Rare access to British Army's monster new battlefield vehicle

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 2 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 717

  • @hk_brit_fisher
    @hk_brit_fisher Рік тому +463

    It can actually move, HUGE achievement

    • @1chish
      @1chish Рік тому +5

      🤦‍♂🤦‍♂

    • @IntrinsicSV
      @IntrinsicSV Рік тому +16

      It’s not the moving it was the stopping that was the initial issue.

    • @keptinjack
      @keptinjack Рік тому +11

      Give it an hour or two 😅

    • @chip1gray
      @chip1gray Рік тому +15

      This isn't Russia we do make stuff we just over pay for it haha

    • @thebrowns5337
      @thebrowns5337 Рік тому +13

      Are we still paying for all the injuries after folk were shaken non stop?

  • @colingoldthorpe5918
    @colingoldthorpe5918 Рік тому +160

    For all those guys that are nagging on about it, we all did the same when Warrior was coming out. But man when that thing showed up it was a game changer. There are many people alive today that would not be if it wasn't for the Warrior platform, me included. The only thing we wore out in Gornji Vakuf Bosnia was track pads and fuel. Those vehicles were a beast, every day miles upon miles, up and down the countryside they were amazing vehicles. I am sure these will be too, once the kinks are worked out....

    • @bacburrito4225
      @bacburrito4225 Рік тому +6

      Kinks, it’s become a joke

    • @peterwait641
      @peterwait641 Рік тому +2

      Fuel pumps became less reliable with age and multiple reconditioning of old units .

    • @bzipoli
      @bzipoli Рік тому +2

      dont worry about it, brits always joke about stuff cmon

    • @scalewarmachines
      @scalewarmachines Рік тому +10

      Always had a soft spot for Warrior. It served well.

    • @Ukraineaissance2014
      @Ukraineaissance2014 Рік тому +3

      Same thing happened with the Bradleys as well.

  • @Steve-bo6ht
    @Steve-bo6ht Рік тому +159

    I was tank Driver / Gunner 16/5th Queens Royal Lancers and was fortunate to drive all the CVRT's variants and Warrior FV510's can say hand on heart the General Dynamics Ajax looks and sounds the absolute business and I wish all the crews the very best that developed and persevered to iron out all the problems.

    • @gusgone4527
      @gusgone4527 Рік тому +6

      I hope you are correct Bro. The specifications for the Ajax are mighty impressive. Just what the troops needed.

    • @keptinjack
      @keptinjack Рік тому +7

      Your Brown Star kissing badge is in the post 🤣

    • @wor53lg50
      @wor53lg50 Рік тому

      Oh damn, i forgot our new indoctrinated brainwashed ideology means its vorboden to pay Brits any compliments, i need to re-read the first chapter of marxist nialism for dummies again...

    • @Foxtrottangoabc
      @Foxtrottangoabc Рік тому +1

      Yep looks good to me , has to be much better than the vehicles you mention in every way , especially troop protection

    • @strippins
      @strippins Рік тому

      What’s the gun actually meant to shoot ?

  • @gusgone4527
    @gusgone4527 Рік тому +59

    It has a mountain to climb if it is to be accepted by the troops. The damage to it's reputation could be irreparable. I sincerely hope it climbs that mountain and goes from strength to strength.

    • @mwnciboo
      @mwnciboo Рік тому +9

      It'll be like the L85 Rifle - It'll improve over 25 years but everyone will still think it is a *Shitbox*

    • @gusgone4527
      @gusgone4527 Рік тому +2

      @@mwnciboo Agreed, the damage has already been done. I converted from SLR and SMG to Rifle 5.56 as it was known, in November 1990. Took the Skill at Arms Instructor course at SASC Browning Barracks, Aldershot. While on that course I actually broke an SA80 when the firing pin snapped. Also broke the forward handgrip on an LSW version practicing "rifle strengthening exercises."
      If only those exercises were designed to strength the actual weapon as the name would suggest. Rather than the arms of the rifleman and accelerate his muscle memory with the rifle.

    • @thecurlew7403
      @thecurlew7403 Рік тому +2

      ​@@gusgone4527Every time I look at sa 80 it makes me sick its ugly like made from a kit.😊

    • @616CC
      @616CC Рік тому

      @@thecurlew7403it is a great short weapon system
      If you want something nice to look at check your wife

  • @peterfeeney721
    @peterfeeney721 Рік тому +102

    Driving at any speed across the Plain is VERY far from marginal terrain.

    • @Coughinggonzalo
      @Coughinggonzalo Рік тому +6

      Like the red square tarmac which is known to have stopped the most modern russian „wunderwaffe”, t14 atrapa😂😂

  • @CaptMelonfish
    @CaptMelonfish Рік тому +31

    Honestly looks like a fantastic upgrade, kind of miffed it's missing an ATGM system though.

    • @InvictusMartin
      @InvictusMartin Рік тому

      @@JimCarner Javelins are hand held missiles, I'm assuming they just mean each vehicle has one on board and a crew member can get out and fire it when needed.

    • @InvictusMartin
      @InvictusMartin Рік тому +1

      @@JimCarner So it can be mounted but its relatively new tech, the CROWS-J variant of the missile started development in 2016, and The U.S. Army completed CROWS-J live fire testing in June 2021.
      It is just a modified version of the handheld strapped to the side of the turret but if it works, it works.
      The Ajax contract was won by GD in 2010, and the fist vehicle were meant to be delivered in 2017, the fist pre-production vehicle was built as early as 2014, so the vehicle defiantly wasn't intended/designed to mount a javelin.

    • @neilba1
      @neilba1 10 місяців тому +1

      Agree....very odd. Like a slightly worse Bradley.

  • @bollewillem1
    @bollewillem1 Рік тому +31

    00:30 Yes, who does not want to drive around in a giant tank. But the thing you are sitting on is not a tank.

    • @synchc
      @synchc Рік тому +3

      I think that's a bit like saying who wants to fly an aircraft if the aircraft you're flying isn't a jet fighter/bomber. I wouldn't even assume it's any more dangerous to crew one of these than it is to crew tanks. But yes, they shouldn't have called it a tank, it isn't and that's not its job.

    • @Wick9876
      @Wick9876 Рік тому +2

      It's not an MBT certainly but it is a tracked and armored vehicle intended for direct fire. That's a tank, unless you feel the APC role sufficiently overshadows the direct fire role.

    • @synchc
      @synchc Рік тому

      ​@@Wick9876 True, you could call it a light tank, at a stretch. It's a reconnaissance armoured fighting vehicle, though. I seriously doubt you'd ever hear a BA serviceman call it a light tank in a professional capacity. It would be about as accurate as calling a QE class carrier a 'boat'.

    • @Krytern
      @Krytern Рік тому

      It is a tank, what are you talking about?

    • @bollewillem1
      @bollewillem1 Рік тому +1

      @@Krytern A tank is a heavily armoured vehicle which serves as a primary frontline weapon that can encage other tanks and well protected targets like bunkers.
      An armoured fighting vehicle has less armour, lighter weapons which can be elevated more than the main gun of a tank. So an AFV can encage aerial targets and is more efficient in urban terrain. AFV’s are smaller than tanks and often can carry troops in the back. Usualy AFV’s don’t loiter around in the frontline when contact is made with the enemy. Tanks will rush forward and strike the enemy.

  • @dazzzdelux
    @dazzzdelux Рік тому +127

    Its a low bar when one of the highlights is that 4 vehicles didn't break after a few days use

    • @VanderlyndenJengold
      @VanderlyndenJengold Рік тому +14

      It's almost as thouygh a defence firm saw a never-ending supply of money when the MOD came calling...

    • @1chish
      @1chish Рік тому +16

      OK lets re-phrase it for your 2 brain cells. It has maintained a 100% reliability rate.

    • @1chish
      @1chish Рік тому +26

      @@VanderlyndenJengold Sorry mate this is the UK not the USA. This is a fixed price contract so any failures have been at the cost of General Dynamics. Yes a Yank firm in the UK being held to contract. You people should try it.

    • @impguardwarhamer
      @impguardwarhamer Рік тому +6

      nah man this is military vehicles we're talking about, 2 weeks with no problems whatsoever *is* very good

    • @warhead_beast7661
      @warhead_beast7661 Рік тому

      I mean most of the new IFVs had major problems. Just look at Puma that was withdrawn from VJTF at the start of the year after most broke down during an exercise

  • @billballbuster7186
    @billballbuster7186 Рік тому +16

    Pleased to see the Ajax is now on track and getting a thumbs up from the crews. It is a huge leap from the old but well loved Scimitar, to an advanced fully digital A-Star reconnaissance system. It is being tested at full battle weight of 38 tons, but some armour can be removed for normal operation.

    • @airhabairhab
      @airhabairhab Рік тому +4

      Dude this is a Government PR channel. You won’t get any genuine opinions here.

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Рік тому +4

      @@airhabairhabYet they reported the issues with Ajax over two yeas ago. Just about every military in the world has an info channel of website. The independent press is way down the list of priorities.

    • @airhabairhab
      @airhabairhab Рік тому +3

      @@billballbuster7186Completely agree, any kind of independent journalism has long since disappeared from these shores.

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Рік тому +4

      @@airhabairhabWell, my interest in Military vehicles goes back over 50 years. I can remember most of the scandals in the press. Very few new vehicles were free of complaints, which is why today they are more cautious. You don't really know how good or bad a vehicle is until its served a few years.
      The worst press I remember was for Challenger 1, for 5-6 years nobody had a good word for it until the 1991 Gulf War. It out performed Abrams and became a super-star over night..

    • @billballbuster7186
      @billballbuster7186 Рік тому

      Ok so you tell me what the Russians have got that was not around in the Gulf Wars? But whatever it is it don't seem to be working.

  • @piers995
    @piers995 Рік тому +10

    Are the soldiers allowed to tell official journalists that they are being deafened and their brains turned to mush? How have they cured the ride experience?

    • @mrrolandlawrence
      @mrrolandlawrence 6 місяців тому

      for a start not having any jurnos ride in the thing :)

  • @toucan221
    @toucan221 Рік тому +6

    Excellent, just love the sound of the engine, sounds really sporty.

    • @JasonBrown-dd7dj
      @JasonBrown-dd7dj Рік тому +1

      Sounds like a 1lt ford focus

    • @graveperil2169
      @graveperil2169 6 місяців тому +1

      its a sneaky scout after they are deaf they will never hear it

  • @richtbiscuit32
    @richtbiscuit32 Рік тому +6

    I can’t believe how effective it is, one video and I’ve already got tinnitus and a massive overdraft 😉

  • @MarkFarrington-hb2ne
    @MarkFarrington-hb2ne Рік тому +3

    Talks to one crew, "I'm impressed by what the crews think". It's an updated Matilda mk2

  • @indiefjant
    @indiefjant Рік тому +5

    Or, they could’ve just bought a bunch of CV90’s instead. More mobile, more modular, proven platform, from a stable long term partner country, etc etc.

  • @dannyblackwell2426
    @dannyblackwell2426 Рік тому +3

    about time, so happy all the issues have been fixed and now it can join the British army.

    • @peterfeeney721
      @peterfeeney721 Рік тому +1

      Sarcasm?

    • @dannyblackwell2426
      @dannyblackwell2426 Рік тому +1

      @@peterfeeney721 no. Not at all

    • @peterfeeney721
      @peterfeeney721 Рік тому +1

      @dannyblackwell2426 Fully agree with you, mate. It's a 40 tonne of raw horse mess

    • @peterwait641
      @peterwait641 Рік тому +2

      Not solved barrel wear issue 750 rd's reported, caused by blow by before cased round seals in barrel !

    • @dannyblackwell2426
      @dannyblackwell2426 Рік тому

      @@peterwait641 barrel issue ? I thought it was just the vibration / noise and speed issue. ok thanks for letting me know about the barrel issue :)

  • @scrambler69-xk3kv
    @scrambler69-xk3kv 3 місяці тому

    Looks like a real beast. Way to go Brits looks like a winner for sure. From the USA.

  • @rydekk-4644
    @rydekk-4644 Рік тому +4

    3 questions unanswered in this video;
    How resilient is it against mines?
    How resilient is it against top attacks/Kamikaze drones ?
    When can they go to Ukraine?

  • @Turbogaggers123
    @Turbogaggers123 Рік тому +6

    Cv90 ❤

  • @esmenhamaire6398
    @esmenhamaire6398 Рік тому +14

    Given that early versions were built with sides that weren't even parallel to each other, were inconsistent in height, and had serious issues with noise and vibration injuring its crews, I remain skeptical about General Dynamics' ability to deliver a good quality useful vehicle that will neither injure its occupants in normal use ,nor have constant maintenance issues. I would be utterly delighted to have my expectations proven wrong, as I want our troops to have the best kit possible and given the history of this project, IMO GD should pay for any budget overruns due to defects in what gets delivered to our troops henceforth - and pay compensation to crew that are injured by noise/vibration issues.

    • @Jonty290
      @Jonty290 Рік тому +5

      The noise and vibration issues are fixed? Thought they were a big problem in the troop carrier version.

  • @yumyunrangLOAL
    @yumyunrangLOAL Рік тому +10

    The monster that vibrated its crew to death, aw hell yeah!

  • @WhoThisMonkey
    @WhoThisMonkey Рік тому +7

    I love the adaptability, very practical and means the vehicle can cover a whole plethora of roles.

  • @DMFP93
    @DMFP93 17 днів тому

    A test driver in this video describes it as a "Giant Expensive Tank". Its meant to be an armed reconnaissance vehicle.
    There are no IFVs that are as heavy or costs as much. It has a miniscule range, and is impractically large. Truly a very British procurement.
    It is 40% heavier than the Bradley IFV - one of the best armoured IFVs and most effective ever made.

  • @catlee8064
    @catlee8064 Рік тому +31

    CV90 would of been cheaper, on time and its battle tested..none of the problems this has.

    • @BoostedMike2
      @BoostedMike2 Рік тому +8

      and with that theory tech would not advance

    • @catlee8064
      @catlee8064 Рік тому +5

      @@BoostedMike2 tech would not advance? The CV90 has been upgraded many times to keep pace with todays tech....

    • @bren2385
      @bren2385 Рік тому +1

      ​@@catlee8064 SO WOULD YOU SAY THE CV90 HAS ADVANCED OR THE TECH HAS MORE SUPERIORITY THAN CV90
      🤔🤔🤔

    • @catlee8064
      @catlee8064 Рік тому +1

      @@bren2385 I would say the CV90 has advanced and the tech has also advanced,

    • @bren2385
      @bren2385 Рік тому +2

      ​@@catlee8064 AND USUALLY THE NEXT SERIES WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF UPGRADES MADE THAT HOW PROGRESSION WORKS OTHERWISE EVERYONE WOULD STILL BE USING WW2 TANKS
      🙃🙃🙃

  • @l.b.3416
    @l.b.3416 Рік тому +2

    Buy the tracked-boxer, it looks/ is sized very similarly and can excange modules with the normal boxer. Its still in development too but its a private project so expect it to go ahead fast.

    • @robinterry9387
      @robinterry9387 10 місяців тому

      Go ahead fast? Its 7 years behind schedule.

    • @zhufortheimpaler4041
      @zhufortheimpaler4041 9 місяців тому

      @@robinterry9387 regular Boxer is better protected than Warrior. With a RTC30 turret (the remote turret of Puma) it can fit a 7 man dismount, can withstand more punishment than Warrior can, s more mobile and better armed and has better sensors.
      just buy the RTC30 module and be happy.

  • @honestmcgyver
    @honestmcgyver Рік тому +8

    You can imagine the team briefing - “whatever you do don’t say there’s anything wrong. Yes we could have gotten something proven but like the SA80 rifle we’re going to plough on no matter what the cost or how long it takes and then years later we realise w eshould have bought something like the M4 rifle or LAV 6 MIV. God bless British procurement

    • @notmenotme614
      @notmenotme614 Рік тому +2

      I was thinking the same, where the Soldiers in this video allowed to tell the truth and their real opinion, with the trouble causers kept away from the cameras?
      Is the biggest priority of the British Armed Forces to make industry lots of money? I wonder who’s really in charge, high ranking military officers or industry directors and shareholders?

  • @godalmighty83
    @godalmighty83 Рік тому +1

    The pockets that have been lined by this thing must be shocking. The troops that have to put up with it have my sympathies.

  • @danielkrcmar5395
    @danielkrcmar5395 Рік тому +6

    Poland and Israel can afford over 1,000 MBTs. Our budget is gar higher so why can we barely scrape enough together for 150 conversions of existing stock?

    • @MonotoneCreeper
      @MonotoneCreeper Рік тому +1

      Poland and Israel don't have two aircraft carriers or nuclear submarines

    • @danielkrcmar5395
      @danielkrcmar5395 Рік тому +1

      @cjjk9142 Do you realise how much we already borrow? They've plenty of action, they've signed multiple multi-billion contracts and have taken their first deliveries.

    • @danielkrcmar5395
      @danielkrcmar5395 Рік тому

      @cjjk9142 I'd rather 1,500 tanks than a navy we can't afford to buy missiles for and an Air Force the government admit would be wiped out in a week if we went into a real war against a peer like Russia.

    • @mrrolandlawrence
      @mrrolandlawrence 6 місяців тому

      @cjjk9142 isreal does actually have nuclear launch capable subs. All part of sampson.

  • @wingsandsims
    @wingsandsims Рік тому +4

    Monster? It looks like a Scimitar and Bradley had a child.

  • @Husker5454
    @Husker5454 Рік тому +27

    Big question . How easy will it be to intergrate ATGM platforms like spike , brimstone etc . Aswell as anti drone countermeasures , drone launch platforms and more . I hope this isnt all we are getting because the 40mm RDEN was already pretty useless and if we see an increase of platforms like terminator where tank chassis are paired with remote turrets instead of an IFV body this litterally wont be able to do anything .
    Im very glad we are getting somewhere with this now as warrior is well overdue but we need some gen on AT capability .

    • @zytoses9223
      @zytoses9223 Рік тому +21

      tbh if they can produce six varients of the vehicle each having a specialised purpose they can probably slap an ATGM on it as well without much hassle.

    • @gregs7562
      @gregs7562 Рік тому +8

      There's a potential Brimstone equiped overwatch version and a 105mm direct fire option.
      Athena troop carrier I guess will have drone teams.
      Would be handy if the individual vehicles could have a Brimstone or LMM missile option on the turret though.
      The Russian Terminator has been a complete disaster in Ukraine btw.

    • @grahambuckerfield4640
      @grahambuckerfield4640 Рік тому +5

      I strongly suspect that Brimstone will be integrated, as well as on Boxer, it was possible to quickly adapt the missile for ground launch from initially at least, soft skin vehicles for Ukraine last year. So in an armored and digitized AFV like Ajax it’s likely bring looked at.

    • @Oxley016
      @Oxley016 Рік тому +1

      Boxer is getting a Brimstone variant so it is more than likely they will start equipping Ajax with it too @@grahambuckerfield4640

    • @ashleygoggs5679
      @ashleygoggs5679 Рік тому +5

      @@gregs7562 Does russia have any terminators left? ive seen countless videos of them being destroyed, i also hear the design of the turret is terrible and the cannons arnt well stabalised making them immensly innacurate. Probably only useful for cover fire and indirect lead showers.

  • @simonwood1402
    @simonwood1402 Рік тому +3

    Should still go ahead with the Warrior upgrade at least we know it's going to work!!! 🙃

  • @rwd76
    @rwd76 Рік тому +1

    I have heard (pun intended) of guys getting permanent hearing damage and getting compensation after trailing them.

  • @petergough2635
    @petergough2635 Рік тому +2

    Get some Soucy rubber tracks on that to stop the track clatter.

  • @PaulAnthony2009
    @PaulAnthony2009 18 днів тому

    always impressive when a war machine splashes through a big puddle, the enemy would just surrender after seeing that...

  • @davequinn2369
    @davequinn2369 Рік тому

    All the best. Good stuff.

  • @IntrinsicSV
    @IntrinsicSV Рік тому +18

    It’s massive for a recce vehicle!

    • @gibbsm
      @gibbsm Рік тому +3

      Looks like an IFV to me.

    • @Ukraineaissance2014
      @Ukraineaissance2014 Рік тому

      Ita not a recce vehicle.

    • @jayspik6498
      @jayspik6498 Рік тому

      You don’t use land vehicles for reconnaissance anymore, you get killed.. Drones do that now..

  • @George-df4uc
    @George-df4uc Рік тому +7

    0:31 Did he just call it a Tank? Call yourself an Armoured Corps soldier and he still cannot tell the difference between a tank and AFV.

    • @naimaliahmed302
      @naimaliahmed302 Рік тому +2

      Exactly!!! But some people call it Light Tank but I prefer to called it AFV/IFV

    • @peterwait641
      @peterwait641 Рік тому

      It becomes a tank if used in an offensive role and heavily armored , many tanks between wars had guns of 20 mm to 37 mm . It would just need extra armor kit , T72 weighs in at 41 tons -Ajax 38 42 tons !

    • @DH.2016
      @DH.2016 Рік тому

      I used to think as you do but now recognise that 'tanks' come in all shapes and sizes. For example, having watched many people trying to define a 'tank,' very quickly their definitions excluded the very first tanks from WW1 right up to WW2. Basically, they were describing a modern Main Battle Tank (must have "long gun," "revolving turret," etc., but WW1 British heavy tanks didn't have revolving turrets - they had sponsons with some not even having short, quick firing main guns and only machine guns). It's not easy to define what a tank is but looking back at the elements that defined a tank through history from WW1 to the present day, I would attempt to describe a 'tank' as a tracked, armoured vehicle armed with variable calibre weapons (e.g., main gun and/or machine guns) designed mainly for direct fire (i.e., line of sight and so excludes SPGs like the M109 designed mainly for indirect fire) and manned by a crew fully enclosed and under cover within the vehicle (so excludes, say, the M10 Tank Destroyer with its open roof). "But an IFV can carry foot soldiers inside," some might say. Well, the Merkava MBT also has that capability - plus, because it had the space, it is known that the likes of the WW1 British Mark IV also sheltered foot troops on occasion. Given the history of tanks, you could therefore argue that MBTs and AFVs/IFVs are all tanks - just simply different types of tanks.

    • @peterwait641
      @peterwait641 Рік тому

      @@DH.2016 Tank was just the code name to stop the Germans finding out what was going to come over the trenches. Therefore any four sided vessel is a tank ! Seems it excites a lot of people who are up there ar*e !

    • @George-df4uc
      @George-df4uc Рік тому

      I've read over what you've put, however in the sense of Ajax, and what the vehicle is used for, it's main roles are either armoured reconnaissance, or repair variants. You would never think to use this vehicle as a blocking / delay vehicle as if it were to come up against any other nations MBT (main battle tank) their larger armanents would make short work of its armour, and the 40mm weapon of the Ajax would be no more than a slight pain job fix on any modern offensive tank. Yes, you could use it in an offensive role trying to take ground and exploit enemy weaknesses. However that does not mean it becomes a tank, as you could do the same with an armoured wheeled vehicle like the future boxer, or current Danish Piranha V.
      Just because it has a turret and tracks does not make it a tank. Ultimately it boils down to armour, armament, and role on the battlefield.
      My comment stemed from a point that a proffesional, well educated soldier does not even know the role of the vehicle he is currently testing. I thought that armoured recognition and roles would be drilled into the very people who use these vehciles day to day.

  • @Gareth04100
    @Gareth04100 Рік тому +1

    Not one comment on here about the Cannon. That installation is what has completely high jacked the entire platform. What a total lemon.... 🍋.

  • @umwhatthistime
    @umwhatthistime 9 місяців тому +1

    As usual video of a tank going through a puddle. Impressive !!

  • @PerfidiousAlbion1815
    @PerfidiousAlbion1815 Рік тому +36

    We could have built CV90 under licence, manufacturing in this country and gotten jobs and a good bit of kit. Time will tell…

    • @truffs1010
      @truffs1010 Рік тому +8

      Ajax is being built in Oakdale and Merthyr Tydfil and supports 4,000 jobs in the UK.......

    • @Foxtrottangoabc
      @Foxtrottangoabc Рік тому +1

      Much of it is built assembled in uk factories. Im not sure there would have been much difference with be cv90 . Yes the Spanish manufacture the Hull. If uk wales can win that part of contract then we are sorted mostly

    • @jamesmccann531
      @jamesmccann531 Рік тому +3

      @@truffs1010 Do you know what building under licence means?

    • @paxundpeace9970
      @paxundpeace9970 Рік тому

      ​@@truffs1010it put millions of taxpayer money down the drain.

    • @Twirlyhead
      @Twirlyhead Рік тому

      "gotten" - you sure you are British ?

  • @adamedwards1937
    @adamedwards1937 Рік тому +1

    Have to say I first read that as "rare success".....

  • @ianwang5242
    @ianwang5242 Рік тому

    "We fixed the crew's hearing damage issue caused by noise!"
    "How did u boys fix that issue?"
    "We added an extra earplug under the headphones!"

  • @ukironman1
    @ukironman1 Рік тому +1

    This is supposed to be a replacement for the fast, relatively quiet , low-weight and helicopter transportable CVR series. Big fat ROFL. I saw one of these being transported near Oxford on the motorway; thing was as big as the Challenger 2 tank...

    • @Louis-ej1lx
      @Louis-ej1lx Рік тому

      CVRT are obsolete. They were made for a recce doctrine of not being seen by the enemy. In todays world that is impossible so the army has had to switch to the doctrine of recce by force/fire, which requires a better protected, more heavily armed vehicle.

    • @stevestruthers6180
      @stevestruthers6180 5 місяців тому

      And at around 40 tons, they weigh as much as a Leopard 1 tank. Ideally, armoured recce is supposed to be done in stealthy, quiet, small vehicles that are hard to detect and hit. Although the 40mm gun might help the crew get out of a pickle, and the additional armour protection wouldn't hurt.

  • @RichCow-xe1bz
    @RichCow-xe1bz 4 місяці тому

    I really hope this is a great platform for our guys and girls. I just hope it’s more comfortable than the old chieftain I learnt my trade in.

  • @mxr572
    @mxr572 Рік тому +1

    these armoured vehicles are targets for smart missiles as war in Ukraine shows. lots will be lost in battle. also low flying planes as well. Ukraine rewrites war.

  • @graveperil2169
    @graveperil2169 6 місяців тому

    "British Army's monster new battlefield vehicle" not how i expected the new scout vehicle to be described

  • @samsmith7212
    @samsmith7212 9 місяців тому +1

    How long before the information of the Ajax is leaked on the war thunder forums

  • @Jake-dh9qk
    @Jake-dh9qk Рік тому +3

    British has yet again made the most aesthetically unappealing IFV ever

    • @chieftainvanguardtroop4564
      @chieftainvanguardtroop4564 Рік тому

      Huh

    • @linus2982
      @linus2982 11 місяців тому

      They didnt make it its based on the Austrian-Spanish ascod

    • @petermeyerhoff8737
      @petermeyerhoff8737 2 місяці тому

      Not so sure the Saxon was one ugly mother f....r! Comparatively the Ajax extrudes beauty 😍

  • @horsebattery9243
    @horsebattery9243 Рік тому +11

    So there are only 4 of them, they're not operationally ready? And a lot of clatter and noise for a vehicle that's not exactly being pushed hard there. I wonder what the operational usefulness of the hull mounted TV cameras will be? Between mud, dust, gun shockwaves, vibration and camo netting how much will anyone be able to see?

    • @SimDeck
      @SimDeck Рік тому

      You know nothing about armoured vehicles. Get back to bake off or whatever it is you do with your dull life cupcake.

  • @petersandstedt7112
    @petersandstedt7112 Рік тому +1

    Best wish from peter sandstedt in sweden and i wish uoi al a great sunday🤔🤔🤔♥️♥️♥️🙏🙏🙏

  • @michaeltate8017
    @michaeltate8017 10 місяців тому

    Best way to gain above average equipment is to follow trends of peer nations. Copy others no need to reinvent the wheel. Look at the boxer, GB in anticipation of start, left then re-examined it years later, missing out on its early use.

  • @philc4661
    @philc4661 Рік тому +2

    6 years late and £10m a pop... They better be damned good!

    • @mrrolandlawrence
      @mrrolandlawrence 6 місяців тому

      wow thats £3m more than an Abraham's mbt!

  • @redjacc7581
    @redjacc7581 Рік тому +1

    so, have they sorted out the mass vibrations making crew & soldiers i'll?

  • @rebel1052k
    @rebel1052k Рік тому

    Looks great, a lot better than the Warrior and Bulldog!

    • @barneyreeves2253
      @barneyreeves2253 Рік тому

      Yeah that's not difficult, those platforms are 30 and 60 years old respectably. For the obscene price tag on Ajax and the fact its taken over 10 years, you would hope so.

  • @rich_rich90
    @rich_rich90 Рік тому +8

    Overpriced, late, disliked & already obsolete. Sounds about right for UK MoD procurement!

  • @qasimmir7117
    @qasimmir7117 Рік тому +17

    Ajax is like Pentagon Wars only true.

    • @Subcomandante73
      @Subcomandante73 Рік тому +2

      Just imagine what we could have purchased for half the money right off the shelf and working from day 1. Oh well.

    • @DavidSternburgYt
      @DavidSternburgYt Рік тому +3

      ​@@Subcomandante73buying off the shelf sacrifices soverignty

    • @fludblud
      @fludblud Рік тому +2

      The one silver lining for bloated military programmes like the Bradley or F-35 is that the end product usually ends up having a shelf life exceeding half a century.

    • @NathUnknown
      @NathUnknown Рік тому +1

      @@Subcomandante73 so what, we now have our own independent platform that we know the ins and outs of, with mechanics who are fully familiar with the systems as they've built them from the ground up, much better than buying from elsewhere

  • @tomandrews1615
    @tomandrews1615 Рік тому +8

    Does it have a number plate so it can get a fine in ulez zones?

  • @rossco88
    @rossco88 Рік тому +1

    Tracks sound loud

  • @ollieisaninja
    @ollieisaninja Рік тому

    0:52 to 0:56
    See the track at the rear.

  • @vincnetjones3037
    @vincnetjones3037 Рік тому +1

    Please let me know if the Ajax has really sorted out all of it's teething issues as we need this vehicle to be the business for the next 20 years... No propaganda just useful facts.

  • @jamiecartwright5093
    @jamiecartwright5093 9 місяців тому

    Beautiful parade ground rig , put in action against kornet! Game over

  • @alanfaulkner6329
    @alanfaulkner6329 11 місяців тому

    Exceded expectations. Four went out four came back. Wow. That was the bar set pretty low for a brand new vehicle worth billions.

  • @peterwait641
    @peterwait641 Рік тому +6

    Why has Santa Barbara systems still got ISO 9001 when the hulls did not meet quality standards as stated in Government report. What is torsion bar and track life as it was stated weight growth was causing noise and vibration ?

  • @markburton5318
    @markburton5318 Рік тому +3

    Needs active protection system to protect against drones and ATGMs but this is not an option.

  • @Foxtrottangoabc
    @Foxtrottangoabc 6 місяців тому

    Alan your the gunner on the ajax .. sorry didnt hear u say again !

  • @gadgetgus
    @gadgetgus Рік тому +3

    Better late than never...
    It seems like a good platform overall.
    Even though the gun has proven effective in trials, it still looks a bit of a 'pea shooter' to me, compared to the actual size of the vehicle.
    However, I know looks can be deceiving sometimes, so only time will tell if it's:
    Ajax the Great
    or
    Ajax the Lesser...
    Let's hope it proves itself with good, tactical awareness to assist in the field, with the ability to dash from midfielder to striker, occasionally ⚽️
    Atb Gus 👍

    • @dalehewison6319
      @dalehewison6319 Рік тому +1

      My understanding is that the gun was added almost as an afterthought - the original requirement being for an armoured fighting vehicle troop carrier and command & control vehicle.
      Then somebody (MoD?) said it should have a gun and hey presto, it's a tank!
      The gun will give the crew a bit of confidence that they can fire back ... as long as it's nothing too serious.

    • @gadgetgus
      @gadgetgus Рік тому

      @JimCarner great feedback, much appreciated 💪
      I agree overall. The MOD identified an APS camouflage requirement a while back, but I'm surmising that they want to keep costs down, as it's already been delayed.
      To get the main procurement sorted is paramount, then they can upgrade the vehicle over time.
      You can overwhelm most armoured vehicles with loitering munitions nowadays, so it will be interesting to see those countermeasures...
      Atb Gus 👍

    • @gadgetgus
      @gadgetgus Рік тому

      @JimCarner
      No worries, buddy 👍
      I can read your replies and sent you one back...
      First, we need 5G or 6G, then perhaps things shall improve overall 😉

  • @Dutch2484
    @Dutch2484 Рік тому +1

    Recce vehicle ? - Obvs a different league from Scimitar but... its flippin MASSIVE (!) CVRT could go places Warrior just couldn't. (Has it still got a BV? :-) )

    • @Louis-ej1lx
      @Louis-ej1lx Рік тому

      CVRT was made fore a doctrine of sneaking around unseen. With drones that has become impossible which necessitates a better protected and more heavily armed vehicle.

  • @Foxtrottangoabc
    @Foxtrottangoabc Рік тому +1

    How did the ajax escape the factory

  • @Carter_Hendry
    @Carter_Hendry Рік тому +1

    “I don’t think I could asked for more” well, that was many good England🤪

    • @SodaPrezsing
      @SodaPrezsing Рік тому +1

      What? It was good English, it means he thinks it doesn’t lack anything so “He couldn’t ask for more”.

    • @P.G.Wodelouse
      @P.G.Wodelouse Рік тому

      are you drunk or stupid

  • @MrWorldwide00
    @MrWorldwide00 Рік тому +7

    Plagued with problems. Would have been more intelligent to buy cv90 or lynx platforms and just built our own turrets for them

  • @tonkerdog1
    @tonkerdog1 Рік тому +22

    Unfortunately 18 months of war in Ukraine, shows that 40 tons of hunking metal can be beaten al by a childs drone.

    • @thephoenix8722
      @thephoenix8722 Рік тому +6

      If you watched wester APC keep the troops alive after those hits while Russian built ones dont have survivors.

    • @VanderlyndenJengold
      @VanderlyndenJengold Рік тому +3

      Only if you have an undergunned 20th army. A more modern army with piles of air superiority may fare better.

    • @drex8925
      @drex8925 Рік тому +1

      True but you still need to get troops through artillery fire

    • @XxASBURYxX
      @XxASBURYxX Рік тому

      @@VanderlyndenJengold I'd say the Israeli army has air supercity and a modern army, and seeing countless amount of armour being EASILY taken out, but a $500 drone + explosives, @tonkerdog1 is right here! well at least the crew survives in these,

    • @XxASBURYxX
      @XxASBURYxX Рік тому

      @@thephoenix8722 Very true, but if you also watch, the Russians use Lancets drones to disable the armour ($40,000, then use drone units to easily take out the troops evacuating, costs less than $100k to disable modern armour and their troops :( )

  • @ahms732
    @ahms732 Рік тому +1

    I wonder how good Ajax anti drone protection is as it seems to be more relevant on todays battlefield against armour.

    • @princeoftonga
      @princeoftonga 10 місяців тому

      Proximity fused 40mm will be pretty effective against drones. The issue in Ukraine is detection and the Ukrainian forces seem to be finding that a decent thermal sight is pretty good for that.

  • @StevenWarren-h1e
    @StevenWarren-h1e Рік тому

    I just hope the lads get the right stuff. They need Shouldn't be about money. When it comes to their lives, they should get the best.

  • @andrewmillerphotography
    @andrewmillerphotography Рік тому

    Monster is the right word

  • @bikes02
    @bikes02 Рік тому +6

    Did I hear one of them call it a tank 0:31 🤣

    • @stonemarten1400
      @stonemarten1400 Рік тому +4

      Yeah, not sure he has to use layman’s language when he’s talking to the audience of Forces News.

  • @JohanLofgren-jc4mh
    @JohanLofgren-jc4mh Рік тому +2

    What can it do that CV90 can't?

  • @RomanHistoryFan476AD
    @RomanHistoryFan476AD 5 місяців тому

    Britain still needs a tracked IFV though, the Boxer while a great vehicle is not tracked and could struggle to follow the armour into more nasty terrain and muddy areas.

  • @XxASBURYxX
    @XxASBURYxX Рік тому +1

    Looks great, but modern war has shown us how vulnerable armour is currently, a Lancet drone costing less than 40k will easily disable this, crew will be fine at least

    • @MaxKingsley72
      @MaxKingsley72 Рік тому +1

      Just like every armoured vehicle on this planet, what do u except u little rat?

  • @rogerthomson9461
    @rogerthomson9461 6 місяців тому

    Sounds like they sorted out the noise and vibration problems.

  • @zimcanit6647
    @zimcanit6647 Рік тому

    Dude was drifting a tank!

  • @RustyBear
    @RustyBear Рік тому +5

    no aa or atgm carrier??? huh?

  • @mauricetoussaint7283
    @mauricetoussaint7283 Рік тому +15

    It's an AFV, not a tank. A bit worrying that they don't all know that. So, has anyone tested it against modern weapons and drone munitions? Going by what we see in Ukraine, it might not last long on the battlefield.

    • @williamfenn30
      @williamfenn30 Рік тому +1

      My thought exactly. Yet with the delay in bringing the system to deployment and lessons learned from the Ukraine topside protection would, I feel, be paramount

    • @P.G.Wodelouse
      @P.G.Wodelouse Рік тому +1

      don't get caught up in the classifications and naming that is more for internet warriors. in reality, they use what is needed where it is needed and don't care what you call it.

  • @markmilnes8954
    @markmilnes8954 Рік тому +1

    I'm speaking of good vibrations..

  • @unclesamuk8687
    @unclesamuk8687 10 місяців тому

    WT really needs to add this to the tech tree.

  • @Bob-bo8ik
    @Bob-bo8ik 5 місяців тому

    It doesn't say much, when lasting 2 weeks without breaking exceeds expectations.

  • @jacksonteller1337
    @jacksonteller1337 Рік тому

    All of the new systems have teething issues. The Puma had 18 out of 100+ break down last year one a total loss. That's why it is smart to combine them with the proven Boxers. It would be better to slightly increase the numbers each year after the arisen issues are solved. That way the costs of overhaul is kept down.

  • @oceanic8424
    @oceanic8424 10 місяців тому

    When will these be coming to CFB Suffield for training here?

    • @stevestruthers6180
      @stevestruthers6180 5 місяців тому

      I live in Canada. I could be wrong here, but last I heard, the BATUS facility there was being wound down and will eventually be decommissioned.

    • @oceanic8424
      @oceanic8424 5 місяців тому

      @@stevestruthers6180 With a war raging on in Europe and many European countries rearming it sounds like a bad decision, if true.

  • @williambullock82
    @williambullock82 Рік тому +3

    About time 😅

  • @smith5796
    @smith5796 Рік тому +1

    Is that a 40mm?

  • @madade27
    @madade27 Рік тому +2

    Good Old MOD Procurment again!

    • @MzLunaCee
      @MzLunaCee Рік тому

      Everything made by the lowest bidder!

  • @firstlast5350
    @firstlast5350 Рік тому +1

    Looks like a relatively small gun. What does it do?

  • @dennisseah9403
    @dennisseah9403 Рік тому

    Just asking, why did the UK choose a variant of the ASCOD vehicle instead of the Cv90?

    • @mrrolandlawrence
      @mrrolandlawrence 6 місяців тому

      revolving doors and non exec positions up for grabs. basically brown envelope money.

  • @Tony-zr6cp
    @Tony-zr6cp Рік тому +1

    And after 2 years of over maintenance they’ll start going down.

  • @BK-uf6qr
    @BK-uf6qr Рік тому

    Does Ajax come with music too?

  • @Toolbod
    @Toolbod Рік тому +1

    The way it crashes through small puddles is worrying. No give in the front shocks at all.

  • @johnbower
    @johnbower 8 місяців тому

    Has it been tested to see what happens when driven over an anti tank mine

  • @michaeltate8017
    @michaeltate8017 10 місяців тому

    Hope it works well. But is it not old now compared to the newer designs. No trophy defence big error I feel. Is the frontal armour thick enough is it got challenger reactive armour as standard and where is the armour for top down defence agains drone and AT attack guided munitions 😮

  • @carlosechevarria1977
    @carlosechevarria1977 Рік тому

    this is a new version of the pizarro . in service for years with the spanish army

  • @charlesteton
    @charlesteton Рік тому

    Lots of recovery variants! 😭 Hope all wearing ear protection. So been tested over the weekend, must be ready for combat then.

  • @FuriousFire898
    @FuriousFire898 Рік тому +1

    Jesus christ the comments chose violence 😂

  • @stephencrossman9402
    @stephencrossman9402 Рік тому

    Bit of a beast not small and nimble for recce work