The Ministry of Defence has ruled out the transfer of surplus Warrior infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) to Ukraine, citing concerns about cost, suitability, and the burden on Ukraine’s logistics and training systems.
Responding to a written question from David Taylor MP (Labour – Hemel Hempstead), Defence Minister Luke Pollard said:
“Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) are key platforms for the British Army to meet Defence Commitments. Although small numbers are scheduled for disposal, these will have been selected in line with serviceability and suitability for role. As such, without substantial investment, they are not likely to offer significant capability to Ukraine and providing such small numbers would only increase the diversity of Ukraine’s armoured vehicle fleet – increasing their logistic and training burdens.”
The response comes as a public petition calling for the transfer of surplus Warrior vehicles to Ukraine has passed 14,000 signatures, prompting an official government response in the coming days.
The petition argues that Warrior IFVs—already due for disposal by 2030—“could be sent to bolster Ukraine’s defences without new cost to the taxpayer.” It also states: “We believe Infantry Fighting Vehicles have proved to be an extremely effective tool on the battlefields of Ukraine… this transfer may be beneficial as it comes with no new cost to the taxpayer.”
Warrior, introduced in the 1980s, is being phased out as part of the Army’s shift toward the Boxer mechanised platform. Defence Minister Maria Eagle previously confirmed in Parliament that 359 Warriors remain in service, with their out-of-service date set for 2027.
“As the Out of Service date for Warrior is 2027, with all vehicles withdrawn from service by the end of the decade, any that remain held by the Department beyond this will be classed as surplus to requirements,” said Eagle. “Plans for Warrior beyond its Out of Service Date are yet to be formally agreed.”
The petition will be considered for parliamentary debate if it reaches 100,000 signatures before its 4 October 2025 deadline. You can view or sign the petition here.
At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!
In other words, we are hanging on to them until we figure out what we are doing.
Agreed, despite all the blurb, that was my take on it too.
Are we about to see WSP brought back from the dead???
Pollard is having a laugh. Warriors are not a key bit of kit. They are all parked up, no BA units. Foot dragging feet, confiscating, do nothing. What the current MoD do best. By the time the MoD makes a decision, Putin will have taken Sumy, Kharkov, pressuring the Baltics, and things falling apart with NATO.
The UKs 630 WARRIORS, 300 SCIMITARS need to get to Ukraine ASAP. Ukraine can sort out the RARDEN 30mm ammo line, KONTAK 5 EPA up-arming and engine /transition parts. Locally.
The UK don’t need them. No British Army unit man them. They are just parked up 3 miles from Tewksbury, doing noting.
Not so, Rob.
Warrior is still in use by several units.
All CVRT, including Scimitar, were withdrawn, so there might well be lots of those at the Ashchurch site you mention.
Warriors are used by a couple of units in Estonia only. The rest in store. So who are trained and drives the rest stored at Tewksbury. Nobody. Johnson Beharry et al? These folk have all left or in the territorials with a beer belly. It looks like a paper exercise of MoD nonsense excused, of not looking too small. Seriously we are looking at hundreds of unused and unassigned vehicles. These hundreds of Warriors are at MoD Ashchurch. They could be donated at the rate of 100 pa minimum.
By the time the UK MoD thinks about or gets around to donating them to UKR, the Russians would have attritted them over a Donbass front. UKR out of IFVs, M2s, CV90s due to drone.It takes 6-12 months to train a UKR on these, some already, it hakes 12-24 months to retain a British Army unit on them. But now they, BA units are training on Ajax family and Boxers. No stored Warriors. It all sounds and smells wrong. Pollard and Healey need challenging furter on the detail, not the excuses/flanneling.
Warriors are still used by the armour infantry and armoured cavalry.. that’s 4 infantry battalions and 3 cavalry regiments.. that’s 7 formations..
There is not actually an operational boxer battalion yet nether is there an operational Ajax regiment.. so there are plenty of people in the British army who can operate warrior.
The rate at which the British army is getting boxer and Ajax is anemic.. so it will be years before they have numbers to equip and convert the AI to Mec and get all three warriors equipped cavalry units to Ajax…
As for money you can convert 4 warriors for the price of 1 boxer.. the army needs at least another 1500 armoured fighting vehicles.. so cost wise the money will be there if that is how they decide to go … it was only in year treasury nonsense that killed the warrior upgrade programme.. need to be war ready will very likely override that.
In addition to what Jonathan said, Ukraine has already been giving it’s Scimitars to Ukraine.
Read the article, 359 remain in service.
Paul. Surely the MoD view is clear. WR will be replaced by Boxer in Inf battalions in the ABCTs. WR in interim service with armoured recce units will be replaced by AJAX.
Yes, the MOD view is as you say. But that view dates from 2021. A lot has changed since then, militarily, technologically, financially and politically. The MOD 2021 view might indeed be the way things go; the Boxer build rate might accelerate; maybe some Boxers will get the RS60 RWS with a cannon. We don’t know; but I’m sure the powers that be will be re-reviewing all the options and timescales.
Paul, yes that MoD decision dates to March 2021, but I have yet to see a policy change. There has been much discussion ‘on these pages’ about additional ARES being procured and converted into an IFV, but I’ve never seen any of those comments attributable to MoD. Equally, your idea about some Boxers getting RS60 RWS with cannon do not have official endorsement. Perhaps the DCP to be written as a consequence of the recent SDR will shed some official light on this.
I am certain that Boxers in the ABCTs for the Infantry is a disastrous step – a huge reduction in lethality and probably mobility, compared even to 40-year old Warriors.
Serendipity; it’s reoported( armyrecognition) that the Germans plan to put the Puma turret on Boxer to create a wheeled IFV.
Hopefully a bit of sense is starting to filter in and they are thinking about extending the life of the warriors.. it’s the cheapest way to keep 350 tracked IFVs.
Either use them or donate
They are using them the army does not have IFVs just hanging around. Once these are gone they are gone and the army does not have 8-10 million o pop to replace them.. better to shove them in a garage and have time for the correct decision to be made ( refit and extent their lives) than give them away..
Don’t agree, the diesel Perkin Condor engines, hydraulics, electrics degrade if stored outside like Ashcroft, Tewksbury. MoD Ashcroft is not Sierra. This is what the Russians have found with their BMPs, needing total engine overhauls, which is added cost/time.
Indeed you would not store them outside, infact we actually need to start a lifex program straight away.. the British army needs to move up to 6 armoured infantry battalions.. the army simply does not have enough armoured vehicles for its size.. look at the French army has about 6500 armoured vehicles vs the British armies 3000 odd.. the simple fact is the British army needs to ensure all its battalions have access to Armoured fighting vehicles and protected mobility vehicles.. until it can do that it’s not in a position to give much of anything away.
Interesting, is it possible the powerpacks and other such corrosion sensitive components have been removed?
Point. The British Army might have 6 armoured infantry battalions, but 4 have not trained on Warriors since 2018-20 era. It takes 12-24 months for training, training on Warriors, less for Ukrainians. In that time, 200-300 Warriors are planned for decommissioning. No Gen Z Calvary filling in. The trend is the opposite. Its a paper exercise. Putin does not have the same timetable.
Point 2 The 2 Armoured units currently on Warriors are transitioning from Warrior to Ajax, the Royal Lancers, Royal Dragon Lancers. The other Cavalry/ Light Armoured units (not CH2) are on Jackal, Cayotes, and Boxers coming in. So no Warrior future. Likely they will be on the Ajax Fleet and 7 variants 2025-2028, not Warriors.
Point 3. The Two week TACO will not be supplying UKR with anything other than PAC2 refill PATRIOTS and intel from now on, parts. M2s will stay in Sierra. That tap has closed.
Point 4 Extended program. Yes, but the UK MoD need their feet held over a fire on this. ie Definite Plans, Timescale, Factory Capacity, Contracts now, Cost; or just ship to Ukraine as a job lot! The UK MoD do need roasting for Decisions. Do nothing is peacetime option, not a current option.
Warrior is not going to be out of service in 2028, both Boxer and Ajax procurement rates are too slow for that.
One armoured infantry and one armoured cavalry regiment are transitioning and will be operational for 2026.. Thats 25% the other 75% of the British army armoured infantry and armoured cavalry is still using warrior. At present you are looking at less than 100 operational standard boxers and ajax that is it ( the first operational boxer was delivered in January and by mid April the army had a grand total of 91 intial operating standard Ajax) with delivery of each at only around 100 each per year you are looking at 2030 for the last armoured cav and armoured infantry to have moved over.. and that is surprised surprise the out of service date for warrior.. but even with the 600ish boxers and 450 ajex the army will still be short around 1500-2000 armoured fighting vehicles..which is why it should lifex ex warrior.. be because 600 extra IFVs ( instead of a big fat zero) will be handy.
Jonathan, it should not take years to make a decision on the future fate of WR. I thought the decision had been made 4 years ago. Infantry WRs are being replaced by Boxer.
The number is actually 615. Clive Lewis. MP for Norwich and ex army, checked this with the MoD last year 2024. 13 were “economic write offs”, which means the fleet is still large.
If the MoD were going to keep them, and stick a GE Ajax type 40mm or CV 90 turret on them; its a time to make a decision. We are at WAR, MoD procurers need a fire under them.
Hi Rob the 615 was all variants.. remember the army only started with 489 IFV variants of warrior with a cannon…..
The most important element of the Warrior is as a troop carrier, numbers, IFV armoured protection that gets troops to and from the front more safely, the 30mm cannon is a bonus. Not every Warrior variant needs a 30mm cannon, 1-2 coaxial 7.62 mm L94A1 chain guns will do. Basically anything that can stand up to a BMP 1 or 2, or scooby doo van, motorcycle suicide squad. The UAFs could start up their own non NATO 30mm RARDEN ammo line. The UK prism of use with CH2 with not be the UKR prism of use. UAF will likely add Soviet EPA, anti drone caged, just like they have with the NATO stored, now reborn Leo 1 A5.
If the UK MoD is vacillating about the Warriors and the original 40mm turret update, they should say so, whether Ajax turret or CV90 turret. But sitting on the fleet is not good enough.
No sorry don’t agree, the cannon that an IFV like warrior provides is the most impactful element.. any old APC can carry a squad to the point it dismounts and moves to contact.. the important bit is the direct fire provided by the cannon that is the different between armoured and mec infantry.
My point was a Warrior variant with a RARDEN 30mm cannon is the most useful, so send these. Its not stabilised, a small point. But second point, sending non 30mm cannon Warrior variants as APCs would be valid and useful. i. e what Italy have done with 400 aged VCC-2 Camilinos. UAFs needs both the IFV/APC numbers, now. The RARDEN 30mm ammo is specialised ammo supply chain and not compatible with the NATO standard 30mm round / cannons found on other IFVs. RARDEN is 1-2mm longer. But this should not be a barrier with UKR being able to produce these rounds locally with their inventive MIC. Scimitars, 300 are also RARDEN 300mm ammo so the it would make sense to send all Warriors and Scimitars to UKR.
If the UK MoD still have revised plans to put Ajax/CV90 stabilised 40mm cannoned turrets on the Warrior fleet chassis, they should say so, not give the UK MOD “key platforms for the British Army to meet Defence Commitments” BS line. IMHO
And what does the British army fighting with ? The British armies armoured vehicle capabilities is a joke at present and removing warrior and essentially the British army is F%cked.
The only thing that should be happening to warrior is a lifex program with a budget of say 2 million a vehicle.
In reality the best think that could happen for Ukraine in regards to IFV is if the EU and UK approach the US to buy a large number of Bradley’s.. the US has a vast supply of old Bradley IFVs stashed away…
People say giving warrior has no cost.. yes it does a new IFV is between 10-15 million.. that’s the cost.. because the army and MOD will end up needing an IFV.
That’s the point. Even if British army armoured units (people) retained on Warriors; they would not be ready, operational until 2027. That’s also assuming the British Army could recruit and train/ retrain another 2000-3000 plus personnel on top of the existing levels to operate Warriors. GenZ is not stepping up to the plate, territorials are getting their beer bellies, long toothed and might not fit. Putin has another timetable.
Yes but unless you can suddenly make 3 regiments worth of Ajax and 3 battalions of boxer the army will be walking to battle if you take away warrior.. there is a reason the out of service date is 2030.. if Putin decides to go to war in 2027 you either leave half the army at home or they deploy with warrior.. and in reality not having an IFV is a huge mistake the army is going to have to rectify unless it wants to be the only army on the battlefield that just drives around in APCs.
The British Army has 1866 modern Boxers already in the IFV/APC variant, which is large. Warriors with wheels.
To Date 100-200 Ajax variants have been delivered to 3 British Army Regiments. The British Army have plenty enough kit; personnel to man all these they do not. They do not have enough personnel to man Warriors, Ajax, Boxers and the rest together. Warriors are surplus 2025-2030 and serve no, little purpose.
This warrants either the realise of 100-200 Warriors to Ukraine, or definite 100% costed commitment by the UK MoD to an extension 40m upgrade plan.
1866 boxers, you are joking.. they have only ordered just over 600 and the British army has zero boxers as IFV ordered, the first British army boxer was only delivered in January this year and the build rate is 100 per year.. they are hoping to have equipment one armoured infantry battalion for the very end of the year.. so at present there are probably about 50 boxers across the British army.
In regards to ajax about 100 have been delivered to the standard for initial operating capability and the army hopes to have 1 regiment equipped for the end of the year..that is it.
Neither boxer or Ajax are operational yet and will not be until a minimum end of this year, and even in 2026 there will only be 1 infantry battalion operational with boxer and 1 cavalry regiment operational with ajex…
at present the only operational vehicle the armoured infantry have is warrior and the only operational vehicle the armoured cavalry have is warrior.. you donate all the warriors and the British army is staying at home.
So to be very very clear 3 of the 4 armoured infantry regiments are mounted on warrior and 3 of the 4 armoured cavalry are mounted on warrior.. they all have and use these vehicles now.. if you take them away they will be walking..
The army has just finished an upgrade of the safety systems on 359 warriors.. Because they are all being used by their sections now.. the rest are part of the attritional reserve and maintenance pool and the 89 being decommissioned are more than likely being pulled apart for spare parts to keep the main fleet running.. because it will need to run for at least 5 years.
@Jonathan, 1866 Boxers! Imagine. We’d be in such a better place if that was even remotely true. I just want to point out as well that the Ajax numbers include the Ares Argus and Athena variants, so although 100 have been delivered that’s not 100 turreted fighty versions that have all gone to the cavalry.
Rob, your figures are totally wrong – where do you get them from?
623 Boxers (523 in Tr1; 100 in Tr2) ordered of which only 146 are Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV) ie APCs. No IFV variants ordered.
But the UK MoD has no plans for this. Its a dream. Yes, I would like 40mm extended life plan to happen, but its not, and the money in the SDR is not there. Ajax Fleet and several A variants are The Plan. The UK MoD plan is dispose at 100 per year until 2030, from 2025, 80 this year. Stored chassis don’t stay pristine, they degrade outside, especially if not run, maintained. 13 were scrapped last year 2024, because they had degraded so far with engines, transmission. “Economic write off” in the UK MoD ledger.
Bare in mind that with the delays to Ajax and the glacial pace of Boxer, these still equip the Armoured Infantry ( what little we have left – 4 Battalions, down from 9 in 2009 ) and also Squadrons of the RAC Armoured Cavalry Regiments.
As CVRT was, as usual, discarded before new equipment arrived.
What would the Armoured Cavalry do without Warrior?
Walk?
So this is welcome.
Probably revert back to the horse, Believe they still have a few in stock!
I guess they’re stealthyish, and cheap to run.
Armed motorbikes and golf buggies? Tried by the Russians/Ukrainians both in UKR. The British army were doing a little of this in the 1970s with display teams. E.g White helmets and signal teams, before the Syrians invented their White Helmets paramedics rebrand.
Long cabToyota Hilux with a .50 in the back mate….
Mate….it’s embarrassing! 😄 I know you jest, but this is the British Army, not some rag tag rabble in the desert!
We have to laugh, joking aside, I wonder if anyone else has pulled the dust sheet off the WSP prototype yet??
There’s absolutely no way the government can’t move defence spending to 3.5% GDP now, it’s just a question of when.
I think you have hit the key thing: once you decide that, on reflection we do need a tracked IFV, and you don’t have a lot to spend then WCSP or a variant thereof, must be considered. My guess is that the 359 number, regardless of how they are currently deployed or stored is the number which are serviceable enough to upgrade; the number of potential upgrades they are modelling.
Nah mate, Ford Ranger and Mitsubishi Barbarian.
🤣😂🤣, you’ve given this a worrying amount of thought Dern, who’s ahead in the trials?
Can’t have the same vehicles as the enemy, would be a nightmare for IFF you know?
Jokes aside, Ranger and Barbarian seem to be largely replacing Land Rovers as the general run about vehicle in the army.
Bare in mind that there are not enough personnel to man and train on 615 Warrior variants in store, perhaps 100-200. It takes 12-24 months to retrain a British armoured unit. Then te point is? These Beharry’s are either not around in previous numbers, or on other vehicles. The rest are territorials, or gone. Hundreds of these waxed and stored Warrior vehicles have not had a British unit near them for several years since coming out of Iraq etc. The lag times and training cycles are all wrong. By 2027, 200-300 Warriors out of the fleet would have been scrapped/ totally decommissioned sold from stocks/storage, and the currency lost. 80 are gone in 2025, 13 last year due to economic write of.
Wish we bought CV90s
Thank god for that.
The MOD can’t sit on the fence any longer.
Either LIFEX warrior with new turret CTA-40 armed and brimstone or purchase a new IFV.
Definitely don’t that the capacity to hand over our only IFV even if they are ancient.
In reality keeping the armoured infantry in warrior is one of the cheapest ways to support the lethality of the army.. and once the armoured cavalry are in Ajax get them to give their warriors back to the infantry and turn a couple of the mec infantry back into armoured infantry.
The heavy brigades really should have 6 armoured infantry battalions.
Exactly this. Which was the Army 2010 set up post 2010.
But this is moot and spurious. My challenge to Luke Pollard would be to get himself down to MoD Ashchurch, and turn the starter key on 10 random Warrior IFVs, of the fleet and see if they start! Bare in mind the British army are being transitioned out of Warriors. It has sufficient more modern armoured vehicles to kit out 6 Armed brigades. Problem, it does not have enough personnel to even man fully Boxers, now Ajax, Jackals, Cayotes etc; there aren’t enough solders to man and train on Warriors. It will take too long 2027 to retrain, even if they had. They don’t. The direction of travel is toward Ajax and fleet, 80% of Boxer fleet orders have been delivered. British Army is 74k, French Army is 118k.
Hoarding and storing Warriors does not have a purpose. If an extension and upgrade to a stabilised digital 40mm platform was definite, yes, fair enough, but its not! Otherwise folks and democracy are dying in Ukraine. They need IFVs/APVs more to play western defence, than been sat around, unmanned, car parked, hoarded and left to their scrap fate at MoD Ashchurch. Use or LOSE.
6 Armoured Brigades? In what world!? The British Army has barely 2 Armoured Brigades, even when Boxer arrives in it’s full order, the current orbat is for 4 Armoured Infantry Battalions in 2 Brigades. The Army doesn’t even have deployable 6 Brigades PERIOD, let alone 6 armoured ones!
80% of Boxer delivered!? Not in this universe.
Problem is the UK is not building enough troops, not the kit or kit numbers. GenZ have gone AWOL.
UKR have 600k troops to train, man and fight. Send the Warriors to UKR, their need is greater and more urgent.
Not impressed by the tired old line about “this generation” that’s been trotted out every generation since 1850. Especially when you don’t seem to have any grasp of the Army’s orbat (hint the issue is less about people “going AWOL” or “building troops” (is English even your native language?) but about the Army’s maximum establishment as set out by the government and the lack of fighting brigades that it has due to that.
But sure throw in a stupid (and yes it is stupid) comaprison to a nation that’s actually in a war (because contrary to what you’ve claimed we are not in a war), and has conscription, and doesn’t have a navy and a minimal airforce for a dishonest numbers comparison why don’t you?
Dern, done my time and service, over to Gen Z. They can debate it out, what is tired, stupid or real. Points made, bar 2 errors. Hope they know what is likely to happen to those 600k Ukrainian troops if UKR is overcome, care of allies not sending stored kit/IFVs. UKR has the best fighting Army in Europe. Believe it or not, the UK have been in a war since 2006. Not a kinetic war as most understand, but a serious and stoked Russkiy Mir proxy, hybrid and information war.
“Bar 2 errors” yeah no. Bar clearly not knowing what you are talking about.
Ignore him. Either on the wind up or a woeful lack of knowledge / reading comprehension.
I’m very tempted to agree, it’s poes law in action.
That’s why I bowed out of this one early and left it to Jonathan, who has shown a lot of patience.
@Daniele well as you know I’m famous for my patience lol
Oh crap I’m gutted I missed this little debate mate lol!!!! This geezer is either a crack head or more likely an absolute troll, giving a few random “knowledge” points to pretend he has subject matter knowledge. Gutted I missed it, could have been fun. Cheers.
Rob you have some really wrong information mate.. the first boxer was delivered 6 months ago and they are building them at around 100 a year that’s about 8 a month.so they probably have about 50 in total
The army does not have 6 armoured brigades it has 2 and a pretend one.. most of its infantry battalions don’t actually have organic protected mobility.. let alone proper APCs. As I said it’s got one of the smallest pools of armoured vehicles of any reference army. France has twice as many armoured vehicles as the British army.
The British army is trained on warrior.. because it’s THE VEHICLE ITS STILL USING…. 359 of them are deployed to battalions and regiments.. and the rest are essentially part of its maintaining pool or attrition reserves.. with the 80 to be decommissioned likely to be stripped for parts to keep the fleet running.
Yes, I concede facts on Boxers, my figures were NATO orders and deliveries.
I meant 6 regiments, not brigades. France has twice the armed vehicles because its almost twice the troop numbers to the British Army 118k v 74k.
Most Warriors are in storage, not heavily used or assigned or deployed to British Army units. I question the 359 figure. Many British Army units “were” trained on Warriors, not extensively now. One Regiment is Operational as a Warrior trained regiment, at a time, in rotation in Estonia eFP. 5th Rifles, Royal Welsh etc. If there are 359 vehicles deployed, ?? lets nail down the exact units and numbers they are assigned to, else they are in storage.
Rob there are deploying vehicles on operations.. that’s one battalion..but the battalions that are not deployed on operations still have their vehicles.. then you have the vehicles in the maintenance pools and the attritional reserves.
So you cannot say we have 50:vehicles deployed in Estonia so we only need 50 vehicles. Each regiment and battalion hold their own vehicles.. then you have the central pool.. so 600 vehicles is actually about what you need for the force structure we have 6 regiments and battalions equipped with warriors
That’s why we have 220 challenger tanks for 3 regiments.. even though we well only ever deploy one regiment of 56 tanks.. the other two none deployed regiments still have their complement of vehicles 56 each for 168 tanks in regiments.. then you have the training establishment tanks say 14 for a squadron, then you need your maintaining pool of vehicles in deep repair that’s 10% so about 22 then you have an attrition reserve of at least 1 squadron of 14…. Probably should be 2 squadrons worth.. so as you can see to deploy one type 56 regiment of 56 tanks into Europe you need around 220-240 vehicles.
The French army numbers include 8000 fight firefighters who are not actually soldiers and 9-10,000 French foreign legion who are essentially a light infantry force for overseas colonial deployment. Also the French marines are included in the numbers of the French army that’s 17,000 stronge bunch of Marines ,,,all those islands France owns. so the core European fighting field army of French.. is actually about 80,0000 to 85,0000 strong… and they are all essentially mec or armoured infantry etc.. that is why they have 6500 armoured vehicles. So yes the UK army of 73,000 could happily use about 4000-5000 armoured vehicles if it could get someone to buy them. The Uk has about 8 battalions of infantry that don’t have organic protected mobility vehicles.. so maybe just maybe we need more armoured vehicles than we have.
Not sure your figures add up mate. Good discussion. Which specific regiments have and operate Warriors specifically in 2025, and the numbers each. Where are they stored and maintained? Its understandable the Mod/BA want to hang on to fleets, even if they don’t use most. Most regiments operate other armoured vehicles and are not operating Warriors or getting regular training. The pooling claim is rather like a Petemkin village and hides to deceive, “we don’t use many, a bit, but we will, or maybe in 3 years, always nice to have 600 in the shed”. Many previous Warrior based regiments have been striped of their Warriors and given other armoured vehicles. eg 1 PWRR, Beharry’s regiment. which operated recently in Cyprus, Kosovo and Northern Ireland without warriors.
The Challenger 2 assignment is straight forward and specific, and each Challenger 2 has a specific number to the tank regiment and squadron/troop it is assigned to. i.e Challenger 2 Tank 62B Devil is assigned to 12 Troop, Dreadnaught Squadron, Royal Tank Regiment.
For someone who claims to have served you either have a very strange lack of knowledge or are being very selective.
You seem confused by the concept of Armoured Infantry discounting for specific ops (or even the concept of Rotational Battalions, hint there’s 5 infantry Battalions aligned to 3 Div, only 4 of them have Warrior because one is on a light role deployed rotation).
You also don’t seem to understand that Challenger and Warrior are operated in the same way, with specific warriors being aligned to specific roles within their battalions. So for example a Armoured Cav regiment has 48 Warriors. By the time you do the maths there are about 350 “slots” for Warriors across the 4 AI Battalions and 3 AC regiments, which largely accounts for the operational number, then, what Jonathan was talking about and I suspect you wilfully misconstrued, there is a central reserve for repair pools, training, overseas exercises etc.
Its a matter of use or lose them. Warriors been mainly stored and not been fully used, makes no sense for UK. They are very relevant to Ukraine, now. Scaling up training will take time, and to capability by 2027 it has little use. Additionally there must be doubt whether CH3 and revamped Warriors will play a future significant part, survivability for UK armoured capability, at lesser scales, expeditionary? Estonia? Things have changed. Same and old no longer works. BAOR capability, basing and scale are gone. Poland and Germany will do the vast amount of Tank and Armoured Infantry warfare, scale up for NATO in Eastern Europe, Baltic. Anti ballistic missile systems, Naval, ASW, Air Force, Drones, Missiles, Cyber, AI, Hybrid, Satellite are likely play a greater part for the UK, capability and relevance to defending the UK. i.e Mainland UK, assets and interests. 20 40 40.
Cool so multiple people have told you multiple times that there are seven units with Warrior, 3 Cavalry and 4 Infantry, and the 3 Cavalry units have Warrior specifically so they can keep training, and that means that the vast majority of IFV Warrior variants are still in active use. But go ahead and prove that you’re a troll by not bothering to engage with what anyone here has told you.
Sorry Dern, what you say about Calvary units is not correct. Just interested in the facts, currency and research.
Only The Royal Lancers have been purely on Warriors since 2022, the others are Reconnaissance, Armoured Calvary units. Future is most likely Ajax family for most, not Warrior. Training on Warriors 2025-2027 is a waste of training time. 2027, what then?
QDG operate Coyote.
RSGG operate Jackal
RDG were on warriors but transitioning to Ajax, Autumn 2025 180 Ajax
HCR are on Ajax, since 2024
QRH as of Jan 2025 are Ajax
LD are Jackal and Coyote
Warriors and training are past. Most don’t. Little justification 2025-2027. Now other than a rotational regiments supporting CH2s in Estonia, little point or uptake. CH3 enters service in 2027, most likely matched with 90 plus Ares, limited Warrior. The direction of travel is Ajax family equipped Calvary units.
Yeah no Rob, you don’t get to play this game, because your facts are laughably wrong to anyone who has even the remotest clue what they are talking about:
QDG does not “operate Coyote” Coyote is the support version of Jackal. Every unit that has Jackal will have Coyote in it’s HQ’s and support Squadrons. If you don’t know this that’s okay, but don’t mouth off about it.
QRH are a CR2 regiment, they are not transitioning to Ajax.
The three formation Recce regiments are HCR, RL, and RDG, none of which have transferred to Ajax and are not going to for a while due to the slow Ajax build rate (and as you have already proven nobody should pay you any heed over adotpion rates since you think nearly 2000 boxers are in service with the British army).
Again, if you bothered to, or where capable of, reading, you’d have seen that I said that Warrior is specifically being used by the three formation Recce regiments until Ajax is available, and was DIRECTLY refuting your stupid claim that nobody was training with Warrior. Warrior is literally being used by these units TO TRAIN while they are between CVRT and Ajax. At the moment only A Sqn HCR has Ajax, it’ll be a long time before all three Recce Regiments have converted fully onto it. (Also that 90 number you throw out is for all variants of Ajax, not just the turreted formation recce version, but hey you’ve already proven that, contrary to what you claim you couldn’t give a flying fuck about facts or the truth).
“Now other than rotational regiments in Estonia” nope. But this has been pointed out to you multiple times troll. All four Armoured Infantry Battalions are still on Warrior and will be for years to come because, again, Boxer is slow rolling off the production line (and no 2,000 in service).
Dern, your facts are blatantly out, skewed, over and out. Do your current research. Its paper stuff, not reality. If you were to a Calvary place like Swanton Morley, you would not see a Warrior IFV or training. You’d just see Jackal 2 armoured vehicles, training on these vehicles ready to go to Poland and Operation Cabrit. The Armoured Calvary are on Ajax for most or, going to Ajax, not going to Warriors. So there is little point training 2025-27 as said on yesterday Warriors, and 100% point training on Ajax, tomorrows kit, and attending the Ajax training centre. That’s before one gets on to RARDEN curtailed 30mm ammo chain, 30×170mm rounds, while NATO forces use a variety of 30mm calibers, most notably the 30×113mmB and 30×173mm cartridge. 170 is not 173mm. Are BAE still producing? They barely advertise.
Bore off you troll. You can’t even get the most basic things straight and you want to chop off about other people being wrong.
Oh and thanks for proving you can’t read. “If you went to Swanton Morely” yeah not shit the home of a regiment that’s equipped with Jackal (not Coyote as you claimed) you’d see Jackal. Maybe try going to Tidworth where the AI and FR battalions are actually based you utter moron (but again you’ve demonstrated that you can’t read so I’m done wasting my breath of an oxygen thief like you).
Refresh the warrior hulls, new as done for some cvrt.
The CVRT Hulls i think you mention were not refurbished – they were new Builds by BAES,this would need to be done with Warrior for the same result.
Is there any manufacturing facility in the uk that could upgrade these warrior vehicles with new turret extra armour and stuff . We have the facilities for Boxer and Ajax family vehicles but I assume they are busy. We have the Lockheed Martin turret facility which I would imagine would love an upgrade project , though i am not sure a fire on the move rilurret would fit the chassis ? Though even a 25mm round chassis would do the job . These ifv apc are just a chassis with engine , wheels stuck on . Surely there must be a place in uk that could smash some new chassis out for a cheap price.
Agreed, either Boxer 40mm or CV90 40mm turret. Its easier/ less time consuming than building a whole new IFV, you start with 600 working and proven hulls.
Either that, state, or send as a fleet job lot to UKR over 2-3 years, retrain with trained territorial instructors. Beharry types who know te kit, engines, transmissions.
The Ajax turret won’t fit on the Warrior Chassis, however the WCSP Turret with the CTA 40mm would and it is a LM project so the industrial capacity *should* be there if the money appeared to get the Warriors upgraded.
I thought the LM turret facility at Ampthill had been closed due to, surprise surprise, the WCSP programme being binned?
Finney, I understand that LM laid off some staff at Ampthill but that doesn’t mean the production facility was demolished. Skilled local workers could be re-hired in the light of a firm contract.
Like I’ve said many times before help the Ukrainians by all means ,but think it’s wise to hang onto our Warriors .HMG may of made the right decision this time round 😀
I actually think they are covering off their bets and not releasing the Warriors is Smart move and not just for the U.K. but Ukraine as well. Think about it, their logistics must be an absolute nightmare with so much varied kit delivered from god knows where adding Warriors just add# to that problem (like it says in the article).
So why not think outside the box for a change and take a leaf out of Ukraines book of how to get by and win. If we want to help Ukraine but not release our own Warrior IFV at this point, then let’s get creative and help them in another way.
Up to now Military Aid for Ukraine has come out of the Defence budget, well after today it can come out of the new “Defence related budget” so why not buy something else instead, but tie in with other NATO countries who also have to increase funding.
The most numerous Western IFV is the M2 Bradley and the US has 000’s of them in store and to be frank not much use for them anymore, so why not buy a lot of them of the US (see if they will donate them free). Then get a couple of the Eastern European countries to fund regenerating them in their countries (lower labour costs), and send them to Ukraine.
Ukraine gets M2s which they seem to prefer and simplifies their logistics, US is seen as cooperating (and not costing them $$), European countries work together and it pisses Putin off.
The issue with that is the US F-, I mean, President wants Putin to win.
I feel giving Ukraine FV432 makes a lot of sense.
There’s loads of them, plenty of spares and they are easy to use.
I know they’re an APC, but sure Ukraine would appreciate.
How does MoD get the view that they would be of little benefit to Ukraine and would pose several problems for UKR. Have they consulted with the Ukrainian MoD?
We need to take a step back. There are several issues. WCSP was cancelled but Warrior has to stay in service until its replacement as a IFV is chosen and manufactured. Secondly, Boxer was intended to replace FV432 as an APC. We have gifted lots of these to Ukraine but their Boxer replacements are not appearing fast enough. Thirdly, we have no self propelled 155mm artillery; Boxer RCH has been chosen as the replacement. I think it was Einstein who said, make things as simple as possible, but no simpler. We have made ourselves too dependent on Boxer; it is a constraint, Kaizan gone mad. We should solve the FV432 APC problem with Patria, keep Warrior effective as an IFV until either it can be replaced by Boxer with the Puma turret. That said, it would ease the pressure on Boxer production if WCSP were re-instated, since you could argue that the most urgent Boxer variant is RCH155.
Paul, has the MoD ever said that the army would get a replacement IFV since they cancelled WCSP? We all know that the army needs an IFV but that was not my question. The MoD has only ever, rather bizarrely, said that Boxer was now replacing Warrior (in addition to replacing FV432). There has not been an announcement about a replacement IFV, although some say that there is some consideration of buying additional ARES and convertng them to IFVs – sounds a quite bizarre way of creating IFVs….and it is doubtful whether there is any money for such a project.
We have some SPGs – a handful of Archers – an interim (and partial) replacement for AS-90. Correct that the proper replacement for AS-90 is Boxer RCH-155 – selected by Sunak without competitive evaluation. Ridiculous.
Are you suggesting cancelling the Boxer ‘APC’ order in favour of buying Patria? Seriously? The cancellation charges would be horrendous and there would be delay surely in getting Patria in. Boxer is actually now in production for the UK, albeit the build rate is glacial.
To keep Warrior effective you would need to do some very overdue upgrades. There is no money to reinstate WCSP, and it is said that many jigs etc have been binned? A less sophisticated upgrade, then? Still no money for that, and no time to go through the Design & Development.
It’s all a horrible mess. The army has screwed up badly over the last 20 or so years.
Graham, so I am just saying what many others have said, perhaps I have put it differently: the ( expensive) Boxer program does not seem to be capable of delivering the capability needed soon enough and at a cost we can afford, so are there other commercially feasible options?
They say if you are in a hole the first thing to do is stop digging. Boxer is a great vehicle, with a lot of variants, but given where we are, is Boxer still the answer to every question? If the powers that be want to maintain that position, then Warrior will need to be kept going for much longer than 2027 and the Boxer build rate will need a quantum leap.