The Ministry of Defence’s Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) has initiated a competitive tender process for the procurement and support of Boresight kits for the AJAX armoured fighting vehicle.
The announcement outlines an opportunity for suppliers to engage with the MoD on this project.
DE&S has confirmed an immediate requirement for 295 Boresight kits, with an initial delivery of 50 kits needed within four to six months to achieve Initial Operating Capability (IOC) for the AJAX. The contract, which is set to be awarded under the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations (DSCPR) 2011, also includes options for other teams within the MoD to purchase additional quantities of the kits to meet their own needs.
According to the tender notice, the overall estimated quantity for these optional purchases is around 400 kits, although this figure may change as the requirements of other teams mature. The MoD estimates the contract value to be between £2 million and £5 million, with a potential duration of one to five years, depending on the confirmed needs and scaling from other teams.
A Cyber Risk Assessment has classified this project as ‘Very Low’ risk. The tender notice advises potential bidders to review DEFSTAN 05-138 to ensure they can comply with the necessary control measures associated with this classification.
Interested suppliers are invited to express their interest by completing the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ) available on the Contracts Finder website. The MoD will assess the PQQs using specified selection criteria and plans to down select between three and five suppliers who will then be invited to tender.
“It is the intention of the Authority to down select to between three and five suppliers and Invite to Tender only those economic operators who successfully complete the PQQ,” the notice states.
In other news, the British Army’s Ajax armoured vehicle programme is progressing towards achieving Initial Operating Capability (IOC) by December 2025, according to a recent response from the Ministry of Defence.
In response to a question from Luke Akehurst, Labour MP for North Durham, Minister of State Maria Eagle confirmed the programme’s timeline.
Eagle stated, “The Armoured Cavalry Programme (Ajax) is due to achieve Initial Operating Capability by December 2025 as planned.”
This comes amid ongoing scrutiny of the programme’s financial and operational milestones.
Efforts to expedite the delivery of the troubled Ajax armoured vehicles have been outlined previously. In response to a Written Parliamentary Question earlier in the year, James Cartlidge, the then Minister of State for Defence under the previous Conservative government, detailed the steps taken to improve the delivery rate.
Cartlidge explained, “As a result of revised contractual terms with MOD, General Dynamics UK have introduced a number of measures designed to improve the delivery rate. These measures include extending the current shift patterns, optimising the build line, and increasing collaborative practices.”
The Ajax programme has faced significant challenges and delays, with the Ministry of Defence disclosing earlier this year that it had already spent £4.096 billion on the project as of May 2024. The programme aims to deliver a total of 446 vehicles between 2024 and 2028, with yearly deliveries varying from 93 in 2024 to 125 in 2027.
Additionally, 143 vehicles are set to be retrofitted and delivered by 2029.
The vehicles are intended to enhance the British Army’s protection, mobility, and situational awareness. However, despite substantial investment and effort, the programme’s progress towards meeting key operational capabilities has been slow. Initial delivery numbers have paused just short of IOC delivery targets for several months.
According to the British Army website:
“The Ajax family has been designed to be at the heart of the British Army’s future armoured fleet, offering enhanced lethality, survivability, reliability, mobility and all-weather intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance (ISTAR) capabilities through its advanced sensor suite.
Ajax is currently in the Demonstration and Manufacture phases of its lifecycle. The Army has been conducting training on early Ajax vehicles in both operational Units and Training establishments, with Reliability Growth Trials progressing well. Operationally deployable platforms will be delivered to the Field Army throughout 2024, with the Household Cavalry Regiment being the first Army unit to convert to Ajax.”
I thought Ajax was a fixed price contract? What with no Boresight kit?? So presumably this contract and then the installation and commissioning contract (presumably more money to Gd?) is addition to contract values already announced?
This contract has bugger all to do with GD.
Designed for but not equipped with ? I thought that was a Royal Navy thing 🤣
A Boresight kit is something you use to maintain zero relatively quickly on almost any firearm. Designing Ajax deliberately not to be able to be boresighted would have been a nightmare. So no, it’s not the situation you are describing.
All RN guns have a boresight kit and adaptor. 556 up to 45 have boresight kit. Onboard you do it a bit differently. You have a datum mark on the ship structure that is set up on build/installation of weapon mounts. There is a mark for the boresight to look at and the various director optics should also look at it. It ensures there are no system errors or misalignments (Backlash etc) when you slew the system onto the marks. For individual weapons with on/off mount sights you also do a distant object check. Lock on the director to a… Read more »
They expect to get through the whole competitive bid process and receive 50 kits within 4 to 6 months? What have they been doing whilst GD have been making a mess of the Ajax contract?
I am no expert on this sort of thing, far from it but the whole programme has been dogged by all manner of upgrading and re design to meet requirements, yet this one presumes a rather crucial element is deemed on the surface at least an afterthought? Maybe it’s genius not committing to something during a much delayed project so as to avoid potential obsolescence but being a cynic…
This isn’t a redesign, it’s just buying a bit of kit to allow you to make sure the weapon maintains zero. Pretty much every AFV with a gun has one.
The Army has been using an older type of boresight with an adaptor. I would suggest the MOD is now looking for a specific 40mm boresight to issue as CES.
Looking at the technical spec of the CTA40, why are boresight kits necessary?
ALL weapons in a mount with optics need boresighting, this means aligning the weapon line of bore (the barrel centre) with the boresight mark in the optics. In the case of AJAX this means aligning the day cameras (x2), the TI cameras (x2), the gun camera and the Cmdrs aux sight. Why would the technical specs of the CT40 indicate otherwise?
I assumed that for a vehicle contracted 10 years ago, all kit necessary to make it work properly would have either been included in the contract or acquired years ago. GDUK paid $1b to LMUK for the Ajax turrets.
As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, the Army has boresights but they may be adaptations. I suspect that this contract is for a CT40 specific item that will form part of the CES.
GD were chosen in 2010. It is generally acknowledged the choice of ASCOD & GD and the structure of the contract (no main gate review between what was a huge development project and production contract placement) was the wrong choice for the Army and the country. UK taxpayers have paid to re tool GD’s Spanish factory. Merthyr has received all of £12M investment from a £5.5B contract. The promised jobs have never appeared and GD’s promise that British companies would be my approached to supply all parts proved to be untrue. GD have refused to admit their issues such as… Read more »
You would have thought the manufacturers of the CT40 Cannon would have thought of that one !🤔
What a f…… mess this programme is.😡
BANG!
There goes that trigger again.
Left a bit, right a bit….😉
🤣
Maybe, but many criticisms are valid. This program has been a disaster for the country and British Industry – it has ongoing issues that will never be fully resolved- mitigated maybe! and we are a user community of one with GD trying to profit from the lessons learned and paid for by British Taxpayers. which will benefit their Spanish factory and US parent. I will be fascinated to see Ajax’s availability for service at FOC -(obviously minus MORPHEUS) mtbf, reliability data etc
It has been but I don’t understand why this is a issue and in the end we are going to end up with a really good vehicle
For the sake of the people in them I do hope sp Tim, I really do.
There was a video put out recently by bovington tank museum where they ask the troops first issued with it what they think and they seem happy with it
Well they arnt going to say it’s an absolute load of crap are they, let’s hope what they said was 💯 honest and we are finally going to get a quality bit of kit!
They love to compare it to the 60 year old cvrt when they talk about how amazing it is. If that’s the bench mark I’m a little nervous. Lynx and CV90 MK4 could well be a generation beyond Ajax in terms of digital connectivity with drones, aps and optics, since Ajax was ordered over 10 years ago now. I hope I’m wrong.
As always ⏲will tell.
Has this need only just occurred to them? Anyone with half a brain would have the supporting equipment in place BEFORE the system enters service!
Does it suggest that originally it was deemed that it wasn’t necessary and now the trials have shown it is? If so what has led to that, is it biased towards the positive ie an additional desirable piece of add on kit or towards the more negative, ie the need is crucial due to failures elsewhere in accomplishing what’s required? And if it is indeed the latter is it connected to any previous problems with the vehicle that have had lateral effects here by not truly being sorted but simply ameliorated in their own right enough to be deemed acceptable.
No, a Bore Sight module would always have been necessary. It probably has much more to do with in year budgets, and the decision not to purchase them until actually required.
What’s a Boresight kit? Is it to calibrate the barrel sight?
It’s a kind of telescope with a graticule inserted into the end of the barrel. The barrel (bore) is then carefully aligned with a distant aim point at a specific range. The optical sights are then adjusted so that the line of bore and the line of sight coincide. This process is conducted whenever live firing takes place.
Oh yeah, I have seen that before in videos. I didn’t know what the technical term was. Thanks.
Every day’s a school day👍🤓
Would the process be completed before each combat engagement? Same process for MBTs? 🤔
Not before each engagement on ops but certainly as an opportunity arises and definitely before each range day commences.
👍
For MBT’s you might not bore sight before an engagement, but you would use the Muzzle Reference System Laser, to measure any changes to the barrel due to heat, gravity, etc and make corrections off that. Boresight is the “rough” calculation, MRS fine (I don’t think the CTA40 has a MRS). Fun fact; you also boresight rifles from time to time (when you don’t have the opportunity to properly zero the sights on a range). Either using a rifle collimator (boresight kit) or by eyeballing it (point disassembled rifle at target, look down barrel, look down sight and make sure… Read more »
I actually have access to a bore-sight kit for 5.56/6/6.5/7/7.62 mm (various adapters). Only use it if a new or refit of a scope. Allows me to get on paper as a start. Luckily a relative used to be a gunsmith. Said relative is quite good at eyeballing it (not me). Once watched him straighten a rifle barrel (another relative), with a hammer by eye. Looked the same to me before & after. Karl 8x scope says different.
Confirmed requirement of 295 Boresight kits with an initial requirement to obtain 50 Boresight kits within 4-6 months of contract award to meet AJAX’s IOC (Initial Operating Capability).
The Houshold Cavalry Regiment in Bulford seems pleased now that they finally have Ajax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmSbOZPCbc8&t=328s
The Household Cavalry Regiment in Bulford has received their first Ajax and seem quite happy.
there is a video on youtube that was posted yesterday by Tank Museum channel, and about halfway through and you can hear soldiers give their feedback.
PS i cant seem to post the link so just go to Youtube and search Ajax Tank Museum for video
Ajax is a “trigger article” for some posters here.
From what I’ve heard the soldiers are chuffed with it. Massive upgrade from Scimitar in firepower, protection, and above all, ISTAR.
👍
Well no MORPHEUS is there? GD took £700m from the British taxpayer and delivered nothing
Agreed but many criticisms are valid
To be fair Daniele it would be truly shocking if it were anything but! Scimitar was designed in the late 60’s! Also comparing a 12T vehicle to a 42T vehicle in protection may not be entirely fair without also comparing ground pressure and utility for deployment on soft ground etc. Try comparing a car designed and manufactured in the same period to a current model! I know everyone wants to focus on the positives but as observers we should retain critical thinking skills and detachment. The vehicle has had and will continue to have issues. One of the most fascinating… Read more »
True to be fair re upgrade over Scimitar! 😏😆
I loved Scimitar myself.
The Ukrainians seem to love CVR(T) too! Its lighter weight and low ground pressure is well suited to the soft ground out there! Not sure Ajax would be!
Bring back Scimitar!
As it is, the British Army has got rid of most of its SP Artillery and the entire CVRT fleet ( bar Stormer ) before the replacements fully arrive.
Watched the video ta . OT, YouTube is becoming unwatchable. A 17 minute video with over 8 minutes of ads, plus more after the video had finished. £10.99/13.99pm to watch ad free? -Extortion & beyond the means of many, including me. I’ll be watching far fewer YT & probably giving up part way, so all the content makers I watch will lose out. Very rare indeed I buy anything advertised. Intrusive advertisers I generally bycott.
Anybody that has ever served knows that the soldiers concerned are not free to ‘spill the beans’
Naturally the bento’s better than vehicles that are thirty years plus old and have never been properly upgraded! The Army have prevaricated for thirty years even though after Op Granby The commons defence committee recommended that ‘as a matter of urgency for the safety of the vehicle users a stabilised gun be fitted. That was over thirty years ago!!! The Army did nothing even though product was available ie Desert Warrior and Warrior 2000. The Army thought UOR’s would go on forever!
IOC December 2025. Considering the whole program has been so painfully convoluted to follow & it seemed it would never produce anything for the army than a huge waste of money, I’m glad we’ll end up with usable kit.
Did these things have all their problems fixed or did they just sign off on reduced capabilities to get the program moving again?
Apparent issues fixed to the MOD’s satisfaction and trials/ production continuing.
So the 27 critical defects are not real issues? Only apparent issues? I think this is one of the real issues with the program as a whole – GD’s insistence they can do no wrong, and everything is the fault of the Army/MOD. Even Carew Wilks when questioned in parliament claimed noise & vibration were a ‘Feature’ of the design. The quality and process control on hulls from Spain has been appalling how they ever passed FAI is a mystery? Or they just didn’t? It was apparent that GD on Foxhound tried to force Ricardo to move straight to production… Read more »
You have to admit though, it should not have happened? Korea would have designed & produced two armoured systems in the same timeframe & done a better job (I think they in fact, did). Did they fix AJAX. Possibly. It should not have needed fixing. Fix the design before you start building it. Lynx & Redback have been literally broken, rebuilt & broken again. (& again). All before actual production started. They were rebuilding both while still being actively broken. Engineers were not sitting in ivory towers saying it should work. Want to test any sort of vehicle, give it… Read more »
Interesting concept, just like RGT I suppose. GD have done a load of trials, admittedly whilst still designing the thing to meet constantly moving goalposts (that is a problem, the parallel design/production route) and have now handed the reigns over to the British Army who, as we know are pretty good at finding weaknesses.
cheers
The difference is very few nations have the terrain options that Australia does & a mindset that thinks everyone is a potential rally driver (even if your vehicle weighs 35 ton).
The other thing to make parallel design/production work is you need to start with a solid design & modification needs to be relative. Neither AJAX or F35 started with a solid design that related to now & we have all been paying the price ever since.
You really think 27 critical defects have all been completely resolved in two years? Ask again when FoC is due end 2029!
Another major “ball-drop” by the Project Team in DE&S.
This should have been identified as part of the ILS process.
Unbelievable, and the head of DE&S got a massive bonus. What a cluster.
Firstly, what is wrong with taking the ‘boresights’ off of the Warrior vehicles, and fitting them to the new wrecks… opps soz, the Ajax vehicles? If optics need replacing, surely it would save a shed load of money to replace those, then fit them? Give REME something to do for a change. Secondly, surely BAE systems have a boresight on their CV90’s? That being the case, why doesn’t the MOD simply buy these ‘off the shelf’ as it were? Thirdly… Thales (by way of a subcontract from bae systems) made the boresights for the Challenger III’s. Why not buy some… Read more »
Try getting a 120mm boresight to fit a 40mm cannon, bit tight. 🙄
Bofors CV 90 cannon is 40 mm , your comment is stupid !
Depends on variant. My comment stands, it is a piss take.
You obviously have no idea what a boresight is or how it works. They are designed to fit a very specific bore size, not one size fits all ffs.
Hey mouthy, I know exactly what a boresight is! The point you missed smartarse, is using and or modifying kit already owned, IF it is possible. Then go read the rest of the post!!!!!
If you know what a boresight is then the rest of your post doesn’t make sense. How can you use a 120mm boresight or a 30mm (without an adaptor) on a 40mm? I use boresights every week.
“Hey mouthy…”
😉 I must remember that one.
🤣🤣
I suspect I’m about to get something memorable on another thread.
Oh. Fight. Oh Goody. Where? ( checks history )
Not a fight, it’s just going to be amusing. The Lebanon evacuation article.
I know, I’m being daft. Commented on it.
If you knew what a boresight is you wouldn’t have made the comment about optics being replaced.
Warrior boresights are 30mm, yet Ajax has a 40mm cannon, so they won’t fit. A bit odd calling our newest vehicle, and one getting favourable comments from the troops, a wreck. Ajax optics don’t need replacing; where do you get that idea from?
Not sure why you thing REME don’t have much to do, or was that banter?
Buying CV90 or CR3 boresights makes no sense as they would not fit a 40mm barrel.
👍
Aren’t the guns different sizes?
Seriously? Is everyone getting their knickers in the twist over buying Bore Sights?
Are they going to get pissy about buying other CES kit as well!?
If you are grumbling about this IMO then you’re just looking for a reason to be upset about AJAX.
Boom. In a nutshell.
It’s getting boring.
Got it in one👍
Not really fixed price contract if it did not come with all the CES kit , hope they supplied the B.V.’s .
Um, yes it is. A fixed price contract just means the price won’t change, it has ZERO bearing on what is or is not included in terms of “extras” in the contract.
Although I’d heard of it, I had no idea what a Boresight was until the army posters explained.
Seems a pretty standard thing. Amazed that rows can break out amongst the community over something so mundane?
I’m amazed that I even bothered to explain what a boresight is, seems there’s no pleasing folk.
🙄
Well you are in the minority as most people have the view that the whole AJAX project is a shambles however you dress it up with your propaganda . GD also failed the 395 million Morpheus project which you used to defend as well . Clearly you and you isolation mounts live in a alternate reality !
(Because random idiots on a online forum determine reality, rather than the end users right?)
Pete, my “reality” is much more real than yours apparently. Whenever you post anything about the AJAX programme is it very negative and certainly anything I post is immediately seized upon as “propaganda”. This is patently absurd, I just speak from a position of some knowledge what with my contacts in the military and industry associated with the AJAX.
All the best
Ian
You previously stated a few years ago that there was nothing wrong with AJAX and the press had exaggerated minor problems, you also said Morpheus was on track. The fact that GD tried to hide the issues to carry on and get the milestone payments has caused the anger, I will stop posting on AJAX if you stop the emperor’s new clothes posts !
Blah blah. You can’t educate pork, as my dear old dad used to say.
Just wait until we buy Prybars and spare track links pins so we can break and bash track…
Lucky the track is made by Cooks Defence or we would be waiting five years for GD to deliver !
I’m sure you’d still find a way to get your knickers in a twist. You seem pretty determined to do so at any cost.
That’s “our Pete”!
Sigh!
Here we go again!