The British Army’s new Boxer armoured vehicle programme has encountered additional delays in reaching its Initial Operating Capability (IOC), according to written answers provided to Parliament by Defence Minister Luke Pollard.

Responding to questions from Conservative MP Mark Francois, Pollard confirmed that the approved IOC for the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (Boxer) remains set for the final quarter of 2025, but that this timeline is currently under review. “An update will be provided shortly,” he stated.

Pollard explained that the delay stems mainly from “global supply chain issues which are not unique to Boxer or Defence.” These have affected manufacturing, delivery, and training schedules across the programme. Despite the setbacks, the minister said that trials have “progressed well” and that “a steady progression of vehicles are being received month on month for acceptance before being fielded to Field Army units.”

The Boxer will eventually form the backbone of the Army’s new Mechanised Infantry capability within 3rd (UK) Division, combining mobility, protection, and modular flexibility. Once in service, maintenance and support will initially be led by the holding units and Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, supported by Field Service Representatives from industry.

Pollard added that spares and support will be provided through the UK’s membership of the NATO Support and Procurement Agency, in collaboration with other Boxer-operating nations, ensuring “reach back to industry for deeper maintenance if required.”

The Boxer fleet, built under a joint venture between Rheinmetall and BAE Systems, is being assembled in the UK at Telford and Stockport. The programme is one of the Army’s largest modernisation efforts, intended to replace legacy armoured vehicles and underpin the new Brigade Combat Team structure.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

64 COMMENTS

  1. “remains set for the final quarter of 2025” so it is now October so what is the delay and how many are we getting “month on month”? One, two, ten ?

    • Geoff, I seem to recall a number of about 85 per year a while back, but the 623 we ordered would take nearly 8 years to deliver and that’s without the Boxer RCH-155 deliveries ‘getting in the way’. Glacial delivery, and much criticised, so I think they would push it up higher than that. So that 85 is 7 per month.

      Bear in mind that the army requirement always was for about 1200 Boxers though, although Governments are famous for fuding fewer than required (not all FV430s were replaced by Warriors).

      • Everything ig glacial now, Graham. We don’t seem to know how to do anything. Thanks for the numbers. Seven per month. It’s painful.

    • half, good one. I just read that the wartime Home Guard alone was 1.7m men, so todays regular army represents just 4% of that. Yes, I know that’s irrelevant but its a ‘fun stat’.
      I guess we have about 18,000 Infantry who will ride in many different wagons from Warrior to PM Veh to truck (TCV). Think we have five lt mech battalions (4 reg, 1 reservist) in 7 Lt Mech Bde.

  5. “New Brigade Combat Team Structure.”
    New? Still a Brigade. Same units, fewer of them, copy the American terminology.
    New. So new in fact I hear the Army might make yet another U turn and call them simply a Brigade again. Which they always were and still are, albeit a Brigade less after the Strike debacle which cost the Army an Armoured Infantry Brigade and will, on official plans, cost it all the IFV of the two that remain.
    “New Mechanized infantry capability.” Which replaces Armoured Infantry with Cannon and Chain gun.
    It’s all new.
    Mobility, protection, modular flexibility. Firepower conspicuous by it’s absence. Are there enough REME to change a module in the field? And how many modules have we ordered to change beyond the initial orders?
    Sooner an IFV is ordered, Patria gets ordered in quantity for multiple roles, and these are concentrated in 7 Brigade the better.
    As you might tell, I’m not a fan, not for the cost.

    • Hi Danielle, been waiting to chat to you on a land forces thread , any idea what’s happening with 11Bde? You seem to be more up to speed than most . My former Bn was on Foxhound but has now been re rolled to 11 Bde as ‘ Recce Strike’ . problem is in doing so whilst they get all the latest goochy kit to olay with, drones, UAS, RPAS, UGV etc they have lost all their beloved Foxhounds and have no way to.mive around. How on earth can you do ‘ Recce Strike’ without any vehicles ?? From bitter experience dismounted Infantry ( Grunts ) are fine when fighting in complex terrain , urban , mountains or jungle but on the eastern flank ? How on earth are they going to get there ( Flix bus?) and when they do eventually arrive how on earth are they going to move around ? Again from experience a young Welsh Guardsman once said to me succinctly ‘ light Infantry aren’t’ and are of very limited use on a modern European battlefield when you are reliant on the speed of the smallest bloke ( or girl!) in your platoon with the heaviest bergan to get you from A to B.

      • Hi mate.
        I don’t know a great deal beyond what you’ve just mentioned.
        There is an article here on 11 Bde BTW.
        The Bde will be part of the LSOF, alongside the Rangers and 77 Bde, as the “Forward Presence.”

        I’m a tad confused about your vehicles comment, as as far as I was concerned it has not had Foxhound for some time, as the Bde was the SIG then 11 SFAB previously, with much reduced Bn headcount with its foreign forces mentoring role. You say your Bn has just been re rolled? Recently, or years ago?

        As far as I knew its Battalions have for some time been 1 IG, 1 R Anglian, 3 RRS ( BW) 3 Rifles.
        Was your Bn any of these, if you’re able to say? Or maybe you’re actually ahead of me and another Bn has been moved in?
        Whatever, yes, not sure either on vehicles. I believe the Rangers also in LSOF might operate CAVS, and another type, which one can find with digging online, wgich MoD bought, so maybe 11 Bde will too?
        As far as I knew, all of 11 Bdes reduced Battalions have not used Foxhound for many years since the A2020 changes.
        Otherwise, as you say, It is seemingly going to have a larger than usual complement of Drones for Light Strike, but seems also to be a testing ground like 2 Yorks for new stuff. What the actual complements of this kit are I don’t know.
        Sorry I cannot be more informative. I csn only learn what I can by digging as I’m on the outside, not within like you and Dern.

      • @Pongolo, I’m probably best placed to respond to your questions I guess. I’m not 11 Brigade but I know a little about what they do.

        There is… a lot here. As Daniele said, none of the 11 Brigade battalions have been on Foxhound for a long time. When the SpecInf Group (Which Daniele never seems to get the right name for :P) was re-rolled to ASOB and Rangers where formed, 5 Battalions where collected from across the Army and formed into 11 Brigade. This was in 2021, and the idea of 11 SFA Brigade was to go back to what SpecInf was originally supposed to do: The idea was for the Battalions to form into small advisory teams that would go to friendly countries (not necssarily peaceful ones, but ones with friendly governments) and provide STT’s to their forces. They went about this in a slightly different way from SpecInf, I believe they largely tried to eschew the 12 man ODA structure that SpecInf went for (and pulled forwards into Rangers, probably SpecOps fobia from 11 Brigade they really didn’t want to talk to ASOB as I understand it). Point being, they never inteded to deploy in more than platoon strength into friendly territory, so they gave their Foxhounds away in 21.

        How does 11 Brigade work now? It’s not officially in circulation outside of the MoD, but given it’s inclusion in LSOF, it’s not a traditional manuever formation. My best guess is that the idea is for 11X to work with and through partner light infantry forces, hence the recent article of them working alongside the Latvian 4th National Guard Brigade, to provide them with additional capabilities. Partner forces provide mass and rifles, 11 Brigade Battalions provides Drones, Mortars, MG’s, and maybe a company of rifles for protection.

        Mobility and lift is probably going to be partner force dependent. As I said 11 SFA never really went in for the ODA style of operations as I understand it, so I’m not sure what their lift solution actually looks like, but given that TDF’s in Eastern Europe, where 11X seems most focused, don’t have military mobility in large quantities either, I’d guess civilian vehicles.

            • Hi mate.
              Yes, I was wondering.
              You’ll be pleased to hear that I’ve finally got it in my head that SIG became ASOB.
              As 11 SFAB had a similar mentoring role, my brain naturally links SIG into 11 SAFB.
              🙄
              I will try to do better! 😉

      • Hi Pongolo,
        Your post about the mobility of lt role inf bns reminds me of discussuion with Daniele a while back. We really could not figure out what MT the battalion has organically. Perhaps its got TCVs but surely not enough to lift a whole bn at once. Perhaps its nothing!

    • Hi Daniele,
      I have always been intrigued by the interchangeable Mission Modules (MM) feature on Boxer. Dern and I once commented on this. Its a great gimmick, but I doubt this ‘feature’ will be used very much in British service. How often would a mech inf battalion decide it wanted more than 8 mortar wagons or 3 or 4 armoured ambulances etc.
      Are we buying more MMs than Drive modules? I hadn’t heard that we were. If so, then we will not really be able to take advantage of the feature.
      If we are however buying more MMs than drive modules, then we have to somehow ship out the orphaned (surplus) MMs to Theatre – they are not easy to handle. Where would we keep them once we got them out to Theatre – in a rear area in a hangar? How do we move them forward to unit lines when required? If that unit has to move due to the tatical situation, how does it move its stash of orphaned MMs? Can you swap them out without hardstanding in a forward area? Where does the unit get a heavy duty crane from?
      Finally I don’t see it as a REME task to swap modules – this is a User task (lead – Bn MTO). However if REME are the only ones in a Boxer battalion with cranage, by default it might fall to them. Will the crane on a REME Boxer variant be able to lift a MM? – I have a few doubts. It would be interesting to find out about the weights of the various MMs and compare it to the crane capacilty on the REME Boxer variant. If a REME LAD at the battalion did not have the right capacity cranage then it becomes a brigade issue to solve (if Bde HQ has command of a REME Bn, RLC Regt or Engr Regt (they have cranes) one of those units could be assigned to provide the swap-out service).

      I am sure this has all been thought through by the ILS staff on the Boxer desk at Abbey Wood, together with Infantry doctrine (Combat Development) staff!
      [Currently we ‘Task Org’ – if a battalion today needed more than, for example, 8 mortar wagons or 3-4 ambulances for an impending task, another unit not on the impending operation would detach some of their assets to the receiving unit, as directed by Bde HQ. It’s very simple, unlike the above.

      • Morning Graham.
        Thanks for detailing some of the complexities involved REME wise.
        On Modules, I’d read that previously, when a future batch of Boxer was in the plan, which now seems to have been quietly abandoned, an army officer was quoted as saying that more Modules than Drive Modules would be bought.
        My cynical brain immediately thinks, just another way for them to save money.
        I think that is all past now, myself, save a Boxer Recovery variant, the RCH155 SPG, and reports that the Army still want to drop Titan and replace it with a Boxer Bridgelayer with a much shorter bridge, in an all tracked formation.
        And pay top dollar for it too. Apparently Titan has poor availability rates, which makes me question why they’re not being kept updated and in order. I thought of you when I read this, with your oft comment about the varied marks of Chieftain when we did update vehicles.

      • As HMG do not have ICY data for modules, we are tied into whatever the Germans allow. Logistically and from a supply chain perspective Boxer is a nightmare. Just how little input control we have is currently being ably demonstrated by Rheinmetall – All deliveries are late and the 4,000 high quality Engineering and technical jobs have vanished like morning mist under a summer sun. It now appears that KNDS/Rheinmetall are co-operating to ensure every British designed platform is removed from service and replaced by a common European standard supplied by them. I am specifically referring to bridging here, but it applies to any in service kit that was GKN, Alvis, BAE. This is of course no surprise after all business is business. But it fails the LIS and Defence Strategy in every way possible. In the longer term we lose all R&D, design, production & test capability (Apart from a little detail stuff for the sake of PR). The UK becomes an assembly shop for the some parts with the critical parts engine, etc retained by Germany No control over supply chain. Sad to see that British companies are no longer supported by MoD. After working on so many developments over the years I have watched as one company after another has been destroyed by our own Army. Terribly sad. Boxer is an excellent example. All British companies poured their experience and knowledge into the platform for years. Alvis delivered prototypes from Telford, then the UK withdrew from the program as it ‘Didn’t meet our requirements’
        BAE take over Telford invest millions in test facilities develop a working turret for WCSP and the contract is given to a US company with no relevant expertise or experience. BAE bid CV90 for the Scout requirement and lose to anon existent vehicle which is allegedly low risk! – Later reports on Ajax and WCSP accurately identify the key reason for failure of both projects was the contracts being awarded to companies that didn’t have the pedigree, knowledge or expertise to discharge them. Meanwhile MoD award Challenger 3 to Germany (which I hear is now badly overweight) forcing BAE to sell Telford to Rheinmetall and thereby destroying the last A vehicle design & manufacturing in the UK. All future vehicle will be German. There will be no substantial export revenue.
        Andover have really destroyed the entire UK vehicle sector

        • Lord B, further to your post about the destruction of the entire UK vehicle sector… what is also worth saying is that MoD did not order any AFVs for 20 years! [Imagine something similar happening in RN and RAF circles]. No wonder BAE closed down their two quite new and very efficient tank factories in Leeds and Newcastle. Industry were not even kept ticking over doing major upgrades of all the in-service AFVs, unlike in days gone past. The only upgrades of note were the conversion of a number of FV430s to Bulldog spec and of some Scimitars to Mk2 spec.

          • Apparent war and conflict were over and peace would reign evermore- isn’t myth wonderful. Also says something about the quality of our political leaders and their lack of vision.
            Some may have benefited from the foreign takeovers of British defence companies

            • Not really. More “War was COIN operations in the Sandbox that saw any upgrades to the armoured fleet deferred in favour of MRAP’s and CIED.”

      • hahaha I wanted to say back in the 90s/00s, but my memory is pretty bad and i thought not even def Procurement can be that bad! by the time we get this “cutting edge, future Fighting vehicle” it will be so old it wouldnt even be liable for car tax 😀 maybe thats the plan

        • I mean it’s been in service with the German Army for over a decade now, we just got side tracked with all the UOR’s for Afghan,

      • We got out due to concerns about escalating costs, size and weight and began FRESS development, which fizzled like a damp squid.

    • A problem with the army at the moment, or over at least the last 15 years, is the inability to create a plan, and stick to it, regards both Orbat and equipment, due to a mix of government imposed cuts and successive reorgs where the changes are not even fully actioned before a new plan arrives forced by finances or a new conop like Strike which impacted the 3 Bde 3 UK Armoured Division we had.

  8. Whatever the shade of HM Gooberment? Swerve, delay, and issue bullshit propaganda at every opportunity. Situation normal.

  9. This is the problem with foreign systems where we get a bit of assembly work. We have zero control! Also of course aside from it being late where are the 4,000 high quality technical and engineering jobs Rheinmetall promised?? And remember that in spite of painting the vehicle in Union flags, it remains German. We are not even privy to the module interface data, so can’t even compete modules and manufacture our own modules locally – we are under total German control. I Guess the Germans will decide when the British Army can receive delivery?

  11. I’m sure the lawyer that our fantastic government has put in charge of rearmement will quickly get a grip of the situation with his years of experience in the defence industry

    • David, Starmer would pick a lawyer to do something he has zero experience of! A bit like himself (Keir has never run a Government Department and was Shadow Home Office Minister only for 9 months).
      You couldn’t make it up.

      • I know I’m sure there are retired senior officer’s who could easily have done the job or a senior Bae executive executive that could fill the post starmer is barking mad and clueless

  12. I know he’s hostage to his voters but you would like think he might have had a bit of common sense with the post and put someone in the job with defence experience

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

By submitting this comment, you agree to the storage and handling of your data by this website in accordance with our Privacy Policy.