British weapon supply flights, the first taking off before the invasion started, continue at pace to supply Ukraine with weapons with which to defend itself against invading Russian forces.

The supply flights started before the invasion and have not stopped since. However, they now land in Poland near the Ukrainian border.

UK military assistance to Ukraine

To date, the United Kingdom has committed £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, with £250 million of this amount earmarked for the International Fund for Ukraine. The Government has indicated its intention to surpass this financial commitment in the upcoming 2023/24 fiscal year and is expected to provide further details in the forthcoming Spring Statement.

As the second-largest contributor of military assistance, the UK has provided lethal weaponry such as anti-tank missiles, artillery, air defence systems, armoured fighting vehicles, and anti-structure munitions, including three M270 long-range multiple launch rocket systems. In January 2023, the UK announced a substantial increase in combat support, with the provision of 14 Challenger II main battle tanks.

Moreover, the UK has contributed over 200,000 units of non-lethal aid, including body armour, helmets, night vision equipment, medical supplies, and winter clothing. In November 2022, the Ministry of Defense confirmed the delivery of the first of three retired Sea King search and rescue helicopters to Ukraine.

You can read about the specifics of UK military aid to Ukraine here.

Operation Interflex, the UK’s long-term training program for the Ukrainian armed forces, has the potential to train up to 10,000 new and existing Ukrainian soldiers every 120 days. The program includes the participation of the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Lithuania, and New Zealand, with Australia joining in January 2023. The UK has expanded the program to include Ukrainian fast jet pilots and marines, as confirmed in February 2023.

Combined with economic and humanitarian aid, the UK has committed a total of £3.8 billion to Ukraine since February 2022. It is worth noting that the United States is the largest provider of military assistance to Ukraine, having provided $29.3 billion since February 2022.

Longstanding support

In response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of eastern Ukraine, the UK has been providing military assistance to Ukraine since October 2014. The initial support included a package of non-lethal military equipment, and in 2015, the UK launched Operation Orbital, which focused on non-lethal training and capacity building for the Ukrainian armed forces.

Through several advisory and short-term training teams, Operation Orbital has been the primary means of providing training and assistance to Ukrainian forces. Additionally, the UK launched an initiative to improve Ukraine’s naval capacity and provide training for its naval forces.

UK to build military vessels for Ukraine

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

217 COMMENTS

  1. Ukraine has shown the UK real strengths relative to any of its peers. The ability to bring together a broad coalition of allies, provide world class intel and a number of high tech weapons many at significant scale.

    No doubt the trolls will be on soon to tell us how crap we are again. It’s amazing how much effort the Russians Put in to anti uk propaganda, considering how “irrelevant” we are, they even want to make a bio weapon that targets only Anglo Saxons now.

    • Anglo Saxons? what have the Russians got against Australians? In all seriousness, the UK took the lead in providing military aid to the Ukraine at the start ot the Invasion, setting the example for the rest of the West, especially the US, and Boris needs applauding for that. But….it is not enough. NATO should of enforced a no fly zone over Ukriane as soon as Russia built up it’s forces, this would of prevented the war. Ultimately the supply of Western weapons into Ukraine will not drive Russia out. Putin needs to be given an ultimatum. Get out of Ukraine or…….?

      • There is a lot of Anglo-Saxon demonisation and conspiracy theories in Russia to make us look like the ultimate foe behind everything, like a version of the illuminati! and yes they mean all
        Anglo Saxons everywhere, just look it up. The fact they often refer to us as that (like the French do) is a means to identify a root ‘problem people’, it is a ridiculous term given the make up and history of Britain and somewhat odd and suspicious thing for countries to refer us Anglo Saxons.

        • Us? Anglo Saxons in Britain? The UK PM is not an Anglo Saxons. The only Anglo Saxons left in the UK are Royal Family.

          • Yes ‘us’ as in English. Not sure what you mean, the Anglo Saxon gene pool in England is significant but the point I made earlier is that a tribe does not make a modern country, my Family in Yorkshire goes right back to the Angles but I’m just as English as Rishi. BTW the Anglo Saxon royal family ended with King Harold, our Royal family is traced to William the Conqueror, who was Norman (although partly related), thought you might have known that being English an all….

          • Should be remembered that the Angles (danish invaders) from who Anglo Saxon is named for and gives English (Anglish) its name actually settled the area from the Forth in Stirling to the Humber and formed primarily the kingdom of Northumbria, the lowland Scot’s are just as Anglo Saxon as the English as both also have Celtic minorities in their north and west although much of the latest genetic research is actually showing that the vast majority of Gaelic speakers on the West Coast are not Celtic but Viking as well.

          • Yes absolutely Jim, and ‘Viking’ is pretty much British anyhow given their settlements here that became part of this nation, half the towns around me has Viking names and my own accent had danish influences from all that time ago. So a Scot of today may actually be an Angle or Viking or a Celt, or whatever and vice Versa, all the generations afterwards plus new people has melded and merged to the one thing we all are now, British! hence why I like the UK to stick as it is and not fragment on false tribal arguments (Celts v English, brave heart independence yawn yawn).

          • Honestly, you seriously have not one clue what you are talking about .

            I’m sure that with you being a native English speaker you’ll be familiar with the aphorism ‘Better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt..’

        • Have to disagree on some parts, I was brought up in the Netherlands from a baby to aged 9, I was fluent in Dutch and know the culture there, we were well known in the area as the English family, never were we ever referred as Anglo Saxon at school or anywhere. But I understand the point you make about a shorthand. Countries are not tribes though, they are a collective organisation with identity, this is the mistake some Russians make with Ukraine, because they speak a similar language and may share some heritage it doesnt mean they are somehow ‘all Russian’ and need to be brought together.

    • It is interesting how the critics of the U.K.’s efforts in the military sphere always begin by stating the country’s influence and power are so insignificant and yet have to keep saying it.

      I look at that training package a little differently too. The list of participating militaries is a global and classy war fighting alliance in its own right.

      • Imo the world pecking order goes like this USA still wayout on its own .2 UK just above 3rd place France . 4th Japan 5th South Korea 6 th Israel with Norway& Finland China maybe top 7 ? Totally untested China and it’s weapons and equipment imo much like Russia a paper tiger . Counties under the radar like Australia could also do some damage I wouldn’t have russia top 12 if Russia didn’t have a lot of old Nukes.

        • Interestingly there are 10 recognised world powers, these are now infact called global superpowers…having moved from the purist definition of a military superpower. These are ( in order of power and influence), but this changes and different ways of looking at it have different participants..

          1) US ( obviously)
          2) China ( yep)
          3) Russia ( this is debatable as it only stands there because of its nuclear weapons
          4) Germany ( personally I would place Germany lower down as it does not really have the will)
          5) UK
          6) Japan ( again I question the will)
          7) France ( I think France is a lot higher due to will)
          8) South Korea ( interesting as I would have placed them as a regional power
          9) Saudi Arabia ( money and the oil…this county has far more clout then we release)
          10) UAE ( not sure)

          other assessments include India, Italy and Brazil and remove the gulf states…..it’s an interesting question because it’s not just about wealth, industrial capacity, military capacity, science, political capital or will but a heady mix of all of them.

          • Who can up what that list, look like nonsense to me. South Korea and UAE make zero sense under any matrix.

            Russia also a joke and Germany being in 4th place is laughable.

          • Germany and Japan may both be goaded into demonstrating greater will by the actions of regional competitors (obviously Russia in the case of Germany, China in the case of Japan).

            Fascinating multifactorial analysis may be required to validate any proposed order.

          • Indeed.

            But Germany would have to fix its military problem to field an effective force.

            BW + Doris did manage to fix a lot of the spares and stock problems quietly as all this was building up.

            The fact that PiP, NSM, Ceptor for T45 and Mk41 for T31 are all real is quite a big thing taken together.

          • Germany’s bigger problem than lack of military capability is that it lacks the will to participate in anything much less fight and it’s interest are defined by a myopic set of trade prospects. Honestly the Netherlands is a far more significant power than Germany.

          • I wouldn’t disagree.

            We have seen the issue with Germany loud and clear.

            As we have seen the issue with France and the Mistral and then gunsight contracts.

            But I’d actually push Poland up the list as they have the kit and muscle and the will to act decisively and defensively?

          • ? Did you intend to respond to my post? Simply stated the opinion that Germany and Japan may be on the path to becoming more formidable conventional powers, largely in response to intimidation by regional competitors–at least to the extent additional investment in equipment can result in increased capability. 🤔

            Don’t have significant differences of opinion re the points in your post, actually an admirer of Big Ben (indeed, wish US could recruit him), but fail to connect your points to the proposed ranking system. Believe UK is currently in 4th place and France in 5th, Russia in 2nd (based solely on a nuclear inventory which could be responsible for an extinction event). 🤔

            Finally, concur that RN (including RM) is demonstrating a coherent investment plan; it is unfortunate the pace of improvement is governed so significantly by budgetary restrictions. Hopefully, real world events match that pace. 🤞

    • The other major strength at display Jim, which doesn’t get enough praise, is the British Army effort to coordinate and deliver effective training to the Ukrainian Army. I didn’t realise until I had dinner with a mate who is in one of the Ranger Bns, that the British Army has more sub-units committed to the training than it did to HERRICK at its height.

      They have a direct feedback loop with the front line so are delivering training packages specifically adapting to the needs at the front. Furthermore, the Army’s logistical effort is also providing the Ukrainians with all of their personal equipment – they have a sort of reverse deployment procedure at the JAMC.

      They are also coordinating the training efforts from other nations such as Australia and New Zealand that are being delivered in the UK. It’s actually deeply impressive in terms of scale, effort and effect.

      • 👍👍; demonstrates capability retained to train a domestic volunteer/conscript force at scale, if future need arises.

        • The UK also retains the capability to take in foreign recruits from commonwealth countries as well. That is quite the manpower pool to draw on. The Gurkhas alone get 100 applicants for every space available and no reason why regiments like the east Africa rifles could not be quickly re established.

          If you control the sea and have financing you can buy almost all the kit you need to equip an army of 1 million pretty fast. We just did in in Ukraine.

          If you have a core professional army you can also use it to train up other recruits fast.

          Army’s can’t be built in just a couple of years, navy’s and air forces take decades.

      • Indeed it is a very impressive setup.

        I had a few of the non UK staying with me, for respite, a few weeks ago.

        At this point I’ll go vague, as I hope everyone else does: there is a war on.

  2. OT to some extent, but read articles recently that Pentagon auditors have reduced the value of US contributions to UKR by $6.2B. Evidently under the Presidential Drawdown Authority, US stockpiles have been utilized to a significant extent until recently, as opposed to new commercial purchases. For accounting purposes, it appears that the equipment donated was not properly depreciated. Sorry, but had very little idea that artillery, tanks, etc. depreciated in value while in storage. Assumed that munitions would be either 100% of value or 0% (upon expiration). Fortunately, even dated “last year’s model” equipment, is apparently suitable for purpose! ,🤔🤣😂😁

    • If there is one thing we can count on, it’s the UK Treasury knowing to the exact penny what is being given away and exactly who’s budget it is coming out of when replacements are being procured. There will be a lot less of course. Depreciation and all.

    • Yes, the mistake that some US accountants wernt consistent in their methodology and and used replacement cost for the equipment rather than book value so they were overstating the value of the aid they had given by $6.2bn (less than 10% of the $70bn in aid provided as most had correctly used book value).
      Capital asset depreciation over the assets expected service life is the standard accounting practise, a worn piece of machinery is worth less than a fresh one, machines wear out, missiles that originally had a 10 year shelf life now having a 6 month shelf life remaining. You may argue a missile is a missile whether its new or old but its already served its value by being there to be used if required, having it work reliably when you go to use it is vital too. A missile thats past its shelf life and can no longer reasonably expected to not be a dud is nearly worthless, use it or lose it.

      A piece of equipment thats been sat in reserve in a warehouse for 10 years after already serving 30 years is obviously worth a fraction of buying a brand new more capable zero-hours replacement system.

      • Understand grudgingly re straight line depreciation of munitions, although still believe accounting value should correspond to physical value, 100% if munitions would probably function correctly, 0% if probability of successful operation would be minimal.
        It makes more apparent sense re vehicles; generally would be consistent w/ commercial practice (although does an artillery piece degrade/deteriorate in storage?). 🤔

        • Yes for example a towed 155mm howitzer in storage still requires oiling of its moving parts about every 8 months or so and draining and replacing fluid reservoirs, replacement of batteries every couple of years (for electronics as they deteriorate over time even when not being used), regular inspection of the firing pin for damage or if its somehow gotten lost (e.g. when stuff is moved around the warehouse and dragged out for maintenance), servicing and replacement of tires if decayed and finally repainting every few years.
          If any of this stuff is missed it deteriorates quite rapidly.

          • there was an article somewhere recently about how a high % of US reserve stock that had been pulled to send to Ukraine was found not to have been in a deployable state & had not been maintained adequately whilst in storage.

          • Understood, always presumed British Army provides proper level of care for maintenance of equipment, if feasible.

        • It is a very different accounting problem to amortise equipment (usually a timescale of an agreed annualised rate to effectively zero) for the military since the market is rather specialised and under constraints. Smaller, friendly countries get bargain prices if the cost of storage can be factored!

          • Makes sense. If there aren’t enough Challenger 2s to upgrade to Challenger 3, should be able to obtain mate’s rates on anything less than current spec M1s.

          • We couldn’t operate the logistics for M1s. We don’t have enough fuel transport. (even with C2 it was a logistical headache to get to Basra in 2003 and we were given Basra because it was logistically viable without US support)

          • M1 was specifically rejected in favour of CR2 back in the late 90s, and the main reason for its rejection was the high maintenance and logistic burden (the number of additional fuel tankers and their drivers and maintainers for those fuel tankers that would have been required was fully costed and the figure was horrific).

            I don’t recall that it was very much more logistically difficult to get 120 CR2s to Basra than it had been to get 221 CR1s to KSA in GW1. What were the problems?
            In-country, our troops on TELIC were well suported by 102 Logistics Brigade.

          • I’m not aware of any mechanised force moving any distance in the history of warfare without fuel problems.

            The US had fuel problems just as we did but all objectives were taken. I believe Paton and Montgomery had much the same problem.

          • Jim, I am not disputing that AFVs need a lot of fuel and ammo, spare parts etc – and troops need rations and water Combat Supplies (CSups).

            In my 34 years in the army our tanks and other AFVs and their crews, never ran out of CSups on exercise or on operations – because we do logistics well – [and our tanks are not as thirsty as M1 Abrams].

            I was querying BobA’s assertion that we had some major logistic difficulties on Op Telic firstly getting to Basra and then operating in-country.

          • Yes but it was some what of a sticking plaster, Paton out ran his logistics and it would probably have not matter how much he had as he would keep running until he ran out.

            Army all ways complain about running low on stuff from ammo to fuel and food. It’s just part of the war however US and UK army’s could never dream of running out of stuff like the Germans or Soviets did where there was literally no fuel for tanks or food of any description and ammo was severely rationed at times.

            Even the 101st at Bastogne did not get that bad and they were surrounded.

          • Hmmm…anyone else feel compelled to rewatch the movie Patton after reading about Patton’s and Montgomery’s advance through France, or Patton’s Third Army relief of the 101st Airborne at Bastogne? BTW, AAF C-47s did drop supplies once cloud cover lifted sufficiently. In any event, if I recall correctly most of your references are covered in the movie. 🤔😁😉

          • My understanding (from chatting to the 1LI guys, and someone from
            102 Log, it was the lack of fuel tankers that meant that their operational manoeuvre was limited in range. Apparently we were originally supposed to have Mosul as the objective, but when Turkey vitoed the invasion from its soil, the US had to do it because we didn’t have the range.

          • I am puzzled about a lack of fuel tankers. Considerable resources were committed to Op Telic, including 46,000 troops and included strong second line logistics.

            I had not heard that we Brits were initially allocated Mosul, but that would have made some sense had the allies invaded from Turkey as per original plan, with the US going on beyond us to Baghdad. Mosul however made no sense for a British objective when the plan was switched to invade from Kuwait as it was 415km beyond Baghdad.

            With the approach from Kuwait, Basrah was a very significant objective being Iraq’s second city, no less, and a key port.

            The switch to Basrah was clearly due to fitting with the allied approach from Kuwait and being a better, more logical,more significant objective, rather than because we had insufficient fuel to go to Mosul which would have then lacked significance.

          • That makes no sense to me as the US 4th division was stationed in Turkey expecting to take Mosul before Turkey pulled the plug and they hand to ship round to Kuwait.

            UK forces along with USMC were lighter and amphibious and much more suited to grabbing the south.

          • It never ceases to amaze me the USA doesn’t bring out a diesel powered M1. Less fuel tanks more room for ironmongery!

          • We bought 386 CR2s in late 90s but now have 227 CR2s declared as active, less the 14 we sent to Ukraine, so there are sufficient for the 148 required for the CR3 project.

          • We also have 79 in storage. If the will was there we could expand CR3 numbers from 148 back to 227, or heaven forbid more. We’d also have to invest in more IFV to support them mind.

          • Big Ben said he would review the numbers of CR3s to be ordered in light of the biggest land war in Europe since 1945! Yep, that should be a relevant factor, especially as both sides are using a lot of armour.

            IR Refresh 2023 has happened and we now wait until after the NATO summit in Vilnius to see what is written into the Defence Command Paper – I am not optimistic though – the money isn’t there for more Defence kit and tax cuts in the run up to the next Election – and BW has already got two extra chunks of money in recent years.

            IFVs – that’s interesting. Government (foolishly and without explanation, but I can guess why) cancelled the WCSP upgrade to our Warrior IFVs – and are buying Boxers instead (I’m waiting to see if they will be the tracked version, will each carry a stabilised 40mm cannon and will cost less than having proceeded with WCSP – I think we know the answer to that one!).

          • Afternoon Graham,

            I think we may have an indication as to whats being fitted on Bpxer. Go and have a look over on UK Land Power, there are several videos of a Boxer variant being trialled with a Bushmaster XM813 30mm cannon, also includes a 12.7mm and 7.62mm MGs. Apparently its for UK ICV requirement. If correct, then can’t see any IFV variant being fitted with spare 40mm CTAS weapons! Still, stranger things have happened in the army!!!

          • Thanks Deep, I could not see the videos at first glance – my first time on that website and it looks very good.
            ICV – Infantry Carrier Variant?

            Currently MoD has ordered several hundred Kongsberg RS4 PROTECTOR RWS for Boxer, which do not take a cannon, although larger Kongsberg RWS do. But that was all before the decision to drop upgraded Warrior.

            I doubt 30mm Bushmaster XM813 (a development of a 50 year old cannon!) will be as good as CTAS 40mm for lethality, range etc – and would it even be stabilised?

          • Hi mate, have to agree, it’s a pretty good site, said owner seems to have an inside track on all things Boxer.

            Also agree with you, can’t see Bushmaster being as effective or light as the CTAS 40mm, despite its Uber expensive ammo!

            You have to wonder what the army is going to do with all those spare 40mm barrels? Can’t see to many other nations queuing up to buy a job lot!

            I would like to think that sometime soon, we will get to know the various variants the army are going to purchase/build. Obviously the four we already know about are just the beginning, but still, shouldn’t we be further down the procurement line by now?

          • Hi Deep, its not just a load of 40mm CTAS cannons that are no longer needed with the scrapping of the Warrior upgrade – its the new turrets that they go in! Unless it is possible to bolt them onto Boxers!

            The Boxer variants mix has been known about for some time – Wiki is good.
            Feb 2018 – ARTEC places contracts with many British suppliers
            Nov 2018 – MoD places contract for 523 Boxers at £2.3bn (figure later revised to £2.8bn) – very expensive wagons! of which 262 will be built by RBSL Telford.
            Apr 2022 – MoD orders 100 more Boxers – not sure of the mix.
            June 2023 – reports that the order has increased to 1000 vehicles.

            From army-technology.com, 7/6/21 – “Of its 523 Boxer MIVs, the UK will receive 85 infantry carrying vehicles, 60 engineer section vehicles, 62 recce and fire support vehicles, 28 mortar carriers, and 50 equipment support and repair platforms.

            The British Army will also acquire a mix of 123 command and control vehicles and C2-utility vehicles, 19 observation post vehicles, 24 beyond-line-of-sight platforms, 11 electronic warfare & SIGINT (signals intelligence) vehicles and 61 ambulances.

            The UK vehicles Remote Weapon Stations will be equipped with a mix of Heavy Machine Guns (HMG), Grenade Machine Guns (GMG) and General Purpose Machine Guns (GPMG).

            First Boxers are due to be with units later this year.

          • Morning Graham,

            Thanks for the detailed post, was aware of some of the variants but not all, nor the numbers per type other than the Infantry section vehicles, which is currently alarming low given that the first 520 odd vehicles will only equip 2 Inf Batt.

            I do wonder if the issue of the turrets is not as simple as just fitting it on to the Boxer hull. Read somewhere a while ago that Mod were concerned with vehicle potentially being ‘top heavy’ depending on the fit! Not sure if it was true, but find it rather odd given that both AUS and Lithuania have turreted versions with no potential weight issues.

            You can only assume that the next 100-400 Boxers on order will contain a greater mix of Inf carrying vehicles, especially as they are replacing Warrior from 2025. I expect we will also see more variants to support those IFV types. Whether or not we actually get upto the 1400 units quoted remains to be seen, but personally, would like to see the Boxer numbers held at around 1000, with the money for the potential last 400 units being put towards a tracked IFV capability (direct Warrior replacement). All wishful thinking I know….

          • Hi Deep,

            Daniele and I both spotted that the number of Infantry section carriers in the Qty 523 (Tranche 1) order is very low, and can only equip 2 of the 5 battalions in the Armoured BCTs.

            I’ve never heard of MoD concerns about Boxer being top-heavy with a cannon-equipped turret – alarming level of ignorance if so – the platform is very stable as it is huge and has 8 spread-out wheels – and other countries have such a turret, as you say.

            I expect MoD will not buy total of 1400-1500 Boxers on the grounds of cost – they are crazy-expensive wagons. What’s new? – not enough Warriors were bought in the late 80s to replace all FV430s – hence we have a large number of 60-year old 430’s still in service.

            …and to think upgraded Warrior (WCSP) and ABSV would only have cost £1bn together (development, testing and production).

            I like your idea of buying a proper tracked IFV one day! But bean-counters would not allow two types of infantry carrier in the Armoured BCTs.

          • Sure, MoD ordered Kongsberg RS4 for Tranche 1 Boxers, based on the MIV requirement for the two Striker brigades, which of course have been dropped from the Orbat now.
            Still time to get the RT60 for the later tranches.

          • Yes thanks. We paid a lot of money to help develop the CTAS 40 mm cannon, we have lots of spare ones following the demise of WCSP. Unless there is a compelling engineering reason, it makes you wonder why we aren’t re-purposing them?
            Of course, might just be a financial decision, as the cost of the ammo is horrendous too.

          • I think the French have a design for a maritime version, not sure if it’s actually been put into service though. Can’t really see us adopting it for the Navy. Still, stranger things have happened.

          • My old boss used to say I’ve got an itch I can’t scratch. That’s how feel about the whole ‘CR3/WCSP/ Boxer/ CTA40/ Ajax/ Future soldier’ thing. I believe that the CTA 40mm on both Ajax and Warrior was key to the decision to reduce Challenger numbers; in fact to the whole strategy: it was a dependency and that is why Ajax has to succeed and its why we hear nothing about Warrior successor except that it will be Boxer based. There was no backup plan for the scenario that WCSP failed ( or was chopped for budget reasons’.We are now in Harrison Ford mode, improvising, working things out as we go.

          • Paul,
            How does the provision of 40mm cannons justify reducing the number of 120mm equipped MBTs? Different weapons, different roles, different targets.

            To me it is clear that MoD ordered Tranche 1 of Boxers to meet the MIV requirement for Carter’s two Strike brigades, then whoops… the army cancelled the two Strike brigades from the Orbat. What to do? I know. Lets scrap Warrior (and its upgrade) and then the AI can have those Boxers we ordered but don’t now have any strike brigades to put them in! Funny, strange, but probably true.

          • Morning Graham, I have to say I don’t know. I’m just saying that it seems to me that somebody thought it did, and came up with a plausible argument for it which they sold to decision makers. I would like to know what that rationale was and who made it. In addition to smaller MBT numbers it is now looking as though a good tracked IFV with a 40mm will be replaced by wheeled APC with a Bushmaster. Not saying that’s good or bad. It’s just not where many folks think we need to be.

          • Paul, I think its called Defence Cuts. Thus there is no military logic at play. The politicos chose to cut the army yet again, by 10,000 in the current iteration, then Orbats shrink and something has to go.
            I would like to hear from an Infantryman as to what they think of losing upgraded, uparmoured, upgunned, tracked Warrior IFV and instead getting Boxer, with at best an unstabilised 30mm cannon, and at worse a HMG in a RWS.

          • I’m sure you are right. It’s not like it hasn’t happened before. Cancel TSR2….re-use Bucaneer. I just need to accept it. So the infantryman will be comparing Bushmaster / RT60 against Rarden.

          • I don’t doubt it. Necessity is the mother of invention. We are at our best when the pressure is on 🙂

          • Perhaps Big Ben will be able to finesse an increase in CR 3 after Vilnius. Hope occasionally triumphs.🤞

          • Forgive me for being pessimistic but I am not holding out much hope. There is no new money, not unless NATO come out of that summit and agree a 2.5% minimum.

            Boxer will be our IFV for better or worse, and the 40mm CTAS weapons will be sold or scrapped.

            On the plus side, there is apparently funding in place for 1,000 Boxers, will an intent to buy more.

            Fingers crossed it isn’t as bad as I fear!

          • I am not hopeful of more money being found. In his time Big Ben has managed to get two extra lump sum payments – he can’t do it again as there is little money in the kitty and the Tories have not yet built HS2, those 40 new hospitals, paid down the National Debt after the pandemic – and dished out tax cuts as a pre-election sweetener.
            Even if NATO agree a higher target or floor figure – we are not obliged to reach it in any set timescale.

            Sadly Boxer will be our IFV – and they all need a beefy stabilised cannon – and we must hope that they have sufficient mobility to keep up with the tanks in deep mud, snow and ice. We must ask the French if a tank and wheeled APC grouping works.

            I am not suprised there is funding in place for 1,000 Boxers – but we are buying the most expensive wheeled Inf carrier in the world – would have been much cheaper to upgrade Warrior.

          • I have a fair bit of info on why that program was cancelled, I have a couple of colleagues who were working for LM at the time. Let’s just say it was run by managers who had no engineering experience. But who also believed in working directly to APM timescales, without the understanding of requiring flex when trials get delayed by “unknown unknowns”. Both of them had said that given another 6 to 9 months the issues would have been sorted.

            I always thought that it was just a gun upgrade with a new turret. But it was a full refurbishment following a complete strip down, and it included a new small auxiliary power unit, new wiring with 1553 databus, plus new armour. The engine was one of the few item’s that wasn’t being replaced. So in essence the Army would have got basically new Warriors, but with a significant capability upgrade.

            Sad really!

          • Some one said to me that the warrior hulls were basically custom made in batches and weren’t all to a common standard. This could of caused a nimrod situation where parts won’t fit without individual modifications. This would of made it a lot more expensive and difficult to fit new standard turrets etc.
            Do u think there’s any truth to that?

          • Thanks Davey for the post. Seems staggering that an engineering company would assign a Programme Manager and others without engineering experience – as an ex-REME officer who has worked in and with engineering companies and has been a MoD Project Manager, I cannot comprehend that.
            I have always been a fan of Warrior – in many respects it was better than Marder, Bradley and the BMPs.
            We used to regularly both Base Overhaul AFVs (about every 7 years or so) and also to regularly complete both simple modifications and significant upgrades. It is salutary to look at the Wiki entry for Chieftain to see listed the very many upgrades and allocation of a fresh Mark number.

            Warrior only received BGTI and Bowman as upgrades AFAIK.

            The upgrades that were cancelled were latterly put under the WCSP: and comprised:
            Warrior Modular Protection System (WMPS) – improved and higher tech armour – for 643 vehs
            Warrior Enhanced Electronic Architecture (WEEA) – to improve reliabilty of electronics and to digitise 643 vehicles

            Warrior Fightability Lethality Improvement Programme – brand new turret with larger hatches, better sensors and the stabilised 40mm CTAS cannon – for 449 of the 643 vehs.

            The other 194 Warriors would be stripped of their old turret and converted into ABSVs to augment the REME Recovery and Repair variants, and also to replace FV432 Bulldog.

            All of the above for just £1bn!

            I hear the trials were 80% complete and were going well, although dates had slipped.

            Given that we have experience of running tracked Infantry vehicles for 60 years, I am sure these hugely improved Warriors would have seen us sorted for a very good long time – and allowed money to be committed into other AFV programmes – perhaps we could have had 227 CR3s!

            The improvements represented by WCSP should have been done in stages from the mid-90s onwards.

          • I’m not sure the U.S. give mates rate TBH ( unless your israel and then you get the full free sample kit).

        • In addition to Watcherzero’s comments whuich are great, a lot depends on whether the stored vehicle or artillery piece is in good storage conditions – Controlled Humidity Environment (CHE) is preferred.
          Fortunately the Vehicle Depot at Ashchurch is in the middle of an upgrade.

        • Is a 1 year old 155mm shell worth more or the same than a 2 year old 155mm shell….a question for the ages.

      • I suspect it is simpler than that.

        some things that were of unknown age or batches of mixed age were put down at replacement cost.

        Then the true book values, based on depreciation, were calculated and updated.

        This is almost certainly so nobody falls foul of versions over aggressive federal accounting policies.

    • How ever one looks at the accounting, the U.S. has saved the day.The war will end some time, perhaps not as hoped but better than I for one believed it would – I gave Ukraine five or six days at best. When the war does end Russia will have been defeated without a doubt; it has already lost on the battlefield and also hugely in political terms; it is objectively a far weaker country today than it was in February 2022. This is in great part due to the Ukraine being one country that will use massive amounts of donated top line military equipment to fight and fight hard (c.f. Iraq or Afghanistan); and the U.S. coming forward and prepared to take a considerable reputational risk following on from recent set backs.

      • I hope the US will continue to save the day, but Biden is weak and makes some bad decisions, including military ones. Would he continue with a big military aid programme to UKR as the Election date gets closer – and would the new President continue the programme at high rate, whoever that might be?

        The war will only end when Putin leaves office, either by the door or by the window!

        • 3rd option – polonium tea.

          Russia will try and drag this out and hope that the US loses interest.

          The war may well end with negotiation if Ukraine is unable to make large gains and the US threatens to reduce support if they don’t go to the table.

          • Absolutely concerned that if UKR doesn’t make substantial gains during this year’s counter-offensive, US Presidential politics will intrude upon continued funding; divided Congress and weak President are not ingredients in a slam dunk recipe for success. The only subject on which there is near unanimity of US opinion, is the entire subject matter of the scum-sucking, slimeball ChiComs (not that I have a personal bias re ChiComs, mind you 😆😉)

          • I disagree. Ukraine stopping Russia advancing much further than they have already is more than enough to keep funding coming.
            Russia will give up before the west does and Ukraine will never give up.
            See the difference is Ukraine and it’s supporters would rather keep the troops alive and equipment intact than waste it for very little gain. Putin doesn’t care how many come back in a box

          • Read an article recently that the German Army High Command was always concerned by presence Soviet engineers at Stalingrad. If allowed time to create defensive fortifications, Soviets proved to be extremely difficult to dislodge. (Rather like an infestation or metastasis.) However, the next iteration of UKR counter-offensive (2024) could have an interesting Tac Air component. If US trains and equips UKR w/ adequate numbers of F-16s and hypothetically, (fully depreciated 😁) A-10s, UKR could conduct true combined arms ops.

          • Read an article recently that the German Army High Command was always concerned by presence Soviet engineers at Stalingrad. If allowed time to create defensive fortifications, Soviets proved to be extremely difficult to dislodge. (Rather like an infestation or metastasis.)

            2024 op could include an interesting Tac Air component. If US trains and equips UKR w/ adequate numbers of F-16s and hypothetically, (fully depreciated 😁) A-10s, UKR could conduct true combined arms ops.

          • Actually, should amend last post to indicate Soviets, on balance, were the aggrieved party, at Stalingrad.

          • Ironically, the Germans themselves helped the Soviets at Stalingrad. In August 42 the Luftwaffe reduced the place to rubble, which instantly created perfect defensive conditions, before any Soviet Engineers could have contributed.

            That the 6th Army should have taken it easily without much fight by late July had Hitler not diverted much strength needlessly south is another story! And also that it was not necessary to even take Stalingrad either!

          • Doesn’t came across at all….

            Got to love their bare faced cheek. Demanding that the Falklands are handed over to Argentina, while taking over the SCS, militarizing it, and all the while openly threatening Taiwan.

            It must take some balls to stand in the UN and say these things while keeping a straight face.

          • Yes, I can safely put all that you’ve posited there in the bin marked ‘Bullshit ‘.

            However, I think in your dissembling, you’ve projected what the Chinese government are thinking of the Russian military. Russia is after all China’s little bitch now.

        • Assume that POTUS is generally provided reasonably sound professional military advice. Unfortunately POTUS is an unconstrained choice of the American populace, and we don’t often have an Eisenhower available for duty.

  3. Jim correct. Thing is Russia can never be a genuine world power military or cultural like the UK was empire days we live rent free in Russians heads . They are obsessed with the UK also something else that doesn’t get much mention how the yanks with the lend lease deal saved Russia ww2 stalin admitted Russia would have lost without lend ease

    • Peter, it was not only the Yanks and lend lease, we the Uk sent to Russia in WW2 tanks, Spits, Mossies, trucks and yes first generation jet engines etc. We hoped they would be a good partner. Also what is not know when we sent these and much more the US down graded the lend lease numbers of kit to the UK. What that meant is if the UK sent a fighter aircraft to Russia the US would send one less aircraft to the UK. If we sold a steam engine to India the value was taken of the lend lease agreement.

      The reason that we live in the Russian head is because of the support we gave to the White Russians in 1917-1920. This means a simple Russian concept, Trust is Good, Control is Better.

      Then comes the next problem, (problem,a word I don’t use often). I worked for many years in both the Ukraine and Russia. There is a diffrence in the mentality. In the Ukraine I did my job, yes I had a driver due to some corruption but I built the mobile network and was involved with the redesign of security and communications of the Ukrainian national back. In fact I was the very first Westerner to have access to the communications room and banking system.

      Back to mentality, in the Ukraine I walked about, talked about history, learnt and in the end respected. This was a two way respect, they understood I did not care but was going to design and build a comms network. I set out to make it work with backup and reroute ability even if it would cost more.

      In Russia I had bodyguards,questioned, open speach was not possible, I found them blinkered. I find that Russia seems to have a small man syndrome, they cannot open up an speak what they think. It got to the point that when I was asked to design the communication system of the National Bank of Russia,(yes the same as the Bank of England) I said NO. I did howerver build some systems in both Moscow and Petersberg, I’say no more.

      I have the gut feeling that Putin and Russia have the Issue of what they have as a cuddle name for the Ukraine: little Russia. The translattion is poor, but the meaning is very much as if a granparent is speaking about their granchild and comparing it to their daughter. However it is more akin to the way that England sees Wales. The big or older brother being taken over by the younger. Don’t forget that the Kievskie Rus Is much older than the Russian fed.In fact Moscow was founded by the Princies of Kiev

      What Russia and Putin needs to understand is this,what will he do if he wins. Can he control a country twice the size of the UK with 40 million people that hate him or the Russian nation. Russia will be fighting a war of hit and run raids. Believe me it was bad enough to get my signals through many of the forests. When I was doing my PhD Naval history I came about a comment made in the UK Parliment about the US war of independence. An MP said this, we can win the war but what then, we cannot police the nation. It would take more troops than what we have in the nation as a population. So Putin needs to understand, he will never get control of the UKraine, even if he wins the war.

      • Ron .You’ve got a lot of inside knowledge of Russia thanks for the sharing . I’ve only got tourist knowledge of Russia and that was eye opening how backward a country Russia is .

      • The US does not understand the British way of war, it’s not fair to fight anyone unless you sell them weapons first. 😀

      • Remember also just after ww2 the soviets were allies and there was hope that we could work together. The iron curtain speech and the real breakdown of relations didn’t come until after the jet engines.

        • Yes, W.S.Curchill’s ‘Iron Curtain’ speech validated A. Lincoln’s homily ending in “… you can’t fool all the people all the time.” Presumably, Stalin was suitably pleased and amused by the irony that his former wartime partner, turned implacable critic, was unable to thwart Stalin’s post-war European machinations, precisely as a result of democratic elections. 🤔😳

        • Remember also just after ww2 the soviets were allies

          No, they were concurrent combatants that before the Nazi attack against Soviet Union undermined and effectively sabotaged Great Britain.

  4. Re the P50u ships being built in U,K could they be sailed to Germany sailed and transported to the black sea via the river and canal network I know in WW2 the Germans transported subs via this route, if so these ships should be completed ASAP and used to help defend the odessa black sea area.

    • Like your alternative logistical thinking number 700!
      Maybe a few of these for the RN too… just kidding! 😁

    • I don’t believe that is possible for other than tiny boats, or low profile barges. A bateau mouche could do it.

      I looked into this before, and I believe there are severe limitations on both max height above water (bridges), and water depth. IIRC the numbers are around 5-6m and 3m at their tightest.

      Check the Rhine–Main–Danube Canal.

      If I recall my history correctly, the German U-Boats in WW2 were dismantled and transported in pieces.

  5. All good stuff. We could do more though.
    We could’ve NOT ruled out sending British troops just before Putins 2022 invasion, we could’ve deployed air power, we could’ve sent token aircraft to try to nudge others to supply them too when Ukraine is begging desperately for them.
    We could have stood on our treaty obligations for which Ukraine surrendered her nukes & said if Russia invaded we would join Ukraine’s defence until all Russian forces left Ukraine. Probably should’ve done someting like that when Russia annexed Crimea.
    It’s a mess. When N Korea, backed by the USSR & PRC, invaded S Korea, the UN deployed a large coalition from across the world. Today we leave Ukraine to suffer, just slowly ramping up equipment supplied,training their troops etc.

    Nuclear blackmail works either when the targeted party has none of their own & surrenders, or when nations who have their own nukes surrenders to threats rather than saying, “If you use nukes we’ll respond in kind”, nullifying the threat/intimidation. When a deranged dictator threatens nations with WW3 if he doesn’t get exactly what he wants, that is the time to stand up & face him down.

    Thankfully Ukraine has not surrendered in the face of outrageous cruel aggression & fought tenaciously for their nation. Thankfully Russian forces are much weaker than we feared. What we have learned is that NATO is woefully short of necessary political leadership & munitions to sustaing anything beyond a brief war. Decades of running down most European NATO armed forces encourages our biggest foes to strut menacingly on the world stage.

    • Agree with all that. Sad state of affairs Bidden is a weak senile President he should have taken a much firmer line immediately pre invasion. The result is Ukraine needs huge investment in terms of donated armaments, munitions etc that we are struggling to replace. Ukraine’s economy has been battered leading to a need for huge bailouts. Then don’t get me started on the £500+ billion reconstruction costs and counting.
      I think you are right. A crash deployment of troops in support of Ukraine pre deployment and enforcing a no fly zone would have stopped the Russians invading.
      Preventing the war would have been less costly in terms of finance and human suffering.
      Part of me thinks the West wanted Russia embroiled in Ukraine so they could be militarily bogged down, although I think that has just been an accidental unforeseen side effect of Ukrainian bravery and tenacious defence.
      There was no unified plan from the West and that’s why we are in the mess we are in.

    • I agree with eveything you say. The issue with NATO is that it is reactive and not proactive.The second issue with NATO it needs everyone to say yes and not a majority.The third issue that NATO and for that matter the EU have three countries, France, Turkey and Hungary. All three block NATO and EU responce due to the veto method.
      As for that matter, the US and UK, I am not sure but I think France was also involved in the garantee of the Ukraine borders on the condition of the Ukraine given uo their nuclear missiles.

      I know the Ukraine destroyed the missiles and silos, I watched them being torn apart or filled.

      However, I do have a question, what would have happened if the UK and the US forward deployed a division of troops and a combat aircraft group to the Ukraine. Would Russia attack? We Europe if not the world have the biggest casult numbers since WW2? Would it have happened if we carried out our paper promise?

      • Russia of course was a signatory too, but yes USA, France not sure, maybe an “observer” or similar as were many Continental nations.

        We(UK, US) could’ve deployed troops & aircraft on the NATO side of the NATO-Ukraine border & said if Rusia invades, our forces come in to assist Ukraine.

        Not a fan of Biden, criminally insane to suddenly pull out of Afghanistan leaving the Taliban to take over & do whatever they want to. Dropped the ball making no tangible deterrent to Russia invading Ukraine. But he’s an improvement on Trump IMO, at least he’s not a Putin fan or risking civil war.

        Mr Bell- I don’t think the West wanted a Rusian war in Ukraine, but it may be the case that the cabal of cynical “kingmakers” who run the West may have thought it helpful to keep the money flowing in. Just the same as they love recessions & austerity as it makes them even richer. Caring not one jot for the suffering it causes.

        • Can virtually guarantee historians will draw a straight line from chaotic Afghan withdrawal to Ukrainian conflict. Biden had preconceived opinion re Afghan, seized on any pretext for withdrawal. Russians and ChiComs duly noted and logged decision. Other shoe will drop when ChiComs invade Taiwan. ☹️

          • Believe there is a vanishing small probability Taiwan will be surrendered to the clutches of PRC, short of all-out conflict.

          • Your national waters remain at 12 miles or the median point regardless of the status of islands off the mainland. The EEZ is a different matter but does not impact on free movement of shipping in international waters. There is no way (if the Channel islands were part of the UK) that we could claim the sea between Jersey and Weymouth and close it to other users.

          • Taiwan/China is an odd one. While everyone keeps pretending there is one China, nobody is exactly clear about which one. The Republic predated the Peoples Republic, so previously claimed the mainland. Taiwan as Formosa was part of the Japanese empire. The “natives” of the island are definitely not Han Chinese. I think maybe it is time it became a state in its own right and this charade ends.

      • Deploying 13 divisions and a lot of RAF aircraft of the BEF to France did not stop the Nazis invading France.

  6. Great that we continue to support Ukraine, without our lead, I suspect a far larger portion of Ukraine would now be under the control of Russia, with little hope of it being returned back to the Ukrainians.
    I hopes that we have started using “commercial” flights for delivery of the more “benign” military aid we are supply, as it must surely be cheaper than using RAF planes.
    My biggest concern it that once the conflict is over, it will be “EU” businesses that will get the bulk of the work in rebuilding and re-arming Ukraine, and the Brits will miss out and just be a footnote in the liberation and rebuilding of the country.

    • RAF transport is the right way for arms. You don’t really want to make public what we are sending. Commercial flights will take over for rebuilding the economy.
      EU firms probably will get most of the reconstruction business. But that’s not surprising since the EU economy is 4 times the size of UK economy. Poland has cared for over 3 million refugees from Ukraine. The Ukrainians are a fair people. They will not forget that the UK has been a good friend and been a leader in supporting their country. If we make what they need at a fair price they will buy from us.

    • A hypothetical future scenario: after protracted war of attrition in which both sides are bled white, negotiations commence re a demilitarized zone to enable an armistice (not a definitive conclusion to conflict). Uncertain where boundary will be drawn, optimistically–less than 2014 Russian encroachment/boundary, realistically–2014 boundary, pessimistically–significantly greater than 2014 boundary. UN eventually invited in as peacekeeping observers. Meanwhile Russian foreign assets seized by cooperating foreign governments are eventually expropriated and form the nucleus of a UKR redevelopment fund. NATO aid continues at some level to UKR and over a period of years UKR military obtains NATO level of competency, professionalism and crucially, equipment. Formal accession to NATO blocked by Hungary and Turkey for an indeterminate period. UKR eventually invited to join EU and enjoys significant economic progress. Russian-US relationship does not materially improve. New START allowed to lapse w/out renewal in 2026, new nuclear arms race begins w/ three principals: China, Russia and US. France and UK eventually increase inventories to match or exceed maximum Cold War inventories. ‘Peace’ restored to European continent, albeit by two armed camps facing off on a hair-trigger alert status. Of course, Mad Vlad could choose to go completely off the rails; in which case, there will be a massive, literal, no-notice, come to Jesus meeting.

  7. Latest pics in news, Ukraine Strikes Crimea Bridge with Storm Shadow Missile.

    Hole in the ground looks about 3ft wide, unless it hit the bridge, went straight through it and didnt detonate whatever damaged the bridge clearly was not a Storm Shadow.

    • JIMK wrote:
      “”Ukrainian forces have hit with a Storm Shadow (the serial number plate has been found) barrage (2/3 definitely, possibly 4) the Chongar bridge on the administrative border between the Kherson region and Crimea.””
       

      No, they haven’t, the damage to the bridge is consistent with the damage we have seen inflicted on other bridges by artillery-based weapons. The Storm Shadow in bunker mode comes with two explosive detonations, the BROACH (cutting charge) and the main explosive yield and as we have elsewhere when that main 450 kg charge goes off, it obliterates anything in the vicinity, as we can see that hasn’t happened on either of the small bridges.

      Finally, there are 3 impact sites (one on each bridge) and one to the side,which tends to point to the use of something a lot smaller than Storm shadow with the possibility that there were 2 rounds, bombs, sent against each bridge, with one missing. The crater left by the one that missed is not big enough to have been made by a Storm shadow,

      Video of the bridges post strikes

      • Then there is actual video of the detonation of one of the weapons on one bridge (second video) and the blast is from a much smaller yield weapon than a cruise missile

        • But they have the storm shadow serial number plate🙈. Russia probably printed hundreds of them to show off. What we do all know is that we can’t believe anything that comes from Russia as they lie so much.
          More research needed on this topic.

          • JIMK wrote:
            “”Big enough incoming missile and explosion for a Storm Shadow””

            Here’s a clearer longer version of that video which:
            1) Shows the blast cloud in full
            2) Shows it dissipating in seconds

            As I pointed out to you before,
            1)    The strikes were similar to other previous strikes carried out on bridges by artillery
            2)    The main charge on a storm shadow would have wiped out the entire bridge, as in blowing it apart
            3)    Just for context, Storm Shadow has a 450 KG high explosive charge. The M31 MRLS High explosive missile used by HIMARS and the M2270, contains 45Kgs of High Explosives, The Ground launched Small Diameter Bomb contains 16kgs of High Explosives and a High Explosive 155mm round contains. (M795) contains 10.8 kg of High Explosive.
             
            Due to the limits on links, the next post shows the aftermath of a Storm Shadow missile on the occupied port of Berdiansk as you can see there is a huge difference between a small round, missile, bomb containing between 10.8kgs to 45Kgs of High Explosives to a cruise missile containing 450kgs.

          • The aftermath of a Storm Shadow strike on the Russian occupied port of Berdyans. Take note of the:
            1) Size of the cloud
            2) The distance from the strike for the main video

            There is a good reason why Cruise missiles are used to take out entire targets: HQs, bridges, supply points, factories, chemical plants , ammo magazines, harbour areas and if you are Russian , shopping centres. For a couple of small concrete bridges to remain standing after getting targeted by at least 4 Storm Shadows (That’s 1800Khs of High explosive in total) Then either those bridges are made out of a really superior form of reinforced concrete , the Russians have in place a new explosive suppression device (Which for some reason they have not used elsewhere) or the munitions that struck those 2 bridges were not Storm shadows.

        • Oh dear Farouk took you to task and you cringe and back off, as you know your posts are crap, and don’t have the nads to argue your case and your version of events! Do you ever get bored of being made to look the bullshitter you are?

  8. I wonder what equipment we will supply next to the brave Ukrainian forces.
    I expected us to deliver a further tranche of CR2s, as just 14 was miserly.
    How about Warrior as ‘the powers that be’ have decided to soon get rid of the vehicle – there will be some in storage that could be released before the Armoured Infantry’s replacement Boxers arrive.

    • I wonder how many are stored. It will be many years before Warrior is gone from the AI Bns and the RAC is using it as a stopgap as they decided to go ahead and remove the CVRTs anyway even though Ajax is delayed.

      Challenger, Warrior, CVRT, all needing replacing at the same time….idiots.
      And to top it off, they then commit to Boxer, who’s value dwarfs Ch LEP, WCSP, and Ajax on top.

      Carter was being grilled yesterday trying to distance himself from the mess he is part responsible for causing.

      • Warrior – 789 of all variants were built for British Army and issued 1987-1995.
        No idea how many are on the active list now, ie: in service with AI Bns, in trg Org, in Repair Pool, in Attrition reserve. I have not ever heard of Brit WR vehs being sold off or scrapped over the years. Every so often a Parliamentary Question is asked about how many AFVs are in service, so the info must be somewhere.

        I too have made the point before that the ‘heavy metal’ should all have been replaced at different times ie 25 years-ish from ISD – you would then have got CVR(T)s being replaced from 1996(!), Warrior from 2012, AS90 from 2017 and CR2 from 2023. Job done. Also, they should have been given an upgrade every 5-8 years or so during their service life. Idiots screwed it all up – replacements and upgrades – across all the fleets .

        Boxer at £5.2m each is not cheap, as you say.

        ‘….in April 2018 it was announced that Boxer had been selected by the British Army to meet its Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) requirement.
        Probably doesn’t meet the IFV Requirement for the AI Bns (which is totally different) though!

        Carter being grilled by a Defence Committee?

        • The number trickles down after each year. There were 767 in 2021 and 721 in 2022 which would be the biggest drop so far.

          One of the ex 1SL speaking up recently certainly was definitely hypocritical, but for Carter to speak up is just taking the piss. Whether you blame him or not, from the time he became CGS in 2014 to when he retired from being CDS in November 2021, the army had been further reduced by 9,000, Warrior 2 was cut, CH3 order was reduced (in effect), and the third armoured brigade was cut. His obsession of strike destroyed the original Army 2020 which wasn’t actually that bad.
          3 armoured, 2 infantry and 1 airborne brigade has now shifted to 2 armoured, 1 infantry and 1 airborne brigade.

          • Who was Carter interviewed by? Carter cannot be blamed for manpower cuts – politicians decide those. He did not cancel WCSP, but he may have had some responsibility for the decision to cut the tank regiments from 3 to 2.
            But he has messed up the structure badly which has messed up the equipment procurement task.
            Strike was borne out of Carter’s viewing of the French using medium armour on expeditionary operations, apparently. We have always needed, and had, a mix of heavy, medium and light forces. But Carter had a strange idea to mix Ajax with Boxer MIVs in two brigades. Ajax is a recce vehicle, not a fire support vehicle – if you want some decent firepower with mech inf, you specify a cannon for it. Eqpt started to be ordered for 2 strike brigades – ie Boxers with MGs in RWS – but we don’t now need Boxers with MGs – we need Boxers with cannons to replace Warriors that some idiot decided to scrap. What a huge mess.
            Don’t agree with your last line Louis – in 3 Div we have 2 armoured bdes, 1 Deep Strike Recce Bde (no Inf in that).
            In 1 Div we have 1 Lt Mech Bde (lt mech Inf) , 1 Lt Bde (lt Inf), 1 Cav/Inf Reserve bde.
            Plus the AA Bde under ‘Field Army Troops’.

          • Don’t agree with your last line Louis – in 3 Div we have 2 armoured bdes, 1 Deep Strike Recce Bde (no Inf in that).
            In 1 Div we have 1 Lt Mech Bde (lt mech Inf) , 1 Lt Bde (lt Inf), 1 Cav/Inf Reserve bde.
            Plus the AA Bde under ‘Field Army Troops’.”

            Hi Graham.

            I think Louis refers to Brigades able to deploy with their own CS/CSS in isolation if need be.

            1 DSRB cannot, it has no infantry and no CS/CSS beyond a REME CS Bn. It is in effect a renamed DAG, a “merger” of 1 AI Bde and 1 Art Bde, previously an administrative formation. It operates in support of the 2 Armoured Bdes.

            4 L Bde in 1 UK is a golf bag of regular Infantry Bns with Reserve CS CSS formations.

            19 Bde a new creation as they move the deckchairs around and put most of the AR Bns into 1 formation.

            So Louis is correct. 3 AI Bdes ( 3 UK Div ) 2 Inf Bdes ( of the 7! that were in 1 UK Div ) 16 AA Bde, and 3 Cdo Bde, 7 Bdes, all of which had CS CSS up til 2015 and A2020 Refine, have reduced to 4.

            The 2015 SDSR A2020R disaster created Strike, scrapped yet more CS CSS, and cost us an AI Bde. All before HMGs financial restraints and the cancelling of WCSP, inevitable if Carter is going to go all in on Boxer BEFORE CH LEP and WCSP and Ajax were sorted!

            People forget that Boxer was originally MRAV for 2029 time frame to replace 3 Bns of HPM on Mastiff.

            Nice work…..

          • Thanks Daniele. I take your point of view that we only have four useable brigades (12x & 20x, 7x and 16AA) – if you discount 1DRSBCT for not having Infantry; 4x for not having reg CSS; 19x for being all-reservist.

            Of course a brigade without something in its ‘peacetime’ Orbat can always gain a unit or subunits and/or detach unit/subunit – Atts and Dets – army does it all the time for every single operational deployment.

            Thanks for the reminder on the Boxer replacing Mastiff point; what is the future for Mastiff now?

          • Yes, robbing other Bdes. Would be lovely if they didn’t have to do that, and if a mobilisation is needed then we’re short?

            Mastiff? AFAIK the 3 HPM Bns are gone, reroled in FS, as are plenty of the Mastiffs. I don’t know how many were retained for CS elements. We gave some to UKR didn’t we.

            We seem to have dropped various types of the UORs, at least Foxhound Jaclal were all kept and put in core budget.

          • Agreed on everything except 3 Cdo Brigade hasn’t been a brigade for a while.
            The third artillery battery was either disbanded or moved long before 2010, and there has never been a third regular engineer squadron.
            Commando Logistic regiment isn’t large enough to support a full brigade either.
            It’s probably better to get 42 Commando to do everything that all three battalions had to do before so that the other two commandos can focus on amphibious operations.

          • Yes fair one re 3Cdo, happened earlier. I remember when they had a mere Cdo Eng Sqn! At least with 24 some movement was made there.

          • Of course you can’t blame Carter directly for cuts, but they happened under his watch, so there is nobody else in the army that can be blamed but him.

            It was Carter who decided on the 2 AI and 2 strike brigades, but as you say it was flawed from the beginning.
            The AI brigades now had no brigade recce, and 198 Ajax would have to fit in 4 recce regiments and 10 recce platoons, which would never work.

            Then there was the mixing of wheeled and tracked in the Strike brigades which went against the precise doctrine they were trying to achieve.

            If instead, they had kept the 3 AI brigades, and converted a LI brigade from 1 UK division to be a purely Boxer formation, everything would be in place and it would still keep an LI brigade with CS/CSS. Instead the plan was to create a strike brigade out of nothing and convert an existing AI brigade, which left 1 UK division with zero CS/CSS units.

            4x relies on Army reserve CS/CSS to deploy so at best it can be counted separately, just like you wouldn’t count ARNG BCT as equivalent to a regular US army BCT.

            19x has no CS/CSS, of course if it took 4x CS/CSS there could be a reserve BCT.

            DRSBCT, as Daniele says below, has no infantry, but more importantly no RLC regiment. It is just a DAG with some recce and couldn’t deploy unless it was supporting a division (whether that division be British or other NATO allies)

            There are 11 infantry battalions in 4x and 7x, when most other countries would have 3 each. If 3 of those were to rerole, 4x could get regular CS/CSS. This would free up the reserve CS/CSS to bring 19x up to a full BCT.

          • If instead, they had kept the 3 AI brigades, and converted a LI brigade from 1 UK division to be a purely Boxer formation, everything would be in place “

            And THERE, we have it. I have highlighted that before Louis.
            But then, that Strike plan would not have been a cut, but a proper enhancement – Boxer wheeled Bde AND tracked armoured Bdes.

            And it ( the 2015 SDSR and A2020R ) WAS a cut, and it hid cuts, to the CSS as well as Tank SPG, and other armoured vehicle numbers.

            That was obvious to those of us who study the internal orbats of these formations and what would remain. The loss of the 3rd Armd Bde was criminal.

            Maybe we need a Prigozin to “march” on the MoD!🙄

          • The big issues were that before Boxer was a side project, not really vital and not the end of the world if it got cut. It suddenly became central to the structure at a time when the Army couldn’t afford that many armoured vehicle orders.
            Creating a new brigade from nothing was also a major issue.
            The structure of course was very flawed as well.

            I was wondering if you’d heard any rumours about NMH. Sikorsky announced recently that if selected the helicopters would be UK built, which seems strange considering they have shown no interest prior, and ‘up to 44’ aircraft seems like a pitiful amount to bother. It makes me wonder what has changed. If anything, from the information available, the programme seems more uncertain about timeframe and numbers than before so why would Sikorsky be at all interested in a UK facility?
            I might be being too optimistic but could this not suggest a larger order?

          • Only that it may be pushed to the right, as MoD budget allocation is greater in a few years so delay any big expenditure til then. I’m expecting that in the DCP, and puma extended.
            Not heard anything else. I’m a supporter of BH, as you know. Build them here? Fine.

          • I’d heard the same about Puma being extended in service. I just thought it was strange that it would be announced now.
            Anything other than AW149 doesn’t make much sense being built here as the UK cannot sustain two helicopter production lines.
            I can’t see any other helicopter programmes coming any time soon.

            If Bell also wins FARA, then that could bring a production line under licence for FLRAA and FARA to replace NMH and Wildcat.

            Airbus’ helicopter factory also seems strange. The MOD should’ve pushed for a factory when there were 3 dozen H135 and H145 on order for training, alongside 30 to replace gazelle and another 50 odd for air ambulances and police forces across the country. Even China and Russia had H135 built under licence.

            Leonardo is the only company that shows it’ll still built helicopters in the UK for export, the recent merlin order for Poland coming to mind.

          • Carter has been blamed for much but he cannot be blamed for the 10k cut to the army establishment – politicians decide manpower cuts, not senior army officers, who would of course be strongly opposed to them.
            Carter was CGS from Sep 2014 to June 2018. The 10k cut was announced by Ben Wallace in March 2021, so it wasn’t even on Carter’s watch. Carter warned about reduced defence spend in a Jan 2018 speech in London.

            Where he can be faulted is on his restructuring ideas which introduced two Strike bdes to the Orbat and lost one AI bde – so loss of the third tank regiment (and its 58 tanks) could be laid at his door.

            I had not appreciated that brigade medium recce was deleted from the Carter Orbat – is that because all 4 armoured recce regiments were in the two Strike brigades? Crazy decision – every division, every brigade, every manouevre unit needs recce.

            Strike brigades as postulated by Carter were badly structured although a medium weight brigade with some punchy firepower is a good idea in general. The Ajax/Boxer mix was weird – and a wheel/track mix may not work (although it has to in the future when we are replacing Warriors by Boxers to work alongside tanks!).

            I also had not appreciated that Carter’s plan would leave 1 Div with no CS or CSS units – really? More evidence of madness.

            You and Daniele are right to point out the flaws in the FS Orbat – but don’t assume that the Army Reserve cannot deploy or cannot deploy in formed bodies – that is not the case. When I was COS Bastion, our FP Coy was led by a TA officer and nearly all the soldiers were TA. Many TA (now retitled as Army Reserve) deployed on both Gulf Wars, to the Baltics and to Afghanistan.

            As for a brigade lacking a capability in its peacetime Orbat this can be remedied by robbing Peter to pay Paul and moving units around – known as Task Org’ing – the Army does it always before operations. On Op Corporate 3 Cdo Bde was bolstered by 2PARA, 3PARA, for example; equally CS and CSS units can be moved around.

            As Daniele says, the problem is if the entire Field Army mobilised – then the gaps could not be closed out – that would be WW3, though!

          • He was CDS until November 2021 though.
            Ultimately he learned the hard lesson of if you ask for too much you end up with nothing.

            Trying to do a massive restructuring of the army without the vehicles was always crazy. How can you build two strike brigades when neither Ajax or Boxer are in service?

            There were too many programs at the same time.
            Ajax- starting to run into issues
            Warrior 2-also running into a few issues
            CH3
            Boxer
            MFP
            All vital for his structure. In the original A2020, Boxer could’ve been delayed as it wasn’t vital to the whole structure. It could’ve also been cut and you would still have 3 AI brigades. In Carters structure if any one vehicle was cut the structure would fail.

            Army Reserve can of course deploy, and as fully formed units, but you wouldn’t expect AR to be at the same readiness or deploy as often as a regular unit.

            Robbing Peter to pay Paul isn’t how the army should be run. With the move to BCTs the army should be able to deploy full BCTs easily, with only a few added troops to bolster it. It makes deployment schedules easier as well.

            Op Corporate was different because 2 and 3 Para weren’t there because 3 Cdo didn’t have all three battalions, but because a brigade+ sized unit was needed. It was at a time where the British army couldn’t deploy outside Europe very well.

            A good example of that is the difference between the Gulf War and the invasion of Iraq. The US military deployed 697,000 in the former and just 130,000 in the latter.
            UK on the other hand grew from 35,000 to 45,000.

          • I’m in full agreement. This is Carter’s baby. He should get the flack and be grilled on it, not flounce off to a cosy consultancy and pension like all the others.

            I’ve posted this before, I still recall the video he made for his personnel in 2015, to sell Strike and the changes to the army. He was “interviewed” by a yes man who ignored the obvious ORBAT issues being created and the cuts and just did a nodding dog impression at Carter’s every claim. Wish I’d been interviewing him. Or you. Or anyone else who could see what was happening.

          • Thanks Louis,

            It was not impossible to trial and kick off Strike Brigades with Scimitars and Mastiffs before Ajax and Boxer arrived – but it was a crap concept anyway.

            Not sure how BCTs are so very different from classic Brigades – its surely just a terminology change (ie adopting yet another Americanism). Our classic brigades always had CS and CSS.

            I served to 2009 – the decline of the army (reduced headcount, reduced equipment numbers and equipment that was old or unmodernised) had already started but it has got worse since then. I think we would really struggle with a medium or large scale deployment, especially against a peer or near-peer opponent.

          • Of course Strike can train on Scimitar and Mastiff, but for how long?
            Ajax FOC is 2028 if nothing more goes wrong, and there’ll be a grand total of 1 battalions worth of ICV for Boxer by 2030. Even assuming the pace of the build picks up you’d struggle to have both brigades ready by 2035.
            In 2035 you’d now have two strike brigades that mix wheels and tracks, 2 armoured brigades with no recce, and 2 airborne battlegroups. This is great if you’re designed to operate off a 1/2 deployment against a peer enemy.
            One of the merit of Future Soldier is the rejuvenation of 16x to return it back to brigade strength.

            BCTs make deployment schedules easier because you have everything you need right there. It isn’t very messy in comparison. You don’t have the issue of certain companies of certain battalions deploying on one deployment, and others on other deployments.

          • If Strike (specifically two Strike bdes) had been a good concept (wheeled infantry carriers working with cannon-equipped tracked recce vehicles) then Scimitar and Mastiff would have first proved the concept and then been the stand-ins until Ajax and Boxer were fielded – for as long as that took.
            But Carter’s Strike vision was no good, so park it and move on.
            I’m surprised that we will only have one Boxer bn by 2030 – that is a glacial build.
            I’m still not seeing BCTs as different to classic brigades. Some BCTs do not have ‘everything you need right there’ – the ABCTs do not have CS; 1DRSBCT does not have Inf, Engrs or RLC; 4x does not have regular CS/CSS).

          • Strike with Mastiff and Scimitar would’ve been a totally different concept. It would’ve been much better for starters.
            Mastiff is half the weight of Boxer whilst having the same number of dismounts and the same firepower with turreted Boxer not being a consideration then. Scimitar is many times lighter than Ajax with of course a drop in firepower. Scimitar had the ability to be carried on a DROPS/EPLS truck, freeing up the few METs and HETs for the AI brigades. It actually would’ve been a pretty good concept and would’ve made a lot more sense than Ajax+Boxer.

            Sure you could always have had a doctrine based on Ajax+Boxer but using Scimitar+Mastiff in interim, but you then wouldn’t have a ready strike brigade before 2035.

            Original Boxer order of 523 consists of 85 ICV. For 3×12 per battalion that gives 2 battalions worth. Half of the original order will be completed in 2030. Of course it could be any variation that is built, there could be 85 ICV built or 0 built by 2030

            The reason for the small number of ICV’s I suspect goes back to the rumour that the army only ordered the vehicles for a single Strike Brigade. The Army themselves said the plan was to be able to deploy a division of 2 AI and 1 strike brigade by a certain time. That already is suspicious considering there were 2 of each brigades.
            The rumours at the time were backed up by the fact that the Ajax order never grew, despite units operating it increased from 3 recce regiments and 9 recce platoons, to 4 recce regiments and 10 recce platoons. 198 Ajax is enough for 2 recce regiments and 8 recce platoons that the aforementioned 2 AI and 1 Strike brigade consisted of, but not enough for all four brigades.
            Boxer order backs this up with the 85 ICV able to cover 2 battalions, but not 4.

            The only difference between BCTs and classic brigades are the name.
            The issue is Britain hasn’t had enough fully fledge Brigades for the number of Infantry and RAC units for a very long time.
            47 RAC and Infantry units pre 2010 but just 7 fully fledged brigades.
            Ideally the switch to BCTs would’ve forced the army to fix the issue, of course this didn’t happen but it should’ve.

        • What you said in this comment made me tally up the numbers, and for armoured vehicles, for a 25 year life, there could be 3 factories each building at a pace nearly 3x that of Boxer at Telford. Instead soon enough there will only be one.

          GDUK won’t get another contract- firstly because how Ajax has gone, and secondly because there is no other armoured vehicles that need replacing and aren’t in the process of already. LMUK has a very uncertain future. The only company with a certain future is RBSL and that’s only because Boxer is being built at an extremely slow pace.

          There looks to be a brighter future for energy security, shipbuilding, aerospace and mining industries, but other important industries like steel and military vehicles are floundering.
          Unfortunately most military equipment no longer uses British Steel, and all UK steel plants are foreign owned. There doesn’t seem to be a future plan from the army for industry.

          Artillery is a sad case, once a great export with M777 and L118, has all but died. Multiple points along the way could’ve prevented it- LIMAWS, buying M777, upgrading AS90 etc.

          Even recently, AEI was sold to a Turkish company. That was the only UK company capable of building a cannon other than CTA, which has an unlikely future. The recent Army Review has said that even light brigades should have up to 30mm for fire support- AEI had a 30mm cannon for MRAP type vehicles, of course the army can’t prevent the sale of a company but a large order (in the hundreds) might’ve changed the outcome.
          Cobham is another case- it has been spread to the winds.

          There are still UK companies that you just don’t hear of unfortunately. Griffon Hovercraft is one, I hadn’t heard anything about them in a while but I saw on Twitter a few days ago that they were building a handful of hovercraft for a Japanese customer. RN is in desperate need for a faster landing craft (LCU Mk 10 is very slow) and the Navy could work with Griffon to produce an LCAC type craft.

          • Thanks Louis for the post. Interesting that you talk of 3 AFV factories – it was only a few decades ago that we had 5!
            The other project that gives work for RBSL is of course CR3.
            Not sure that LMUK has an uncertain future – building turrets for medium weight AFVs is only one part of their business – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_UK

            Good point about artillery – the last British artillery we bought was AS90, built in 1992-95. Crazy we didn’t buy M777 and LIMAWS.

            With a small army, we need to offset numbers by firepower, so I am nit surprised that comment about even light brigades needing 30mm fire support. Also, our mortars are very elderly and none are over 81mm or under armour.

          • Not sure which 5 you are referring to.
            I can only think of 4;
            Leeds
            Telford
            Newcastle
            Barrow

            Of the closed facilities, only Newcastle could be reopened, having been closed less than ten years ago, and engineering companies occupying it currently.

            Of course even in the Cold War, the large UK armoured vehicle industry relied heavily on exports.
            Over half of Cheiftains were built for export, and the concurrently running Vickers MBT were all for export.
            I still maintain the fact that the CH1 buy and cancellation of MBT-80 destroyed the UK MBT industry.

            Equally 1/4 of Warrior IFV’s, nearly half of all Fox and a large (too many operators and variants for me to calculate) percentage of CVRT (over 50% of Scorpions) were for export.

            Since CH2 which ended production over 20 years ago, discounting Ajax, AEV are the only AFV that have been built, and zero exports.

            It’ll take a long time to build up trust in the UK AFV industry in order for exports, and it may never recover.

            The same issue mentioned that a new 60mm mortar would be bought. Either it is a new mortar that is lighter than the 60mm that was binned, and close in weight to the 51mm mortar, or it is another humbling moment for the MOD.

            The army needs to take some initiative with MRVP, build a vehicle off HMT400 and 600, like the covered versions Supacat has floated around, fit it with AEI’s 30mm cannon, and order around 3,000 units like the original requirement. It would force Supacat to invest in a production line- currently large orders are contracted out to Babcock- and open them up to export orders beyond small numbers for SOF use.

      • The scimitar mk2 was only brought into service from 2011 onwards. I think the some other variants got the new models upgrades as well.
        Some sources say it’s an upgrade, some say new vehicles

  9. Having visited Russsia for 3 month 2011 it was obvious to me they could never be a major conventional military power Russia got no real industrial base of any real sorts . Russian infrastructure 3 rd world once a mile or so outside the major cities . Travelling trough the rural country parts in our hire car we would regular drive past drunk conscript soldiers and sailors flat out in bus stops and stations basically unconscious with cheap drink the uniforms looked dirty ripped old rags some only had shoes not boots . We have a go about pot holes in UK roads out side Russian cities the holes in the roads are 5feet deep. Still no running water in the majority of Russian rural villages it’s well water could be a 600 yard carry for old people and potty toilets.. Moscow central beautiful and St Petersburg like London it’s got a huge Muslim population from eastern Russian federation and huge cheap labor Muslim community work force who only work in mosow. Russia nothing like the Putin lies it’s in a very bad way .

    • Wow, that’s a real eye opener. Massive corruption too. Certainly not the impression most in the West have of Russia, I would guess.

    • I have only been to St Petersburg. I loved it, a beautiful place, with beautiful women! We drive a few miles down the road into the suburbs and the reality hits. Total dump. Reached the closest point that the German Army got to outside Leningrad, there is an AT Gun sat there.

  10. Does anyone or any intelligence agency have an accurate view on the Russian industrial base to replace hardware losses, specifically tanks and helicopters? Putins regime has apparently put stalin style targets and consequences to its manufacturers to increase production, and probably working, but with sanctions what does that look like in terms of numbers ? Are they only T90s and T14s rolling off the lines. As bad as the Russian army is and the losses, is their actual capability improving as obsolete tanks have been destroyed en-mass and replaced by better ones?

    • T-14 production is slow. Even before the war they were hoping that 40 could be produced by the end of 2023. Money and the difficulty getting western components will not have helped, although there is no news, they keep it quiet.

      It has one, possibly two, tank factories. They can, allegedly, build 250 new T72 and T90s per year, while also refurbishing old models. Possibly producing between 500 and 800 in total pa.

      Its all conjecture and based on the boasts of the Russians themselves.

      • Maybe they will just relaunch the T34 with the all important Z logo, be as effective as their other tanks.

      • T14 is a failure and are not being build due to new engine fundamental issues. They need to start a new variant.

        • Almost a shame that they aren’t wasting money on it. I thought they had a new variant, it’s called T55 isn’t it? Lol.

        • So obsolete they are being used in their thousands in Ukraine, plus many countries actively buying more i.e. Poland. Blimey we’d all take 300 as we’re actually only getting half that.

        • We are constrained to have 148. Does not make them obsolete. Tanks are only obsolete if tank-operating nations take them out of service – who has done that?

    • Don’t shoot the messenger wtf, we leave the Russian Nazis to shoot the messenger, along with their own Russians retreating, Ukrainian women, kids, old people, disabled etc etc! I love those figures you post, just waiting for Farouk to pop up and rip them to shit!

    • yes jolly old Shoigu, didn’t he also state how many millions of Russians he’s prepared to throw under the bus also, a true general Melchett. Every one of those 13000 dead Ukrainians he talks about would be alive and with their loving families if Putin had not invaded, it’s a toll of shame of which history will remember. What’s your take on that?

      • It is clear that Russian authorities are conducting a war of aggression rather than protecting people in Ukraine. Someone said the same about the Sudetenland.

        Look John, the tension and nationalistic fervour between ethnic groups in places like the Donbas were agitated by Russia in order to create the narrative that you are saying. I don’t agree with your opinion of western backed ethnic cleansing, that’s outrages and almost made me choke on my cornflakes. Can the west be arrogant, maybe, but not the evil you think it is. Putin said on TV in May 23 that an alleged absence from a 17th century map of Europe – is evidence that Ukraine has no historical legitimacy as a country. That is the reason right there – a belief that all of Ukraine belongs to Russia and it needs putting in its place when flirting with democracy.
        On your last point, I do not support the murder of Russian speaking people who live in the Ukraine. Obviously uninvited visitors who turn up in tanks wearing Russian uniforms need to be vanquished.

      • JIMK wrote:

        “”Had the NATO powers kept their word since 1991 of ‘not another inch east’ we would not have been in the situation where Russia was faced with Ukraine heading for membership.””

        There was no word, because if there was it would be written in black and white somewhere on a document. So to that end please be so kind as to present that document to this board in which to substantiate yours (and Russia) claim.

      • JIMK wrote:

        “The Russians were under no illusions, the West was supporting the potential ethnic cleansing of eastern Ukraine and Crimea. It could not allow that to happen, so it moved to prevent it. Do you support the murdering and God knows what else that has been happening to Ukrainians, just because they speak Russian, since 2014?”

         It never fails to amaze me how whilst you will question anything from the west (where media transparency is enshrined in law, and Governments and the media are held to account for what they say) you have no problem parroting anything that comes out of Moscow where free speech has been stamped down with an iron boot.
        So regards that so called genocide in Eastern Ukraine. The figure banded around about how many people have been murdered in that so called genocide is 14000 since 2014. Well as I have pointed out a number of times, we used to ask our officer candidates to write at home an essay on a current world affairs subject (of our choosing) and bring it in with them for us (looks in the mirror) to read, so in which to allow us to gauge their ability regards world affairs. Subjects were many such as : Falklands, Brexit, South China sea, ISIS, Venezuela, Iran, Afghasntan and of course  Ukraine.
         
        So regards that 14000 which is often cited as the reason why Moscow invaded :
        The total number people killed in the East of the country from 2014-2021(as of the 31st Dec 2021) comes in at 14303 this can be broken down as:
        3404 Civilians from both sides (which includes the 298 deaths from flight MH17)
        4400 Ukrainian soldiers
        6500 Pro Russian Rebels
         
        That civy death toll can be further broken down chronologically as:
        2014:2084
        2015:955
        2016:112
        2017:117
        2018:58
        2019:27
        2020:26
        2021:25
         
        The vast majority of deaths for the last few years has been due to mines
         
        So that 15k death is from both sides of the argument and if we remove combatants, we arrive at a figure of just over 3400 from both side which whilst 3400 too many taken over 8 years isn’t as bad as some claim it to be.

      • Oh dear, a top chuff post, getting desperate and a little angry. Put the handbag away troll and condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Putin! With angry desperate posts like this yet again your true colours and agenda show through.

      • And you have been ripped to shreds yet again by Farouk, and yet again you cannot come back with proof and facts for your random claims! And amusingly enough yet again you don’t defend your claims and debate the issue! Troll status confirmed!

    • Well we all know Russia loves to spit nonsense. They have destroyed the Ukrainian airforce several times over, blew up Bradley’s before the arrived, killed leopard tanks disguised as John deer farm equipment and best of all himars hiding in a 2nd storey building.

    • Setting production quotas with the threat of “consequences” ,whatever they would be out East, tends to have a hilarious effect on quality.

    • By them moving forward slowly in a number of areas, probing for weak spots and degrading the Nazis defence, platforms and people more than they are losing. And with an armoured reserve ready to penetrate the chosen location, a reserve which the Nazi Russians have no ideas about its location. That’s for a start, but I’m sure you will respond with your normal guff, but miss out the part you condemn this illegal invasion of Ukraine by Putin!

      • Oh dear, you’re getting angry and your civvy troll qualifications are showing! It’s about shaping the battlefield, and that is part of every military establishments offensive doctrine. Alas, troll or civvy, neither qualifies you as a subject matter expert, just an uneducated observer. Know your limits my little troll, and make sure you keep greasing the leash, it could chafe.

      • Your bias is showing again, even to me…..

        You should watch Denys videos, probing is exactly what they are doing. But, as you’re on the other side, watching the reality unfolding would probably upset you?

        “Almost no-one apart from you calls this probing, they call it the Spring Counter Offensive.”

        News media call it the Spring Counter Offensive. Thus people who do not understand military operations, like many of us here. The Ukrainians, those who do understand what is going on, have been playing that down since before it commenced as it is real life, not Hollywood.

        How are your army’s supply lines BTW?

      • As you seem to be asking questions, how about you answer mine?
        Just how in denial of facts do you have to be to overlook the nakedly expansionist aims of Russia’s invasion, its promotion of a narrow ethnic Russian nationalist agenda, the harassment, imprisonment, torture and murder of political opposition, the constant aggression against neighbours, the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, the casual, summary rape, torture and execution of Ukrainian civilians, the abduction of children, the filtration camps, the use of proxy, extremist militias, punishment without trial, torture, imprisonment and warcrimes etc. And then somehow conclude that it is Ukraine with its democratically elected government and Jewish president that is nazi ?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here