So the warrior is being replaced by a wheeled relatively lightweight vehicle, and the Scorpion etc is being replaced by a vehicle bigger than the Bradley!
The Army is buying 589 vehicles across all six variants, which include reconnaissance (Ajax), personnel carrier (Ares), command and control (Athena), engineer reconnaissance (Argus), and recovery and repair vehicles (Atlas and Apollo).
The KE-AB, the anti-air round They didn't explain that very well, they made it sound like a canister round, a "shotgun" It's much better than that! It's actually a directional airburst round, a flying one shot shotgun if you will. Launched, it's a proximity fuzed round. When close to the target, it "fires", sending a directional shot of tungsten balls into the target destroying it. It's a flying single use shotgun that you shot from a different gun. Only us , the French, the Germans and (soon) the Ukrainians have this capability.
This is a video about the CT-40 cannon, which was fitting on the old Warrior chassis back in 2008 with no problems to the crew, it is still featured in the Squad video game as the Warrior CTAS40. The AJAX chassis that it is now fitted onto is where the damage to the crew came from, not the cannon, there was excessive noise and vibration that caused crew injury but it is said to have been resolved and back on track for a number of years now.
You do know that the RARDEN is an autocannon, don't you? The rounds are stored in 3 round clips, and can take up to 6 rounds (2 clips) at a time. The only hand loading is the clips into the magazine well for the gun. BTW, the US and other countries have had stabilized guns on their IFVs since the 1980s. The fact that the British Army is now getting on the bandwagon is showing how behind the times the MoD has been.
If you look at the comparative muzzle velocities between this and the 40mm bofors, it looks like it's sacrificed about 12% of muzzle velocity and between 1/3 and 1/5 of the rate of fire. Those are probably worthwhile trade-offs for the compactness.... My only issue is that this does not seem to provide any benefits to Ajax, seeing as it's bigger than CV9040 and holds about the same ammo... But CV90 is intended to hold a bunch of troops in the back too.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 the thing is, the Bofors 40mm/L70 only have 3×8 ready rounds in the CV9040 turret and then has to have those three casettes topped up manually from floor ammo racks.
At 40 tons the Ajax is hardly a recce vehicle as it's top speed is poor and therefore can't run if it needs to. Additionally, the lightweight and nimble CVRT can go places where Ajax I am sure will get bogged, plus Ajax does not give you air-portability, which for a rapid deployment force, to me, seems like a net loss in capability. Could you imagine the capability of the CT 40 on a re-designed fast CVRT chassis? I think the British Army has been screwed-over quite badly in terms of overall capability and it will be years before it could ever recover.
Or fitted in a CV90 turret as a replacement upgrade of the venerable Bofors 40mm/L70. Slightly more propellant with a much more compact case with the same projectile mass&volume gives a small effect improvement against armored targets and a huge improvement in ammo capacity.
Just a suggestion, balance your sound output as you are far louder than the video you are reviewing. Having to adjust the volume repeatedly is frustrating, to the point of not bothering to watch.
So why is Ajax replacing CVRT, not Warrior? They brag about how compact the gun is, then put it on one of the largest AFVs in the world... And it's not even that bit to accommodate a squad of troops in the back.
The Army is buying 589 vehicles across all six variants, which include reconnaissance (Ajax), personnel carrier (Ares), command and control (Athena), engineer reconnaissance (Argus), and recovery and repair vehicles (Atlas and Apollo).
The Ukrainians have proven that when it comes to AFV's the Bradley is king. I think the age of the MBT is over and AFV's like the Bradley and the new British Ajax is coming. Size isn't everything because even a Bradley can outwit out fight a MBT.
BAE System est une entreprise Britannique , non ? Ensuite que ces munitions soit fabriquées en France ou à Pétaouchnok, ne fait aucune différence . Aujourd'hui l'industrie de l'armement demande du savoir faire international, et là en l'occurence Européen avec KNDS Nexter.
Billions over budget, more than a decade late, 40t minimum weight - nearly as much as Russian MBTs, about 30yrs later than was needed. Apart from the already proven Cannon, the rest is not really what the Army need. Lets be honest, had they bought Bradleys to replace the CVRTs back in the early 1990s when this program started, it would have cost several billion less and kept up going - look at how the Bradley has performed in its life. The whole US program for development and delivery of nearly 8000 units was only $5.7 billion - Ajax has already cost more than that in development, not even delivered any yet!!!
This has been on the go for a long long time. There's nothing the "enemy" haven't found out long ago here. Ontop of that I think almost all other canons out there have more information available. This one is actually rather difficult to find out about.
It's a new system and probably still has issues to sort out so 500 is probably a reasonable compromise to let the company earn something while it's continuing to work on the system.
Enough for the small amount of vehicles. Will be initial order. Note armament industry has been reduced and will take years to scale even if money sorted
And no it’s not. The 57mm naval gun is, hands down, better, faster in all ways. More destructive and lethal. And only 57mm, blows any 40mm out of the water, as it’s bigger, faster, higher velocity, more payload. Longer range, way better targeting and way, way more ammo. Lol. As it’s a ship, not a tiny vehicle. 57mike mike stomps all over that little platform and gun…and well the to be fully real, the CV 90 obliterated all in, everything but ammo capacity.
The Ajax is rubbish waste of money already spent £5 billion on it still can't move and shoot at the same time, plus the vibration seriously hurts & injures the crew. It's a death trap watch the Bradly pentagon wars movie.
And we’ll, at least in theory ad the M2 Bradley has been the most mass produced and combat proven/successful IFV variant ever made. And the 25mm bushmaster is no joke. Yuh can say whatever is “better” have they been in 49 years of combat and always come out top? No, no you cannot, we can. Nothing compares, so they are theoretically better, lol. Not Provence we’re testing 50mm auto cannon 2 decades ago, while they offer improvements the cost and sacrificing ammo capacity clearly is worse as we stick with the 25mm. And better ammo being developed, that can already kill MBT’s under the right circumstances.
That's a hell of a cope when the even the basic mk1 Strf9040A beats the hell out of the Bradley in every category except ammo quantity and the deliberately dropped ATGM launcher! 😂
@@SonsOfLorgar sure…how many wars has it been in and won? The M2 Bradley killed more tanks in the gulf war than our tanks did. And our M1’s ripped through them like they didn’t exist. I’m saying it’s the best, mass produced IFV, the only one that actually fits the description of being mass produced, their numbers of the cv9040 thing that have been made is laughable, sire it’s better on paper, I’m not saying it’s bad, it’s not proven for decades, and can’t kill tanks. From any direction, reliably, especially at long range. My main point was, it’s funny so many people hated on the Bradley, said it was all corruption and graft, we didn’t need it, was a mistake and waste of money, but they all overlook its excellent performance in heavy combat, scouting, supporting troops and killing tanks. Until the Ukrainians use it, get the same result as we did, for decades, then everyone is praising the Bradley. Who were just hating on it. I’m sure the CV 90 is a great vehicle, unless WWIII happens, they will not be widely tested, as they can’t make enough to matter, lol. They make them for security, not war, of they were making them for war, there would be orders for ten thousand at least, per nation using them. We (US) have the most armored vehicles on earth for our military and for a long duration, non nuclear, or limited nuclear world war, even we wouldn’t have enough, and would have to ramp up production before and during it, to have any hope of providing enough. Even though ours are among the worlds best in all categories and top everyone in mass production. No cope involved, we made the modern idea of the IFV, and what it should do, a reality, others tried, but they weren’t as good, or they couldn’t make enough to matter, yes, it’s a compromise in many ways, so is everything else, the 90/40 Carrie’s way less ammo, and no guided missile…there’s its compromises, the main ones anyways, what’s it gonna do, when it has to face tanks, with no tank support cause the countries that use them, only have a handful of tanks? And they out of javelins and gustav ammo? They have tiny air forces that can’t dominate the sky…then what? Long range 40mm and hope it breaks it enough it can’t kill you? Sure, in fully combined arms, with infantry fully resupplied, they will do just fine, try to get them to win at 73 easting? Not gonna happen, they couldn’t kill the T-72’s unless they drove to the sides or rear of them, reliably that is. Their doctrine and basis for them is, if NATO is fully intact. And so is the US, as the main force, and guaranteed air and sea supremacy, via the US, and guaranteed logistics through us. Sadly, they may not always be the case, then they are screwed.
@@knoll9812 definitely, they do their intended purpose very well, which is why I find the hate on them, weird and also hilarious. Until recently anyways, as almost all critics changed their tune, after the Ukrainians used them and got similar, stellar results, now all of a sudden they good…after decades of use and proving that…lol.
And no it’s not. The 57mm naval gun is, hands down, better, faster in all ways. More destructive and lethal. And only 57mm, blows any 40mm out of the water, as it’s bigger, faster, higher velocity, more payload. Longer range, way better targeting and way, way more ammo. Lol. As it’s a ship, not a tiny vehicle. 57mike mike stomps all over that little platform and gun…and well the to be fully real, the CV 90 obliterated all in, everything but ammo capacity.
