Remember the Warrior? The Lockheed Martin WCSP was cancelled, leaving another capability gap in the British Army. (Photo: author)
Taking a hit – why the British Army may lose out on essential capabilities
No one yet knows what shape the British Army will be in after the Strategic Defence Review announced by the incoming Labour government last month rolls out in 2025, but recent history suggests it will neither be larger nor more capable.
To put matters in context, the former government under Rishi Sunak said it would reduce the size of the army to 75,000 people, but due to a fall in recruitment and large numbers of leavers it has already fallen below this figure, which includes those still in training and some potentially unfit for combat... Continues below
This analysis article originally appeared in August's Decisive Edge Land Warfare Newsletter.
Newsletter Sponsors:
The Conservatives also said they would increase defence spending to 2.5%, while Labour has said this will only be achieved when the economy improves. Defence was not mentioned by the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, in a crucial speech in the House of Commons late in July so the rumour mill has already started about potential cuts to an already strained UK defence capability.
So far so familiar. Also notable is that apart from France, the UK is the only country in Europe to have a submarine-based nuclear deterrent, which is now to be replaced by a new fleet of SSBNs being built at Barrow-in-Furness by BAE Systems. There is a good case for taking this programme out of the main defence budget, but the money will still have to come from somewhere!
Furthermore, the UK defence sector has had a run of major programmes being late or over budget. In some cases industry has had to pick up the bill including for the Astute-class nuclear attack submarine, Nimrod anti-submarine aircraft and on the land side the Terrier combat engineer vehicle, all of which are BAE Systems products. More recently Babcock took a major hit on its Type 31 frigate programme.
These overruns can be for a variety of reasons, including inflation, the increased cost of raw materials and changes to the original contract for valid reasons such as new technology becoming available. With some projects running for ten years or more it is very difficult be 100% accurate on costs.
The hard fact is though that when compared to the RN and RAF, the British Army has been underfunded for many years, especially in the vital area of ground manoeuvre and indirect fire capability.
In addition, the army took into ‘core’ large numbers of MRAP-type vehicles which, while effective at protecting their occupants in counter insurgency operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, lack the firepower and mobility for high intensity conventional warfare.
KNDS-Germany’s RCH-155 is now in production for Ukraine, to be followed by Germany and then the UK. (Photo: KNDS-Germany)
What of current flagship programmes? It appears the RBSL-led effort to upgrade 148 Challenger 2 MBTs to Challenger 3 standard with brand-new turret and Rheinmetall’s 120mm L55A1 smoothbore gun is on track.
But with a total of just 148 tanks the UK will be well behind France and Germany on the size of its MBT ranks, with the latter especially increasing its fleet as soon as possible.
The Alvis Scorpion family of Combat Vehicles Reconnaissance (Tracked) should have started to be replaced by the GDLS Ajax series some ten years ago, but this has seen numerous delays and only now started to enter service with the Household Cavalry.
The other major land programme, the Lockheed Martin UK Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP) was cancelled when on the verge of meeting its demanding requirements and Warrior will soon be phased out with no replacement.
In a prime example of not-so-joined-up thinking all of the CTAI 40mm for both WCSP and Ajax were delivered some time ago, so there are a large number sitting in a depot!
The UK was potentially an early customer for the ARTEC Boxer 8x8 Multi-Role Armoured Vehicle but pulled out of the programme more than once only to re-join in 2018. The army is receiving its first vehicles from the German production line while UK manufacturing is coming on stream.
Even if all these programmes face no further cuts, in whole or in part, we are still looking at an overall decline in numbers and capabilities in an era of heightened threats.
In the area of indirect fire the Royal Artillery (RA) is now very weak as it has passed most of its AS90 155mm artillery systems to Ukraine.
To provide an interim capability the RA has already taken delivery of 14 BAE Systems Bofors Archer systems which are now deployed by 19 Regiment plus two for training at the Royal School of Artillery, Larkhill.
There has been an ongoing competition for the AS90 replacement called the Mobile Fires Platform, (MFP) with an original requirement for 135 systems which would be sufficient for four regiments.
Of the latter, two would be for strike brigades and two for armoured infantry brigades, but the strike brigades are no longer to be formed.
In the end there was no downselect on MFP to two competing systems and the UK opted for the German Remote Controlled Howitzer 155 (RCH-155) based on the Boxer MRAV platform under a sole-source deal.
The origins of RCH-155 can be traced back well over 25 years and as of today it only exists in prototype form, but 18 are in production for Ukraine funded by Berlin and a significant number will be ordered by the German Army to supplement, not replace, currently deployed PzH 2000 tracked artillery systems.
In another contrast, while the UK has fielded very few new actual AFVs in recent years, the French Army has forged ahead with its SCORPION programme with three new wheeled vehicles put in quantity production by a consortium including the best of French technology.
The Jaguar 6x6 reconnaissance vehicle, Griffon 6x6 APC and Serval 4x4 APC all replace older wheeled vehicles which were developed over 40 years ago and had already been upgraded to extend their operational lives.
But a time eventually comes when they can no longer be upgrade and have to be replaced by new vehicles. (Either that or you simply do not have a modern army any more!)
It remains to be seen what happens when the latest UK defence review is completed as the incoming head of the British Army wants increased emphasis on special forces as well a significant increase in firepower in the next three years, but I suspect there will be some losses and not enough gains.
