Jump to content


Photo

Uk Boxer Purchase Imminent.


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0551 AM

Well true. It kind of reminds me of the forced jingoism over the new Cunard Liners, when the only British thing about them is the Name and the flag hanging off the back. :)

 

Top and bottom of it, we have done a miserable, miserable job of sustaining an indigenous AFV production capablity, and now its biting us on the bum because it costs so damn much to import anything. We really should have seen that coming.



#62 2805662

2805662

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0715 AM


Cynical marketing is cynical.

Did make me laugh, though.

"British by (surrogate) birth"

 
In a sense it is.
 
The hull of the first prototype was built by Alvis and delivered to KMW for integration in November 2001.

TIL....shame the UK voted itself off the MRAV island back in the day. Though I give the UK a lot of grief over their fecklessness with acquiring equipment, things like the DEF STAN on the generic vehicle architecture are worthy of roll out.

#63 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0721 AM

Ive argued before we have not really  had a well considered AFV policy since the MK1 tank rolled out of Fosters of Lincoln in 1916. The surprise is not that we get it wrong still, the surprise is that we got it right as often as we have.

 

If nobody has read this yet, anyone whom has a passing interest in British AFVs really ought to make time for it. Some of the problems Stern describes still have relevance. Not least, the effect of political interference in procurement, and an inablity to think ahead more than a year or 2. In a war that was dangerous, postwar its was damn near fatal.

https://archive.org/...gbookofpi00ster


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 13 September 2017 - 0723 AM.


#64 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,129 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0800 AM

Boxer represents stupid soldiering.When you run up and down a road waiting to be blown up. It means a lot of money for not a lot of combat power.

#65 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0808 AM

I think wheeled vehicles today offer more potential than just roadrunning. And its not as if the Stryker proved to be the disaster in Iraq that its critics said it would be, and that would appear to  not as well armoured as Boxer is.

 

That said, we would do better to max out on IFV's, but then we have to give the RAF something to do with their C17's or the treasurer might take them away. That, and it would mean the Army handing over the rapid reaction role to bootnecks and the Maroon machine.



#66 2805662

2805662

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 September 2017 - 0831 AM

Recent mobility trials in Australia demonstrated pretty good cross-country mobility of Boxer and AMV. Both were noted for having better off-road mobility: each clearly superior to the legacy ASLAV (Piraña 2).

#67 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 13 September 2017 - 1150 AM

Aside of the fact that the Boxer is fitted with the Dutch command post mission module, the Boxer carries enough food, water and equipment for the crew and dismounts to survive 10 days without any assistance from other sources; as far as I know, that is not common practice with older APCs.

Does it carry enough fuel and ammo for 10 days of operations? No. Hence:

unique_-_just_because_you_are_unique_doe



#68 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 13 September 2017 - 1702 PM

ARTEC really wants the deal, does it not?
The first pic I saw of it looked like photo shop, but no they have actually painted it.


Brexit camouflage, I presume.

#69 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 14 September 2017 - 0149 AM

:D



#70 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,382 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicagoland

Posted 14 September 2017 - 0832 AM

 

ARTEC really wants the deal, does it not?
The first pic I saw of it looked like photo shop, but no they have actually painted it.


Brexit camouflage, I presume.

 

 

Yes, its an attempt to use a large Union Jack waving in the breeze to conceal the fact that Theresa May is stalling on making hard choices and the UK is likely to suffer for it. :angry: (No more in this political vein from me on this thread, but sometimes one has to vent when politicians are behaving badly.)



#71 jmcmtank

jmcmtank

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 716 posts

Posted 14 September 2017 - 1204 PM

We are buying loads of these seemingly;

JPG5X43W5ZDEZBKWNZJT4J6KGE.jpg



#72 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 14 September 2017 - 1254 PM

Looks like something out of a Chuck Norris film. :)



#73 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,420 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 14 September 2017 - 1755 PM

We are buying loads of these seemingly;

JPG5X43W5ZDEZBKWNZJT4J6KGE.jpg

 

Oshkosh J-LTV to standardize with the rebellious colonials?.

Next you are going to dump AS-90 and CR2 for Paladin and Abrams. :P



#74 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 15 September 2017 - 0836 AM

 

 

ARTEC really wants the deal, does it not?
The first pic I saw of it looked like photo shop, but no they have actually painted it.


Brexit camouflage, I presume.

 

 

Yes, its an attempt to use a large Union Jack waving in the breeze to conceal the fact that Theresa May is stalling on making hard choices and the UK is likely to suffer for it. :angry: (No more in this political vein from me on this thread, but sometimes one has to vent when politicians are behaving badly.)

 

 

 

Amen to that! 



#75 2805662

2805662

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 September 2017 - 0816 AM


We are buying loads of these seemingly;
JPG5X43W5ZDEZBKWNZJT4J6KGE.jpg

 
Oshkosh J-LTV to standardize with the rebellious colonials?.
Next you are going to dump AS-90 and CR2 for Paladin and Abrams. :P

One can only hope!

#76 Dawes

Dawes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,797 posts

Posted 16 September 2017 - 0835 AM

"The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested a possible sale of up to two thousand seven hundred forty-seven (2,747) Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).  This possible sale also includes baseline integration kits, basic issue item kits, B-kit armor, engine arctic kits, fording kits, run-flat kits, spare tire kits, silent watch kits, power expansion kits cargo cover kits, maintainer and operator training, U.S. government technical assistance and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. Total estimated cost is $1.035 billion."

 

Most observers don't expect the full forecasted quantity to be procured.



#77 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,382 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicagoland

Posted 16 September 2017 - 1029 AM

"The Government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested a possible sale of up to two thousand seven hundred forty-seven (2,747) Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).  This possible sale also includes baseline integration kits, basic issue item kits, B-kit armor, engine arctic kits, fording kits, run-flat kits, spare tire kits, silent watch kits, power expansion kits cargo cover kits, maintainer and operator training, U.S. government technical assistance and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. Total estimated cost is $1.035 billion."

 

Most observers don't expect the full forecasted quantity to be procured.

 

True, but by getting their "everything-we-could-want" request approved by the US Congress the UK MoD doesn't have to go through the approval process again if it places a second JLTV order.  It also gives them a high starting point against purchase cuts mandated by the Treasury.

 

Overall, the JLTV is a smart idea for British service.  It is of high quality and is available in quantity at a cost low enough that even if the UK's military cannot buy all the JLTVs its services want they should be able to acquire the numbers that they really need.  And production for US forces and likely for other armies will keep spare parts cheap enough that MoD will buy them.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users