The Ministry of Defence has outlined the vehicle types to be retired from service by 2030 to “streamline the Army’s fleet”.

The information came to light via a written Parliamentary question.

John Healey, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to British Army press release entitled Army’s top Brass Turns Out in Force to Address the World’s Leading Armoured Vehicle Conference, published on 22 January 2024, which 13 vehicle variants are being removed to streamline the Army’s fleet and improve readiness.”

James Cartlidge, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:

“The vehicle variants currently identified to be removed from service by 2030 are:

  • AS90
  • Stormer
  • Warrior
  • 105mm light gun
  • BV206
  • Mastiff
  • Ridgback
  • Wolfhound
  • Beach Recovery Vehicle
  • Heavy Equipment Transporter
  • Foxhound Protected Patrol Vehicle
  • Jackal
  • Coyote
  • Pinzgauer
  • Landrover (including WMIK/RWMIK variants)
  • Quad bike
  • Wheeled Tanker
  • Challenger 2
  • Puma

Similarly, on current plans it should be recognised that a number of new platforms and families of vehicles are being introduced such as the New Medium Helicopter, the Boxer family, the Ajax family and the Light Protected Mobility Platform family.”

George Allison
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
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

202 COMMENTS

    • Exactly BD, and in truth not one of these weapons should be retired until the last moment of their useful lives. The Government is not looking at the big picture and making fundamental mistakes when it comes to War Reserve measures. Under the right storage conditions, these units can be saved for what is coming. This article is proof that the government is not listening to experts and allies who have warned the UK repeatedly about the inevitability of conflict, within five to eight years in the future with several potential foes. This report is depressing, to say the least.

      • Absolutely. It is criminal to dispose of reserve equipment that will be vital if push comes to shove.

        There is a good reason the forces are selling off kit like there is no tomorrow: their budget on paper isn’t all money the Treasury is actually forking out, it includes the receipts from sale of equipment.

        If they don’t sell kit to raise money,.then the budget shrinks accordingly. Another tricky Treasury way of reducing military spend. Hence the rush to sell off Panther, Husky, Hercules etc, all good enough kit that should have gone into reserve for a rainy day.

        • Defending a nation should not have a commercial component that reduces availability to make money. Such a policy should be called out at the highest level as this could so easily result in meanless loss of life. The snatch Land Rovers were a national disgrace and rushed into service because superior vehicles were either cast or not available at the time of commitment. Mastiff, Jackel and the other Afgan units are currently on a NATO exercise proving that they are still right for the job. 600 Boxers/300 Ajax personnel carriers will not be enough protection for UK troops if the published list is executed.

          • All the vehicles mentioned are being replaced, there a vehicle pipeline that is doing the rounds. As part of that the Protected Mobility pipeline will decide on a medium and light vehicle that hasn’t been chosen yet.

        • Are we disposing of it all simply to give it to Ukraine. Making great political spin and huge announcements impressing the world of how much support the UK is providing?
          All of course at the expense of our ability to wage any sort of war against our known enemies.
          All of this equipment should be stored away if not needed as a national war reserve. Not given away and definitely not scrapped.

  3. To be fair most of the above are getting replaced (maybe not in equal numbers or even when they go out of service leaving a capability gap (Looks at Stormer) but they are getting replaced (i hope) . Looking at AS90, Warrior, I cannot but be dismayed at how the MOD whilst going out of its way to develop and procure top of the range equipment then in a pound foolish penny shy management style fails to upgrade them in which to keep them current at the time (A common recurring theme for the British MOD) but the two most interesting vehicles for me are the foxhound (Why? when we appear to have a lack of MRAP vehicles on our books ) and the Hippos (Beach Recovery Vehicle) seeing as they are part and parcel of the equipment list for HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark. especially after Shapps demanded the Marines justify their existence. (Ah the joys of jobs for the boys at the Tory party where a bloke whos only link to the military is his granddad served .

    • To be fair Farouk… I think he may have had an Action Man as a small child, which has led to his in depth knowledge of… oh never mind. 😂

    • wasn’t one of the issues with the current Hippos, that they are converted Leopard 1 tanks which caused issues with spares. Maybe they are going to be replaced by a version based on Challenger 2 or 3 ?

      • I would be deeply impressed if they could make anything based upon a CH2 reliably float- they are significantly heavier than Leopard 1. I’m not aware of any modern NATO MBT having amphibious capability, but could be wrong.
        I can imagine parts are an issue as you say though, with Ukraine taking (rightly) any available. Wed do better getting in on whatever the USMC’s getting.

        • Good Point
          Centurion: 50 tons
          Leopard I: 42 tons
          Challenger 1: 62 tons Challenger 2: 64 tons(figures taken from Wiki)
          May be a new base vehicle?

        • BaRTs dont float. Thats the point. They need to stay in contact with the beach out to a specific depth of water to shove vehicles and beached LCU/LVCPs off.

          • Ah, that’ll teach me for commenting without understanding the brief! I thought it was an amphibious vehicle- I stand corrected.

        • you would think a supply chain issue could be sorted as these have been in service since 2003 and it seems to be an ongoing issue since then. Leopard 1 is an obsolete tank. Mind you MOD sales have 14 factory refurbished L60 engines for Chieftain tanks for sales at the moment, so you never know

          • 3D printing is very useful for some mechanical parts, but it cant do everything. And then there’s the case of obsolete electronic parts

          • Somehow a supply chain has been established to keep Ukraine’s Leo 1s roadworthy.

            The well-known Leopard owners club (it really is ‘a thing’) is probably involved.

            I am amazed to hear that the MoD is currently selling L60s.

      • I think current thinking is that a contested beach landing would be suicide in an age of drones and precision guided weapons. Slow moving LCTs and LCVPs – and LPDs at anchor inshore – supporting the landing would be sitting ducks for USVs, UUVs and UAVs as well as guided missiles, shells and bombs – like San Carlos Water on acid. Thus the key is to land small commando forces stealthily, to enable them to use suprise to capture port facilities or airfields from which a main force can be landed conventionally. If so, the the age of the LCT, LCVP and BARV maybe over, and instead some sort of high speed, long ranged and stealthy ship-to-shore connector aquired to bring in raiding forces at remote coastal landing points, with heavy equipment delivered by air or via heavy sealift to airfields and ports when they are captured. Some small tractors (or an amphibious capability such as a hovercraft) might be needed to get these raiding craft off the beach, but probably not a 50ton wading vehicle. That said, rather than dispose of them, I would put them into storage!

    • Agreed about Foxhound, now that JLTV seems to have ballooned in price we should be going with what we already have in inventory and expanding, rather than scrapping without a proper replacement.

    • A lot of the wheeled stuff is going to be replaced by a single class. For light stuff it will be something like the Australian Hawkeye or the american JLTV medium stuff will something like the bushmaster

      Thales has submitted both the Hawkeye and the bushmaster for the UK’s protected mobility vehicle program

    • BaRTs are Leopard based so probably not supportable in the med-long term. I would expect a replacement on a more modern base to be procured if Amphibiosity is to remain a thing.

    • I am sure the Hippos have more useful life in them – their predecessors, Cent BARV were in service for over 40 years. Just need to improve the Hippo’s spares supply chain.

    • Thank you, I was thinking the same thing. Is it simply the ones going are to be replaced by the newer ones coming in? I hope they aren’t coming in only to be going out by 2030.

      • Loooking back they have also upgraded 50 Foxhound to c&c variants due to be delivered by 2025 only 5 yrs service? It looks like Oshkosh vehicles are out replaced with MAN? More questions than answers on that list!

  5. So what Artillery are the Marines / Paras going to use ? And if they are operating on Snow how will they get anything around without BV206 ?
    And although I know very little about land warfare stuff, what do they use for NBC contamination or transporting infantry cross country if it’s too wet for wheels ?

    Just asking because I’d have thought they need something to shoot with and move around in as I hear it can be slightly boggy in the Baltic, Snowy in Norway and some countries use Nasty Chemicals and other horrid stuff.

    Dare say someone will tell me to not worry as Fujitsu have had a look at stock and have discovered that we secretly bought 100’s of M777, New Volvos, CV90 and some brand new NBC vehicles.

    Oh wait they’ve just vanished 🤷🏼‍♂️

    • Hi mate, there is a strong rumour going around that our 105mm LGs might just be replaced by 120mm mortars in some units. There have been hints on various occasions, but we shall wait and see.

          • I’ve said this before I know very little about land warfare. Bug L let me get this straight, we are seriously thinking of using a gun calibre that’s not used for land warfare by any other country ?
            WTF it’s like saying go back to the 5.5” and use anything but don’t ever suggest the M777 155mm.
            What planet are these people on ?

          • There is nothing wrong with the 105. It was used in the Falklands to great success. You can undersling it throw in an aircraft with little prep. Ammunition is a dream to a logistical mind. Relatively easy to move on Battlefield. Quick into action. It’s a proven force Multiplier. Madness to let it go.

          • Time to retire the 105 and time we got larger mortars like the rest of nato the 81 just isn’t cutting it now a drone can do what they do

          • USMC are actually giving up their M777 because of the logistics trail.

            YouTube USNI Naval proceedings and I think Task and Purpose put something on YouTube just last week.

          • That was before Ukraine. Many ex US M777 went to Ukraine. I would not be surprised if their is a rethink in USMC, now that M777 is going back into production.

        • If we did switch, you would like to think that it comes with some form/s of transport given the whole system must weigh a fair bit more than our 81mm version we currently use?

        • I think that thats basically the version in the link that @Louis sent me.
          Its a bit of an odd calibre though – 5″/127mm. Granted its the same as whats going into our T26’s, but no other NATO army really uses it, so dont really know why they have gone down that route…?

      • 120mm mortar range only about 7km.
        105mm LGs range is 17.2 km
        increasing to 20.6 km for base bleed rds.

        Retrograde step to replace LG with mortar. But good idea to have 120mm mortar for Inf.

    • Loss the the 105mm guns would mean no realistic artillery options for air dropped/delivery, which would result in serious issues.

      • As 16AA and 3 Cdo would then have no artillery regiment. Which clearly is not going to happen, so people need to calm down. I’d hope they keep them and buy the vehicle mounted mortars to expand the firepower. Unlikely though with the manpower.

      • I think the government are undertaking a deliberate scorched earth policy. Destroy the UKs ability to wage war and then the cost of replacing capability gaps falls on the next government to sort out.

        • It does feel like that across the board not just defence, but I suspect its just they have been bouncing from scandal to scandal since boris and just too busy fighting among themselves to actually govern.

    • Rodney,
      The BV 206 (TOS 1980) was replaced in teeth arm service by the BV10 (Aka Viking) around 2006, of which we purchased around 143 of which 99 received a mid life upgrade by 2016. The remaining BV206 were relegated to support elements. In Dec 2022 the MOD signed a deal (In conjunction with Germany and Sweden) with BAE for the successor to the BV10 : The  international Collaborative All-Terrain Vehicle (CATV) programme,
      google :
      DE&S secure 60 new amphibious vehicles for Commando Force under international contract
      for the story

      of which the Uk ordered 60  with a TOS date of Feb 2025,(Sweden 236, Germany 140) I suspect that the remaining BV 10s will replace the BV 206s in the support role with a strong suspicion that follow on orders will follow.
      Interestingly in 2008 the Uk placed an order with Singapore for 100 of their Bronco All Terrain Tracked Carrier for use in Afghan, after we ended combat operations in 2014, the Broncos were sold off in 2015

      • Ta I knew we hadn’t completely lost the plot. Until someone suggested using a BAe 5” as a land gun when the 155mm is NATO standard and we designed the M777.

  8. There isn’t much left once they are all removed. Hopefully there is a plan for replacing vehicles and not just some aspirational programs, that will lead no where.

  9. The AS-90s , M270 MLRS and Stormer should all be sent to Ukraine ASAP. I know there is a supply problem with the StarStreak missile for the Stormers but I’m sure the Ukrainians would prefer 8 Stormers with one missile than 1 Stormer with eight missiles !

      • The FV432s have just had their fifteenth midlife update and are programmed to receive lasers and anti grav hover systems in the 25th midlife update planned for 2186

  10. Well there goes the entire Royal Marines vehicle fleet without a program active to replace it…

    Haven’t we only just bought a new batch of BVs and still have orders for Foxhounds and Jackals until the mid to late 2020s. With only 600 odd Boxers and 600 odd Ajax ordered what the hell are they replacing this all with, there’s no new MRAP procurement in progress so are we just giving up on light armoured vehicles all together.

    This government is killing us from the inside out.

    • To be fair, the Landrover’s are all being replaced on a one for one basis with the latest Defender 110’s….. A new Carpark is currently being built in W1 with a special High Speed Rail Link straight to the Commons and lords…..

      MP’s are reported to have been given the full range of options and their Expenses allowances have been given an inflation busting boost to enable the continued World Beating, Cutting Edge, State of the art ability to project power from every level of the Soap Box…… thus continuing the long tradition of punching above our weight on a global scale…….

      Apparently the 5.4 litre V8 Supercharged powered option also has ULEZ immunity too…… 😂

      Rich Sunak and Sadact Khan have already placed orders including one each for their Wives, Kids, Gardeners, and anyone else about to become Lords, Sirs and Ladies…….

      A spokesman from the AA has expressed his concerns as to the suitability and reliability of these rather expensive vehicles but apparently the MOD have carried out a detailed study and concluded that as they have no Prop Shaft Bearings directly in contact with salty sea Water… the risk is rather negligible…..

      Apparently, Gretta Thunberg has just become a UK Citizen and wishes to stand for Parliament in the next election if she can have the British Racing Green option with the Bad Boy Exhaust and CAT bypass…… ….

      Most of the above is made up, just to clarify.

    • BvS10 already replaced BV206 in the more fighty roles with 99 in service. 60 more will be ordered to replace BV206 in the support roles.

    • AS90 – RCH 155, Archer
    • Stormer – Medium Tactical Mobility Platform (MTMP)
    • Warrior – Ajax, Boxer / ASCOD?
    • 105mm light gun – M777 155mm, 120mm Mortar?
    • BV206 – Bvs 10 Viking/Beowulf
    • Mastiff – Boxer / Medium Tactical Mobility Platform (MTMP)
    • Ridgback- Medium Tactical Mobility Platform (MTMP)
    • Wolfhound –Medium Tactical Mobility Platform (MTMP)
    • Beach Recovery Vehicle ??
    • Heavy Equipment Transporter ??
    • Foxhound Protected Patrol Vehicle – MTMP
    • Jackal – Jackal 3
    • Coyote – Jackal 3
    • Pinzgauer – Light Tactical Mobility Platform (LTMP)
    • Landrover (including WMIK/RWMIK variants) – LTMP
    • Quad bike – MRZR-D4, UGV?
    • Wheeled Tanker – HX2 Variant??
    • Challenger 2 – Challenger 3
    • Puma – Panther? – Medium Tactical Mobility Platform (MTMP)

  13. So getting rid of the Beach Recovery Vehicle (BARV), means that the Royal Marines will have nothing to recover broken down vehicles from a beach landing. I know they only have about 3 or 4, but this is a unique capability that should be retained. Once it is gone it will be hard to get back and you will have totally lost the skill set. Madness, but as they are also getting rid of all the RN boats specifically designed to land Commandos on a beach, it doesn’t seem surprising, although I my opinion, a stupid and shortsighted move.

    • The Hippo. Yes, only 4 I believe.
      RM all about small raiding craft now.
      I believe in the long run it could spell the death of the Corps, if they remove the ability to land heavier forces by sea.

  17. I make that 19 vehicles, not 13.

    Totting it up, it totals 2,911 vehicles. I think the list should probably also include the FV432 Bulldog (746), which is already going out of service, and probably the CRARRV Challenger 1 REMÈ recovery vehicle (72). If so , that would take the number of vehicles to be lost to 3,729.

    Then there is the Land Rover cut. There
    are apparently 7,019 of these between RWMIK, Wolf and ambulances. If they are all going, that takes the total cull close to 11,000 vehicles, by 2030.

    What have we got coming in to replace them?

    589 Ajax
    623 Boxer
    70 Jackal 3 ( possibly rising to 240 one day)
    14 (?) Archer
    36+ Puma replacements, if they ever actually order them.

    That’s 1,332 entering service eventually. So we lose net 2,400 vehicles, guns and helicopters from the ‘fleet, that’s over half our equipment.

    MOD is no doubt planning a limited buy of their proposed Land Mobility Vehicles, but these only exist as a PowerPoint and some generic visuals at the moment.

    When all efforts should surely be concentrated on growing our pool of equipment, in light of increased threat from Russia, we seem to be going the other way, halving it in the next 6 years before even ordering most of the replacements.

    It all looks rather rash and hell bent on cutting costs at any price.

  20. Given we have such depleted numbers we should at the very least keep AS90, Warrior and other high value eqpt in reserve as you never know what might happen in the near future. Surely as demonstrated in Ukraine we need the numbers to defend ourselves on multiple fronts and what’s worse we don’t have the raw materials and manufacturing base other countries have access to if required to ramp up manufacture.

    • The election will happen after Hunt has delivered the March budget tax give aways and Sunak has had a chance to repeat his ‘the plan is working’ mantra a few more times. May is looking more likely. I think the voters will punish the Tories even more if they delay to autumn.
      The economy is like a computer which is grinding to a halt because so many fixes have been applied to the software. The Tories are trying to run the country by patching Windows 8. The country needs a reboot and a change a new operating system.

      • The Tories deserve to lose, but one look at Labour run Wales, shows that a Labour Government is not the answer. Oh & Denis Healey presided over defence cuts. For example RAF transport, Belfast & Andover, were scrapped in the mid 1970s.

        • Well, we all make voting decisions based on personal circumstances and experiences. As you say, I think there is a general view that, notwithstanding stormy waters- Brexit, Ukraine, Covid…there is an issue of competence and integrity with the helming of the Tory government. People will differ as regards how much of that is cultural and ideological.
          The people of Wales might have a different view to yours of the performance of the Welsh government. Similar situation to the SNP in Scotland; these are culturally different peoples to the English. They have different priorities and values. It’s their decision.
          Not sure it’s meaningful to look back to the 1970s. For what it’s worth the present shadow Secretary of defence comes over as pretty sound.

          • So did Ben Wallace, but the rest of the Tory Gov would not fund defence properly. SDR98 was a good document from a Labour government, but Gordon would not fund it. Having a decent DefSec is no good if he cannot carry the rest of the Party with him.

          • TBH At the moment I would say the people of Wales are some what unhappy with Welsh government to say the least. However that dosent mean at a UK government level it isn’t time for a change

  23. MOD / Treasury strikes again, priority number 1, retire and replacement an afterthought.

    These should just be left to retire naturally as their replacements get delivered. It’s a bit like me saying I’ll retire my car this year and saying to my boss I won’t attend the office until my new car arrives which I may order next year.

  24. Lose Light Gun (range of 17km); replace (maybe) with 120 mm mortar (range of around 7-8km (Soltam K6 as used by US Army as an example).
    Perhaps the idea is to copy the USMC and use air instead of artillery….but we’d need more air then….
    ….But I’m sure the MoD knows what it’s doing.

    • Just for a sense of balance with all these vehicles going, it does seem like they’ll have more Boxers on order very soon.

      The following is taken from Janes:

      The UK plans additional variants of the Boxer armoured vehicle, Janes learnt at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) 2024 conference being held in London from 22 to 25 January.
      The first priority is to order Boxer Repair and Recovery Vehicle, Armoured Mortar Vehicle, and Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridge variants in 2024, with initial operating capabilities (IOCs) at the end of the decade. This could be followed later by the Serpens Deep Find radar, Mounted Close Combat Overwatch (MCCO) anti-tank vehicles, and counter-unmanned aircraft system vehicles, and if the UK selects it for the British Army’s Mobile Fires Platform (MFP) programme, Remote Controlled Howitzer (RCH) 155 self-propelled artillery with IOCs in 2031–37.

      The UK has so far ordered 146 Infantry Carrier Vehicles, 200 Specialist Carrier Vehicles, 212 Command and Control Vehicles, and 65 Ambulance versions of the Boxer for one or two brigade combat teams.

      The first two Boxers in UK configuration built in Germany were delivered by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann + Nexter Defense Systems (KNDS) to the British Army at the end of December 2023 for trials with the Royal Fusiliers. The IOC of the UK Boxers ordered so far is planned for 2025.

      • Thanks for the reminder that the Tr1 and Tr2 Boxer orders combined includes 146 Infantry Carriers.
        Assuming Platoon Commanders have a C2 wagon, then a Pl needs 3 Inf carriers, so a rifle Coy needs 9, so a Bn needs 27.
        Hence thats just enough for the five Mech Inf Bns in the ABCTs – but only just – and just 11 to be shared between the Trg Org, Repair Pool and Attrition Reserve.
        We surely get more Inf Carriers in the 3rd tranche (another c.400 vehs in total).

  27. Beach recovery vehicle goes – we only got a few and it’s very niche – so you just know we ain’t gonna replace this specialist vehicle – cue uor at some point in future

  32. As usual, the never ending sea of moans with no context, where most of these have a replacement.
    So, for balance.

    Jackal, Foxhound gone by 2030? I’d be very surprised.

    Light Gun will be replaced, or retained.

    Stormer will be replaced initially by VAMTAC Rapid Ranger followed by, it is rumoured, a Boxer variant.

    Warrior is being replaced by Boxer, over 1,000 planned not just 600 or so. It’s a mistake, as an IFV is needed.

    BV206 are replaced by more BVS210. A pity, should just keep them as a useful go anywhere vehicle in Support roles.

    Mastiff Ridgeback Wolfhound by whatever LPV they choose. Many are already gone.

    BARV a loss, niche capability. But if the RM are all light raiding now hardly a surprise.

    HET will be replaced or remain, how else to to move heavy vehicles.

    Coyote supports Jackal so something will replace them,big if if they’re gine by 2030. We are still buying Jackal.

    Pinzgaeur and Land Rovers will be replaced.
    By thousands of replacements and we probably have far too many legacy ones when the army was bigger.

    Other bikes are in use, look at the paras. So Quad bikes going is hardly a disaster. They’re also looking at UGV and drones for resupply.

    Wheeled Tanker, just like HETs, will be replaced. You cannot do without them if you have armoured vehicles and a military.

    Challenger II is being replaced, we’ve done that to death.

    Puma is being replaced by better drones.

    • It also seems Ajax is getting closer to IOC.

      From Army Recognition:

      The British Army’s new reconnaissance tracked armored vehicle, the AJAX, has successfully undergone rigorous testing in the extreme weather conditions of Sweden’s Lapland. On February 19, 2024, the British Army released information about the AJAX’s trials, where it faced the daunting cold of winter, with temperatures plunging to as low as minus 30° Celsius.

      he testing was conducted by the British Army Household Cavalry Regiment, an armored reconnaissance unit based in Wiltshire, showcasing the AJAX’s exceptional all-weather capability. The trials in the frozen landscapes of Lapland proved the vehicle’s ability to operate efficiently in severely cold conditions and its capacity to fire accurately while on the move.
      This overseas testing marked a significant milestone for the British Army, as it was the first time a Field Army crew had fired the AJAX, both domestically and internationally. The soldiers’ successful engagement with the vehicle in such challenging conditions highlights the AJAX’s robust mobility across difficult terrains and its superior level of protection.

      The AJAX is equipped with cutting-edge Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) technology, ensuring a high standard of operational capability. Its performance in Lapland signifies the vehicle’s readiness to provide the British Army with a world-leading competitive advantage in reconnaissance missions.

      The AJAX family comprises six variants, each designed to enhance the Army’s operational flexibility in any weather condition, around the clock. The successful trials in Sweden underscore the British Army’s commitment to maintaining a technologically advanced and versatile force, prepared to face the challenges of modern warfare in any environment.

      The AJAX program encompasses a family of armored fighting vehicles, with the AJAX itself being the centerpiece and equipped with a formidable 40mm cannon. This main variant is specifically designed for reconnaissance and combat, providing the British Army with a highly mobile, well-protected, and powerfully armed platform capable of operating across a wide range of environments. The 40mm cannon equipped on the AJAX variant represents a significant upgrade in firepower, offering the capability to engage and defeat enemy armor and fortifications, as well as providing direct fire support to infantry units.

      This cannon is part of a new generation of weaponry designed to deliver higher velocity and more accurate fire, enhancing the vehicle’s effectiveness in combat. The AJAX’s advanced targeting systems and sensors complement the firepower, enabling it to acquire and engage targets at extended ranges, day or night, and in all weather conditions.

      Beyond the AJAX, the family includes several other variants tailored for specific roles, ensuring that the fleet can support a broad spectrum of military operations. These variants are designed to fulfill roles such as command and control, equipment support, recovery, and engineer reconnaissance, among others. By sharing a common platform, these vehicles benefit from logistical and operational efficiencies, including easier maintenance and the ability to interchange parts and crews as needed.

      • Indeed. Your post above is spot on Sam. There has to be balance in comments, many of that list are or will be replaced.

  34. I hope retired and put in storage and not sold off cheaply, given away, or even worse scrapped. Ukraine has proved one thing sometime you need to use things from storage to cover losses most of this equipment is still modern and high quality. As for the challenger2s cant see why after the 148 have been upgraded that we can’t continue with a rolling upgrade of the remaining at a slower pace. Ukraine has proved we will need more than 148 going by the Russians losses I know most are not even upto spec of the challenger2s.

  35. i like how they are keeping the old 432 bulldog and yet scrapping warrior, when i joined in 89 warrior was pretty newish and the bulldogs were all just about knackered…quite a few i do know are sitting at the bottom of an ocean somewhere as they used them to create an artificial reef

    • FV432 were rebuilt as Bulldog in 2006 and was a pretty comprehensive upgrade/rebuild. Still they are old. Wiki is suggesting some RE models have been equipped with a SWARM Remote Weapon System

        • It is tricky to tell although the army guide website suggest there was an issue with the original engine/steering not meeting the latest regulations which would suggest that was a fleet wide upgrade. various sources suggest between 500 to 1000 have been back to BAE for an upgrade of various types

          • Wiki says this about the Mk3 Bulldog: “The need to upgrade the FV432 to extend its service life further led the MoD to sign an £85m contract with BAE Systems Land Systems to update over 1,000 FV 432s to Mark 3 standard. Major changes include a new diesel engine and braking system. Initially, only FV432 and 434 models were converted, but other variants are being considered. The first 500 of the batch were handed over to the British Army in December 2006.”

          • All the 432’s remaining in service got the Bulldog upgrade, to the point where Bulldog and 432 have become inter-changable in Army parlance. If they weren’t converted, they were disposed off.

          • They’re ancient though. Surely need replacing at some point. Haven’t we also sent some of them to Ukraine?

          • At some point, but what roles is the 432 in? Mostly supporting roles where just some sort of off-road mobile vehicle is needed, they’re not exactly in flighty jobs. (And even then, some 432s are being replaced eg the 63 Boxer Ambulances will be replacing 432 armoured ambulances)
            The chief benefit of a modern replacement would be reduced maintenance burdern, but as long as the hulls are still good and the engines run, there isn’t a rush to replace the 432.
            *Edit* Yes 432’s have been sent to Ukraine, there’s footage of the combat beetle trundling along out there, but I’m not sure if the ones that went are MkIII’s from army stock or if they’re surplus that where bought up and sent over, lets face it there’s tonnes of 432’s on the civilian market.

          • Yes and given the muddle in the AI brigades it’s even harder to get a clear picture of how many are going to be retained going forwards.

          • Thanks Dern. I assume the same is true for the other FV430 variants? My interest would of course be in the FV434!

          • I think so? Tbh I’ve always heard 432/Bulldog colloquially used to refer to all 430 variants still in service, but then I’ve also never worked with a REME unit.

            Btw is anyone else not getting reply notifications?

  36. 105mm light gun ? to be replace with what ? Tank Transporter with what ? HMG say there appreciate our men and women in the forces Really 🤔 Going to be amazed what we end up with ,do the government expect the troops to push the Tank back to base or the training ground 🤗 For the 105mm probably get pea shooters .Lord help us Sorry about the rant Guys ,time for a walk .

    • vehicleThe HET’s that have been up for sale over the last couple years seem to be quite old (~2006) I thought they were operated under a private contract, although may be the MOD feel a change of vehicle type is needed ( there were suppose to be 99 tractor units) Maybe they more for Ajax ?

  37. ok, what replaces the 105mm Light Gun, AS90/Stormer with HVM, no orders for any of that yet it takes for ever to field new kit. We just do as normal and do with out for a decade.

    • They’ve got Archer on order. Whether it’s the long term AS90 replacement who knows. They’re looking at ordering VAMTAC Rapid Rangers with STARStreak to replace the Stormer, at least in the short term.

    • 105mm LG. Still not publicly revealed though strong rumours ( considering the MoD is making moves ) regards 120mm Mortars.

      AS90 is being replaced by the Future Mobile Fires gun, whichever they choose. They have taken 14 Archer as an interim as they were available immediately.

      Stormer, as Sam says, and I reported here the other week. A SHORAD Boxer variant is said to follow as SHORAD will triple in size, according to the CGS.

        • Yes, many if not most on this list have a replacement. Smaller numbers, yes, in most cases. So let’s not panic just yet here.

          • most on the list are over due replacement or not really ideal for any thing over than internal security. I do feel time is ticking on to match out of service date to new replacement in service date. After all Ajax is 6 years over due, Boxer is not many a year its a very slow rate of build. And Warrior replacement is as yet still no contract ,

          • I agree there, so often there is a capability hap and they drop stuff far too soon before the replacement is in place.
            Boxer is “replacing” Warrior as things stand.

          • That,s a bad idea and a money saver. Boxer can not go proper cross country like C3, or Warrior could and will be rubbish in most Deserts.

          • Yes, not buying an IFV saves money. But Boxer over Warrior in itself is not actually saving money, Martin, as WCSP to provide 4 Battalions of Warrior was much, much cheaper than Boxer.
            As I’ve tried to explain many times here with the timelines of Strike Brgades after the 2015 review, General Carter/The Army Board/HMG, whoever, brought Boxer forward. We should have been sorting Warrior, Ajax and Challenger before Boxer, which was then known as MIV, and was to enter service much later in 2027, once the other 3 were paid for and in service.

            Too many balls in the air and Warrior got culled.
            Yes, Boxer as it stands is no IFV, the opinions of the likes of Graham are enough for me there.

          • It’s not all doom and gloom however:

            “ Reports from London reveal that on January 19, under severely challenging winter conditions, with the temperatures plunging to minus 30 degrees Celsius, Ajax flawlessly completed its tasks. The proving ground was Sweden, but specifically in the harshest terrain the Scandinavian country has to offer – the icy expanses of Lapland.

            The task of testing Ajax fell to the British Army Cavalry Regiment, an armored reconnaissance unit stationed in Wiltshire. These trials didn’t merely assess mobility and the speed at which the vehicle could traverse this terrain. They also tested the firing capabilities of the onboard weaponry. According to the British Ministry of Defence, the verdict was a complete success. Experts involved in the inception, growth, and past issues of Ajax regard these outcomes as a critical landmark. This success signals promising things for the future of Ajax.”

      • Very short range of 120mm mortars (c.7km) so would be a lousy replacement for LG. Good as an infantry enhancement though.

      • That look like a toy, any one can design some thing, but will it work and the light gun is out ranged and lack power fact. That is why the Abbot was withdrawn. That drawing will NEVER enter service and yes i crewed the Abbot and Light gun, as well as other tube Artillery, not an expert but no the guns well and their limits. Light gun should be scrapped and replaced with M777 or some like it. its a range issue,

  38. As an Irishman, living in a Country that seems to be walking around with fingers in its ears when it comes to defence, this is both depressing and an opportunity. As an increasingly strategic and vulnerable outpost in Europe, and a supposed guardian of the undersea Data Cables and Western Approaches, we are woefully inadequate. Constantly Badgered ( if you excuse the pun) by Russian aircraft and Naval vessels along the coasts of Donegal, Sligo, Mayo, Clare and Limerick, we have zero chance of repulsing any bad actor who may want to, or already has, meddle with the Data bridges off our coasts. Why don’t we take any of your surplus naval and ground equipment to bolster our defence forces? It makes sense. Most of the items you are retiring have years of life left. Christ, we don’t even have a primary Radar! In a European conflict, whether we like it or not, we will be dragged into it as we are so strategically important to any war effort. Spend a few days watching the aircraft coming through our “Neutral” Shannon Airport paints the true picture.

  41. That’s a few more than 13 vehicle types. The follow-up question should have been….and are they all to be replaced with the correct number of new equipments which are better than the outgoing equipment and before the legacy equipment is taken out of service so there is no capability gap?

    • I guess some of the gaps might be filled by Boxer variants, based upon the following:

      On July 19, the UK Ministry of Defence shared its plan to acquire between 400 and 600 Boxer vehicles. They’re even considering the possibility of adding up to 900 more. This could bump up the total purchasing number to a whopping 1500 units. Given the UK’s ambitious order and their renewed partnership, we’re now exploring potential local manufacturing and export opportunities for these Boxer vehicles.

      • We have ordered a first tranch of 523 Boxers and a second one of 100 vehs. The funding is in place for a total of 1,016 or 1,018 – I forget which. It was said that army staff were looking at ways of increasing lethality of the Boxer fleet. That might mean that the next tranche will include Boxers with more firepower than the Infantry carrier. I had heard that the army requirment was for several hundred more than this c1,000 figure. Maybe 1,300 or more, even up to your figure of 1,500?

  42. The boxer is no where near as good or effective as the warrior ifv …as90 will be missed too ..I’ve been with both and the fire power and protection factor is a down fall

  43. I think there will be 3rd world war soon and I done my service to my country but if I am needed I will rejoin again even as I am 68 yrs old

  44. That means cuts and reading between the lines ; no increase in personal ,but we hear that labour still want to increase numbers in our armed forces also so said and done some of the quipt does need up dating so we wait and see all could change after the G /E

  46. Someone at the MOD is taking the term “foot soldiers” a tad too literally!

    A very diverse list. Presumably Puma is the helicopter? Is the Ridgback a bicycle?  And it’s not often that you see the 105mm light gun being referred to as a vehicle!

    The RM’s won’t be happy about the demise of the Hippo BRV, which interestingly implies an expectation by the MOD that both Albion and Bulwark will be gone by 2030, regardless of regular public statements that their “planned” out of service date is 2033/34.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here