JasonJ Posted June 13, 2021 Share Posted June 13, 2021 This all reminds me of another not-yet-ancient-thread, maybe about a year ago, about IFV caliber cannons that resulted in illuminating a sort of two main categories that IFV caliber cannons fall into. One put emphasis for being ready and avaiable to provide much fire support. The other put emphasis on armor penetration ability. Basically, 20-25mm wss the former while 35mm plus being the latter. 30mm being a sort of compromise of the two classes. The smaller caliber naturally had more ready ammunition and greater ammo storage. The larger caliber had better punch. Which was better tended to be up to what the designers in question wanted between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Posted June 14, 2021 Share Posted June 14, 2021 Two vehicles - Begleitpanzer 57 analogue and a separate APC with an RWS mounted 40mm AGL and LMG in whatever calibre is flavour of the month.... Given that Ajax is 7 or 8 different vehicle variants, the point of having multiple types is fairly moot - the 40mm armed IFV is quite different to the APC variant, even to having a different (still side opening) rear door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Tan Posted June 27, 2021 Share Posted June 27, 2021 Holy shit, I didn't realise the Hanwha AS21 Redback is a Class 50 vehicle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 20, 2021 Share Posted July 20, 2021 Parliamentary inquiry into the Ajax debacle at 3pm today. Parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a76c7259-26f3-43f2-b721-03957c76fcd3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 there is a lot more in the same thread of anyone is interested. But it's all bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawes Posted July 24, 2021 Author Share Posted July 24, 2021 Is Ajax too far along to cancel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssnake Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 6 hours ago, Dawes said: Is Ajax too far along to cancel? That is an entirely political question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 Nimrod wasnt. Twice. The only question is, why does the Army do next, having shagged its replacement for the 50 year old CVRT, AND Warrior. Because they could have converted warrior hulls to carry the Ajax turret, if some clown hadnt cancelled Warrior in favour of Ajax. GD also dont really seem to entirely grasp there is a problem with vibration so much as a problem with non standard noise cancelling earphones. That is not such a great place to start iwth putting the problem right. They were told right from the start of tests of this vehicle there was a problem with vibration, but nothing seemed to make it to the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssnake Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 I don't know nearly enough about the project to comment on whether some obstinate busybody within the MOD is raising a stink by demanding something exceeding the legal requirements for workplace safety, or whether it's indeed GDLS bungling the process. Wouldn't be the first time in .mil procurement that armies or individual project managers all of a sudden develop a certain fixation, or use a single issue as leverage because they want something entirely different. The Ulans and Pizarros I've driven in were totally acceptable WRT noise and vibration, within what's to be expected in a tracked armored vehicle, so I'm meeting with some skepticism the claim that the Ajax using the same hull and drivetrain components is dangerously noisy and uncomfortable to ride with. But again, I don't know enough details, so I can't say who's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 50 minutes ago, Ssnake said: I don't know nearly enough about the project to comment on whether some obstinate busybody within the MOD is raising a stink by demanding something exceeding the legal requirements for workplace safety, or whether it's indeed GDLS bungling the process. Wouldn't be the first time in .mil procurement that armies or individual project managers all of a sudden develop a certain fixation, or use a single issue as leverage because they want something entirely different. The Ulans and Pizarros I've driven in were totally acceptable WRT noise and vibration, within what's to be expected in a tracked armored vehicle, so I'm meeting with some skepticism the claim that the Ajax using the same hull and drivetrain components is dangerously noisy and uncomfortable to ride with. But again, I don't know enough details, so I can't say who's right. No, its rather more serious than that. Crews have reported injuries from the vibration, I think there may even have been damage to hearing. If you listen to the Parliamentary inquiry, some of them even seem to be suffering from industrial white finger, which is the kind of injury you get from using things like pneumatic drills. I doubt that has been seen in British tracked vehicles since the MkV Infantry tank. It seems to be a case of the lower ranks of the Army saying 'we really dont want this', and the higher ranks and the MOD closing ranks and saying 'well you really ought to, because its the only think we have as an option'. When of course, it really isnt. Apparently BAE offered an CV90 based option, but the MOD didnt want to buy ONLY from BAE, and in fact insisted it was anyone else other than BAE. Which as they were instrumental in creating BAE and making it become the behemoth it became, really illustrates the mentality at work at the moment. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawes Posted July 24, 2021 Author Share Posted July 24, 2021 If vibration is really that severe, wouldn't it have the potential to cause damage to some of the vehicle systems over the long term? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 I think I read someone say that because of either the vibration issues or something else, it already cant fire on the move. So yes, presumably. Its enough to make you bloody weep, it really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 Armor: Crew Discomfort Matters https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htarm/20210726.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GJK Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 Can't help but feel this is what happens when you close your AFV research and design centre and production facilities and have to start from scratch. Best, Greg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 Yep. Would never have happened if FVRDE had been kept open. Quinetiq is the solution to all problems apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 The idea was to take a proven underlying design and tailor it. I suggest that vibration and noise issues have very little to do with the equipment fit, they're fundamental to the vehicle and engine combination. As has been noted, it's quite likely that the ASCOD2 platform was selected due to the "Anybody but BAE" mindset in place at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Did Retac or Sunday say something about the guys in spain who built he first hulls are well reknowned at turning out rubbish? Im sure somebody here pointed it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucklucky Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 (edited) I doubt it. Ajax do not make sense now with a minimal tank fleet and no tracked IFV, maybe MoD wants to get rid of them without a big penalty. There is a considerable lack of detail in what has been said. Why MoD approved all steps until now? Edited July 31, 2021 by lucklucky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 Well we have nearly as many tanks as Germany at the moment. I'd like it to be bigger, but even after the cuts it's going to be bigger than the majority of European nations. I think really, we have been had. One by a Defence Contractor, and once by the Army that could fulfil the recce role a hell of a lot cheaper using drones. No, the MoD really wants them. Even now, when it's becoming increasingly apparent it's probably unsalvageable. There is no conspiracy here, only incompetence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 10 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Well we have nearly as many tanks as Germany at the moment. I'd like it to be bigger, but even after the cuts it's going to be bigger than the majority of European nations. I think really, we have been had. One by a Defence Contractor, and once by the Army that could fulfil the recce role a hell of a lot cheaper using drones. No, the MoD really wants them. Even now, when it's becoming increasingly apparent it's probably unsalvageable. There is no conspiracy here, only incompetence. Would take an ODS level NATO-wide conflict to shake Europe into defense investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 Well, now Russia has its bases in Belarus, and Ukraine is all but surrounded, we may not have long to wait. We shall see. I look with dismay that the British Army will soon have more light infantry Brigades than Mechanized Infantry Brigades. You would think the Army leadership have wholly ignored the events of 2014, and still think the WOT is the only war that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 Or maybe respecting Russia and saving on defence spending is a better idea. I think Europe could cut the military spending by 50% and still be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now