'So, what's the Ajax actually like to drive?' Crewman: 'half past three'

@godalmighty83

Жыл бұрын

Doctor: 'I'm sorry, you can't interview this soldier until the concussion and nausea have passed'.

@KONAMAN100

11 ай бұрын

Say it again mate, Do I need a new drive?

Honestly they should have adopted the CV90, we know it’s pros and cons and many of European our counterparts use them.

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

The big problem was BAE refused to build the CV90 in the UK, that cost them the contract.

@jacktoy3032

Жыл бұрын

CV90 seems to be the only viable European option not that more stories of the troubles with the German Puma has come to light.

@fod1855

Жыл бұрын

It wouldn’t have been a problem had these things actually worked.

@codyhearne932

Жыл бұрын

Even if it did work the CV90 family is a better platform and has been extensively tested. Plus the Brits could gets parts and ammo from a majority of a European armies. I don’t believe any Soldier would care if there vehicle was built on the UK or not. I just don’t get the British MOD.

@fod1855

Жыл бұрын

@@codyhearne932 yes I think you’re right, although it’s not about the soldier caring, the gov want it built in the gov because it will provide jobs in that industry.

You can always tell an Ajax crewman. (You just can’t tell him much).

@87ecosse

Жыл бұрын

They would be so mad you're mocking them if they could read.

Surprised they weren’t just given paracetamol and told to wrap sniper tape around anything that moves

@thecurlew7403

Жыл бұрын

Put Cameron in it tell him to Drive this heap of noise.

@380Scania

Жыл бұрын

If it is a military doc it woyld be some Bruffen 😂

@dbz9393

Жыл бұрын

Your hearing loss is not service related

Interesting. Never heard of an armored vehicle being a disaster because of internal noise and vibration before.

@thecurlew7403

Жыл бұрын

Yes Ajax should be put into the house of commons and use both to see whos the biggest noise.

@RR-us2kp

Жыл бұрын

World first

@gilbert7794

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like every 432 ever made

@normanboyes4983

Жыл бұрын

The first British tanks were .

@gaptaxi

Жыл бұрын

@@normanboyes4983 CVR(T) had to be used with helmets and ear Defenders as well! They still use them and they are over 60 years old!

Is anyone going to be held accountable for the failings?

@Ratty_Rex

Жыл бұрын

Nope. If it's as deep seatedly flawed as they think.... they'll do an investigation, find an individual to blame (that didn't cover their arse quick enough) and move on. Not learn anything and be doomed to repeat it all again in 20 years. 😞

@godalmighty83

Жыл бұрын

Yes. The tax payer. The guys sharing out new mansions in London are less fussed.

Let’s not forget that what is now Ajax started in 1989 as FFLAV…. 33 years in development and still not in service. And the actual cost is therefore much higher. After FFLAV, there was TRACER and FRES

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

I think you need to learn what "development" means , General Dynamics have not been "developing" this IFV for 33 years. The contract wasn't awarded to GD until 2010 ...... 13 years not quite the same as 33. As for looking at a replacement 33 years ago yes that is true but also common place in every army everywhere , for example the UK government has already handed out funding for initial RnD on the Astute class submarine replacements .... the astutes have not even finished their production yet so stop trying to pass this off as some massive failure by the MOD "look the MOD took 33 years to do this thing harr harr harrrr" thats just simply not true.

@michaelmulligan0

Жыл бұрын

@@furiousscotsman2916 no Ajax hasn’t been in development for 33 years… the programme that is now Ajax has been

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelmulligan0 Again your statement is highly misleading, you make it sound like the MOD knew exactly what they were gonna buy and spent 33 years tryna buy it lol. Lets take some other examples shall we: -Astute class 1986 started, commissioned in 2010, that's 24 years. -Typhoon 1971 was brought into service in 2003 thats 32 years . -AS-90 took about a decade to develop and enter service and that's just a gun on some tracks . So lets not pretend that the start of a programme is when the production or hell even the procurement starts .

@michaelmulligan0

Жыл бұрын

@@furiousscotsman2916 the MOD did know that they wanted a number of times during that period but each time they changed it

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

@@michaelmulligan0 welcome to weapon procurement.

how did the latest CV90 lose out to this in competition?

@carldavies4776

Жыл бұрын

And think how many we'd have if that money had been spent on procurement

@mrsmall1990a

Жыл бұрын

corruption.

@gregs7562

Жыл бұрын

CV90 is BAE. BAE were in the bad books after the Nimrod MRA4 fiasco.

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

They refused to build it in the UK. Jobs win contracts.

@eraldorh

Жыл бұрын

The cv90 is older than the challenger 2 and the challnger 2 is about to be replaced. If you are going to upgrade a vehicle and call it new then we might as well upgrade the warriors and keep them.

It’s a piece of machinery that the users didn’t want and had no input into what they’d like . It’s nearly the size of a tank not what you need for the recce role it’s supposedly meant to be for .

@teancrumpets5685

Жыл бұрын

why don't they just work off of the old CVRT series? an updated scimitar with modern armour and systems would be perfect for the role, wouldnt it?

@thecurlew7403

Жыл бұрын

@@teancrumpets5685 No because its old and needs replaced cv 90 should be purchased along with boxer a 1000 vehicles each that will sort out the infantry at the moment funny thing f432 apc is still used with remote gun and upgraded armour and engine recruit more troops creating one big regiment getting numbers up to at least 100 000 and get Guards regiments 2 batt each going back to 6ft Guarsdmen then drill them till we get a better army standard at present convert the carriers with cats and traps to receive f 35 c and with new frigates destroyers coming in and at least 12 subs airforce buy more eurofighters and f 35 until tempest is ready thats this whole mess sorted with a better trained workforce than we have my goodneess a 10 year old could do better than these Parasites indeed.

@lutherburgsvik6849

Жыл бұрын

Like the US Bradley then...

@teancrumpets5685

Жыл бұрын

@@thecurlew7403 pffff

@thecurlew7403

Жыл бұрын

@@teancrumpets5685 Likewise.

Please stop the awful music.

@RR-us2kp

Жыл бұрын

This music is probably what caused the soldiers to go deaf

Great summary of a vehicle procurement disaster not seen since the Valiant design.

@1chish

Жыл бұрын

Nimrod MRA4 wants a word .....

@Ratty_Rex

Жыл бұрын

@@1chish Yeah, that's very true. Maybe I should have caveated by saying "tracked" vehicle.....

And so what now? Where, and more importantly when, is the light tank/AFV coming from to replace it?

So how did it get so far with such a fundamental flaw as too noisy inside?

@zhufortheimpaler4041

Жыл бұрын

fascinating isnt it? and its an ASCOD with a few modificatioins... the brits really cant do anything right with armored fighting vehicles it seems

How this was picked over the CV90 is baffling

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

BAE refused to build their CV90 in the UK, that was why they lost.

@v4skunk739

Жыл бұрын

The cv90 caries infantry and the Ajax doesn't though, kind of different roles but i get the point.

5 soldiers for noise induced hearing lose paused this programme. It’s a shame no one cared during Herrick. A lot of us still live with damaged hearing but no one cares.

@theimmortal4718

Жыл бұрын

I have hearing loss romr the driver's seat of a Bradley IFV. Not uncommon in the types of vehicles. The BMP is pretty loud for the driver, too

@robnorton9496

Жыл бұрын

You what?!👂🦻

@theimmortal4718

Жыл бұрын

@@robnorton9496 Reeeeeeeeeerrrr

@robnorton9496

Жыл бұрын

@@theimmortal4718 the turbo whine of Challenger 2s has done mine in

@theimmortal4718

Жыл бұрын

@@robnorton9496 I'm sure it's just as horrible. My head would be ringing for an hour after we stopped

I say either upgrade the Warrior and try “fixing” the Ajax in that time and if that doesn’t work then buy from outside the county like the Bradley or PUMA or CV90 there’s so many better options then the Ajax!

It's like british pentagon wars without the Bradley.

@Cartoonman154

Жыл бұрын

Apparently, the film is nothing like the book regarding events.

Get rid and buy the CV90 instead, BaE Systems even said they would adapt it to use the turrets already made for the Ajax and anything else the MoD wants, plus they'll be largely manufactured here in the UK instead of just final assembly like the Ajax white elephant.

@1chish

Жыл бұрын

I totally agree but wait a sec there mate. As soon as you make something a hybrid of something else you build in delays and problems. The CV90 is excellent as built so the Government should just ditch this boondoggle, sue General Dynamics and get BAE Systems to take over the factory and build the CV90 there.

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

Problem is BAE didn't want to manufacture them originally in the UK and only tried to renegotiate after the MOD went with the AJAX, they played hardball with the MOD because they felt the cv90 would win and they lost the contract, so i dunno if the MOD should go back to BAE just out of principal , also GD are contractually obligated to fix the ajax and if they can't the money come out of their pockets not the MODs where as if we cancel the Ajax i do believe we only get a small portion of that money .

@dc-4ever201

Жыл бұрын

@@furiousscotsman2916 Sometimes problems can't be fixed, they are an inherent design flaw as in the ASCOD that General Dynamics based the Ajax on it still has issues that were never fixed. If I were Defence Minister I'd put a boot firmly up their and the Army's arses and tell them they have a deadline otherwise the contract is terminated. The Army can't wait for these vehicles forever particularly in light of what's going on in Ukraine. Putin will rearm with modern equipment circumventing sanctions via China and he can throw more people into his wars, remember Stalin during WWII throwing unarmed soldiers at the Germans saying pickup a weapon off the dead and the cult of yes men surrounding Putin will do the same as long as it's not their kids dying.

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

@@dc-4ever201 Sometimes they can and sometimes they can't i agree a decision needs to be made and it looks like the MOD has made one , tests on Ajax are going forward with modifications to try resolve the issues . Also with whats going on in Ukraine i don't think 600 IFV's will make the difference for example Poland has over 1000 MBT's and have ordered a 1000 more k2's from south Korea so i really don't think we will be adding much to the EU ground war in all honesty , we will provide stand off munitions from the astutes and prob fighter and strike capabilities from Typhoons and F-35's so realistically i don't see the need for an IFV as super important in any war with Russia .

@dc-4ever201

Жыл бұрын

@@furiousscotsman2916 Thing is Poland is largely flat terrain and Nato will take time to organise a response to any invasion that's why Poland us building europes biggest tank and armour force to slow them down long enough for Nato to respond. They would need to hold out at least a week before sufficient heavy armoured units could reinforce as ours have to be put on ships and escorted. 2 IFV's could be carried by the biggest RAF air transports so the air mobile brigade could be on the ground within 48/72hours even then it takes time to shift enough vehicles. The only saving grace is that as long as Putin keeps making threats our tanks will be kept in mainland Europe instead of returning home.

Does the British Army not issue hearing protection, or at least some ear plugs, or is the noise and vibration problem really that bad? On the Abrams we either wore our CVC headsets or just plugged our ears, and that was with hydraulics in the turret and a jet turbine engine.

@EOGSS13

Жыл бұрын

if i recall its something to do with the frequency of the sound that ajax puts out while your sitting inside. active noise cancellation used in challenger doesnt work with ajax due to that

@nightjarflying

Жыл бұрын

The excessive noise and vibration has caused some of the troops riding inside to experience tinnitus, swollen joints & nausea. Noise-cancelling headphones don’t fix the problem which is spread across a wide frequency range some of the noise/vibration is 'felt' rather than heard. The causes are multiple & are built into the fundamental design - many elements of the engine mountings, suspension, turret & upgrade armour kits require redesign. Big job. The cure at the moment is to drive slow & avoid some surfaces!

@gregs7562

Жыл бұрын

@@nightjarflying yet its apparently not been an issue on the Spanish Ascod which this is based on.

@jacktoy3032

Жыл бұрын

@@gregs7562 Interesting! I wonder if the root cause will be traced to the modifications requested by the MoD.

@peterwait641

Жыл бұрын

@@gregs7562 Its heavier , shorter and narrower with a more powerful engine, also hull build quality was not as good , expect many of the old engineers who built ASCOD have retired !

I don't understand what would make this vehicle special in regards to noise. Is it the powerplant or the tracks/sprockets themselves or something about the frame? I haven't seen it explained as to what component is causing the excess noise and vibration. I was a Bradley IFV driver in 2003, and the noise from the engine is pretty terrible from that spot.

@peterwait641

Жыл бұрын

The old style ASCOD torsion bar suspension is on limit of design spec's , increased track tension generates more noise at the drive sprockets !

The CV90 is right there, ready to be bought 🇸🇪🇬🇧

@nigelmacbug6678

Жыл бұрын

or the tracked boxer buy/design extra modules

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

@@nigelmacbug6678 Tracked Boxer is entirely unproven, risky choice.

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

If only BAE hadn't denied building CV90 in the UK, they'd have won the contract years ago already.

@nigelmacbug6678

Жыл бұрын

​@@Retrosicotte granted, one of the excuses for not adopting cv90 was low upgrade path due to a max weight of 37T, ajax max 42T, boxerT max is 45T

They didn't mention how the retired General who the government put in charge of the program paid all the money up front to General Dynamics, which is basically corruption. All in good time, General, you're going to go to your new retirement location. As for the resolution to the question of a tracked IFV, the best option all around in the adoption of the new tracked Boxer chassis, which is fully interoperable with the fleet of 8x8 wheeled fighting vehicles already purchased, and may be fully produced in the UK using the licensed design. The CV 90 may be the ultimate, but it wouldn't be anywhere near as flexible and economical as the tracked Boxer variant.

Why was it purchased BEFORE trials had ended ?

CV90 MK,IV.

Its been a disaster...sort it out quick or scrap it!

If they cant get it fixed hopefully we can finally replace warrior . But if it cant be fixed cut losses and pickup CV90 .

@davidhouseman4328

Жыл бұрын

It isn't a warrior replacement it's a CVRT replacement.

Check out the turret stabilisation at circa 1:12. As turret designer I can tell you that if this azimuth jitter is a bit a problem for actually hitting something... oh dear... I guess the turret being over weight does have performance issue beyond just noise and vibration in the hull...

@peterwait641

Жыл бұрын

Does the turret wobble or has the muzzle break cured the excessive recoil ?

Probably used the same NVH standards as the Mk1 Tank

Sack the Order! CV90s for more advanced the tech on Ajax already 20plus year old!!!!

Can always loan from France, their 8 x 8 infantry support are very good 👍

Buy CV90

According to the UK's most accurate and serious newspaper, The Daily Express, Ajax has passed trials and is good to go. Manufacturing to start. The daily express, though.

Very interesting

which is noiser. the ajax or a mark 1 tank from WW1?

@nightjarflying

Жыл бұрын

Why do you ask? Do you think a WWI tank is a suitable comparison to a modern light reconnaissance tank capable of 70 mph? The Ajax has severe noise AND vibration problems causing some of the troops riding inside to experience tinnitus, swollen joints & nausea. Noise-cancelling headphones don’t fix the problem which is spread across a wide frequency range some of the noise/vibration is 'felt' rather than heard. The causes are multiple & are built into the fundamental design - many elements of the engine mountings, suspension, turret & upgrade armour kits require redesign. Big job. The cure at the moment is to drive slow & avoid some surfaces!

@haroldamiss4883

Жыл бұрын

@@nightjarflying christ mate i think he was joking, no need to right paragraphs.

@teancrumpets5685

Жыл бұрын

@@nightjarflying yeah but you just copy/pasted half of that

@nightjarflying

Жыл бұрын

@@teancrumpets5685 I just copy/pasted this: "yeah but you just copy/pasted half of that" - does that invalidate the content? If you have an actual objection to my 'copy/paste' what is is it? What's your argument?

@teancrumpets5685

Жыл бұрын

@@nightjarflying my argument is you are a silly goober

What is it with the music!

Just buy our PUMA. 18 of them became available recently. They can shipped over to UK in January. 🙃

@HYBRIDHAWK

Жыл бұрын

The PUMA is also having its own problems. Likely going the same way as the Ajax.

Similar to the problems the Germans are having with the Puma IFV. Nobody makes armoured vehicles properly any more.

@zhufortheimpaler4041

Жыл бұрын

oh its not the same. Puma had 12 years from developement order to full production in 2014, meaning currently they are still ironing out a few kinks and teething issues (its not as bad as it is portrayed overall, the unit with the full failure of the system put the systems through excessive combat training for the whole year whith limited maintenance and spare part availibility. sooner or later it breaks) Ajax on the other hand is based on ASCOD, a system in active service for 20 years by now, developed in the 80´s and the UK MOD and BAE managed to mess a working system up that much, that it sends its users to the hospital.

@grahamstubbs4962

Жыл бұрын

@@zhufortheimpaler4041 Given the opportunity we could mess-up anything. Just give us a chance.

@zhufortheimpaler4041

Жыл бұрын

@@grahamstubbs4962 XD i mean there is still some good stuff coming from the UK in respect to arms (primarily as coorprative developements like EF-2000 and other stuff) but the armored vehicle developement of the UK has been abysmally regressive since the late 50´s and never recovered from then onwards

@grahamstubbs4962

Жыл бұрын

@@zhufortheimpaler4041 True. But we have a lot of Ajaxes to shift and we're prepared to throw in some SA80s with them. Can't say fairer than that.

We ask them to do their best and expect them to do it in something sub standard. I know the feeling well guys. Woody QGJM

So after a lot of evaluation they still can’t pinpoint the NVH component, how strange, perhaps their engineers need to go back to basics then, strip install and retest like we did back in the day…or is there another agenda that’s going on here ?

@vinceking7878

Жыл бұрын

What is NVH (Noise, Vibration, Hearing). I would have thought that computer simulation would cover some of that?? I believe that these are tested in Wales?? Probably Westminster enjoys torturing and depleting the whole millitary, especially the Welsh army??

imagine just buying cv90, it could have been in service by now, replaced, cvrt, bulldog and warrior, 1 supply chain, streamlined driver and commander qualifications, proven platform

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

Yes but BAE didn't want to build them in the UK and tried to play hardball with the MOD so when the MOD turned around and offered it to GD who were willing to build it in the UK it was already to late for BAE even after they came back to the table and tried to say they would build it in their Newcastle plants the MOD had already decided not to play their game , so really can you blame the MOD? they wanted the jobs and skills in the UK and BAE tried to take them for a ride and the MOD where having none of it.

Any timeline needs to go back to the 90s. I worked on it when it was TRACER and the mistakes in that programme were brought fwd into Ajax. The problems go much deeper than the vibration.

Why can't the Poms get their Armoured programs right ? Every vehicle seems to have major issues.

ask for the money back!

the MoD is trying to replace old tried and trusted systems like the warrior and CVRTs

@LukePRTR

Жыл бұрын

tried and true against something in its same era, those are legacy vehicles and have no place in a modern battle

@v4skunk739

Жыл бұрын

Ajax is the Ascod a 20 year old design that works. Apparently the Spanish welded the Ajax hulls out of spec and is the cause of all the problems. If true there will be a huge lawsuit against the Spanish General Dynamics.

It looks like an excellent and flexible platform, but those noise issues could end the whole program.

@godalmighty83

Жыл бұрын

Also the chassis not being welded together straight, it will make future updates nigh on impossible as everyone is a different shape.

The biggest problem may honestly just be that the vehicle is stupid a conceptual level. Like what is it FOR? Is it a recon vehicle, is it a tank, is it an IFV? It's everything, but nothing, and merely average to poor at all of it.

Band tracks reduce noise and vibrations.

UK would have a great military if they didn't waste so much money

@carldavies4776

Жыл бұрын

Couldn't agree more

@johnwoodward680

Жыл бұрын

Unfortunately every Military suffer from the same problem. The Americans, the French, the Australians and many more...

@timmurphy5541

Жыл бұрын

It keeps wasting it by trying to save money - this seems the default UK strategy: try to get the fanciest tech for the lowest price possible - then end up paying much more and getting nothing.

Which is less expensive, a TTV Narrator, or superimposing a Text caption? How about both? I hear faster than I read.

Everytime I hear about Merthyr Tydfil, I think about the bloke ringing ASDA about his pizza.

The Engine in this thing is a MTU V8 199 TE21 diesel which is a German made engine but the company is owned by Rolls Royce. I think they would have been better off a Cummins engine for many reasons :)

Why don’t they just update the warrior instead of wasting money on failures

Increasing the defence budget doesn’t mean we are better protected

What a waste of money how many do we actually have for 5.5 billion pounds

Bin it. Draw the line under it. Tank = dinosaur. Drone = the meteor

How hard and how much does it cost to fix a noise and vibration issue, stop reviewing it and messing about just fix the damn thing

@JammyDodger45

Жыл бұрын

Oh, I wonder why they didn't just think of that? 🤷🏻‍♂️

@nightjarflying

Жыл бұрын

The excessive noise and vibration has caused some of the troops riding inside to experience tinnitus, swollen joints & nausea. Noise-cancelling headphones don’t fix the problem which is spread across a wide frequency range some of the noise/vibration is 'felt' rather than heard. The causes are multiple & are built into the fundamental design - many elements of the engine mountings, suspension, turret & upgrade armour kits require redesign. Big job. Possibly an impossible job. The cure at the moment is to drive slow & avoid some surfaces!

@staylor6877

Жыл бұрын

@@nightjarflying There was a statement that said these issues had been fixed a couple of weeks ago, which is how it passed the user validation trials. It’s now moving onto reliability trials in January. There was an MOD tweet on the 20th.

@timmurphy5541

Жыл бұрын

Apparently they were not all built properly - bits of the hull are different sizes - and that means that the problems are slightly different in each one which is why apparently they had trouble coming up with fixes that worked across all of these things. It seems like insufficient quality control early on.

@nightjarflying

Жыл бұрын

​@@staylor6877 It has not being fixed - some elements have been fixed, but the main activity has been the moving of goalposts. There are speed restrictions, crew can only operate it for x hours per month & all are regularly hearing tested & removed from AFV duties at the slightest indication of loss, discomfort or pain. That's burying the problem not fixing it.

I hope they can sort the vibration issues out. As fighting vehicles go, it’s a beauty!

@chrisbacon3071

Жыл бұрын

No it’s not a beauty it’s a failure, and until it can prove itself, it does not deserve your praise.

@jameschoice3983

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisbacon3071 Its a beauty and it has lots of superb qualities- b u t there is an issue hard to get by.

@chrisbacon3071

Жыл бұрын

@@jameschoice3983 true true

@dbz9393

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisbacon3071 asthetically it looks quite nice

@chrisbacon3071

Жыл бұрын

@@dbz9393 It can look nice but if it can’t function properly then what’s the point in having it?

The film needs to go back to the start 2009/10 when the contract was tendered.....that was the start of the problems.

Next video, please do not use this music!

And there's me thinking that only low rent "defence channels" only did the text on the screen with the crappy music

I mean parts were falling off it about 2 months ago when they tested it in bovy 😂

How comes the U.K spend nearly twice as much on defence than France and the french armed forces are nearly twice as big and better is it down to are civil servants if so shouldn’t something be done.

I really think the KF31/41 Lynx would be a better choice over either the CV90 or the Ajax. The modular design means it should be able to easily go from APC to IFV, Overwatch, Armoured Recovery, et cetera - allowing it to easily replace the Bulldogs, CVR(T), and Warriors in a modular fashion and all on a single platform. That would also allow easy integration of mortar systems, 75-105mm cannons, AA guns, a SAM system, or other more situational capabilities in the form of a mission pack/module, onto a common tracked chassis.

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

Lynx actually scored lower than CV90 or Ajax in trials for other buyers. It has a lot of issues too. It's also enormously expensive and unproven.

@arakami8547

Жыл бұрын

@@Retrosicotte Has it? It's a relatively new design... Was there any noticeable deficiencies discussed? To my understanding, its suspension, transmission, and upkeep is easier and more qualitative than say those on the Ajax. Unlike the Ajax as well, it's armed variants could carry more than 2 dismounted personnel like the Warrior, at the cost of the networking, data management, and reconnaissance capabilities of the Ajax. Comparing the Ajax with contemporary US Army armour, it's akin to the M3 Cavalry Fighting Vehicle; admittedly however, more geared towards reconnaissance and networked capability. That would be fine for the British Army, a reconnaissance vehicle replacement for the CVRT has long been awaited - however that also means there's no armed APC replacement for the Warrior. Meanwhile a Lynx Recce module should enable her to conduct the same jobs as the Ajax. As for cost, I imagine the KF31 would be cheaper than the Ajax considering its gotten a weaker engine - however admittedly the KF41 does seem like it would be pricey. I imagine the KF41 could be equipped with a weaker 800hp engine to save on costs, such as the one mounted on the Boxer. With a turret and extensive armour package, the KF41 is expected to weigh 44 tonnes and travel at 70km with an 1100hp engine - its not much heavier than say the Boxer or Ajax. The KF31 is expected to travel 65km/h with a 750hp engine and weight of 34 tonnes. I would hope that a KF41 equipped with an 800hp engine, together with a less extensive add-on armour package, could maintain the speed of 70km/h that most modern tracked IFVs exercise. That would also cut down on her maximum permissible tonnage however, though crucially save on costs. Anyway, for both the KF31 and KF41, any cost increases incurred from the procurement of mission packs/modules should be paid back for from decreased maintenance and capability development costs, and of course the strategic, logistical benefits that modularity brings.

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

@@arakami8547 The Lynx's main problem was its engine. Apparently that was where it lost the most points, it wasn't very reliable and had a lot of issues performing as it needed to. As in, Chieftain level issues.

@zhufortheimpaler4041

Жыл бұрын

@@Retrosicotte on the other hand.... it hits its targets, while Ajax only sends its crews into the hospital and CV90 scores alot worse in hitting stationary and moving targets

@davidjacobs8558

Жыл бұрын

UK should go for AS-21 Redback instead. and also K9-A2 Howitzer.

maybe the MoD and the British army, should have just purchased, the BAe's oqn CV90 Mark IV Infantry Fighting Vehicle, from Sweden?

The L85A1 of IFVs

Nothing changes with MOD procurement and development programmes. Years behind schedule and way over budget. Just look what happened to the Nimrod and other programmes. I am a veteran so speak from experience

Should have just bought the Bradley Fighting Vehicle from the US and modified it to UK standards.

According to an engineers officer (but former RTR) the Challenger was even louder when it passed its trials. I think now it's a different safety culture which prevents the Ajax from being used.

@peterwait641

Жыл бұрын

Ajax is louder than CR2 at lower speeds , torsion bar suspension will always make more noise than hydro-gas as resonance travels down the bars !

@godalmighty83

Жыл бұрын

Only had brief experience in a C1 but it wasn't that bad, admittedly this was ~5 years after its in service date so some tweaks may have been made.

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

It's apparently not the actual noise level it's more the resonance of it , it's more "felt" than "heard" if that makes sense , the vibrations are more the problem like people are actually getting severe pains after 30 mins in the back , where as in chally u slap on some ear gear and you are good to go .

@peterwait641

Жыл бұрын

@@furiousscotsman2916 Government measured 117 db inside !

@furiousscotsman2916

Жыл бұрын

@Peter Wait yea but that's been mitigated heavily ad I understand it they where still struggling to deal with the frequency that it was vibrating the chassis itself .

Follow the money, lots of corrupt politicians and military contractors making mugs out of all of us

should up graded the warrior

A scandalous waste of public funds. The British Army doesn't need light tanks. Concerning APC's they should simply produce modern versions of the Saracen, a tried and trusted vehicle.

So it was doomed from the start had deep seated flaws and caused soldiers to be medically discharged and downgraded, then how has it passed its user trials and who is footing the bill for all the problems. It has taken decades for the Royal Armoured Corps to get Recce vehicles to replace the CVRT and this is what these long suffering Recce soldiers get.

How have the poor soldiers who have been booted out been compensated? Their careers have been destroyed.

Reminds me of the Littoral Combat Ship program

Just stick with the Warrior IFV. Its tried, tested and battle hardened

£5.5 billion wasted not a paltry sum. It is not as though it is a new concept.

Scrap the Ajax buy the CV90 Mark IV job done.

Sometimes it’s better to quit and move on. Any excess assets could be shipped over to Ukraine?

I never understood why they keep reinventing the wheel and coming up with new vehicles that largely do the same as something else already on the market with another army. Sure it might be slightly different to what you need but come on. It's just about supporting the defence industry not actual capability.

@Nainara32

Жыл бұрын

Agreement on this point. There have to be hundreds of IFV variants employed in armed forces around the world. Unless you're developing truly unique capabilities, why wouldn't you just license something that's widely in use, proven, and well supported by friendly nations?

@davidhouseman4328

Жыл бұрын

@@Nainara32 we didn't want an IFV, the problem comes from starting with an existing IFV (ASCOD) and adding lots of extra weight.

If the company supposed to be delivering the vehicle cannot supply it in a usable condition, then I fail to see why that company should have any of the taxpayers money; the government should require a refund and use the money to buy an already proven usable vehicle that is available and in use by our allies.

Should've just gone with the CV90. Proven platform and ready to go. Why does the MOD always go for the most expensive and bespoke option, and end up wasting a sh!& ton of taxpayers money

@ByronBohte

Жыл бұрын

Because politically it's easier to say oh hey we've created jobs in *insert small town here *

Cancel it before it becomes the next littoral combat ship debacle.

Be interesting to see what inducements were offered by General Dynamics so Ajax was picked.

It needs to be more diverse

5 got Med Discharged. That's disgraceful. Just scrap the project and start new with knowledge now where the issues arise.

It should of been scrapped years ago and the CV90 ordered instead, 5 years overdue and still not in service with dozens of problems nope much better platforms out there and battle proven.

The SA 80 and Type 45 destroyer are examples of the waste of taxpayer’s money by MOD procurement.

We should buy some German armour.

More waste of money the warriors don’t have any of these problems. Something not right because Germany has put the puma on hold too as their having trouble.

Should have bought the German Lynx instead

CV90 forever

22nd December end of year decision. Whats happening. No way they suddenly fixed the many problems. I dont think they will cancel. So the British army gets an overweight ( too heavy for many bridges in the Baltics and Romanian eastern europe. Also unreliable, plus useless coaxle gun. ( have to stop to fire) There so fixated on this data battlefield sharing capabiliry. And not the basic platform. CV90 was the answer

Standby for an influx of comments telling you that Ajax is not a tank!!

@afc8981

Жыл бұрын

It isn't, but the average person isn't well versed enough to know the difference between an AFV, an IFV and a tank. They therefore think that any large tracked vehicle with a long barrel is a tank. I've seen foreign legion fighters in Ukraine refer to all large armed tracked vehicles in interviews as "tanks" for brevity, despite them knowing the difference between each vehicle type.

@tattyheid7279

Жыл бұрын

@@afc8981 Or freakishly big reconnaissance vehicles... If they are going to report on a serious subject then they should at least be accurate.

Noise in a tank, Part and parcel of a heavy combat system, any of these guys been in a Chieftain/Challenger MBT at full pelt, then they’d know about NVH?

Just try the French EBRC Jaguar,God dammit !

We need to learn from this mistake, take the loss on the chin and then purchase the CV90. Done, problem solved.

Should of bought the b.a.e tank in production for four years

@Retrosicotte

Жыл бұрын

BAE refused to build it in the UK. Jobs win contracts.

The tech on the modern battlefield has evolved so fast that vehicles such as the Ajax are redundant before they can get off the assembly lines. . While I understand the need to transport and support infantry into the battlefield I also know that without proper air cover these vehicles and it's cargo are sitting ducks for battlefield drones today so the issues of anti-drone has to be addressed first before anymore of these IFV's should even be considered.

What’s the best similar vehicle in the World? Just buy that one.

Germans haveing same problems with there new equipment to