Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    British Army: News

    Share
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    British Army: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Aug 04, 2009 8:09 am

    Night vision devices blamed for the deaths of British soldiers
    04.08.2009

    The cause of death of two British soldiers in Afghanistan a few years ago was the poor quality of night vision devices, as well as insufficient training of personnel for their use. This conclusion, according to the Defence Management, were involved in the case investigators.

    Sergeant Phillip Newman (Phillip Newman) and Private Braen Tannikliff (Brian Tunnicliffe) died in 2007, due to the fact that SUV Pinzgauer, in the cabin where they were, turned over and fell into a small pond. Both soldiers were in the movement of special night-vision goggles, although Tannikliff was only one 45-minute course on the operation of such devices, but that the accident instruction was unnecessary operation points for military drivers.

    According to the investigator David Masters (David Masters), used by British military goggles HMNVS (Helmet Mounted Night Vision System) reduces the distance to objects, which makes the driver feel that they are closer. Therefore, the cause of the incident could be the lack of preparedness of the driver, who did not take into account this factor. Nevertheless, the investigation recommended that the British military authority to choose a better quality of night vision equipment for its soldiers.

    http://www.lenta.ru/
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    British Army's new Sharpshooter - L129A1

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:43 pm

    LONDON, Jan. 19 (UPI) -- The British Defense Ministry announced it has issued a new rifle to troops in Afghanistan with long-range target acquisition capabilities.

    Quentin Davies, minister for defense equipment and support, says the new L129A1 Sharpshooter semiautomatic rifle issued to troops countering Taliban militants in Afghanistan marks the first new infantry combat rifle for troops in more than two decades.

    Officials say the L129A1 Sharpshooter provides soldiers with strengthened accuracy capabilities. The order was purchased by the Defense Ministry for approximately $2.4 million.

    "The Sharpshooter rifle adds to this arsenal and provides them with an additional, highly-precise, long-range capability," Davies said in a statement.

    "This is a concrete example of where we add to our range of equipment to ensure our brave forces have the best kit available to them on the front line."

    UPI

    here is a photo of the rifle:



    Info about the rifle:


    7.62mm rifle
    Trijicon ACOG TA648 sight, 6x magnification with RMR sight on top
    16" stainless steel match grade barrel
    Retractable stock and furniture in tan
    CAA/Tdi folding downgrip
    (Got it from another forum)
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16515
    Points : 17123
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 08, 2010 7:23 am

    Looks nice.
    Have read on a few forums that the main reason for the new longer range rifles the forces in Afghanistan are getting is because their 5.56mm rifles don't have the range of Kalashnikovs.
    Boy, the suggestion that a Kalashnikov can outrange the wests wonder rifles like the M16 and SA80mk2 seems to push a button... especially considering the low opinion in the west of the 7.2 x 39mm AKM for range and accuracy etc etc.
    The Irony is that of course the Kalashnikov can outrange a 5.56mm rifle, the problem is that so many westerners don't realise what the K in PKM stands for...
    I guess with British forces adopting this rifle and the US forces often having M14s and M21s in units to improve long range performance we can conclude that the west is now adopting Soviet style equipment practises al la SVD.
    Nice to see the adopting "Western practises" works both ways too.
    avatar
    DickSharpe

    Posts : 7
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2012-02-11
    Age : 27
    Location : Manchester, UK

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  DickSharpe on Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:16 pm

    We could say much the same about any combat death. If only we had XXXXXXX piece of equipment, real or hypothetical. Lack of Night Vision didn't kill them, the enemy killed them and Night VIs would have helped to prevent it.

    People attach such significance to equipment.
    avatar
    DickSharpe

    Posts : 7
    Points : 9
    Join date : 2012-02-11
    Age : 27
    Location : Manchester, UK

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  DickSharpe on Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:19 pm

    That looks pretty awesome, I cant see much use in low calibre rounds. Easy on the shoulder, easy on the target if you ask me.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16515
    Points : 17123
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 12, 2012 9:28 am

    It is a problem as old as war... having the right equipment is half the equation, being trained to use it properly is the other half.

    Just as the German forces of WWII weren't prepared for winter in the East, it is clear that the investigation above suggests issues with kit and training, which are both serious things.

    Of course motor vehicle accidents happen during the day time as well, but using night vision equipment is a skill, as is driving at night with it.

    Thermals don't work through windscreens so we can assume the NV was image intensification, so we can also assume he was therefore driving with the headlights off, or filtered so as to not overload his NVGs.

    From the report above the NVG in question were magnified, which makes things difficult.... it is like doing anything manual with a pair of binoculars strapped to your face.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16515
    Points : 17123
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 12, 2012 9:41 am

    The effect on the target has rather more to do with shot placement than the calibre you use.

    Of course in addition to shot placement (which is of course critical) is bullet design.

    A full metal jacket 7.62 x 51mm NATO round will simply punch cleanly through a human target unless it hits bone or a belt buckle it makes a fairly neat fairly straight wound.

    A full metal jacket Russian 5.45mm round on the other hand has a centre of gravity near its rear so on impact it tends to tumble and after about 10cm of penetration or so its penetration path tends to yaw 90 degrees.

    I have read lethality studies that talk about cases where someone has been hit front on at the hip, where the bullet has turned 90 degrees inside the body and exited through the shoulder blade of the victim. The bullet smashed through the heart and lungs on the way past.

    Of course that was a bit of a fluke and the bullet could have easily gone a different direction and create much less damage.

    Within 200m or so the 5.56mm will fragment and make a terrible mess inside the body.

    The point is that the much more powerful 308 will motor right through a body and continue on with most of its energy and do more damage elsewhere.

    The new modern light cartridges are designed to dump their energy into the first target they hit.

    The problem with the 5.56 is that it can either be very spectacular, or pedestrian. The 5.45mm is much more consistent... it doesn't fragment, but it does create a much worse wound than the larger calibre heavier rounds.

    So effective it is, that the latest 5.56mm round has a steel tip and a lead rear to achieve the same effect of a rear heavy high velocity bullet.
    avatar
    War&Peace

    Posts : 27
    Points : 6
    Join date : 2012-11-15
    Location : Nashville,TN (USA)

    Royal Army: Equipment and News

    Post  War&Peace on Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:30 am

    The £1 billion Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP) is one of the largest and most significant projects being pushed through the MoD as it seeks to upgrade and refit the Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle with improved lethality systems and an electronic architecture that will future-proof it until 2040.
    “Effectively this is about improvements to lethality that will really transform our military capability,” Lt Col Howard Pritchard, Senior Requirements Manager for the DE&S Combat Tracks Group, told Defence IQ. “Warrior CSP is the Army’s key priority.”
    The UK government awarded Lockheed Martin the contract last year with Defence Secretary Philip Hammond saying that the new fleet will “give commanders and their soldiers greater flexibility and firepower.”
    At an industry day at Lockheed’s Ampthill base last week Peter Pietralski, Business Area Chief Engineer Vehicles, explained how the firm is working towards future-proofing the Warrior out to 2040.
    “The key area is in the ability to provide more power generation on the platform itself,” Pietralski explained. “The main engine generator has the ability to provide much more electrical power than is currently required, which provides a good growth path for the future should more equipment be added to the platform.”
    In addition, Pietralski also said that the electronic architecture  will allow for a certain degree of future-proofing while the new 40mm cannon is a “new generation technology” that “has the potential for significant enhancements to its ammunition system to enable it to meet future threats.”
    To make sure armoured vehicles are always future-proofed going forward, they need to be thought of as like “clothes hangers” according to Pritchard – they must be designed from the outset to be interchangeable and modular.
    Prioritising capabilities
    The principal upgrades Warrior is receiving with this £1 billion facelift are improvements to its lethality, electronic architecture and modular armour systems. Of the three, Pietralski said all were important but picked out lethality as being particularly prominent.
    “The biggest priority is on the lethality side. We’re incorporating a 40mm cannon that will enable the crew to have a fire and move capability, which is something the current platform can’t achieve.”
    Pritchard stressed the importance of this capability, saying that “it’s just something we haven’t been able to do before” and underscored why WSCP is the critical project for the Army.
    On the commercial side Lockheed Martin was keen to stress the importance of its supply chain in delivering this contract and announced that it had opened a dedicated new facility at Nuneaton with its engineering partner, MIRA.
    Lockheed will need to work closely with its partners as WCSP represents a step-change in the MoD’s reliability requirements. It’s something that is at the forefront of the team’s mind, especially that of Colin Gilding , WCSP programme manager, who said that “reliability is a big part of this programme … it permeates every decision we make.”
    Pietralski agrees: “The key challenge for WCSP is to provide a reliable platform … [to] ensure it’s capable, not only for tomorrow but well into 2040.” He explained that Lockheed is implementing rigorous testing procedures at every stage and is looking all the way down to the sub-system level to achieve the reliability required.
    WCSP progress
    “We are integrating a number of new technologies into the existing platform around space, weight, height and power and we are making good progress on these fronts,” said Gilding. “Our focus is to ensure that the technology is mature by the time we reach Critical Design Review, which will be followed by firing trials with men in the loop in 2014.”
    The most recent milestone saw Lockheed Martin conduct a System Architecture Design Review this month and it said design work will now continue to further reduce risk.
    Lockheed is currently working towards completion of the demonstration phase and the subsequent start of production in 2016. The anticipated in-service date for WCSP is 2018, with the government likely to procure at least 381 vehicles.
    £1 billion well spent?
    With budgets tight some may question the obligation to spend £1 billion on upgrading an armoured vehicle considering today’s predominantly COIN threat landscape. So why is DE&S investing so much in Warrior?
    For Lt Col Pritchard it’s simple: Warrior is “a central pillar for the Army’s future ground manoeuvre capability” because under the new Army 2020 structure the armoured infantry is pivotal.
    What about armoured vehicles in general – haven’t they had their day? Pritchard doesn’t think so, far from it.
    “We’re in the process of winding up a second counter-insurgency campaign in the space of ten years and that’s bought with it certain challenges in terms of what armoured vehicles need to do for us in that particular environment.
    “What we must not lose sight of is that armoured vehicles warfare is still out there and we’ve got to build our requirements around a wider set of scenarios than just being able to do counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan.
    “AFV design will change – it already has changed as a result of our operations – but the armoured battlefield I think is certainly here to stay.”

    Source : DefenceIQ
    avatar
    NickM

    Posts : 181
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    BAE Jammers for Anti Aircraft Misiles

    Post  NickM on Thu Nov 28, 2013 5:17 pm

    Virtually all anti aircraft missiles can now be jammed . As usual , BAE has develop a state of the art jammer to ensure just this .

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4291298#!
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5589
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Nov 28, 2013 8:51 pm

    Do you expect somehow a "WOW" reaction from the community?

    IRCM technology is 30+ years old and DIRCM is almost 20 years old and was already tested in mid 90s, that is nothing new, not only BAE is producing it and to put it frankly there are already countries who have fielded DIRCMs on helicopters and jets since years, CH-47 uses them, Mi-8 uses them, Ka-52 is the only current Attack Helicopter with a standardized DIRCM equipment and a few jets AFAIK use them, too.

    And even DIRCM which represent today the only solution for IIR-seeking missiles to have at least a certain reliability to counter such seekers are not and will never be a garantee of counter measure against such threats.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10519
    Points : 10996
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  George1 on Fri Jan 30, 2015 7:06 pm

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2968
    Points : 2999
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  max steel on Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:27 pm

    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2968
    Points : 2999
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  max steel on Sun Apr 05, 2015 9:23 pm


    British nuclear sub suffers £500k damage tracking Russian vessels lol1 pwnd thumbsup

    British nuclear submarine HMS Talent suffered a huge gash to her conning tower after hitting ice floes while tracking Russian vessels and will be out of action for several months for repairs, according to Royal Navy sources.


    http://rt.com/uk/246945-uk-nuclear-submarine-damage/
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2968
    Points : 2999
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  max steel on Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:08 pm

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10519
    Points : 10996
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  George1 on Wed Oct 14, 2015 3:05 pm

    UK Army To Extend Life of Challenger 2; New Tank Too Costly

    LONDON — Deciding that purchasing a new main battle tank would be too expensive, the British Army will likely stick with what has long been its plan A and proceed with a Challenger 2 life extension project (LEP) starting early next year, the Ministry of Defence said.

    “During the concept phase of CR2 Life Extension Project (LEP) all options, from do nothing to buying a new tank, have been considered. As it stands, the manufacture and costs of a new main battle tank make it unlikely that the Army would seek this option. CR2 will be taken forward and the LEP is scheduled to enter the assessment phase in early 2016,” an MoD spokesman said.

    Challenger 2 was essentially sidelined in the 2010 strategic defense and security review (SDSR), with the number of operational tanks slashed and capabilities allowed to atrophy. The question of how to keep Challenger 2 viable was given new impetus by the re-emergence of Russia as a strategic threat and the appearance of the new T-14 Armata main battle tank at a Moscow military parade in April.

    The admission that a new tank was probably beyond the reach of the Army follows a recent media report that said the Army was considering such a move.

    Industry responded to an LEP request for information from the MoD last year and later followed that up with a rough order of magnitude on pricing.

    Lockheed Martin UK, one of the contractors that responded to the request, said it expects a prequalification questionnaire to emerge next month.

    Other contractors that responded to the information request last year included BAE Systems, General Dynamics UK and Kraus-Maffei Wegmann

    British Army boss Gen. Sir Nick Carter, speaking at September's DSEI show, admitted the Challenger 2 is showing its age.

    “We certainly have issues with the tank we have at the moment and we should be in no doubt that if we don’t do something about it some of the obsolescence built into it will be challenging. How we deal with it is still in discussion,” he said.

    The MoD has insisted the LEP would only resolve aging issues and not be a capability upgrade, but analysts wonder whether more now needs to be done.

    Ben Barry, the senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London, said conditions have changed since the SDSR of 2010.

    “In the light of world circumstances now, rather than 2010, the need for an upgrade of Challenger 2 becomes more important,” he said.

    Challenger 2 is just one of a number of programs the British are looking to modernize armored vehicle capabilities.

    Except for new vehicles rushed to British forces in Afghanistan to combat Taliban bombs, the past decade has largely failed to deliver what the British Army would have hoped for to build armored vehicle capabilities with several key programs falling by the wayside.

    Many of those urgent operational requirement purchases have now been taken into the core equipment program.

    But new programs are coming through, including the Multi Role Vehicle — Protected (MRV-P), the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV) and a Royal Marines replacement for their BV206 all-terrain vehicles.

    The eight-wheel-drive MIV is the Army's priority and Carter said the program would be launched shortly.

    Barry said it was an important program to give the British the sort of balanced force of tracked and wheeled armored vehicles the US, France and other respectable armies have.

    The MoD briefed industry on the program in May.

    “The MIV project is still in pre-concept and initial work is taking place scoping the approach to the project. Initial Gate [the concept phase] is anticipated in 2016," said the MoD spokesman.

    The British have already tested Nexter’s VBCI and the Army visited the US for a look at the Stryker.

    Other likely contenders include ST Kinetics, Patria and General Dynamics. Companies like Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems, which are vying for the US Marine amphibious combat vehicle program, may also throw their hat into the ring.

    “Lockheed Martin is considering a number of possible options for the MIV program which could include offering our own 8x8 platform,” a spokeswoman said Sept 30.

    Affordability of the armored vehicle programs remains a big concern, though.

    “I am not convinced the MoD can fund its future armored vehicle aspirations. The SDSR will need to make some very hard decisions [on programs],” said one leading industrialist.

    The MoD is set to spend £15.4 billion (US $23.4 billion) on land equipment up to 2024, although not all of that is on armored vehicles.

    Data released recently under the Freedom of Information Act regarding land forces equipment spending to 2024 showed seven of the 18 programs covered in the largest A and B spending categories were armored vehicles.

    Category A is for deals above £400 million and category B is for programs costing £100 million to £250 million.

    Barry, though, said the issue with armored vehicle requirements isn’t just money but the changing strategic situation the SDSR will have to address.

    “The latest edition of the UK defense equipment plan was written to allow the armed services to implement the 2010 SDSR. The strategic situation has changed since then. Particularly relevant to the British Army is the French operation in Mali as a model of intervention that involved some armor, including wheeled vehicles, and more importantly the events around Russia and the Ukraine,” he said.

    “NATO’s readiness action plan and the UK’s commitment to send forces to train in Eastern Europe is all about deterrence. If you are going to deter Russian conventional forces you need credible land forces,” Barry said.

    The Army has been working to achieve some of its priority capability improvements.

    Last September, General Dynamics UK signed a £3.5 billion deal with the MoD to deliver 589 Scout Specialist Vehicles between 2017 and 2024. The first of the most important version, a reconnaissance vehicle recently named Ajax by the Army, is scheduled for delivery starting in 2020.

    Lockheed Martin UK is in a £642 million development phase of a program to update the Warrior infantry fighting vehicle with a new turret, 40mm cannon and other improvements.

    The Lockheed spokeswoman said the production element of the contract is “currently scheduled to be awarded in December 2017.”

    The MoD was less clear about the timing for a production contract, suggesting there are still issues to be resolved.

    “A decision to proceed to contract for manufacture will be made once the MoD is clear that the proposed solution provides confidence and value for money for this phase. It is anticipated that trials will commence in 2016 and an initial operating capability will be delivered in 2019,” said the MoD spokesman.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2015/10/11/uk-army-extend-life-challenger-2-new-tank-too-costly/73410010/


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Militarov on Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:54 pm

    "An unmanned UK Army spyplane has crashed landed at MOD Boscombe Down. The Ministry of Defence confirmed that the Watchkeeper drone — one of eight currently being tested from the base — suffered extensive damage last night. The £1.2billion fleet of drones is under testing and it is expected to come into operation in 2017. Nobody was injured in the incident and an investigation has been launched. An Army spokesman said: “I can confirm that on November 2 an Army Watchkeeper unmanned aerial system was involved in an incident on landing at Boscombe down airfield “A comprehensive investigation will be completed by the Defence safety Authority [the Military Aviation Authority], therefore, it would be inappropriate to offer any additional comment at this point.” The drone was on a routine training exercise."



    Source: http://defence-blog.com/news/uk-army-watchkeeper-drone-crash-lands-at-boscombe-down.html"
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2968
    Points : 2999
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  max steel on Mon Nov 23, 2015 3:23 pm


    Rodinazombie

    Posts : 580
    Points : 612
    Join date : 2015-04-22

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Rodinazombie on Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:35 pm

    They will vote for war its pretty clear. The war dreams are beating over hear, almost clamouring for it, its pretty sick really.


    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/26/shadow-cabinet-seriously-split-over-syria-with-corbyn-in-minority

    Labour leadership in turmoil over vote on UK military action in Syria


    Jeremy Corbyn and the shadow foreign secretary, Hilary Benn, have adopted sharply opposing views on UK military action against Islamic State, hours after David Cameron argued it was time to extend bombing to Syria.

    The Labour leader faced dissent in the shadow cabinet on Friday, with reports that most of the party’s front bench were considering supporting the prime minister when the House of Commons votes on airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria.

    Corbyn wrote to his MPs on Thursday saying Cameron had failed earlier in the day to explain how an aerial campaign would protect UK security, setting up an intense debate in the party before an expected Commons vote next week to broaden RAF airstrikes from Iraq to Syria.

    “I do not believe the prime minister’s current proposal for airstrikes in Syria will protect our security and therefore cannot support it,” Corbyn wrote.

    The letter was met with surprise among the most senior Labour MPs, who were believed to have agreed to spend the weekend sounding out constituents on the issue before presenting their position next week. Emily Thornberry, shadow employment minister, said there was a “brutally honest” debate within the party and accepted that there would be a rebellion if a whip against airstrikes were imposed.

    “I think that we have all agreed on a process, and the process is that there was a shadow cabinet meeting yesterday, we are then to go back to our constituents and ask them what they think,” Thornberry told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Friday.

    “We have an open debate, and a brutally honest debate, going on within the Labour party,” the shadow employment minister added. “I think there will always be divisions within the political parties – the Conservatives will have their divisions too.
    “When it comes to an issue of war, it is something that people think very profoundly about. We do usually act collectively, but I think on issues like this there are times when people cannot stick to a whip which is imposed.”

    Corbyn’s letter set the leader at odds with Benn, who had earlier told a meeting of the shadow cabinet that the arguments in favour of extending the airstrikes were “compelling”.

    The shadow foreign secretary, who believes that the prime minister has fulfilled the conditions laid down in a motion passed at the Labour conference on Syria, also contradicted Corbyn in public.

    Benn told the BBC: “We have heard compelling arguments both because of the threat to the United Kingdom and also because we are right to have been taking the action that we have in Iraq to support the Iraqi government in trying to repel the invasion from Isil [Isis].”

    This weekend, Corbyn will seek to win the approval of the shadow cabinet to oppose an extension of the airstrikes. He is drawing up plans to reach over the heads of his frontbench with an appeal to a parliamentary Labour party meeting on Monday night, after winning the support of just four members of his shadow cabinet at a meeting on Thursday afternoon.

    The Labour leader has pulled out of a planned visit on Friday to campaign in the Oldham West byelection in order to be in London to focus on building support for his position.

    A spokeswoman for the Labour leader said: “Regrettably Jeremy Corbyn is not now visiting Oldham because matters to do with Syria mean he must return to London.”

    The early skirmishes between Corbyn’s supporters and the once mainstream former ministers in the shadow cabinet came after the prime minister set out the case for an extension of the airstrikes. In a lengthy statement, Cameron said the UK was already facing the threat of mass casualties from Isis and argued that Britain could not outsource its security to allies.

    ‘Hit Isis in their heartlands’: David Cameron lays out his case for Britain to bomb Islamic State in Syria on Thursday
    The prime minister, who was formally responding to a report by the commons foreign affairs select committee, which had opposed the airstrikes, told MPs: “We have to hit these terrorists in their heartlands right now: and we must not shirk our responsibility for security, or hand it to others. Throughout our history, the United Kingdom has stood up to defend our values and our way of life. We can, and we must, do so again.”

    Downing Street is planning to table a vote in the commons next week amid signs that the prime minister is assembling a majority. In a sign that a Tory rebellion will be smaller than expected, the chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, Crispin Blunt, who rebelled in a vote on military action in August 2013, signalled his support for the airstrikes. No 10 remains nervous about Labour’s position but believes that enough MPs will defy Corbyn to neutralise any remaining Tory rebellion.

    The French government took the unusual step of expressing the hope that the Royal Air Force “will soon be working side by side with their French counterparts” in taking military action in Syria.

    In a sometimes emotional appeal, the French defence minister writes in the Guardian that UK military capabilities would “put additional and extreme pressure on the Isis terror network”. Jean-Yves Le Drian said he wanted the RAF “to take the fight to the very heart of Isis, defeating it and making our countries and peoples safer”.

    French diplomats have been in touch with Labour frontbenchers to supplement this argument in private. The statement by the French is unlikely to move Corbyn, who unequivocally rejected the appeal by Cameron.

    In his letter, Corbyn said: “In my view, the prime minister has been unable to explain the contribution of additional UK bombing to a comprehensive negotiated political settlement of the Syrian civil war, or its likely impact on the threat of terrorist attacks in the UK.”

    The Labour leader released his letter after he found himself in a minority at a meeting of the shadow cabinet, where he won the support of four shadow ministers. Corbyn was supported by Diane Abbott, Jon Trickett and Nia Griffith. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, did not speak but he supports the leader.

    Corbyn’s supporters said he was not isolated because many shadow ministers said they were conflicted over the airstrikes. But Benn was supported at the shadow cabinet meeting by Tom Watson, the deputy leader, the shadow lord chancellor Charles Falconer, Michael Dugher and Lucy Powell.

    A number of shadow ministers believe that the shadow cabinet should impose a three-line whip in favour of military action. But Corbyn is likely to appeal to the PLP if, as expected, he fails to win consensus behind his position at a meeting of the shadow cabinet.

    The leader’s camp are also hoping that pressure from the Momentum group – the social movement which grew out of Corbyn’s election – will persuade Labour MPs to back Corbyn on Syria at the meeting of the PLP. Corbyn believes that he enjoys greater support proportionally in the PLP than he does in the shadow cabinet.

    If the two sides fail to reach agreement, there is a growing expectation that Corbyn will eventually agree to allow Labour MPs to have a free vote. A three-line whip to oppose military action would split the shadow cabinet and lead to resignations.

    Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor who is close to Corbyn, suggested that there would be a free vote for Labour MPs. He told Question Time on BBC1: “You can’t force people to vote to kill other people or not to vote to kill them. This must be a matter in which people have the freedom to express their own view. I suspect it will be [a free vote].”

    Livingstone outlined Corbyn’s strategy in the run-up to the vote, saying: “I don’t think Labour is going to fall apart. We have got to decide whether we have a line or whether we allow a free vote.

    “The simple fact is that although the shadow cabinet has quite strong support for bombing, I suspect the parliamentary Labour party is much more divided on that. Over this weekend MPs are going to go back to their constituents; they will be listening to what people say and they will find there is a lot less support out there among the public for simply bombing than there might be in parliament. There’ll be a shadow cabinet meeting on Monday to decide what to do.”

    Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary, rallied behind Corbyn. He said: “I believe that no Labour MP should be conned or browbeaten into supporting this incoherent plan, which threatens to involve Britain in its fourth war this century.”
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10519
    Points : 10996
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  George1 on Sun Jan 17, 2016 7:31 am

    UK Surges Ahead With Challenger 2 Upgrade

    LONDON — The UK Ministry of Defence has kick-started a program to update the British Army’s neglected Challenger 2 main battle tank fleet with at least three contractors submitting initial proposals to undertake the work.

    Challenger 2 builder BAE Systems, along with rivals General Dynamics UK and Lockheed Martin UK, have all confirmed they responded by the Jan. 14 closing date to a pre-qualification questionnaire (PQQ) issued in December by the MoD’s procurement arm, the Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) organization.

    Germany's Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, the builder of the Leopard 2 tank, was previously reported to be interested in the update program but it’s not known if the company has filed a PQQ now that buying new or secondhand tanks has been ruled out by the Army.

    Company officials could not be contacted ahead of going to press.

    Officially known as the Challenger 2 Life Extension Program (LEP), the update, including initial logistic support, could be worth up to £700 million (US $1 billion), said the MoD’s Contract Bulletin. The update program could also be applied to Challenger 2s operated by the Oman government, said the Contracts Bulletin.

    The contractors are vying for two competitive assessment phase contracts expected to run for two years.

    “The duration of the competitive assessment phase is expected to be two years, to be confirmed at the bid stage. Future [production and delivery] dates will be dependent on the solution and approval at the main investment decision point currently scheduled for 2019,” said a DE&S spokeswoman.

    After prevaricating over what to do about obsolescence and upgrade issues on the Challenger for several years, the British have now moved to make good on a pledge in the government's recent strategic defense and security review (SDSR) to update the tank, extending its out-of-service date 10 years to 2035.

    The move follows a reappraisal of the threat from a resurgent Russia and the public unveiling last year of the new generation T-14 Armata tank at a military parade in Moscow

    The previous SDSR in 2010 saw Challenger fleet numbers reduce to 227 vehicles and the British under-investing in a platform seen by some as a Cold War relic.

    That’s changing though, according to Ben Barry, the senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London.

    “It’s fair to say Challenger 2 has been neglected. Its update was seen as a far lower priority than programs like the Warrior infantry fighting vehicle modernization,” he said.

    “Three things have changed since 2010. The Army now has control of its budget, priorities and requirements. Secondly, we have a resurgent Russia and finally the advent of operationally fielded active protection systems [on vehicles like the Armata] makes direct fire anti-armor guns and the tank much more important,” Barry said.

    The LEP assessment phase has still to be formally funded, approval for that is expected at the end of the month, but the MoD said in documentation supporting the release of the PQQ that getting the process underway now would speed the subsequent release of an invitation to negotiate to selected bidders.

    The DE&S spokeswoman declined to detail the scope of the update plan citing operational sensitivity. Industry executives though said the update would focus mainly on updating turret subsystems and would not involve replacement of the L30 gun or the powerpack.

    Since Challenger 2’s entry into service in 1998 the British have considered numerous options to upgrade the machine, most notably replacing the 120mm rifled gun with a smoothbore cannon, which is the standard fit throughout the rest of NATO.

    Upgrades have been pushed through to meet urgent operation requirements but many of the tanks' turret systems face obsolescence.

    At last September’s DSEI defense show in London, British Army boss Gen. Sir Nick Carter admitted the tank was showing its age.

    “We certainly have issues with the tank we have at the moment and we should be in no doubt that if we don’t do something about it some obsolescence built into it will be challenging,” he said.

    One case in point is Thales UK’s TOGS II thermal observation and gunnery sight where the British are looking at providing a stop-gap capability ahead of the life-extension program kicking in.

    “This interim solution will ensure Challenger 2 retains a credible capability through to the LEP; the planning assumption for service entry is 2018,” said the spokeswoman.

    Getting the tank update underway coincides with the award of assessment phase contracts to BAE and WFEL, Krauss Maffei Wegmann’s UK-based bridging arm, to update heavy forces and general support bridging capabilities, a requirement driven in part by the growth in weight of some of the Challenger fleet from 62.5 tons to 75 tons to meet requirements during operations in Iraq.

    The companies will undertake rival two-year assessment phase work ahead of a competition to provide the British Army with updated bridging capabilities.

    BAE, the incumbent British Army bridge supplier with the BR90 system, is targeting the bridging upgrade and the Challenger 2 program as key campaigns as it seeks to secure a long-term future for its much diminished land systems business in the UK in the face of stiff foreign competition.

    Big land contract decisions in the UK have gone against BAE in recent years with General Dynamics beating the company to a big scout reconnaissance vehicle contract and Lockheed Martin securing the Warrior infantry fighting vehicle upgrade deal — together they form the Army’s premier vehicle programs.

    Both companies have set up armored vehicle operations in the UK on the back of the deals.

    Although BAE has substantially retrenched its land operations, the company, the design authority on Challenger 2, has built a new design center and retained a core of heavy armor engineers to support post design services and the life-extension bid.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2016/01/16/uk-surges-ahead-challenger-2-upgrade/78841260/


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Apr 08, 2016 5:05 pm



    1st live fire of Ajax, key element of new Strike Brigades for UK.
    avatar
    Godric

    Posts : 470
    Points : 490
    Join date : 2015-04-30
    Location : Alba (Scotland)

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Godric on Tue Apr 26, 2016 9:41 pm

    Rust in Rosyth: Furious unions say flagship Navy carriers being built at Rosyth will be left to rot if Clyde shipyard jobs are axed

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/rust-rosyth-furious-unions-say-7833348#WlwGSiKAP3aCgC28.97

    THE GMB Union have issued an extraordinary warning shot across David Cameron's bows, as they warn that BAE job losses at Rosyth could see the new flagship supercarriers being held hostage.

    this is about the Type 26 frigate order BAE Govan was promised during the Referendum this was one of several carrots put in front of Scots to vote no in the Scottish referendum ... personally speaking if they don't honour the contract it will be another case of broken vow by the no camp ... whether they do carry out their threat or not their is nothing to stop Westminster to bring in ship builders laid off in Portsmouth to finish the job and sack the shipbuilders taking industrial action ... personally speaking it is union bluster ... but if the UK government was to replace the shipbuilders with laid off English ship builders it would provoke a massive backlash towards Westminster
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2968
    Points : 2999
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  max steel on Wed May 04, 2016 1:26 pm

    MoD Unveils New Armed Drone That Can Spy On Targets for Twice As Long

    Britain will double its fleet of armed surveillance drones with a new upgraded generation of unmanned aircraft able to fly for nearly twice as long, laden with more bombs, missiles and sensors, the MoD has disclosed.

    The 79ft wingspan, remotely piloted planes will be able to circle over and spy on targets for nearly two days, while sophisticated new flight computers mean they will be able to fly in bad weather and survive ice, lightning and bird strikes.

    The new General Atomics Certifiable Predator B, which is expected to be named Protector when used by the RAF from the end of this decade, is likely to be at the forefront of spying and air strike campaigns against militant and terror groups such as Islamic State.

    First details of the new aircraft have been disclosed as defence officials signed a £415m contract with the Pentagon to buy 20 of the new drones to replace the RAF’s 10 existing MQ-9 Reapers.

    The 38ft long aircraft will also be certified to fly in European airspace, allowing them to be potentially used in Nato intelligence-gathering missions in eastern Europe, or even over the UK and its waters.

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jun 08, 2016 1:31 pm

    "BAE Systems Land (UK) has formed 'Team Challenger 2' to bid for the life extension programme (LEP) of the British Army's Challenger 2 main battle tanks (MBTs).

    The main aim of Challenger 2 LEP is to replace obsolete parts that were originally developed over 20 years ago, and extend the life of the Challenger 2 MBT out to 2035. A total of 386 Challenger 2 MBT were built by the then Vickers Defence Systems at its Leeds and Newcastle-upon-Tyne facilities (both of which have now closed). For planning purposes a total of 227 Challenger 2s are expected to go through the LEP."

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jun 08, 2016 1:35 pm

    Militarov wrote:"BAE Systems Land (UK) has formed 'Team Challenger 2' to bid for the life extension programme (LEP) of the British Army's Challenger 2 main battle tanks (MBTs).

    The main aim of Challenger 2 LEP is to replace obsolete parts that were originally developed over 20 years ago, and extend the life of the Challenger 2 MBT out to 2035. A total of 386 Challenger 2 MBT were built by the then Vickers Defence Systems at its Leeds and Newcastle-upon-Tyne facilities (both of which have now closed). For planning purposes a total of 227 Challenger 2s are expected to go through the LEP."


    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10519
    Points : 10996
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  George1 on Thu Nov 03, 2016 2:24 pm

    'Fight, Survive and Win': British Army Moves Closer to Tank Modernization

    Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201611031047017161-uk-tank-upgrades/


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Sponsored content

    Re: British Army: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 18, 2017 10:16 pm