Brit haderőfejlesztési program és hadiipar

[Törölt tag 1945]

A vicces az, hogy ha jol emlekszem mindegyik amerikai (Trident?), nincs is mar sajatjuk igen regen, magyaran megint egy adag penzt keszulnek az amerikaiak zsebebe tolni, szerintem pusztan political posturing okan.

A harci rész, amiről a cikk szól, annyira Britt fejlesztésű és gyártású, hogy még az amcsik licenszelték a 80-as évek elején annak neutron elnyelő hővédő pajzsát.
A hordozórakéta viszont amerikai gyártású, de mivel Britannia fedezte az amerikai Trident-II rakéták fejlesztési költségének 5%-át, cserébe kaptak 58db rakétát,

 

[Nemerson]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371590273529155586

40%-al növelik a nukleáris robbanófejeik számát

 

[kamm]

A harci rész, amiről a cikk szól, annyira Britt fejlesztésű és gyártású, hogy még az amcsik licenszelték a 80-as évek elején annak neutron elnyelő hővédő pajzsát.
A hordozórakéta viszont amerikai gyártású, de mivel Britannia fedezte az amerikai Trident-II rakéták fejlesztési költségének 5%-át, cserébe kaptak 58db rakétát,

Jaja, az jelkepes osszeg, gyakorlatilag az amerikaiak anno eladtak nekik parat, igy egyszerűbb az eletuk nekik is (ugyis oveke a szotver stb.)

Melyik designra erted? Mert a mostaniak - W76-88 - tudomasom szerint mind los alamosi design, valamikor 10 eve (?) volt a modernizacioja egy adagnak, emlekszem a ktg vitara.
A britek maskepp hívják, persze, de itt a sajtoban meg policy kiadvanyokban vilagosan az amerikai warheadet nevezik meg a britekenek is (nem kulonosebben erdekli oket a britek gyerekes posturingja.)
Azt tudom, hogy a briteknek volt sajat air dropped bombajuk a Cold War alatt, de uvy tudom, azt regen kivontak es csak az amerikai Tridentjeik vannak...?

 

[kamm]

Nos, kinn van: Global Britain in a competitive age - The Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy

 

[kamm]

Elso benyomas: a 110+ oldalbol kb az elso 90-100 (!) semmi mas, mint istentelen mennyisegu buzzword, nagy szavak, klisek es oszinte almodozas, kinek is kepzelik el a valosagban attol igen messze allo UK-t.

Az is feltuno, hogy a service branchek kozul csak es kizarolag a Navyt emlegetik mindenhol.


Az elso 100 oldalon kb ennyi konkret, hard, relevans (military-related) fact jott szembe:

"To bolster collective security with our allies worldwide – especially in the Euro-Atlantic and with a new emphasis on the Indo-Pacific – our priority actions will be:

• To reaffirm our commitment to leadership in NATO, supporting its adaptation to threats above and below the threshold of war under international law

• We will increase our defence budget by over £24 billion over the next four years and remain the largest European spender on defence in NATO, with our expenditure now standing at 2.2% of GDP.
• We will continue to: commit a full spectrum of forces to the Alliance, from our nuclear deterrent to offensive cyber capabilities; make a leading contribution to NATO’s Enhanced Forward Presence and Response Force; and ensure we are at the forefront of implementing NATO’s new Deterrence and Defence Concept.
• We will also continue to serve as a framework nation able to connect and coordinate NATO’s forces effectively, while more UK equipment will be prepositioned in Germany to facilitate rapid response.
• Operating across the Euro-Atlantic region, and with a focus on the northern and southern flanks of Europe, we will support collective security from the Black Sea to the High North, in the Baltics, the Balkans and the Mediterranean.

• To improve interoperability with our Euro-Atlantic allies.
- We will strengthen bilateral relationships – particularly, but not solely, with our key allies the United States, France (via the Lancaster House treaties and the CJEF) and Germany – as well as multilateral groupings such as the Joint Expeditionary Force, which comprises the UK, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

• To modernise the UK armed forces, maintaining a full spectrum of capabilities, as set out in the Defence Command Paper.

• We will prioritise the development and integration of new technologies – including those required for near-peer, high-tech warfighting – and a ‘digital backbone’ to enable multi-domain operations and interoperability with allies and partners. In the Euro-Atlantic, the UK will be one of only two NATO Allies to bring to bear nuclear, offensive cyber, precision strike weapons and fifth-generation strike aircraft.
• We will also contribute to missile defence, to space awareness and resilience (including through a new Space Command) and to CBRN resilience. A new generation of warships will support our historic role in keeping the North Atlantic open.
• Our highly mobile airborne and amphibious forces will be able to reinforce Allies at short notice.
• Our land force will undergo its most comprehensive modernisation for two decades, becoming better integrated with other domains, better able to intervene quickly and effectively over large distances, better protected from electronic, air and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle threats, and better able to engage an adversary at long range.
• Our Special Forces will be ready to operate in the most hostile environments and against our most sophisticated adversaries.
• With international partners including Italy and Sweden, we will continue to develop FCAS as a replacement for our Typhoon fast jets, drawing on ground-breaking technologies from the defence sector and beyond.

• To improve our ability to manage and de-escalate a multi-domain crisis, reflecting the increased intensity of competition from our potential adversaries and the more complex range of routes for escalation, including to nuclear coercion.

• The UK will run a series of national, strategic-level exercises to test resilience and our ability to navigate crises.
• We will actively support similar NATO and EU-NATO exercises. IV. Strategic Framework 73

• To sustain our commitment to collective security beyond the Euro-Atlantic, strengthening our ties and understanding.
- In particular, given the growing importance of the Indo-Pacific, we will reinforce our commitment to the FPDA and increase our regional maritime presence to support norms and laws in the region. In 2021, HMS Queen Elizabeth will lead a multinational task group on a global deployment, visiting the Mediterranean, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific."

A tobbi minden, ami szem-szajnak ingere, az emberi jogok vedelmetol a national resiliencen at a szervezett bunozes elleni harcig meg genderegyenlosegig, valamitn 2050-re net zero kibocsatas.
Az ujjam elfaradt a scrollingban...

98. oldaltol jon az implementalas, ott kezd erdekesse valni, majd Appendix A a 100. oldalon indul, abban mar konkret szamok vannak:

"3. Strengthening security and defence at home and overseas
Defence (MOD)
• Over £24bn increase in cash terms over four years, including at least £6.6bn of R&D (as mentioned above) to maintain a cutting-edge military. This reaffirms the UK’s commitment to its allies, making the UK the largest European spender on defence in NATO and the second largest in the Alliance.

• The additional funding in this settlement will:

• Enable research into AI and other battle-winning technologies.
• Reshape the UK’s armed forces for a more competitive age.
• Establish a new Space Command and enhance the breadth of our space capabilities.
• Continue the renewal of the UK’s nuclear deterrent.
• Develop the next generation of naval vessels, including Type 32 frigates and Fleet Solid Support ships, and deliver our plans for eight Type 26 and five Type 31 frigates.
• Progress our Carrier Strike capabilities, with at least 48 F-35s by 2025.
• Develop the Future Combat Air System for the RAF, along with delivering upgraded Typhoon radars.
• Enhance the UK’s position as a responsible, democratic cyber power (as mentioned above)."

CBRN – nuclear detection capability (HO)
• £22m resource funding in 2021-22 and £329m capital funding from 2021-22 to 2024-25 to enhance nuclear detection capability.

Conflict, Stability and Security Fund
• £874m to support the UK’s national security and resilience through overseas engagement. This is focused on tackling instability, preventing conflict and supporting capacity-building."

A tobbi mar ezutan border control, anti-terrorism etc.

Hat, ez a doksi egyelore a koronanak nez ki az eddigi nesze-semmi-fogd-meg-jol, egyik sarokbol a masikba torteno ganetalicskazas tetejen.

Gondolom, van ennek egy konkret szamokat tartalmazo katonai fejezete, de azt ezek szerint nem tettek kozze...?

 

[kamm]

Olyannyira totalis a Navy-fokusz, hogy BoJo mar 24 frigaterol beszelt 2030-ra:

Ez persze hulyeseg, ahogy mindenki ramutatott Twitteren, de valoszinuleg frigate+detroyer+etc flottara ertette a PM - ugy meg elvileg tarthato is lehet, kis kesessel:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1371831326035283972

 

[kamm]

A Financial TImes editorial board udvariasan, de helyere teszi az egesz doksit: megdicseri tisztan leirt nemzetkozi stb helyzetert, de vilagosan ramutat, hogy remenytelen a tavolsag az ambiciok es a valosag, az eroforrasok kozott. Egesz egyszeruen hibas az az idejetmulta elkepzeles, hogy a UK full-spectrum military powerkent kepes nemzetkozi szinten funkcionalni, a szarazfoldi csapatoktol a legieron, navyn at az expedicios erokon keresztul a nuklearis elrettento erokig. Ennek az eroltetese megint az eroforrasok szetszorasat fogja eredmenyezni.

https://www.ft.com/content/9968f465-1e15-429b-8c27-b8d6a97147c2

Opinion The FT View

Building ‘Global Britain’ will require hard choices

Image of UK as a mini-superpower does not match funds and capabilities

The editorial board

The vision perpetuates the flawed assumption, dating back decades, that the UK can maintain a ‘full-spectrum’ military capability © Bloomberg

The editorial board 7 HOURS AGO

Three months after its post-Brexit transition period ended, Boris Johnson’s government is finally adding flesh to its vision of “Global Britain”. Its more than 100-page review of security, defence, development and foreign policy sets the goal for the UK to be a “problem-solving and burden-sharing nation with a global perspective”. Yet there is a Johnsonian, have-your-cake-and-eat-it quality to this image of Britain as pocket-sized superpower.

There is much to commend in the framing of the challenges the UK faces, and its aims. A commitment to building up technological resilience and science policy, notably in countering a rising China, is welcome. So is the recognition, after the pandemic, that security threats can take unforeseen forms.

The review is right to balance making the most of Britain’s soft power — harnessing its creativity in the arts and science — with bolstering hard power by funding “next generation” weapons, though lifting the cap on nuclear warheads raises eyebrows. The pledge to reverse cuts in foreign aid — one of Britain’s most effective soft power tools — once financial circumstances allow, is one Johnson should stick to.

Recognition that Russia is the most acute threat to UK security reflects hard realities, though the language around China is ambiguous. A tilt to the Indo-Pacific makes sense, even if it is mainly a cover for opening markets.

Yet there is a mismatch between the scale of ambition and the resources and capabilities available. The vision perpetuates the flawed assumption, dating back decades, that the UK can maintain a “full-spectrum” military capability — from troops to an expeditionary force, and an expanded nuclear deterrent. The result will be resources continuing to be spread too thinly.

More realistic would be to accept the UK’s role as a sizeable European power, with global interests. Beyond the challenge from Beijing, most threats the UK faces — Russia, Islamist or far-right terrorism, uncontrolled migration, cyber attacks by Iran or North Korea — are shared with its European neighbours. The starting point should be for Britain to be a solid European pillar of Nato.

US officials have suggested they would favour the UK focusing on the north Atlantic, European mainland and Mediterranean, allowing America to concentrate more of its own capacity in Asia. The planned deployment of the Royal Navy’s new, flagship aircraft carrier to east Asia might be a chance to signal resolve to China, and cement alliances through joint exercises with Japan and others. But, with borrowed US aircraft to fill its flight deck, it risks being a symbol, too, of overstretch.

The “Indo-Pacific tilt” also obscures a sizeable hole at the heart of the document — any vision for co-operation with the most important partner for Britain’s safety: Europe, and in particular the EU. Brexit opens possibilities for independent policy and action, but should not mean antagonising or circumventing the EU. Johnson’s government seems intent instead on a combative trade relationship with Brussels; the review came just 24 hours after the EU launched legal action against the UK over implementation of the Northern Ireland protocol. While there is merit in working closely in the “E3” with Germany and France, moreover, this should be a way of enhancing UK clout within the EU, not engaging with capitals to bypass EU institutions.

For all its positives, the review reflects a government reluctant to concede that it cannot have everything — as in the Brexit negotiations, and much of its pandemic response. Building “Global Britain” will require difficult trade-offs between what it can credibly achieve, and the resources available."

 

[pöcshuszár]

- In particular, given the growing importance of the Indo-Pacific, we will reinforce our commitment to the FPDA and increase our regional maritime presence to support norms and laws in the region. In 2021, HMS Queen Elizabeth will lead a multinational task group on a global deployment, visiting the Mediterranean, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific."

Ez különösen azért lehet igazán kellemetlen hozzáállás, mert Kína már rendelkezik egy 1Mrd-os keretszerződéssel Argentínával. Ha sokat bohóckodnak azangolok a Dél-Kelet ázsiai régióban, akkor lehet, hogy Kínának csak annyit kell tennie, hogy megemelik ezt az összeget 2-3-4Mrd-ra. Ez nekik gyakorlatilag semmibe sem kerül, mert az argik úgy is kínai fegyverekre fogják tudni csak elkölteni.
Mindenki sokkal jobban járna, ha az angolok inkább csak a saját régiójukkal lennének elfoglalva.
Persze, ez az egész csak egy White Paper, ami ráadásul rengeteg bullshitet elbír. Aztán meg majd meglátjuk, hogy ennek az egésznek milyen lesz a megvalósítása.
Mindenesetre az biztos, hogy a tendenciáik a flotta fejlesztése felé mutatnak, ami szerintem kimondottan jól is fog nekik állni, meg hasznosabb is lesz. Ráadásul a flotta intenzív fejlesztése sokkal több pénzt is hoz vissza, mint a többi fegyvernem és az ott jellemző elég radikális selejtezési hajlamuk. A kiszolgált hajókból talán sokkal könnyebb pénzt látni.

 

[Terminator]

Army 2025

 

[pöcshuszár]

Army 2025

Nyilvánvalóan a C opciónak van leginkább létjogosultága.
Az Ajax variánsok már be vannak rendelve. Az FV432-re építeni akkora marhaság 2021-ben, hogy csak na. (Különösen a 2 nappal ezelőtt megjelent "páncélos helyzetértékelő" figyelembe vételével.)

Különben ezek honnan vannak? Én még csak az utolsó képet láttam az uklandpower-en.

 

[kamm]

Nyilvánvalóan a C opciónak van leginkább létjogosultága.
Az Ajax variánsok már be vannak rendelve. Az FV432-re építeni akkora marhaság 2021-ben, hogy csak na. (Különösen a 2 nappal ezelőtt megjelent "páncélos helyzetértékelő" figyelembe vételével.)

Különben ezek honnan vannak? Én még csak az utolsó képet láttam az uklandpower-en.

Mi az A es B kozott igazabol a difi?

 

[Pogány]

Mi az A es B kozott igazabol a difi?

Én sem láttam, szerintem ez a beugratós benne. A két legszimpatikusabb opció marad a versenyben majd, a teljesen ugyanazt tartalmazó A és a B, ebből választhatnak.

 

[pöcshuszár]

Mi az A es B kozott igazabol a difi?

Igazság szerint szerintem el lett cseszve az ábra. A magyarázatban az szerepel, hogy a Warrior-t beszántják, viszont az ábrán meg szerepel.
Szóval az A és a B verzióban is a két jelenlegi minta szerint tervezett Strike brigade szerepel. A különbség a középen feltüntetett harckocsikat tartalmazó dandárban van. Az A opció esetén tulajdonképpen egy supernehéz harckocsi dandárt vázoltak fel, ahol maradnának a Warriorok és az FV432-ők. Háát ezzel értelemszerűen főleg az elavult technikai háttér a probléma, meg az, hogy gyakorlatilag 3 láncos típust futtatnának, miközben még a Challengereket ide sem vettük. (agyrém)
A B opció esetén is 2 vegyes Strike brigade mellé a harckocsikat is full Boxer zászlóaljakkal párosítanák. (Warrior és FW dobva)
Ez eggyel szimpatikusabb megoldás, mert a Boxerrel azért nagyon nem fognának mellé, azonban itt a fő gond ott lenne, hogy a harckocsikat csak korlátozottan tudnák támogatni a kerekes Boxerek. Típusegyszerűsítés szempontjából sokkal jobban néz ki.
A C. opcióban viszont egyneműsítik dandárokat. A Strike dandárok tisztán Boxert kapnának. Itt valószínűleg lenne minden MGS-től kezdve CRV-ig, hogy a megfelelő tűztámogatás meglegyen a Strike dandárnak.
A harckocsi dandár viszont egy "atomállat " lenne az egynemű Ajax (ASCOD) leszármatokkal (Atlas, Athena, Ares, Apollo), és a harckocsikkal. Minden harctámogató jármű is rendelkezésre állna azonos platformon.
Minden típus már jelenleg is meg van rendelve (Boxer, Ajax és alverziói), egyedül a Cockerill 105/120 tornyokat kellene normálisan integrálni a Boxerre. Tudtommal tesztelve már volt ez a kombináció is.
Amit még meg kellene oldani, az a Boxerre való CT40-es Mission module.
Ha szívtak is a Warrior és az Ajaxra való installálással, a Boxer Mission module-ja sokkal nagyobb mozgásteret biztosít az integrációra.
Szerintem akár a komplett Ajax torony is felmehetne a Boxerre.

 

[kamm]

Ugy tunik, volt bezony extra oldal benne, ahogy sejtettem: https://www.army-technology.com/fea...or-integrated-review-organisational-overhaul/


"Describing a move to Brigade Combat Teams (BCTS), the page said: “In order to be able to operate and fight in the way described in the Future Land Combat System document, the Army will be organised differently.

“Brigade Combat teams will be self-sufficient tactical units with the ability to work across the Army, partners across government, allies and industry.”

The page also outlined how the British Army ‘must be more lethal and more agile’ than it has been in the past to win battles and reduce risks to frontline personnel.

It describes how combat forces will consist of ‘armoured troops – using modern armoured vehicles’. Mechanised and Infantry soldiers, it says, are to be tasked with ‘seizing and holding complex or urban terrain.’

Close combat forces are set to be supported by a mix of lethal and non-lethal capabilities including artillery, attack helicopters and uncrewed aerial systems or UAS."


Mondjuk konkretum ebben sem volt sok...


"It adds that ‘growing emphasis’ will be placed on long-range precision weapons – including ‘the upgraded Multi Launch Rocket System’, as well as uncrewed vehicles and cyber capabilities."

 

[kamm]

A RM call transcriptbol:

"And then finally, just from some of your comments earlier on today, you seem pretty optimistic about the Challenger 2 upgrade program. How quickly do you think that could have a material effect? Do you have a lot of work still to do on prototypes, for example, or could that enter production relatively fast [the way it went 34:10]? Thank you.

[0:34:15] Armin Papperger
Thanks for your question, Sash. And I will start with the Challenger. On the Challenger side, I am expecting, day by day now, that we get officially the information from the British MoD that everything is done. So we had very good negotiations and we are very happy to have United Kingdom then also as customer on the main battle tank side. So at the moment we see that there is not a big negative impact because we made good negotiations about a down payment on the Challenger side and also the investments that we are doing at the moment in Telford. This in combination also with our MIV program and the Challenger program. So it's a limited impact. We have to invest something but a limited impact, in comparison what we get from the programs."

"On the Ammunition side, the driver will be because we have as you know, this frame contract about 120 millimeter, there will be an opportunity now also over the next years because after signing the British contract (Challenger LEP), the 120 millimeters smoothbore gun is inside. And for sure they need ammunition, it makes not lot of sense to have a main battle tank and to have no ammunition. And the Brits had no smoothbore gun before. So therefore we see a big potential therefore and the growth rate. Then we have a new family of 155 millimeter ammunition. At the moment, the most of the distances, most of the artillery around the world can fire 40 kilometer or a little bit more. And we have now new 21 technologies to fire more than 70 kilometers. So the long range artillery with high precision fuses is a point, which really helps us to grow the business on the ammunition side."

 

[kamm]

Es tényleg jól tudta Armin: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/busines...any-upgrade-britains-ageing-challenger-tanks/

 

[Terminator]

Typhoon, C-130J and Puma retirements, FCAS investment headline UK defence review...

"The UK will retire its Tranche 1 Eurofighter Typhoons, Lockheed Martin C-130J tactical transports and Airbus Helicopters Puma HC2 rotorcraft by the middle of this decade, as the Ministry of Defence (MoD) targets a range of capability updates.

Detailed within a Command Paper publication released on 22 March titled Defence in a competitive age, and covering the period to 2025, the MoD’s plan also includes major new investment in a future combat air system (FCAS) project, but provides only vague details on its total commitment to the stealthy Lockheed Martin F-35B.

Around 24 of the Royal Air Force’s (RAF’s) oldest Typhoons will leave service by 2025, with the saved support funds to be channelled into upgrades to its more modern Tranche 2 and 3 jets. This will include integrating MBDA’s Spear 3 air-to-surface missile and an active electronically scanned array radar. The service will continue to sustain its current seven-squadron strength with the type, including a joint unit formed with Qatar’s air force.

More than £2 billion ($2.77 billion) will be invested in the FCAS activity by 2025, with the report detailing new investment from the UK worth £1.2 billion of this total. Work on the project – which also involves Italy and Sweden – will include advancing a manned or unmanned Tempest fighter, plus supporting capabilities including an unmanned Mosquito ‘loyal wingman’ and what the report refers to as “swarming drones”.

The report also commits to “grow the [F-35B] Lightning II force, increasing the fleet size beyond the 48 aircraft that we have already ordered”. No further detail about this plan has been released, but it is expected to cover the acquisition of additional examples within the coming years to ensure that this number of aircraft – required to ensure continuation of the UK’s Carrier Strike capability with the Royal Navy’s two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers for the next several decades – is safeguarded.

A decision on potentially reducing the UK’s programme of record requirement to eventually acquire 138 F-35s appears to have been deferred until the time of its next strategic defence review in 2025.

Meanwhile, a project to replace the RAF’s Boeing 707-based E-3D Sentry airborne warning and control system aircraft with five 737-derived E-7A Wedgetails has been cut back to just three airframes. The MoD last year ordered a trio of 737NGs for conversion into the surveillance type, plus two secondhand airframes sourced via Boeing for modification by STS Aviation Services. The first of these arrived at the company’s facility at Birmingham airport in early January.

Retirement of the RAF’s stretched-fuselage C-130J-30s by 2023 will see “the A400M Atlas force increase its capacity and capability”, the MoD says. The first operator of the “Super Hercules”, the UK has previously withdrawn its short-fuselage C-130Js and sold the surplus assets to Bahrain, Bangladesh and the US Navy.

A pair of BAe 146 transports acquired secondhand to support operations in Afghanistan will also leave use next year.

Use of the Puma rotorcraft will be brought to an end in the 2023-2025 period, with a replacement medium-weight helicopter to be acquired.

The MoD has not provided further details of this proposal, but notes: “The army is retiring its oldest CH-47 Chinook helicopters and investing, alongside the US, in newer variants of this operationally proven aircraft, enhancing capability, efficiency and interoperability. Investment in a new medium-lift helicopter in the mid-2020s will enable a consolidation of the army’s disparate fleet of medium-lift helicopters from four platform types to one,” it adds (in fact, the RAF operates both the Chinook and Puma fleets).

In the training sector, the RAF’s remaining British Aerospace Hawk T1 trainers will leave use by 2023, apart from those assigned to the Red Arrows aerobatic display team, which will continue to fly the type until 2030. “We will enhance the new military flying training system with further investment in synthetic training that will deliver more capable pilots more quickly and more efficiently,” it adds.

“The development of novel technologies, and a step change in how we use simulators for mission rehearsal and training, will enable the Royal Air Force to be among the most technologically innovative, productive and lethal air forces in the world,” the report states.

“The Royal Air Force will conduct a radical overhaul of how it is organised and how it approaches its people, training, bases and the aircraft and equipment it operates, harnessing the ever increasing effectiveness of a digitally empowered force,” says the report.

This will include measures intended to “amplify UK global influence by deepening our alliances in the Indo Pacific, Middle East and Africa [and] developing a global network of adaptable basing with key allies and partners,” it adds.

Such a shift will also be supported by the development from next year of an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellite constellation."

 

[kamm]

Itt a hivatalos Defence Command Paper: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...fence-in-a-competitive-age-accessible-version

 

[kamm]

Huh, mindossze £750M megy a C2 LEP upgradere - hat ebbol tenyleg nem vettek volna 148 uj 2A7+ hkt, az biztos (annyi C2 lesz upgradelve.)
Papperger jol sejtette, igy a C2 megkapja a 120mm nemet smoothbore gunt vegre, ahhoz gazdagon kell majd loszer is. A maradek sorsa ismeretlen, szerintem megprobaljak majd eladni egy reszet, masik reszet meg kannibalizaljak, esetleg par tucatot lekonzervalnak.

Az F-35 szama kodos maradt, az eddig berendelt 48-nal tobbet iger, de semmi konkretum, ha jol olvasom - azaz ez erosen attol fog fuggeni, milyen engedmenyt tesz majd a LM...

 

[tacticool]

Huh, mindossze £750M megy a C2 LEP upgradere - hat ebbol tenyleg nem vettek volna 148 uj 2A7+ hkt, az biztos

Nem csak az az összeg megy a Chally-ra. Elvileg. A LEP program mellett párhuzamosan fut még a HAAIP progi is, ami a meghajtás teszi rendbe, növeli a motor, felfüggesztés megbízhatóságát élettartalmát és egységesíti a különböző feladatú Challenger 2 alvázas járműveket.

Modernising the Army will mean some legacy platforms that have already been extended beyond their planned life will be retired. In doing so, the Army will be able to invest new funds into accelerating the in-service date of the Boxer armoured vehicle and enhancing its capability. Boxer will allow the Army to respond at pace to deliver soldiers around the battlefield, travelling long distances quickly, cross country, and in the most austere and hostile environments.
As planned, the Army will invest around £1.3-billion in our armoured capability by upgrading 148 of our main battle tanks to ensure the Challenger III will become one of the most protected and most lethal in Europe. The remaining fleet will be retired. We will no longer upgrade Warrior but it will remain in service until replaced by Boxer, which we expect to happen by the middle of this decade.

Úgy néz ki a Warrior-t is a sima, APC feladatú Boxer fogja váltani. Sehol sincs utalás a white paper-ben egy IFV modulra. Szép lesz nagyon...