Troops with a lead role in NATO’s high-readiness land forces have practised their rapid response capabilities.
According to the British Army here, more than 160 Army vehicles could be seen on Rutland’s country roads recently when 2nd Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment (2 R Anglian) practised a NATO Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) call out.
“Rutland-based 2 R Anglian is part of the spearhead NATO VJTF land forces – the alliance’s highest-readiness element. It can deploy within days anywhere in the world in support of NATO allies. NATO created the task force in 2014 after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea. It was first deployed in 2022 for the collective defence of the Alliance after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
7th Light Mechanised Brigade Combat Team HQ (7LMBCT), otherwise known as the ‘Desert Rats’, took command of the ‘spearhead force’ on 1 January 2024. The multi-national land force comprises of approximately 6,000 troops and over 600 armoured and protected mobility vehicles.”
“The Alert exercise simulated being called out as NATO’s Spearhead Battlegroup to deploy anywhere we are needed. For 2 R ANGLIAN, the exercise was a real success.” – MAJOR FRANK ATKINS, SECOND IN COMMAND, 2 R ANGLIAN
You can read more here.
That’s just about one days worth of Russian Equipment destroyed in a single week ?
I am sure all of that and more in just a day, in some days.
They lose 160, vehicles in a day? I wish that were the case. Not sure about Dave’s comment as it says both a day and a week, the latter might on occasion be closer to the mark and that’s a bad enough rate of ‘kapputting’ as the Ukranian guy I follow puts it.
Sorry i was going by the photo not the number on the text. I think in more harsh days for Russians they might have loose about 100 vehicles/artillery pieces/radars etc.
Yes, the Russians lose a lot of kit because its not very good, not very well logistically supported, not very well supported by engineering technicians, not handled tactically skilfully, crewed by troops with poor morale, led by poor quality leaders, etc etc – and they are opposed by a determined, innovative opponent.
I would be very surprised if NATO would suffer the same loss rate in men and machines if pitched against the Russian army and air force.
I look at the above picture and all I can think of is the BEF of WW1 and WW2 and this quote by George Santayana:
“”Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.””
But we did learn from history, it’s called NATO and we are just a small part.
Jim,
The point I was making regards how the above picture of a lightly armed expeditionary force with its major remit (As per the article) of European deployment reminded me of the British Expeditionary Forces of WW1 and WW2, which were too far too small , far too lightly armed and far too ineffective.
2 things here, check out the link to the brigade, it isn’t even based in one county so for me it’s just paper.
if we want to have BCTs they need to be based in the same location.
secondly, Foxhound is a great vehicle, but is that really what we are calling a mechanised brigade, hardly any firepower on show at all.
i am sure the Anglians will do us proud as always, but when are our politicians going to do right by those who serve?
Hi Pac.
Our Brigades have often been garrisoned in several locations so to me that is not such an issue if they end up being deployed either by rail or all loaded onto Points at the SMC.
For example, the ABCTs are at Warminster, Tidworth, Bulford, Larkhill, Perham Down, Aldershot, Abingdon, Bicester, and maybe other places I miss out.
7 is called a Light Mech Bde so, yes, it certainly could use more firepower but they do not call it a Mechanized Brigade to be fair. Good job too as our previous Mech Bdes pre 2010, 1,12,19, had 432s, CVRT, Warrior, Bulldogs, AS90, and Tanks!
To be fair “Mechanised” is a very wishy-washy term anyway. Anything from units mounted in WW2 halftracks and Universal carriers with nothing heavier than a 50 cal and a Boys AT rifle through to brigades with tanks, IFV’s, and armoured SPG’s have been called “mechanised” so getting upset over it is generally a bit OTT.
Yes. Pre 2010 there was also little difference, that I could see at least, between a Mechanized and an Armoured Bde beyond the infantry compliment, Armoured having 2 Warrior Bns and Mech 1 Warrior and 2 Saxon.
I think the Armoured Reg for the UK based Mech Bdes was also a tad smaller, and had Scimitars in the Medium Armour Sqn after the Tank cuts in Future Army Structures.
Their CS CSS compliment I think were identical, all having a CS Logistic, Artillery, RE, RAMC Reg and also a REME Bn and RMP Coy.
I recall at the time being curious at the name difference and the exact reason why.
Sounds good I guess, or maybe the slight structural difference was judged important enough to have a different name?
Yeah, there was obviously a reason.
The forces are dispersed throughout the country. Goes back to recruiting areas etc. having everything in one area makes a juicy target. It can have benefits also.
There was a plan to make super barracks but as with most plans it disappeared as fast as it arrived. A scottish one was going to be built at kirknewton.
I don’t mind forces being dispersed as such, but I am in favour of all arms units being in the same location. I am also in favour of super barrack with airfields.
my view is to follow the old USMC MEU model and have small brigades of 2352 personnel inc. integrated air, we can have 32 combat MEUs + 8 HQ MEUs with artillery instead of embedded air+ rangers, SFG, large logistics support element & HQ.
these formations should work together constantly to make all arms seamless.
This makes it easier for us to assign tasking.
I agree with the airfields. Useful real estate MoD should retain.
And to be fair, they have kept several that are now army facilities.
They’re also really shitty postings that are retention nightmares because they’re invariably nowhere near anything, while the army flogs more centrally located facilites to maintain runways for the RAF.
Just saying.
Ha!! I remember, you’ve mentioned that before lol.
Brawdy as a typical example?
I use Cottesmore because I have personal experience of it.
I also like to use it because it’s a perfect example of how the Army’s basing scheme destroyed an Army relevant skillset I had. (I used to rock climb every week, then I got based in Cottesmore and mysteriously I never climbed again, could have something to do with me having to drive all the way to Leicester to get to the nearest wall… instead I just sat in my room after work and got depressed and unfit).
You base in the middle of nowhere and you force people to have only the army as their life, and if you want people to have hobbies that require anything beyond sitting in their rooms you need to build and cater for them out of pocket.
You build near somewhere Urban and chances are the local community caters for activities.
N gauge model railway Dern, think of the skills you would have learned; all in your own room.
Hang on! Own room!!?
I’m an NCO mate, that means I get my own broom closet to live in. Not sure I’d manage to fit a model railway into it though.
Own room is very usual. I would think the vast majority (note I did not say ‘all’) of trained soldiers had their own rooms by now. In Colchester (I was there 2006-2009) all soldiers had their own rooms except for newbies who had a 4-man room.
N Gauge??? Come on….OO mate, N far too small, even for a squaddies room.
I think Dern needs TT gauge… 😉
Now you’re just being ridiculous!! Maybe O and run it around the Barracks?
Keep it off the grass and parade ground and you’re onto a winner!
BTW, not something I care about but something the old sweats here might get into a tizzy about:
Thanks to the habit of taking over old RAF bases (or just sharing their bases with the RAF) there are tons of Army establishments that no longer have parade grounds.
Olen is indented into my mind.
I never marched in the RMP and I never drank.
In Belgium, 30 miles from Leuven (ish) and the Company went out on the lash. I had 5 Stellas – real Stellas, when normally I would have 2 330 tins on a Friday night. I was dragged into the Landi.
Having hit the whirlpool, I tumbled out of bed… unfortunately, I was top bunk. Splat.
It was a bad night that got worse…
Well the girlie’s got sh!t faced as well, and decided to pull a sicky with the MO and a biffchit.
God was deeply displeased in the morning with the turnout and our collective Team Effort and got the PSIs to drill us up and down, about turn, lift your legs, 90° on the knee, stamp your heels, all over a vehicle park at Olen, felt like the recoil of GPMG on full auto smashing my brain… at every turn, every 5 seconds – you’ve been there.
Truly a moment when I wanted to be dead.
Via the kitchens and Co’s office for tea deliveries. 😆
You mock, one pivovar in Prague delivers beer to their clients from just such a system.
Brilliant.
Did you know the Security Service delivered files to staffs desks in a similar way? Some builder smuggled photos out of Thames House during the build showing the miniature rail tracks.
Now, you jest!
Well paid job as a signal man at the Establishment Daniele… just saying.
Hmmm, I wonder what grade the box is in the basement? Cannot imagine it comes up too often, cushty little number.
😆
Some towns, areas would love to have a barracks located near by. All the benefits local economy etc. If the have good facilities it’s a win win for all.
the wellbeing of service personnel extends outside the barracks. RAF by the role they play are normally away from built up areas.
Some the historical barracks. Could do with being abandoned and nice new locations built.
glencourse barracks some time ago was knocked down and rebuilt and has a good location near Edinburgh with dreghorn and Redford barracks and the castle barracks near by.
I think the problem is that every time the Army has a bit of good real estate they just see the money they could earn by flogging it off to developers because “we have rural sites that nobody wants that we can move to instead.”
They don’t stop on think of the second and third order effects like you mentioned.
Fulwood must be a potential gold mine in terms of land value. When you see the new housing estates springing up around Preston, question of time.
And sure enough, it’s on the disposal list.
Case in point.
God in Heaven. Take a leaf out of the book’s of Cadogan Estates – make it 49 year leasehold.
In fact, give it to Cadogan’s as a management contract!
Should be banned from doing it…I assume by central you mean prime real estate?..- and the RAF should look after their own bloody runways.
Pretty much.
I’ll be honest, it’s not like stationing an infantry unit on a airfield actually means the airfield is looked after. At best all the Army will do is use the runway as a great location to run PT, at worst you’ll get something like N. Luffenham where the Army blew loads of holes into the Runway.
You don’t need a Army Unit on an ex RAF airfield to maintain it. You just need to maintain it.
Chivenor might be the exception though it has Royal Marines…. lovely place.
Ah sadly another one Im’ unfamiliar with.
Don’t think super Garrisons (not super barracks) disappeared – there has been one at Colchester since the early/mid-2000s, then later one embracing Bulford/Tidworth/Larkhill and Catterick too is a super-Garrison.
Exactly.
On the RAF Airfields that are now used by the Army topic we have:
Kinloss.
Leuchars.
Cottesemore.
North Luffenham.
Chivenor.
Woodbridge.
Lyneham.
Wyton. ( bit different to be fair )
Honington. ( Army and RAF )
Colerne.
South Cerney.
Bramcote.
Wattisham.
Probably others too that don’t spring immediately to mind.
I cannot thinkof a single army Brigade that is totally accommodated in one place, there are always outstations and other units elsewhere.
Ha, another. Ouston/Harlow Hill with the RA and the Trident enclosure.
Could also add ex-RAF Catterick, formerly home to the Rockapes and now has or had 1 or 2 loggie units.
Army units are used to being dispersed and coming together to fo formation-level training – its no biggie.
Ah yes, that barracks on the A1, away from Catterick Garrison proper.
Marne Barracks I think it is called? Has 5 RA stationed there for some time.
Didn’t know that was ex RAF, thanks.
There are conflicting views about army use of ex-RAF airfields. Generally lots of hangar space!! for parking vehs, gennnies,trailers, for housing stores, REME LAD etc. Good vehicle circuits. Usually the RAF managed to get building maintenance carried out to a fair standard in their time, pamper themselves – one unit had a bowling alley (Brawdy?). I think one ex-RAF station even had a swimming pool.
Tons of space for parading, doing runs etc. Often the Married Quarters are inside the wire or very close by – easy commute.
But Dern’s point is the flip side – usually miles from anywhere there is social stuff happening – very isolating.
There has been a gathering of units together. Are these new built super barracks? Have they always been like that. I only know there were plans for them perhaps 2010? but some were cancelled like the Scottish one.
Colchester, Catterick, Aldershot, Bulford Tidworth have been major garrisons for a long time mate.
I know about Colchester Garrison best as I was the COS 2006-2009 and the deputy customer-side POC. The Garrison comprised Colchester Station, Woodbridge (Rock Bks) and Wattisham Flying Station (AAC). A large number of very old (mostly Victorian era) barracks in Colchester often housing just a single unit were demolished and the land sold.
A new huge central Barracks was created (Merville Bks) on the site of a number of other units and comprised a mix of new buildings and refurbished existing buildings. Merville was unique for the army in that a great number of 16AA Bde units were colocated on a single new site and shared facilities (Messes, guard room, JRC etc) were introduced wheras units had preiously operated their own. Woodbridge and Wattisham also received some partial refurbishment.
A Super-Garrison is more than a lot of new and refurbished centralised buildings/barracks. It is envisaged that many troops will be able to be posted around the Super Garrison every few years thus reducung the number of family moves.
Don’t know about the cancelled Scottish barracks – was it just for one unit? If so then it was not a super Garrison as they contain many units, in some cases most of a brigade, as in the Colchester example.
7 LBCT and 4 Brigade have a commitment to provide 1 Battalion each to the Cyprus garrison, it’s on a rotational basis that last years, so effectively instead of having 5 infantry battalions the brigade just has a more manageable 4 (I think it’s 1 Rifles and 1 Lancs in Cyprus atm).
Anyway, if you want to demand that brigades are all based in the same place or it’s just “paper” then the British Army has had very few brigades indeed (even during the BAOR it was normal for brigades not to be entirely co-located).
If we are looking at BCTs they should be fully deployable as a BCT & train as such, I do not think that’s an unreasonable expectation.
Nothing wrong with having other brigade types that deal with single tasking and if we go for an MEU style org, that gives us far more flexibility with meeting tasking and give the guys a chance if they should have to fight.
Basing is not the same thing as training though, you don’t tend to train on camp unless it’s something indescribably low level like dry run troughs of fire team or section attack.
I recall it was Paderborn and Sennelager for 20, Bergen Hohne and Hameln for 7, and Osnabruck for elements of 4, with Gutersloch, Bruggen, Biefeld and other places added for varied CS CSS.
This being post Cold War 1 UK Division so not BAOR.
Today, I’d assume if it were even desired to co locate, only Catterick, Aldershot and the closely located Tidworth/Bulford would be big enough to accommodate an entire Brigade?
With the close proximity of the garrisons around SPTA, our ABCTs are pretty much together anyway, even if not in the same barracks.
12 and 20 and 1 are vaguely colocated between Tidworth, Bulford and Warminster but some CSS units are far afield. But again I’d raise Tid-Bul-War as a retention issue because once again: in the middle of nowhere (I have a pathological objection to Tidworth Garrison because Army Senior Leadership doesn’t seem to grasp the concept of young people not wanting to live somewhere where the only thing to do is drive the wife and kids to “a nice pub 20 minutes away,” since all Soldiers must be exactly like them: I’m not kidding I once had an argument with a Senior Officer who couldn’t grasp why someone wouldn’t want to be based in Tidworth because of that exact reason).
As “Mcnab” called it…”S*** Arse Tip of a Town” when he was there with 2 RGJ.
Hypothetically, which barracks do you think would meet your criteria if it could all be magically changed?
Aldershot? Preston? I’d noted before when looking at basing spread very few MoD installations in the Manchester Liverpool Leeds belt. Our bases are very much legacy installations and predominantly in the south and South west. And near SPTA for training.
Aldershot depends on the Barracks, but generally better than most. Woolwich of course wins out. Preston I’m unfamiliar with personally but looking at it on a map looks okay. Paderborn was a really good example, even if the language barrier undermined that a bit.
The problem isn’t just legacy, it’s that the MoD see’s £££ whenever it has a good site on it’s hand and flogs it to developers: Aldershot is a good garrison for example: it’s got an actual town, with stuff to do in it, and if anyone wants more there’s loads of easy ways to get into London on an evening etc… but the MoD sold half of Aldershot garrison to private developers and instead sent everyone to Salisbury plain, then wonders why it can’t recruit urban youth.
Same, as you said with Manchester-Liverpool-Leads, realistically if your from there your best hope of a posting is probably either Catterick, Preston or Strensal.
(I also could go on an active travel rant as an aside because I believe we should make basing choices that enable soldiers to do things without driving, both to minimize drunk driving incidents and to help improve fitness but that’s another matter)
Preston is a paper Brigade. You’re probably thinking of Weeton near Blackpool.
An interesting ‘camp’ is Halton outside Lancaster – you never see anyone there and yet, there it is next to the Pennine moors, where heli’s roam at night, hmm.
Lancaster being a Uni town would see squaddies having seven bells kicked out of them in the old days by the latent ‘woke’ moberati who went on to breed the modern woke Brigade.
In other news, little swmbo is doing 3 milers.. not running but for a 3 y/o not complaining; fine Cumberland lass in the making; many a sheep will be jealous one day.
Preston used to be home to quite a few Med Units, but they’re all moving to Strensall now since the RAMC decided to do a bit of Empire building and emulate Tidworth on a mini scale. At any rate I’m not talking about what units are stationed there, I’m talking about what the actual camp locations are like.
A quick look at Halton shows it to be a Transit Camp. Ie one of the places that units will stage themselves on as they deploy on exercise.
Yes David. I was thinking of 2 sites, Preston “Fulwood ” Barracks in the town, and the bigger “Weeton” Barracks to it’s west, north west and closer to Blackpool. Halton is a training camp.
Yeah, Woolwich, good one. Suppose Maidstone and Chatham too, being in the populated South East.
It’s amazing that UK land forces has just under 100,000 personnel and half the commentators on here don’t think we can deploy a brigade because not every unit is sitting in a nice diagram with a deployable HQ.
The last time we deployed a division only one of the three manoeuvre brigades was actually attached to that division before the conflict (7th armoured) with the other two being previously independent brigades 16AAB and 3 Commando.
The US is going through exactly the same thing with Division HQ being interoperable with Brigade Combat teams because you never know if you’re going to require to deploy with armour or helicopters or light infantry.
The Army is not stupid, they have learned lessons in having units stuck in Divisions or Brigades that then had to be broken up to meet the needs in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The current system is far from ideal but so was the last system. It’s always the problem of a peace time army with lots of responsibilities and no clear idea of what the enemy looks like.
That being said I do think we should restore a second deployable division even if we don’t have enough manoeuvre units for it. If we are fighting at division or corp scale then we will have significant numbers of allied manoeuvre units at battalion or brigade level that we can slot in but other than the USA the UK is the only military unit in Europe with experience in fighting a major mechanised war in the last 20 years.
The issue is that we don’t have a lot of manuever brigades that can deploy left. 12, 20, 7, and 16 is really it at this point. 3 is no longer a fighting formation, 4 doesn’t have regular CS and CSS assets so can’t deploy, 19, even if it could be raised, has no CS/CSS and is just a mass of light infantry units, 11 isn’t a fighting formation, and ASOB is it’s own kettle of fish.
So yes, you could task org a division, just about, for a short period of time, but there aren’t a lot of units that could be attached to a divisional HQ left anymore.
BTW I’d argue France has a fair amount of experience fighting a major mechanised War, Op Serval was pretty damn impressive, even if Wagner eventually took Mali a decade later.
Your 100,000 figure includes the Army Reserve and the Regular Reserves, of course.
The army ‘task orgs’ all the time – many personnel come in from different directions and different units to make a suitably structured BG or Bde or Div or Task Force or whatever.
Have you served mate? Many brigades (and 3rd Division) and even some units are based across several counties. That does not make it a paper force – I don’t understand that comment.
[I once served in the first iteration of 6 Bn REME – we had a BHQ, HQ Coy and GS Coy in Bordon, Hants and CS Coys in Catterick, N Yorkshire and Tidworth, Hants – it worked.]
It is preferred if all of a BCT can be in the same Garrison town but that is often impossible.
Clearly a Lt Mech Bde will have less firepower than an armoured BCT, as they lack tanks and cannon-equipped IFVs. But it has a lt cav regt, 5 x lt mech bns (each with a fire sp coy), 2 x lt arty regts – in addition to a sapper regiment and regular CSS units.
Yes I have served although I don’t think that’s relevant
what is relevant is the amount of time it takes to train up to be a top class brigade capable of using its full range of effects. Being based all around the country does not facilitate that. IMO
Anyone remember the mobilisation exercise in the 1980’s. Lionheart if memory serves, 1984 or thereabouts. It highlighted the major issues a full Cold War mobilisation would cause.
Farouk hit the nail on the head with…
George Santayana:
“”Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.””
Yes 14 yrs old at the time loved coming home from school watching the news feeling very proud in the day of all our kit and numbers compared to now 😕.Bottom sentence very true.👍
I was 12. Having such a force now would be unaffordable in peacetime, but yes it was an impressive exercise.
It wouldn’t be unaffordable Daniele.
The NHS would have to cull gender reassignment and associated counselling, kids might be told that Mum and Dad shouting at them not to play with fire was not a form of PTSD – no counselling needed, and anyone in hospital caught smoking on the doorsteps would be given the high port and told to foxtrot Oscar, ditto, fat barstewards drinking coca cola and munching on surreptitious Greggs.
Heavens, I’d cut the population, free up social housing and DWP expenses and solve the national debt in a stroke.
Oh yes. Do not resus strokes…
Did you find your sock? 🙂
Again well said my friend.
😆 Morning David.
I was mid twenties and have never forgotten the traffic jams from Hull all the way to Germany. Oh those were the days. Never was the phrase hurry-up and wait more applicable.
I also remember discussing with others. “What wonderful targets we are sitting here like this. Neatly lined up to be sprinkled with cluster bombs and napalm. Not forgetting liberal amounts of chemical weapons and nukes.” The Warsaw Pact certainly learned where the choke points were going to be. BTW, I’ve just confirmed that 131,565 personnel were involved. Yes indeed, those were the days.
I ‘slept’ about 3 feet away from those convoys coming in for replen at an airfield in Belgium.
Woke up next to a 40 tonne wrecker whose crew were asleep at the wheel..
Those were the days where Die Hard 1 was so boring in the first 5 minutes and I was so tired, I jacked it off for sleep and when asked the next day, said I was bored: “Die Hard was boring?”
jacking off to Die Hard ? 😱
Noooo, as in to bin it. Wash your mouth out with soap young man 😉
😂
😆
LOL I was on both Spearpoint/ Crusader 80 and Lionheart 84So much fun😂
I was elsewhere for the crusader showing.
Remind me, was the armour Spearpoint part of/coincided with Lionheart. Not that I would have known anything about it playing traffic jams. Oh well, at least the local ladies kept us supplied with beverages, stickies and the occasional handshake. Hectic time the 80’s all things considered but the world felt a much safer place.
Then the rising sandstorm and the wet fart implosion of Ivan. If only we had known what was coming. We’d still be able to muster 131,565 and march them off to war.
No mate Spearpoint was the deployment phase from the UK and Crusader was the ‘war fighting’ bit in Germany in 1980.Again that was mile after mile of traffic from Zeebrugge to Soltou in our case.
I was already in Germany for Lionheart playing enemy for that one,that was 1984! Not going to get 3 Armd and an Inf division again are we🙄?
Somethings only ever change for the worse. I wonder what the ratio of front line “teeth arms” to rear support staff was back then, compared to now. How many fighting men we could deploy today.
Slightly off-topic but relevant.
UK to review Chinook buy in Q1 202419 February 2024
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is to review its plan to acquire new Boeing H-47 Extended Range (ER) Chinook helicopters later in the first quarter (Q1) of 2024, ahead of any decision on final numbers.
Minister of State at the MoD James Cartlidge made the disclosure on 15 February, telling the House of Commons, “The Review Note for the Chinook extended range helicopter programme is due to be assessed by the MoD Investment Approvals Committee in quarter 1 2024, and will inform any future decisions affecting the current programme of record.”
Cartlidge added that as the assessed costs and schedule for the programme are currently under consideration, he would not disclose the figures and programme timelines until a full review has taken place.
https://
janes.com/defence-news/defence/latest/uk-to-review-chinook-buy-in-q1-2024
Pretty crap considering…
A. The Chinook force is one area we are well provided for and these replace older examples which will be retired.
B. With their imbecilic cut to the Hercules force, which carried out missions for UKSFG and had aircraft specially equipped, the ER Chinooks are needed as 7 Sqn in JSFAW is all that’s left regards deployable SF helicopters to enable that longer range insertion mission.
60 aircraft
The Chinook was brought into Service for the UK MOD in 1981. The departmental fleet is 60 aircraft, reducing to 51 over the next few years.1 Jun 2023
“The UK originally announced a £1.4 billion agreement ($1.8 billion) had been reached for the 14 H-47 ER aircraft in May 2021 with deliveries set to begin in 2026 and run until 2030, but budgetary pressures linked to COVID-19 caused London to order a three year delay.”
“David Williams, UK MoD permanent secretary, said during a British Defence Committee hearing today that any decision to drop the deal would have “an impact on the range of operations that our armed forces are able to prosecute,” and confirmed that negotiations between London and Washington to close a Foreign Military Sale are ongoing.
That said, the push for the procurement to continue is down to a political policy around the need to prosecute “the hardest targets” identified by special forces, but if “that requirement disappeared tomorrow morning, then we wouldn’t need” the new helicopters, Lt. Gen. Rob Magowan, deputy chief of the defense staff for financial and military capability, told the Committee.
Williams suggested that the question of whether the UK should “carry on” with the H-47 ER procurement had been triggered by “concern in the summer” around the issue of affordability and the impact cost increases could have on other helicopter acquisitions.
The main rotary acquisition that looks to be under threat, and which already has been delayed on several occasions, is the £1 billion ($1.3 billion) New Medium Helicopter (NMH) program, aimed at replacing Royal Air Force Puma and other smaller rotorcraft fleets.”
https://
breakingdefense.com/2023/12/as-costs-rise-uk-has-made-no-decision-to-ditch-h-47-extended-range-helo-acquisition-yet/
OK here we go, the start of a Defence Spending Review which involves reassessments of spending commitments.
This an announced, budgeted commitment and is part of the Equipment Plan of Record.
Its the last throw of the dice of a bunch of complete idiots who are clutching at the last straw of hope they can avoid the General Election hammering they know is coming.
The timing is blatant and we should all have seen this coming, it’s to make cuts in expenditure for Tax cuts in the Budget. They have no other ideas left 😡
So we are reviewing the contract for US H-47 Chinooks, which translates as a cut or cancelation of the purchase and screw our SF which is one of the few decent assets we can add to the NATO mix.
We have a contract with Boeing which will have been passed as a Foreign Sale by the US Government inc Congress.
The US is getting pretty hacked off with Europe including the UK not pulling its weight and it’s a Presidential Election year.
One of the 2 candidates is just looking for an opportunity to pull the US commitment to NATO, and inviting Russia to do what it wants with parts of NATO that don’t pay their way.
Can anyone see any problems with this bright idea ?
Any guesses as to what’s next ?
Meanwhile…just announced…Australia is restructuring and effectively doubling its surface warship fleet… Hunter (t26) class otder cut from 10 to 6, but 11 new GP hulls being added plus additional patrol vessels. Massive uplift overall. Going from +/- 10 surface escorts to +/- 20. (40% of UK population!)
Yep and what a Bun fight the GP contract will be, but leveraging the Hunter Class build has got to be a tempting option. And looking at the Version Bae showed recently with less ASW and 48 extra VLS instead of the module bay looks attractive as you just keep building the base hull.
indeed. I assume any basic Hunter hull design would exclude the Hull ASW noise reduction stuff. Perhaps a Type 31 concept as is now being fitted out but with Bow Sonar may also be being considered (Like the recent Polish decisions). Have to say, with 40% the population of the UK the Australians just seem to get more bang for % of GDP buck.
12 x P8
5 x Wedgetail
96 Fast jets (currently 60 F35A + 24 F18f and 12 F18 Growlers
8 x C17
12 x Hercules
10 x Spartan
7 x KC30 Tanker x Multi Role
4 x MQ 4C Triton
2 x Mistral Class LHD Carriers
1 x LSD
Committed to 8 x SSN to replace 6 x Diesel Electric
Tell the truth here, that is the entire Britani Jundi on show 😂
Who was I talking to about Foxhound Battalion Orbat? *edit* Sorry Graham had to go back and check to find out who it was!
I’m seeing 6 Platoons drawn up side by side with Recce on one side and another supporting unit on the other, and CHQ’s/A1 in the rear.
So, by my count that’s about 7 Foxhounds per platoon, with Recce on WIMIKs and possibly Mortars on Jackal/Coyote?
Either that or because the Runway on Cottesmore isn’t wide enough they’ve combined platoons so everything fits. So if we say mixed platoons as a floor and a company is missing from the picture as a roof that’s between 42 and 63 Foxhounds for a LMBCT Battalion.
(Unless 2 RA are very under-strength I’m leaning towards one company being missing because 42 Foxhounds would only lift about 250 men compared to 380 for 63).
Thanks Dern for the update. Someone here was concerned at lack of firepower in 7 Lt Mech Bde, and by extension, I suppose, to that in a Foxhound battalion – but you will have the same sort of Fire Sp Coy as for a Warrior (or in future, a Boxer battalion), won’t you? Unless ATGW numbers are less?
Should be:
HQ Coy
Rifle Coy
Rifle Coy
Rifle Coy
Support Coy
with Support coy having;
-Reconnaissance Platoon (seemingly still on WIMIK)
-Mortar Platoon with 82mm Mortars
-Anti-Tank Platoon with Javelin (which is another candidate for the Jackal/Coyote force in the picture)
-Assault Pioneer Platoon
-Machine Gun platoon (although with the number of GPMG’s a Foxhound carries this might not be a thing in LMech these days)
Generally NLAW and ASM will be available to the Rifle coys as well as Jav at Battalion level, so it’s definitely not like there’s zero anti-tank capability, just that it’s a dismounted ATGM capability and not a vehicle on vehicle fight which I know a lot of commentators think every brigade should be capable of doing.
Thanks. I call that a fair bit of firepower and the lads are benefitting from some light armour protection on good mobility vehs.
I am sure someone will say that this is all very well but shouldn’t everything down to a motorbike have an effective anti-drone system fitted!
I mean, I agree. But an anti-drone system doesn’t have to be big. We need ECM, manpackable ones even, and a kinetic anti-drone system can be as simple as someone carrying a shotgun with birdshot (I suspect if you can hit a clay you can hit a quadcopter). Both Russia and Ukraine field ECM systems, and from what I’m reading it seems like when their ECM gets degraded that’s when the Drones really get to work.
Agreed. Do you guys still do AAAD? – that was just using small arms up to and incl. MGs.
Don’t know, wasn’t my job even back when I was in that unit so *shrug*
OK, In my day every man jack of whatever cap badge was trained to do All Arms Air Defence with small arms, even though firing a rifle at a fast jet seemed a bit ludicrous. Maybe we could have brought down a slow flying helo with a LMG or GPMG though!
Different times, I guess.
I think someone at some point decided having people wildly throwing lead into the air that would inevitably come down was perhaps to much of a burden on both the RLC and the RAMC.
Yes, I am sure you are right.
No heavy vehicles or heavy armaments in the above picture. All light. Seriously , I thought the priority for the Army is to fix its front end, with some teeth and serious armour and not just playing photo shoot with all this stuff.
It will be 2027 until the first CH3 sees service that’s 3 years away.
and 2030 until all 148 are delivered 6 years away
In comparison, ISW states that Russia is refurbishing 100 stored T62/T72/T80s per month and producing about 20 new T90Ms per month.
Three things need fixing here, Upping defence expenditure, speeding up procurement processes, and expanding our military-industrial capacity.
Two of which could be mitigated by buying foreign AFVs
The clue might be in the name “Light Mechanised Brigade”
Guess what, even if the Army got all the tanks it wanted, it would still have light units.
That is because it is a Lt Mech brigade!
Not all of the army have tanks and cannon-equipped Warriors – just the two armoured BCTs.
This is a Very High Readiness force going on exercise (not simply assembling for an inane photoshoot) – it is no surprise that it comprises kit that can be deployed more quickly than heavy armour and its support.
The Army is still hard at work rebuilding the heavy metal side of things – CR3s, Boxers and Ajax are being built ‘as we speak’. I am sure they will go on exercise once they are built and issued!
Hi Graham, yes, you, BoF, Dern are all right of course. Sorry, just got the shits with this photo shoot. Big like a multi lane taxi rank at the airport! Wanting to hear some good news more at the front end. Don’t we all?
Certainly looks like an airfield!
The vehicles are lined up like they are in a Convoy Marshalling Area, prior to getting on the rail flats or the ship or to drive up the motorway in packets.
The guys in front are either getting collectively briefed (unlikely) or are posing for a photoshoot – the public does like to see what their army is doing, so unavoidable at times.
I am sure the next pictures will be ‘more tactical’, when they are in tactical locations.
I agree we all want to hear some good news about the army – that UK is leading NATO’s VJTF is good news…as is the deployment of a goodly number of troops on a major exercise.
It’s Cottesmore Airfield, it’s their home base.
…and to think there were those who thought the UK was not ready or able to lead the VJTF from 1st Jan this year. Not sure why?
We lead VJTF in 2016, not sure why we wouldn’t be able to in 2024?
I agree. I do recall there were some doubts expressed in the media and some suggested that the Germans ‘stag on’ for a bit longer as lead nation. Looks like it was a story planted by the Germans.
Forces Net 4/1/23: “Britain says it is committed to leading a Nato task force in 2024 – disregarding a report that delays had driven the German defence ministry to explore extending its leadership beyond 2023.
The report, by Berlin-based digital news organisation Table.Media (which cited German military sources), suggested the UK would take up the reins several months later than initially planned.
MoD Tweet, 12/2/23:The Mail on Sunday story claiming that the UK is not ready to lead NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) is completely untrue.
Because the moaners only see how many tanks guns and planes and ignore the wider organisational structure and logistic tail beneath that works and enables our military to deploy as needed and have SLE and others at readiness?
I’d confidently say many had no idea 7 LMBCT even existed.
Our business is on the sea, this is (1) of a laughable scale (2) not our fight at all.
It’s just an Exorcise…..😉
What? We have three services (not one) that defend our nation, our continent and British interests overseas. What is not our fight? Training to defend the continent? It is…that is what NATO is for.
This article is about NATO’s Very High Readiness force – it is NATO (not the UK) that has decided the Land Component is based on a brigade. It is our turn to provide that brigade and lead the force, and to deploy the force on exercise.
Of course, in time of war, follow-on forces would …follow on a short time later…. then we would send everything else.
“then we would send everything else”…shouldn’t take long….
Possibly not. On the army side…
For WW3 we would send 3 Div (HQ, two armoured brigades, 1 Deep Recce Strike Bde, all Div Troops including 7 AD Group, 25 CS Engr Gp), and possibly 4th Light Brigade and 8 Engineer brigade from 1 Div. Up to two Operational Sustainment brigades. 6th Div (Army Special Ops Bde, 77th Bde). Most if not all of 22 SAS. 16 AA Bde. 1st Aviation Brigade Combat Team. The ISR Group. The CEMA Effects Gp. 2nd Med Gp. One or two Sigs Groups.
Then we would send some/most/all of the Army Reserve units and individuals plus some of the Regular Reserves.
Hopefully we should not feel a need to clear out the Trg Org of regular staff and deploy them – they will be too busy training the conscripts!
Well said.
You are being very patient mate!
Wow we can rapidly deploy 160 light wheeled vehicles with no air defence, artillery, Engineers etc. to a training area in the UK. Well done, big pat on the back.
Hi Martin.
That isn’t a training area, that is Kendrew Barracks, that Battalions home station. The old RAF Cottesmore.
And that photo shows but a part of one of 5 Infantry Battalions in the Brigade.
The Brigade of which that unit is a part have all the assets you mention:
32 Regiment RE, 1 CS Bn REME, an AD Battery from 12RA, 6 FL Regiment RLC, 3 Medical Regiment RAMC, The Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, a Military Intelligence Company from 1 Bn IC ( either 11,14,15 I’m unsure ) and a RMP Provost Company. It probably also has an attached Battery from 32 RA, with TUAS.
What 7 LMBCT lacks is organic aviation, and heavier artillery.
Cheers.
very well informed thank you, what the whole army lacks is heavy tube Artillery as AS90 is out ranged but just about every thing, and we have about 60 left if that.
Maybe. GMLRS is a growth area, however.
yes it is but the rounds are very, very expensive, and the M270 was stopped being made a while ago, there are no new ones. And its not really heavy tube Artillery it lacks the rate of fire and ammunition types for a battle field. ITS MORE LONG RANGE STRIKE
It lacks the ammunition types? 4 precision rocket types are being bought, one with 500km range.
It is an area the MoD has decided to prioritise having seen how effective they have been. 44 increased to 67 and 75 ultimately.
We are getting them from the US stocks and other sources, and refurbishing them with new cabs.
I am looking at positives.
i commanded and crewed mlrs, its ideal for long range strike, useless in close combat, breakthrough. Simply put its not got enough rounds for a long battle, rounds are too few/too expensive. And it has a large launch signature. Tube Artillery is better in battle etc. ie FOB etc contact battle
Did you. Interesting, nice to know Martin. 👍
Any way MLRS is depth fire/strike. Tube Artillery wins battles, Depth fire shapes the battle.
Ok, we get more. do we buy more ammo for them, we would run out of Ammo in a week. We never have enough ammo as it cost money, we had 64 mlrs in 90s, what did we do with them? left them to rot, cut the MLRS Regts down, from 3 regular to 1 and two ta, we can not look after the kit we have. Why get more and what strip them for spares in 10 years
Ah, so as an MLRS man you know the timeline I often mention, lament!
Yes, 3 Regs to 1, 39 RA. Then that Reg was cut and the 3 Batteries absorbed in the 3 AS90 Regiments, with an Exactor Troop in the 2010 cuts.
They then repeated the trick and cut another AS90 Regiment, of 3 left, to re brigade the MLRS back into a Regiment! And then formed another on it by rerolling 4 RA which had the LG.
But they did that by moving one of 26RA’s 3 Batteries and reducing both Regiments to 2 Batteries, calling them “Binary” !!!!
OK, I can see your prefer tube artillery in bulk Martin. Fair enough.
That was just HQ DRA smoke and mirrors, and total lack of planing messing it all up. I worked on tube Arty, but MLRS is better for every thing less the contact battle. And near battle area
As an ex RA man then you’ll be pleased to know I consider your corps the main area I’d like to see investment, in my view, as a primary arm.
The RA has been allowed to wither for too long.
Arty wins battles, shapes the battle space, causes highest casualties etc. We have over 100 light guns, less than 60 As90’s left. And out of 44 MLRS most are not ever B1 standard let alone new cab A2. Like any contact fire power wins the day. We have next to none and what we have is old/out ranged
We should have embodied the Braveheart upgrade all those years ago to get that ‘vital extra’ 5 or 6km range.
That was up grade cut in numbers etc to save money, a lost chance. As normal be went for second best.
Second best option was not to do the Braveheart upgrade?
I call that the worse option.
cheap option as always, half arsed, money saver. AS90 if fully upgraded is a great system. but it was left to get old and out of date like every bit of kit we have, used untill falls apart.
MoD has not pushed upgrades for AFVs across the board or frequently enough – mad! Now all our AFVs are barely effective.
CR2, Warrior, AS90, CRARRV, Titan, Trojan – to name just a few – denied upgrades at intervals during the course of their working lives.
Imagine if the RAF and RN had not upgraded any of their key platforms! There would be questions in Parliament and even the Public would have written letters to MPs and newspapers to complain.
Lack of drive from the top brass, they seem very quite about the crap state of the Armies aging kit. We blame the MOD but really if the top brass do not push the issue then the MOD will of course be happy not spending the money.
The Army has not been well lead in years a lot of yes men or those wanting get in the house of lords. They should hang their heads in shame it happened on their watch.
The army has had a number of firm CGS’s who speak their mind, more so than the other 2 services, and seemingly one who has caused havoc with the army’s organisation structure and equipment plans – General Carter.
But none of them have been effective in influencing equipment procurement satisfactorily for the army.
That name…….Carter! Wash your mouth out.
One of the greatest acts of self harm in many years.