The Ministry of Defence has again frozen training on the Army’s troubled Ajax reconnaissance vehicle after 30 soldiers reported noise and vibration symptoms during an exercise, prompting a new safety investigation only days after the fleet was formally declared to have reached Initial Operating Capability.

In a written statement to Parliament, Defence Readiness and Industry minister Luke Pollard said he was updating MPs on the Armoured Cavalry Programme “commonly known as Ajax,” and confirmed that although IOC had been reached, “a recent training exercise has raised concerns regarding the safety of the vehicles.”

Pollard stressed repeatedly that he had demanded direct assurances before signing off on progress. “As safety is my top priority, prior to IOC I asked for and was given assurances in writing by senior Ministry of Defence personnel that the system was safe,” he told the House.

Those assurances were tested on 22 November, when “around 30 Service personnel operating Ajax reported noise and vibration symptoms during a training exercise.” According to Pollard, the chain of command reacted immediately. “The exercise was stopped at once in line with our safety protocols and those affected received full medical care and attention, and continue to be monitored,” he said. He added that “there have not been any hospitalisations and none of the symptoms are life threatening.”

Pollard has now directed a full pause on training. “The safety of our Service personnel remains a top priority for the MOD,” he wrote. “As such, and out of an abundance of caution, I have directed a pause on use of Ajax for training and exercising, while a safety investigation is carried out.”

He used the incident to argue that the safety reforms introduced after earlier Ajax controversies were working as intended. “The rapid escalation of medical concerns, and halting the exercise immediately, demonstrates both the professionalism of our people, and an improved safety culture functioning as designed, with the chain of command acting appropriately and with the required urgency,” he said.

Pollard also stressed that the platform remains in active development. “It is important to highlight that Ajax is continually being tested and developed,” he wrote. “This approach enables our soldiers and industry partners to work collaboratively to address challenges as they are identified.”

Investigators from the Defence Accident Investigation Board and the Army Safety Investigation Team are now working “at pace” with manufacturer General Dynamics to identify the cause of the latest symptoms. Pollard told MPs that “the Ministry of Defence will provide further updates in due course, upon completion of the investigation.”

Although Pollard did not address what the incident means for the wider programme, the decision to halt training only days after IOC underlines the continuing fragility of a project that has faced years of delays, technical problems and repeated safety scares.

Lisa West
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.

5 COMMENTS

  1. Convert this useless heap into an unmanned drone and rework the warrior. Or , the best solution was to buy the CV90 but a bit too late for this. Now you have another mess on your hands as if MoD was actively collecting them

  2. I have heard on cross reference article in France that suspensions are designed for the original 24 tonnes plateform, designed max to 32 tonnes. And due to Ajax Program, with armor and new équipements added on, it now weights 40 tonnes. Since 40 tonnes is the max for A400 Atlas transportation, the team is stuck and cannot fix the issue, is it correct?

    • Do we have a “Pollard porky” here? For goodness sake can’t they get this sorted and talk some truth as they must be pretty expert on every square inch of Ajax by now? Can it be given some good Anglo -German re-engineering?

  3. It wasn’t me, Miss!! Politicians getting their excuses in early. So who said it was safe? And if it’s not safe, sack them.
    I still believe it to be a highly capable vehicle, but if it has flaws like this?
    Are there any comparable figures for noise and motion sickness type injuries for other army vehicles?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here