Armoured mortar, repair and recovery, and mounted close combat overwatch capabilities are no longer being pursued within the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle programme, and Boxer will not be used in the armoured cavalry role at all, according to answers given in Parliament.
Ben Obese-Jecty, the Conservative member for Huntingdon, asked what elements had been cut from the programme as part of the funding removal and budget reprioritisation recorded in the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority’s Major Projects Annual Report for 2025 to 2026, which logged £1,858.38 million coming out. He separately asked how many of each Boxer variant would go to the armoured cavalry role and how many to mechanised infantry.
Luke Pollard, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry, said: “As part of reprioritisation within the Military Strategic Headquarters, the Armoured Mortar, Repair and Recovery and Mounted Close Combat Overwatch capabilities of the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle programme are no longer being pursued.
“The Army is considering how the underlying capability requirements will be addressed.”
On the cavalry question, Pollard said: “Boxer vehicles will not be used in the Armoured Cavalry role. Boxer will form the spine of the Mechanised Infantry force. Under current plans, Boxer is being fielded in supporting roles across 3rd (UK) Division, including Command and Control, Specialist Troop Carrier and Medical functions. Detailed fielding plans and vehicle allocations remain subject to refinement.”
The requirement survives the first decision even though the Boxer-based route to meeting it does not, which leaves the Army to find another way. In practice that means an existing vehicle takes the task on, a separate procurement follows, or the capability thins.
Each of the shelved functions does a job the mechanised infantry brigades still need done. Armoured mortar gives a battlegroup indirect fire of its own, able to move with the vehicles it supports and put rounds down without waiting on artillery allocated at a higher level. Repair and recovery keeps a wheeled armoured fleet running and drags disabled vehicles off the battlefield, which matters because a vehicle of Boxer’s weight that loses mobility cannot be moved by anything smaller than a purpose-built recovery variant. Mounted close combat overwatch is the anti-armour role, carrying a missile system that lets the infantry hold tanks at a distance.
Armoured cavalry is the reconnaissance and screening job the Army is equipping with Ajax, the tracked family built by General Dynamics Land Systems UK and fitted with a stabilised 40mm cased telescoped cannon. Ajax carries the sensors and the gun for that work, while Boxer is wheeled, has no turret on the British variants ordered so far, and is built to carry infantry and the things infantry need. Ruling it out of the role closes off a line of speculation that has followed the vehicle since Britain rejoined the programme.
Boxer is a modular design built around a common drive module onto which different mission modules are fitted, the feature that was supposed to make adding variants straightforward. Britain rejoined the programme in 2018, having left it in 2003, and the order has grown past six hundred vehicles across infantry carrier, specialist carrier, command and ambulance types, built under licence by Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land at Telford and WFEL at Stockport.
All this makes ement sense as we face unlimited threats against our country. Stopping Army exercises to save money, turning the other cheek regarding Ajax and now the only programme showing any progress Boxer, is about to be substantially cut. To compound matters, it’s becoming clear that CH3 is turning into another mess, with a predicted weight increase and no engine power increase! Rest easy, friends.
Whoops ’eminent’
You have to despair. It feels like no one’s at the helm in the defence ministry/MOD, it’s just a rudderless ship. It’s the guys on the ground I feel sorry for, not having the kit of sufficient quality and continually getting push back in critical areas.
For me, old news, I’d read long ago that most of Boxer batch 2 was effectively shelved, it stopped appearing in the Companies financial projections as well.
I’ve read that a CAVS variant is being looked at for the Mortar role. The Recovery role will have to be fulfilled by sonething, as the REME will need a vehicle.
Armoured Cavalry? News to me, as far as I was concerned Boxer has never been destined for the Armoured Cavalry or Armoured Regiments of the RAC, those are filled by Ajax variants.
The units due to recieve Boxer were listed in a FOIA request a while back, cannot recall all but they included the 4 Warrior Battalions, the two Armoured CS RE Regiments, 2 REME CS Battalions, 2 RAMS Medical Regiments, some RA Regiments, and elements of the Royal Signals.
I don’t mind this at all, the vehicle, however capable, is ruinously expensive, buy something in bulk cheaper to complement it and spend the saving on more artillery, GBAD, and Drones.
Yes completely agree, it’s a bit of a none story, other than to confirm the army is not going to spaf even more money on the most expensive APCs in existence.
Although bizarrely the one area I think boxer would have been worth moving forward on would be a 120mm with direct fire capability.. as is so well protected it’s perfect for direct fire support.
Yes, the irony.
Hi mate, thanks for the update. Much as I suspected, I dare say the patria 6X6 can take on many of the roles at 20% of the cost of boxer. The National Armaments Director just gave an interview and talked about procuring equipment that was good enough rather than exquisite. Seems like that is squarely aimed at the army vehicle program. So much money wasted on very bespoke vehicles for little benefit.
Morning mate.
Yes, I for one agree. Though Boxer will be a great vehicle, that I don’t doubt.
Options i guess for the REME variants are either to retain the 512 and 513 variants of Warrior or go for a bespoke option. In this case i sort of see the logic as the Recovery/Repair variant of boxer is probably financial overkill for what essentially needs to be an oversized offroad Wrecker.
Exactly.
Reality is dawning. We are cutting our coat according to our cloth. Time is the enemy now. The BAe CR2 lifex was the way to go. What are our options now? Re-instate WCSP and use Patria and Supacat for everything else?
Or some common sense?
Who at Andover thought that having one of the, or the most expensive APC out there for numerous roles that could be fulfilled by cheaper but good enough was a good idea?
In a cash strapped military.
In the 80s, MCV80, so Warrior, could not be bought in sufficient quantity for all roles, FV432 and Spartan were retained, and the 432 still is.
Why should this be any different?
Yeah it was beyond me why anyone thought we needed £5 and £10 million state of the art armoured vehicles providing recovery and ambulance variants.
Is it time to go public with both the British people and our NATO members and render the Army a rapid, light force, leaving heavy armour to Europe’s mainland MBT units, which is not insignificant? The latest CH3 news is also depressing, as additional top armour is making the vehicle very heavy and with no engine power upgrades in the pipeline, moving 75 + tonnes could be a ‘challenge.’ To add insult to injury, any turtle protection could make it inoperable. New Ukrainian land tactics have had some success using turtle tanks combined with a network of protective drones. Is it conceivable that CH3 could do the same, knowing it is right on the edge of its optimum capabilities??
Totally it’s what they should have always done.. in my view boxer was and is a complete money spaf.. its five times the cost of the apc france is purchasing and low and behold France has purchased about 5 time more.
They should have always kept WCSP and it should be immediately re instated and yes a 1000 Patria and a 1000 supacat for the protected mobility role.
Or perhaps the Army should just be honest and say – We got it right the first time this vehicle doesn’t meet our requirements…….
Turrets on wheeled AFVs are always very nervous making for the crews in challenging terrain.
Aussie Boxer programme:
‘Military insiders say integrating the Lance turret is proving far more complicated than first anticipated because crucial anti-missile and anti-drone countermeasures are making the weapons system too heavy and unstable’
“Army is equipping with Ajax”… really?
The Army is equipped with Ajax and it’s using it now. It passed IOC in 2025. The suspension has been lifted.
Honest to god I don’t know why the army fucks this up so much… work out how many vehicles need then how much money you have.. then. Buy the vehicle you can afford in the numbers you need.. stop going but we need Aston Martins so we are going to buy 5 and then worry about the other 15 cars later.. just buy 20 fucking Fords to start with.
France can manage it.. they buy cheap or what they can afford and they buy the number they need.. so now France has ordered about 3000 armoured vehicles and we have ordered 600.. because France buys the Ford.
Gold plating at all costs has permeated the military for some time, it, along with the incompetence and constant chopping and changing of priorities is making things worse.
Whichever way you look at hths and we can dress it up with whatever we want, BUT, the army is a shambles. Problems with integrating Challenger, with Ajax and now Boxer; no artillery to speak of and helicopters being scrapped. Decisions still to be made (postponed?) on everything else. It may be that reasons can be given for individual situations but it’s the overall picture. Add to all this the Healey budget and probable lack of real money for defence, and we might as well write the army off as a fully balanced force.