A GBP 53 million contract has been awarded for the long-lead production of key artillery weapon systems for the British Army’s new Remote Controlled Howitzer (RCH) 155, part of the service’s long-term replacement for the AS90 self-propelled gun.

The contract, awarded by the Organisation for Joint Armament Co-operation (OCCAR) on behalf of the British Army, will see ARTEC GmbH manufacture 37 weapon systems for the Boxer-based artillery platform. The RCH 155 forms the Army’s Mobile Fires Platform (MFP), intended to restore and modernise artillery capability following the transfer of AS90 systems to Ukraine.

The contract covers the production of the weapon system elements of the artillery module, including the barrel, muzzle brake, breech, recoil system and trunnions used to mount the system to the turret.

The announcement also includes significant investment in Rheinmetall’s large-calibre gun barrel manufacturing facility in Telford, known as the Gun Hall.

Around GBP 30 million of the contract value will support development of the facility, which is expected to create roughly 100 highly skilled jobs as well as further employment across the wider UK defence supply chain.

The MOD say the investment will help establish a sovereign UK capability to produce large gun barrels at scale, improving resilience and surge capacity for future artillery production.

The RCH 155 combines the Boxer drive module with the Artillery Gun Module (AGM), a remotely operated turret and gun system. The platform can fire up to eight rounds per minute and strike targets at ranges of up to around 70 kilometres depending on the ammunition used.

The vehicle can deploy rapidly, operate with a crew of two and reach speeds of up to 100 kilometres per hour, features intended to improve survivability against counter-battery threats.

Brigadier Toby Lambert, Head of International, Industry and Prosperity at Army Headquarters, said the contract represents a major step for both the Army and the UK defence industry.

“This contract is really great news — not only for our soldiers, but for the UK’s ever-increasing industrial base,” he said.

“It demonstrates a strengthening of our supply chains and delivers on our commitments made in the Trinity House Agreement with our close ally, Germany.”

Lambert added that the wider economic effects of the investment could extend beyond the immediate programme.

“The second order impacts of this award are far-reaching: the creation of high-skilled jobs combined with the drive for continued innovation will undoubtedly stimulate further investment in Defence,” he said. “This demonstrates another key step towards the Army’s continual modernisation programme, preparing our soldiers for the future fight.”

George Allison
George Allison
George Allison is the founder and editor of the UK Defence Journal. He holds a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and specialises in naval and cyber security topics. George has appeared on national radio and television to provide commentary on defence and security issues. Twitter: @geoallison
X

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

105 COMMENTS

      • I do hope so, the write up is not clear on that either way. I feel 37 can in no way be a final total that would equip one full Regt and a few spares for trials, school of Artillery and war reserve. Let wait and see but not holding my breath we are seeing tiny orders when bigger one are needed.

        • You never know with HMG. Some Batteries of the 3 Regiments that need the guns might now be dedicated to using catapult to launch OWE, as seen when the CGS visited an exercise.
          A bit like the Exactor Battery in MLRS Regiments.
          Another thought, a useful way of saving money, they might just use some of the 600 or so Boxer on order as the chassis.
          Not possible with a conventional SPG asset like K9.
          If this is indeed all that will be ordered, well, the usual, utterly shameful.
          But hopefully not.

          • Is it just me or does that article not clearly state what the money is for it can not be just for the barrels yet at that price it can not be for full vehicles, a bit of clarity is needed, or may be its just old age catch up on me and its there clear as day.
            May be there is a cunning plan we do not know about and all will be good come DIP, but not holding out much hope as we all know that the DIP will be budget driven compromise which will likely be a cut not a total gain.

          • You say we have 3 regts to equip Daniele. But we only have 2 arm inf bdes, so surely we are looking at just two regts? Do you think it’s going to equip 7 LM Bde as well? It looks a big beast to mix in with a light mechanised Foxhound Bde Gp.

            The 37 number does look odd. It would equip two regts each with 18 guns (3 btys of 6) but leave just one gun for trials and training, which can’t be right, and none at all in reserve!

            The most logical conclusion would be that this is just a preliminary order to get manufacturing started and there will be a subsequent order later on. Have to hope so!

            I note your point about the possibility.of OWE maybe equipping.the third battery in a regt. Interesting, but wouldn’t like to see a regt drop below 18 howitzer. A fourth battery with OWE would be better, it can ‘t be that expensive a system.

            • Hi Cripes.
              Yes, the third Regiment being 4 RA, which is allocated to 7 LMB.
              The fourth, as part of the original 116 gun requirement, was 3 RHA, but that is now MLRS equipped.
              3 RHA and 4 RA were the two Regiments that had their AS90 guns cut post 2010 and were then equipped with Light Gun, to be used by Strike Brigades! Surely too light a piece for the mobile role that Strike was meant to be.
              Given 7 LMBs a wheeled formation, RCH155 might go well in it? If not, it is jjust the two Regiments as you say, 1 RHA and 19 RA.
              But as others have noted, this 37 is for parts of the system, not the whole SPG, so it’s still open to speculate what the eventual total might be. 60 to 80 or 90 has been my guess.

              • And to add on your other point, unsure if the Army has the people to form a 4th Fire Battery per Regiment of OWE, alongside the traditional 3 of guns.
                If you follow the Army ORBAT as I do, and the individual Companies, Squadrons, and Batteries of Regiments and Battalions, they are being thinned out, and formations reducing in size. All looks the same on paper, until you look inside.
                One of the reasons the Gurkhas have expanded, with new Gurkha units in non Gurkha formations to alleviate the manpower issues.

              • Hi M8 Re read it this is £53 million with £30 million of that’s towards setting the facility up, recruitment and training etc so they can produce the long lead items of which the biggest bit is the barrels.
                Ask yourself a question would RBSL spend a penny setting up a barrel factory for 155mm guns on spec, based on the maybe / some time / we’ve delayed it mentality of the U.K. Political Leadership. I wouldn’t invest a penny without a contract and this will be the minimum that was acceptable to RBSL.
                On the other hand it’s good news for SFM who will be forging the barrels and TBH doing it in Tranches makes perfect sense.
                Timing is odd though unless the DIP is very close 🧐 Healey is in Westminster on Monday to answer Oral questions and the devil is in the detail. The slot has been booked for a month, no questions announced till yesterday when 23 all dropped in which were all dated the 10th.
                Most can be answered by either announcing the DIP or sorry not yet ! If it’s the latter then things get sticky as the 2025/26 FY kicks in and no major announcements are made when they are in the run up to the local elections it’s called purdah and start on 27th March.

                • Hi mate.
                  Yes, aware of purdah and the upcoming elections.
                  I’m not holding my breath on any date.
                  As far as I’m concerned, they will release a DIP of reannouncing existing programmes as if they are new, but less of everything.
                  I’m not hopeful of any surprises, but it will seduce the public easily enough.
                  On the long lead stuff, yes all good , but I’m looking forward to finding out how many we shall buy.

                  • I think there will be elements of carry over from the previous plan and a lot of that will be because the expenditure is ongoing but also it never got to the end of its intended period.
                    The thing is not having a new plan is suicidal, industry has no certainty of any business so zero investment. The forces personnel have no idea if or when kit will be replaced and as for military planning good luck on forming an ORBAT out of quicksand.
                    At present they seem to be dealing with issues on a crisis principle, we need the NMH but it only got ordered when Industry and the Unions loaded their guns up. Same for the Typhoon upgrade order and now the RCH155 which is the bare minimum to get things rolling and fact is if we hadn’t our deal with Germany would go down the pan and we are stuck with a joke for Artillery.

                    • Well, that is the Labour government for you.
                      Tories were no better.
                      Thus, I vote for neither.
                      Pity some cannot see the logic in that, and expect one to keep voting for the same failed few.

          • I do wonder if they are going to keep the 14 archer systems for anything.. it would seem a sham to just dump 14 essentially new 155mm systems.. especially as the are light enough to deploy from a Airbus A400M Atlas at 34 tons.. but the rch155 is 40 tons so cannot…. So the archers would be a handy addition to 1st deep recce strike brigade when it moves to 1st division and may need to support an airmobile deployment.

            • I understand 1 DRSB has already formed, though there was very little publicity.
              The existing DRSB just changed it’s designation from 1 to 3, and lost some of it’s units in the process.
              Now HMG can grandstand that the Army has a “new” Brigade.

              • It’s magic… a little hand wave and we have 2 deep recce strike brigades.. still not sure how you can have 2 155mm regiments with 3 batteries of 6 or guns each when you only have 14 guns total… it’s remarkably efficient of the British army being able to turn 14 guns into 36- 48 guns… because it would never be that we would essentially only have 6 gun systems per regiment.. because that would mean we were essentially pretending that a gun battery was infact a regiment… that’s either lying or living a fantasy depending on your perspective…. And HMG would never do that… I try to be optimistic for the future but I kind of live in despair of the present…still it’s looking like it’s more and more possible we may end up with a PM who was a decorated royal marine colonel and ( possible) SBS CO…who was apparently going to be promoted to brigadier… so we could end up with our new Churchill.

                • What i dislike is individual Brigades having their Close Support Artillery removed and centralised under the DRSB.
                  Always looked at them as Corps or Divisional level assets.
                  As it is, they’re bulked up by having the gun artillery assigned alongside the 2 MLRS Regiments.
                  AFAIK, 1 DRSB currently has a Light Recc Reg, 3 Sqns of Jackal, a Light Gun Reg, so 2 or 3 Batteries of 105mm, and a MLRS Regiment, 2 MLRS Batteries.
                  And that’s a Brigade?
                  I say 2 Batteries of 105, might be out of date, as I’d had 4RA down as having more TAC Gp Batteries than Gun Batteries for some reason.
                  Whatever. Where is said Brigades RLC Regiment?
                  Apparently, this has been solved with the original DRSB, now 3 DRSB, by assigning it the CS Log Reg that was with one of the two Arnoured Brigades!!!
                  So….we now have an Armoured Bde without.
                  If true, ridiculous. But the state of CS CSS is ridiculous, there isn’t enough for the Brigades we have, before people start wishing for more combat mass.

        • With 14 Archers replacing the AS90s, 37 RCH 155 would bring us to a total of around 50 Howitzers. It really doesn’t sound like a lot. How many are people here expecting?

          The DIP will be out of date in significantly less time than we have been waiting for it, but it should tell us.

          • I suspect the 37 order was previously authorised as part of AS90 replacement which is why we are seeing it pre DIP. Previous aspiration was for 100 systems.

            However with 70 MLRS, 37 RCH155 and 14 Archers the Royal Artillery won’t be starved for firepower.

            • I hope we keep the archers they are new modern gun systems and they are ligher than a RCH 155 so they can be transported on a A400M where as a RCH 155 at just shy of 40 tons is to heavy and would need a C17 I believe as the A400m has a 37 Ton weight limit on vehicles..

              So keeping a couple of batteries for airmobile deployment would be very very useful.

  2. I’m so confused, this seems like a miniscule amount of money for 37 systems? Is this just for the turrets? Also why only 37, it seems bizarre.

    • “The contract covers the production of the weapon system elements of the artillery module, including the barrel, muzzle brake, breech, recoil system and trunnions used to mount the system to the turret.”

      • Yeah sorry, I’d skimmed the article too much.
        ‘weapons systems’ could have meant anything from the sights on the RWS to the whole vehicles, in hindsight.

      • Trunnion is such a good word that I don’t want to look it up just yet. The definition might somehow spoil the word, so I’m letting it roll around in my head for a little bit longer.

        • It’s a good word, and in refernece to guns I think it works well, but boy do I find it hard to explain. So I’ll let you keep it safe for now.

            • I honestly hadn’t thought about how firing on the move would degreade the system faster, since I just assumed firing on the move won’t be a common occurence, but yes, thinking about it that probably would be where the extra stress would go.

  4. It is just long lead time parts for Batch I reading between the lines.

    Continuing with the spatter gun of small procurement contracts…..

  5. Yay we finally got a number!
    But really is anyone surprised about the pitifully small order? But a good vehicle all the same
    Not sure if it’s firing on the move gimmick really works in battlefield conditions but here’s hoping it does

    • It’s a bit of a gimmick really.. when you consider the standard counter battery fire is 3 minutes.. the very best response is 1 minute 1 minute response.

      But if your fires are 25km behind the Forward Line of Own Troops as are your enemies then it will take 2 mins for the round to reach you.. so you have 3 mins after the first round leaves your gun..

      An archer can fire 20 rounds in 2.5 minutes and move in 20 seconds. Or fire 3 rounds in 15 seconds and be moving by 35 seconds.. that’s 25 seconds quicker than a counter battery round can even leave the enemies gun if they have the fastest and best response possible and a whole 2 minutes 25 seconds before a round is likely to arrive..

      So the whole moving and firing is a bit gimmicky really… because Even if your moving and firing after a few rounds your still going to want to drive a good distance really fast without adverting where you are…

      • Also by the looks of it you need relatively flat ground, and have to be moving very slowly, in a perdictable direction, and it looks like you can’t speed up until the gun is stowed, so it’s not even like it lets you fire for longer.

        • Yep because going a slow predictable direction as you fire will be no better than staying still really.. I would imagine they will still shoot and scoot.. as it works

      • You do realise that artillery has regularly come under attack within 30 seconds in Ukraine thanks to drones, also a competent crew running a modern CB radar and gun can have your guns position within 10 seconds, and have shells on your possession within 80-90 seconds if the gun is ready to fire and just needs aiming instructions.

        • Hi yep but the drone threat is different essentially moving is actually more likely to trigger a response.. it’s a visual signature issue.. essentially the FPV drone operator finds you.. moving and firing is just as likely or more likely to trigger this… 80-90 seconds is still 45-55 seconds slower than an archer fire and scoot 3 rounds…

  6. They must mean £23M for 37 turrets once you minus out the £30M facility costs?? Otherwise this is the deal of the century.

  7. So 37 Boxer chassis that were going to be used to carry bods around. Will now be used as artillery units. Ergo, if they buy 63 more turrets thats another 63 chassis that cannot be used.

    Army procurement. It really is about time for a clearout.

    where did they pluck the number 37 from?

    in service 2037 IOC 2041 NO DOUBT

  8. 37??

    That’s 2 18 gun regiments and a prototype. So we are saying our ambition is to field one 2 brigade division.

      • Everywhere I look gives a different number. I’ve also seen it quoted as 32 + about from those remaining – total 197 were apparently delivered to UK originally. We only have about 14 Archers at the moment. I finished up (just now) doing an AI search and got ‘The UK has transferred its entire fleet of
        approximately 68 to 99 AS-90 self-propelled howitzers to Ukraine across several batches, including systems for use and as spare parts, with final deliveries occurring in early 2025. The transfer included an initial 32 systems, followed by further shipments in April and September 2024, essentially exhausting the British Army’s inventory of these 155mm guns. Total Quantity: Reports indicate the transfer of all active and in-storage AS-90s, with numbers citing up to 99 total units (including donor/spare parts vehicles).
        Initial Shipments: The UK initially donated 32 “battle-ready” AS-90s in 2023.
        Subsequent Deliveries: Additional batches were sent throughout 2024, including a 10-gun package announced in September 2024.’

        • And the Ukrainians love them, as they are a little more maintenance friendly in the field, than the PzH 2000 (and now the RCH) due to being a 90s platform, but still accurate using the LINAPS! It’s a rough tough effective bit of kit we decided we did not need anymore! Crazy, but at least it’s doing its job killing and disrupting Russian aggression!

          • I sort of think it was a bit insane dumping the lot.. they should have kept 24 for 1 UK regiment and the archers could have provided another regiment.

  10. I don’t understand the small number. If the development contract proved satisfactory, why not order the full number you plan to deploy.
    Or is the number restricted by the slow pace of Boxer vehicle production.

  11. Good grief an order for something?
    Surely there must be a mistake!
    ~Stil 37 seems very low especially considering the number of artilery systems recently disposed of (either directly or by donation to Urkaine).

  12. Hang on 37 for £53 million and it was 3 for £52 million the other month, is there a sale on? buy 3 get 34 free? this story makes no sense at all

      • I did its badly written and not totally clear, but aside of that may be you should tone your insults down a bit you not in the military hidding behind your rank now talking down to people. If you have nothing constructive to say then please say nothing.

    • “The contract covers the production of the weapon system elements of the artillery module, including the barrel, muzzle brake, breech, recoil system and trunnions used to mount the system to the turret.”

  13. I get the armamnet only bit but the Boxer itself? existing chassis? Also the number. If we’re so committed to the system it really doesn’t make sense to order such a small number. If we are, for arguments sake, going to have a hundred SPG’s then why not order 100 now.

    • It’s bits of the system, and getting some work going through long lead items for Telford, not the overall final number mate. 👍

      • Yep, I appreciate that, but I’ve been around long enough to know that if you order 37 of something you get a price. If you order 100 you should get a better price. I know I’m asking a lot from Starmer and Co. but…🤔

  14. Got excited(ish) for a moment but basically the order is just for the gun.

    Has line item budgeting written all over it. Next year we will order the turrets and the year after some of the chassis. The year after that we will pay to put them together.

    • Good spot. They have decided that since the Treasury will not agree to fund the whole thing, in order to minimise any political fallout they will they will publish selected salami slices. Think of it like buying ham in the supermarket in reverse…..lots of tiny slices in a plastic packet = higher price, and you can’t eat a big ham anyway. Confuse and impress the customer with slick packaging.

      • If so it’s a sensible idea, I suspect the full DiP is still being affected by Ajax. If that’s the case no point in waiting around if minimal orders like this or for the AW149 can get factories tooling up and equipment moving to the forces faster.

        I think the DiP was a noble idea (trying to match funding with desired programs) however I suspect they are encountering the same historic issues of unknown legacy program cost over runs and the inability to accurately judge future program costs.

        Unless you want a basic armed forces solely reliant on imported equipment this will always be the case. It’s like hearding cats.

        From what we know from Japan and Italy it also seems the development cost of GCAP has tripled which will also fuck yo a lot of future protections.

        • I’ve long suspected the delay to DIP is essentially HMG trying to hardball GDLS into resolving Ajax. Merthyr have no work past 2030 so they will be seeking new orders. HMG therefore need to keep the prospect of new work alive without committing to anything. Big orders for other platforms such as CAVS, RCH, LPM etc. might leave GD deciding there’s no budget or requirement left to chase.

  18. For context, the original requirement was for 116 guns, when we had 4 Regiments to equip.
    Now, only 3.
    So this surely isn’t the total unless somethings gone very wrong, we have no money, or we will use OWE more than guns.

      • That’s if they keep the Archers!
        In my world, they’d be with 4RA and 7 LMB.
        Or kept permanently in Estonia in their own Regiment and RCH155 equip the rest.
        But there’s not the manpower for that it seems.

          • That’s brilliant news, having archers as part of 7th light mech brigade is a significant upgrade.

            Although that will mean in 2027 14 archers will be spread across 3 regiments…

            • There’s a lot going on we’re not seeing with OWE, like Modini Dart 250 and another type I understand is in use which hasn’t been officially revealed.
              I’ve raised the subject here, but of course, no Army bods who might know are biting, as in, how, by Battery, by Troop, what’s the lay down for the OWEs and their launchers?
              Is it possible the other 2 Regiments will be mostly OWE equipped until RCH155 arrives?
              Because otherwise, as you say, with the 14 Archers allocated to providing a Battery forward with Cabrit, thats spread even thinner.

            • The shortage is only temporary because we gave all the AS90s to Ukraine (rightly IMO)
              In the fullness of time, Archer+Jackal in 7LM creates a rapid brigade that can make very efficient use of airlift.
              RCH+Boxer makes a self-deployable medium tier, all on wheels for emergency speedrun to the Baltics.
              The question is, do we ultimately do the same for heavy (i.e. add a tracked IFV and SPG and perhaps this explains the low number of RCH?)

              That would very much tie in with the German three-tier model (air/wheels/tracks)

              • The Army isn’t structured for a three Tier model, or more accurately a four tier model. With two manuever Brigades + the Cavalry Group of 3 DSRB being on Boxer, 7 and 4 being light Mech and 16 being Air Assault. If you want a Tracked IFV and SPG you would need to create new brigades or discard one of the existing types.

  19. What this says is we are going to buy them, but not just yet. Kinda silly. My previous comment was somewhat facetious but not really.

    What we need to do, and it would probably be better for the Treasury as well is instead of looking at budgets on a yearly basis is to say (for example) we will commit to 60 bn for 5 years plus the rate of inflation. The MOD can then plan, and if they want new artillery next year they could save 10bn from this years budget and apply it to next and bam, we order all the stuff we want for that particular item in one go. Then whoever we order with barfs them out as soon as they can. Made up numbers but you get the jist. This would have the added bonus I suspect of saving an awful lot of money on chopping and changing contracts and cancelling projects due to budgetry changes. It might also install some fiscal discipline into the MOD.

  20. So the gun, breech and mountings come in at around £620,000 each with 30m to develop the factory to be ready to produce more.
    I assume this is the first batch or a test batch that they are going to test the hell out of?
    How many rounds can each tube fire before needing replacement?

  21. Guys, a lot of you are not reading the article. This is an order placed by the Prime Contractor (OCCAR) to just one of its subcontractors (ARTEC GmbH), not from MoD to the Prime. It is for part of the RCH-155, namely the artillery system. Not the turret. Not the complete vehicle. It is a £53m contract of which £30m helps to build and equip the factory, and £23m goes to buy 37 artillery systems ie gun, breech etc. It’s not an order for 37 complete vehicles or for 37 complete turrets. Its for the gun bit in the turret.
    Why do people infer that we are only buying 37 SPGs? This is clearly Tranche 1. We always buy significant platforms in tranches.

  23. We’ve seen Artillery as the king of the Battlefield in Europe and we’re only ordering 37 Artillery turrets to mount on the already ordered Boxers… Of which I believe it’s 700+ units. Presuming the Boxers are less sole troop carrying (Owing to the CAVS Patria thing we joined) and they’re more split out as IFVs, Command, Ambulances, etc, then this 37 RCH-155 figure I hope is just the first tranche, since we love tranches, we do.

  24. As I read this this is Purley for the manufacture of UK built systems we will be getting some first from the German manufacturers line as we have a joint order I believe for the initial batch.

  25. 37?

    I did not expect the AS90s would be replaced one for one. The MOD seems to have this attitude:

    “The UK is shifting from a quantity based artillery model to a capability based one.
    Modern systems like Archer and the future RCH155 deliver far greater range,
    precision, automation, and survivability, meaning fewer platforms can generate more effect.”

    The provision for long term attritional warfare, does not seem to cross their minds.

  26. Just a thought is this 37 ontop of the 1 demonstrator we have already ordered.. 38 seems so much more rounded.

  27. Should have just gone for more Archer platforms ,we know it works ,quicker to get into service and in the long run sure it’ll be cheaper .And really performance wise Boxer no better than Archer.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here