The UK has confirmed the provision of over 12,000 anti-tank weapons to Ukraine since the onset of the conflict with Russia, according to a recent parliamentary exchange.
This information was disclosed by Luke Pollard, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, in answer to a query from James Cartlidge, Conservative MP for South Suffolk.
Cartlidge asked the Secretary of State for Defence about the number of anti-tank missiles procured for Ukraine both directly and through international routes since the conflict began.
Pollard responded on 25th July 2024, stating, “The Ministry of Defence has supplied over 12,000 anti-tank weapons to Ukraine since the outbreak of that country’s conflict with Russia.”
Pollard also highlighted the UK’s commitment to working with international allies to support Ukraine. “We will continue to work with international Allies and partners to cohere and coordinate our support to Ukraine. This includes through the International Fund for Ukraine and through international Capability Coalitions, as a demonstration of our collective enduring commitment to build a Ukrainian force capable of deterring Russian aggression for the long term,” he added.
The Next-generation Light Anti-tank Weapon (NLAW) is the first, non-expert, short-range, anti-tank missile that rapidly knocks out any main battle tank in just one shot by striking it from above.
NLAW utilises predicted line-of-sight guidance and has overflown top and direct attack modes, and it is easy to use, making it a valuable tank destroyer for light forces that operate dismounted in all environments, including built-up areas. It also has night vision capability and is designed for all climate conditions and environments.
According to the manufacturers:
“The unjammable and man-portable system can be deployed in around five seconds by a single soldier, day or night. With a combat range of 20–800 m and a single shape charge, NLAW is the best anti-tank weapon for infantries and dismounted troops in complex terrain.
Extremely flexible, NLAW can attack from almost any position, from up high in a building to behind a tree or in a ditch. You can fire down 45 degrees and can shoot from inside a building, from a basement or from the second floor of a building out of the range of most tanks. One of the major challenges facing anti-tank weaponry is hitting the target when obstructed by countermeasures and obstacles, such as other vehicles, heat sources and power lines. No lock-on signature is required. The operator simply tracks the target for a few seconds before firing and NLAW does the rest.”
Hang on a cotton picking moment, 12 thousand ? what’s the hit rate ? would CH3 be capable of withstanding a few of these ? I’m just trying to work out how many our 148 Tanks can each expect to take. Russia seems to have thousands of tanks to act as targets it seems yet not one T-14 Armata has been destroyed yet. 🤔
Russia has about two dozen T-14s and there’s no concrete evidence they have been used in Ukraine.
I think my point might have evaded you.
You don’t make a point. You ask 3 vague questions. The best I can do is to inform you that regardless of it’s anti-tank moniker The NLAW can be used (and has been used) against all types of mobile and static targets. It’s an extremely potent short range surface to surface guided missile. 12,000 is enough to fire maybe fire 100 or so a week since the start of the conflict. Useful but likely not decisive. Unless 1 was a mythical horseshoe nail.
It appears that my reply to you is on hold.
hahahhahahhahaahahahahahahahahaa pause………. hahahahahhahahah.
No one knows. Info on destroyed western tech is kept secret by Ukraine and only comes out when Russia has pictures or videos.
A T-14 needs to be sent into combat for it to be destroyed…
That’s because the Russians haven’t sent ANY T14 Aramatas to the Ukraine war. Sorry would you prefer “special military operation”?
The fact is these 12,000 weapons have destroyed thousands of Russian armoured vehicles including many of their automatic turret ejecting T55 through to T90 series vehicles.
Not sure about top attack weapons when the tank is fitted with APS systems. That’ll be classified. Does make me think we should be purchasing Trophy APS for all our tanks, upgrading all C2 to C3 standard and ensuring every armoured vehicle has Trophy or another APS.
Well done us gave that much ammo and AS90’s etc that our own army can not do it job if called to, who’s great idea was that. Help others by running the Army down to its in s**t state.
Let’s be honest who is the biggest threat to us in the uk , I would say Russia it’s the only country that actively attacks us be the cyber or by poising people on our streets China is on the other side of the world so sending some missiles to Ukraine to blow up Russian tanks seems a good idea to me underfunding the army is a problem that has always existed sending as90 that in reality should be replaced by now again isn’t a problem it would only cost us money to dispose of
oh i agree, but its may be gone a bit too far,
To a point yeah but when you compare the UK donations as a percentage of gdp we aren’t even in the top 10 nations (i believe we are 16th). Raw numbers we are 4th behind US, France and Germany.
To be fair the US is also low on that side also.
i just feel we gave too much and totally now have 14 long range 155 Arty guns and a the few AS90’s deployed to the Baltics. We could not fight a war if we had to.
Our MLRS is either waiting to be up graded or still at a less than A1/B1 standard the same as it was when brought in to service 33 years ago, be it slightly up graded with Bowman and new software. The B1’s were gifted to Ukraine.
We could have given money for them to spend on buying kit, but we focused on the news headlines of actual kit.
It’s hard to hit the goverment as the initial delivery following the US example was huge and in comparison most other nations dragged their feet. It’s what came next where the is I think positive news stories trumped actual aid.
giving kit and ammo was the right thing to do but too much was given, what good is the Army now? if honest it can not do its job and will be unable to for may be 3/5 years. That is stupidity and no wonder retention is crap if we got no kit/no ammo and its all a big fake bluff.
As long as it’s replaced then money well spent as no realistic threat on the near horizon. Issue is replacement has come out of MOD budget
I disagree, it should never of got the shambles it is. The Army can not do its job, saying its ok no threat it can be replaced does miss the point.
I agree, but considering the country is close to 20% (1/5th) worse off now compared to 2010 when you look at gdp per capital using a common gdp/dollar comparison to compare against other countries, then where is the money coming from? Take away 1/5th of your income and I guarantee you have to make cuts. Now if we had an actual government that run the country and not in constant internal battles within its own party maybe that wouldn’t have happened but it did. Although to be fair we are less than a month in an labour already have internal… Read more »
ok, very detailed but changes nothing the Army is a mess, Government and Top Brass let it get like that. Fixing it will take many years. The real question is do with the right people in Government and top brass to that?
We gave away so much we ruined our own army.
Now now, remember what CGS said mate, doubling lethality by 2027 and trippling by 2030! 😆
Can not wait to see what that involves.
Assume latest ISTAR and C3 systems linking to Deep Fires.
Oh yeah of course, and i trust his word? he got one hell of job ahead of him. i pray hes a man of his word, what latest ISTAR and C3?
Ajax = latest ISTAR and C3, surely?
I’m guessing so, not too knowledgeable on those systems.
Assume latest C3 like Morpheus, and whatever EW and Sigint systems they’ve got to create a clear recognised land picture for situational awareness, backed up by the new Drones and Ajax sensors, all connected and linked to AI? Feeding the precision fires side from Apache to the GMLRS.
I’m not sure what 5 RA have got new either, to feed into it.
agreed, but not sure it comes under latest, or more like just late?
Very good! But ISTAR kit on Ajax is cutting edge.
but not yet in service
Dunno.
I have also been pondering that. CGS has set his own bar massively high and he will be judged against those metrics. How much extra lethality is Boxer going to give the Infantry?! I couldn’t help myself!
It is like the ISTAR side makes what firepower we have more effective, rather than literall increases in weight of fire.
6 different AD programs in the works too, and the 120mm, if it ever appears?
Did you see his comment about ARRC being a SACEUR reserve, where SACEUR values quality and effectiveness over sheer mass.
Ah, I am sensing the revival of the old mantra, ‘a smaller but better army’ first used I think at the time of Options for Change. I suppose a case could be made that greater lethality could be achieved by quantum leap forward in ISTAR such that targetting is far more efficient. Might deflect attention away from the future lack of infantry cannons and any capability gap/reduction in barrels of the tube artillery. I missed all those new AD programmes – interesting. ARRC becoming a SACEUR reserve is a fundamental re-think. Previously the notion was that the ARRC was first… Read more »
There have been previous posts on other same subject threads that a significant proportion of the NLAWS donated to UKR were approaching expiration. That would seem to be an entirely rational plan of action.
oh i see we sent them all just the near end of life ones, if only that were true. And the AS90’s?
Would surmise that the first several tranches of NLAWS were indeed near expiration. Ten to twelve thousand missiles later? Probably not. AS-90? Entirely separate matter. Concur w/ Graham Moore that there was culpable negligence in the failure to modernize/update AS-90 to maintain the capability. Evidently, it has been decided that a Boxer variant will become the specified replacement. Dunno, doesn’t appear to be an intuitively obvious choice…
RCH 155mm a good choice for logistics etc, depends on how many we buy. Not sure no tracked Arty is wise though
Look up the latest Kiel Institute report. UK is way up on France in military aid ( and still ahead on aid overall) for starters. US has also done a great job too. Germany has got better over time but only because countries like UK,US, Poland snd Baltics have shamed them. France just mskes up numbers to be honest and this is addresses in the Feb Kiel Institute report I recall.
Did Mr Cartlidge get concussion or something over the last few weeks? He knows the answer to those questions, it was his job.
Politics.
First rule of politics – never ask a question you don’t know the answer to!
Posturing.
Hope we stock up ourselves to round about that number. Since we have next to no Tanks to do the job our Infantry are going to need a boat load to even have a chance of surviving
Agreed
Worth pointing out that we supplied Ukraine with a lot of NLAWS before the Russians invaded.
And the training to use them.
NLAW is really too short ranged for how the war is now…
It really isn’t.
Only repeating what Ukranian troops have said, Javelin’s range is much greater
Javelin is also much heavier and much more expensive Battalion level ATGM, while NLAW is a section level ATGM that is meant to be carried by infantry soldiers during actions on.
So yes, of course Jav has a much higher range, but NLAW isn’t “too short ranged.” (Especially if you are a Ukranian in a trench that is under a Russian Armoured Assault).
The simple fact is that that NLAW saved Kiev in the first few days of the war.
Had the RAF not been ferrying them over day in, day out, week in, week out in the run up to the *PREDICTED* invasion, Kiev would have likely fallen to that massive armoured column that was approaching from the North.
UKR were very lucky, considering they should have been dropping bridges etc weeks earlier. The signs were there.