The Ministry of Defence has refused to say when each of the seventy-eight Warrior infantry fighting vehicles removed from the fleet in the past year was disposed of, according to an answer given in Parliament.
Ben Obese-Jecty, the Conservative member for Huntingdon, asked for the dates on which each vehicle was disposed of, following an answer of 7 September.
Luke Pollard, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry, said: “The answer to Question 23452 explained that the seventy-eight Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicles removed from the reported fleet between 2025 and 2026 have been disposed of in accordance with Defence disposal policy. It would be inappropriate for me to provide exact disposal details, such as dates or variants as to do so could, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability of our Armed Forces.”
The number leaving the fleet has been confirmed, but not when they went or which variants they were, so the rate at which Warrior is being drawn down cannot be read from the published record.
The FV510 Warrior entered service in 1988 as the British Army tracked infantry fighting vehicle, carrying a section of dismounted infantry behind a two man turret armed with the 30mm RARDEN cannon.
A programme to rebuild the fleet around a stabilised 40mm cased telescoped cannon, the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme, was cancelled in March 2021 after more than a decade of development and around £430 million of spending, and the vehicle has been running down since.
instead of disposal, couldn’t they be recycled as a platform for unmanned systems?
aren’t we supposed to recycle to preserve our planet?
Sure is said on here that some of them are being converted to UGV. Mine clearing rings a bell.
Why would we dispose of such systems instead of keeping them in storage. By Russian armoured vehicle standards they are practically new.
Jim, Once an army equipment has been declared Obsolete, it is disposed of very quickly by gifting, sale by auction or scrapping. In rare cases a number might be retained and re-roled as is the case with a few Warriors being converted to unmanned mine clearance role. We have always done this. Similarly AS-90 disposal and CVR(T) disposal happened quickly.
Storing and maintaining old kit (and ultimately upgrading it) would be very costly and they would soon fill our one quite small vehicle depot.
Interesting that you postulate that a vehicle designed in the 1970s and with ISD of 1987 and hardly upgraded is modern!
Hi Graham, yes thanks for relaying the British army policy and offcourse of all the army’s in the world the British army knows best 😀
Unfortunately our adversaries don’t share such an “efficient” policy.
Everyone else retains large fleets of older vehicles, they don’t need to be upgraded, they serve a purpose by simply existing.
Without such a reserve of older weapons it’s now impossible to conduct anything like a large scale mobilisation. Indeed such vehicles stock piles kept both Ukraine and Russia in this war and a lack of such stockpiles is why the UK had nothing to provide Ukraine with.
It’s this type of mindset that shows the British Army is not serious about fighting a major war. All its rhetoric is about getting more cash and funnelling it into more exquisite roles largely built around special forces, expeditionary warfare and colonial policing. All the mistakes it made in the 1910’s and the 1930’s are being repeated.
This is the same reason that we have the smallest reserve to regular ratio of any major military in the world. Less than half the US ratio. But as ever the British army knows best 🤣
GM,
Perhaps an ignorant question, but why wouldn’t HMG/MoD/BA gift Warriors slated for disposal to Ukraine? Have become seriously impressed w/ UKR technical capabilities under extreme duress over the past 4.5 yrs. Almost willing to wager that the Ukrainians could turn a Warrior into a Challenger 2 equivalent w/ only duct tape and bailing wire. 😉 Hell, they may even regift the improved Warriors back to the BA after the conflict concludes! 😁 Personally believe Uncle Sugar should subcontract drone development to the Ukrainians, and have them bid on the inevitable next frigate contract, once current contract/plan implodes and sinks beneath the waves. 🤔🤞🇬🇧🇺🇲
Security grounds? Like allowing the army to fall apart in front of their eyes. What a bunch.
If we were serious about defence they’d be mothballed as an attrition reserve. But we aren’t serious are we.
The same Generals on TV telling me we are at a state of near war and we need massive spending cuts and tax rises to pay for their new massive army are the same Generals that are disposing of these vehicles 🧐
Kind of sums it all up.
New Me, I don’t recall any instance where the army retained equipment once it had been declared Obsolete. We do not have the funds or the storage space.
spare parts being an issue as well. no good having vehicles parked up with no spare parts on maintenance in place
I assume the old 30mm Rarden has no effective ability against UAS so not useful for there?
How about putting a Company’s worth at Mount Pleasant in a hanger, can the REME element there or contractors not maintain them?
Spad and SPTA I assume have enough training targets, I wonder how many will be kept and put to some use?
Didn’t it say they’d spent £430 million on upgrading them, including fitting with the 40mm, before cancelling the program? |That’s a lot of potential anti drone units.
That was the money spent on 2 prototypes ( I think there were 2 ) the earlier R&D on the programme, and buying a couple of hundred new cannons, now homeless as not fitted, not actually upgrading the actual remaining vehicles.
I’d read that existing Warriors received new rear facing cameras but not aware of any other upgrades, I think the vehicles remain as is otherwise.
So expanding, could those new Cannons be used in some fixed CUAS capacity?
I’m guessing that these will now be fitted to Ajax.
Ajax ( Scout ) turreted variants are but a part of the overall Ajax buy, so I’d think for what we’re paying they have their own turret and CTA40 already.
Maybe spares? Seems such a waste for a useful bit of advanced firepower.
Turrets built by LMUK for Warrior are not compatible with those they built for Ajax. No idea whether they could be adapted
Thanks, and as I thought, not necessary anyway. Hope we find some use for them though.
Rarden is a low rate of fire, basically loaded clips put into the gun by hand, any moving drone hit is a lucky hit. No airbust, it needs to hit he drone directly.
Daniele, the army never keeps equipment once it has been declared Obsolete. We do not have the funds or the space at Ashchurch to keep them. Are you really suggesting retaining some Warriors in the Falklands? Such a distant place to keep them.
I was. 😂 Might be useful one day!
Brain dead time again at the MOD. With Ajax still in the wings and Boxer modularity being trimmed, you would be mistaken to believe we are living in a peaceful period in our history. In no way should the Warrior be replaced until such time as the new kit is up to the mark. We must remember the lives of our troops are at stake and that should be written large on the walls of Whitehall.
It’ll be gone soon, the IFV capability gone and the “replacement” not fully established.
It’s no replacement no matter how HMG spin it, some of us have long memories and know full well the role of HMG and General Carter in proceedings, from the original A2020 plan, changed to the A2020 Refine plan, which was to see Boxer and Ajax in separate roles but somehow complementing the other, to the botch job now which sees Boxer as the default “replacement” as there’s bugger all else and no money either.
And CAVS is meant to fill in the gaps.
Meanwhile, in France and Italy, they HAD A PLAN AND STUCK TO IT, buying IFV, VBCI and Freccia, for combat roles, and cheaper supporting roles fulfilled by other types.
Here, one cock up after the other as they attempt to put square pegs in round holes.
DM, I would not want to be responsible for Army planning due to the shambolic approach to modernising our land forces’ armour. They must be given the best we have in order that, if the balloon does go up, we have done our best to keep them from as much harm as possible. Sadly, that is not the case and shame on those who disregard the value of quality and quantity in protecting our troops.
These programmes take decades, in the interim, politicians come and go, and cause the chop and change of the previous plans, as do Generals.
Just who was it who insisted that Boxer be brought forward around 2015 on causing WCSP to be cancelled as the money was no longer there to fund Challenger III, Ajax, Boxer around the same time frame?
£430 million just wasted when we keep losing force capabilities & running down way beyond safe levels even for the quietest peacetime levels. Keep them in storage as a reserve or finish the job updating them. Better to have something to defend free society for a rainy day when the storm is imminent.
What is this insane fetish with providing UK forces with the weakest glass jaw imaginable?
No you can’t have any money to provide what is vital to the civilised running or protection of the nation, but the super rich can continue to rape our economy & take all the wealth offshore taxed at levels anyone else can only dream of.
I do love how every difficult question is answered with we can’t answer, national security. It feels to me that hiding all this info is doing more to damage our national security than disclosing it.
Stock response to hide embarrassment, incompetence, and cuts of HMG own making.
The sooner Defence has a proper Strategic plan ring fenced, and agreed at all levels with full Parliamentary scrutiny the better.
As it is, there’s nothing Strategic about any of these reviews, they just resort the pieces that remain after the latest cuts.
These vehicles should have remained in service as we are so short even if it meant long term storage, more hollowing out of defence!!
So, disposed of in accordance with Defence disposal policy can mean a lot of things: totally scrapped, put up for sale, dismantled and stripped for useful spares. Alternatively perhaps they have been carefully dismantled, assessed for soundness and estimation of the feasibility of a ‘lite’ upgrade or lifex.
Prehaps, those ones that are serviceable are being earmarked to provide, the recently cut mortar, Ambulance, long range Anti tank and recovery variants.
Alternatively, 78 is roughly 1/4 of the original planned WCSP number. The idea to crowbar Boxer into the Ajax cavalry regiments has been dropped. But maybe they are thinking if they can form meaningful units which combine Boxer with some ‘sustained’ Warriors with the CTA40mm.
I don’t think it was ever in the plan anyway Paul, just a MPs question which lacked the knowledge of that in the first place.
The units planned to recieve Boxer were detailed in a FOIA request a few years ago and didn’t include the Royal Armoured Corps.
Plan? To be honest Daniele, I think they are making it up as they go along, keeping their cards close to their chest. Obese-Jeckty keeps trying to prise out info.
They do, because they keep chopping and changing mate, in response to budget.
But, as I said, Boxer was not destined to go to the RAC.
As for plans Army 2020s Armoured Division was openly defined as far back as 2010, Army 2020 Refine introduced Strike Brigades and brought Boxer forward, all openly announced.
It envisaged 4 Battalions worth of Boxer, replacing the then 3 HPM Heavy Protected Mobility Battalions on Mastiff.
Boxer was originally the MI programme, for post 2027!!
No guesswork. Carter himself went on video announcing what was to happen and WCSP was a casualty due to the desire to emulate French wheeled ops in Africa. That desire to then base Strike Brigades in Catterick and “race to Tallin” resulted in the loss of an entire tracked Armoured Brigade and has cost the IFVs of the two that remain.
Thus the utter mess around Warrior now. Boxer has been shoved in as a “replacement”
Replacement my foot.
So the good news is we are reaching MI 2027 ahead of schedule. :-). I expect CAVs will replace Mastiff etc. LMV will happen, so that just leaves the question of whether we ( like every other nation?) will need an IFV.
I’m confident that if you asked the soldiers do we need an IFV the answer is yes.
Others have them, it’s our own failure that we dropped WCSP for financial reasons ( which always goes back to the same infernal politicians )
I don’t think there will be one for a decade or ever, no money, despite what HMG grandstand.
I think the Army wanted a tracked IFV, NATO want us to have a tracked IFV with cannon, HMG put Boxer forward and pretend it’s the replacement all along.
Is it meaningful to conceive of an affordable Warrior upgrade which combines a cannon with counter unmanned drone capability?
Mortar. CAVS.
Ambulance version still on order.
Anti Tank, Overwatch, why does a heavily armoured Boxer need to do that? Brimstone on a trailer in the rear towed behind anything else?
Recovery will probably be another heavy REME truck type.
I wonder if the warrior hulls could be repurposed with a rapid ranger style turret with a 30/40mm gun and Starstreak missiles. A relatively cheap GBAD solution.
You would probably have power/wiring issues for the turret itself and new terminals etc. Did you know Ajax has something like 2 tonnes of wiring!?
Probably yes, and not trying to be flippant with you, but it couldn’t be beyond the wit or wisdom of engineers to adapt wiring and electrical components to suit.
You are right of course. I would worry that as with every other modern British Army procurement/upgrade, the right people have never just been left to do their job.
Why not? This nation built Concorde for God’s sake, it isn’t beyond us to do anything.
Only political will and military vision.
Keep them or give them to Ukraine, we should not dispose of any more military kit, we are going to need it by the end of this year
War footing my arse.
How hard can it be for a basic upgrade to keep them going?
In the 90s Kuwait bought 250 with a simple turret swap that had 25mm bushmaster and 2 TOW.
There are numerous suppliers who offer a simple cannon and ATM combo on a remote turret.
Remove the Rarden if obsolete and bolt something on top.
Thr Ukraine army seem to make do, starlink cons, iPad displays.
If war is imminent this should be the ideal platform to hand to the army and say adapt it in the field and REME workshops, add drones, whatever you fancy.
O/ but armoured,Challenger 3 has passed over 2000kms in testing according to the defence blog.
I do wonder, why saying how they were disposed of is a security risk ? They have been stricken and that is a known fact.. so it cannot be a security risk.. so it can only be how they have been disposed of.. maybe they are going to Ukraine or maybe they are being converted for the proposed mine clearance role…
Another crime and incompetent act by HMG and the MOD! Is the warrior the most modern and effective platform at the moment, no of course not! But, is the warrior a decent and well armoured infantry fighting vehicle, compared to our potential opponents, yes it fucking is! There enough platforms knocking about to keep 4 Bns in role, to maintain an armoured Division, not just in name but in kinetic potential.
The 30mm cannon may be slow and clip fed, but it still does a job, a job where the replacement does not have that capability! And there is enough hulls to convert to other variants, such as overwatch, mortars etc! We are supposed to be moving into a state of war, where they need ex regulars dragged in up to 65 years old but not kit which is just 40 years old!!! It’s all about money, money and more money and this bunch of pathetic socialists criminals currently in power have an ideological aversion to spending money on the military, but prefer to fill their voting trough with handouts and freebees to ensure they keep their snouts in that oh so lovely tax payers trough!
To be fair it was not this government that cancelled the Warrior upgrade..
But it could be this government that says let’s do a life extension on and keep them running..
The right course would have been to carry out the full Warrior capability upgrade programme,, giving us a capable AIFV to hold the line, while rapidly planning and building its successor. When the new AIFV came into service, the updated Warriors could then have replaced the very elderly FV-432/Bulldog in the armoured battlefield support role (ABSV), as mortar carriers, command posts for comat support units, AOPs, field ambulance and so on. The budget was there to do so.
Unfortunately, Gen. Carter’s vision of a medium-weight, lightly-arned wheeled vehicle replacing tracked Warrior.and Boxer was all the rage, so the budget all went to the expensive Boxer battlefield taxi.
The right course now would be to put retiring Warriors, less any being converted for mine clearance or donated to Ukraine, into storage for a rainy day. The argument that storage is expensive is a real MOD bean-counter’s one, penny wise but pound foolish. Atlrmies the world over store retired equipment, so they have something available on mobilisation, while industry gears up wartime production.. If you can’t have the best the second best will have to do and we may well need them in the next few years.
Gabriel Molinelli has an interesting post, I think on X, on our current Boxer order, which he argues is distinctly odd. It has an unusually high proportion of command vehicles and ambulances, but nowhere near enough infantry section vehicles to equip 4 infantry battalions. The former roles don’t need an expensive Boxer, an up-armoured Patria 6 x 6 would do the job for less than half the price. The follow-on order for more Boxers, which now looks to have been dropped from the plans, likely included more infantry section vehicles and other missing variants. All in all, the relatively straightforward task.of replacing one class of AIFVs with a successor looks to be a bit of a planning shambles.
While budgets are very tight, there was the money there to build 600+ Boxers. It would have stretched a good bit further if a less expensive Patria-type platform had been procured in tandem to take over the various battlefield support roles, for which Boxer is overkill.
We can criticise the Labour government all we like for not providing oodles of new money to the army. But the reality is that (a) this semi- shambles has been long in the making, it is another botched legacy from the Tories’ 14 years (like Ajax), (b) this government has put an extra £10bn on the table so far, the first decent increase for decades, and hopefully HMG will find the missing DIP £5bn in the forthcoming budget and (c).the vast sums now needed to fund defence nuclear, because it too has been left in a parlous state by previous governments, now account for near-enough HALF of the entire defence procurement budget, which completely feks the equipment plans for all three services for the next decade.
If we are so determined to have our own independent nuclear deterrent, plus expensive SSNs and aircraft carriers, somebody better tell the public that we will need to return to Cold War levels of defence spending , up to and likely over 5%.of GDP. I am sure they will be jolly enthusiastic about the necessary cuts to public spending and tax rises needed!
Correct. Good a vehicle as Boxer may be, bringing it front and centre under Carter who ripped up A2020 has caused great damage.
5 million a pop for an APC is by any measure spaffing money that the army simply did not have. It in reality needs closer to 2000 APCs and it needed to buy what it could afford to get that number.