The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has announced the award of a £60 million contract to BAE Systems Bofors AB for the in-service support of the Archer Artillery System, as detailed in a transparency notice.

This contract ensures the continued operational readiness of the Archer system by providing crucial maintenance, repair, training, and configuration management over the next five years.

This support contract falls under the MOD’s Interim 155 Capability Project, a key programme aimed at enhancing the UK’s artillery capabilities.

The Archer Artillery System, designed and developed by BAE Systems Bofors AB, is one of the most advanced artillery systems in the British Army’s arsenal, offering long-range firepower and rapid deployment.

The MOD opted for a negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice due to the specific technical expertise required to maintain and support the Archer system.

The decision was made in accordance with the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011, as amended by post-Brexit legislation. The MOD cited BAE Systems Bofors AB’s unique position as the system’s original designer and manufacturer as the primary reason for awarding the contract without competition.

According to the MOD, “BAE Systems Bofors AB is the only company with the necessary technological skills, knowledge of the underlying design, and expertise required to provide support services for the Archer Artillery System.”

The contract covers a wide range of services, including technical design adjustments, repair and maintenance activities, obsolescence management, and training. BAE Systems Bofors AB will also provide configuration management, ensuring that the Archer system remains up-to-date with the latest technological advancements and meets the MOD’s operational requirements.

As the Design Authority (DA) of the Archer system, BAE Systems Bofors AB holds proprietary rights to essential technical drawings, designs, and components. The MOD does not have sufficient rights to share this data with any third party, meaning that only BAE Systems Bofors AB has access to the specialist tooling and testing equipment needed to maintain and upgrade the system. This proprietary control ensures that BAE Systems Bofors AB is the sole provider capable of delivering the necessary safety standards and performance enhancements required by the MOD.

The MOD further emphasised that no other party has the capability to combine the technical re-design with maintenance and repair activities for the Archer system, making BAE Systems Bofors AB the only logical choice for this contract. The MOD explained, “No other company possesses the technical expertise or access to the proprietary design information needed to safely support and maintain the Archer system.”

Archer

The Archer artillery system, officially known as the Archer – FH77BW L52 or Artillerisystem 08, is a highly advanced Swedish self-propelled howitzer designed to deliver precision fire support on the battlefield. It features a fully automated 155mm L52 gun-howitzer mounted on a modified 6×6 Volvo A30D all-terrain hauler, and comes equipped with a remote-controlled M151 Protector weapon station. Its crew compartment is armoured, with bullet and fragmentation-resistant windows, ensuring protection in combat scenarios.

The system includes an ammunition resupply vehicle, support vehicle, and is capable of firing Bonus submunitions and M982 Excalibur precision-guided projectiles.

One of the key capabilities of the Archer system is its ability to perform counter-battery strikes. Its long-range capability, combined with the ability to fire three rounds and relocate before the first shell even lands, allows for low-risk operations in hostile environments. The system can fire a variety of munitions, including standard NATO shells and advanced precision-guided munitions, extending its effective range to over 50 kilometres with Excalibur rounds. The fully automated loading system carries 21 projectiles, and reloading takes just 10 minutes using its dedicated munitions carrier.

The Archer artillery system is also highly mobile, with the ability to reach speeds of up to 90 km/h on roads and traverse rough terrain, including snow and mud. It can be deployed quickly, with a firing setup time of under 30 seconds, and features a high rate of fire, capable of delivering 20 rounds in 2.5 minutes. The system supports 24-hour operations with sustained fire rates and can be operated by a crew as small as one, though typically it is manned by three or four personnel. Its mobility and speed, combined with its advanced fire control system, make it highly adaptable for a range of missions.

Currently, the system is in service with the Swedish Army, which ordered 48 units, with 26 active as of March 2023. The British Army recently acquired 14 units as an interim replacement for the AS-90, and Ukraine has received eight systems as part of Sweden’s military support.

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

82 COMMENTS

  1. Cutting edge and available, British designed ( as far as anything is nowadays) but not ordered…or at least, 14 is hardly much of an order.
    It might be a stopgap (only 14??) if boxer 155 was coming in soon but we have no ordinary Boxers yet let alone anything else. Buy another 40? and let Boxer come along as and when, or never.
    AA

    • These 14 were in storage in Sweden. They were for a cancelled Norwegian order.

      If we’d wanted new build we’d have been waiting years…

    • The 14 secondhand Archers sourced from the Swedish MoD has always been declared as an interim capability.

      The long term replacement for AS-90 is Boxer RCH-155. I suspect that will take a very long time to come into service for multiple reasons.

      • Well they can’t leave active gun batteries without any guns, what would be the options in the interim? There must be something knocking about that could fill in short term? 105 light guns out if cold store??

        • Daniele says that 1RHA still has its complement of AS-90s and there are those 14 Archers. Not sure how many AS-90s are left in storage after all those UKR donations, and what shape they are in.
          Not sure about 105mm LG numbers in storage either.

          So, good question.

          Hope someone has the answers on this.

          • “1RHA still has its complement of AS-90s”

            I don’t think it is a full 24 in 3 Fire Batteries though. I might be wrong, I understood it too well down on establishment.

          • As I said, I knew it was down and not full, but not that bad! Thanks.
            I assume RSA, 14RA will give their compliment to UKR too? What’s the point of 14 RA still having examples if no front line regiments have it?

          • I look after the rsa guns we’ve already sent two As90 and have six left for training they are naturally all fully fit

          • There’s a battery of As90 out there until they go out of service its a bit like batus the kit is permanently there just a change of manpower

          • Yes. I have seen that spreadsheet from June 2023. Much has changed since then. Be good to see this year’s document if HMG dare to put it in the public domain!

          • Thanks Sam. It will surely make shocking reading. During the time a SofS says we are in a pre-War era, I expect that equipment numbers will be appreciably reduced.

          • Yes, one of the sources I based my guesstimate on. And some Tweets.
            But David L works at the RSA, no better source than him.

          • The 2024 one is due at the end of October.

            Will make very interesting reading.

            I feel MLRS will be higher, light fun the same and AS90 virtually nothing.

          • 12 of the AS-90’s handed over to Ukraine were “non-functional spares” If that was guns missing or something else?

          • Those 12 were non-functioning AS-90s, that UKR could strip for spares. In that shipment was also 20 functioning AS-90s. We have sent more since. Not sure what the total now sent is. Could be 60 or more?

          • According to Wiki ” 36 operational ones and 12 non-functional spares received from UK. I was interested in the non -functioning one, did they become non -functional as we striped them for spares ? or were they sat in storage

        • I read one suggestion that with the Army increasing its M270 Batteries from 6 to 9, those extra regular Batteries may be found from Regs like 1 RHA with few or no guns, as another “interim” until new SPGs arrive.
          Where else do the RA get personnel from to expand the Deep Fires area?

          • The problem there is there isn’t enough Mlrs to do that the mod has procured extra miles from Norway and I believe Japan but they all have to go back to the USA for upgrade to glmrs they’re being fed through rsa remember to have non usa parts removed

          • Thanks. So not a short term option either.
            Do you have any timescale estimate for the completion and expansion to 75?

          • there was a post to say we were looking at 85 units which would make us one of the biggest MLRS users

          • Germany purchased ~114 units and only has 34 in service supposedly. Some have gone to Ukraine. maybe a source for some?

          • Obviously different times. I can remember having to go up to a storage site in Melton Mowbray around 1978/79 to pick up a new Radar (Cymbeline) the site had a number of very large sheds brimming with kit. Good times.

      • It maybe quicker to buy more Archer platforms ,which I think is the better Artillery platform ,RCH-155 looks more like a make do job .

        • I don’t think there are anymore secondhand Archers on Volvo chassis to be had.

          Anyway Sunak did a PM to PM deal to get Boxer RCH155. That is not going to be unravelled.

          A pity the army did not get the chance to evaluate Archer, Caesar, K9 and RCH155 alongside each other as was the plan under the MFP programme.
          What did Sunak know about artillery?!

  2. So they had an initial 24 month support contract for £4 million, and now a long term one for £60 million. We have just 14 systems so that’s £4.5 million a pop, anyone know how much we paid for them ?
    I may be way off the mark but this doesn’t look like a very good deal to me for just an interim solution. I always find it odd that we have stuck with the Volvo Truck chassis when Sweden is moving to the same MAN Truck as we use for everything else.

    It may explain why Norway backed out of their purchase of 24 🤔

    • I often wonder just how competent staff at DE&S actually are, if those figures are accurate? Support costs are so high they I think are higher than the equipment budget.

      • Over a, say, 30 year service life then support costs for any equipment is far, far higher than original acquisition costs.

        But I doubt we are keeping Archer, an interim solution, for 30 years and anyway this support contract is for just 5 years!

        So you may well have a point!

    • We clearly quickly bought what was available or others will moan about a long capability gap. There is still one anyway as we have donated more than 14 AS-90s to Ukraine.

      I agree that this support contract looks poor VfM at first glance. The RA will do Level 1 maintenance, REME will do Level 2 and would do Level 3 if the unit has a Regt Wksp REME rather than just a LAD. Looks like we would send repairable E&MAs to the OEM for specified repair.
      Not sure how many years this deal runs for but it does not look good at first glance.

      • I struggle to figure out why as an interim we just didn’t buy some M777 ? Yes I know they are towed, not self portable or automatic but it’s an interim solution.
        Failing that ask Poland how expensive it is to upgrade the AS90 turret like they have for Krab SPG. They picked the Braveheart turret over the Pzh2000 and fitted a Nextor 52 calibre 155mm.

        I suspect we could have bought far more M777 for the budget than Archers.

        • Not a bad idea. Sunak should have stayed out of it and let the army do the MFP to determine the long term solution, centrepiece of which would have been a comparison between Archer, RCH155, Caesar, and K9.
          Then when the final selection is made those interim M777s could be issued to support the mech brigades or light brigades in 1 Div.
          If 16AA and the Commandoes wanted to keep 105mm, then they still could.

    • I have spent a long time trying to find out how much we paid for our 14 secondhand ‘Mk1’ Archers. Not found a thing. It smells fishy. I suspect we massively overpaid.

  4. i hope that includes a lot of spare gun tubes and ammo, otherwise it seems way overpriced for maintenance for 14 units for just 5 years.

        • I mean there is 600 odd already in the pipeline, at a build rate of supposedly no more than 60 per year.

          It will be very interesting to see the equipment list at the end of October for what is actually in service.

          You suspect about 50 Ajax variants and less then two dozen Boxers.

          The LMP has also been delayed to an IOC of 2029 today, so you wonder what vehicles the army will actually have left that won’t be completely obsolete by the end of the decade.

          • At present the Ajax are on RGT and familiarisation with HCR and my old unit. 6 Bn REME. Would that count as being in service? Probably. Will we really have any Boxers in service within a few weeks or so?
            The age of the army’s heavy metal is alarming.

          • You’d think they’d count the Ajaxes.

            There will no more than a handful of Boxers; last year said 2.

            And you’re right about the state of the armour.

            Bulldogs will probably still be our most numerous vehicle; previous year they were over 700 and are no closer to being replaced.

          • Boxer must be replacing many if not all FV430s, certainly the mortar carriers and armoured ambulances as we are buying Boxer variants of those types.

          • That was my assumption.

            Numbers wise they’ll need a hell of a lot more to cover all the FV432 and Warrior.

            Don’t want to get into the Boxer isn’t an IFV conversation again, but they will certainly need modules with a lot more firepower going forwards.

        • A build rate of 60 a year means a decade to complete the already existing Boxer order.

          Let’s say 116 RCH155 on top; minimum 2 years. (Based on mobile fires programme and Soldier magazine.)

          That’s already 12 years.

          Plus all the other variants shared at DVD, if they order them.

          You’re looking at 20 years in terms of numbers, variants and build rates in current terms.

          • Yes, and only 623 Boxers ordered so far when the army requirement is for twice as many. (Not talking about RCH-155 as they are additional)

          • That’s if funding is put in place and orders placed for the other 600 or so.

            Trouble is HMG has a bad record in not funding all that is required. You will have noticed that not all FV430s were replaced by Warriors in the mid-80s!

          • I recall reading somewhere funding was in place for up to 1200 Boxers already.

            Can’t remember where though.

            And yes. We are still replacing vehicles from the 60s, let alone the 80s. A sorry story.

            Let’s hope they go all in now and modernize everything fully.

            As well as finally doing mid-life upgrades.

          • By the way there is now a tracked module for the Boxer vehicle family!

            It makes use of the standard Boxer modules… I don’t much more than that, there is a publicity page on the KNDS website.

            Cheers CR

          • Thanks. I had heard of that. It is of course a different motorised base unit rather than a different mission module. Seems to be a PV project with no buyers so far.

            Not sure what it means for BA. If the politicos could be convinced of the need we would have to buy a huge number. What then of the mission modules procured for wheeled Boxer? Put them on the tracked vase units? That would leave a lot of wheeled bases with no mission modules and so would be useless.

            Then you would need to buy IFV mission modules with stabilised auto cannons, for many of your tracked base units to turn them into tracked IFVs.
            It’s all messy and expensive!

          • Hi Graham,

            Actually I think it might reduce costs in the long run as you could use the same mission modules for both wheeled and tracked vehicles thus reducing the range of spares and simplifying training.

            You would need to buy more mission modules or, as you point out, you deplete your wheeled capability which I think is needed for lighter formations. I would think you could switch some of the wheel requirement to tracked to keep up with the MBT and Ajax in the heavy brigades.

            Buying the auto cannon module is needed whether we buy tracked base unit or not as I would suggest as sticking with the solely light armament currently being procured is totally insufficient on the modern battlefield.

            Over all I think all our armed forces need to be strengthened significantly as I feel we really are entering a pre-war era. Conventional force deterence is as important as Nuclear deterence in the European context as weakness in either could lead to misunderstanding…

            I think our armed forces need to be re-equipped and scaled up significantly.

            Cheer CR

          • A build rate of 60 should, in any realistic world, be an initial production rate and should be easily scalable.

            However, it could be that the Treasury is limiting the supply of funds as they did for T26… It could also be that the UK supply chain and assembly factory cannot yet build more than 60, assuming that they were not scaled to ‘peacetime’ assumptions which is not beyond the realms of possibility.

            The supply of money could be sorted given sufficient political backbone to deal with a Treasury that sees defence spending as a waste of money! Scaling up our production capability will require a lot of hard work and money, especially given 40% of the supply chain is in Europe and busy supplying our European allies.

            The British Army has been treated appallingly over the last last 30 years as have the rest of the services and we are in a pre-war era apparently.

            Utter madness.

            CR

          • Yes, they are still driving round in FV432 which were produced when my Dad was a child.

            The mistake is also letting too many capabilities run down together and then needing to replace them all.

            I hope they learn this lesson and also do mid-life upgrades, which the UK seen much worse at than similar sized forces.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here