The King’s Royal Hussars (KRH) have taken part in Exercise Iron Cyclone at the Castlemartin Ranges in West Wales.
The exercise is a combination of the Regular Battle Craft Syllabus and specific training modules for new tank commanders, aiming to optimise regimental training and prepare soldiers for global operations.
Captain William Howlett, Intelligence Officer for the KRH, spoke about the importance of Exercise Iron Cyclone to the regiment’s training regimen:
“Exercise Iron Cyclone allows us to make better use of our time, to be more efficient and get more people trained with less effort.”
He further emphasised Castlemartin’s significance as a training range for armoured warfare, asserting its unparalleled capabilities in the UK for providing progressive training for the troops, taking into account the variety of weapon systems and platforms it can accommodate.
“The size and the width of the arcs we have at Castlemartin make it the best range for armoured fighting training, anywhere in the UK, taking into account the number of weapon systems, the number of platforms and allowing a progression of training to get our troops up to the competency levels they need to be.”
Exercise Iron Cyclone involves not only the KRH but also the 1st Battalion The Mercian Regiment, 26 Engineer Regiment, and 127 Battery Royal Artillery.
Having recently returned from Operation Cabrit in Estonia, where they reinforced NATO’s armoured fighting capability on Europe’s eastern flank, the KRH are now focused on making full use of the facilities at Castlemartin, the largest live-firing range in the UK.
How the war in Ukraine and the use of drones are changing the current designs for an MBT. “The development of the K3 Main Battle Tank comes in response to the South Korean Army’s assertion that the currently deployed K2 Black Panther Main Battle Tank no longer meets the tactical demands of modern combat and emerging battlefield threats. The Joint Chiefs of Staff has approved the development of the K3 tank, with the first prototype anticipated for release in 2030. The K3 incorporates a traditional layout, featuring a driver’s compartment at the front, the turret in the middle, and the… Read more »
Which is why those saying ditch CH2 in favour of K2 were talking out of their exhaust pipes.
CH3 is all of that and better and a designed and close to fully developed concept that is prototyping now.
“Which is why those saying ditch CH2 in favour of K2 were talking out of their exhaust pipes.” “No, there is a war in Europe now and they can deliver quickly. By the time the last CH3 is delivered the next generation of tanks will be on the market. “Less than a year after contract signature, South Korea has already delivered 28 Black Panther main battle tanks to Poland, out of 180 on order, demonstrating a delivery capability that Western manufacturers cannot match. WARSAW — The fourth Tranche of South Korean K2 Black Panther tanks was delivered to the port… Read more »
“Less than a year after contract signature, South Korea has already delivered 28 Black Panther main battle tanks to Poland, out of 180 on order, demonstrating a delivery capability that Western manufacturers cannot match.”
These were already in production and diverted to Poland.
Actually CH3 is forward on schedule and under budget.
“Actually CH3 is forward on schedule and under budget.”
You just had to say it SB, you know the Whitehall Gremlins will get to work now to put that right.. 🤣
I’m guessing double the budget and 5 years late when the dust settles, let’s see…
I think this one will be OK.
Good idea club kept at a good distance.
…and it helped that a high budget was assigned and a very relaxed ISD agreed.
But, but, but it comes from abroad so it must be better than ours!
Sorry I forgot that.
Obvs why so many other countries are buying our frigates…..
Well pains me to say it but a tank designed relatively from scratch now as opposed to updating a 30 year old design is going to be fundamentally better on most counts I suspect, even if CH3 will be excellent in some regards. South Korea also has the means, as a super efficient manufacturer and the necessity with a hostile nutter opponent on its border to produce such a product while we (as oft expressed on here rightly or wrongly, probably think if our tanks are a crucial part of European land defence, the war has probably already been lost,… Read more »
And it might not be so much better than CH3 – hard to know from a few pretty pics.
What I do know is that NK will make Russia look technologically advanced.
LINK
Nigel – I know what a K2 is?
“And it might not be so much better than CH3 – hard to know from a few pretty pics.”
Hence the link.
K3 is modern concept – crew separated from the gun and ammunition that can make reduce the armour and overall weight , CH3 is an obsolete tank concept from post WW2.
Alex,
My car represents an obsolete concept from 1920 – it has the same layout – petrol engine in front, 4 seats, a boot at the back, 4 sprung wheels etc.
Still it does the job!
Why you say your car is an obsolete concept? It has not been replaced by a better concept.
A wheel concept despite having thousands years is not an obsolete concept.
Well is my throwaway comment worth pushing much further?
The petrol engine is being replaced by Electrical power (EVs). More significantly, some cars can be driven autonomously. Doesn’t mean my car does not do the job.
Steady on AlexS. Fire power, mobility and protection are still the defining characteristics of every MBT. Regardless of era. That will never change, unless crews are replaced by AIs. If CH2 had been blessed with a more powerful engine, which was available at the time. It would have been the best MBT of all time, no argument. It’s combat record is second to none. CH3 will address the powerpack issue along with other upgrades. It’s greatest strength will be that superbly protected, tried and tested armoured hull. It’s greatest weakness will be the pitiful low numbers being converted. Even if… Read more »
CH2 has never combated against heavy ATGM’s neither the combat was significative.
Sound like a tour of duty tugger
MBT regardless of its age of design and the fact it needs a crew. is still at a huge disadvantage in a modern Drone looking down battlefield, all the low silhouette and radar paint, will not hide that Tank from a £25 drone and a missile. if it looks like a tank, sounds like a Tank chances are it is a Tank and goes pop like a tank
IF the presumed K3 performs as advertised, is there a domestic UK manufacturer still available to co-produce it? Believe SK/PL/UK would be a heavyweight consortium. Understand that BAE is previously committed.
On our side is the stellar combat experience of CR1 and CR2. What combat experience is Korea drawing on to design its tank?
👍
Exactly
tour of duty 55
That’s an awful lot of assumptions. Any facts anywhere to back that up or is the assumption that it must be better because it must be better!
I think the C3 will be superior to the K2 in terms of armour and survivability. The big problem is lack of numbers 148 is no way near enough of a heavy armoured force. The entire fleet requires the upgrades to C3 standard- all 220+ active fleet tanks. The second biggest issue for me with the C3 programme is the complete lack of APS systems from the word go to equip the entirety of the fleet- all the C3 units should have APS- as should most armoured vehicles entering combat zones. The Trophy system should be adopted on mass and… Read more »
Armour maybe but the crew being separated from the ammo means the K3 has the CH3 decidedly beat on survivability, which iirc is still not confirmed to even have ammo stored in a blow out compartments (turret tosser)
Based on what? Your “professional” opinion? Battle tested evidence? Scientific evaluation? Why post nonsense?
What part of what I wrote are you questioning?
Yes according to my extensive scientific research and peer reviewed analysis: being in a sealed compartment with a rapid deflagration is sub-optimal..
And as soon as you stick your head out of you sealed room, you get snippered. or have to walk back across a open battlefield. Crew survivability is a Hollywood fantasy. or Mums backroom warriors.
Having ammo behind an armoured door in the bustle of the Abrams together with blow out panels has not prevented many of those tanks from brewing up when hit.
Yes but I’ve noticed from drone footage that the Leopard 2s tend to slowly burn, rather than detonate, allowing the crew to escape.
Thanks mate. Good comment. Good to know that so far those in our 14 gifted Challys are OK.
Your comments are noted. However, the “I want all the sweets in the shop” argument is not really the way to plan acquisitions. You plan acquisitions based on past experience (deployments) and risk based scenarios (probabilities). Which suggests that they have adopted a rational acquisition strategy. In modern warfare tanks are not the force multiplier that they once were and therefore the logical (not emotional) approach is to put resources elsewhere.
I have to say, I am sitting down, that army have done this right.
As with T31 get the basic units ordered and the TROPHY system fully integrated. If the connectors are there then more TROPHY can be ordered and bolted on.
But I do agree that active protection system are needed more widely if just for things like drones against trucks.
Winning on the battlefield hinges on well…..survivability…..at least for starters.
Of course we do not deploy 148 under the Future Soldier (FS) Orbat. We would deploy at most two armd regts ie 112 tanks. We need to cancel at least some of the 10,000 cut to Establishments and preserve the 3rd armd regt – thus we could deploy 168 (need to amend the CR3 contract accordingly). It was stated a very long time ago that just 60 tanks would have Trophy APS – never heard the rationale so it must have been a savings measure. I would be surprised if the 60 figure has survived, particularly in light of the… Read more »
“Actually CH3 is forward on schedule and under budget.” “Work on the programme to upgrade the tanks will begin this year, with Challenger 3 having an expected in-service date of 2027. Full operating capability for Challenger 3 is planned for 2030.” RBSL said the contract would create and sustain 450 jobs within the UK supply chain and a further 200 jobs at RBSL. Work will be led from RBSL’s Telford plant with support from the company’s other sites. Commenting on the announcement, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said: “This represents a huge shift in the modernisation of our land forces through… Read more »
How many jobs would this have created for the UK workforce going forward?
“Poland’s acquisition of the K2 tanks began last year, with a purchase of 180 units for PLN 5.8 billion (equivalent to EUR 1.3 billion). Under the framework contract signed earlier, Poland is set to acquire a total of 1,000 vehicles, out of which 820 will be manufactured locally under license in subsequent stages.
In addition to the K2 tanks, Poland has also placed orders for other advanced military equipment from South Korea. These include K9 howitzers, K239 Chunmoo rocket artillery launchers”
LINK
“ How old are the hulls we will be upgrading?????”
Irrelevant if they are sound and up to spec.
“ How old are the hulls we will be upgrading?????”
Irrelevant if they are sound and up to spec.
So, thirty years old at best when they reach FOC in 2030, smart move eh and worth the investment!
“Production began in 1993 and the unit’s tanks were delivered in July 1994, replacing the Challenger 1. The Tank entered service with the British Army in 1998, with the last delivered in 2002. It is expected to remain in service until 2035.”
They have also had their first delivery of Abrams tanks in recent weeks though these are serviced ex Marine stock I believe as it will take an age before the new ones on order are delivered, which is why I believe they turned to South Korea in the first place. That new proposed K3 tank does rather look impressive mind.
Indeed!
03 JULY 2023
Poland receives first company of M1A1 Abrams tanks
Poland received its first company of 14 M1A1 Abrams tanks at the Port of Szczecin on 28 June, the Polish Ministry of National Defence (MND) announced on its website later the same day. The Polish Armaments Agency said on its website on 28 June that three M88A2 Hercules armoured recovery vehicles were also delivered.
Two more M1A1 companies will be delivered in 2023, to be followed by a second battalion in 2024
LINK
Slight correction–newly remanufactured Abrams.
K2 delivery speed is impressive.
CR2 hull age is unlikely to be any issue at all. First stage in conversion to CR3 is a Base Overhaul of the CR2 donor vehicles which of course includes checking hulls for ‘straightness’ and weld integrity.
“K2 delivery speed is impressive.”
These were already being made and were diverted to Poland.
Quite cynically, I suspect, as they looked at the Ukrainian conflict and decided that they needed K3 and not more K2 and so sold the K2’s that were coming off the line to an eager customer?
Not to mention the fact that a so called “stealth” design serves absolutely no purpose if “spotter” drones are being used!
It doesn’t take much of a MAD to spot a 50,000kg lump of metal?
But never mind – a nice coat of paint should do the trick….
Unless it’s that Bae digital camouflage perhaps. Mind you don’t think they have applied it to the top. 😱
Not very stealthy with that big sticky out gun stuck on top of the turret!
CR3 is not really ‘all of that’ – it is conventional with a 4-man crew, 3 of whom are in the turret, loading being manual by a human loader. K3 has 3-man crew all in the hull and none in the turret and an unmanned turret with autoloader.
Not saying which is better!
But CR3 is ahead in programme terms as K3 prototype won’t be ready till 2030, as you say, and CR3 will be fully fielded by the same date. CR3 though lags K2 by many years.
Challenger 3 hits milestone ahead of schedule
09 FEBRUARY 2023
“The work was carried out under an £800M contract which was awarded to RBSL in 2021 to deliver 148 upgraded, fully digitalised battle tanks to the British Army from 2027.
The supply-chain sub-contracts have now been awarded to UK supply chain companies, contributing to the government’s levelling up agenda. Following two key design reviews, work to modernise and expand RBSL’s production facility in Telford – which will also manufacture Boxer vehicles – is now almost complete.”
LINK
Thanks for that link, Nigel.
You’re welcome maurice10!
It will have the same issues as the T14 Armata. Which is a lack of situational awareness for the crew, as soon as the cameras are taken out. Thereby making it it easier for artillery to achieve a mission kill. I fully understand the reasoning of placing all the crew in a centralised armoured box in the hull. As it reduces the armour required for the turret, thereby making the tank lighter. But it does mean the crew are effectively cut off from what is happening around them. This was one of the findings when the US Army trialled the… Read more »
Hi Davy B, It’s still at the very early concept stages, but my point is that we could have been involved in this project and gained a large workshare if we opted for the same type of deal Poland now has including new tanks in the short term. Instead, we will end up with old hulls supporting new technology with a FOC of 2030 if all goes to plan. 148 The CDR means that the design for the tanks has been agreed and that RBSL can now start building the CR3 prototypes. The work was carried out under an £800M… Read more »
What’s gone wrong with the UK Boxer programme?
Last year,Jane’s reported supply chain problems esp with electronic components. Similar difficulties as faced by Auto industry. Australian Boxer programme also delayed by COVID and component delays.
Thanks Peter. That makes sense. Worrying news when all our AFV programmes are delayed or very slow.
Hi Graham, I meant to say Ajax in the above post.
Am I correct in thinking that we will produce 36 units a year which would equate to 17.5 years for all 623?
BOXER
5th April 2023 at 4:34 pm
“In total, the Army has ordered 623 Boxers. RBSL (Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land) is contracted to deliver its first vehicle next year.
The first welding on the first of 260 vehicles to be manufactured for the Army in the West Midlands has taken place, with around three a month set to be produced.”
LINK
Thanks Nigel. The 623 figure is Tranche 1 (523) plus Tr2 (100). There will be further orders as 623 is not sufficient – only 85 of the 523 tranche were infantry section carriers which would be enough for just two battalions, and there are five armoured inf bns in the two armoured brigades. The end figure should be well over 1,000 – and some say closer to 1,500, however I don’t think such people are realistic. You quote an article (source?) saying that 3 vehs/month will be produced. Yes, I agree that makes 36/year. I have found no alternative figures… Read more »
Thanks Graham, “LRIP – Low Rate Initial Production” sounds much better! We really do need to get a move on. Some positive news for today. “The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has awarded BAE Systems GBP870 million (USD1.1 billion) for further development and integration of the European Common Radar System Mark 2 (ECRS Mk 2) for the Royal Air Force’s (RAF’s) fleet of Eurofighter Typhoon combat aircraft. Announced on 4 July, the electronically scanned (E-Scan) radar award for BAE Systems and its partner Leonardo is part of a wider GBP2.35 billion investment in continued technology upgrades for the RAF’s Typhoon… Read more »
Sorry, Ajax.
I note the few Armata tanks Russia has in stock are not being used in Ukraine- despite the fact the Russian army are getting pasted and losing thousands of armoured vehicles to relatively simple drones and ATGWs. The Armata simply cannot be that good. If the Russian army had faith in the design and its lauded abilities it would have already been deployed to Ukraine. The fact it may or may not be deployed in a supportive mobile fire support capacity is evidence enough the Russians are scared the truth will out. The design is flawed, lacks survivability and ultimately… Read more »
All well and good and I’m delighted that the KRH are getting some practice in – but would have been better if they were in the old BATUS range in Canada
Well yes, entire all arms BGs could operate there. But with the size of reduction our armoured and mechanized forces have suffered it made sense to remove that type of training from there. We no longer have the number of vehicles to justify keeping them on the other side of the world just for training. Them back in Europe is helping us maintain Cabrit, with just 2 Brigades. Ironically, the KRH is still scheduled to be the Regiment reduced to the Armoured Cavalry role as Tank Regs reduce to 2, courtesy of Carter’s Strike Bde plan, now dead. I hope… Read more »
Indeed. In November 2021, reports suggested that the base would be closed in favour of the joint training area in Oman, however this was denied by Wallace, who added that the base would see “change” but would not close. The MOD Press Office stated that Suffield would remain “a vital training base for the British Army”.
And that’s still the case as far as I know. He’s hardly going to admit HMG have cut to the point it’s not viable to keep it. At least not til he’s got his pension!
I don’t think it matters where armoured BG trg takes place so long as it is on a massive, massive area which can accomodate Live Fire and Force-on-Force trg (TESEX). The British Army website still reads as if nothing has changed since the glory days of at least two Medman exercises per year. https://www.army.mod.uk/deployments/canada/ Extract: “BATTLEGROUP-SIZED TRAINING AREABATUS is equipped with in excess of 1000 vehicles including a full complement of Challenger 2 tanks and Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicles. More than 400 permanent staff and 1000 temporary deployed staff provide highly demanding combined arms manoeuvre training for the armoured forces… Read more »
Anyone else find it weird CH2 hasn’t appeared in combat footage in URK yet?
I assume they’ll use them in their main push once they figure out where is best to advance in numbers, once forward lines are broken.
Keen to see how they perform to be honest.
Not really, there aren’t enough of them to form a sizeable force around and they’d be a non standard logistical pain in the arse which the low numbers don’t justify. I expect them to form part of a reserve force somewhere.
They were sent as a political message more than anything to trigger supplies of leopards.
They will be used, I’m sure, for whatever task they are considered optimal for.
This will have been minutely planned.
CH2 with its Dorchester and sights is quite the beastie.
I think the Ukrainians are holding the C2s back as a strategic reserve- they are ideally suited as a counter offensive defensive tank being more survivable and better armoured/ slightly less mobile and heavier than L2s.
I think this is a wise move by Ukraine.
The gov has admitted putting restrictions on how UK supplied kit can be used. There was a rumour that one of these restrictions was that the chally couldn’t be used in any combat where they could not be realictivally recovered, although that hasn’t been officially confirmed.
The design of the chally gives it better armour than the lighter leopards (heavy armour Vs speed different design philosophies), so it’s going to be interesting to see how they hold up to combat, which we will surely see in the coming month or so.
I hope the U.K. has supplied addon armour packages and remote guns etc. With only 14 they should be the best versions possible.
The remote machine gun gives an extra thermal, night vision set. I guess until we see them in actual combat we won’t know what they have on them.
Really all countries supporting need to be giving as much as possible to try and end this war as quick as possible.
For example I had hoped the U.K. would get supacat building vehicles and get updated scimitar, stormer etc building. Any useful equipment should be getting made
It’s easy for the UK to give away gear, we have a massive hole in the defence budget which getting rid of kit helps with and we have no realistic land threat to the UK. Most of Europe aren’t in that position as Russia is still a threat, small one but could still try and land grab.
Agree that we have no realistic land threat to the UK – and no realistic naval threatto UK waters, and not so very much of an air threat to UK airspace.
Our army is used for overseas deployments – not for defending our beaches, enemy landing grounds, fields, streets and hills. (with apologies to Mr Churchill!).
All pictures and videos of CR2 in Ukraine I have seen show no up-armouring mods at all, just the basic standard.
CR2 has of course already been in combat zones – Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf War 2 (Op Telic).
Not really again modern equipment, although admittedly Russian kit isn’t that modern. Most of the losses recently have been caused by mines and artillery, which they haven’t been tested against as far as I am aware.
I would not be surprised if the R&D on CH3 will be looking at future enhanced protection requirements on the back of lessons learnt during the Ukraine war. CH3 will be a worthy design as long as rapid updating can be packaged into the basic turret structure? However, let’s get the current design built and into service by 2027, if not earlier.
Active defence systems clearly need to develop beyond knocking out incoming missiles to taking out drones at a further distance as well. Its all very well knocking out incoming missiles but if a drone is out of range giving your position to a cm of error to artillery you are in big trouble. Maybe a gun based system with bursting rounds to pepper a drone with shrapnel? It’s vital it remains affordable to use, the ammo needs to cost less than the drone, if not any enemy will just throw cheap drones at the target until it runs out of… Read more »
Expat and I were having a discussion about this very problem. In particular how to deal with suicide drones and loitering surveillance drones. It boiled down to the “vehicle (tank)” requires the combination of electronic surveillance equipment and an onboard RF jammer, along with a sort of air defence system. The surveillance equipment is needed to try and detect the communications between the drone and the operator. If the gear detects the drone’s communications, it activated the RF jammer. If it is a commercial drone, then their operating and communication frequencies are well. Plus there are cheap RF jammers that… Read more »
Whilst I appreciated the read, your solutions seem overly complex. The simple solution for tank “overwatch” going forward is for tanks to have their own “overwatch” drones built in. This would mean available targeting and multiple effects options potentially available continuously.
Proximity fuses were mass manufactured in ww2 alone, there could be an replacement to the current RWS that is deployed on the Challenger 2 TES vehicle to maybe fit a 50 cal or 20 mm with those smart rounds or proximity fuses. The radar for the APS could also be used for fire control, depending on how capable it is and how truly digitalised the tank is that may allow the rws to interface with the radar.
My thoughts exactly. DaveyB has some great ideas but I’m of the opinion that an RWS & proximity fused rounds is the cheap and effective way to take them down at range. Sounds like a problem tailor made for 3P ammunition. There’s a new scope for the L85 to enable infantry to take down small drones. This tech shouldn’t be difficult to integrate to provide targeting either if needed. I’m also of a mind to look at the PIRATE system from Typhoon. I wonder if this technology could be utilised on a ground vehicle. As you and DaveyB say, radar… Read more »
The Koreans have installed the Israeli Trophy Active protection system on the K2 for the Norwegian demo, so this would be a very good choice to have installed.
The CH3 will receive something similar according to this site? Sadly, the UK has decided MBTs have a limited role in the British Army and that is reflected in the small number of CH3s on order. The concept that they would purchase K2 is hard to see in light of the current policy. Howitzers might be a different story.
You are most probably right sadly.
As I have posted in another thread, worth reading!
One for Daneile and a few others on here to read and answer!
“The British Army has been allocated a £41.3 billion ($51.4 billion) funding package for procurement and support to the end of the decade. The forthcoming Defence Command Paper — set to outline new procurement changes and due for publication before July 21 — could see existing acquisitions overhauled to better reflect equipment priorities influenced by the Ukraine war.”
LINK
Whilst on holiday in Wales a couple of years ago, stumbled across the Castlemartin range. Able to park up in a public viewing field area above and watch training fire from CH2s and Warriors. The sounds from the CH2s main gun was incredible and tracer fire from Warriors mesmorising.
Is Challenger 3 getting blow out panels for ammunition storage?
Yes ☝
Thanks.
Not enough CH 3 s though..if they aren’t making enough,they need more AT capabilities spread through the army.IFVs given javelin or an equivalent AT missile.Boxer overwatch to replace the stormers . The stormers did real well in Desert Storm and the few exactors in service are a poor replacement.
You mean Striker Swingfire combination. Stormer is for the HVM.
No expert on tanks, far to dangerous for me, but essential platform for a modern military, adaptable to the circumstances with passive and active defences, able to operate offensively and defensively, well handled and with a decent crew, in a combined arms formation, always going to be needed! Anyone saying otherwise has never, ever served in the job! Need to get back to minimum 3 Regiments to ensure 3 rounded BCTs with loggies! Also, as an aside I see a few tank crew being female nowadays, good job, good luck!
and yet a mere 12 months ago there were those (many on here) shouting out about the demise of the tank- and suggesting the 148 CH3 (or whatever the figure is) was actualy far too many to be upgraded as the tank was a busted flush on the modern battlefield.
Probably the same guys who say that our army isn’t needed…and that 35-40k (ish) actual fighting troops will be more than adequate….until it is…and its not.
There are a few aren’t there! The tank is dead etc but forgetting as the threat changes so do tactics, kit and capabilities mate 👍 “fuck me they’ve invented the shield, best get rid of the swords then lads”!!! 😂
MBT to defend the UK, was the point of that conversation. MBT deployed in the UK. and we have already lost. Let Europe have its own Tanks to defend itself. we just defend our shores.
Oh dear, your concept and thought process very wrong! Tanks form part of an all arms battle group, and an important part of defence is attack! To include expeditionary warfare!
Since the King is head of our state (still, here in NZ), I’m allowed an opinion on brexit. Get back into Europe, you’re going to need the Leppard ll’s right now. You won’t be able to manufacture enough Challengers in the meantime!
Just because he is YOUR head of state doesn’t mean you can lack Common sense. Lep 2s are as outdated as Ch2s and it was looked at with the Budget you would get 60 Lep2s for the 147 CHR3s. you need to look out for China mate as he is coming
MoD yesterday (James Cartlidge MP, MinDP) confirmed that the UK CR2 fleet now comprises 213 vehicles ‘in service. Makes sense as the previous figure was 227 and 14 tanks have been gifted to UKR – nothng wrong with his maths!
The article in armytechnology.com went on to say that it was revealed at a UK Defence Committeee session on 8th March, that 157 CR2s were ‘available for operations’ with the overall fleet having been reduced due to cannibalisation for spares.
Thus increase of CR3s from 148 upwards is rather unlikely, unless we buy back the 38 Oman vehicles.
Good spot. Thx. So realistically the 148 CR3 number is a done deal. The discussion is moving on. This article dates from 2021 and says clearly that Warrior will not be replaced by a like for like IFV.
https://www.army-technology.com/features/british-army-outlines-how-boxer-will-fill-warrior-capability-gap/
Decision was announced in March 2021 in the Defence Command Paper that WCSP was cancelled, that Warrior would be retired in the mid-2020s and that Boxer would essentially replace it.
The Brigadier’s comments are interesting – the only way they can make Boxer more ‘IFV-like’ is to equip each one with a cannon – and the army requirement was for a stabilised 40mm cannon – has that changed? Let us watch this space!
No 1 on your wish list I think mate?
Yep, such a cannon was an endorsed agreed army requirement for AI – not sure anything in the enemy Orbat or vehicle design will have changed that.
Not privy to the background of the Requirement document, but a stabilised cannon allows firing accuratley on the move, obvs – but there must have been lethality concerns about sticking with a 30mm.
Some intriguing phrases in the article; references to ‘integrating vehicles’ and Boxer being ‘networked’, suggest that the army is looking at options other than putting the CTA 40mm turret on Boxer as a 1:1 Warrior replacement. As you say, watch this space.
I listened to the Defence Select Committee meeting yesterday, at which Admiral Radakin was the guest. It was made abundantly clear that there is no new money and that the cuts as previously announced will be followed through. So basically its 148 unless the defence budget is increased, even then there may be other priorities.
I wonder why Wallace said he would look at the 148 figure in the light of the Russo-Ukraine war.
148 was the indeed the number that could be saved, its not a budget, it was the total of suitable chassis that could be converted
Jon, I very much doubt that – thats not how requirements are devised and set. 148 represents the army future requirement number as per Future Soldier, ie two Type 56 regiments, plus a number for the Trg Org, Repair Pool and Attrition Reserve. Not saying Treasury doesn’t drive an earlier number down – thats life – Navy wanted 12 T45s but Treasury funded only 6, etc etc There are clearly more than 148 suitable CR2s that could have been converted (but a higher number has not been endorsed and funded) – we have 213 tanks on the active list –… Read more »
Morning mate.
That is an interesting point oft forgotten actually.
What happens to the CH2 training Tanks and CRARRV regards the new CH3s? They remain as is or get updated too at some point?
Good point. CR1 had Challenger Training Tank (CTT) at the RAC Trg Centre and CHARRV initially for repair & recovery (CH – means Chieftain, not Challenger!!!) in 1st and 2nd line REME units. CR2 had Driver Training Tank (DTT) at Bovvy [22 vehs and based on CR2 hull obvs] – and CRARRV for REME. We always considered CRARRV to be CR1.5 in technology terms. No Chobham armour as I recall. It had the CR2 transmission (TN54) but just about everything else was CR 1 era. CRARRVs were later upgraded to full CR2 powertrain spec – ie CV12-5C/6C engine with TN54E… Read more »
Morning mate. I thought as such, we will no doubt continue with what we have.
I was up with the CHARRV or CRARRV difference, just! Though I had to double check I typed the right one in my intitial reply.
We always abbreviated Chieftain to CH and Challenger to CR.
I would appreciate it you could find out anything about HARRV (the ‘H’ was of course for ‘Heavy’) – I only heard about the project on the grapevine.
C3 far better than K2.
In what way exactly?
Seeing as CR3 is still being prototyped and K2 has not been in combat how can you make such a claim ?.
Easy the C2 is combat tested and proven high end obviously up graded C3 version will be better than a untested probably over hyped k2 .
The CR3 should be a vast improvement over CR2 but only on paper atm, until the first prototypes are built and fully tested. The K2 must be pretty average for Poland to want 1000+ examples, Turkey’s Altay is heavily based on it and the Norwegian Army preferred it to the Leopard 2.
Never mind chap’s. If i tcomes to war in Europe who needs tanks when we have the royal hourse artillery and the red arrows…..that should put the wind up the ruskies.
Its an exercise, not an Operation.
However, the name is not that meaningless. Participating troops are from 3 Div, known for a very long time as the Iron Division. Metereological terms of violent and dynamic and destructive weather activity have often been used for powerful military equipment (Hawker Hurricane, Whirlwind, Tempest, Typhoon) or past Operations (Desert Storm).
The next generation of MBTs will very likely have a roof mounted anti-drone weapons station of some kind and a plethora of sensors. In addition to a large calibre gun and other goodies, such as laser weapons and EW gizmos. It’s capabilities will be upgradable by software tweaks and have an unmanned option or an unmanned companion vehicle (wingman) as standard. It saddens me to admit I’ll not be here to see them.