The Warrior family includes several variants such as the Infantry Fighting Vehicle, Infantry Command Vehicle, Repair & Recovery Vehicle and Observation Post Vehicle.
Warrior is one of the most widely deployed vehicles in the British Army and was highly successful during the Gulf War, Bosnia, Kosovo and Iraq.
According to a response to a Palriamentary written question, there are currently 625 Warrior vehicles in service. Here’s the full breakdown.
James Cartlidge, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, stated:
“There are currently 625 Warrior in service. Activity is ongoing to draw the Warrior fleet down to the post-Integrated Review 21 funded position of 540 platforms and to reflect the Future Soldier structure. On current planning, Warrior will be retired from service by the end of 2030.
Across the initial tranches of disposal, 172 platforms were identified. Two tranches were completed prior to November 22, and 138 of the 172 platforms have been declared for disposal since this date.”
Warrior is equipped with a 30mm RARDEN cannon and a 7.62mm chain gun – both providing an anti-helicopter capability. Warrior can reach a top speed of 75km/hr and has a range of 600km.
The first production vehicle was handed over to the British Army in May 1987 to 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards and from 1988 to 1990 four more armoured infantry battalions in the British Army of the Rhine were converted to the new vehicle.
A total of 789 FV510 and variants were manufactured for the British Army and 254 of a modified version (Desert Warrior) were produced for the Kuwaiti Army.
Are the disposed vehicles going to Ukraine? In an ideal world I would like to see some retained in storage and the others donated.
With an unstabilised cannon and little in the way of ISR upgrades, they’re going to be the poor cousin to the Bradley’s and Murder that they’ve been receiving.
Best thing you can say is that they’re a step up from their BMPs..!
The Warrior MCV-80 was terrifically advanced for its time. I did the extreme cold weather trials with it in 1983 at Chobham as a young Lance Corporal (the boffins lost all of their windproof smocks during that trial 😉 ). We were super impressed with it, especially as it replaced the aging AFV 432 which was little more than a battlefield taxi. The problem is the Warrior was never intended to serve for 50 years. But, as is usually the case, the politicians got involved and the Warrior was upgraded and upgraded over the years to extend its life span… Read more »
You’re right, at it’s time it was a great vehicle- and would be on par with the current Bradley models today if a decent upgrade programme had been properly delivered. I realise I came across as harsh in my post, but I was just looking directly at the current Warriors we have in stock compared to the Bradleys that Ukraine is receiving.
Sure enough.
Bradley and Marder are older vehicles than Warrior (Marder is very much older, its design commencing in 1959) and also have unstabilised cannons. You play Warrior down, suggesting it is only marginally better than BMP and not as good as Bradley and Marder. Bradley has a 25mm cannon, Marder has just a 20mm cannon and Warrior has a 30mm cannon with more punch (although granted its ROF is slow). Warrior has a lower height profile than Bradley and Marder, can take a 10th man, has higher P/W ratio than those other two, giving it higher top speed, and it has… Read more »
All I needed was a atgw system
Where were you and when.. to require an ATGW if I may ask?
All Inf Bns have an a/tk platoon surely?
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying- but the Bradleys that Ukraine has got have been heavily upgraded multiple times- they have TOW missiles, all kinds of sights and optics, and I believe now have a stabilised gun. Warrior, while probably better at the time, is now outstripped.
Maybe I’m mistaken about the Marder, but I thought it was closer to the ODA-2 Bradleys than Warrior in terms of upgrades.
Thanks mate. I had not seen what mark of Bradley had been sent by USA to Ukraine – I assumed they were older types. What mark was sent?
Anyway, I think we should send any Warriors we can spare to UKR. They are good wagons and have TI – they could perhaps go with TES kit if we had any spare?
Sorry, been slow over the festive period… They’re M2A2 ODS models, updated with lessons learned from the gulf war. They’ve got updated sensors, twin TOW launchers, and additional armour protection- with the option for ERA as well (which apparently the Ukrainian ones have). In honesty, I’ve had a look and there’s mixed information about whether the gun is stabilised. But with the updated optics, I think it’s still a step ahead of warrior- unless they received an upgrade I don’t know about between the late 90s and early 2000s. It’s entirely possible, I’m not always upt I speed with the… Read more »
Thanks. Warrior has only had minimal upgrades since first fielding – I can only recall replacement of Clansman radio with Bowman, and fitting of BGTI. [The really big and important upgrade got cancelled]. So I guess M2A2 Bradley would be better. But you are right that Ukraine should get our surplus Warriors.
Warrior, whilst ageing and little modernised, still has its strengths – fairly reliable, reasonable armour, quite fast, packs a fair punch with its 30mm cannon (albeit slow ROF and unstabilised) and has a BV!
All vehs slated for disposal are disposed of and none are retained at Ashchurch – what would be the point of that?
It would be good if they were all offered to Ukraine.
👍
On the issue of storage, I have a feeling pressure will grow to reinforce the UK war reserve as the threat of multiple wars increases. I now fear British boots will be back on the ground in the Middle East before long as that powered keg becomes more volatile. At the moment new fighting vehicles are a long way off in significant numbers and the need to rethink dwindling the Warrior fleet is now due. Mastiff, Husky and FV432s (Bull Dog) are still in plentiful supply and should remain so for the foreseeable future.
I imagine that the ones being disposed of are already in poor condition but if they run I’m sure Ukraine would appreciate them. Don’t know if there is much Rarden ammo left but it’s pretty useless anyway so they might just strip them out and use them more as APCs.
Garden is useless? Everything I’ve ever read suggests that it is one of the hardest hitting 30mms on the planet, which is why the CTA40 was needed to provide extra muzzle velocity to match it.
*Rarden
I’m exaggerating but it’s unstabilised and has a much lower RoF than Soviet and Russian 23 and 30mm cannons which are ubiquitous in Ukraine. It might be ok for overwatch and plinking at machine gun nests but I wouldn’t want to rely on it for a meeting engagement or against AFVs or helos.
It was designed to have high muzzle velocity, so AA was never it’s strong point, but reportedly could penetrate side armour of MBTs?
I don’t understand this reasoning, high muzzle velocity is essential for AA.
Now Rarden certainly don’t have rate of fire and rounds for AA
I have never considered the Rarden 30mm as being optimised for AA use – it is there to take out lt/med armour and strongpoints, and to provide covering fire when the troops debus. Some anecdotal evidence suggests it can pierce side and rear armour of older T-series tanks without add-on armour.
I was not replying to you Graham, but to SailorBoy.
Apologies Alex for joining your convo with SailorBoy.
I don’t think the Russians would agree, those that have been on the wrong side of the Scimitar have found it ‘uncomfortable.
Clip loaded and not stabilised, but certainly not useless.
We absolutely should be sending them to Ukraine.
More to do with the 3 round clips of 30mm and slow rate of fire! But with a few modifications it could be viable weapon to give the Warrior a few more years in service!
The plan was to upgrade Warrior with (amongst other things) stabilised 40mm CTAS cannon of course – but canned as a project in favour of buying Boxer.
Rarden has a powerful 30mm round but it is not automatic , not stabilized like have been already said.
I thought its intended targets were APC/IFVs and Helos and it was still good for that?
540 platforms? What’s that, 4 battalions worth?
In the early 2000s there were 9 Battalions with the type.
Post 2010 cuts, up to the Strike Bde plans after 2015 there were 6.
Currently 4 or 5.
The vehicle also appears in REME Battalions and is now in the RAC in recc regs having stood in for CVRTs.
The out of service date confirms the slow pace of Boxer production with FOC no earlier than 2029.
If this many Warrior hulls are judged fit to serve until 2029/30, outright cancellation of the upgrade programme looks to be another poor decision. The problems arose from the attempt to fit the CTA 40 in a vehicle designed to have a low recoil cannon. We could have achieved 90% of the capability wanted with an AEI designed magazine fed development of the Rarden. Instead we are going to rely for the IFV role on Boxers with as yet no cannons planned.
Checkout Digital Concepts Engineering in Leicestershire. They demoed an unmanned Warrior a few years ago. The conversion of course included stabilisation of the Rarden. Combine their stabilisation mods with your idea and you could conceive of a worthwhile Warrior upgrade which would not cost the earth. Thing is you would probably have to see a change in government and the 2025 Review to reverse or modify the decision to trash the Warrior Sustainment Program. A ‘lite’ sustainment program would be cheaper and faster than building Boxers and would not require an immediate change of doctrine.
That depends on mechanical and structural status of the vehicles.
Yes, of course. I don’t know how much of that was a factor in the cost of the original sustainment program. Still, given the very slow Boxer build rate I would say its worth another look.
I hadn’t heard about either of these, both would offer a real uplift in performance, shame the MoD rarely gives contracts to these smaller firms, even when they come up with practical solutions like this, and being smaller firms they ought to be 100% committed to getting it right and making it work within a reasonable budget.
Times are hard; money is tight. I’m not qualified to say but maybe pareto works: 80% of the improvements for 20% of the budget?
An infantry vehicle without a cannon is not an IFV – it is a mere APC.
The problems in fitting the 40mm CTAS cannon were clearly resolved as Ajax has the identical LM turret AFAIK – and that is now ‘good to go’.
Well built, well maintained AFV hulls can last for many decades – that is why we have 60-year-old 432s still running around, and until recently 50-year-old CVR(T)s. Elsewhere many old 1960s M113s etc still trundling around.
In 2029/30 the oldest Warriors would be barely 40 years old.
The WCSP programme was going to allow WR to run on to 2040 assuming ISD in 2018. Thus a hypothetical 2025 ISD would allow upgraded WR to run to 2047.
What were your thoughts on the WCSP programme mate?
It looked like a sensible approach to me and I have grave reservations regarding going all wheeled personally.
Hi John, Preamble – We had a multi-wheel (ie 6×6) APC with a MG (0.30 Browning) from 1952 (Saracen) to operate independently or with Centurions – then from 1963 we had a tracked APC with a MG (but Berlin Bde had a 30mm cannon) (FV432) which had a better ability to keep up with the tanks (Cent, then Chieftain, then CR1), then we entered the IFV busienss (tracked, with 30mm cannon) along with everyone else with the Warrior from 1987. That cannon could deal with enemy IFVs, APCs, strong points and provide suppressive fire for dismounting troops, albeit not accurately… Read more »
It was the wrong cannon and wrong company . A bushmaster 30 mm cannon with a new turret would have been a sensible approach to WCSP as it had already been done on the warrior 2000 prototype by GKN .
Pete,
How is an unstabilised 30mm Bushmaster cannon better than a 40mm stabilised cannon?
Turret integration was achieved by LMUK for the 40mm CTAS, admittedly after some problems.
There are two REME variants, not a single Repair & Recovery type.
Seems like any opportunity to give the Warrior’s any sort of a decent upgrade will pass by. Even with the UK “totally in the box” with Boxer with the US and Aus and others still going for tracked IFVs might the UK be a bit tempted to join in and go for a small quantity of Ascod 2/Ares+ for commonality with Ajax vehicles?
I’ll wait for your reply Graham.. Lol 😁
Yes. MoD cancelled the WCSP upgrade programme – announcement made in March 2021. We are buying Boxer instead for the armoured brigades.
ARES is not an IFV – it has no cannon and can only take 4 dismounts, not an Infantry section.
Morning Graham, with only 4 dismounts what is the purpose for Ares? Are these special ops/anti-tank/manpad/mortar teams? Why didn’t they go for a larger Ares type, like the Ascod 2?
ARES is ‘the APC’ variant of AJAX, and carries 4 dismounts in addition to its 2-man crew. It replaces CVR(T) SPARTAN.
On dismount, troops will be able to conduct a variety of tasks, such as dismounted surveillance (including patrols), observation posts, and close target reconnaissance. ARES can deliver and support specialist troops across the battlefield, including Anti -Tank Javelin Teams, Snipers and Support Troops.
There is no need to have a larger ARES type as the teams carried are small in size. ASCOD 2 is intended to carry an Infantry section, a totally different role.
Thanks for explaining, saves me typing with one thumb.!😎👍
Is the Warrior deployed to Ukraine alongside the Bradley?
No. Perhaps it should be. I am sure we have some spare even accounting for the vehicles in service with the AI and RAC.
The Army could do with a new tracked IFV, The Boxers APCs that we have on order are not really a replacement.
You hope some good sense prevails here. Pardon the terrible pun, but maybe we need some to stay on tracks and lose some wheels… Lol 😆.
Tell that to the politicians! I would imagine everyone in the army should know this.
You can send the whole armoured corps to Ukraine
Apart from the corrupt media everyone knows Ukrain is about to collapse. The Ukraine military and civilians have been led down the wrong path. The only winners are military complex in Washington DC.
I have fired both 30mm and 76mm too many years ago
Ukraine is doing a good job so far. Much Russian equipment destroyed, many Russian soldiers killed. Recovery over the last 18 months of much land seized in Feb/Mar 2022. They are getting through the triple Russian defensive line, but slowly.
But they need more western support – especially more tanks and some F-16s.
The Russian forces might collapse, especially if Putin leaves office.
Over a month later no collapse. We could see people’s posts from 18 months ago saying it’s all over, about to collapse, colonel macgregor said so😂😂😂
I enjoyed driving and being a gunner in these back in the early 90,s, it was a bit hairy driving them around in the snow and ice of Bosnia and the so called snow tracks were as much use as a handbrake on a canoe, i think the only good modification when we got them to Bosnia they changed the drivers hatches over from a single periscope to a 3 scope arrangement, for good reason from an incident in Batus which sadly cost a life….like everything else though good at the time even if rarden was a slow rate of… Read more »
Thanks Andy for your account. Were the snow tracks just ordinary tracks with the rubber road pads removed?
no they still had the rubber blocks but they were thinner and on the outer edges of the tracks they had grooves cut into them a bit like teeth but not as aggressive..it was one of the first jobs that had to be done as soon as the warriors got to Vitez, track bashing anytime of the year is a pain, but doing it in central Bos with the coldest winter for 40 years in snow and ice was bloody awful, we spent more time being concerned about anything made of metal and steel because we did not want to… Read more »
Reported 23rd January in Janes; the UK is planning to order more Boxer variants in 2024. Priorities repair and recovery, armoured mortar and bridge laying. Could be followed later by other variants….
.