A look at the Equipment Programme and an ear for the Secretary of State's speech

Equipment Programme 2017: Category A and B projects

The MOD has published a FOI answer in which it details the names of the projects of category A (value exceeding 400 million pounds) and B (from 100 million to 400). The list does not provide any additional detail, but even so it is simply invaluable to better understand the 10 Years Equipment Programme.

The fact that the MOD is fine with revealing this list if specifically asked to do so, but does not include anything comparable in the EP document itself, is extremely irritating, and it proves once again that there is no security reason whatsoever for publishing such a vague EP document. As I’ve fully embraced the cause of greater accountability and transparence by the MOD in the handling of the defence budget, I will remark that in the future it should no longer be necessary to use FOIs to get this level of information. It would be very helpful to include it in the EP document itself.

Getting to the document, in addition to the really big programmes that are well known and expected to figure, the list does contain a number of voices worth touching upon. 

Complex Weapons

There are several voices here that are of enormous interest. One is the Category A project unimaginatively named “Battlefield Weapon”. It is hard to guess what this is, exactly. With the JAVELIN anti-tank missile having a notional OSD of 2025, the development of a new, more multi-role missile for the infantry might well be what’s hiding under this name. The British Army also has (or had?) a requirement for a “Reusable Multi-Role Medium Range Shoulder Launcher (MRSLs)” to introduce into the platoon to increase anti-structure and anti-infantry firepower and, effectively, replace the outgoing 60mm mortar. The expected date for contract award has however passed months ago without a selection being announced. The contenders were (are?) the Carl Gustav, which is enjoying a major renaissance being selected by both US Army and USMC as new Squad weapon; and the C90 Reusable.

MRSL might be hiding behind “Battlefield Weapon” as well, in theory, but it is not likely, also because even an Army-wide purchase of Carl Gustav would still not get anywhere near the 400 million mark.

There is also a “Tactical Guided Munition – Indirect”, which appears as a voice both under Procurement and under Support. This could hide the decade-old requirement for a guided 155mm shell solution for the Royal Artillery’s AS90 howitzers.

We also have, however, “Land Precision Strike”, which, if I had to guess, would be related to the GMLRS rockets. Again, there is no way to tell for sure. These are both Category A procurement programmes, so we are talking about sizeable projects for new capability. It would be hugely beneficial for the Army to procure the new GMLRS “Alternative Warhead” which restores area-effects lost with the demise of traditional sub-munitions, but I’m not sure an area-effect weapon would fit very well within the project name.

Finally, we have the “Deep Fire Rocket System”, again a Category A project. To comment on this one we have to note that for well over a decade the Royal Artillery has wanted a long range weapon, namely the ATACMS large rocket for the M270B1 launchers. 
We must also go back to the end of last year, when 16 RA Bty went into suspended animation, but with a most unusual promise of a relatively swift return to active service to operate a new Deep Fires capability. In the occasion it was said:

 “There is a plan in the middle of the 2020s around 2024 when we develop a new capability for the British Army and enhance some of our deep fire capabilities as part of a divisional fires regiment.”

While there is no way to confirm it, it seems very likely that the British Army intends to procure the new missile that the US Army is developing to replace ATACMS, the Long Range Precision Strike munition for GMLRS launchers. The standing up of a new battery for it, however, suggests that the launcher vehicle might also be new, and it is relatively easy to imagine that the army might be thinking of the wheeled HIMARS launcher, which would complement the tracked, heavier (but with more rockets ready for launch) M270. This solution would deliver wheeled GMLRS capability for the Strike Brigades and introduce a 500 km precision strike capability (or maybe even more than that if the INF treaty collapses for good. The LRPF is a prime candidate for quick range extension in that case).

HIMARS and LRPF for the Royal Artillery in the early 2020s? 

Curiously, the integration of Meteor on the F-35 also appears in the “Complex Weapons” budget rather than in the “Combat Air” one, as happens instead for weapons integration on the Typhoon. This might be due to the fact that the missile is to receive a new set of “clipped” wings as part of the integration. It might also have to do with its further development (GaN AESA radar seeker) under the name “Joint New Air to Air Missile”, a bi-national programme with Japan. JNAAM does not appear in the FOI: it is either part of “LII (Lightning II) Meteor integration” or is too small a budget to enter in category A and B.

There is a “Next Generation SPEAR” voice as well, which is not readily identified. Brimstone 2 Capability Sustainment Progamme (also known as Brimstone 3), SPEAR Cap 3 and Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon are all listed separately, so this might revolve around the Paveway IV spiral development, or represent a whole new system.

In the Category B list it is worth noting two large purchases of Paveway IV bombs for arsenal replenishment: 1200 and 3500 bombs respectively.

There are also a “Javelin follow-on buy” voice, which might or might not include the purchase of the latest, multi-role Javelin F with improved blast-fragmentation effect for roles other than anti-tank.

The 4^th Tranche of High Velocity Missiles (Starstreak) is also listed as Category B.

There is a Category A “Future Systems” which is as vague as it could be but no doubt covers all sort of studies.

The Storm Shadow Mid Life Refit is a Category A equipment support project. There is a “Future Ground Based Air Defence contingency” voice which is probably connected to FLAADS Land Ceptor (now Sky Sabre).

Complex Weapons budget includes also a “Medium Range Radar” voice which is probably ARTISAN. The inclusion of this and most of the Sea Ceptor costs in the Weapons budget explain why the Type 23 CSP appears so cheap.

Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon is quoted as two programmes: FLRDFC is (probably) the replacement for Storm Shadow, but the exact meaning of the horrible acronym is uncertain. FC/ASW FOSUW should be the Future Offensive anti-Surface Weapon, the replacement for Harpoon on ships.

Brimstone 2 CSP is worth a mention as this programme should deliver a "Brimstone 3" round which is expected to replace Hellfire on the British Army's Apache Block III helicopters in the 2020s. By then the US Army will be transitioning to JAGM, and while Hellfire will remain a plenty big player for many more years, it will become progressively harder to support as the main customer moves on to the new system. Brimstone, on the british side, is the obvious solution. Brimstone 3 is also offered to France for the TIGER attack helicopter modernisation, but it is pretty easy to imagine that Paris will go with a MMP development or some other non-british solution, especially since a british purchase of VBCI has well and truly gone with the wind. 

It would be very interesting if Brimstone 3 added a launch mode that sees the missile dropped before the rocket ignites: this modification would enable integration of the 3 inside the F-35's bays. Currently, Brimstone is rail launched so is not compatible with confined spaces... 

LAND

In the Land Sector the big disappointment is the disappearance of the Armoured Battlefield Support Vehicle which brings the issue of replacing FV432 in armoured formations back to square one. It had been present up to the 2016 edition. Not for the first time I’m left wondering how the “Armoured Infantry 2026” overarching programme is supposed to ever deliver full operational capability if the Warrior CSP is not supported by a replacement for FV432. If they are looking at having MIV covering the role, I can only repeat my suggestion: bin WCSP and put the new turret on MIV. It would be absurd to have, say, the mortar team in support to a battalion of Warriors traveling on a wheeled AFV larger and heavier than the IFV itself… 

MITER and NAV-P are both present, however. MITER is a large Category A programme which aims to unify, in the 2020s, the provisions of the current C Fleet, Protected Plant fleet and Mechanical Handling Fleet.

The C Fleet comprises of engineering, construction and plant equipment to enable manoeuvre, construction, logistics, force protection engineering and life support. It is currently provided under a Private Finance Initiative contract which will end in 2021. The current small protected construction plant fleet is owned by the MOD and is mainly the result of UORs. It is now supported by industry under a contract also ending in 2021. The Defence Mechanical Handling Equipment is currently almost entirely provided under the DMHE contract, ending in 2020. The equipment fleet, composed of pure Commercial Off The Shelf kit, is owned by the contractor and provided to MOD on a period lease basis. Under MITER, the future contractor will manage and sustain the combined construction and mechanical handling equipment fleet in the United Kingdom, on deployed operations and overseas environments.

The Non Articulated Vehicle Programme is the replacement of DROPS. In July 2018 the MOD ordered the conversion of 382 of its MAN SV HX-77 trucks to be converted into Enhanced Pallized Load Systems EPLS, including 33 winterised/waterproofed for Royal Marines operations. 40 deliveries are planned early this year with final deliveries by the end of march 2021. Around 180 had been procured earlier on. NAVP will build on this interim solution to hopefully finally complete the DROPS replacement.

One notable absence, not easily explained, is the Multi Role Vehicle - Protected voice. The Foreign Military Sale authorization for up to 2,747 Joint Light Tactical Vehicles is dated 10 July 2017, so the programme was definitely ongoing already. But, up to that point it might, for internal accounting reasons, have been reported as a smaller-budget project? After all, no MRV-P candidate, not even the JLTV, is still fully and definitively selected. 
JLTV should cover the Group 1 requirement, while Bushmaster and Eagle 6x6 are still battling it out for the Group 2 requirement for a larger vehicle (selection might take place this year). Group 3 should cover the Light Recovery Vehicle. 
The absence of MRVP from the list is curious, but not necessarily concerning. However, MRVP does seem a remarkably vulnerable programme which might well be delayed once again in the near future as far too many priorities battle over a far too tight budget. 

Worth a mention is the Category B project TYRO for the upgrade or replacement of BR90 equipment, both Close Support (Titan-launched scissor bridges) and General Support (the ABLE system.

The latest variant of contract notice published for TYRO – Close Support adds a new vehicle requirement: a Wheeled Close Support Launch Vehicle that must be able to launch the same bridges as operated by Titan.

As of today, the Close Support bridge does not have anything like this: the supporting vehicle is a Unipower trucks that carries spare bridges but is not meant to launch them.

Up to 36 Wheeled Close Support Launch Vehicles are requested, and the inclusion of “Close Support” is significant because, keeping pace with army doctrine and definitions, it requires a vehicle that can operate in the Direct Fire zone. In other words, something offering a decent level of protection, because it is expected that there will be a fight going on while launching the bridge.

Not just Tank Bridge Transporters anymore. Under TYRO, a wheeled close support launch vehicle is now requested. The number of ABLE General Support bridges, on the other hand, shrinks to compensate. 

It is pretty evident that such a vehicle would deliver greatly enhanced bridging support to the Strike Brigades when compared to the Rapidly Emplaced Bridge System (REBS) which spans a smaller gap, is launched by a lightly protected MAN SV EPLS and has a Military Load Class limited to 50.

TYRO requests that all bridge elements are certified at least for MLC 100 (Tracked), which means that pretty much everything has to be able to cross.

There is no Project TRITON in sight yet, but it might just be because of timelines. The TRITON project for the procurement by 2027 of a replacement for the M3 rigs for Wide Wet Gap Crossing has been unveiled in late 2018 in the new Army’s newsletter. It probably hadn’t been firmed up yet in the 2017 plan.

ISTAR

ISTAR big projects are dominated by communications, and in particular Future Beyond Line of Sight, or SKYNET 6, the successor to the current constellation of comms satellites. As is know, a first “transitional” satellite, SKYNET 6A, has been ordered in summer 2017.

Many of the other voices are part of the Land Environment Tactical Communication Information Systems mega-programme for the renewal of comms at pretty much all levels. FALCON 2 EXPLOIT and EVOLVE both figure in the Category A programmes, and it is meant to expand on the capabilities of the current FALCON, which is the deployable High Bandwidth Backbone Network for the joint force, and primarily for the army.

Importantly, Dismounted Situational Awareness appears as a Cat A programme. It is part of the MORPHEUS communication system (data and voice radios and display for situational awareness) meant to progressively replace BOWMAN.

PICASSO also figures, and in this case we are talking of the national capability for strategic Imagery Intelligence (IMINT) and GEOInt, which provides commanders with information obtained from the analysis of date coming from national and multi-national collectors.

The Increment 1 and 2 of the Aliied Systems for GEOINT (AGS) are also included.

Combat Air

The elephant in the room, due to the current uncertainty surrounding it, is the UK-France Future Combat Air System, aka the UCAV for the 2030s. If we believe the press reports, France was ready to progress into a funded Demonstration phase and proceed with the building of prototypes, but the UK has refused to commit funding to that. Whether the programme survives, and in which form, is currently hard to say.

Then we have, of course, the national FCAS, better known in public as Project TEMPEST. Connected to it is also project PYRAMID, which is meant to develop the solutions for the MOD’s Mission System Reference Architecture for future Air Systems.

Worth of mention is Typhoon RADAR 1, a category A project meant to deliver a workable AESA radar for Typhoon Tranche 3 (and hopefully Tranche 2 too). The radar 1, or R1, is the baseline AESA in development for the consortium, but the UK’s intention is to eventually use a more ambitious R2 standard, with Electronic Warfare capability. R2 does not appear in the list, but this might simply be because the additional investment so far authorized over and above R1 funding does not yet qualify into Cat B. Some 60 millions were given to BAE Systems. A more recent version of the list might or might not display R2 since the Secretary of State for defence, speaking at RUSI on February 11, mentioned that the Transformation Fund includes another 60 million for the Typhoon radar. The 100 million mark, in other words, might now have been passed.

One notable Cat A project is the Watchkeeper Mid Life Update. Given the pricetag, it should include some serious improvements and additions. The Army has finally declared Full Operational Capability for Watchkeeper, but it is actually still struggling to secure the certifications needed to operate it from Boscombe Down as intended. Training on Salisbury Plain, in non-segregated air space, was the big promise of Watchkeeper and on this one point there isn't yet a happy ending. 

Air Support 

One surprising absence is ASDOT, which should more than qualify as Category A. It might, however, have been included into the rather incomprehensible “DCS+S - DOTC-A- Core System + Services”, which stands for Defence Operational Training Capability – Air. Its core component is the development of a Common Synthetic Environment that enables the connectivity between different simulators, in different locations, to enable articulate, large-scale simulations.

Another byzantine acronym is MSHATF PFI, but this is the well known 40-years Private Financing Initiative with CAE for the delivery of the Medium Support Helicopter Aircrew Training Facility in RAF Benson.

The Sentry CSP makes an appearance, but as we know the MOD’s preferred approach is not so much a Capability Sustainment Programme anymore, but rather replacement with new build E-7 Wedgetail.

Sentinel R1 capability and its “project team” are both Cat A programmes. Its mid-life update, with the addition of maritime radar mode and other upgrades, might be the explanation.

The Secretary of State for defence’s speech at RUSI

While it is clear that the uncertainty around the budget has not gone away, the Secretary’s speech should be welcomed as it signals that the armed forces have finally found a champion who truly has a vision for the UK’s role in the world.

For one, I was particularly pleased with it because it attempts to change a narrative of decline into a rather happier one in which the armed forces return to the center of the UK’s visibility in the world. I was of course particularly happy also because, in the last few months, defence policy has been heading in a direction which I had identified years ago and for which I’ve been campaigning as relentlessly as I could, while admittedly having a lot less time for blogging than in the past.

I was incredibly pleased to see the removal from service of the River Batch 1s being pushed to the right. My readers will known that ever since the River Batch 2s were ordered earlier than necessary, I’ve been saying that the only way to make them into a genuinely good story was to also keep in service the earlier ships. While at the moment it is a short-term promise only (a couple of years), the Royal Navy has confirmed that it will try to man them with the help of the Reserve, and if the scheme can be made to work successfully it will prove to be a massive force-multiplier. I believe that there are good chances that the three vessels will stay into service well beyond the next two years if the experiment is successful. In turn, this will allow some of the newer Batch 2 to be employed in constabulary tasks far away from home. You might have noticed that, following the experimental deployments of two River Batch 1s in the Caribbean in the last couple of years, the North Atlantic Patrol tasking is regularly quoted as part of the Batch 2’s missions. This is all the more likely to become routine if the Secretary’s “ambition” of restoring a more permanent and sizeable presence (or a “base”, even) in the Caribbean is realized.

The other massively welcome development, which I’ve also auspicated for a very long time, is the announcement of two “Littoral Strike Ships”. The image released on Twitter by the 1^st Sea Lord is virtually identical to the American MV Ocean Trader, and so very, very similar to my proposal for aconverted Point-class RoRo vessel. However, at this stage the programme is still in concept phase and the exact look of the ship, as well as the decision for whether it will be newly built or perhaps converted from an existing vessel, is still up in the air.

While the announcement came a little “out of the blue” after months of gloomy reports of cuts, it was actually in the air from a while. Back in 2017, Jane’s reported that a concept study for a Multi Role Support Ship had been launched, to firm up options for a vessel with utility for amphibious, forward repair, and medical capability work.

More recently, during a hearing in front of the Defence Committee, the MOD’s deputy chief of staff for Military Capability, Lieutenant General Sir Mark William Poffley, said that a new programme for “support ships” was being considered for launch ahead of the Solid Support Ships, something i discussed in depth here.

Finally, reports emerged of two “hospital ships” to be jointly funded with DFID.

The Secretary’s speech, most evidently, is just the culmination of a quiet but determined campaign which has been progressing within the MOD for at least a couple of years.

It is pretty likely that these new vessels will cost the Navy the “optional” third Fleet Solid Support ship, but this is not a bad trade-off. Two supply vessels are enough to support the single large task group that the Royal Navy is able to generate, while these two new vessels will greatly help in a number of areas which would otherwise be very problematic. The loss of RFA Diligence without replacement, the lack of a realistic plan for replacing RFA Argus in 2024 and the fact that up to two thirds of the Landing Ship Dock hulls are actually unavailable for amphibious operations at any one time are 3 major concerns which I’ve been highlighting constantly over the years.

The Littoral Strike Ship's first concept art as posted by the 1st Sea Lord on Twitter. The MV Ocean Trader vibes are evident. 

 

All the way back in 2016 i made my very own "mad" suggestion for something similar to the MV Ocean Trader, but a bit more ambitious and even more flexible. If the Littoral Strike Ship was newly built rather than a conversion of an existing ship, it would not be impossible to incorporate all of these changes. 

The name “Littoral Strike Ships” is kind of misleading, as we are most likely looking at something which will be done on the cheap and will thus not be quite adequate for the more “fighty” operations that “strike” suggests. Multi Role Support Ship, while far less pyrotechnic, is probably still the best definition for these units.

The “new” Littoral Strike Groups announced by the Secretary, in fact, might not be based on the new ships, but rather on the existing Bay-class LSDs that these new hulls might end up releasing from the Caribbean and the Gulf respectively.

The Littoral Strike Groups will, realistically, be the continuation of the semi-experimental “Special Purpose Task Groups” that the Royal Marines have been sending out at sea in the last couple of years. These formations, normally of Company-group size and embarked on a single amphibious vessel, have been sent all the way to Pacific (HMS Albion’s tour of last year) and have repeatedly traveled in and out of Mediterranean and Indian Ocean (RFA Lyme Bay, most recently). The Littoral Strike Group should be a more capable evolution of the SPTG, hopefully enabled by the availability of extra supports, including escort vessels.

The new Littoral Strike Group will probably embark significant amounts of Marines and is likely to beat the Bay-class in aviation facilities (the MV Ocean Trader used as example has a two-bays hangar for medium helicopters and a two-spot flight deck that can take anything up to the gigantic CH-53), but is unlikely to have a dock in the stern. It will still be plenty useful, however, and if a RoRo / container ship hull is used, it will have enormous utility as additional strategic sealift.

With the right people and modular facilities on board it could also do decently as a Forward Repair and Support vessel, and it could be able to replace Argus in the medical role if able to embark a modular Role 3 hospital, for which the Navy could work alongside the Army for maximum efficiency.

The MV Ocean Trader, ex MV Cragside, after being modified for use by the US forces 

MV Cragside undergoing her transformation in Mobile, Alabama

The announcement of a RAF Squadron equipped with Swarming Drones is also a welcome development. The mention of this by the Secretary fueled a lot of comments, especially since he made it sound like the whole system would be ready by the end of the year. The MOD has subsequently clarified that it Is more a three years effort, and at the moment we can only speculate on the final form that this capability will take. The “end of 2019” mentioned by the Secretary might actually be for the formation of the squadron, which I figure could well start out as an experimental unit, much like the Fleet Air Arm’s own 700X NAS.

At the moment it is impossible to say if the LANCA (Lightweight Affordable Novel Combat Aircraft) low-cost UCAV, which was sought last year in a call for proposals to industry, is part of this effort or a parallel development.

The UK, however, was already experimenting with unmanned loyal wingmen back in 2008, when a modified Tornado took control, in flight, of a BAC 1-11 modified to serve as UAV; plus 3 other simulated unmanned aircraft. There clearly has been an interest in the capability for many years, and this fits into the wider campaign of experimentation ran by UK industry, which includes of course TARANIS, but also the very interesting BAE MAGMA which replaces flaps, ailerons and other moving surfaces with blown air taken from the engine. In other words, there are the capabilities to put together some good capability.

The result might be something like the Kratos XQ-58 Valkyrie intended to be used as part of the Low-Cost, Attritable Strike Unmanned Air System Demonstration for the USAF.

It will also be a step forwards on the way to unmanned companions for FCAS / TEMPEST. Replying to a House of Lords written question by Lord West on 14 february, Earl Howe wrote that “the combat air acquisition programme is looking at the replacement of Typhoon's capabilities and any new combat air system will need to be interoperable with the Carrier Enabled Power Projection (CEPP) programme. The concept phase of the acquisition programme will consider QEC basing for any unmanned force multipliers which may form part of the future combat air system.”

This reads as if the TEMPEST will not be carrier-capable (sadly, not a surprise and one of the reasons why the lack of catapults on the QE class remains regrettable) but the unmanned part of the future combat air system might be. This is very interesting, but it’s very early days and I’m somewhat skeptical still.

Williamson also mentioned a non-specified “VENOM kinetic strike capability” which is meant to give an attack capability to “ISTAR platforms”. UK Defence Journal says that, according to MOD sources, the platforms in question are the C-130J and the SHADOW R1 (soon to be R2 after the ongoing mid-life update programme).

The C-130J is not properly an ISTAR platform, but like the SHADOW R1 is commonly used in support to the Special Forces and there are several good options readily available for its armament.

It has now been confirmed that at least one C5 short-fuselage C-130 is being retained as part of the 14 that the RAF is going to keep in the long term. This is important because the tanking kit has only ever been installed on short-fuselage C-130s and might not be adaptable to the stretched ones. The HARVEST HAWK kit has been developed to equip short C-130s in tanker configuration (KC-130J). 

HARVEST HAWK originally swapped out one Air Refueling pod and replaced it with a quadruple launcher for Hellfire missiles. In addition, a palletized console is embarked into the cargo bay and a 10-cell launcher for GRIFFIN lightweight missiles was installed on the ramp. A TSS EO/IR turret is provided thanks to a modified external fuel tank. 

HARVEST HAWK evolution is continuing, however, and the USMC is replacing the TSS with a MX-20 EO/IR turret mounted under the nose, to restore the full fuel load. Moreover, with the Outer Wing Station 430 modification (OWS430), by 2020 they will have added two additional underwing pylons, doubling the capacity for externally-carried missiles while allowing the return of the Air Refueling pod. The new and improved HARVEST HAWK will restore 100% of its tanking potential while doubling its fire power at the same time. 

The missile launcher on the cargo ramp has been replaced by an enclosed launcher in a modified side door ("Derringer Door") which enables the launch of the missiles without requiring decompression and ramp opening. That also ensures that cargo capability is retained and requires less preparations before a mission. 

The USMC is also integrating the INTREPID TIGER II Electronic Warfare pod, while Hellfire will be replaced by JAGM. 

The RAF has only activated two pylons on its C-130J-30s so far, adding external fuel tanks to them in the last few years. 

In an ideal world, at least a second C5 should be retained and HARVEST HAWK kits, including AAR capability, should be procured for the pair. That would deliver a great firepower boost while also introducing in service a couple of tankers able to refuel helicopters. The Merlin HC4 is AAR capable and the Commando Helicopter Force wants to tap into that latent capability since extra range would obviously help a lot in all missions, including Joint Personnel Recovery.

Harvest Hawk in its original configuration. The 30mm gun pallet is on hold. 

The Special Forces are also known to want the capability, ideally on CHINOOK, and the SDSR 2015, in theory, promised them “longer range helicopters”.

Putting a couple of pylons and lightweight munitions such as MBDA’s VIPER-E on SHADOW R1 wouldn’t be difficult, either. But if I was in a position to make the choice, my priority would definitely be converting two C5 into KC-130Js and getting a pair of HARVEST HAWK kits for them at the same time.

PROTECTOR deserves a mention too, because we have recently been given the first official indication that maritime patrol capability could feature in the intended second batch (16 are on order, but there are 10 options as well and the stated intention remains to get to “at least 20”). Leonardo has showcased its SEASPRAY radar, which is ready for adoption on the centerline pylon (PROTECTOR will have 9 pylons overall, up from 5 on REAPER, or 7 counting the low-payload external ones, which in practice have never been used so far but would be good for, say, Sidewinder / ASRAAM). ULTRA is continuing work on its ASW sonobuoy-dispensing pods.

It is now contractually confirmed that PROTECTOR will be armed with Brimstone and Paveway IV and fitted with the Due Regard Radar, which was initially only going to be Fitted For But Not With. On the other hand, deliveries will happen later, and entry in service will arrive in 2023 rather than 2021, while the RAF is in the process of “decommissioning” one of its 10 Reapers. A curious development, might be because the UAV has suffered damage that is deemed not worthy to try and repair.

In his speech, Williamson briefly touched on the issue of Warrior upgrades, indirectly confirming that WCSP is going ahead. 2017 and 2018 have been tough and unpleasant years for the programme, which was called into serious question over the big delays accumulated (entry in service now to start in 2023 when it had once been 2018, then 2020…), but the ongoing trials at Bovington seem to have been positive enough that cancellation is no longer a possibility.  

A remotely operated, unmanned TERRIER was used to breach anti-tank obstacles during a demonstration ran by the US Army which also included unmanned M113s laying smoke to cover the action. The US Army is already seeking an Optionally Manned IFV for replacing Bradley. 

Also for the army, the Secretary remarked that he supports the fielding not just of unmanned logistic support vehicles, which have so far gotten most of the attention, but unmanned combat vehicles too.

At the latest AWE event, a WarriorIFV was converted into a remotely operated combat vehicle and I thinkt the demonstration opens up interesting possibilities. If I had to put my money on something in this area, it would be on surplus CRV(T) Scimitar to be converted in unmanned combat vehicles. Their insufficient protection would no longer be quite as concerning, while their awesome strategic and all-terrain mobility, as well as air mobility, would make them incredibly flexible in support of manned AFVs and infantry alike. The RARDEN is not a good weapon for an unmanned vehicle due to manual reloading and lack of stabilization, but there a few good options out there for replacing the turret and introduce an autocannon+missile combination that would be enormously capable.

Jordan's KADDB's proposal for upgunning CRV(T). Add remote control. The first British Army unmanned companion for much larger and less deployable manned AFVs? 

The Secretary also announced that funding will go towards equipping all infantry (including Royal Marines and RAF Regiment) with advanced night vision equipment which so far was reserved to Special Forces. This follows on similar decisions in the US and will go a long way in ensuring the Army can truly own the night. It could be argued that night vision is a major asymmetrical advantage over non-peer enemies, but that so far it hasn’t been exploited as much as it should have been. 

Some growth

In the coming months, 23 Amphibious Engineer Troop, in Germany, will be growing into a Squadron. Mothballed M3 rigs are being reactivated and the new ORBAT is being defined. With its M3 rigs, it will remain forward based in Germany, alongside its german counterpart and well positioned to continue training on the river Weser.

M3 rigs, british and german, in action during NATO exercises

This is also the year of the return of 28 Royal Engineer Regiment as a joint C-CBRN regiment is reformed after the idiotic SDSR 2010 cut. 28 RE Regt will take under command 77 Field Squadron, ex armoured squadron, which was part of 35 RE Regt until this converted into an EOD unit.

FALCON Sqn Royal Tank Regiment, with its FUCHS reconnaissance vehicles, will join the regiment in July.

27 Squadron RAF Regiment, the current CBRN specialist, will also join the new unit; 64 Headquarters & Support Squadron will form up this year and 42 Field Squadron will be re-established in 2020. There are also tentative plans for a reserve squadron to follow in 2022.

The Brigade of Gurkhas in particular is growing quickly to fill some gaps and help with the manpower deficit. This too is a U-turn on disastrous 2010 and 2011 choices. The Gurkhas now man Gurkha Company (Tavoleto) in its role of Training Support Company, part of the Specialist Weapons School at the Land Warfare Centre in Warminster.

Moreover, the Queen’s Own Gurkha Logistic Regiment is growing and two additional Gurkha sqns are appearing, one within 9 RLC Regt and one within 4 RLC Regt.

The Queen’s Gurkha Signals are growing by two squadrons as well, with 247 Sqn within 16 Signal Regt and 249 Sqn within 3 Divisional Signal Regiment.

The Queen’s Gurkha Engineers could also see growth in the near future. They have taken up significant roles within the ARRC support battalion, beginning in 2014 with the Close Support Troop and Engineer element.

DSEI 2011

I'm putting together all articles about DSEI, along with a final, fast word.
Technologically, there have several interesting novelties shown in this edition of DSEI, but nothing revolutionary. In terms of contracts signed, by the MOD especially, we really are at an all-times low: the budget crisis and the difficult state of economies worldwide truly is having a very evident impact. Despite much expectations, for example for the signing of the Warrior CSP contract, almost everything is delayed to, as a parliamentary answer puts it, to "later this autumn". The 10-years Equipment Procurement plan is not yet complete, as the Forces are struggling to fit within the budget: in particular, the Army appears to be in serious difficulty, as it is probably the service which needs the most new kit, and has several serious urgencies, (FRES SV and Warrior upgrade above all) which all need addressing but all are expensive and heavy on the budget and planning.

The equipment report, promised for September, is in my opinion likely to be released only in October, if not later, as it appears very hard, as of 18 September, to imagine publishing a report before the end of the month if the Army is still unable to fit its two top-priorities in it.
We'll have to wait some more for the report, and in the meanwhile, we all have to hope it is detailed, clear and well thought... and especially, we must pray that it does not bring too many bad news along.

The links below will bring you to the articles i made for the various days of the DSEI show.

DSEI - Day 1
DSEI - Day 2
DSEI - Day 3
DSEI - Day 4

Think Defence also collected in a page of his blog a big list of useful links to articles from various sources and publications about DSEI and the products showcased there.

DSEI - Day 3

FRES Scout at risk?

The key British Army requirement for a new scout armored vehicle contract is in danger of being canceled due to continuing defense financial constraints, according to General Dynamics UK boss Sandy Wilson.

Speaking to reporters at a briefing on the sidelines of the Defence System Equipment International exhibition here, Wilson said that while a delay to the program was the most likely outcome, cancellation remains a possibility.

General Dynamics UK signed a 500 million pound ($791.4 million) deal in July 2010 with the government to design and demonstrate a family of medium weight specialist vehicles based on its ASCOD platform for the Army. The design and development phase is working to prepare 7 prototypes (3 Scout, 1 Recovery, 1 Repair, 1 Protected Mobility and 1 Common Base Platform) for a campaign of tests and for demonstrating the solutions prior to begin of production.

Under the government's original agreement, it was due to make a decision to enter a production phase in 2013 with first deliveries starting in 2016. Earlier, 2015 had been the planned date. A damning NAO report on Armoured Vehicles Procurement, published a few months ago, had contained hints about the FRES SV sliding to the right to 2017, and now it seems that they might well have been right.

Or perhaps even too optimistic.

The specialist vehicle requirement is the British Army's top vehicle program along with a project to update the Warrior infantry fighting vehicle. Lockheed Martin is negotiating with the Ministry of Defence to secure that deal.

Timing and numbers are being discussed, but the Army is trying to alter the spending profile to be able to afford both key programs.

This however seems to indicate that the Warrior upgrade contract won’t be signed during DSEI, as had been widely expected. It also calls in question the famous report on the 10-years equipment plan that is to be released this month. With two weeks left, it is in my opinion hard to imagine a release in the timeframe planned, if the Army is still struggling to find a way to signal the go-ahead for its two main programmes.

CVR(T) MK2: yes, the hull is new.

BAE Systems Global Combat Systems is upgrading a batch of Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) to an enhanced standard, the first of which have recently been flown to Afghanistan and are now deployed. Most of these are in the Scimitar Mk 2 reconnaissance vehicle configuration, for around 30 - 35 vehicles.

The most significant change is the new aluminium hull, built at BAE Systems’ Wolverhampton facility. This offers a higher level of protection, improves maintainability and lowers support costs. It is based on the hull of the Spartan troop carrier and provides greater internal volume than the original Scimitar hull, as well as raising the driver’s position for improved safety. The vehicle also incorporates the previous upgrades under the Life Extension and Environmental Mitigation programmes, which were deployed to Afghanistan several years ago.

Survivability requirements play a significant part of the Mk 2 design, with a new hull based on the Spartan troop carrier providing improved mine blast protection. The new aluminium alloy, which is fabricated at the company's Wolverhampton site, has greater resistance to corrosion while keeping the weight down.

The extra headroom has allowed the fitting of blast attenuating seating ‘in every position in every variant'.

In addition, redesigned and repositioned driver foot controls aim to reduce lower limb mine blast injuries while improved appliqué armour has been added to improve blast and ballistic protection.

According to company literature ‘a new power distribution system, including a new rotary base junction, provides improved power management between chassis and turret and will enable further systems upgrades in the future'.

Additional improvements include a redesigned fuel system and a larger fuel tank, an environmental control system that provides air-conditioning for the complete vehicle, a new power distribution system, new crew seats and upgraded suspension.

The turret is the old standard Scimitar’s armed with the ancient 30mm RARDEN cannon and 7.62mm coaxial machine gun, and remains the big weak spot of the combination due to lack of stabilization and awkwardness of gun loading.

In addition to the Scimitar reconnaissance vehicle, over 20 new hulls have been built for four other members of the CVR(T) family, including the Spartan, the Sultan command post vehicle, the Samson recovery and the Samaritan ambulance. These are mainly minor changes, such as a heavier-duty winch on the Samson variant.

This £30 million upgrade, also referred to as Project Transformer, is being carried out under urgent operational requirements funding and is due to be completed early in 2012 with the delivery of 58 vehicles.

The Scimitar MK2 is already online in Afghanistan, as proudly announced today by the MOD who also released the following pics: 

 

Interesting cruise missiles from Turkey fits the F35’s weapons bays.

Tübitak-SAGE, the defence industries research and development institute of Turkey’s scientific and technological research council, has unveiled the Stand-Off Missile (SOM) on its stand at DSEi (N7-168). Last month, this major weapon programme successfully conducted its first guided flight.

SOM has been in development by Tübitak- SAGE since 2006, and following extensive wind tunnel and systems tests – followed by captive-carry and release trials – made its first guided flight on 9 August. Flying over the Black Sea, the SOM covered more than 100 nautical miles using GPS/ INS guidance. A campaign of about 30 test flights is to be conducted to assess aspects of the missile’s design.

SOM is a 1,300 lb stealthy cruise missile offering a variety of programmable ingress and attack profiles. Midcourse guidance is accomplished by GPS/ INS, with terrain reference updates.

Furthermore, the missile’s imaging infrared seeker can also be used to provide image-based midcourse navigation by taking snapshots of waypoints and comparing them against predicted position to update the navigation system. Infrared and terrain updates allow the missile to navigate without GPS if that capability is denied or degraded.

The IR seeker provides terminal guidance using target auto-tracking, and the weapon can be programmed to attack at various angles to match the required effects.

The warhead weighs 500 lb. SOM has a two-way datalink that allows in-flight retasking, and it is networkenabled. With the exception of the French Microturbo engine, the major elements of SOM are of Turkish design, including the high-resolution imaging infrared seeker.

Tübitak-SAGE has also developed a mission planning system for the SOM. This is common with that required for the HGK, a GPS/INSguided bomb kit for Mk 84 bombs that the institute has also developed and tested for the Turkish air force. Both HGK and SOM are compatible with NATO’s universal armaments interface.

Initial development work on SOM is being undertaken using the F-4E 2020 upgraded Phantom operated by the Turkish Air Force, but around the turn of the year work will begin on integrating the weapon onto the F-16, which is Turkey’s most numerous fighter.

SOM would also likely be included in any indigenous Turkish fighter development, but perhaps the big prize is the F-35 JSF that Turkey will operate. Tübitak-SAGE has sized the SOM to the internal bays of the Joint Strike Fighter, although the four rear fins will have to fold to fit the missile into the bay.

As befits its role as a design institute, Tübitak- SAGE produces only prototypes and development items, and does not have the capacity for mass production.

Turkey has not yet finalised production plans for the SOM, although an announcement is expected next year.

New Viking variants.

BAE Systems Global Combat Systems is showing two new versions of its combat proven BvS 10 Mk II all-terrain tracked all-armoured vehicle at DSEi for the first time. The first is a crew-served weapon platform, fitted with a Selex Enforcer remote weapon station (RWS) armed with a stabilised .50 M2 HB machine gun on the front unit, which is aimed using a flat-panel display from under full armour protection. Also mounted on the front unit is a Boomerang acoustic sniper detection system, coupled to the RWS.

These images show the BsV10 Viking MK2 Crew Served Weapon carrier. The Enforcer RWS on the front car is very evident, as is the installation of the Boomerang acoustical fire source detection device, the rear (manned, shielded) weapon turret and the Mast-Mounted Sensors for battlefield surveillance.

A complete Selex sensor suite is installed. It includes DNVS 4 night driver’s vision system, local situational awareness system and retractable mast-mounted sensor pod. The latter features high-performance day/night sensors and a laser rangefinder for surveillance and target acquisition. The rear unit also has a roof-mounted protected weapon station for increased firepower.

Second BvS 10 Mk II has a rear unit modified to carry a turntable-mounted 81mm mortar and about 140 rounds of ready-use ammunition.

The BsV10 Viking MK2 Mortar Carrier, with its 81 mm mortar in firing mode.

A key feature of these new versions of BvS 10 is that they both retain their full amphibious capability, making them very, very attractive for the 3^rd Commando Brigade, which would need such firepower enhancements greatly. Although not optimal in terms of commonality, the Viking mortar carrier could also be a solution for replacing the FV432 MC in Armoured and Mechanized Infantry Battalions, since (very worrisome detail) the British Army seems to be oblivious to the need to provide a replacement to the protected mobility of mortal sections.

The first customer for the BvS 10 was the UK Royal Marines, which deployed it on combat operations to Afghanistan, followed by the British Army. A total 190 units have been delivered to the UK, including battlefield replacement vehicles.

Foxhound is in production

First Foxhound vehicles will be delivered late this year for training. Around 35 of the 200 vehicles are expected to be used for training purposes. Deliveries of all vehicles are due to be completed by mid-2012 to replace the Snatch Land Rover, which has proved highly vulnerable.

Ocelot was selected following extensive competitive trials carried out last year. Since then the vehicle has been further refined and by September this year more than 50 physical blast trials had been carried out.

Final assembly of the Ocelot is carried out at the Ricardo facility in Shoreham, with the support of other key subcontractors including the Defence Support Group, Formaplex, Sula, Thales and QinetiQ.

Export marketing is already underway and two vehicles – one in the standard configuration and one in the two-door configuration with a flat bed at the rear – were delivered to Australia to take part in the Australian Land 121 Phase 4 requirement.

A trackway for UAVs.

Faun Trackway, the defence division of North Wales-based Faun Zoeller, has introduced a landing mat specifically designed for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). It is the latest addition to Faun’s suite of temporary runway solutions. The lightweight aluminium mat will be capable of clearly marking permissible landing areas and will provide a smooth landing, regardless of terrain, for any size or weight of UAV.

Faun’s UAV mat is being developed for rapid deployment by hand and will prevent foreign object damage to help protect valuable UAV assets when in the field. To enable the UAV to rapidly decelerate when landing, the mats can also be fitted with arrestor gear usually found on aircraft carriers.

Alternative ancillary equipment will also be available, including lighting systems, painted markings, generators, heat-protective gloves and electric hammer drills. Faun plans to launch the product in 2012, and the British Army could be interested due to the need of Watchkeeper for runways, even if semi-prepared airstrips and grass surfaces can do. Watchkeeper could also be adapted for catapult launch, but the Army did not express interest nor did formulate a requirement for this aspect.

The Warrior bridgelayer is shown to the public.

Pearson Engineering has completed development of its Bridge Launch Mechanism (BLM), which is being shown for the first time in the Vehicle Park (South Hall) integrated onto a BAE Systems Warrior manoeuvre support vehicle.

The BLM is a special to role attachment that can be fitted to a wide range of chassis, tracked and wheeled, which allows for the launch and recovery of a bridge from under armour in less than two minutes.

At DSEi it is being shown for use with the BAE Systems No 12 bridge, which is currently deployed by the British Army from the Titan bridge layer. The BLM has also been tested on a Leopard 1 tank chassis.

Four versions are being marketed: Heavy, Medium, Light, and one for use on vehicles fitted with a palletised loading system, which, typically, is based on an 8x8 cross-country truck chassis. BLM has three operating positions: transport without the bridge fitted; transport with the bridge fitted; and a deployed position with the bridge laid in position over the front of the chassis.

Hydraulic power is provided to a BLM directly from the vehicle or from an onboard hydraulic system, which can be supplied as part of a Pearson Engineering common interface system (CIS). Installation of the CIS allows the vehicle to be rapidly re-rolled according to mission requirements, such as installation of a dozer blade or mine-clearing devices of the roller or plough type. The CIS makes the vehicle more than just a bridgelayer, and the name (Warrior Maneuver Support Vehicle) is a clear allusion to this, other than a proof that this development is aimed at giving the MOD a cost-effective path for fulfilling the FRES Maneuver Support Vehicle requirement, which has a slot for some 35 bridgelayers and support vehicles, alongside 60 Terriers already on order. 

This ridiculously tiny picture is all i can find so far for a vision of the Warrior Maneuver Support Vehicle. I doubt the Challenger II development was as secretive and less publicized, sincerely. A pity, because as always i'd love to know more.

Other options for fitting the CIS and meeting the requirement are the ASCOD SV Common Base Platform or the Terrier hull. Both are inexorably going to cost more than using Warrior hulls made available by the reduction in Armoured Infantry requirements.

The UK and the F35C progresses.

Rear Admiral Amjad Hussain, the Ministry of Defence’s Director of Precision Attack, earlier this year visited Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland, where he was briefed on the F-35C programme progress and witnessed flight test operations.

Three F-35C test aircraft are now operating from the Patuxent River test facility to support integration testing with the US Navy’s Nimitz class aircraft carriers. CF-1, at Patuxent River since last November, was joined earlier in 2011 by CF-2 and CF-3; the latter is the primary catapult launch and arrestor recovery test aircraft and is also a fully mission systems capable platform.

Jet blast deflector tests were recently completed at Lakehurst, New Jersey.

Carrier suitability testing is scheduled throughout this year, including ongoing catapult testing and the start of arrestment testing in preparation for initial ship trials in 2013. While the Royal Navy’s new Queen Elizabeth class ships are smaller than the Nimitz class, there will still be considerable read across from the US test and integration campaign.

In a separate but associated development, the UK and US governments are close to finalising a JSF ‘swap’ deal that would see the UK exchange one of its three F-35B short takeoff and landing (STOVL) initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) aircraft for an F-35C CV variant.

A deal has been agreed in principle by the national armaments directors of both countries. Final approvals are expected by the end of 2011.

The mock-up F35 exposed at DSEI is shown accompanied by a Meteor missile, indication of the MBDA’s firmness in adapting the design to the JSF’s weapon bays constraints and pursue export orders associated with the plane. 


MASC, Crow's Nest... Give the carrier a flying eye: the RN has a requirement for an airborne early warning platform embarkable on ships, mainly the Strike Carrier. This capability will have to replace the Sea King MK7 ASaC, which is working in both Afghanistan and Libya (flying from HMS Ocean) as we speak, but that is planned for retirement by 2016, along with all other Sea King variants. 

The MASC requirement could be filled by 3 to 6 Hawkeyes (in terms of performances, unbeatable, but also very expensive to acquire) or by around 10 Merlin helicopters. However, funding will be so constrained that the RN is clearly anticipating to have no chance of buying new airframes for the role. Perhaps, if the Senior Service is really lucky, the 8 non-upgraded Merlin HM1 will be recovered for the role, but in case this was not economically feasible, the 30 Merlin HM2s will be given yet another role, making them even busier. 


Thales and AgustaWestland presented in 2010 a solution with a palletized Cerberus radar suite that could be installed easily on the Merlin HC3, which is planned to be navalized and given to the navy by 2016/18. 

The original Thales - Westland proposal, rolled out in 2010, showed the Cerberus radar bag mounted on a pallet in the back. This required the Rear Loading Ramp, and thus either a new buy Merlin, an HC3, or a heavier rebuild process on HM1/2 at time of navalization. The Merlin in HM2 configuration has a two-men crew console in the back, but for ASW sensors. It is not clear if this same console could be expanded (mainly software-wise) to work with the Cerberus suite and in the AEW role as well, or if some kind of AEW-specific console will be provided, sized to be embarked through the side sliding door.

However, the 25 Merlin HC4 will be too precious and in demand providing vertical mobility to troops to be used for the AEW role as well, and Thales is showing at DSEI a revised fast-installation option. 


The Cerberus suite already used in the Sea King is, again, retained as core of the system. The Searchwater 2000 radar (the black bag that gives the Sea King MK7 its "Bagger" surname) would now be installed on the Merlin and deployed using elevator rails attached to the aircraft's fuselage, and not using a pallet approach, removing the need for the rear loading ramp, and thus making the solution perfectly compatible, potentially, with ALL Merlin variants. Roughly one-third of the HM2 fleet could be equipped with airborne early-warning sensors at any one time, with all capable of carrying it if and when necessary.
The two-men radar console for the Radar Crew would probably sized and designed in order to enter the Merlin by the side sliding door.

Lockheed Martin, which in 2010 announced a plan to adapt fuselage-mounted AESA radar arrays to the Merlin for fullfilling the same role, is now presenting its plan: essentially, two small pods mounted on the helicopter's pylons, each containing a radar array and IFF, to give the 360° coverage required by the RN.

The pods would feature synthetic aperture radar and ground moving-target indication modes and be suitable for tasks such as fighter control and maritime and battlefield surveillance, tracking targets in the air and on land.

The LM proposal: one radar pod can be seen, attached to the sling points were the pylon for Stingray torpedoes is normally found. Again, no details are currently available about the crew radar workstations.

Also incorporating a gimballed radar and electronic support measures and identification friend-or-foe equipment, each pylon-mounted pod would weigh roughly 280kg (617lb).

Lockheed says the design represents "a role-fit solution which can be mounted on any fixed-wing transport/surveillance aircraft or medium-sized helicopter".

Concerns definitely remain. The Merlin HM2 fleet will routinely be asked to provide 6 or 8 Small Ship Flights for the Type 23 and then 26 frigates, with more potentially earmarked for Type 45. A requirement also exists for providing larger (6-helicopters) flights to big ships such as RFA Argus (it has become a common solution for Somalia anti-piracy deployments) or the Fort class replenishers, and of course on the Aircraft Carrier in future.
If we consider that all ship flights ideally should be triple (one training, one deployed, one recovering after deployment), we can immediately appreciate the full dimensions of the problem, and of the work that the already stretched Merlin family does.

It really is to be hoped that the 8 HM1 airframes (12, actually, considering 4 stored ones) can be recovered for this job.

Puma HC2 silently but steadily progresses:
The project to inject new life into the RAF's fleet of Puma support helicopters is making good progress, according to Eurocopter. Since the maiden flight of the first modified aircraft in June, Eurocopter test pilots have completed nearly 30 hours of manufacturer's test flying. That work is due to be complete by the end of the year when the aircraft will be transferred to Boscombe Down in Wiltshire for military certificate and acceptance testing by QinetiQ.

Under the £300 million Puma Life Extension Programme which was launched in September 2009, 28 (NOTE: 24 is the number that was presented post SDSR, so i highly doubt there's been a return to the 28 figure, which anyway always was, even in times of lesser economic despair, expressed in terms of "up to 28") of the RAF's Pumas are being given a new avionics suite, similar to that fitted to the EC725, new Turbomeca Makila engines and a modified gearbox to cope with the extra power.

The aircraft is being totally re-wired and given a new fuel tank which will further extend the range of the aircraft, potentially making it more attractive for special forces use. The type is understood to be the preferred mount of UK SF personnel.

Airframes selected for the update are delivered to Eurocopter UK at Kidlington in Oxford. There the aircraft are dismantled and components not required, such as the engines, are delivered back to the RAF.
The aircraft is then trucked to Eurocopter Romania's facility in Brasov where the work is being undertaken. Fourteen aircraft are now going through the upgrade process. Four of the 20-some will be completed at Eurocopter's plant at Marignane near Marseille.

As well as the new Pumas, the training simulator at RAF Benson will be modified into a Mk2 cockpit configuration, but early training of instructors will be carried out on a simulator in France.