The UK British Army is set to receive more than 623 Boxer Fighting Vehicles as production has started in United Kingdom and Germany. This news is certainly very encouraging news for the British Army Thanks for watching
We need to move from peace time production economy to a war economy. Reason we need to replenish our armories and magazines. Given what we have sent to Ukraine.
So for 155 canon shells tyhe uk has gone from producing 14,000 shells a month to 112,000 shells a month at this time. This is the only thing I have looked up, so other things have been ramped up I would have thought by the same multiplication.
@@paulmcgee1867 The problem is and always has been that any political party in the UK back to Elizabethan times always wants to cut defence spending. Then we end up with our pants down, so to s[eak, as always!!
@@hc-nj3ve plus I'm sure both are actually more about the UK re-learning how to build military armoured vehicles domestically before Challenger 3 is due to be phased out in 2040. The MOD would much rather have a bunch of fuck ups with Ajax with the option of just buying CV90's if its really never going to work over a load of problems in whatever next gen tank the Brits come up with and are probably hoping to have a LOT more export success with than the ever did with challenger.
Sadly from my time in hm forces by the time the squaddie gets a new bit of kit and this is after cutbacks and being built by the cheapest and mostly crap monkeys who I wouldn’t get to put together a feckin dolls house it’ll be out in ot date and the icing on the cake the squaddies will get sweet f a for decades after so in short the British army screwed
Not enough armour. Ajax is a completely different class of vehicle. It's almost double the weight. The UK should have gone with the CV90 but despite the bad start the Ajax will come good.
@@wsm7929 I see. Well, the Ajax's tendency to make the crew feel awful after a short ride will absolutely have to be dealt with. Clearly the CV90 is far better, but if Ajax doesn't deliver a product the troops can use without it chronically injuring them, then General Dynamics and General Sycophant von Crony are going to be eating it.
@@MichaelK.-xl2qk Those issues have been fixed and I suspect given the USA New M10 Booker light tank is an Ajax platform it will be here to stay. The M16 had lots of problems but it turned out to be one of the best guns ever made. Harrier jump jet was heavily critised it was said it wouldn't stand a chance against supersonic fighters. Turned out fine. I accept it was a procurement disaster and as required alot of fixing. But once working as intended it should be one of the most affecting vehicles on the battle field.
@@wsm7929 I agree with your assessment of what may be possible when a good idea gets through the debugging and fine tuning that inevitably accompanies making it real. What I am concerned about is the appearance of a swindle, which can only be judged at the point where the promised goods are delivered and the bill is presented. The UK can not be expected to pay twice as much as originally bargained just because GD ran into internal problems getting the thing done. They are clearly going to make money selling the thing to the US Marine Corps, so they need to eat the cost overruns themselves. These defense contractors should be held to a high standard or they will take advantage.
@MichaelK.-xl2qk From my experience with government contacts, I suspect there were lots of instances of. "Wouldn't it be good if it could also do this or could you had this function please." Generally this one sentence is the root cause of most projects delays and overspends. I work in construction and the public sector is terrible for it. Then when the cost go up they will say. "We don't have the budget it this year can we spread the cost over more years". This always put the cost up even more and it's a vicious circle. I suspect military contracts are no different.
be easier to just make one type of vehicle, that is multipurpose. And have a rail system on the floor and ceiliing, then you could just slide modules in to it.
@@czar6595most of the places they can’t go you would want the better protection of Warrior or Ajax. One use for this platform could be a wheeled Geopard to combat drones at a more affordable cost than a more heavily armoured tracked system, allowing for more units. A common turret that could be fitted to a tracked platform would be good for front line use.
If the Brits see the BOXER is so important then WHY is the US beginning to get rid of its very similar STRYKER battalions? Maybe US Army troops holding small Pacific islands would find STRYKER IFVs very useful.
the 50mm round has not so many benefits over a 30mm round. Penetration is not good enough to engage heavy armored targets, vs BMP-3´s and other IFV´s the 30x173mm APFSDS round does more than enough on medium to long range. Vs Infantry and soft targets the 50mm HE round does not increase the lethality by such a large margin that it is drasticly better. 30mm ABM rounds tear infantry and soft targets to shreds. 30x173mm roundes require about 50% of the storage space of the 50mm autogun ammo. so more bang for the same volume. And against anything that is armored enough that a 30mm wont go through, the 50mm wont either and you use the ATGM´s
@@mantapi1781 LAV and Patria have on average only small caliber protection (7.62x39mm ap rounds -AK-47) all round and protectin vs .50cal (12.5x108mm) from the front. Patria can mount heavier armor. with that it looses its amphibious capability and is resistant vs 14.5x114mm rounds. (the russian heavy MG) Boxer comes with allround protection against 14.5x114mm from the factory and has protection vs 30mm cannon fire from the front. Also mine protection on boxer is drasticly higher than on LAV 25. Boxer and Patria both can take 10kg TNT explosions, LAV 25 has troubles with 5kg. Also other protection areas are drasticly better on Boxer. Artilleryblast and Bomblet/Clusterbbomb protection allows it to survive clusterbombs , near hits of 155mm HE rounds and even loitering munitions like Lancets. It also got close to 50% more operational range, can mount a fully stabilised 30x173mm autocannon with airburst ammunition + twin SPIKE LR II launcher etc. There is just no competition here. The only advantage of Patria and LAV is weight. And unless you want to regularly operate on the other side of the planet and ship your vehicles around like its a fed ex delivery... so it got better protection, mobility, armament etc than a Warrior IFV and is more comparable to a M2A3 Bradley IFV or something like that, but with greater speed,range and capabilities.
@@mantapi1781 I think the modularity was also reason. So you have the base vehicle and can customize it for your needs. Don't know another vehicle with this modularity
Yes you shall need double the platform size to accommodate the amount of infantry division. Ajax platform with boxer and challengers 2 and 3 need to be given more platforms. How could we protect Britain from a few boxer and ajax and challengers tanks. Shetland islands north of Scotland. Four challengers 2 and 3 platforms. 20 boxer infantry support APC Four ajax platform with missles. Four challengers 2 and 3
Well you need to think about mobility and mobility doesn't always mean going off roads. Sometimes mobility means to get from the Netherlands coast to Eastern Poland as fast as possible! Tracked vehicles drive half the speed and start to replace their tracks halfway through Germany while a wheeled based ifv only needs to stop 5 minutes for gas. Every purchase is based on threat assessments and UKs main defense interest was and always will be to ensure status quo in Europe!
Ajax is only a light armoured reconnaissance vehicle not a armoured personnel carrier like the warrior and 140 challenger tanks will not be enough for any war.
So armoured expert, please explain the concept between wheeled and tracked vehicles considering battle damage,supply,logistics fuel over a prolonged period.???
Drive them right onto a ferry and take to Ukraine. What are you going to do with them? Parades, boys toys for the soldiers? Just call up Biden and send the US the bill, say it's all part of UK's loyalty to our 'special relationship'.
@@Bob10009 UK MOD planning for the "strike brigades" from 2030+. But currently no IFV Modules are on order. So for now, the UK is brewing up a lot of steaming shit with its actual procurement. still the Boxer APC version is better than Warrior in basicly all categories from mobility, sensors, stabilisation, operation range, protection etc. Just the 30mm cannon is missing. But the 30mm RARDEN is an non stabilised 3 round clip fed piece of garbage. going to a FLW200 with fully stabilised thermals and fully stabilised 40mm AGM is for the time being an "improvement" in most areas, except range and penetration power. Still the UK neets to get ther shit together and start procuring the IFV modules and not just think about them.
Seriously, video makers.. we understand that I narrators are here to stay since you obviously don’t have anyone who can narrate your videos, but please, please learn to write manuscripts that AI narrators can read properly… it is Rhein Metaal, not a Rhein Metal. It is Bee Aye Eee Land, not Bay Land. Do over and do right!
I see the future of these types of IFVs are more prominent in the next war. The MBTs are a prime target of loitering munitions.. what's left to fight are these types.. highly mobile and modular.
@@mariusz3891 it is a stupid reply/comment. Yes and No. Yes, everything is a target to loitering munition but NO, EVERY TARGET has a priority. Which one to be decommissioned first during the heat of the battle.
@@nimay13 perhaps you are stuck in the conventional ways and you do not spend too much time watching videos from Ukraine. What is COD? Cash on delivery?
Instead of farting around with the Ajax, they could have stayed on this program, that produced a superb 8x8 APC/IFV instead of wasting time on the failed Ajax and the failed Warrior upgrade.
Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land is producing Boxer for the UK. Its majority owned by Rheinmetall Germany. The UK just has no capability for design and developement left and needs Rheinmetall to train staff etc
If you watched the video you would see 117 are being made in Germany while the U.K production is being setup with the other 506 are being made in the U.K
Think on it this way, 40% of all inventions were Britsh, did it do this island any good?? As one Cambridge study put it, "In real terms each UK household would have benefitted" had it not been for Government ineptitude to grasp what was put before them!!
I can’t remember what design of vehicle it was but I think there was a vehicle that sprayed small jets of water onto the brake system that cooled it down somewhat but the trick is to not putting too much on the disks at once because cooked disk’s have been known to warp and explode
@@thegrinch8161What a stupid idea. Means yet another thing troops have to remember to do, just to drive the vehicle safely. Is the water supply harmed for winter driving? Yes even at low temperatures brakes can overheat. Water cooled brakes are fine on a WRC Rally car that can be replaced every 200km. Not on an APC.
Replacing an IFV with an APC is mind boggling. You turn mechanised infantry into 'not-so-light Infantry'. Hearing all the arguments made for that decision was like walking into the logical fallacy enthusiasts club.
Ahh well let's hope the next war is fought in a dry country with plenty of roads, if not we will go through the "shit these are crap off road, we need tracked vehicles ASAP" moment again, still it is cheaper with wheels.
Real battles and war always prove the old truth - the easier a weapon system is to operate, the more chances of success you have... what modules, what 3 dollars? Logistics in Ukraine, for example, is a terrible problem, any complication of servicing an armored vehicle reduces operational efficiency. In other words, it's very cool to make tugrs while the Allies spew T-34s and Shermans. And not only are they more numerous, but they are served much more quickly and easily than tigers and elephants. And yes, numbers do matter, especially when the front line is 1,500 km...
I always laugh at these crappy generated voiceovers pronouncing BAE as "bae" instead of "B A E". Also when they say something is an "M K five" or whatever because the idiots who made it never learned that "Mk" is shorthand for "Mark".
so when we rebranding the british army, the royal german reserve? i think the old land rover wolfs, are the last british vehicles, even the rifles will now be american
still have challenger and all sub variants. bulldog as well. doesnt matter if we used all german vehicles or swedish or whoever. good kit is good kit. important part is if its built in the uk which a majority of boxer is. along with ajax and challenger 3
@@jamesamas5527 well thats my point with the trucks etc. the brand does not matter, the fact is, we are financially in the sh1t and we are still hemorrhaging money, while british companies are still collapsing, obviously, most recent is vauxhall, just being bouth as part of psa group. at one point ALL our trucks wree Bedford, Albion, Foden or Leyland. (DAF)
@@markhuckercelticcrossbows7887 true, while yes i think at the moment we should stick with RBSL, MAN and the like we do need to have it all produced here in the UK to make more jobs and bring more money in. for example i think we need to open more munitions factories to become a large exporter again
@@jamesamas5527 yep, colt, have got to be laughing with the armalite m16 ar15 range, im wondering if the gov have done a deal on ammo as well, they done it with nearly all the munitions on all our new fighters. it is funny how as soon as erf was absorbed into man, uk army switched to man, from leyland foden.
Get rid of a tracked vehicle because its 30mm gun was unstablised and give them a wheeled beast with an unstable 50 caliber. You couldn't make it up. I don't have a problem with wheels but give our guys the turreted version
basicly every planet. Boxer has similar terrain mobility but better alround protection than warrior. And when armed with Lance or RCT30 turrets drasticly better firepower and optronics with fully stabilised, dual feed autocannon capable of firing ABM rounds, twin SPIKE LR II launcher and a coaxial HMG.
wheeled vehicles do not have the same mobility as tracked, if they did there wouldn't be any tracked armour as there would be no need. i don't know what armour package boxer has but warrior was a well armoured machine once the theatre entry package was fitted. the old rarden cannon was due to be replaced with a 25mm bushmaster in a new turret but it was shelved due to boxer. @@zhufortheimpaler4041
First they have to modernise and change there ways of thinking and move forward thinking & stop doing old out dated practices & move forward modernise that’s the only way saving the NHS going forward ....
So how many ‘spare’ boxes are gonna be kept on hand for the avg battalion … where you gonna store them and move them when all the boxers have different load outs in use?
We can but we have chosen to buy a ready made one which has a proven track record. Makes sense to me! A lot of countries choose to buy instead of manufacturing. Look how many countries bought the F-35 instead of designing new fighter jets!
Patria AMV is drasticly lighter armored than Boxer but has similar mine blast protection. Boxer is also faster, but is not amphibious (like Patria AMV when it got its hightest level protection mounted. Patria is only amphibious in its lowest protection level and in that case is only protected against small arms) Puma is completely different, as it is a full blown heavy IFV with even heavier protection.
Patria is a pure ATV, The Boxer have much more armour and modules which make the vehicle to an IFV, the puma is a pure IFV with the best armour. In germany there is the plan to have light, medium and heavy combat groups. The light groups are e.g. paratroopers, in the medium groups is the boxer the default vehicle and in the heavy groups there are e.g. the Leopards, the Pumas and the Panzerhaubitze-2000. Aditional germany plans to buy a new ATV to replace the fuchs(maybe the patria) in the future for the troops which are normally not in the hard combat zone(e.g. electronic countermeasures).
The Puma is much more heavily armoured and more specifically designed as an IFV. It carries missiles as well as the remote controlled turret. The German Army initially planned to only use the Boxer in the APC role, but has now also acquired a better armed version as a reconaissance vehicle and will likely buy a similar version for its "Mittlere Kräfte" (mobile forces that use heavily armed but wheeled vehicles).
Typical England mess. The Victorians must be turning in their graves at the sheer incompetence. They can't even take a 1960s chassis and produce a better vehicle in the timescale demanded. The Boxer has inadequate protection for the troops carried. I would demand that the designers and engineers travel into real combat with the users. But, the cowards will never do that. They've been paid. And the comparisons between this and the French VBCI, don't come out in favour of the Boxer. A similar comparison between Boxer and the EBRC Jaguar, again, doesn't favour the Boxer. The Boxer is not even as well protected as a VAB, for heaven’s sake! Over time, over budget, and still not good enough to tag along with the tanks. Typical British modern efficiency.
Odd that the UK is getting the Boxer and Ajax whilst potentially upgrading the Warrior. This means that every trooper will have his very own vehicle as the numbers of troops are cut back.
Baser 6 zırhlı araç insansız üzerine k9 a2sh obüs insansız yeni versiyonu tam otomatik 155.52kalibreli topu entegre ettim atış yapıyor etkili mevzil 130km. Azmi mevzil 190km. 30mm8namlulu makinalı topu entegre ettim 900kw lazer topu entegre ettim insansı robot asker kullanacak
@@jamesamas5527 There is basicly no terrain where Challenger 2 has better mobility than Boxer due to its prohibitive weight and atrocious power to weight ratio.
@@jamesamas5527 and i have personally seen boxer driving through terrain, most tracked vehicles wouldnt follow into on german training grounds. That thing has comparable terrain mobility to an MBT. Only when we are talking about extreme deep mud conditions, tracked vehicles gain an minor edge. but only those, that are in a similar weight class. Challenger 2 has double the combat weight and struggles with alot of stuff Boxer can do. For example Obstacle climbing or slopes. Here Boxer outperforms CR2. The only real thing CR2 can do mobility wise, that boxer has problems with, is trench crossing, here CR2 gains 40cm trench width over Boxer.
2 questions: what does this do that other ones don't do? We know tanks/vehicles like heavy IFVs are increasingly useless on a modern battlefield, so, why make this now? Without knowing a real answer to the first question, there's no real purpose in producing these. Opinion: It'd possible be better to invest in a stealth motorcycle lol. Or, upgrade a nice cheap yet effective infantry carrier if needed, like the US hmmvv or MRAP that are essentially just cars with mounted things on them; where it's cheap enough, yet good enough to protect the troops and provide fire support, so losing one isn't a big deal either. There's a reason why fitting cheap, old solutions with upgrades to fit the current purpose, has been usually better than the cost of making something brand new that's just as vulnerable. It also seems like Britain just wants to try to make something itself and in doing so made something that's negligibly better, 'at best 10% better', for a much larger cost. They'd be better off, if they could make like a competitor F35 plane or something else to specialize in. No one is going to want these vs the competition, unless you can answer the first question and prove the vehicle is revolutionary somehow.
Sweden sent its latest and best to Ukraine they lasted a few minutes 😂 one look says this is massively overweight for a wheeled vehicle and won't work in Mud
It’s an oversized waste of time fuck sitting in that with these drones about ,things have changed to much in the last 15 months Drones have changed the landscape beyond belief
