A wildfire destroyed a Jackal vehicle and equipment, incurring a loss of £537,000.

The incident occurred last year 35 miles north of Menaka in Mali.

Kenny MacAskill, MP for East Lothian, asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the Ministry of Defence Annual Report and Accounts 2021 to 2022, published on 13 July 2022, where the wildfire occurred which destroyed jackal vehicle and equipment and incurred a loss of £537,000.”

James Heappey, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:

“The wildfire that destroyed a Jackal vehicle and equipment, incurring a loss of £537,000 occurred 35 miles north of Menaka in Mali.”

Jackal

The British Army say here that Jackal is a high mobility weapons platform, with a unique air-bag suspension system allowing rapid movement across varying terrain.

“It is designed to protect personnel against roadside explosions and mine attacks (the chassis is heavier than its predecessor to give additional protection). Jackal 2 is armed with a General Purpose Machine Gun for crew protection and can carry either a Heavy Machine Gun or a Grenade Machine Gun as the main weapons system in the fire support role. The gun ring has been moved forward to give a 360 degree sweep of fire. Jackal 2 is closely related to the new Coyote tactical support vehicle, which is a six-wheel, Jackal-based armoured vehicle.”

Why were they in Mali?

Operation Newcombe served as the designation for two simultaneous and distinct British military initiatives in Mali. The first component provided logistical and transportation assistance to the French-led Operation Barkhane (formerly Operation Serval), while the second focused on peacekeeping efforts in collaboration with the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA).

Initiated on January 13, 2013 by Prime Minister David Cameron, the operation initially encompassed strategic airlift and aerial reconnaissance missions. Subsequently, a detachment of Chinook transport helicopters was deployed, with the operation’s focus shifting towards UN peacekeeping activities in 2020. Due to the prevailing political instability in Mali, Operation Newcombe concluded on November 14, 2022.

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

74 COMMENTS

  1. I’m sure the govt will take the opportunity to blame the wildfire on Climate Change and divert more MOD £ to cutting emissions.

  2. Kind of shows why the British army is so expensive. Jackal which is a protected recon vehicle is £537,000 while Ajax which is a protected recon vehicle with armour and a cannon cost £5.5 million.

    Both vehicles can return “similar” effects for an army but one is 10 times more.

    • The other thing that sets jackal apart is it’s the army’s only vehicle that never had to be draped in a British flag.

      Because it’s actually British not some US or German company trying to score some political points while funnelling jobs to Spain or Germany.

    • I agree with you on the cost of things, imagine the number of vehicles the Russians likely get for such money even if they are pretty basic and unimpressive, but numbers as we see have a qualitative effect all of their own like it or not. Hopefully Europe generally is beginning to get that now realising these platforms are actually for fighting and not just to keep local industries ticking over economically and thus storage of older versions of equipment are thus a must over scrapping. However there isn’t really much comparison between Jackal and Ajax one is much more Special Forces and light operations orientated.

      On the note of scrapping, after the scrapping of our Rapier systems just prior to the Russian invasion even when we knew an invasion was known to be highly possible I now note that Switzerland in the process of scrapping theirs offered them back to Britain (as is constitutionally required there) and never received any interest apparently. Wonder what the reasoning for this is, one might have thought they would be very useful to Ukraine yet the Govt seem to be going out of their way to resist that happening.

      • With regards to rapier the first mistake is assuming the person that dealt with the return request from Switzerland had a clue what there were asking. Then assuming they understood what rapier was would of come how much is this going to cost from my budget. Decommissioning missiles etc.
        We dont actually know if the systems were in working order. The missiles and other parts may had timed out. Perhaps we will find out sometime in the future.

        • The Rapier used by Switzerland were Rapier Field Standard B.

          These are incredbly old and were replaced in British Army service by Rapier Field Standard C (FSC, also known as Jernas) from 1996 onwards, which should give you an idea of how old they were. No spares remain in the UK for them, and by all accounts the Swiss systems were knackered. There was also the question of manufacturer support.

      • I think we’ve seen in Ukraine that an emphasis on quantity without any regard to quality has simply resulted in lots of dead Russians…

        • It’s hard to know if it’s an equipment issue or training and tactics issue. I guess we will find out once the dust settles and there is a realistic comparison between western and ex soviet gear.

          • Sure but realistically how much safer are you in a Ajax vs CVR(t) or Jackal if your facing Javelin, NLAW or SMArt 155?

          • Sure but realistically how much safer are you in Ajax or Jackal if you’re facing small arms, heavy machine gun fire, or grenades?
            Well a lot I’d have thought 🤷🏻‍♂️

            All of those are far more numerous and so likely to be encountered than Javelin, NLAW etc.

            (Not to mention, why is an ally firing at us?)

    • While looking into the scimitar vehicle and other CVRT variants it appears that some of them are newer vehicles built to scimitar2 or upgraded to scimitar 2. Other variants have been either rebuilt or newly built in 2010s. Couldn’t find a lot of info about these. Does anyone know anything more about this?

      • Correct. I think some of these were in the “Medium Armoured Squadrons” that the army created when 7 Squadrons of Challenger II were cut by HMG around 2005-2008 time frame and replaced with CVRT Scimitar.

    • You forgot that aside from armour and cannon, Jackal is wheeled and Ajax is tracked…

      Or was that to avoid igniting the usual firestorm debate on here habout wheeled versus tracked vehicles?…

      • Tracked vehicles have wheels, but wheeled vehicles don’t have tracks so wheels must be better😂😂😂😂😂

        • There have been examples of wheeled vehicles that used tracks. There was a Christie suspension based tanks that could have their tracks removed and then run on road wheels…infact one Christie suspension tank was clocked at 104mph on a road…….but the question is were they tacked vehicles that turned into wheeled vehicles or wheeled. Vehicles that turned into tracked vehicles ?…….and the you have DARPA who made a wheel that turns into a track….minds blown….

          • I saw the darpa tracks. Very cool, how they would work in the real world and what the failure rate, maintenance needs are would need to be found out
            Just shows what’s possible when the boffins get to work.

          • The Americans turned down the Christie suspension in the thirties for their Tanks but the Soviets didn’t and the T34 proved how good it was

          • You mean the T-34 proved how bad it was right?
            A lot of the issues with the T-34 where, at least in part, due to the suspension and the slanted side armour taking up stupid amount of room in the tank.
            That’s why when they had a breather they designed all their follow on models with Torsion bars.
            (Also why the British abandoned it when Centurion came along).

          • Weight ratio was it’s downfall but it did look impressive in the Propaganda films of the time

          • Tracked vehicles that turned into wheeled: You needed to do some nifty tricks with a chain and the drive wheel to get it to run without tracks.

    • Jim, there is a world of difference between a Jackal and an Ajax. Different propulsion, armour protection, weapons system, role equipment etc etc.

      • Although the biggest difference is of course that Jackal works and is deployed/doing its job as a tool….Ajax is not. But they are clearly different tools and cannot be compared.

        But you do have wonder if Ajax is just too heavy for its role. A 40 ton reconnaissance vehicle is going to be restricted by things like bridges and is always going to be more restricted than a lighter vehicle mobility wise..etc where as a 8ton CVR(T] would not have to worry about such things as weak road bridges.

        • I have always thought that a 40 tonne, large vehicle is inappropriate to be a stealthy recce vehicle and would not be able to traverse weak bridges, tracks and culverts etc.

      • *mounted on the vehicle. It can still carry a few bits and pieces that the crew use dismounted. But yes, doesn’t compare to Ajax.

  3. I’m assuming the vehicle was broken at the time or some other reason why it wasn’t moved out the way.
    So what’s the preferred load out on these vehicles? HMG or grenade on the ring and a GMPG secondary?

    • Yes, I believe it is a mix of GPMG, AGL, or .50. Assume NLAWS will be strapped on too?

      I agree with the comments of others regards the cost of just one plus kit. A lot more than I imagined.

        • The issue is whilst miltiary land equipment is generally not very complex and when compared to their civilian versions it’s hard to justify the insane costs, they are however not made in large numbers meaning most of the cost effectively goes to keeping factories and supply chains profitable when they may only get a big order every couple of decades but still need to survive.

          • I remember that when a popular saloon car was costing about £10k to make, hand built pre- production models cost over£100 k. Military vehicles are effectively hand built with numbers too low for cost saving robotized production lines.

          • Don’t forget the constant micro management that comes with a military contract. A company I subcontracted to about 10yrs ago got a proof of concept prototype build from BAE due to their expanding vehicle expertise, essentially a glorified command & control post in an expandable oversized iso container to be protected against small arms, light blast and CRBN protections also to be included was an optional CRBN wash down room built into a 10ft iso container fitted in front of the main access door. BAE saw the army as a potential customer so allowed an MOD rep to tag along for the build.

            Micro management from MOD was insane BAE’s rep was only concerned in a working proof of concept as such was happy not to see real “armoured” panels and instead wood being used to correct thicknesses as to simulate real panels with thin lead layers to simulate the weight.
            MOD Rep on the other hand seemed to want it finished to full milspec for immediate delivery to Helmand this included constant bullshit like “I don’t like metal cable ties” when discussing cables hidden on a tray in a false ceiling, I’m sure most sensible people would understand when told that they existed for fire rating and to stop people dying in a ball of cable, except this and move on, no this muppet wanted them gone, so at 5pm 1lad stayed back and painted them all Black so they looked plastic. No more heard he never checked. Another puzzling episode, despite constantly mentioning the dessert and heat, he never once got involved in the Environmental control and quality system despite being offer to, personally I saw it as an insult to the electronics bloke designing it he was genuinely trying to teach the Rep how his system would protect the troops inside from being cooked or killed.

            It culminated in the MOD rep demanding all work stop the day after painting finished, he later informed the company owner that we needed to remove the walls and roof and await for someone to contact us for delivery of the real panels against BAEs wishes and also turned out behind their back whilst the BAE lad was back at base singing the projects praises. Essentially he was trying to look like a hero of procurement and trying to run before the project had even got out the birthing canal.

            It was at this point BAE pulled the MOD out of the build so it could be tested as the proof of concept they wanted. I know the project was canned about 6months after, we were just starting a full prototype for testing when they cancelled. It was truest an eye opener of the shambles the MOD procurement team brought to the table of any project.

      • The most recent order is 70 Extenda version for £90m to be delivered by 2024. I assume this is more expensive than the now standard 4 wheel Jackal 2. The French programme for Griffon APC and Jaguar Recce vehicles planned to cap the unit cost at €1m using an off the shelf commercial 6×6 chassis. The actual costs have risen and the latest I can find is €2m for Griffon and €5m for Jaguar. All of these are far cheaper than Ajax which has an average unit price across all variants of @£9m.
        The Supacat range uses mainly British components, another plus. Ajax doesn’t, with guns, engines, gearboxes and many of the basic hulls imported.

      • Tbh not actually surprised. Especially if someone left for example a few sights and radios in the vehicle.
        E.g. Vehicle + GMG + GPMG + Radio + Nightsights for both guns + 4 blokes issued kit + Leopold + Ammo for both guns.
        Now imagine if people had left their HMNVS’s or a set of Thermals for the driver in the vehicle and the cost starts to rack up pretty quickly.

      • Thanks Paul,
        I actually recognised the YPR-765 from my time in Bos (Dutch Bat, Mal Bat and Turk Bat used them) I actually was asking what was the Bobby Moore in carrying out a frontal attack on Russian positions with the supporting APCs moving back and forth

        • I think someone in the discussion the read thought that they saw troops had been dismounted ( maybe in another video) before the carriers withdrew. If that was not the case then I can only suppose the manoeuvre was designed to draw out the enemy/ reveal their positions.

        • I thought it was suicidal for an APC like an M113 with its light armour to deliver a section onto an enemy position. Thus the use of an IFV type instead?

          • If you’re up against modern weapons like Javelin or NLAWS, I don’t think an IFV would survive either. The M113, like other APCs of its generation, was designed to protect against small arms and shell fragments. In Vietnam, US troops would often sit on top rather than inside, both to improve their ability to spot an ambush and avoid the impact of mines.

          • IFV’s don’t really deliver “onto” enemy position either. The difference is IFV follows infantry onto the position providing fire support with the 30mm while the APC withdraws after the drop off.

        • Pretty standard IFV tactics tbh. Driving back and forth means you’re a moving target, which makes you harder to hit with, for example, an NLAW, which requires you to hold position and “lock on” for several seconds. Changing direction and speed often spoils aim, which will probably be rushed anyway in such a situation, and for unguided RPG rounds, means even an accurate shot might miss if you time things right. (Warriors used to do the exact same thing in British Armoured Infantry attacks).

          My guess is the lack of real IFV’s means the Ukranians are pressing M113’s into the role, using .50’s and GMG’s in the suppressing role instead of 25 and 30mms.

  4. Off-topic – apologies. But has anyone heard if the 14 Challys have been delivered to UA? Was always slated to be this month.

    • The end of March was quoted, so expect an announcement next week if all went as planned.

      In other news.

      The Pentagon announced on 21 March that the 31 Abrams main battle tanks (MBTs) promised to Ukraine will not be M1A2 model as initially planned.

      In order to get platforms to Ukraine faster, the US will pull 31 M1A1 tanks from US Army stocks and spruce them up for battle, said Pentagon Press Secretary Brigadier General Pat Ryder on 21 March.

      The variant change will “significantly expedite delivery timelines” and will ensure that the tanks will arrive by “the fall timeframe”.

      LINK

        • Quite possibly!

          The U.S. Army is believed to have 2,509 Abrams in various versions, with an additional 3,700 in storage.

          Currently, the U.S. has about 8,000 Abrams, but “significantly less” are battle-ready, he said.

          The U.S. will likely remove classified electronics from the Abrams before shipping them to Ukraine, similar to what it did with a Stinger missile part last year.

          Yet Lockwood noted that even a somewhat stripped-down Abrams, if captured by Russian forces, could help Moscow look for vulnerabilities or reverse-engineer NATO technology.

          “I suspect there are a lot of people in the Army who are not happy about this whatsoever,” he said.”

          LINK

          • I think the ‘lot of people in the army’ have a point. Russia is desperate, dusting off cold war era tanks. The PT91s and Leopard 1s coming from Poland and the Netherlands are more than adequate.

      • Thanks Nigel. So the Americans think fast delivery is 6 months or so after Zelensky wanted them for his Spring offensive?

        • Far from ideal I know, but they will be useful should Ukraine lose any western tanks during the initial ground offensive.

          • Not sure the Ukrainians can even launch a major spring offensive without the 300 western tanks it asked for. Some say that 300 is a gross under-estimate anyway and that they really need at least 500 western tanks.

          • Ukraine will need to use its western tanks and most modern other types smartly.
            It still has a load of T72 variants, T64 as well. The soviet tanks have a good fragmentation shell that western tanks don’t carry so perhaps mixed fleets will work well.
            The shell info comes from someone else I don’t personally know if it’s good.
            The front lines are vast so Ukraine could attack where suits them.

  5. I assume someone somewhere can give breakdown costs, detailing how much the Jackal, Ajax and Boxer vehicles are in £’s shillings and groats.

    £537,000 for a Jackal and kit. So how much is a Jackal then? My guess is around £350,000 or thereabouts.

    My guess is £500-550,000 for a Boxer.

    Again my guess for a single Ajax would be… oh I’m buggered if I know.

    so… Why do these vehicles cost so much? I cannot for the life of me see how the UK Government can justify paying half a million plus for a vehicle to be used by the military.

    • Tom, sit down and pour yourself a strong drink. You are way out.

      Boxer is about the most expensive wheeled APC in the world at £5.4m each.

      Ajax £9.3m each but that includes ammortised Non-Recurring Engineering costs (NRE).

      • Bloomin heck! No wonder we have no Army any more. All that money siphoned off into whoever pockets. It’s scandalous, disgraceful total rip off. It would be mega cheaper to purchase 100’s of Nissan Frontier PRO-4X, and issue one to each rifle section or squad!

        • It’s an expensive business. Where the balance between cost and capability lies is a tough one to find. Most people will want the best just in case.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here