Clive Lewis, the Labour MP for Norwich South, requested information on the status of the FV107 Scimitar armoured vehicles this week.

The question sought clarity on how many of these vehicles were still in use and how many were awaiting disposal.

James Cartlidge, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded on May 10, providing specific details regarding the operational status of these vehicles.

The British Army’s fleet of Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) totals 114 as at May 2024, 97 of which are FV107 Scimitar platforms,” Cartlidge explained. He further noted that, “As the Army’s entire CVR(T) active fleet has been withdrawn from service, all 114 are currently in the disposal process.

The FV107 Scimitar, part of the CVR(T) series, was retired from active service in 2023 and is being replaced by newer Ajax vehicles.

This response confirms that none of the FV107 Scimitar vehicles remains in active service, signalling the end of their operational lifecycle within the British Army.

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

126 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_817524)
9 days ago

Give them to Ukraine.
Although it might be wise to retain say 50 as a light cavalry reserve force Doesn’t cost much/ anything to hold hardware in storage. Might actually prove useful if we get embroiled in a war with an expanionistic empire building Russia

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_817528)
9 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

I would agree, just donate them and the Spares to Ukraine. They are making very good use of the fast nimble little Simitar! These no point keeping obsolete gear here in the UK, the AR is no longer a hand me down force like the TA once was. Today AR units and individuals operate seamlessly with the regular Army, with the same equipment. As much as ‘we’ can see the value in retaining such equipment in reserve, the powers that be, don’t and certainly won’t. So off to Ukraine I say, where they will actually be employed with effect against… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_817532)
9 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

It’s vehicles of this nature that certainly seem to be doing quite well in Ukraine at least when used properly.

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_817545)
9 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

👍, riding shotgun for pickup based shoot and scoot anti armour units…..

If the Russians manage a breakthrough, then such units will be front and center again, putting the ‘manoeuvre’ into warfare….

They will put the Scimitars to excellent use…

Grizzler
Grizzler (@guest_817622)
9 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Tracked as well so not as constrained by terrain …just saying 😉

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_817624)
9 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

Yep…

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_817661)
9 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

The CVRT’s have a very low ground contact pressure and as such are excellent across terrain other tracked vehicles would get bogged down in. In the Falklands the CVRT came into their own, able to traverse ground wheeled land rovers and even tractors couldn’t pass over.
I think retaining some as a reserve hardware store would be a sensible idea, keep 50- give the rest to Ukraine. The Ukrainian military I am sure will be grateful for the 60+ additional units we will then be supplying.

Allan William Ullmann
Allan William Ullmann (@guest_818071)
7 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

Agreed track them for reuse, or gift Ukraine?

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818648)
5 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

Mate, is that you slagging off the Boxer?!!

Chris
Chris (@guest_817803)
8 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

I whole heartedly agree with your comments, it will help Ukraine against the Russian invasion. But, remember that what we British armed forces loose, will need replacing with new equipment, and spares, that will mean increasing taxes to pay for the replacements. Is everyone in agreement to pay for the additional taxation for the next say 25 years? High at first, the slowly becoming a stable rates of taxes.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817829)
8 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

I do worry that the UK will no longer operate such light vehicles, something armoured against small arms, with a 30mm cannon that can deal with infantry fighting vehicles…yet only weights 8-12 tons..I specifically think there should be a place for retaining the 50 scimitar mark 2 as they have specifically been fitted out for an armoured support role In stability operations and would give 16 brigade some good high mobility armoured support. That is capable of engaging the older MBTs that the brigade may find itself coming up against In stability operations. The problem we have is the replacement… Read more »

Last edited 8 days ago by Jonathan
AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_817593)
9 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Agreed.

Embarrassing that small private concerns in the UK (e.g. TanksALot) are having to refurb a few from the open market and get them to Ukraine. My understanding is that that they are ideally suited to the muddy situation there. What are the British Army’s contracted, much heavier, replacement recce vehicles going to do in that sort of warfare?

Grizzler
Grizzler (@guest_817623)
9 days ago

errrr…sink?

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_818107)
7 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

At least somebody is awake. 😀

Darryl2164
Darryl2164 (@guest_817646)
9 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

I agree , send them to Ukraine , I,m sure they would find a use for them

Dave
Dave (@guest_817526)
9 days ago

And have we given them to Ukraine? No. Have we kept some back for when we need them… No. The russian supporting British civil service will have scrapped them – probably abroad.

Steve R
Steve R (@guest_817534)
9 days ago

Give every single unit plus all spare parts to Ukraine.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817541)
9 days ago
Reply to  Steve R

Yes, no point keeping any of these plus the Ajax.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817835)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Yes there is the scimitar mk 2 is a 12 ton vehicle that can Ben deployed via a heavy rotor…Ajax is almost 30 tons heavier and needs strategic air lift…very different beasts…we should keep the 50 Mk2 for 16 brigade.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817843)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

That seems very sensible. Not sure if it’ll happen. If the Warrior’s are going I imagine they’ll want to clear out all the Rarden based vehicles inventory too?

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817850)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Warrior is going to be with us for a long time yet..out of service is not until the 2030 at the earliest..but I suspect it will be delayed further depending on the speed of boxer delivery and or what happens in Europe and the world over the next 6 years…not sure we will be disposing of anything if it comes time we end up in a long draw out peer conflict with a china, Russia, Iran, North Korea power block.

Mark P
Mark P (@guest_818163)
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve R

I couldn’t agree more. It would probably even cost less than having to despose of them in the correct PC manner everything is done these days?

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_817542)
9 days ago

Ukraine for these, and anything else we are withdrawing from service if the Ukranians have a use for it. All agreed here I think.

DB
DB (@guest_817566)
9 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

100%

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_817585)
9 days ago
Reply to  DB

We do seem to be donating equipment or disposing before there’s a complete replacement for equipment As90 is a good example

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_817721)
9 days ago
Reply to  David Lee

That’s my worry 👍

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818582)
6 days ago
Reply to  David Lee

Happens all the time eg aircraft carrier, MPA….

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_818588)
6 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Absolutely harriers and carriers

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_817771)
8 days ago
Reply to  DB

👍

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817620)
9 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

On your theme, read an article/tweet the other day saying that the army had fired it’s last shells from AS90s in the UK, that the entire remaining fleet would be withdrawn and gifted to Ukraine in the next 9 months!!
Unfortunately it’s replacement (RCH 155?) won’t be ready in that timeframe, so if true another capability gap coming to us real soon.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_817723)
9 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Absolutely

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817815)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Do they take a standard NATO 155mm shell which could be supplied from other NATO compliant countries?

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817819)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Yes I believe they take standard 155mm shells as per the majority of Western 155mm howitzers.
Supplying Ukraine with our surplus kit is a good move for them, but, the issue is when are we getting the replacements? The 14 Archers we received late last year aren’t enough to compensate. You have to wonder what the thinking in the MOD actually is!!

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_817895)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

They take the same shells but not the propellant archer and rch use modular charge bags because of the auto load system that’s not standard with the rest of nato

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817926)
8 days ago
Reply to  David Lee

Sorry, my mistake, I thought @Q was referring to AS90 shells. Thanks for the update.

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_817978)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

As90 fires all nato 155 ammo

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818585)
6 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

The MoD thinking seems to be twin track:

  1. Keep the politicos happy by offering up tons of kit for Ukraine.
  2. Keep the Treasury happy by selling off kit ASAP, even though the replacement kit is not in service.
Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817821)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Why the capability gap with the RCH 155? Can’t they mitigate that with some more Archer? Seems a bit bonkers going all in with wheeled RCH. Maybe they’ve got to use some of all the Boxer fleet on order? You’d think a mixed fleet with some K9 Thunder’s to back up the tank fleet would more sensible and even more survivable? I think the US and Aus are still going with tracked SPGs. I guess it’s horses for courses and no two allies are completely alike in their choices.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817841)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

There are no more archers available..they would have to be new builds and would probably take the same timeframe…re survivable I think the RCH 155 is probably the most survivable heavy fires available…it’s armour is pretty good, but more than anything it’s the only system that can fire on the move and engage a new target while on the move…essentially it never has to stop while engaging..all other systems do..which is the point of highest risk.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817848)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Yes, I do remember that that was mentioned here before. Is the UK going to purchase HIMARS or just stick to the tracked? I remember seeing a Supacat type HIMARS developed ages ago. Seems like UK industry missed some opportunities there. Maybe time to bring it out again!?

Last edited 8 days ago by Quentin D63
Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817858)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Believe what you are referring to is LIMAWS R. It was something that was developed along with the G (Gun) version back in the early naughties, but never got accepted into service.
I believe we should have our own wheeled version of HIMARS, based on a Supacat chassis for Light brigades. I also like the PULS version that the Dutch are buying, very versatile payloads.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817859)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Yes the old LIMAWS (R) programs LIMAWS(R) that was cancelled by the old Labour administration in 2008 I think…but for long range precision fires they are doubling down on MLRS…increasing the fleet to 85 and ensuring they are all upgraded…but the number deployed will remain the same I believe ( it’s got one regulator regiment with 3 batteries of MLRS 26 regiment and then the 101 regiment ( reserves, which I believe has 3 batteries of MLRS and is rerolling its last battery to MLRS as welll for 4 batteries).

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_818867)
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I’m unsure. 26 RA had 3 Fire Batteries but thought I learned somewhere that it now reduced to 2 Batteries as 3 RHA converted from LG to MLRS. 3 RHA also has 2 Batteries, and 101 apparently also has 2 Batteries, unsure if they are converting more.
So 4 plus 2.
I expect, and so do others here when we discussed this a few weeks back, that each regular Reg may stand up a 3rd Fire Battery with the expansion underway.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_818889)
5 days ago

Your probably right Daniele, keeping track is difficult…

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_818935)
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

It is, even I’m starting to lose it!

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817853)
8 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Believe the gap with bringing RCH 155 into service is that’s it’s still a prototype, and setting to work for production will take time. Then we need to take out place in the delivery line. Germany afaik has an order for some 100+ units already on the books, so, we will come sometime after that.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818649)
5 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

The Swedes only had 14 second-hand Archers to sell us.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817836)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

That would be madness if true..it would leave the army with very few heavy fires at a point of very high risk of war in Europe…

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817855)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Totally agree utter madness which ever way you look at it.
IOC for AS90 replacement is 2027 I believe, bought forward from 2028/9 I think. If correct it will only leave us with LG units and GMLRS for several years. Not a good position to be in is it!

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817862)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Especially when you consider the geopolitical significance of the 2027-2030 period…this is the highest risk timeframe for a major war..Russia will one way or another have ended the Ukraine war and will have probably re-armed and will be looking for its next victim, china will be deciding if it’s going to war over Taiwan..and Iran and North Korea will like jump on the back of anything china does to take advantage of the chaos… at present everything should be focused on maximising the force levels available for the 2027-2030 period..sunsetting and gapping is for the heady years of the draw… Read more »

Last edited 8 days ago by Jonathan
David Lee
David Lee (@guest_818586)
6 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

The whole thing is absolutely barking mad next march the only tube artillery we will have is 14 archers and a hundred odd light guns scattered around various places

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_818858)
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

It is true I’m afraid! Well done all involved….

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_818887)
5 days ago

I find the actions at present more and more bizarre…the government are going full belt at “we are in a deadly world…2.5% GDP…ra ra” at the same time they are decommissioning a perfectly good frigate that was only lifexed 2 years ago and could have run on to 2028…started the process of decommissioning 75%+ of our 155mm self propelled fires…years before the replacement will be ready..and getting rid of the last scimitars MK2s..which are all very good rehulled tracked light recce…that could be vital for our quick reaction forces…16 brigade if it had to do something globally or supporting the… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_818934)
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Agreed. I’d also suggest the military themselves sign off in this.
Let’s hope they know we have some wonder weapons tucked away.
On certain things, I suspect this is true.

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_817856)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

I’m afraid we’re going to be woefully undergunned

Deep32
Deep32 (@guest_817860)
8 days ago
Reply to  David Lee

And them some! Totally depressing to even think about it.

David Lee
David Lee (@guest_817861)
8 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

I’m ex RA and I’m totally dumbfounded by some mod decisions

Steve R
Steve R (@guest_818204)
7 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

To be honest though, in this case I don’t see much of a problem. Better Ukraine has it and puts them to good use smashing Russian forces than us having them to sit in warehouses and sheds gathering dust.

I just hope that they get on with ordering these asap, order in decent numbers and get them delivered asap.

DaveyB.
DaveyB. (@guest_818231)
7 days ago
Reply to  Steve R

I agree, but Ukraine is in an attritional war. So once the units sent are damaged/destroyed, where are the replacements? It’s all well and good sending our assets to Ukraine. But if it’s taking over 5 years to get replacements, then both Ukraine and us could be without effective heavy artillery.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_818289)
6 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

Sadly we have a permenant capability gap. It’s called the UK procurement process. 😏

Jacko
Jacko (@guest_817544)
9 days ago

Perhaps they could protest outside the Iranian embassy and tell them to stop supplying Hamas with weapons as well!
Free Palestine,what does that mean? Iran was freed from the Shah,Afghanistan was freed from its govt,now what do we have two countries that are taking them back to the Middle Ages. Is this what free Palestine means as well?

Jacko
Jacko (@guest_817546)
9 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Oops wrong thread should have been the protests one🙄

Jacko
Jacko (@guest_817556)
9 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Oops wrong thread🙄😀

ABCRodney
ABCRodney (@guest_817562)
9 days ago
Reply to  Jacko

Did you perhaps over indulge last night ? 🍻 If so excellent use of the freedom you enjoy and the countries you mention don’t. 🥳

Jacko
Jacko (@guest_817574)
9 days ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

😂🥃🍺

DB
DB (@guest_817565)
9 days ago

I just read another capability gap from our ultra pro-defence Government; who would have thunk it?

Can’t be true, can it?

A Headhunter
A Headhunter (@guest_817573)
9 days ago

These vehicles have 2 outstanding features: 1
Their ‘ footprint’ is lighter than an infantryman (unlike Ajax) so they do not set off anti-personnel mines and 2: They are powered by Jaguar E-Type engines, each worth around £10,000 second hand. As a bonus, they can do 60 mph in forward or reverse over rough ground. The Ukrainians would love them.

Simon
Simon (@guest_817654)
9 days ago
Reply to  A Headhunter

Wasn’t the engine changed to Cummins diesel during the mk 2 upgrade ?

pete
pete (@guest_817656)
9 days ago
Reply to  A Headhunter

Was replaced by Cummins BTA 5.9 190 hp engine in life extension program.

Ian M
Ian M (@guest_817825)
8 days ago
Reply to  A Headhunter

Changed for a Cummins diesel decades ago.

Moonstone
Moonstone (@guest_817583)
9 days ago

The Ukrainians might well take them – but only because of their desperate situation I think. I’m aware it was intended to be a reconnaissance vehicle and not a proper tank, nevertheless the old 30mm Rarden L21 cannon – with its hopelessly inadequate three round clip feed – would I suggest be a poor match if this vehicle was ever pitted against any of the many more modern autocannon armed vehicles commonly found on the battlefield today – such as the BMP 2 and its fearsomely effective 30mm weapon. It is a nothing less than a scandal that our soldiers… Read more »

Last edited 9 days ago by Moonstone
Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817845)
8 days ago
Reply to  Moonstone

Actually the scimitar always did very very well in every single theatre it was ever engaged in from the deserts of the Middle East to the boggy cold south Atlantic…it’s probably the best armour available that can be slung under a helicopter….the 30mm cannon was able to engage and destroy even MBTs…it’s a very solid platform for something that is 12 tons…it’s also very small and very quick….can go over almost all terrain and bridges…..where as a 40 ton monster cannot…..recce should be very light and very fast and very small….everything this vehicle was infact.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818590)
6 days ago
Reply to  Moonstone

I believe (my view) that most AFVs should have a roughly 25 year service life and should be upgraded 2 or 3 times during their service life. Thus Scimitar should have left service about 1997!

Even more bizarre, its successor should have been retired two years ago!!!

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_819846)
2 days ago
Reply to  Moonstone

We have traditionally conducted ‘recce by stealth’, not ‘recce by fighting’. The Scimitar cannon is for emergency self-defence – fire a few rounds and bug out at speed. Scimitars should not ordinarily be ‘mixing it’ with IFVs who will be behind their recce screen.

Phil
Phil (@guest_817598)
9 days ago

If you want stealthy reconnaissance it’s better to use a drone, if you need to fight for information you need a better AFV with a better gun and more room for surveillance equipment. Scimitar had it’s day and giving it to Ukraine would just get a lot of good people killed. A bit like giving them Saxon.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817847)
8 days ago
Reply to  Phil

Drones cannot generally see under trees..that cannot stay hidden in a few bushes for many hours.. they cannot proved direct fire support…drones have a great place..they do not in any way replace light armoured reconnaissance.

Last edited 8 days ago by Jonathan
Paul T
Paul T (@guest_817944)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

They can – they can use IR and just look for abnormal signitures.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817968)
8 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

Can they sit in a bush for 48 hours ? IR signatures can be hidden. Not taking away from drones…but on the ground recce does stuff drones cannot as drones do things only drones can do.

Dern
Dern (@guest_818026)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

^ Drones are a tool in a Recce commanders tool box. They do not completely replace the tool box.
Also: Do you think you can fit a better IR camera onto a drone or a armoured vehicle? One of the scary things about trying to ambush modern armour is the sensor packages they carry means it can actually be pretty hard to hide from them.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818591)
6 days ago
Reply to  Phil

It’s not our doctrine to fight for information – we have traditionally done recce by stealth = covert.
Different story when you switch to using Ajax as a Strike asset – that will be very overt.

Ron
Ron (@guest_817599)
9 days ago

I am not sure how or what I think about this. I do in general like the CVR (T), there size, hitting power and speed. I do wonder if the Ajax family or Boxer family are good replacements. For recon, airborne and sea borne you need something small, fast and that if need be can hit. Ajax and Boxer are not small, not easily transportable, can’t hide very well. I really do think that we the UK should look at the CVR(T) again keep the same concept, dimensions and just improve it, e.g a more modern armour, digital rather than… Read more »

Ian M
Ian M (@guest_817827)
8 days ago
Reply to  Ron

Ron, the CVRT equipped with M-SPIRE, Bowman is/was already digital, modern armour would increase size and weight beyond what the already upgraded drive train could handle.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817849)
8 days ago
Reply to  Ron

Ajax will be a great platform, but it’s a very large 40 tonne vehicle..that will be limited to strategic air and sea lift, will have problems with a lot of bridges and cannot really be considered a replacement for a 12 tone recce vehicle that can be slung under a helicopter….Ajax is 2.5 meters wider, 1 meter taller, and 1 meter wider…with an extra 30 tones…it’s for combined arms work with heavy armour battle groups…what it cannot do is the same level of global deployability ..we should keep the 50 scimitars for 16 brigade.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_818856)
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Agree. A Sqn of the HC was once allocated to 16, or maybe 5 Airborne before it.

Ryan
Ryan (@guest_817603)
9 days ago

Less worried about our own stock for a possible war…when a war rages on!

Putin’s legacy of pain and misery on his own nation needs to echo into the 22nd century with an attached message: Democracy will never lose to tyranny!

We should send everything we’ve got that isn’t recent, as part of our own longterm security. Not scrapping it.

Sam
Sam (@guest_817608)
9 days ago
Reply to  Ryan

I’m wondering what vehicles we’ll actually be using next few years, with Scimitar scrapped and Warrior starting to be. The build rate of Boxers is glacial.

Rowan Maguire
Rowan Maguire (@guest_817652)
9 days ago
Reply to  Sam

Well, Warrior is to be replaced by the Boxer variant which doesn’t feature a turret so we will be loosing the ability to deploy about 800 auto canons on the front, a weapon type that has consistently proven to be one of the most effective on the modern battlefield. As well as this the 600 odd Scimitars are being replaced with just 350 turreted Ajax, so again we are loosing another 250 potential gun carriers. It is pretty abysmal when the attrition of even the modern types of IFV (CV-90, BMP-3 and Bradley) is high. We are going to be… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_817824)
8 days ago
Reply to  Rowan Maguire

Quite a few of us here have been saying the same or similar for a while. Hopefully the US IFV choice may have some necessary influence on the minds of those who procure equipment for the Army. The Aus have chosen the Hanwah Redback tracked IFV, not too many, I think 147, but at least it is modern and looks capable and beat the RM Lynx. Aus is also getting the Huntsman K9 Thunder. The AUKUS allies must be looking at what each other purchases.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818592)
6 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

How does the US IFV choice influence our procurers? Politicians, aided by HMT, have decided that we will not have an IFV for a generation at least.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_817678)
9 days ago
Reply to  Sam

Bulldog ? 🙂

Sam
Sam (@guest_817806)
8 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Ha. The eternal Bulldog.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_817820)
8 days ago
Reply to  Sam

I am expecting the imminent announcement of the new BCSP ; the turreted Bulldog 🙂

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_819694)
2 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Take one Scimitar turret and one Bulldog, one plasma cutter, a mig welder and gaffer tape for the gaps….

Next, give it a fancy patriotic name “Project Britannias shield” perhaps, give the prototype a union flag wrap paint job, talk up it’s combat proven British technology and the all important 100% British manufacturing base

Add the periscope from decommissioned Swiftsure and Trafalgar class boats for the recon variant….

Put in a bill for billions, job done……

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_819687)
2 days ago
Reply to  Sam

I think Bulldog MK2 is being considered under project Triggers Broom…..

Sam
Sam (@guest_819690)
2 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Stranger things have happened!

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_819722)
2 days ago
Reply to  John Clark

Easuer and cheaper than WCSP; I think the Bulldogs have Warror level armour and rhe Rarden turret is already removed. Can’t think why we didn’t think of it earlier. 🙂

Jason
Jason (@guest_817672)
9 days ago

I bet that the ingenuity of Ukraine could turn them into something more than useful so get them over there toute suite.

John Clark
John Clark (@guest_819697)
2 days ago
Reply to  Jason

I believe the Ukrainians have been using them mainly as overwatch for mobile anti armour teams, able to put down some suppressing fire when needed and get out of dodge ‘very quickly’…

It’s 1970’s tech and clip loaded Rardan are compensated for by it’s relatively simple mechanicals and it’s speed….

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_817728)
9 days ago

Served our Army well ,so now I guess it’s time for the Ukraine. But do wish we’d wait till replacement was in place .And would it be such be a bad idea to keep some in reserve 🤔 but HMG don’t really do that. Or make a new Army reserve unite ? I’ll go for a walk 🚶🤗

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817833)
8 days ago

I would like to see the 50 scimitar mark 2s retained..as these are essentially very well designed and modern light armour for stability operations…they would be perfect for 16 brigade..providing some armour with a 30mm cannon, with armour that can manage blast frag, light Heat and small arms..that can engage old MBTs or give direct fire support and only weights in at 12 tons…remember its replacement is 30 tones heavier..2.5 meters longer, a meter wider and a meter taller…it may be an eminently better platform for a peer engagement involved heavy brigades/battle groups and combined arms in Europe..but it’s to… Read more »

Simon
Simon (@guest_817873)
8 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Pretty sure the only ones we have are the MK2 versions.I also thought there were more then 50 or at least they had the power pack upgrade

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_817876)
8 days ago
Reply to  Simon

hi Simon, the full Mk2 , new higher hull shaped for mine blast management, mine/shock resistant seats, better mine IED protection, upgraded protection package, EW package was only for 50….but I think you are right others may have had the power pack upgrade.

Last edited 8 days ago by Jonathan
Simon
Simon (@guest_818087)
7 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Yep. from what I could find all the remaining ones had a new power pack, but not the other upgrades or had only a partly upgrade

M Warr
M Warr (@guest_817868)
8 days ago

Give them to Ukraine. Retain 50 in storage and use them for Army Reserve and Territorial Army training purposes.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_817989)
8 days ago

So how many Ajax variants have been delivered?

Sam
Sam (@guest_818155)
7 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Supposedly 97 more this year.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_818159)
7 days ago
Reply to  Sam

Thx. So it looks as though the Ajax production line is up and running. This contrasts with Boxer. Read a recent report that the first UK manufactured Boxer module has just been delivered. UK Boxer vehicle chassis due later this year.

Sam
Sam (@guest_819689)
2 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Does seem incredibly slow.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_819724)
2 days ago
Reply to  Sam

German attention to quality detail I expect: every fault in the first one will be traced back to the process which created it and fixed. So when production starts it can continue.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_819847)
2 days ago
Reply to  Sam

Boxer build is glacial – might take a decade to fully equip the Infantry!

Sam
Sam (@guest_819905)
1 day ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Yeah and with them retiring Scimitar, then Warrior and Bulldog; you really wonder what’s going to be used in the interim.

It seems the delivery schedule of the Ajax variants has picked up, but not sure it’s enough to plug the gap as they are designed for recce.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_820112)
22 hours ago
Reply to  Sam

Scimitar was retired in March 2023, yet Ajax was not available as it was still on Trials and was not available in quantity, so a number of Warriors have been used as our interim recce vehicle.

Warrior and Bulldog have not yet been withdrawn from service, so no interim is required.

You are correct in stating that Ajax is a recce vehicle, aka a recce/strike vehicle. It has no remit to be an interim vehicle for anything.

Paul
Paul (@guest_818036)
8 days ago

Lots of people saying they should goto Ukraine and I agree so I looked a little harder into the comments about the FV107 in parliament and did come across a question from John McDonnell just last month asking if there were any FV107s included in the PMs recently announced aid package to which the answer was yes, so someone is either lying, got their wires crossed or that removal to Ukraine is to be considered as part of the disposal process.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_819848)
2 days ago
Reply to  Paul

What is the lie here?

Paul
Paul (@guest_819851)
2 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

James Cartlidge said that the FV107s were being disposed of yet the PM announced that at least some were going to Ukraine so one could be lying (they are Tories after all), wires could have been crossed or most likely the so called disposal process including getting rid of some to Ukraine, it’s all in that last sentence.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_820105)
23 hours ago
Reply to  Paul

No, I’m still not following you. A good number of FV107 Scimtars are being disposed of by gifting them to Ukraine.

Disposal means taking them out of active service and off UK MOD books and removed from MoD premises and with ownership transferred.

We dispose of kit declared Obsolete by gifting, sale or scrapping (the last resort).

No-one is lying.

Paul
Paul (@guest_820110)
22 hours ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

I’m not sure what you don’t get, I haven’t said anyone was lying at any point. Given the last two times that the FV107s were bought up in parliament over just this last month or so and looking at the statements given, out of the three possibly scenarios you literally repeated what I said was likely going to happen, the removal to Ukraine as part of the disposal process but neither statement given said it explicitly hence why so many of the people posting here are asking for them to be sent rather than be sold or scrapped. If it… Read more »

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_820290)
34 minutes ago
Reply to  Paul

OK. Disposal of equipment does not necessarily mean scrapping it – that is one of three options. The other 2 are gifting or selling the kit.

Chris.skuzanski
Chris.skuzanski (@guest_818052)
7 days ago

By the time this government decides to donate them to Ukraine its likely to be too late

Snow
Snow (@guest_818089)
7 days ago

The cvrt is a combat proven platform that should be used by reserve forces,the UK shouldn’t make the mistake like they did with Harriers HMS Ocean and HMS Invincible (?) Keep at least half of them or donate them to Ireland Defense Force Ukraine Estonia or New Zealand Defense Forces either way it’s still can be put to use.

Mickey
Mickey (@guest_819157)
4 days ago
Reply to  Snow

Irish Defence Force decommissioned theirs 7 years ago from the Army. They are looking at several purchasing options for this ability currently.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_818108)
7 days ago

Good to see this thread being mentioned on ATP GEOPOLITICS’ YouTube site yesterday, and the media in general increasingly quoting UK DEFNCE JOURNAL.

Well done George and the team at UKDJ.

Bruce Harper
Bruce Harper (@guest_818237)
7 days ago

Cut my teeth on these Brill machines when they first entered service. They served well in Germany and I will always respect their abilities. Pity the bean crunchers and tactically inept have decided on their demise. (Ex R.E.M.E artisan)

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_818594)
6 days ago
Reply to  Bruce Harper

Arte et marte!