the work with russian airplanes anyway.
I do find it odd that weve got a vehicle here with 4 or 6 variants troop carriers and all yet we spent £1b to upgrade warrior and keep it in service till 2040 and beyond. Should we not just have used that 1b and bought the troop carrier of this instead. Did you see how many cvrt2 we got into the antonov wonder how may FRES SVs.
“Should we not just have used that 1b and bought the troop carrier of this instead.”
1 billion pays for updating over 300 Warriors. It won’t pay for as many new vehicles. Besides, the FRES Infantry Carrier is not an IFV. No big gun on top.
The Army still wants Infantry carrriers AND IFVs.
“Did you see how many cvrt2 we got into the antonov wonder how may FRES SVs.”
I’d say 4, weightwise, seen the AN124 payload capacity. Should have to check the cargo bay sizes, but i think there should not be issues. It’s real big.
The reason they probably went by Antonov rather than C17 is because C17′s and their DAS are being used to support the airbridge for personnel, because we don’t have much else to do it or so it would seem. No personnel, big lift, so civvies in Russian aircraft can do it.
Plus, its probably cheaper
Have the final number of the upgraded Warrior been released anywhere?
On what £1b would buy us
Spain spent about £800m on its entire fleet of 350 odd Pizarros, including its share of the development costs
Or, put another way, a billion quid buys about 285 CV9035′s including support
According to Uncle Wiki of course!
What a load of marketing bollocks!!!
Points:
It mentioned replacement of medium AFVs. That must mean Warrior, surely. If so why the fcuk are we upgrading them? If for the TA fine but to have Warrior and this THING makes no sense to me.
That optical site looks like it could be telescopic. Would make sense if it was. Oh that would be a no then.
I know its only a fcuking computer generated image but could not see any active DAS either.
Still cannot se why the fcuk we are paying half a billion for a existing ASCOD2 pimp mt ride make over.
Waiting for incomming from Bob!
Does anybody know how much Scimitar2 weighs? I went over to Snafu’s site and he’s quoting a Daily Mirror article that it’s 35 tons! Surely that can’t be right?
That “put another way, a billion quid buys about 285 CV9035′s including support” is a good benchmark,
- as it a market price
- and it (or some other figure?) was offered
Let’s not forget that in the end we will get 300-600 upgraded Warriors of different sorts (incl RA)
- not even Bob could keep track of the unit prices (as in upgraded units) because the upgrades are being done in “slices” across varying numbers of units (unknown, and some still undecided/ not funded/ or in negotiation).
The CVR(T) mk 2 is more like 15T. Link to article in Daily Mirror http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/11/07/three-british-soldiers-walk-away-from-bomb-blast-without-a-scratch-thanks-to-scimitar-s-stronger-armour-115875-23543425/
The Scimitar 2 weighs approximately 12 tonnes according to BAE’s International Export Manager. This information was given during a lecture on upgrading the vehicle as recorded on video during DESi in September. I guess that eventually all of these Scimitars and upgraded Warriors will be handed over to the T.A. when enough FRES SV’s become available, but also that the RARDEN turrets and cannon will be stabilised by then and ABM ammo will be introduced to compliment the APFSDS-T round that has been available for the last two years.
I think Bae said 12500 kg for Scimitar 2.
“Have the final number of the upgraded Warrior been released anywhere?”
Not yet. But LM spokesmen were quoted saying that they expect something between 340 and 370. Not all will get the new turret and gun, of course.
Gabriele,
According to Shepherd Media on the 25th October a total of 380 Warriors will be upgraded (all versions), well down on the original 649 that had been thought. This is why I think that they will end up in the T.A., unless this is a first batch of course.
I hope we get the FRES SV planned in all versions, but I don’t believe there will be over 600. I think they will enter an A400M. But I don’t understand that some want to keep a vehicle older than 30 or 40 years, even upgraded?
Frenchie,
The reason is cost, an upgraded AFV is about one third to half the cost of a new one and in this case perfectly adequate for reserve forces who do not put the wear and tear on their vehicles as the regulars do. The rebuilt Warriors should be still very competitive, especially if they were to get an engine power increase to 750-850 h.p. in the next few years, funding allowing.
@Phil Darley
You are right, there is no current plan to fit a hard kill defensive aid system (HKDAS). The UK has reservations about the battlefield credibility of such systems and the one they had hoped to order has unresolved issues. Current thinking is to concentrate on special armour which is seen as better value for a restricted budget and wait for HKDAS to develop further. I am unaware of any British company developing a HKDAS system, although numerous foreign ones are doing so. I would be interested in readers’ views on this policy.
Hi MR,
RE ” in this case perfectly adequate for reserve forces ”
- why wouldn’t they be perfectly adequate for the regular AI bns?
- in the early years FRR/BRR mainly equipped with FRES (some Warrior-based specials like bridge layers and RA teams mixed in)
- and AI riding in Warriors
… MI bns; who knows in what
Then we get to the knit picking: Will there also be a close recce troop in an AI bn with FRES etc (paul g will have to make space in the back for double sets of spares and clear out his “essentials”!)
Hi ArmChairCivvy,
Of course they will be adequate for Al bns in the near future but I am looking long term when FRES SV will be around in decent numbers. The same applies to Scimitar 2, but because the present orders for these AFV’s are much smaller than originally thought, I am assuming that they are a stop gap until around 2020+ when they could then be re-issued to the reserves.
“According to Shepherd Media on the 25th October a total of 380 Warriors will be upgraded (all versions), well down on the original 649 that had been thought. This is why I think that they will end up in the T.A., unless this is a first batch of course.”
380 vehicles are going to be updated because:
A – The 649 Warrior upgrade plan dates back to a time in which the Army had 8 Armoured Infantry Battalions plus 1 training battalion. This has gone down to 5 + 1 post SDSR.
B – The 6 battalions remaining are not supposed to be deployed all at the same time.
Maximum deployment assumptions are for a Division of 3 brigades, for 6 months, which means 3 Armoured Battalions at once. Four, perhaps, at a stretch.
C – Consequently, the 6 battalions are NOT being given enough Warriors to all reach wartime establishment at the same time.
D – In peacetime, Whole Fleet Management means that each battalion operates a small number of vehicles, with the other in storage.
The total fleet will be just big enough to supply enough vehicles to bring to wartime strenght the deploying battalions, according to Deployment estimates, even if it means that the 6 battalions will be, effectively, not capable of all going up to full strength.
Final effect is that 300-some Warriors are enough to cover the armoured infantry battalions requirement as formulated.
The “Warrior to the TA” idea, with the regulars getting a new IFV, is as fascinating as it is hopeless. There’s no aspiration. No plan. And especially no money for it.
Challenger II (which should get a limited upgrade in the middle of the decade) and Warrior will both last out to 2040, and no matter the wishes formulated here or elsewhere, this is the financial and operational reality.
The Challenger II fleet is even more stretched following the 40% cut and considering that some 30 tanks are in Canada at BATUS.
The deployed regiments (again, no more than 3 at a time, in the most ambitious scenarios) will, at most, be able to reach Type 38 strength, if not lower.
There’s no official announcement about this yet, but numbers mean that it is highly unlikely that we can see more than 38 tanks per each deployed regiment.
Risk is that they might effectively be even less than that.
“The same applies to Scimitar 2, but because the present orders for these AFV’s are much smaller than originally thought, I am assuming that they are a stop gap until around 2020+ when they could then re-issued to the reserves.”
Again, sorry, but the chances of CVR(T) MK2 lasting long into the future are close to none.
CVR(T) MK2 is effectively an Afghanistan UOR, and if they live longer than 2015 it is because the remaining vehicles of the 60-or so built are used by regulars waiting for the FRES Scout.
When the Scout arrives, CVR(T) goes. And it is highly unlikely that the TA gets funding to keep the fleet going.
“Will there also be a close recce troop in an AI bn with FRES”
I’d be very surprised if there wasn’t.
Possibly, the two armoured Sqn on FRES SV in the Brigade Recce Regiments will have 12 vehicles, on 3 Troops of 4 vehicles each, 3 of which might be Scout and 1 Protected Mobility carrying dismounts.
The Scout itself has 2 seats in the back.
Perhaps it will carry Desert Hawk 3 teams or some other kind of specialists, or just whoever needs to be brought around at the moment in time.
As it is, there’s a Spartan instead of Protected mobility, so 4 dismounts instead of 8.
Yeah, is is a numbers game (vs. budget frame).
There is a surplus at the heavy end (Ch2, SPG, GMLRS) and yawning gaps in the middle. I think the 50 or so of the “light” armour (and maybe you can put Warthog and Viking into this category as well)is just about right and will be needed (for, dare I say, rapid deployability reasons)by the active formations
FRR/BRR and AI almost sorted (a long time before they get the delivery) so the “orphan child” is now MI
- only ancient or worn-out kit (the former implies the latter, but the Bulldog programme has done much to provide a stop-gap)
Gabby, no one can say for any certainty what will be happening to CVR(T) 2, you, me or anyone else for that matter so your comment about it being close to none have no basis whatsoever
I don’t think any unit in the British Army has ever had its wartime establishment in terms of kit or personnel when not at war, that’s kind of the point, so no surprises there
Same with the structure of whatever comes out of studies on the composition of units to be equipped with FRES, we just do not know what will happen
If you can see out to 2040 then I would be most interested in the next several hundred weeks lottery scores please, there are plans and aspirations but nothing is written in tablets of stone so when you tell us what is going to happen with absolute certainty perhaps you might like to consider the changes that have happened in the last 30 years.
It really is time for CVR(T) to be pensioned off. Great in its day, it has rendered useful service, but it is simply under-protected against IEDs and its gun is state-of-the-ark.
However, I do not believe that Scout SV is the answer, although I very much like its new 40 mm cannon. The ASCOD chassis is almost as old as Warrior’s and uses an identical torsion bar beam suspension. No one has adequately explained what an ASCOD 2 with a 40 mm cannon can do that an upgraded Warrior equipped with the same armament could not.
With a reduced requirement for Warrior infantry vehicles, the surplus vehicles could easily be used for the medium reconnaissance role. This would provide a common vehicle for both infantry and recce regiments. Supporting roles could continue to be provided by recently upgraded bulldogs and other FV432 variants.
During DSEi I heard whispers that Scout SV was already dead. If it isn’t, it should be cancelled and the Warrior upgrade program should be extended to include additional recce vehicles. This may well be Hammond’s first visible act as SOS for D.
What makes me think that there may be substance for this rumour is that there has been no mention of Scout SV when Warrior upgrade was announced. No money has yet been allocated to it.
Finally, as fears of a war with Iran shift from being pure fantasy to a scary but inevitable outcome of its continued quest to develop nuclear weapons, I don’t think we can sensibly say that we have a surplus of anything at the heavy end.
When I made my comments about the Scimitar upgrades lecture at DESi, the point was made by BAE that these vehicles would continue to be modified throughout the next few years, first by fitting ceramic brake discs as per TES(H) Warrior, then new band tracks and roller wheels followed by an armament upgrade probably around the end of this decade. I think that CVR(T)2 will be with us for some time yet and isn’t just an Afgan UOR.
@TD
Certainty, no.
But there is “Highly Likely”, “Likely”, “unlikely” and “holy hell, did it really happen?”.
Warrior to the TA and long-term permanence of Scimitar MK2 both fall into the last one case.
While no one knows for sure, certain things can be guessed with good chances of getting it right.
So far, for example, i’m being proven right on my expectations for CVF conversion, with PoW being the one which gets the cats and all that. It’s not magic, it’s observation.
“Supporting roles could continue to be provided by recently upgraded bulldogs and other FV432 variants.”
Until when?
I bet your car isn’t older than 20 years. Very few are. The FV series will be 62 years old by 2020, and it will have changed its mechanics (engine and stuff) at least thrice. It started eating petrol, after all, as the MK1. It became MK2 when it got a diesel engine, and now it is a MK3/Bulldog after another one major change and upgrade.
I think there must be an end at some point, and holy hell, it is time for the FV43X and CVR(T) both.
“I think that CVR(T)2 will be with us for some time yet”
Just as long until the Scout enters service. Might mean 2017 or so if that’s delayed. But simultaneous long-term running of FRES and CVR(T) is absolutely unlikely.
I agree Mike, especially for light role support, we could find that CVR(T) 2 actually outlives the FRES SV project
Given these are new build hulls, I wonder how much it would cost or if it would be feasible to add the Warrior turret, same narrow turret ring et al, resulting in a new build vehicle
On the subject of IED protection
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/SoldiersSurviveIedStrikeThanksToScimitar.htm
Are we being buttered up with a bit of positive PR before an SV cancellation announcement?
Cynical, moi
This is what happens by the way, when your big projects like CVF, JCA, Trident, Astute, Typhoon and the numerous pay now pay tomorrow as well PFI’s start sucking the wind out of the defence budget.
Stuff that very rarely gets an outing but supports vanities/egos and the defence industry always seems to be first in line with the Army getting the shit end of the stick again and again and again
Hi TD,
I think I have been saying that a couple of times
“This is what happens by the way, when your big projects like CVF, JCA, Trident, Astute, Typhoon and the numerous pay now pay tomorrow as well PFI’s start sucking the wind out of the defence budget.
Stuff that very rarely gets an outing but supports vanities/egos and the defence industry always seems to be first in line with the Army getting the shit end of the stick again and again and again”
And a learning organisation picks up the winning game, and their own is called… “FRES”
- really, really: this gaming is very bad news but the winners carry the trophy for a decade or more – and then it is the next round, a changed environment makes all the arguments look fresh and brand new
Not necessarily weakness of political masters to blame – just the short-lived tenures (14 months vs 14 years, for a really quick platform acquisition)
Hello TD,
I would be very surprised if FRES was to be cancelled in the near future due to two main reasons:-
1. Next Main Gate is 2014 and all is proceeding well (we assume) because it didn’t get mentioned by Liam Fox after the bad projects were named recently.
2. If this was cancelled it may throw our home based AFV manufacturing capability out of the window, as it seems that BAE Land Systems is not in favour any more except as a much smaller contractor. GD has not announced any definite potential export buyer for FRES SV as yet, so I am sure we are all watching to see what might happen in the next year or so, regardless of what we think about it.
I think FRES SV might be cancelled as they have given the Warrior upgrade to LM, and this could be seen as throwing them a bone when the cancel FRES SV. Especially if they use some of the money saved to upgrade a second tranche of Warrior to fill additional roles.
my own (with no facts to back it up) opinion is FRES will go ahead, purely as the ball has been rolling in the infastructure in deepest darkest wales and the loss of jobs (potential and actual)would be a disaster.
As i noted in the first comment 4 variants were shown, 6 listed. This i think will be happening bye bye ambulance (as they are still using the 43 series and a bloody rickshaw would be an improvement). Also the cmmd vehicle will go down the warrior route and it will be a case of remove recce sensor suite and insert radios. If (a big if) they want a bridgelayer then BAe have got it sorted with their warrior version.
However, my balls are made of gristle not crystal so all of the above could be rubbish!
I still cannot see why we need two vehicles capable of doing the same job, similar design, should both be in service, seeing as one of them is 20 years old already. As usual, the MOD is not taking decisions: Warrior needs to be replaced with FRES. It’s idiot “small penny packets of everything” has utterly screwed fleet levels and commonality for fighters (Tornado and Eurofighter), air transport (C130J and A400), helicopters (Puma and Chinook and EH101). Take the decision: bin Warrior and replace everything with FRES.
Hi Mike Reeve,
Your money worries are understandable, especially at this time of crisis, but I think in terms of lives saved. That the reconnaissance troops traveling in jackals and Scimitars is a suicide, when I go every day see the website of the Ministry of Defence and I see every day a died, it makes me sad. If all projects FRES SV and FRES UV were made on time, there would not had all these deaths, especially that the price of Mastiff and other vehicles would have the same price that the FRES UV planned.
This is not an attack against you.
Hi Tubby,
I read this ” they have given the Warrior upgrade to LM, and this could be seen as throwing them a bone when the cancel FRES SV” exactly the other way round
- maximal commonality with SV (through supplier choice) and minimal modifications to the turret (still to fit the fire on the move CTA)
Hi paul g,
OK, money does not (probably?) stretch to the ambulance version of the SV in the first, perhaps not even in the second batch of SV
- this does not mean that the just under 700 hundred WR minus the just under 400 to be modernised = a few left over… to be sent straight to the scrap head; rather small modifications, rather than an all-through upgrade would return a decent battle field ambulance?
Hi ACC,
I thought the turret came from Rhemintal, am I wrong? If LM are sub-contracting in the turret and just integrating it with ASCOD base vehicle then I cannot imagine there is much saving awarding them Warrior contract, or am I wrong?
Hi Tubby,
Out of memory LM is the lead (in both cases) and Rheinmetall the sub
- but the point I was trying to make:
Primarily standardise what goes into those two different turrets
Secondarily, within that constraint, change as little as possible by keeping the new turret design similar to what already was on WRs ( I think the BAE bid was much more a new departure altogether)
Mike,
On the UK AFV manufacturing industry have you had a read of this
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2011/10/fres-british-to-its-bootstraps-part-2/
I wonder where AFV’s will be in the new DIS
Re: Monty’s remarks:
“Finally, as fears of a war with Iran shift from being pure fantasy to a scary but inevitable outcome of its continued quest to develop nuclear weapons, I don’t think we can sensibly say that we have a surplus of anything at the heavy end.”
On the subject of Iran, there was a report today in the “Telegraph” headed “Iran ready and able to build a nuclear bomb, UN watchdog warns the world”. The report details how a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency will detail how specialists from Pakistan and North Korea have helped take Iran to the threshold of full nuclear capability. It goes on to say that in anticipation of the report, tension has risen in the Middle East, amid suggestions that Israel may use it to justify a pre-emptive military strike against Iran. It also mentions how Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister and Ehud Barak, the defence minister, have lobbied cabinet colleagues to back military strikes. Shimon Peres, the Israeli President, has warned that the possibility of the Jewish state launching a pre-emptiveattack is getting “closer and closer”.
Now you might say such warnings are nothing new and that such statements are all part of the diplomatic manoeuvring. However, I think I detect something much more urgent this time and the danger is that we might be sucked into yet another conflict. Mary Ridell, writing a fascinating article on the crisis, quotes Enoch Powell, who said, “History is littered with wars which everyone knew would never happen”.
I might be being unduly alarmist about this and I don’t want people necessarily to discus the probability of war breaking out over Iran. So I’m going to end rather lamely and merely say I agree wholeheartedly with Monty’s remarks about our being unable to say that we have a surplus of anything at the top end! Or the bottom end or in the middle, come to that! Time for more money to be spent on defence? I can’t even say that, as there ain’t any!
BAe should plough some of their own money into CVR(T) 2, lightweight 40CTA turret and perhaps the extended chassis of the stormer and I can see a fairly good market for it.
Hi TD,
RE “I wonder where AFV’s will be in the new DIS?” You also asked earlier, what might France and Germany be spending on defence R&D
- France has now released a document “D E F E N C E K E Y F I G U R E S
2011 release” that has its 2010 figures on p. 12
Hi MIke W,
RE ” I can’t even say that, as there ain’t any!”
- last time around when Europe went broke, an arms race like never before emerged from the mess
I reckon that Scimitar 2 etc will end up replacing the Sturgeon/Salamander fleet that are used by the enemy in BATUS.
@ACC
Good point. Hadn’t thought of that! Forgive my ignorance but presumably you are referring to the post-WWII period and the Cold War arms race? Economies were recovering then,I suppose, albeit slowly.
The Great Depression (normally counted from 1929 but start varied by country)
- halfway through the decade arms race was in full swing
Demob after WW2 was really reversed only by the shock from the Korean War
@ACC
Yes, of course. You might gather that history and economics are not my strong points!
@Grey
“BAe should plough some of their own money into CVR(T) 2, lightweight 40CTA turret and perhaps the extended chassis of the stormer and I can see a fairly good market for it.”
I’m sure you’re 100% correct on that. I’m certain it would sell.
Personally I hope its cancelled.
As mentioned the ASCOT is old technology.
I’d rather they go back and look at the BAe Armadillo built on (admittedly getting old CV90) technology but including research and improvements from the SEP technology programme.
A system which has won far more international improval than the ASCOD with orders. If some of their camoflage technology was included in a Scout variant that would be even better