In a recent disclosure to the House of Commons, James Cartlidge, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, revealed that more than half of the vehicles procured for the British Army since 2010 have been manufactured in the United Kingdom.
The disclosure came in response to a written question from John Hayes, the Conservative MP for South Holland and The Deepings, who asked about the proportion of vehicles procured for the British Army that have been manufactured in the UK since 2010, and what proportion has been imported.
According to the Ministry of Defence, the vehicles procured since 2010 that were built in the UK include:
- Foxhound: 400
- Coyote: 17
- Jackal: 195
- Terrier: 60
- Quad bikes: 2
- Panama: 23
- JCB Excavator: 17
- Ajax: 59
- Ares: 41
- Argus: 16
- Atlas: 18
- Apollo: 20
- Athena: 26
- Wedgewood: 195
The imported vehicles procured in the same period include:
- Buffalo Mk1: 12
- Buffalo Mk2: 5
- Abacot: 10
- Warthog: 100
- Talon: 18
- Mastiff: 193
- Ridgeback: 21
- Wolfhound: 54
- Boxer: 4 (currently being used in trials by the Army)
- Gasket: 177
- CAV: 237
Notably, four imported Boxer vehicles are currently being used in trials by the Army.
This release of data demonstrates a significant reliance on domestic manufacturers for the British Army’s vehicular needs. In short, 57% of the vehicles procured for the British Army since 2010 have been manufactured in the UK.
How many of the Ajax, Ares,Argus and so on were made in Spain but finnished off in UK ???
Interestingly if it had not been for the ‘out of area’ Op Herrick in Afghanistan and the resulting requirement for PM vehicles sourced under the UOR procedure from the USA, then the %age of vehicles being British-made would have been higher.
A pity that the UK cannot make even more of the vehicles listed as imports – Gasket is an EOD command and control vehicle based on a German design (Mercedes Benz Atego).
It’s more nuanced than this list suggests. Whilst the base platforms for something like the Gasket vehicles are based on COTS products from abroad (why wouldn’t you use a quality product like that as your base platform?), the design, engineering and manufacture of their military-specific conversion is done in the UK by UK firms.
Thanks Paul. I am aware of that – many specialist top hampers and TCs are made and integrated by Marshalls of Cambridge, for example. I guess the list has to be drawn up in a simple and straightforward way.
I think it reasonable to express some disappointment that we had to go to Mercedes to buy the base vehicle when we previously had a huge number of British truck manufacturers who could build competent military vehicles.
And no Tanks 🙄
Correct – we didn’t order any new tanks or tank variants over the 20 years since Trojan and Titan were built – tragic.
Now of course after all those years, we are upgrading just 148 tanks.
When was a new tank built in Western Europe and North America? Just been upgrades of existing ones for a very long time.
Leopard 2 and Altay are MBT’s currently being produced in Western Europe,in the US the M1 are upgrades but would the M10 Booker count as a Tank ?.
I think Ariete is also being produced, or at the very least thoroughly modernized and refurbished? Also the PT-91 Twardy is still in production.
Both Ariete and PT-91 for the Polish Army finished production in 2002 ( PT-91 for Malaysia 2007-2009 ) so are not applicable in this instance,Ariete is due to start a major upgrade and the PT-91 is being cascaded to Ukraine due to new Tank deliveries 👍.
Agree Ariete is being produced for Italy and meanwhile Poland is soon going to be mass producing K2 Black Panthers….lucky buggers.
The PT-91 Twardy is probably similar to all T80/90 variants. Likely equipped with the self ejecting turret system so common in soviet/ Russian tank design.
Ariete are not being produced, the production lines are dead like Challenger ones there is not way to restart production.
That is why Italy wants to buy Leopards.
Leopard 2 is still in production though which is different to upgrading existing vehicles.
OK. But please don’t denigrate upgrades which deal with obsolescent parts, safety issues and add capability and effectiveness. CR2 has had little done in 25 years. Bowman fitted to replace Clansman radio. The APU was updated. Otherwise pretty much no upgrades for 25 years. Compare to the US upgrade history for M1A1 and M1A2 (for US forces, not export versions): “M1A1HA (Heavy Armor): Added first generation depleted uranium armor components. Some tanks were later upgraded with second generation depleted uranium armor components, and are unofficially designated M1A1HA+. M1A1HC (Heavy Common): Added new second generation depleted uranium armor components, digital engine control and… Read more »
Great post, Graham M.
Thanks Maurice. It really grips me that we do little to no upgrades on army vehicles, artillery and other equipment over their many decades of service. We used to do it regularly and frequently – twice a decade was not unusual. A read of the Chieftain history is illustrative (in Wiki or elsewhere) – every major upgrade resulted in a new Mark number and there were many. Upgrades were done by Industry or REME, depending on its nature and complexity.
Different story in the RN and RAF.
The blame for the neglect must be laid at the feet of the Army leadership and the MOD. Centurion also underwent many upgrades though, to be fair, CH2 did get the armour enhancements for the Iraq War. As I have said before the RN and RAF will get the lion’s share in the future due to the uncertainty over Chinese military intentions. Both services require considerable investment to achieve meaningful operability in the Far East. As for the Army’s role in this theatre, one can envisage small but well-equipped quickly deployable light infantry and not heavy armour. As for Russia… Read more »
Hi Maurice, I pulled out Chieftain as an example of a tank that had many upgrades – I was not suggesting that it was the only tank in British service to have upgrades, but rather it was the last one of all those going back to 1916 to have had regular/frequent and significant upgrades. I wasn’t counting the Special-to-Theatre TES mods for CR1 or CR2 using UOR procedures and UOR money. Just the core programme stuff. My point about RN and RAF was not that they should get the lions share in future, but that they have continuously and regualarly… Read more »
Agree the army’s role will be as per outlined global rapid reaction force. So a reinforced brigade sized group.
Key point is that we cannot roule a brigade sized group without recourse to the Army Reserve and/or RM commandoes. Otherwise its a one-shot operation.
Very good point, it tells a story of not maximising what you have. I assume that the ability to upgrade would be entirely within the armies power to sort out within its budget if it so wished.
Yes of course. A single huge upgrade was very belatedly planned for Warrior (but has been cancelled) and CR2 (CR3 is really the CR2 LEP by a smarter name). Point is the upgrades should have been done incrementally roughly every 5-8 years. AS90 will not be upgraded – it will be replaced. Of course the army can do upgrades (by REME) or get them done (by Industry) – as it always used to do. REME and Industry have not gone away. As well as ring-fenced budget you need hard-charging project managers in the army and Industry, politicians who do not… Read more »
It has to be a money saving issue. As you’ve informed us many times, in your previous life and experience updating in use vehicles was standard.
It’s already a joke. An even bigger joke is that were only upgrading 148 of our tanks 😕
History shows its more important to have manufacturing capacity to ramp up, US and UK at the start of WWII had very little military manufacturing capacity, US had something like 300 tanks in 1939. What they did have was industrial base which switch to military manufacturing overnight. So the fact we import £49b in domestic and commercial vehicles is far more worrying. UK population selecting UK made vehicles would massive increase our industrial base and therefore our ability to switch to manufacture military equipment.
Yes indeed very true.
The UK Government has had scant regard for the UK’s heavy armour for at least the last thirty years and letting MBT manufacturing close down is proof of its disregard. Too much daft debate was allowed to influence the development of the MBT in Britain over the last twenty+ years. Sadly, too many people were persuaded by the argument tanks were obsolete. Even now when a reluctance to upgrade CH2 was approved, just short of 150 vehicles will actually be modernised. Pictures of endless Russian MBT losses do not strengthen the need for considerably more gun tanks as their vulnerability… Read more »
Re production that was the same as the US pre WW2 they had zero tank production. Germany was producing tanks but due to its Socialist command economy was making them inefficiently. Within a year both UK and US were outstripping Germany in tank production because they had efficient manufacturing. I’m not concerned we don’t have military production I’m concerned we don’t have a base to switch to military production. But that base needs customers and that’s the public. We’d rather support other countries manufacturing base than our own.
Would there be time to switch civilian industry to making military vehicles and armaments? We started re-arming in 1934/35 and only just ‘got there’ by late 1939…and military equipment today is so much more complex.
We also had an economy that really wasn’t geared towards building armoured vehicles. America had a lot of truck production that easily switched over, we where making steam trains, so unless you wanted tanks with steam engines, a lot of expertise was missing (which is why you got things like Tanks being powered by London Bus engines, or upgrading the liberty engine from WWI until production could be spared on Merlin engines from the RAF. Then there was the whole issue with the “leaving a load of equipment on the continent” which meant a lot of catching up and having… Read more »
Well right now we don’t have the individual base so tge question isn’t relevant. Whilst military equipment is more complex so is civilian kit. Even if we had tank manufacturing today if it can’t keep pace with losses your going to loose. Germany couldn’t replace its losses from Poland because it wouldn’t embrace modern manufacturing techniques. We will inevitably turn to civilian sector to increase capacity so having token tank production now will not win a war. Its not that we just got there in 1939 sustainment was the biggest factor and that came from civilian production facilities turning their… Read more »
Good points. My point about rearming from 1934/35 was that we just recognised the possibility of Hitler starting a war on the Continent in time. I am not sure anyone in the UK has recognised and reacted to Putin in the same way; we are not rearming the army and RAF even in a small way despite his invasion of Ukraine. Perhaps that is because the existence of NATO means that Putin is prevented from waging war against European NATO nations. Agree that token tank production capability now will not win a war. But won’t having near-zero tank production capability… Read more »
Very sound reasoning. We bought 386 CR2s after the Cold War had ended, as that was the number deemed necessary for our army’s role in the post Cold War world. The Threat-driven (rather than cost-driven) SDR of 1997/98 by a Labour government did not conclude that 386 was too high a number – but successive Conservative governments have unreasonably cut the size of the army, which has reduced tank numbers. 148 means only two tank regiments – not enough to convince the Americans that we have a true armoured division in 3 Div. Would it be enough to convince our… Read more »
Im sure we have discussed this before Graham but the drawdown of CR2 numbers started around 2004-2010 under Labour,the fleet had already been reduced by the time the Coalition Govt took over.
Paul, I am sure you are not right. Labour in SDSR 97/98 reallocated but did not reduce the 386 tanks – RAC reorg’d from eight T38 regts to six T58 regts.
Next review to impact on RAC was Cameron’s 2010 SDSR which cut CR2s by c.40% and took them from 386 to 227, which has been the declared active list number ever since, until we gifted 14 tanks to Ukraine earlier this year.
Your figures are nearly correct – SDR2010 did propose a 40% reduction in the active CR2 Fleet to the 227 we are familiar with,but if you reverse the numbers a 40% increase of 227 doesn’t get you to 386,more like 318.Like i have said before a sizable chunk of the fleet was withdrawn/scrapped before 2010 which has been pointed out before.
Hi Paul,
SDR2010 did not propose a 40% reduction in CR2s – it mandated a cut of about 40%.
A cut of 41.19% on a fleet of 386 reduces the fleet by 159 tanks and so takes it down to 227 tanks.
41.19% is about 40%.
It was SDR2010 alone that took the fleet from 386 to 227 tanks.
Indeed that is what we had at beginning of the war, all manner of companies were able to adapt to war production even as the prime industries were seriously compromised. Spitfires were even built in local garages & whole Lancaster factories built & concealed under ‘fields’. Subsequently production went up even as original production lines were damaged. If claims today are correct Ukraine is managing to pull off something similar despite the onslaught. How well Britain could do it again is less certain as you say, do we retain the skills and flexibility to even produce mass drone production? We… Read more »
UK does not have currently industry to build a 120mm tank gun or an artillery gun(155mm)
Daft question but 195 Wedgewood ? I thought they were based on a German truck and 195 ??
I had to google the Wedgwood vehicle. It is an EOD/ECM specialist vehicle being replaced by GASKET. 195 seems high. This link talks about 120 vehs, which still seems high!
https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/uk-ministry-of-defence-receives-first-10-eod-and-ecm-specialist-vehicles-from-marshall-land-systems/
One has to remember that 11 RLC is widely dispersed around the UK for the EOD/ECM role. Squadrons are detached from RHQ at Didcot and then Troops detached from the regional Squadrons.
To me that many vehicles sounds like it has been properly, correctly, resourced.
German truck – yes, so that makes it an import. Pity we can’t make trucks now! Marshalls of Cambridge have always done the ‘fitting out’ to turn a standard truck into a specialist military vehicle.
We still have the capability, DAF knock out 15,000 vehicles a year.
Perhaps I should be less flippant. I meant trucks that the army actually buy nowadays. [I certainly know that the army bought Leyland Daf 4 tonners many moons ago].
What no Tanks 🙄
An interesting list, if only for the fact it lists what Ajax variants have been completed so far.
I like the 2 quad bikes. Also interesting that CAV just sits there as it’s own nebulous category. 😛
Yes, I noted the 2 bikes?
CAV, I did not know what that was. A Google shows a LR type made into a LPV? Who uses it?
CAV in this context is short for Civilian Armoured Vehicle. Typically a Toyota, Nissan, or Ford that’s had armour applied to it while retaining the look of a civilian SUV. But it’s really a family of vehicles, rather than any specific singe vehicle which is why I find it interesting that it’s just a single category rather than being broken down by chassis.
Given the description of an armoured vehicle that’s meant to look like a civilian vehicle I’m sure I don’t need to point out the primary users.
Right, cheers. The truth started to dawn early on there reading your 1st sentences on Nissans and Toyota’s!
Interesting, that term had passed me by.
I’ve seen vids from Syria and Qual I Junghi ( spelling? ) in Afghanistan where those types were filmed in use.
Assume lumping the types into one CAV category is deliberate to not reveal too much detail on current fav model.
Were those vehicles ‘technicals’ or CAVs?
Ah, now that is beyond me mate. I know the term “technical” but differentiating between the two from a few seconds of video?
Hi Daniele, I guess you know that a technical is made by a couple of rebels who start with a 20 year old rusty, pickup truck, often a Toyota, and add on a HMG to the rear and sometimes a homemade shield for the machine gunner. They may put some sandbags on the floor. It costs about a tenner to make. A CAV is made by a western specialist factory who take a production car, usually a luxury limo, and armour plate it to within an inch of its life, add bullet proof windows, often its own oxygen system, sophisticated… Read more »
I do. Well whatever they were, as you don’t get much time to view them, there were 4 at Qual I Junghi, white in colour with SBS driving them. The German film crew incorrectly called them SAS. They looked pretty “clean ” to my untrained eye.
The ones I saw In Libya and Syria looked more like the old Pinkies, desert cam and .50s and GPMGs all over and obviously military vehicles.
SF use Bushmasters too but they’re something else entirely.
I had some familiarity with the Passat GL5 fastback used in Northern Ireland many years ago, armoured doors, MP5 door pockets
(an interesting adaptation with an actual VAG part number), interesting, if rather heavy cars..
Ah, for use by the Det, or 14, or JCU (NI), or the JSG.
Fascinatingly, on GE, one can still see the space where they leave these vehicles at a certain location when not in use for the fast driving training, using these old cars acquired from the police.
So clearly the requirement is still there.
A bit before my time that XD
All full of Chinese microchips and Indian steel.
Does Panama count as a vehicle as in, we are building 40 new hospitals? Which, clearly, we are not?
Google images and Wedgewood is based on a Merc Benz chassis and cab
Are the Ajax hulls not built in Spain?
And when will Labour grow a pair and call out this insidious mis-use of information?
Now, could someone attribute the spend on the vehicle i.e. not the gizmo fitted kit.
Ajax hulls are built in Spain but so what? Many automotive manufacturers source even quite large parts from overseas – quite a lot of a Rolls-Royce car is made in Germany but the whole car is built at their Sussex factory.
The Ajax vehicle is built in Wales.
Ajax doesn’t have a great deal of UK content- German built engines an d gearboxes,CTA40 manufactured in France and even the turrets for CTA40 subcontracted to Rheinmetall by LMUK.. I understand that the MTU engines for UK Boxers will be manufactured by Rolls Royce in UK, so some increase in UK sourced content.
From Wiki: “Eighty percent of the vehicle manufacture will be completed in the UK, with 70% of the supply chain companies UK-based.The Ajax family project supports 400 jobs at General Dynamics UK’s two facilities at Merthyr Tydfil and Oakdale in South Wales, and an estimated further 4,000 jobs in the British supply chain….75% of the turret and CTAS work is done in the UK.”
I am happy with that. Many complex platforms (including F-35B) have a great deal of bought-in items.
Because we are being sold stats that are questionable and Labour should be gripping this.
Unfortunately, Labour has all the grip of a tadpole.
Is that before or after the tadpole grows arms?
It wouldn’t matter, they’re are a shower of shoite at the moment and ‘really must do better’ is about 10% of how much they must improve.
Why do you think it will be any better with Labour, we will become a partner in EU defence projects manufacturing parts or subsystems so really no difference to today where we partner on the A400, Typhoon and the MRTT. Quoting Labour below.
Britain will need to become a partner – not a part – of the EU drive for greater d
defence cooperation
Labour won’t call it out because the end result is no different.
You are rather missing my point.
The Cons spin dits without facts or mis-direct the facts.
ULEZ was classic Con misdirection that lost Labour a seat because Labour didn’t have the gumption to call it, Bluffer and Steve Barclay (?) out for implementing it and then doubling down on it before settling the TfL lending crises.
They’re being equally ineffectual on Defence, which grips my shit.
Not missing the point both sides spin the facts. Recent labor span that Shell made 40b in profit. Which they did but not from the UK, but reading the spin you think 40b was made from UK customers there’s many more examples . Both side do it. Personally I rate both parties unelectable
where is the other half manufactured?
As against the general public who almost entirely buy foreign made vehicles. UK import a staggering £49b of vehicle every year, most have a UK made equivalent from factories like Nissan, Mini Jaguar etc.
Careful quoting mini. They are quietly moving everything over to China.
I thought they had decided to invest in UK plant
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64902153
Is carving the number up by quantity an relevant measure? Imagine if we’d bought 10,000 quad bikes made in the UK the we’d have 95% UK manufactured. But hardly relevant or anything to cheer about. Better measure would be things like technology, contribution to industrial base, % high value UK content of foreign purchases etc rather than just volumes.
Take out all the “Ajax” based variants which aren’t in service, then add in a couple of thousand MAN Trucks (Cab&Chassis built in Austria with Loadbeds, Top Hampers made in UK) and you will see that the figure is not quite as accurate as the Minister stated. 😀
Love the old Bedfords 🇬🇧
Excessive engine noise from under powered engines and no tipping cab, chassis was bomb proof !
100%
The list covers the period from 2010. Weren’t all the MAN SV trucks built several years before that? The £1.1 billion order for 5,165 vehicles and 69 recovery trailers, was placed on 31 March 2005.
They were built in the UK by MAN Truck & Bus UK Ltd as preferred bidder. It makes no difference if major parts were subcontracted to MAN in Germany; that is common in the automotive industry – and permits a faster build.
First delivers in mid 2007, with the last deliveries in spring 2013. Final order was for just over 7000. As for being built in the UK by MAN, that is not the case. As I said before, the Recovery vehicles had Top Hampers, designed by EKA fitted by Terex in Glasgow, Fluid Transfer built the tankers with tanks from South Africa, and Marshall’s fitted the load beds, built in their UK facility with winches from ROTZLER in Germany, and Cranes from HIAB, built in Europe. The EPLS were assembled in Vienna with top hampers from HIAB in Sweden. MAN UK… Read more »
Thanks Mark. The confusion was that MoD signed the contract with MAN UK.
OF the Topic a little does anyone know what happened to all the USA M60s see none been offered to Ukraine .Would of thought uncle Sam would of many in in storage . 🤔
The RAF bought a shed load of them when the US Army replaced them with M240s. The M60s are used by Chinooks, predominantly fitted to the ramp, where they normally have M134 miniguns fitted to the starboard door and port escape hatch. Chinooks do have M60s sometimes fitted to these positions. They are not as effective as supressing enemy incoming as the minigun.
Weirdly the GPMG was never integrated on to the Chinook. Whereas, the US Army have integrated both the M240 and M249 along with the M134 on to their Chinook fleet.
I think Andrew was referring to the M60 Tank 🤔.
Yes, that was my take too! 😆
👍
Bugger!
The US army probably has kept the M60 in reserve. National guard units and deep storage. Likely held as a war reserve. Probably a few thousand still in the USA somewhere.
Tanks…not machine guns.
Thanks mate
👍
Good answer
VERY well presented
But, wrong.
M60 tanks is my take on the question.
Duh!
? 🤔
I know, I hadn’t had a coffee yet!
No worries 🍺
I assume you mean the M60 tank? Although still in service with several countries, the US kept some for national guard units and others for weapon and other testing, but they don’t appear to have many left. They do have a large fleet of Abrams having built over 10000. NG units now equipped with Abrams. Ex marine corps units add further to the stockpile available for refurbishment and upgrade.
Cheers🍺
Gasket (a 4×4 Mercedes truck kitted out by Marshall’s) is replacing Wedgewood (a 4×2 DAF truck) – these vehicles are used for domestic EOD/CIIED roles in UK and overseas territories.
Yes, by 11 RLC.
A little off topic, I didn’t realise we didn’t sell our C1s to Jordan but gave then away!!.
Graham M is your man – im sure he will say that was not the case .
We sold the CR1s to Jordan, just as we had previously sold them Chieftains and Centurions.
Who said we gave them away?
All was handled by the Al-Hussein Project office in London run by Brig Paul Cort, who I knew very well. I was Brig Paul’s technical wingman at DLO Andover with two REME WOs. My day job was ESM for in-service Tank variants and the withdrawn-from-service CR1. I paid a liaison visit to Jordan on one occasion.
We did of course give away a small number of CR1s to museums and to units as gate guardians, including RMAS.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1999-10-27/debates/fc1b9e63-2ac8-487a-a15f-00b229a9a0be/ChallengerTanks
Jordan paid for the logistics
True. Jordan made a payment. I had not realised that Hansard had published the specifics of what their payment covered.
The reason the tanks were zero-valued on exit from service is that they were originally deemed unsaleable in the usual way.
If you did the same analysis for the RAF based purely on number of assets it would be even worse around 25% UK built. Only the Typhon is from the UK. There’s also no orders in progress for UK made aircraft.
That’s why Tempest is so crucial. We need that programme to deliver a world beating 6th gen aircraft. In large numbers for the RAF, Japan, Italy and to be a huge export success. We can live in hope. Occasionally, just occasionally the UK does deliver something outstanding.
The last fast jet combat aircraft designed and built in the UK was the Harrier!
The military aerospace industry is much stronger than the AFV industry. 10-15% of every single F35 30% of every single Gripen 40% of every single Typhoon Final assembly of 268 Typhoons Every single Merlin helicopter (aside from the Italian airframes)- recent Polish order Wings for A400M Rolls Royce is in the top 3 aero engine manufacturers. Tempest in development Aeralis in development NMH to be UK built whichever aircraft is chosen Loyal Wingman drones in development by BAE Vixen, Proteus and Vampire in development for the RN 3 tonne Leonardo UK unmanned helicopter in development. Zephyr and Phasa 35 UAV’s… Read more »
I’ve seen Lukashenko the Belorusian president has gone on record stating he is struggling to stop the Wagner PMC from attacking Poland.
That’s an easy one to respond too.
Don’t stop them. Let them try. I’m sure they’d last less than a couple of days against the Polish army.
NATO troops, trust me, are itching to be let loose against Wagner and their rapist, looting, murdering scum bag rag tag supporting Russian army.
Give us an excuse to enact article 5….please!
Why would the quite small Wagner Group attack Poland? Fake news?
The hammer would be dropped so hard and so fast on Wagner by the Poles, they wouldn’t know what hit them, what was left would be limping back over the boarder smoldering and looking like the result of a Tom and Jerry cartoon Acme explosives accident!💥💥