The UK government has indicated it will not transfer Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs) awaiting disposal to Ukraine, citing limited operational value and the risk of burdening Kyiv with added logistical complexity.
In a written response to Labour MP Peter Lamb, who asked whether surplus Warriors could be donated to support Ukraine’s defence against Russia, Defence Minister Luke Pollard said that while small numbers of the vehicles are due for disposal, they are unlikely to offer meaningful capability without “substantial investment.”
“Providing such small numbers would only increase the diversity of Ukraine’s armoured vehicle fleet, increasing their logistic and training burdens,” Pollard wrote. “Although small numbers are scheduled for disposal, these will have been selected in line with serviceability and suitability for role.”
The Warrior IFV, in service since the late 1980s, has seen extensive use in British Army operations but has been slated for retirement. The Army announced in 2021 that the planned upgrade programme would be cancelled, with the vehicle to be replaced by the Boxer Mechanised Infantry Vehicle under the Future Soldier plan.
Pollard nonetheless affirmed the UK’s broader commitment to military support for Ukraine. “The UK will continue to work with Ukraine to identify how best to help them to resist Russian aggression,” he stated.
The Ministry of Defence has already provided a wide range of armoured vehicles to Ukraine, including CVR(T) platforms, Mastiff and Husky protected mobility vehicles, and Challenger 2 tanks. British officials have consistently emphasised the importance of aligning donated equipment with Ukraine’s existing training capacity and maintenance infrastructure.
The rejection of the Warrior transfer suggests the UK remains cautious about contributing equipment that, while technically surplus, could prove a net drain on Ukrainian forces without additional support.
#Day31 #AnotherDayAnotherDaaler
#AnotherDinAnotherUPIping
This.
I want Ukraine armed to the teeth but our military is bare bones as it is. We need everything we can get right now.
I hear the argument however, as the Ukrainians have suffered losses, would these vehicles not act as replacements?
Ukraine needs as much help as possible, yesterday.
Depends on there material state as well as numbers. Some of the equipment supplied to Ukraine by some countries appeared to come straight from long term storage, without any apparent attempt to bring them up to any semblance of scratch. Some were barely useful as spares. Others supplied equipment even older than Warrior that were in perfect running order, had been upgraded from original & came from operational stocks / ready reserves. A good example suppled by many countries is the M113. Some could barely move. Others had numerous upgrades including drivetrain & weapons systems. If it needs a new engine, new gearbox, new tracks etc you aren’t doing them a favour.
I’m not sure of the exact number, but it’s clearly a small one—likely making it more of a logistical burden for the Ukrainians.
Yes, we sent a small number of tanks (14), but the goal was to break the so-called “tank taboo”—overcoming political hesitation and paving the way for other Western nations to follow with their own tank contributions.
What we should be doing is ordering a new IFV to replace Warrior. The entire Warrior fleet could then be transferred to Ukraine. While this process would take years, Ukraine will still require long-term military support, even after the war ends.
I take your point. However in this case, Bradley’s etc have already made an appearance in Ukraine. UK warrior replacement appears to be Boxer, which is wheeled rather than tracked like Warrior & seems reluctant to make an appearance in IFV format. Nothing wrong with Boxer itself, but delivery rates makes Leyland of old look efficient. Even Germany has had to place an order with Australia for 100 Boxers + modules, fitted with turrets with 30mm cannon + 2 ATGM. Why – because their (Germany) peacetime scaled factories are already pushed to the limit.
I mentioned the small number of tanks we sent to clarify the reasoning. As I said, sending Warriors in small numbers is a different matter and would actually be more of a hindrance to Ukraine than a help.
As for Boxer replacing Warrior, the decision to cancel the Warrior upgrade was made before the Russian invasion—so you’d like to think they’re now looking into a tracked IFV replacement again. Probably optimistic of me, but hopefully we’ll find out more in the autumn.
These would have been useful early on but it’s too late now.
An important lesson: use it or lose it.
Agreed. They’re now in a position where, frankly, they’d probably dump them on a National Guard unit because their frontline units have something better.
Not knocking the Warrior in and of itself, but without the WCSP, it lags seriously behind the other western IFVs that are being provided to Ukraine.
I don’t want any transferred.
We need them.
AI Battalions, REME Battalions, RAC Regiments still use them.
If there’s any sense, they’ll be kept as better than nothing and good enough until a new IFV is bought.
Completely agree with you on this.
One thing is to donate surplus (and even then one can go too far), but there’s nothing left to give. The army is in an appalling state, with no contingency.
I agree with you mate.
Its progressively looking like little will be done with the Army prior to 2030, bar underpinning what we have and stopping the rot going any further.
The money is going to the RAF and RN.
I’m not so sure. I’d wager there will be a small increase in numbers, say 3000: not immediately but before 2030. In Autumn we will hear more detail on the decisions and timelines on exactly how Warrior will be replaced by Boxer variants and Ares. I would also not be surprised to see announcements on more deep fires, Patria and NMH.
Agree, the army is not awash with AFVs and losing IFVs is not something we should be considering..
I dunno, I’ve been told that the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards don’t have them anymore so clearly nobody else will have them.
😆
Indicative of the mess The Army regards its armoured vehicle procurement , that we all realise that ,even though Ukraine’s need is important that we simply cannot even contemplate sending a vehicle that came into service almost 40 years ago for fear of exposing our fragilities even further amongst both the wider public and those that would seek to extort them.
A pathetic and sorry state of affairs that , if nothing else , should surely prompt serious questions around accountability – it won’t.
Exactly.
Right decision to retain Warrior until we have decided in detail exactly how it will be replaced i.e. new Boxer IFV variants for 1 Div – how many, funding, manufacturing plan, what turret. Ditto for Ares for. 3 Div; is it vanilla Ares or modified, if so how, at what cost, when can it be manufactured, funded and delivered? Can we get any SAFE funding for the new IFVs?
This is for Ukraine to decide, for us to make the decision for them smacks of superiority.
The Ukraine armed forces are currently the toughest , most battle hardened and innovative army in Europe. They are continually turning countries casts offs into effective weapons.
Yes, but we need to be also careful that Ukraine are not saying yes because they think it might risk the next shipment of NLAW’s, Storm Shadow etc.
Then we need to make it clear it is up to them and they are under no obligation nor will it effect future help.
Pollard makes sense (unusually) in that WR would be unsuitable for use in UKr, creating a logistic burden they can do without. WR also suffers from antiquated technology i.e. non stabilised weapon, manual loading of the 30mm etc. so would be of limited tactical use.
Soo.. did the Scimitars sold to Latvia/donated to Ukraine not have “non stabilised weapon, manual loading of the 30mm etc” ?
I think the Scimitars were refurbished by Rheinmetal before being sent to Ukraine, where they have performed well in their primary role of reconnaissance.
Very true, however they wouldn’t be used in the same context as an IFV.
What they are saying is these out of service ones are completely knackered, broken, no extra spare parts to send, ammo etc etc.