The Ministry of Defence has again frozen training on the Army’s troubled Ajax reconnaissance vehicle after 30 soldiers reported noise and vibration symptoms during an exercise, prompting a new safety investigation only days after the fleet was formally declared to have reached Initial Operating Capability.
In a written statement to Parliament, Defence Readiness and Industry minister Luke Pollard said he was updating MPs on the Armoured Cavalry Programme “commonly known as Ajax,” and confirmed that although IOC had been reached, “a recent training exercise has raised concerns regarding the safety of the vehicles.”
Pollard stressed repeatedly that he had demanded direct assurances before signing off on progress. “As safety is my top priority, prior to IOC I asked for and was given assurances in writing by senior Ministry of Defence personnel that the system was safe,” he told the House.
Those assurances were tested on 22 November, when “around 30 Service personnel operating Ajax reported noise and vibration symptoms during a training exercise.” According to Pollard, the chain of command reacted immediately. “The exercise was stopped at once in line with our safety protocols and those affected received full medical care and attention, and continue to be monitored,” he said. He added that “there have not been any hospitalisations and none of the symptoms are life threatening.”
Pollard has now directed a full pause on training. “The safety of our Service personnel remains a top priority for the MOD,” he wrote. “As such, and out of an abundance of caution, I have directed a pause on use of Ajax for training and exercising, while a safety investigation is carried out.”
He used the incident to argue that the safety reforms introduced after earlier Ajax controversies were working as intended. “The rapid escalation of medical concerns, and halting the exercise immediately, demonstrates both the professionalism of our people, and an improved safety culture functioning as designed, with the chain of command acting appropriately and with the required urgency,” he said.
Pollard also stressed that the platform remains in active development. “It is important to highlight that Ajax is continually being tested and developed,” he wrote. “This approach enables our soldiers and industry partners to work collaboratively to address challenges as they are identified.”
Investigators from the Defence Accident Investigation Board and the Army Safety Investigation Team are now working “at pace” with manufacturer General Dynamics to identify the cause of the latest symptoms. Pollard told MPs that “the Ministry of Defence will provide further updates in due course, upon completion of the investigation.”
Although Pollard did not address what the incident means for the wider programme, the decision to halt training only days after IOC underlines the continuing fragility of a project that has faced years of delays, technical problems and repeated safety scares.











Convert this useless heap into an unmanned drone and rework the warrior. Or , the best solution was to buy the CV90 but a bit too late for this. Now you have another mess on your hands as if MoD was actively collecting them
I have heard on cross reference article in France that suspensions are designed for the original 24 tonnes plateform, designed max to 32 tonnes. And due to Ajax Program, with armor and new équipements added on, it now weights 40 tonnes. Since 40 tonnes is the max for A400 Atlas transportation, the team is stuck and cannot fix the issue, is it correct?
Yes, that’s my understanding as well. Not sure if it uses Soucy “rubber track”, but if not, this would be pretty easy to fit and trial with minimal engineering required to install.
Late in the day to find out too over weight.
More hilarity from Pollard, the ex was not shut down immediately!
Do we have a “Pollard porky” here? For goodness sake can’t they get this sorted and talk some truth as they must be pretty expert on every square inch of Ajax by now? Can it be given some good Anglo -German re-engineering?
At best we have a Pollaŕd believing whatever he’s told. Unfortunately for him he signed it off so the buck stops with him.
It wasn’t me, Miss!! Politicians getting their excuses in early. So who said it was safe? And if it’s not safe, sack them.
I still believe it to be a highly capable vehicle, but if it has flaws like this?
Are there any comparable figures for noise and motion sickness type injuries for other army vehicles?
I read that the WW1 Mark 1 tank was safer.
Hi Daniele, try riding in the back of an early WR. The fuel tank was not opaque and the pax could see the fuel sloshing around X country. Barftastic!
Bouncing around BATUS or N. Germany in a 432/434, long road runs in the same! Personally, I believe some of the problem is the fact that personnel are unused to being closed down for extended periods and also X country driving whilst closed down, but that is the way AJAX was required to operate by MOD.
Morning Ian, was waiting for you to comment here.
I assume as well that there are still plenty of experienced personnel in the Cavalry Regiments who worked with CVRT. How did that differ, were they not also required to operate closed down?
It would be interesting to see data on how many personnel were involved in the exercise and how many % were unaffected. And why they were unaffected.
Also, as a layman, surely, crews are exposed to all this in phase 2 at ArmourCentre and either develop experience with it or if vulnerable are weened off elsewhere as unsuitable. Just like RAF pilot trainees are not all suited to fast jets and get streamed onto rotary or multi engine.
Doesn’t add up for me.
I still as always believe in the vehicle.
Keeping this vague, I heard circa 75% of crews suspected of being affected with 20% confirmed and 10% hospitalised, that’s from a few days ago though.
Bit late on the negative comments… back in November 6th I stated ‘I gather it’s still having issues. Seems to me that it was a bad buy.’ – fot Ian M, does this represent an answer to ‘What issues are these Rob?’ and ‘HaHa, just read that article, pure comedy with no substantiation or facts. I wouldn’t put any credence in such an article.’ – simple fact is, the issues never went away and have been reported for a long time. November 7th I said ‘Easy enough to say HaHa, but reports keep coming in… Sky News today ‘Soldiers hospitalised yet again after riding around in army’s problem-plagued vehicle’. ‘The Ministry of Defence confirmed that a “small number” of troops had reported noise and vibration concerns following trials on three variants of the 40-tonne, tracked vehicle. A spokesperson said an investigation was carried out and “no systemic issues were found”. As I said, still seems to be having issues, even if the official view is that everything is fine.” – so this article is 20 days behind the times regarding how ‘good’ the vehicle is. So ‘You do put credence in some drivel.’ followed by my comment ‘No, I just don’t acept things at face value. There are still reports of issues; it’s persistent.’
Incidentally, not trying to sound ‘good’ or boastful with this post – just like to make the point that, sometimes, the people who dissent are actually right!
It never stopped having issues unfortunately. Lots of covering up has been done and it’s not going to end with tea and medals.
Excellent. Another success story ! We were told five years ago that there were problems but all was going to be well…except for the poor people who had to drive around in this heap of junk.