IRON CYCLONE, a pilot exercise taking place on Salisbury Plain Training Area, Wiltshire has been designed to “train the British Army’s troops differently”, say the British Army.

According to a statement:

“The King’s Royal Hussars Battle Group collective training package with elements from 1st Battalion The Mercian Regiment, 26 Engineer Regiment, 19th Regiment Royal Artillery, and real life support from the Royal Logistic Corps, Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers and the Royal Army Medical Corps, plus 200 vehicles will draw on lessons from Ukraine.

It will be more relevant, challenging and will increase the combined arms competence of the force – a crucial element for success on the modern battlefield. A combat ready force that is more lethal, agile, expeditionary and resilient, and ready to fight and win wars on land.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

143 COMMENTS

  1. If this exercise is for putting into practice and learning from the lessons of the fighting currently underway in the Ukraine. Then expect to see most of the vehicles taken out by Lancet type drones. I’ve yet to hear how the Army are going to counter this threat? Especially when you consider a Stormer was taken out by a single Lancet. Plus firing Starsteak/Martlet at these types of drones will be prohibitively expensive. Perhaps, dare I say it, Ajax with its better EO sensors and CTAS 40mm, will become a pseudo SPAAG?

    Whilst away, I watched a guy operating a small DJI type drone flying over a castle. What struck me was that when the drone was around 50ft away, you couldn’t hear it. Plus when it was hovering, it was really easy to lose sight of it, if you looked away for a moment. Only when it was darting about, could the eye really detect it and track it. So when maintaining vigilance either statically or on patrol its going to be pretty hard to defend against these things when they carry grenades etc. Guess the guys will still need to lug around the jammers!

    • British Army has seemed for a long time had a downer on anti aircraft guns. Maybe this is about to change ( for anti drone guns)

      • Guns with proximity fuses are the answer. The solution simply has to be cheaper than cheap throw away drones that can swarm and outnumber expensive missile defences.

        • Totally agree 40mm grenade launcher with proximity fusing and air defence ring sight as most of these will be engaged at a couple of hundred meters max

        • How about 50 caliber self-correcting ammunition? This was first announced over ten years ago and DARPA/Teledyne have been working on it since that uses EO sensor to track the target. Scandia also have a laser guided one; so long as a sensor can find and a laser can paint the drone, the bullets will hit, correcting in flight like a minature missile. DARPA estimates theirs will cost somewhere between $100 and $1000 per bullet, so considerably cheaper than Martlet and probably cheaper than the drone. Check out Exacto ammunition.

          • Try an L70 1.5″ (35mm) punt gun. If this was hooked up with a mount, predictor and made automatic it would throw out 500g of shot or flechettes out 100m. The same could be done with 30mm or 40mm guns and would be devastating to any drone and extremely cheap per round.

          • That might be okay for suicide drones, but I don’t think 100m is going to hack it in general. Even £11K commercial DJI drones can come with EO/IR and a 1km laser rangefinder delivering your coordinates back to the operator (or the operator’s artillery). Drone ISR is only going to get longer range and they need to be taken out quickly.

        • Maybe a projectile that fires a weighted net into the path of the drone? the intention is to destroy the aerodynamics and /or tangle up the drone’s prop.

      • Hope so, B Army has been shown some thing called Terrahawk. Counter UAV is one of the 6 announced British Army AD programs.

        • Without getting into this D man I’m A get into Terrahawks space Sgt 101 👊🏼 Those days were much simpler 😃👍🏻

          🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

          • The 1980’s bro where the finest of Gen X watched TV 👍🏻 You got it it the cubes N balls 😉

            🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

      • I recall that Rapier replace the Bofors L40/70 and that was the end of anti-aircraft guns in British service. I always used to think our army also needed Gepard or similar.

        • Yep, I think the L40/70 may have passed to the TA for a short time, who then switch to Blowpipe. I agree with you on the Gepard ( or indeed Marksman)

          • True – and looking at this from the other end, NATO pilots in the Cold War were absolutely terrified of ZSU 23-4 back in the day – it had a fearsome reputation.
            Gepard is very old (ISD 1976) but has been relentlessly upgraded and is still an awesome AAA system.

      • Anti drones guns are short range and expensive. If you want to kill a cheap drone swarm then the answer will probably be an anti drone swarm of drones.

        Just like aircraft are still best place to shoot down other aircraft.

    • I happen to own a small specialist dron Company. I fully agree with your view about how difficult it is to loose sight of a drone even with civillian navigation lights on. So much so we have painted extra his vis tape to all ot ours as so many get lost to sight and crash into buildings. I acept this is just in a civillian role not miltary so some things will be different (I hope so anyway) even deliberatly downing a drone is not as easy as it sounds. Jamming is one thing but what else does it jam at the same time even if just localised. Hard to down with say an SA80 (more so a close range) as you loose line of sight. ( maybe an old fashioned high power with wide spread shot) shot gun may work at close range. This has been a problem highlighted by the Gatwick airport fiasco.. Certainly some solutions are a bit heath robinson -Cannon fired nets work in a civillin role. The police have even tried Eagals ( works but it may cut up the eagals feet!) I hope so better solutins than I have mentioned have now been devloped but certainly not as easy as people think especilly when a battlefield situation is in place.

    • Fortunately there’s an opportunity to incorporate some learnings in the Challenger 3 before it ever leaves the factory.

      • Ah, Challenger III, so few in number you can miss them entirely should they be in a parade of British equipment.

          • 😂😂😂

            It’s the ultimate battlefield survivability, field so few of them you can’t locate and target them….

          • All part of the smaller, more agile and deployable force structure for the Army 2030 plan you see…..

            SDSR 2025.

            A little taster from the Army section

            “We will counter the excessive weight issue of the L85A3 Individual Weapon, by issuing one L85 per two service providers, the other will carry the magazines, this way we ensure and look after the physical health of all our 16 genders of service providers”

            You saw it here first guys ( and all other genders).

          • Now you’re talking…Treasury’ll soon adopt that Refresh option. Be a bonus in it for some cunning Baldrick.

        • Surely we should be reopening the production line for 500+ Challenger 3’s for the Ukrainian Army and 250 for the British Army. What would it actually cost to reopen?
          The Abrams is unsuitable and the Leopards dont seem to be the exclusive answer.

      • Maybe,maybe not – all design work was completed earlier this year and manufacturing of the Prototype(s) has started.

      • The WASAD, Sights & Tracking do look suspiciously vulnerable to top attack. Trust the Trophy system is fully up to this.

          • Did wonder if drones would be recognised as a threat, but anticipate Israelis of all people would soon get ‘on top’ of that.

        • All 60 Trophy systems being bought will be sort of be capable…… I’s the equivalent of Soviet conscription in WW2, one gets the Mosun, next gets the ammo clip……

          Best hope you get the Tank with the Trophy system come the big push!

          • Is it possible that’s just the first order? It seems illogical, even for the Army.
            How much are we paying for 60?

          • I suspect that Trophy will be held in reserve as part of a Theatre Entry Kit. Given that we are supposed to rotate our Brigades through in accordance with harmony guidelines, the Regiment that is getting deployed gets the Trophies.

          • Yes, I’m of that opinion too as the numbers fit. The main angst I read on here, which JC has mentioned often, and of which I can see the point, is if we deploy at Divisional scale so both Bdes, both Regs, only one with Trophy.

          • Surely, at some point, MoD will have enough loose change laying around to fully equip 148 CR3 w/ Trophy (or successor)?!? If for no other reason than as a CYA measure? 🤔

          • I think it will be more important to have Trophy ( or Ironfist) in Boxers that follow up the 60 Challengers.

          • Ideally, all would be equipped. Based on current trends, future battlefields are going to be incredibly lethal. 🤔

        • Hi Gavin, WASAD is a software driven function of the Thales sight system rather than the sight itself. It’s identical to the system fitted to AJAX.
          Cheers

    • Every combat vehicle that have an automatic gun should be able to fire 90º up.

      To fight a problem like this we need a multi approach so includes anti drone radars/IRST, infra sound for detection, helicopters and drones for anti drone mission.

    • DB, before you get too excited by the potency of these little drones….” Russian technical ingenuity is evident on the battlefield, as its engineering talent is bent to the dark arts of cyber warfare and electronic sabotage. Note how talk of wars fought largely by drones has diminished a little recently; a report this May by the Royal United Services Institute said Ukraine was losing 10,000 drone a month to crude and clever countermeasures. An army of a million robots can be disabled at a keystroke, exploiting a bug left by sloppy code.”
      The trouble with small drones is that by definition they have limited protection and tanks etc can use simple countermeasures.

      • Yes, I agree, but small suicide drones as used in Ukraine will become the norm in future conflicts. Sadly anyone with the knowledge of building and flying radio controlled aircraft can easily build one. I’d also expect terrorist cells using them more and more.

        The simplest countermeasure to these drones is a white noise jammer operating on the same command frequency. Or for a bit more money a specific coded jammer. However, that does mean you could in turn be targeted if your opponent has decent electronic surveillance gear. Which would then lead to a jammer using an active electronic array to form a narrow beam that could better target drones that has a much lower chance of being detected.

        It’s interesting you mentioned the “dark arts of cyber warfare”, as its something that is rarely mentioned in Ukraine’s war. I fully expect it to be used by both sides. Funny though, it seems the North Koreans pulled a fast one on Russia by hacking a missile manufacture.

        • Agree we are entering a period of defence and countermeasures, much of which will be software defined. Problem is whilst the political and military gerontocracy are banging on about more boats and tanks, we should be paying more attention to how to attract and retain the software/machine learning skills needed for battles to come and not dwelling on the past.

    • Presume that there have been multiple teams formed w/in NATO (and larger individual militaries) to collect and analyze the lessons learned data, recommend and implement revisions to doctrine, tactics and future equipment requirements. This is perhaps one of the few silver linings resulting from this conflict. Really hope NATO has been roused from a stupor. 🤔🤞

      • It’s not just NATO and for our part the MoD, who are looking how the Russian-Ukrainian war is progressing. Within both NATO and the MoD, there were already extant teams tasked with Russian military intelligence gathering. The war has made these teams a higher priority in making sure information is passed to them, which is then collated and passed out to the various commands and Countries.

        They will be keeping a keen eye on how the equipment and materiel given to Ukraine performs in real World operational conditions. But also how its employed and what Russia’s response to it is. You can also be sure the companies that manufacture the kit being sent to Ukraine, are being kept appraised of how its performing.

        For example Kongsberg/Raytheon’s NASAMS has been performing better than expected, having also taking out a ballistic missile. Which I believe was not an original requirement. Plus also the employment of Storm Shadow and ALD-160 MALD has proven to be highly effective, with Storm Shadow reaching 95% of its designated targets. When most people thought that Storm Shadow would stand an even chance of getting through Russian integrated air defences.

        The conflict is also proving to be an intelligence gold mine in both how Russia employs its forces and weapons. NATO are seeing how they perform in real terms rather than what is published in a brochure or gleaned from 3rd hand information.

    • I expect our army will respond to Lancet droes in a similar way to the Ukraine Army: fitting of cope cages and other warhead disruptors; use of inflatable and wooden decoys shaped like vehicles and artillery systems to confuse and divert Lancet attacks. There will surely be various systems that can jam drones. I take your point that use of Starstreak/Martlet might be expensive given that Lancet is cheap at £35k a copy – pity we don’t have something like Gepard, but Ajax might work as an anti-drone solution. [Sounds like the army needs something like the navys CIWS Phalanx/Goalkeeper]. I guess also that a lot of effort goes into searching for and neutralising enemy drone launching sites.

      • Something like a cheapish loitering munition that can home onto the command signal would be good. I’d call it Crossbow for the operation where they were hunting the V weapons. The two elements could be George and Peppard.

        • Good point. Drones are a problem for civvys too.
          Gatwick airport was plagued by occasional drone flights in Dec 2018 by ‘hobbyists’ –
          Wiki: “The RAF withdrew on 3 January 2019 (having deployed there on 19 Dec 2018) after Gatwick spent £5 million on a system to prevent attacks. During the crisis, it had been reported that the Army had been deployed and would be using the Drone Dome – an Israeli-developed counter UAS system – at Gatwick. The Ministry of Defence later confirmed that the RAF Regiment had been deployed and were using an alternative system as the Israeli one had not yet been delivered”.

      • As shown by the company, the Dutch Robin Elvira and Iris radars are designed to detect and track small drones, such as the DJI types. They also showed a Hilux type vehicle with a radar mounted on a elevated platform from the truck bed. Therefore it can mobile rather static.

        We do have something similar in the Army. Which is the counter-battery radar COBRA and MAMBA. Although not specifically designed to search for and track small drones. Their ability to track artillery shells, which have a RCS of around 0.001m2 is in the ball park for these drones. However, their signal processing probably filters the drones out, as they are pretty slow. Which would need the software modifying to enable them to track drones.

        However, both radars are pretty big and not suited for operating near the front line. Which is where radars such as the AN/TPQ-50 lightweight counter mortar radar (LCMR) comes in. This is slightly bigger than those from Robin, but can be mounted and powered from a Humvee. It can detect shells out to 10km. It is also used as part of the sensor suite for C-RAM, so it may have a surface to air tracking mode for air threats.

        To be more effective, you really need to use an upper X, Ku or preferably Ka band radars. These radars can build a better picture of the target without the clutter, whereas the lower frequency radars that Cobra and Mamba use, requires more signal processing. However, they will also detect birds pretty easily, which could confuse the system, which would need decent signal processing to differentiate between the two. Especially as they’re both relatively slow moving objects (i.e. less than 100kts). Depending on the processing power, you can use the higher frequency radar in a inverse synthetic mode, to build a photo style image of the target. The higher the frequency the better the definition. Which would make classification of the drone threat much easier. The Robin radars in particular use a number of X-band radars, though they’re not electronically steered phase arrays strangely, plus a shed load of signal processing.

        As I’ve mentioned before the Trophy’s Elta AESA radar operates in the X-band. It could easily be software modified to look for drone threats. I’m sure Israel will be monitoring what is happening in Ukraine very closely, so the drone threat to vehicles will be pretty high on their priority list at the moment. Trophy’s explosively formed fragment field will shred any drone that gets within 50m.

    • Measure vs Counter-measure is an endless cycle. In WW1 the Germans developed a rifle with bullets that could penetrate the frontal armor of a tank, a simple weapon cheap to make. The allies countered it by upping the thickness of their tanks’ frontal armor.

      There is no doubt that drone countermeasures are coming and will implement both kinetic and electronic means of defeating drones.

    • It should be interesting to see the results.

      Australia tests Boxers for C-UAS capability09 AUGUST 2023

      “Brigadier Michael Say, commander of the Australian Army’s 7th Brigade, said the service tested the Boxer’s “target acquisition systems to shoot down UASs loitering in the sky”.

      LINK

  2. The Army has not been slow to come up with ideas and has always shown creative thinking when finding solutions. These trials should result in some surprises in the coming months?

  3. Just wondering why to be honest. A UK tank squadron is 15 tanks. So the KRH’s two squadrons, that 30 tanks. (if all those tanks are available at once)

    1st Battalion the Mercian Regiment… well it’s not a Battalion, it’s 1 Infantry Regiment of up to 500. (if they are lucky enough) Within that Regiment there will be HQ Company and a Fire Support Company. So that could mean there could be up to approx 300 combat Infantry, maybe 3 companies.

    The point here is that a British Battle Group is of such a size in 2023, that frankly its about as much use as a handbrake in a Canoe. One large toe to toe slugging match against any current foe, would result in said battlegroup being deemed ineffective by the end of such a scrap.

    Now before the ‘we are one, ‘we are NATO spokespersons’ start pitching into this debate, facts are facts. This article deals with what the British Army can do in 2023.

    • Hi Tom.

      “So the KRH’s two squadrons, that 30 tanks.”

      Armoured Regiments have 3 Squadrons of Tanks, not 2, an HQ Sqn, and a “Command & Recc Sqn.”

      “1st Battalion the Mercian Regiment… well it’s not a Battalion, it’s 1 Infantry Regiment of up to 500. (if they are lucky enough) Within that Regiment there will be HQ Company and a Fire Support Company. So that could mean there could be up to approx 300 combat Infantry, maybe 3 companies.”

      Yes, it is a Battalion. The Corps of Infantry is comprised of Regiments, which comprise Battalions. The Regiment is purely an administrative formation. In the Field Army the Infantry are grouped into Battalions. The Mercian Regiment did have 3 regular Battalions after Future Army Structures as the Corps of Infantry was reorganised into large regiments, but as usual cuts arrived. Currently MERICANS has a regular and a reserve Bn.

      “The point here is that a British Battle Group is of such a size in 2023, that frankly its about as much use as a handbrake in a Canoe.”

      What size would you like a BG to be? As far as I’m aware BGs have been this size for decades. Elements of an armoured Regiment and Armoured Infantry Battalion, combined with CS and CSS assets. A Brigade could form 3 or 4 such BGs in the field.

      In this case, as it is indeed a BG and not a Bde exercise, I doubt there will even be the entire Battalion, as you mention regards HQ Coy, FS Coy, and the 3 Rifle Companies.
      19 RA probably 1 Battery of AS90, 26 RE a RE Armoured Eng Sqn with Titan, trojan, Terrier. REME will likely be from 4 REME, possibly an entire Armoured CS Company, maybe less, and the RLC and RAMC ( a Sqn from 4 CS Reg RLC and a Sqn from 2 Armoured Medical Regiment ) make this a good sized BG exercise in my view.
      Davey B’s comment is on point as in where is the enhanced protection from UAVs? No AD assets involved it seems.

      “One large toe to toe slugging match against any current foe, would result in said battlegroup being deemed ineffective by the end of such a scrap.”

      I don’t write off our training, our equipment and people quite so easily.

      • To be frank, the statement I made is factual. Taking what I said personally, only serves to cloud the issue.

        I cannot see where I ‘wrote off our training’, or equipment, or people.

        I’m sorry you don’t like the particular facts and realities of the current situation with the British Army. However, these realities have resulted in a British Army which has been mauled and savaged by cuts.

        The cuts have been made by accountants who advise the government, based purely on finance, and not what the Army really needs, in order to do its jobs properly. I say jobs as the Army is so stretched, it’s almost see-through.

        We both respect and care for our Armed Forces, however as was pointed out only last week in an article on this site, size and numbers do actually matter.

        The other issue that barely gets a mention is moral. Moral in the British Army is at an all time low. In one of the most prestigious Regiments in the army, the number of soldiers looking to leave, has gone over the 51% mark.

        Unfortunately, that is the true state of the British Army. British Soldiers are looking to express their dissatisfaction with all that’s going on, by leaving.

        • Tom, Tom. You’re talking tosh now.
          And actually, to be even more frank, no, much if it isn’t factual, which I pointed out.

          Shall I provide links? Though I cannot be bloody bothered.

          You cannot see where you wrote us off? Try reading your own words again, I’m not repeating them.

          Your “sorry I don’t like particular facts about the army”

          What, that your regiments have 2 Squadrons, when they actually have 3? That infantry battalions are not battalions, but regiments, where as I explained they’re actually both?

          I could talk you under the bloody table about facts on our army, thank you, so enough of the patronising crap, eh.

          The rest if your post on morale, cuts, and size mattering, while I’m in agreement to all, has no relevance to your 1st post where you also complained about Battle Group sizes, where again I corrected you.

          I’m sorry you’re unable to take a bit of a friendly reply on my part correcting you.
          If you post crap, expect others who might know to correct you. Many, many thousands read this site, and people in this case you, have posted supposed facts that are incorrect. So I’m happy to correct you.

          Sadly some don’t take it too well, as you’ve just done.

          • I think armoured regiments are back up to 4 squadrons. They were changed to 3 squadrons of 18 in 2010 but since seem to have reverted to 4 squadrons of 14.

          • Thanks Louis. KRH I have as Sqns A to D, one of which I think is the C&R Sqn, plus RHQ. So I must have one missing if they’re back to 4?

          • Wow… who’s talking bollocks now!
            “Talk me under the table about the Army”? Wow oh do tell you arrogant pratt!
            You know a lot more about the Army than anyone else on this site… wow bollocks again!
            Come to think of it… I’ve never noticed you mentioning moral before?
            I base my comments on what serving soldiers say to me, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

            Dude you are soo wrapped up in lambasting people who do not share, nor subscribe to your viewpoint. Your comment regarding you correcting and ‘schooling me’… wow… lines straight out of the dictators, or trolls handbook. The sheer audacity of that one line says it all.

            Your over opinionated, rude, and bullying counter claims are embarrassing to this site to be fair. The site is about exchanges of thoughts, views and opinions, and yes at times facts! Generals, (past and present) and serving officers have said that the British Army is no longer fit for purpose. That unfortunately, is a fact, horrible, but a fact non-the-less!

          • Agreed this site is about exchanging opinions and thoughts, and as most ex and serving members on this site find Danieles encyclopaedia knowledge, good manners and constructive and thoughtful posts are without doubt the highest quality on this site and second to none. His “counter claims” are not counter claims, they are factual posts containing researched information. If more posters were like Daniele we all would learn more, no matter how much time under the colours! Cheers.

          • Crikey…..right, lets put this sillyness to bed.

            “You know a lot more about the Army than anyone else on this site…”
            Nope, never said that, cut and paste it. Go on. I said I know more than you ( Based on your first posts basic inaccuracies )
            I’m confident in my knowledge. Confidence is not arrogance.

            Some are clearly intimidated by knowledge. Why? Why not just learn? I do, every day, from the real experts here.

            “Come to think of it… I’ve never noticed you mentioning moral before?”

            Neither did you, in your first post, which I’d replied too which set you off on this defiant tirade.

            The points you made which I replied to were –

            ““So the KRH’s two squadrons, that 30 tanks.”
            “1st Battalion the Mercian Regiment… well it’s not a Battalion, it’s 1 Infantry Regiment”
            “British Battle Group is of such a size in 2023”

            To which I replied, the morale bit in my second post replying to your rant you might have seen I actually agreed with you.

            “I base my comments on what serving soldiers say to me, so stick that in your pipe and smoke it!”

            Good for you. Do they also think Battalions are regiments too?

            What you’ve basically done here is gone off on one, because of what looks to be your own ego, that did not like being corrected.

            And this…

            “you arrogant pratt!”

            Strange then that over on the training thread, and many others, when I have myself posted something that is incorrect ,and been corrected myself in a reply by Dern, I did not throw my toys out of the pram like you’ve done, but replied “thank you”

            Go on…look at it.

            Look at my history…I say thank you, I have politeness, the only arrogance is on your part.

            Now what has happened you’ve taken umbrage at my initial reply, and gone full on defiant, you could have said “thanks for that Dan” or whatever, but oh no.

            Let me copy and paste those comments here –

            “To be frank, the statement I made is factual.”
            “Taking what I said personally, only serves to cloud the issue.”

            Nothing personal about it, I was talking of Battalions, Tank Regiment sizes and Battlegroups, YOU are the one taking it personally by including that in your reply, rather than addressing the points I made.

            “Dude you are soo wrapped up in lambasting people who do not share, nor subscribe to your viewpoint.”

            Nope, just discussing military stuff. Why not open your eyes and see on countless articles over countless years how many comments there are debating defence issues and people putting differing views and data forward?

            “‘schooling me”

            Nowhere did I say that word, again, you’re putting words in my mouth. This is a free site to exchange info and views, and I expressed mine on what you said. The issue is how YOU reacted.

            “Your over opinionated, rude, and bullying counter claims are embarrassing to this site to be fair.”

            Fine. Complain to George Alison so he can read this and judge if I’m being rude. Strange then that others who have chipped in on this sorry exchange comment on how polite and well mannered I am. Over many years.

            So who is wrong?

            You’re talking nonsense, your ego is hurt and your flying off on one ignoring the original points that you made that prompted me to reply to you in the first place.

            “Rude” Where have I sworn apart from saying “bloody” in my second post to you as I was frustrated by your defiant, pig headed reply to me rather than addressing my points?

            “Bullying.” You’re in a fantasy world, Tom, I bully no one. I was bullied in my own life once, I know the feeling. You’re just using that word to throw at me because you could not answer my replies to you in a civil manner. Let me remind you what you replied to me with…

            ““To be frank, the statement I made is factual.”
            “Taking what I said personally, only serves to cloud the issue.”
            “I cannot see where I ‘wrote off our training’, or equipment, or people.”
            “I’m sorry you don’t like the particular facts and realities of the current situation with the British Army”

            All of which had nothing WHATSOEVER to do with Battlegroup sizes, Regiments sizes, or whether Battalions are actually Regiments.

            You could have said “thanks Dan” or words to that effect, or even ignored me altogether.

            Instead, this endless tirade.

            I note also that you’ve not replied, apart from one defiant post, to Airborne, to BobA, to Graham, and to Dern, all serving or ex army who had no issue with my comments on Battlegroups or Regiments, yet all commented on the inaccuracies your initial post, which I’d replied to.

            Why not direct your spleen and hurt ego at them?
            No? Course not, they did not “correct you” or, as your bruised ego calls it “schooled” you.

            And that is the issue, Tom.

            You. No one else.

            I thought long and hard about replying, and had intended to leave it, but such is the unhinged venomous spite you’re coming out with I thought I would, despite Derns attempts to calm you down.

        • Tom, British Infantry BGs have always had 3 manoeuvre sub units since we’ve been using BGs. Normally, we task organise by combining a tank Sqn with two Rifle Coys. The BG HQ comes from either an infantry Bn or the Armd regiment.

          Sometimes we also break Fsp Coy down to support the Rifle Coys directly, sometimes we group them to mass the effect.

          It’s literally how it is designed to work – so yes you’ve technically stated fact, but to use it to say something about the state of the Army just belies a massive lack of knowledge.

          Especially as you obviously didn’t know from your statement that ‘combat infantry’ doesn’t include Fsp / HQ Coy. They are all combat infantry, some just happen to be specialists.

        • If you’re going to lecture people about the British Army, I suggest you make sure you get the difference between a British Battalion and a British Regiment correct.

          • Mate, could you please have a look at the discussion I’m having with Cripes over on the other thread “Where have the Challengers gone?” Any corrections you may have, as I’m probably out of date with some of it. Thanks.

            2nd post re this, as first had a link to UKDJ and got moderated!

          • I’ll have a look, but I’ve just come back from a long walk after a very bad nights sleep (as you can probably tell by my 3am posting) so my eyes are a bit glazed over, might take a bit of time.

          • Tom, you’re coming across as an arrogant piece of utter sh*t, and you’ve decided to pick a fight with one of the most mild mannered, polite and informed people on this site (Daniele). You got on your high horse and tried to lecture him, sit the fuck down and chill out.

      • Hi Daniele. Good example would be the Rifles Regiment – 7 Battalions ( 4 Regular, 3 Reservist, including a Ranger Battalion ) Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that is still the situation.

        • Morning John.
          Yes, the Rifles is a good example, several antecedent single Battalion regiments amalgamated.
          Isn’t the Rifles 5 regular? Or did one get cut…
          I recall when FAS merged many of the existing single Bn regiments the army’s idea was that soldiers could transfer between individual Battalions of a regiment to develop different skills, a Reg might have a Bn in AI role on Warrior, a Bn of LI, and so on.

          No idea if that actually happens, Dern and other army chaps will know more than me.

          • 1 Rifles – Light Mechanised Regular
            2 Rifles – Light Role Regular
            3 Rifles – SFA Regular
            5 Rifles – Armoured Regular
            6 Rifles – Light Role Reserve
            7 Rifles – Armoured Reserve
            8 Rifles – Light Role Reserve

            4 Ranger is not part of the Rifles, though it recruits from the Rifles so a lot of it’s personnel are Ex-Rifles. Personnel do go between Battalions within a regiment, or more widely the division (as in Admin division not field division), but it’s usually more at the SNCO and Officer level when the pids get scarcer, and less about “gaining different skills” and more about matching qualifications to PIDs.

          • Thanks for that. That Rifles list tallies with what I have, but for 4 Ranger….which I have as being 4 Rifles! 🙄😆

            Looking at it….I think I can see where I’ve gone wrong, as 4 Rifles was part of the SIG previously.
            So I’m lost…what was the previous ID of 4 Ranger???

          • 4 Ranger was indeed (mostly) 4 Rifles during the SpecInf days, you’re not wrong about that. But when ASOB was stood up they ceased being part of the Rifles.

            There are links of course, a lot of the rank and file are the old Riflemen still in 4 Ranger. And Ranger Btn’s are theoretically aligned with the Infantry Divisions so 4 Ranger does recruit mainly from the Rifles, but that’s more theory than practice, especially since Ranger selection is open to all arms.

          • Afternoon Daniele. Just been having a look on the MOD Army website. I think looking at the details – 4 Rangers Special operations land unit seems to be treated separately from the Rifles Regiment now. Sorry about that, my bad.. So that seems to leave the other 4 Reg and 3 Reserve Battalions. But I stand corrected if I’m wrong about those details. Thank you for the other details you mention there..

    • We don’t know the structure of the KRH BG in this article ie whether they have 2 or 3 squadrons in its Orbat etc. A BG can number 600 – 1,000 troops or more – the BG on Op CABRIT in Estonia includes a core of 800 British soldiers and many hundreds from other countries. A BG can include organic recce, tank squadrons, infantry companies, fire sp coy, sappers, field gunners, AD gunners, RMP, Int, loggies, second line REME etc etc

      A BG is no small thing. Of course our warfighting div can configure many BGs. We would not ordinarily intend to send a single BG on the offensive up against an enemy that is as numerous or superior in numbers. For a significant warfighting op, we would send at least a brigade as our national contribution to an allied operation.

      Are you saying that a British BG is less effective than a Russian or US or French BG? That somehow the British BG is smaller and less effective than other nation’s BGs?

      • Indeed, we don’t. The reason I based my own guestimate in this instance was in their wording –
        ““The King’s Royal Hussars Battle Group collective training package with elements from”
        Which to me implied that the majority was made up from the KRH, who also of course provided the BGHQ based on their own RHQ, and the “elements”, thus smaller units, from the attached arms and services.

        For all we know there was but a single Armoured Squadron. Who knows, they don’t give out much.

        • I too have always taken it that the majority of manouevre sub-units come from the named BG who provide the BG HQ and the framework ie HQ Coy (including LAD) etc etc.

    • Your understanding of the British Infantry formations seems to be limited Tom, as Regiments can be made up of Battalions, could be one, two, three or four. And all Infantry soldiers in said Battalions are combat Infantry, including Support Company, Sigs, pioneers etc. There are Atts and Dets, medics, REME, AGC etc who have their own specialist role within Battalion, these people aren’t combat Infantry.

      Also, we talking Armoured about Infantry, numbers vary and certainly in an Armoured Infantry Coy do you include the Warrior crew as combat Infantry, or anything else/ Light role Battalions, numbers and roles can differ. Also BGs have always been pretty much the same size, operating with the rule of three, 1 Sqn 2 Rifle Coys and visa versa. BGs can be tailored to suit the tasks and are not set in stone. Cheers.

  4. Not remotely close to being ready for the modern battlefield. Where’s the drone defence is the first question? Nothing but big fat tempting targets as things stand today and soundbites don’t change that.

    • Do you expect the MoD press Office to tell us everything about how the British Army will counter new threats? OPSEC!

  6. The question is are they really focusing on operating in an area saturated with small drones..as the battlefield of the future seems to be many many small expendable drones…are soldiers going to have to wander around with personal jammers… are we going to see a change in weapon systems…after all modern weapons are generally designed to put a very large amount of kinetic and or chemical energy into a small area..but your little Micro drones etc don’t need a lot of energy delivered…but they are very small agile so energy spread over a wider area is needed…( automatic shotgun turret anyone..what’s good for a 🦆 would be good for a drone ?).

    • It’s certainly a mind boggling subject Jonathan, who’s to say in the future we won’t see anti personal suicide drones the size of a winged pencil, launching in their thousands, on a mission to kill and maim….

      I certainly wouldn’t want to be an infantryman in 2030!

      • John, an infantryman of 500 years ago was targeted with arrows, then with bullets and artillery fire. What does it matter what the enemy’s weapons amount to. They will all kill or maim you.

        • Arrows were not fired from 50km distance. That is a different ballpark. Imagine what John Clark says a pencil drone to kill infantry.

    • How about a net projected from a “gun” to foul the mechanism?
      What worries me is, where are our versions of all these Drones? Beyond Switchblade?

    • Another mindless comment. Repeat. Would you care to state what the largest expeditionary force deployed by the U.K. that included tanks, since the 2WW was? What exactly do you think we do with tanks, send them out on their own.

  8. Surely the point is, that the lack of Defence Spending has hampered the entire Armed Forces from having, not only enough modern equipment, or personnel.
    The Government spent or wasted immense amount of money during the Covid period and so far have done little in chasing the that wasted money, much of which would do much in providing the funding for AA guns or new drones, indeed anti drone equipment, which Ukraine has shown is a definite must.
    Artillery and Artillery systems must receive vast improvement and investment over the next few years too.
    Above all, the number of 148 Challenger 3 tanks is an absolute disgrace.

    • The government didn’t waste money during covid, they gave away huge amounts to companies started by their mates that had no ability to provide what was offered. Their mates got richer at all of our expense. Job well and truly accomplished perfectly from the government’s perspective. No waste there 😡

      • Exactly, post-Brexit, post-Covid UK is looking very grim. As the UK looks inwards, it’s military will decline, it’s position on the world stage will diminish, the NHS will become privatised, the top 5-10% elite will become very rich. The rest of the population will not own homes, just rent and live in state owned accommodation. One thing is for sure, if the vote happened again, post the Ukraine war, it would be an absolutely overwhelming vote to remain in the EU. Now going back to tanks. The Ukraine teaches us they are obsolete due to drones. For example 50% approx. of Leopards supplied are now destroyed?

        • Not exactly sure “..post the Ukraine War…” how a Socio-Political trading block would make us safer from Mother Russia. In absolute fact we were able to supply offensive weapons (NLAW) first to Ukraine before any EU ‘country’ (region). Something as an EU member, in consensus, that we would not have been able to do. By the way, before it’s mentioned, it wasn’t the EU that preserved us from a Warsaw Pact offensive it was the military doctrine, under N.A.T.O, of M.A.D (‘Mutual Assured Destruction’.

        • According to the oryxspioenkop online database where equipment loses are listed if there is supporting photographic evidence:

          Leopard 2A4: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged.

          Leopard 2A6: 2 destroyed, 4 damaged, 2 abandoned.

          There will also be some out of service with mechanical or electrical issues and some damaged recovered tanks in the above figures.

          Given we don’t know how many Leopards have actually been delivered, a percentage loss rate is unknown to us!

          • How? More BMPs, trucks, fuel tankers, T series tanks, Russian OS etc have been destroyed than any western platforms. Do stop trolling in desperation, it makes you look even sadder than normal.

        • Yaaaaaaawn so how is it in your country? Oh sorry you never tell anyone as you’re either a full time troll of an angry little European who is gutted we have left the EU, as what else can explain your jealous hatred! And as for tanks, you have been informed many times from SMEs, you are very wrong and have no experience in such matters!

          • I know, I feel for you, Brexit was just a miscalculation by Mr Cameron. Everybody listened to Mr Farage. Now everybody regrets it, but nevermind “old china”, at least you still have Scotland and 2 Carriers. MBTs are just sitting ducks.

          • “MBTs are just sitting ducks”

            But not as sitting as the Russian ones.

            “Now everybody regrets it”

            No, actually.

          • Main battle tanks do not have the same effect as they used to. It would appear that they are all vulnerable from top down attacks by simple drones, either Russian or Western. Drones can give vision above the battlefield, are inexpensive, lightweight, can bel lethal. How can you defend a 60ton lump steel on tracks against such a threat.

          • Oh dear, the whole Brexit debate has left you very sour, angry and maybe a little scared, very much like your posts and replies, getting vexed. It’s ok, you’re not from the UK so it doesn’t affect you! And “everybody” regrets it, so every single person regrets it? please provide a link to verify your claim. And you still know nothing about tank warfare.

          • I live on the Faroh Isles. Come from Canada, family from England on 1 side, Denmark on the other. Partner is Ukrainian.

          • Really I had you down as being a scrawny Ruskfascist sitting in the basement of the Kremlin or FSB building with a handler standing behind you telling you exactly what to write. Faroe islands. Nice place tell us something about your”life” on the Faroe islands. I’ve visited the islands 6 times before so do have a little bit of knowledge on this subject matter.

          • That’s fortunate then, as so do I! My partner is also Ukrainian and I have mixed Danish and Canadian heritage. What a coincidence eh. I can see why you are so vexed about Brexit, but still it’s ok, don’t be scared, and you, like me must be annoyed with the SNP and it’s reduced ferry service.

          • Oh and you have spelt your home Island incorrectly. Oops. But at least you verify your not from the UK, so we understand your aggression and fear in regard to Brexit, but I’m sure Europe can fight through and make a go of your future without us. Don’t be scared, I’m sure it will be ok for you.

      • and a lot of ‘working class’ scrotes created a lot of imaginary companies that did nowt and took money as well…but to many of the great unwashed they are lauded for ther ‘ingenuity’ flaunting their ill gotten lambo’s on Facebook-like some sort of perverse Robin Hood taking from the poor …and keeping it.
        Same coin diferent sides.

  9. I think we are at the point that the next gen MTB need their own CIWS to deal with drones and to an extent ATMs. A small calibre mini-gun such as the prototype XM214 on an automated mount, similar to a Phalanx configuration would give the tanks some well need air defence against flying chunks of plastic…..

  10. Wondering if we can persuade the Ukrainians to hand over some captured T-90Ms and T72BM3s for analysis. Currently, it appears the Russian tank factories are concentrating on T-90Ms, not new T-14 Armartas.

  11. Some more good news for the Polish armed forces.

    “The Polish 18th Mechanised Division is based on the US model, Polish Minister of National Defence Mariusz Błaszczak said on 5 August during a visit to Siedlce, eastern Poland, where the formation is headquartered.

    Błaszczak said the division already has M1A1 Abrams tanks and expects it to receive Chunmoo multiple rocket launchers (MRLs) with a range of up to 300 km “soon”. The 18th Mechanised Division’s 18th Artillery Regiment, which will receive the MRLs, will be expanded into a brigade, he added.

    Błaszczak and Son Jae-il, president and CEO of Hanwha Defense, signed a framework contract for 288 K239 Chunmoo MRLs on 19 October 2022.

    Poland received its first company of 14 M1A1 tanks for the 18th Mechanised Division’s 1st Warsaw Armoured Brigade on 28 June, to be followed by two more companies later in 2023 and a second battalion in 2024.

    Błaszczak said the 18th Mechanised Division is important for the security of Poland and of NATO’s eastern flank.”

    LINK

  12. No one simple answer to solve the problem!

    “SMD SYMPOSIUM — The US Army has discovered a new obstacle in its quest to use high-energy lasers to defend soldiers and installations against the growing threat of drones: some of the systems have proved difficult to maintain in remote locations.

    “Lasers are complicated. This is not a Humvee that’s sitting in the motor pool,” Lt. Gen. Daniel Karbler, the head of US Army Space and Missile Defense Command and Joint Functional Component Command for Integrated Missile Defense, told reporters here in Huntsville, Ala. “Many of the some of the main [laser] components… you’re not going to have a supply room or maintenance office full of repair parts. Those are going to be ones that are going to have to be built out.”

    LINK

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here