Showing posts with label Joint Ground Based Air Defence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joint Ground Based Air Defence. Show all posts

Sunday, September 28, 2025

SKYKEEPER, the incumbent Air Defence “C2” solution

 

The current system, operated by 49 Bty Royal Artillery, could succeed itself

At DSEI, I had a chance to talk with Richard Turner, Business Development Manager for SKYKEEPER at Lockheed Martin UK Ampthill. A RAF veteran with a background in Air Control, Richard feels strongly for the capability he is overseeing and developing. As an Operation HERRICK veteran, he also noted his relationship with LEAPP / SKYKEEPER began earlier than he initially realized, as the Sense and Warn solution used in Afghanistan to warn personnel of incoming indirect fire used elements of LEAPP.

We discussed the latest developments and the Army trials and demonstrations SKYKEEPER has been involved in, with an eye to the possible future role of SK as C2 solution for ground based air defence.

Lockheed Martin is actively talking to other UK firms as it considers how to pursue the opportunity of becoming the Lead System Integrator for the Land GBAD programme. A pre-market notice has been published by the MOD recently alerting Industry of the need for such a figure.

 

 

 

The Land Ground Based Air Defence programme is a multi-project enterprise to be delivered across 3 “Capability Uplift Periods”, the first of which has essentially concluded, having seen the delivery of a number of new capabilities including GIRAFFE 1X radars for improved counter-drone capability within SHORAD batteries and the introduction of soldier-borne C-UAS sensors and kinetic and non-kinetic soldier-borne C-UAS effectors (SMASH computer sighs for assault rifles; electronic / jammer “guns”).

The (unfortunately slow) growth of SKY SABRE Medium Range Air Defence batteries is also underway, most notably with the recent order to MBDA for new launchers and the procurement of more trucks for reloads, for battery logistics support and also new engagement modules.

6 additional SKY SABRE 'systems' are being procured (22 August 2025 announcement), 'doubling' the number of deployable systems. A lot of confusion is caused by the MoD too liberally using "launcher" and 'system' interchangeably, as if they were one and the same. But as the MOD itself notes in its press release, a “system” is comprised of 3 main elements: radar, C2, and launcher.

More accurately still, a complete system, correctly called a Fire Group, has 3 launchers by design. Unfortunately, at this moment in time it’s impossible to say for sure how many launchers the British Army can truly count on. The 4 batteries of 16 Regiment Royal Artillery, each composed of 2 independent Fire Group, would need 24 launchers to express their full potential but it’s unclear if they actually have anywhere near that many.


The 3 elements of a SKY SABRE Fire Group seen in Poland at the start of operation STIFFTAIL, which saw a Fire Group (with at least 2 launchers) deployed there until December 2024. Closer to camera, the Rafael-supplied C4I shelter; then the GIRAFFE AMB radar and further away a launcher vehicle. The usual slogan that a CAMM "system" can control up to 24 missiles in flight at the same time is exactly the reason why a full Fire Group should have 3 (3x8=24 missiles) launchers


An earlier letter by Lord Coaker had evidenced that “growth” was underway to get to 9 “launchers”, with deliveries known to be underway in 2024 under an earlier, unannounced procurement by the previous Government. If we were to take the language literally, 9 + 6 launchers would lead (within 3 years, an unacceptably long time) to just 15 total launchers, which would mean that a “massed” deployment in the field would see Fire Groups having 1 to 2 launchers at most.

The latest procurement, also includes “12 fire unit support vehicles for ammunition, 8 vehicles for baggage, and 8 threat evaluation and weapon assignment systems”.

The “Fire Unit Support Vehicles” are 6-tonner HX-60 4x4 truck with flatbed that carry a complete "clip" of 8 missiles that the launcher truck can hook and drag into position, DROPS-style. The “baggage” vehicle should be, again, a 6-tonner HX-60 flatbed with tail crane. Vehicles of this type are commonly seen with SKY SABRE Fire Groups and the tail crane is also used to aid reloading of single canisters where needed.

The “threat evaluation and weapon assignment systems” should be the C4I heart of a Fire Group, in theory, but the inconsistent language used by the MOD introduces doubt about what exactly they are talking about.


A SKY SABRE launcher (right, mostly out of frame) hooks a reload clip of 8 CAMM missiles from a HX60 ammunition truck. 


The HX60 flatbed wth tail crane truck seen here (left) is (probably) what DE&S called "baggage" truck in their news release. Unfortunately we are always bound to interpret what the MoD says. 


The next big event, at the sharp end, should be the formal selection of the new vehicle base (expected to be the Patria 6x6) and the new turret for the new Manoeuvre SHORAD Fire Unit destined to replace STORMER.

Getting back to SKYKEEPER proper, the relevant project to look for is the new C2 system which, towards 2030, is meant to ensure maximum interconnection of the various systems and batteries across the battlefield.

The new C2 is a key capability upgrade, part of the wider CUP2 and 3 “eras” which are meant to field capability between 2026 and 2030.

During 2024, the MOD communicated, with an ex-ante voluntary transparency notice, its intention to award Northrop Grumman 2 small 6-months contracts, active from 1st October 2024, to assess the feasibility of adopting their Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) and Forward Area Air Defence (FAAD) C2 systems to meet British needs.

Until 2029, however, the task of building and distributing a Recognized Air Picture to UK land formations will fall on SKYKEEPER, and that could continue well into the 2030s. It remains more than possible, after all, that SKYKEEPER is actually selected, in the end, to succeed itself.

The SKYKEEPER in service with the Army and the SKYKEEPER full potential are, after all, currently two very different things.

 

From LEAPP to SKYKEEPER

We need to take a look back in time to understand how we got to the current situation.

In Afghanistan, the British Armed Forces initially fielded “Automated Sense and Warn”, a capability acquired under Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR) which integrated Saab GIRAFFE AMB radars, MAMBA (Saab ARTHUR C) counter-battery radars and other sensors, networking through an early Land Environment Air Picture Provision (LEAPP) C2 system and feeding into WAVES towers to sound alarms and warn personnel on base of incoming attacks.

The “true” LEAPP came into service while Operation HERRICK came to a close. Deliveries of the core LEAPP equipment concluded in October 2014 and it was only in 2015 that 49 (Inkerman) Battery Royal Artillery became operational with the system.

LEAPP as originally delivered comprised of 5 Saab Giraffe Agile Multi Beam (AMB) radars; 4 “Control nodes” (shelters carried on MAN SV HX60 4x4 trucks); 3 Air picture trailers and a single Link 11 (receive-only) access node for use primarily by 3rd Commando Brigade, manned by 29 Commando RA. Link 11 was then very necessary to access data coming from warships; now Link 16 is more universal, even at sea, and indeed Link 22 is coming in.

A JAPPLE Tactical Data Link provided a Receive-only data link 16 capability and capability to forward the Recognized Air Picture (RAP) to remote terminals.

LEAPP relays on external communication bearers in the field, primarily the Army’s FALCON battlefield Wide Area Network. Relevant information for air defence needs is circulated on the GBAD BISA (Ground Based Air Defence Battlefield Information System Application), a dedicate BOWMAN mode for transmission of air defence information.


LEAPP elements from 49 Bty in the Field. The 8x8 trucks are GIRAFFE AMB radars (folded), while two Tactical Nodes follow. 


In the simplest possible terms, LEAPP uses “its own” assigned radars and data coming in via data link through other sources, including from Air and Sea, to build a Recognized Air Picture that it then supplies to Land HQs (Divisions, Brigades, etc).

LEAPP has been used extensively since, but the field of radios, data links and electronics has evolved very quickly. By 2020, LEAPP in its original form, very bespoke, very “bulky”, very closed architecture, was already showing its age and the Army started to plan out upgrades.

The requirement as published was ambitious, but intelligent: LEAPP needed to evolve “to have a small form factor, which is essential to allow its continued deployment into LAND HQ’s.
The new small factor system must integrate GIRAFFE-AMB radars using an ASTERIX standard, a Link 16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDS-JTRS) tactical data link terminal and external systems using a Joint Range Extension Applications Protocol-C (JREAP-C) interface. The means to connect the Command and Control (C2) to multiple G-AMB’s via both wireless and wired links is required. The LEAPP requirement is for the provision of 5 sets, each comprising C2, Human Machine Interface (HMI), TDL and communication equipment. Each set should be provided in ruggedised cases allowing the system to be man-portable
”.

Lockheed Martin UK agreed that all these demands were eminently sensible and worked on exactly these lines to develop LEAPP into SKYKEEPER. Unfortunately, when the MOD finally awarded the contract for the Life Extension of LEAPP, in January 2022, the funding was insufficient to go with the full ambition and the form factor reduction was left out of the project entirely.

LM upgraded all of the LEAPP systems, replacing the old software with new, open-architecture, ITAR-free, UK-sovereign SKYKEEPER software but the system is still bound to trailers and shelters carried on trucks, when it no longer needs to be that conspicuous (and thus vulnerable).

SKYKEEPER now and in the future

SKYKEEPER now is fully capable of working with Link 16 MIDS/JTRS with the potential for JREAP-C and also offers a wider array of options to connect with lower tactical echelons via radio and Wide Area Networks. It also enables Mode V IFF data receipt from the G-AMB radars. The new system is more user-friendly, the Human Machine Interface having been completely revised, making it easier to exploit information and streamlining decision-making.

Lockheed Martin has developed SK FLEX, a “boxed” solution that delivers exactly the man-portable solution the British Army wanted, allowing the set up and movement of nodes within buildings, battlefield fortifications or other expedient locations.


SKYKEEPER FLEX in the field (photo Lockheed Martin) 

The British Army has its eye on these new solutions. In January 2024, the Army deployed a GIRAFFE AMB radar to the US for Project CONVERGENCE Capstone 4 but it did not deploy a tactical node. Instead of taking one of its truck-carried shelters, the Army packed 2 SK FLEX sets supplied by Lockheed Martin UK instead.

Once in the US, a decision was made to further experiment by connecting the GIRAFFE AMB to SK FLEX not by cable, as would usually be done with LEAPP (where the radars were used specifically to build a Local air picture) but with a wireless link. Lockheed Martin UK personnel on the ground sent the request back to Ampthill and in the space of one night, time zone difference assisting, the UK laboratories were able to send back a workable software solution.

Again in 2024, but in November, at the Army Warfighter Experiment (AWE), SK FLEX was again central. A new sensor was used to help build the RAP, the small and portable GIRAFFE 1X that the Army (and RAF Regiment) have procured specifically to enhance short range and C-UAS air defence.

More importantly still, the RAP from SK FLEX was distributed all the way down the tactical echelons to an AJAX vehicle fitted with SK MANOEUVRE, a specific SKYKEEPER solution meant to bring air picture data directly to combat vehicles. For the demonstration, AJAX was temporarily fitted with a dedicate, extra antenna in the camouflage bin, but a proper SK MANOEUVRE software load would enable the crew to visualize the RAP directly on their existing screens, thanks to AJAX being a digital vehicle with GVA architecture.


SKYKEEPER MANOEUVRE inside an FV432 (photo Lockheed Martin)


Again, at AWE SKYKEEPER was also able to take in the feed from a number of infrared anti-drone cameras and integrated, for the first time, the Sensing for Asset Protection with Integrated Electronic Networked Technology (SAPIENT) protocol.

SAPIENT was developed by the UK's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) as an open standard that allows the fusion and integration of autonomous sensory information into a single integrated picture. The MOD, and then NATO as a whole, adopted it as standard.

At AWE, SKYKEEPER software was also loaded into the ground control station for TIQUILA, the new pair of drones for the British Army, aka the Edge Autonomy Stalker (renamed EAGLE) and the Lockheed Martin INDAGO 4 (renamed KESTREL). This allowed an INDAGO 4 at the exercise to distribute its live video feed to AJAX and beyond, all the way to dismounted soldiers who had SK software loaded into their ATAK terminals.

Lockheed Martin also offers another solution to bring the SKYKEEPER RAP to single, non-digitized vehicles and/or dismounts or, say, STARSTREAK / LMM vSHORAD teams. Called EDGE, this solution uses a tablet to receive and visualize a local RAP.


SK EDGE, (photo Lockheed Martin) 


SKYKEEPER has demonstrated a lot of flexibility and capability in the field; the adoption of those capabilities now depends on Army choices (and budgets). One key upgrade that should be put under contract soon is the addition of Joint Range Extension Applications Protocol (JREAP) C, a crucial upgrade to enable SKYKEEPER to transmit information via data link over much greater distances.

The adoption of the “in-a-box” form factor is also a candidate enhancement the Army could order sometime soon.

 

The future

SKYKEEPER has demonstrated that it is agnostic to Sensors, Network and Effectors. It can integrate data from a multitude of different sources and systems and distribute information over different networks, in support of multiple different effectors.

Lockheed Martin UK is pushing the system both domestically and abroad as a full, integrated C2 solution for GBAD needs, but also as a gateway that enables information distribution for other roles and domains.

For example, LM UK intends to push SKYKEEPER also as solution for the C2 element for Project SERPENS for new artillery-locating sensors (both radar and passive acoustical & optical detection).

“Condensed” variants of SKYKEEPER can also be used, on Commercial Off the Shelf electronics, for civilian counter-drone applications as well.


SKYKEEPER as a C2 network not just for Air Defence, but for multiple applications, forwarding data from multiple sources and sensors, to multiple effectors. SERPENS is the next big C2 opportunity. 


Back in April, then Minister Maria Eagle said in a Written Answer that the next phase of LGBAD improvements would see the achievement of “an Initial Operating Capability of Medium Range Air Defence for warfighting by July 2026. This includes 2 Surface-to-Air Missile Operations Centres, and 2 enhanced Wireless Enabled Network sets”. No additional information was provided, but this suggests progress on C2 solutions is expected.

Obviously, while wireless is by nature more vulnerable to jamming, EW and disturbs, it enables the network to spread over far greater distances, taking in and redistributing data to more and different sensors and allowing the weapon launchers to spread out far more to be more survivable and to expand the protected bubble. Arguably, the “wireless” element of IBCS is its main selling point: the Integrated Fire Control Network Relay towers are its distinguishing component: deployed alongside launchers or sensors, linked to them directly by cable, the IFCN connects them wirelessly into the overall network.


The main rival to SKYKEEPER is almost certainly IBCS. Note the all important Integrated Fire Control Network wireless relay masts deployed alongside sensors and launchers to network all elements together. 



It’s clear the UK needs to get to that kind of air defence (and beyond) network, in a way or another. Northrop Grumman’s IBCS, Lockheed Martin’s SKYKEEPER and a proposal by Thales and L3 Harris are the “obvious” contenders for the British Army’s Air Defence C2 needs. The frontrunners, to me at least, seem to be SKYKEEPER and IBCS: the Thales-L3 team offers an integration of L3Harris’ Target Orientated Tracking System (TOTS) into Thales’ Agile C4I @ Edge (ACE) but their offer is not as well established and a known measure as the other two contenders. SKYKEEPER is UK-sovereign and established (to a degree) as the incumbent, already in service; while IBCS is used by the US Army, Poland (importantly including with CAMM/CAMM ER missiles in the PILICA+ and NAREW batteries) and is planned for adoption by other NATO PATRIOT users such as Germany.

As with pretty much everything else in UK Defence, we wait for actual decisions and contract awards to happen, hoping the Defence Investment Plan will provide more clarity on the way forward.



Monday, April 14, 2014

Force Troops Command and Royal Engineers of Army 2020


The Army has produced a good, clear brochure showing the structure of the "new" Force Troops Command, which is more honestly describable as a restructured Theatre Troops command.



The brochure is very clear in showing how units are assigned to the various brigades of the FTC, so i'll let you read it directly from the document. It is however worth noticinga few things: after a lot of speculation about the fate of the Self-Propelled Starstreak (Stormer HVM) air defence platforms, we can now say that the system looks like a big winner, not a loser.
Fears for the future of the system were generated by the news, dating back to 2009, that the Stormer vehicle would be withdrawn from service and sold. While it is true that several Stormer vehicles have been put up for sale, a sizeable force of modernized Stormer HVM remains very much in service and important. Under Army 2020, Stormer HVM will equip a total of five artillery batteries, of which three regular and two reserve.

As of now, 12 Regiment Royal Artillery has a couple of Stormer HVM batteries (9 (Plassey) Bty and 58 (Eyre's) Bty), and is apparently due to form a third battery. I've been trying to find out which colors will be assigned to the new battery, but at the moment i still don't have the answer.
Predictably, the three Stormer batteries are meant to support the three armoured infantry brigades of the Reaction Force. 
12 Regiment also maintains 12 (Minden) Bty employing the LML triple launcher. This battery has the task of generating air defence packages at very high readiness, notably to be assigned to 16 Air Assault Brigade.

106 Regiment Royal Artillery, in the Army Reserve, is to have two Stormer HVM batteries (295 and 457 Batteries) and a Lightweight Multiple Launcher (LML) capability in 265 Bty.

The document also finally clears up the position of 49 Bty Royal Artillery, which is confirmed as LEAPP formation, as passing under the command of Joint Ground Based Air Defence and as based in Thorney Island. It will however remain an independent battery, instead of being absorbed by 16 Regiment RA. 
Joint Ground Based Air Defence is under Air Command OPCON, but Force Troops Command will have a coordinating authority over the force.

Less operationally relevant, but still worth noticing, is that the badge for the Intelligence and Surveillance Brigade might not have been firmly chosen yet. In earlier Army 2020 documents produced by the Army, the new brigade was identified by the glorious badge of what in the past was Reconnaissance Corps. But in the whole FTC brochure, the Intelligence and Surveillance Brigade always appears without any badge. This might indicate that the Army is still thinking about it, on the way to the formation of the brigade, which will stand up on 1 September.

Will this be confirmed as the badge for 1 ISR Bde?


Moving to the Royal Engineers, an excellent graphic has been produced by the corps of Royal Engineers, showing the structure that the force will assume as part of Army 2020 restructuring:

SEE IMAGE IN FULL SIZE ON PINTREST



The graphic is clear and immensely useful, but it needs a couple of notes. Since it dates November 2013, it shows 24 Commando Engineer Regiment in red, denoting its uncertain future. It has now been announced that the regiment will not disband as earlier announced as part of Army 2020 cuts.

Another note regards again the use of color code. Despite being an official document, the graphic contains a couple of errors: 106 Field Squadron, in 32 Regt, is shown in black, denoting regular forces. It should be written in green, as it is actually a reserve squadron.
In 33 EOD Regiment there's a second mistake, exactly opposite: 821 Sqn is written in green, denoting reserves, but it is actually a regular squadron, comprising two Air Assault and two Commando EOD troops for the support of 16 Air Assault Brigade and 3rd Commando Brigade.

In the EOD regiments, including 11 Regiment EOD Royal Logistic Corps, much is changing, as Search and EOD functions are combined in the squadrons, and RE and RLC elements get mixed and integrated together. 821 Sqn has been the first mixed RLC and RE squadron, born out of a wider restructuring process that saw the disbandment of 49 EOD Sqn in July 2013.
According to a Royal Engineers report, 11 Regiment RLC is assuming the responsibility for the provision of Search support to Special Forces for UK Resilience and work is ongoing to give it a UK Military Aid to Civil Powers (MACP) Search capability as well.
33 EOD Regiment is primarily tasked with EOD support to the Reaction Force, while 101 EOD Regiment supports the Adaptable Force.

In the EOD area there are also promising news regarding the future of the TALISMAN Route Clearance system. I have to thank MikeW for dropping me a comment in which he linked me to the website of the 101 EOD Regiment association, which contains information about the future:


As a result of OP Herrick EOD deveopments in support of Afganistan it is envisaged that the 'Talisman Troop' concept for route enablement and IED search and destroy missions will be retained and further developed. It is thought that 101 and 33 Engineer Regiments will each operate four enhanced Talisman Troops.
Talisman currently comprises 5 key equipment elements: Buffalo clearance vehicle, Mastiff 2 command and control 'Protected Eyes', T-Hawk micro UAV system, Talon robotic vehicle and a High Mobility Engineer Excavator.
It is probable that Talisman will be enhanced further in the near future with one or two 'Terrier' vehicles, and a 'Husky' vehicle equipped with ground penetrating radar. 


This brief passage does not quite contain all the information i'd like, but it does give good hopes. The Royal Artillery seem set to retain the T-Hawk micro UAV. The purchase of the proven, capable Husky would provide better capability than the current PANAMA system, made up by a number of Land Rover Snatch converted into remotely-operated vehicles fitted with ground-penetrating sensors.
The incorporation of a number of Terrier vehicles is not surprising. What remains in doubt is the future of the High Mobility Engineer Excavator, which was originally purchased as a gap-filler between the withdrawal of CET in 2008 and the entry in service of Terrier itself.
It might well be that a number of HMEE will actually stay, to provide a deployable wheeled capability to complement the tracked Terrier.
No details about another component of TALISMAN, the unmanned Mini Minewolf MW240.

Mini Minewolf with all its tools
Buffalo rummaging vehicle with PANAMA in tow
PANAMA in action
Husky: a possible future addition


The retention of TALISMAN elements (or even the interity of it) and its further evolution are a relatively cheap way to meet the  Route Clearance and Mine Countermeasure RCMC requirement of the wider Army 2020 plan. Thales UK, already Mission System Design Authority for TALISMAN, is working with the Army to develop the concept to bring forwards. There is the ambition to maintain the capability and further evolve it, and Husky with ground penetrating radar could well have a role to play.
However, there are alternatives: Pearson Engineering offers its impressive Pearson Engineering Route Opening and Clearing Capability (PEROCC) vehicle, which while expensive to buy new, would arguably replace at least two big parts of TALISMAN: the sensor (PANAMA or Husky) and the rummaging vehicle, currently the US-built Buffalo. It also has a full set of rollers.
PEROCC is a big vehicle, but is air portable inside the C-17, and replacing at least two different platforms with only one could well be actually advantageous.

The huge and very impressive PEROCC brings three capabilities into one vehicle: a complete set of rollers; ground-penetrating radar and sensors; and a powerful rummaging arm. On its own, it can replace two or three of the current TALISMAN vehicles, which could very well prove advantageous.

Other big changes in the Royal Engineers have taken place in 170 (Infrastructure Support) group, which has taken under command the Royal Monmouthshire RE (Militia) regiment and has seen the Specialist Teams (STREs) reorganized across Works Groups.
67 Works Group has been disbanded under the cuts, with the remaining STREs redistributed to concentrate all Heavy Teams (Power, Water, Fuel, Force Protection Engineering (FPE) and Materials)
all under 66 Wks Gp, leaving 62, 63 and 64 Works Groups as construction teams.

How 170 (Infra Sp) Group changes

20 Works Group, for support to air force deployments, sits under 12 Force Support group, alongside the Air Support regiment (39 Regt, paired with the reserve 71 regiment).
36 Regiment, which in these years had been "loaned" to EOD Search work, has moved back into Force Support role, mainly land. In support it has 75 Regiment, Army Reserve, which is receiving the M3 rigs to become the Army's sole Wide Wet Gap Crossing regiment, replacing the regular capability which used to come from the now disbanding 28 Regiment RE.

25 Group (Close Support) is wholly new, and is born out of the Army 2020 decision to centralize control of combat support units. It will have two Hybrid Adaptable Regiments, including reserve squadrons (21 and 32 Regt) and 3 regular Armoured Engineer Regiments, for support of the Reaction Force armored brigades.
Only 16 Air Assault and 3rd Commando are retaining direct control of their supporting units. 25 Group will anyway have coordinating authority over them.


Now, if only the Royal Artillery could produce a similar graphic with all the many changes at battery level, it would be very handy! As it stands now, there is still uncertainty regarding many of the details of the Royal Artillery reorganisation, from the unnamed new battery for 12 Regiment to the exact fate of the batteries in 4 RA [97 (Lawson's Company) Battery] and 3 RHA [J (Sidi Rezegh) Battery] that lose their guns but do not disband. These two batteries become additional TAC Groups, but it would be nice to have clarity on this and other things. If the two regiments don't lose other batteries in exchange, they will both end up with two gun batteries each, and two or three TAC Batteries each, denoting that they will be containers for large numbers of Fire Support Teams.
This might be the result of the assumption that FSTs are better provided by regulars due to their more complex role (and training), while additional L118 Light Guns could be provided by the paired regiments of the Army Reserve: 4 RA is paired with 103 RA, and 3 RHA is paired with 105 RA.



Monday, January 28, 2013

Army and Sealift snippets


The Internation Institute for Strategic Studies writes about the British Army structure under the Army 2020 restructuring and helps adding some more clarity on a few points. Their report is to be trusted, because they have been holding several meetings with figures such as general Carter, the architect of Army 2020, general Peter Wall, Chief General Staff, and Major-General Kevin Abraham, Director General, Army Reform. The IISS is among the most well informed about Army 2020. Videos of the meetings with Carter, Wall and Abraham have been made available, and i've linked them inside previous articles on Army 2020.

Their review of Army 2020 is, as a consequence, to be considered extremely reliable. 

The article confirms what has been reported about the brigades mechanism, in which 3 of the 7 "Adaptable" brigades are intended to be 'privileged' and kept up in strenght, readiness and composition, as they are intended to combine to deliver 2 deployable brigades, to achieve the total of 5 (with the 3 Reaction armoured infantry brigades) deployable brigades necessary to support an enduring operation abroad. 
These three brigades will be based one in Scotland, one in the Catterick area and one in and around Cottersmore (now Kendrew Barracks).
The other four adaptable brigades will

[...] will be held at a lower state of readiness. New thinking suggests that the Adaptable Force could be used as a primary tool for UK military assistance and training to other countries. Its units are likely to be aligned to particular regions of the world, such as the Middle East, Africa and Southeast Asia, to establish closer links and develop broader understanding and language skills. The adaptable force will also be the primary source of support to the UK civil authorities.

There is a passage in the report that does bring up questions, which is the following:

The overall size of the regular army will fall from 142 to 119 units, a reduction of 17%. The number of brigade headquarters will fall from 27 to 18. Four out of 36 infantry battalions are being disbanded. Two armoured regiments will merge and another will be disbanded. The number of regular artillery, engineer and logistics units will fall by 14%, 27% and 33% respectively.

As we know, a fifth battalion of infantry is not being disbanded (on paper) but will effectively cease to matter as a fighting unit as the 5th SCOTS are being reduced to a public duty company only.
The IISS, conversely, considers one of the two merges in the Royal Armoured Corps not as a merge but as the disbanding of one regiment. Presumably, they are thinking of 1st Royal Tank Regiment, which is formally to merge with 2nd Royal Tank, but is more than likely to pretty much vanish, as only A sqn has tanks, while the others have been left without a clear role when the Fuchs CBRN recce vehicle was retired and the CBRN role was given wholly to the RAF Regiment.

The truly controversial point in the passage is the "27 to 18" brigade HQs part. This figure is in conflict with the stated targets of Army 2020: the brochure released by the MOD is very clear about the number of 1-star (brigade level) HQs.

3 Armoured Infantry Brigades
1 Air Assault Brigade
7 Adaptable Infantry brigades
2 Logistic brigades (101 and 102)
1 Logistic Support brigade (104)
1 Artillery brigade
1 Intelligence and Surveillance brigade
2 Signal brigades
1 Medical brigade
1 Engineer brigade

In addition, the Military Police is commanded by a Brigadier and is indicated as grouped under a  1-star HQ. That gives a total of 21 brigade-level HQs.

There are 21 1-star HQs according to the MOD


As i said, the IISS has been speaking with very high level figures in the Army, so we have to assume they know what they are writing. But the difference here is very evident: there's three 1-star HQs missing from the IISS number, with no clarity on how this comes into being. In the article, they confirm the number of frontline brigades, mention the 2 deployable logistic brigades and most of the elements of the Force Troops, so it's hard to even guess which HQs are missing. Unless they are counting only 1 Signal Brigade, they effectively mention 19 of the HQs while putting that 18 figure that just doesn't fit.
This one point is tricky.  

Moving on, an important passage seems to prove me right on the composition of the Intelligence and Surveillance Brigade:

Previously disparate surveillance, drone and intelligence units will be grouped into a single new intelligence and surveillance brigade. 

This would suggest that 5th Regiment Royal Artillery and the UAV regiments 32 and 47 will transfer under the command of the "new" brigade (which actually is an evolution and replacement of the current non-deployable 1st Military Intelligence brigade HQ).  

On the Royal Signals front, the IISS reports:

Signals units will be redesigned to deliver network and broadband access to battlefield units in new ways through deployed 'points of presence'.

As i had already explained in detail, the Signals will restructure to provide 5 "theatre" regiments, each capable to support a brigade-sized deployment providing network, close support communications and information services. The NAO Major Projects report provides an indirect confirmation of this, as it specifies how the Army has decided that the FALCON system will now be distributed to the various regiments, instead of being centralized in just two formations (30 and 22 regiments).

On the two specialist, high readiness brigades, 16 Air Assault and 3 Commando, the IISS reports:

[...] 16 Air Assault Brigade, which will retain a unique mixture of parachute battalions and Apache attack helicopters, although its ground element is set to get smaller, as will the army's contribution to the Royal Navy's amphibious force, 3 Commando Brigade.

16 Air Assault Brigade seems destined to see its ground element reduced to the two regular PARA battalions plus 4 PARA, the reserve battalion. Unfortunately, the number of Apache squadrons is also at risk, it has been reported, with the possibility of dropping from 6 to 4 deployable sqns.
As for 3rd Commando, reductions include the reversion of 24 Engineer Regiment to the sole 59 Independent Commando Sqn and reductions still not clearly set out to 29 Commando Royal Artillery. I also expect 1st RIFLES battalion to move out of the Commando brigade. 

IISS also confirms that the infantry battalions (and the cavalry regiments too, i'll add) in the Adaptable Force will be deliberately undersized:

For example, strengths of regular infantry battalions in the Adaptable Force are being reduced on the assumption that they would be joined by reinforcements from their partnered TA battalion when mobilised for operations.

The IISS does not expand on the extent of the reduction, but reportedly we are talking of one platoon removed from each of the three Rifle Companies. The official figures for the total establishment of the army formations by type are as follows:

Armoured Infantry Battalions (6x): 729 men
Heavy Protected Mobility - Mechanized Infantry (3x): 709 men
Light Protected Mobility (6x): 581 men
Light Role Infantry (14x): 561 men
Gurkha (2x): 567
PARA (2x plus 1 PARA which however is likely to be a completely different matter): 660 men

Type 56 tank regiment (x3): 587
FRES SV-mounted Recce regiment: 528
Jackal-mounted Light Cavalry regiment: 404
Household Cavalry Mounted Regiment: 341

For the Royal Engineers, the relevant passage says:

The army's hard-won expertise in countering improvised explosive devices is to be merged into a single group of engineer search teams, bomb-disposal operators and search dogs.

Four High Assurance Search squadrons are to be part of the Reserves' contribution to the Royal Engineers, it has been revealed, but exactly how the already existing 29 EOD & Search Group will change has not yet been disclosed in detail.

On the Royal Artillery front, the IISS reports:

The Afghan war saw British troops making extensive use of close air support. So numbers of tactical air-control parties, which act as the essential interface between ground troops and attack aircraft, were increased accordingly. These are set to be retained at their current level. Army air-defence units are to fall under the operational command of the Royal Air Force.

The retention of JTACs (indeed, of the whole Fire Support Teams, able to direct any supporting fire from that of mortars up to air attacks) is important and welcome. For what has emerged so far, the idea is to have a battery of FSTs into each artillery regiment.
Hard to say how exactly the Ground Based Air Defence HQ, which is already a Joint structure bringing together Army and RAF, will change as the RAF takes operational command. 12 Regiment Royal Artillery, which used to be outside the control of JGBAD and under the direct command of 1st Division will now join 16 Regiment RA and the supporting 106 (Volunteer) Regiment inside the air defence formation.


On the Artillery front, and returning for a moment to the problem of the number of brigade HQs, i want to express my thought that the need for a separate Artillery brigade has in my opinion ceased to exist with Army 2020. If, as it seems, 5th Regiment and the UAV force are moving to the Surveillance brigade and considering that the only depth fire regiment in the Army (39 RA) is being disbanded, i don't see why a separate 1-star HQ would have to continue existing.
The IISS notes:

Close support communications, engineers and artillery were previously part of the armoured and mechanised brigades. But, driven by the need to partner both regular and reserve units, and to make the most cost-effective use of equipment, the majority of support units are to be centralised in specialist brigades.
 [...]
And the centralisation of most combat support may make it more difficult to bring all combat and supporting arms together for all-arms training, an activity that has been essential preparation for fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We are going towards a Royal Artillery which lines 5 regular regiments (excluding those assigned to PARA and Commandos, which are a different subject) of which 3 are going to each have:

1 GMLRS Battery (coming from the disbanded 39 Regiment.)
2 AS90 Battery
1 TAC Gp Battery (Fire Support Teams)

The composition gives away the fact that these regiments are destined to the 3 Reaction, armoured brigades. It is evident beyond any possibility of error. It has also already been made clear that these three regiments (1 RHA, 19 RA and 26 RA) will be based in the Salisbury Plain area (indeed, with the exception of 26 RA which is currently in Germany, the other two are already based in Tidworth). 

The other two regular regiments are just as clearly destined to be the artillery element of the two deployable brigades to be formed from the three main Adaptable Brigades.
They are going to have:

2 L118 Light Gun batteries
1 TAC Gp Battery (Fire Support Teams)

In terms of basing, 4th Regiment should not move from its current home at Topcliff, which is right in the Catterick area, home to one of the famous 3 brigades.
The second regiment, 3 RHA, on return from Germany has been rumored to be heading for Albemarle Barracks, Newcastle, current home to the disbanding 39 RA. This is an acceptable basing solution for the regiment to be close enough to the Scotland-based brigade.
In alternative, 3 RHA could inherit St George's Barracks in North Luffenham [current home to 16 Regiment: the rumor is that 47 Regiment will move out of Thorney Island to reach 32 Regiment in Larkhill, to centralize the UAV force. 16 Regiment RA would then move to Thorney Island, where it would join 12 Regiment, centralizing Air Defence.] and be well positioned to be part of the Cottersmore-centered brigade. 

In short, i don't see why the Artillery regiments have to be pulled out of brigades and "centralised" (in terms of command, but not physically) when they can be based exactly in the right areas to be part of the relevant brigades. It's simpler to just assign the regiments to the relevant brigades and, in future, was it to be necessary, deploy a regiment under a different brigade HQ. It has been done for years, and it can continue.  
Much the same reasoning could be made regarding regular Engineer regiments, as well, with two of the intended "Heavy" regiments already well placed to support the Reaction Brigades in the Salisbury area, with the ambition to move a third in. 
21 Royal Engineers, which is one of two regiments due to become "Adaptable" (read: reduce to just 2 squadrons, get light) is already well placed (Ripon) to be part of the Catterick-centered Adaptable brigade.  

Anyway, if the basing review of the government gets delayed again, i might be in time to write about my own personal basing review proposal in greater detail, so i'll stop here for the moment.





Strategic Sealift downsized 

A written answer from Mr Dunne on Friday 25 January 2013 seems to reveal that the UK has no longer assured access to the full fleet of 6 invaluable Point class RoRo transports.

Procured with a PFI approach, the Point RoRo were delivered 18 months early and on budget, just in time for the first four vessels to be used to ship heavy equipment for Operation Telic in 2003. Alone, four Point ships carried 11% of the equipment employed by the UK for the war.

4 Point class ships are permanently available to the MOD and crewed by british personnel, while two more used to be employed on the civil market, while being at 20 days notice (the first) and 30 days notice (the second) to move to serve the UK's military needs.
Dunne's answer suggests that the 2 "on call" Point ships have been dropped out of the contract, following a (demented) decision made in 2011:

The review of the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) strategic sealift requirement, conducted in 2011, concluded that for the movement of cargo by sea, strategic support is primarily provided through the private finance initiative (PFI) strategic sealift service, and that better value for money would be achieved if the number of vessels contracted as part of this PFI was reduced from six to four. The PFI strategic sealift service now comprises four British flagged roll-on/roll-off vessels used for MOD business, manned by British mercantile marine officers and crews. If required, additional sealift capacity is chartered by means of competitive tenders.

The better one system works, the more likely is that the MOD will cut it, it seems at times.