Britain's £6B armoured sickener Ajax cleared for duty despite injuring troops

Britain's notorious Ajax armored vehicles are being accepted back from the manufacturer after investigations found no single cause for the symptoms plaguing crews, meaning soldiers will need to grin and bear it. The tracked reconnaissance vehicle was effectively grounded in February, after repeated instances of crew members …

[Primus Secundus Tertius]

Not just one cause

No single cause, they say. The truth is that almost everything is simply damn wrong.

A classic case of the accountants defeating any engineering effort. Scrap the whole lot, the sooner the better.

[BBRush]

Re: Not just one cause

Never going to happen. That would mean that there was a wrong decision, which means someoen was wrong, which would mean blame and that could not happen.

Also, too much money in the project now and too much time between now and a replacement for the goverment to trumpet an acheivement in delivering a new vehicle. So, as usual, the crew are going to have to suck it up and hope that something comes along as a mid life update that will stop them going permanently deaf and/or injured.

[Pascal Monett]

So, how's about we shove the MPs into them for 12 hours and see what they think of it afterwards ?

[Anonymous Coward]

That only works if your premise that they actually think is correct..

[Jellied Eel]

So, how's about we shove the MPs into them for 12 hours and see what they think of it afterwards ?

This. There'll be another recess coming up, so send MPs etc off to Bovington for a week. Let them be both shaken and stirred, and much cheaper than holding an inquiry. Might even make some money if vids of Austin Healey & co puking into their helmets get put up on YT.

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if we can first do that to the buffoons at the MoD involved in "managing" this shit-show. They're the ones that fucked it up, not our useless MPs.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Only if we can first do that to the buffoons at the MoD

A good number of whom are promoted-because-of-seniority ex-officers who never actually would have had to sit in these clown-APCs..

[EnviableOne]

Re: Not just one cause

its ok it was the other lot that ordered them, so they can shift the blame there

[Aladdin Sane]

Re: Not just one cause

They're desperate to avoid another Nimrod MRA4

[EvilDrSmith]

Re: Not just one cause

If so, they may actually be going the wrong way about it by continuing the 'there is nothing wrong' line.

Nimrod MRA4 was actually a good idea - in theory.

Upgrade the existing airframes, so get an improved aircraft for less cost than buying an all new type.

However, then it went a bit wrong.

The big problem was that the existing fleet of Nimrods were not identical airframes - being based on a 1950's airline, they were all subtly individual, so the sausage machine turning out and fitting new wings to each 'plane needed individual attention (adding time and cost to each conversion).

The second problem was fleet size.

I think at peak, the RAF had about 3 dozen Nimrods, and the original plan was to keep and upgraded 21 airframes (working from memory, I may be a bit out).

By the time that the decision to cancel the programme was taken, we were down to having a fleet of just 9.

So all your development costs are now hung on just 9 'planes, plus all the maintenance costs you need to keep a unique airplane type in service for a decade or more are for just 9 aeroplanes. It just was not sensible value for money.

Canceling Nimrod MRA4 was the right decision, taken at least 5 years too late.

Hopefully, Ajax isn't a repeat of that.

I suspect (and hope), though, that Ajax will turn out more like the L85: a dreadful reputation full deserved from early performance, that resulted not from fundamental design failures, but shoddy manufacture. However, once the politicians stopped lying, claiming it was perfect and world beating, and allowed for the defects to be fixed properly, it turned into a good, reliable weapon, that still gets uninformed criticism because people remember those first impression stories that get oh so many national news headlines, and not the article on page 7 explaining that everything has been fixed (see also Type 45 destroyer and the persistent reference to the design flaw that was identified and addressed long ago).

None of the above should be taken as approval of the way that the Ajax programme has been (mis-)managed.

[Like a badger]

Re: Not just one cause

Well, as it turns out we did need around 30 or more maritime defence aircraft, because as we've found we can't rely on previous allies, the Cold War "peace dividend" turned out to be an illusion*, and in especially surprising news to the cretins of Westminster it now turns out we have a coastline of around 8,000 miles, plus a huge reliance on undersea power and telecoms cables. Not to mention the airborne intel role that MRA4 was intended to add to the capabilities.

The airframe decision was wrong from the outset, somebody should be hanged for that; But when that useless fop Cameron cancelled the programme he also threw away the avionics that could and should have been fitted into an Airbus airframe, albeit at notable additional cost. We've since bought a pitiful nine Boeing P8s, allowing for maintenance that's about six aircraft in service at once to address all UK maritime needs.

* Unless you're a Tory or Reform politician happily taking money from Russian sources.

[SkippyBing]

Re: Not just one cause

'Cameron cancelled the programme he also threw away the avionics that could and should have been fitted into an Airbus airframe'

Which is what they should have done in the first place. However doing it at the point Nimrod was cancelled would have meant another decade without a maritime patrol aircraft which just wasn't tenable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Not just one cause

They could have bought French aircrafts...

[VoiceOfTruth]

Re: Not just one cause

The West, and in particular, the USA squandered the peace dividend.

NATO marched right up to Russia's borders. What did people expect them to do? Britain, France, and Germany have all invaded Russia at one time or another. Germany murdered 20 million Russians in WW2. The 'peace loving West' is a fabrication.

[EvilDrSmith]

Re: Not just one cause

Norway was a founding member of NATO.

Norway and Russia share a land border.

Thus, there has never been a moment in NATO's existence when NATO was not right on Russia's border.

[herman]

Re: Not just one cause

Also, the US and Canada are both just meters away from Russia.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Not just one cause

Fuck me! How big are those electricity meters?

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: Not just one cause

This big

[DrGoon]

Re: Not just one cause

Canada maybe. The USA is yards away.

[Androgynous Cupboard]

Re: Not just one cause

Demolish that straw man comrade! You show him who's boss.

I've said it to you before, and I'll say it again. just because the west is in the wrong doesn't mean Russia is in the right.

The world is not a zero-sum game.

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: Not just one cause

Russia is always in the right, at least on a map.

[Blazde]

Re: Not just one cause

Germany murdered 20 million Russians in WW2. The 'peace loving West' is a fabrication.

Agreed with Hitler to invade Eastern Europe together... got screwed over.... no sympathy (for Stalin that is).

Gorbachev already apologised for this but a minority of Russians still aren't ready to move on from it. Germany today is nothing like it was in the 1930s. If only Russian leadership had gone through the same self-reflection.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Not just one cause

Germany today is nothing like it was in the 1930s. If only Russian leadership had gone through the same self-reflection.

I dunno. Mertz is busily doing the traditional inter-war thing of re-arming Germany in preparation to go to war with Russia again. Which to be far, is somewhat reasonable, ie after decades of defence cuts, those really should be reversed. Especially if we're building the Pan-European Defence Organisation to replace NATO. But that's also why our colonial cousins are a bit unhappy given we're supposed to be buying their weapons, not making our own. Which also makes sense given Europe's defence interests aren't always aligned with the US, and the US seems especially ungrateful at the assistance we've given them in the past. And certainly not after the US has been making threats against Greenland and the Falklands.

But hell hath no fury like an egomaniac spurned. Iran hasn't quite gone the way the US expected, even though it was pretty much entirely as predicted. So now we get rants that we're not bailing the US out of the mess they've created, which glosses over boring details like we weren't asked or invited until things all started going a bit pear-shaped.

But this is also a potential Ajax thing. There's some videos from Lebanon showing the IDF didn't seem to learn anything from Ukraine, and their vehicles being destroyed by drones. Who would have thunk it? It's not like drones weren't being used pre-Ukraine in places like Syria and Yemen. Now, more hostiles are using them, even narco-terrorists because they're cheap & effective. But there were some interesting images showing a drone attacking an Israeli Merkava, with the Merkava's Trophy defence activated.. Which might mean that system wasn't effective against drones, or Hezbollah just used multiple drones.

So then how to defend Ajax, and the troops inside it. Ajax is sort of modular, so maybe an air defence version, or just a truck derivative that can carry and launch from boxes of drones in a truck bed.

[Snapper]

Re: Not just one cause

Pan-European Defence Organisation

P.E.D.O.

[snowpages]

Re: Not just one cause

Fortunately we spell it differently in Europe

[Boris56789]

Re: Not just one cause

Its seems the idea the Russians got pushed into anything is laughable, even when they had a puppet leader in Ukraine, they put out a tender for medals for the conflict, so they have always been wanting to expand and recapture under Putin's eyes - the Great USSR, the irony is he is as much Russian as I am Latvian - which I am not for those wondering. He is Georgan by birth and they have been a pain in the arse to Russia for millenia, so like Farage in the uk, but a racist asshat, underdeming democracy - who also is a french decent - euro loving (personal life) egotist, no wonder both are great buds and Farage keeps taking the cash via crypto lol.

But, in reality Russia was on the side of the Nazi, killed millions of Polish citizens and forced their own army to stay and change their name or face siberia or worse. They just got off from being rounded up like the Italians as they served a handed body of mens and resources and based in Europe, so saving so earlier than needed dropping and recapture by US ans UK forces.

The US has and always will be out for itself, and Nato was just a useful tool as we see now to drop some weapons smack bang next to Russia, we know what happens when Russia does the same Cuba anyone. They just wanted to be able to launch weapons first and have cake and eat it as they thought well our so called friends will be out of it, Russia gone and we can just gain whatever poistion they want as victor.

The Russians using the we are being picked on and had to do something, that is bull crap and they know it - they have been assisted by the west when the whole USSR split up and they were in dire straights and even conned the Ukraine with the US to disarm its very large weapons stockpile, as like Israel, if they kept it Russia wouldn't even try it and not only the nukes, but considering the naval and other strengths Ukraine has it could snap back and Russia wouldn't of tried again.

Putin wants a massive landmass again, that wont happen, so it will just undermine all those around it and knows US is in its pocket, as it fears China calling it in its debt as its so debt ridden its all smokes and mirrors its front, what will happen if we all act like Adults is Russia and America will be left with its fossils and the rest of the world will move to renewables and less reliance. China is not stupid it knows it has more control and money making by selling goods and becoming less reliant on others tech and resources. If it has humans rights and other issues, that is an issue in itself to worry about, as in reality the whole liberation crap is just a guise for control and resource not to make things better, so less butting into others home issues and unncessary wars and the world would be a better place.

The real bad guy in reality is just the bully that is the US, - cold war caused by its itch to use a weapon and kill millions, cause others to waste billions or trillions to have one to, lump debt on friends that take nearly 70 yrs to pay off, restrict access to tech friends help build, put fingers in other countries and made worse, just because it could not get its way. Forcing its tech on others and ban other countries tech on fake claims - 99.99 % of chinese tech ripped out nothing found wrong with it, but just Euro government kissing US arse, as US has got greedy sold out its skills to china and elsewhere and now bitching its an empty husk.

Surprise you treat people, countries like crap it comes back on you and you de skill for country for more and more wealth and less skills your just become a has been player. Poor choice, bullying behaviour and mass murder - why anyone would want the US as an friend god knows.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Not just one cause

...and even conned the Ukraine with the US to disarm its very large weapons stockpile, as like Israel, if they kept it Russia wouldn't even try it and not only the nukes, but considering the naval and other strengths Ukraine has it could snap back and Russia wouldn't of tried again.

Ah, Budapest. Ukraine never had nuclear weapons, only Soviet/Russian weapons on Ukrainian soil.. Which the West didn't want falling into Ukrainian hands. The breakup of the Soviet Union did, however leave Ukraine with massive stockpiles of conventional weapons, which it promptly started to flog off, often to people we might have preferred it not to arm. Then those stockpiles became memes, eg-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72_operators_and_variants

In January 2014, Ukraine had 600 T-72 tanks all in storage. They were returned to active service since the War in Donbas, and several were captured and pressed into service during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

With 'several' doing some heavy lifting. So following the Soviet Union collapse, Ukraine inherited massive stockpiles, along with the Malyshev factory and Morozov Design Bureau in Kharkiv, which Ukraine arguably mismanaged. Then came the coup & civil war, the breakaway of the Donbas, some UAF forces defecting to the seperatists who promptly took kit from the stockpiles in Donbas and turned those against the Kiev forces. Then because the West doesn't seem to like accepting the coup triggered the civil war, the meme of a 2014 'Russian invasion" and Russia supplying the seperatists.. Which was true to a limited extent, but the seperatists were mostly drawing from existing stockpiles on the breakaway territory, along with capturing some kit from the UAF.

Putin wants a massive landmass again

Russia already has the largest land mass in the world, and doesn't need more territory.

The real bad guy in reality is just the bully that is the US, - cold war caused by its itch to use a weapon and kill millions, cause others to waste billions or trillions to have one to, lump debt on friends that take nearly 70 yrs to pay off, restrict access to tech friends help build, put fingers in other countries and made worse, just because it could not get its way.

And increasingly, the EU. 90bn supposedly going to Ukraine, but in reality, 60bn stays in the EU to go to defence companies, and 30bn to Ukraine. Fighting a proxy war to the last Ukranian has proven very profitable. The people behind the conflicts eat cake, the Ukrainians & Russians doing the fighting & dying eat mud.

[Roj Blake]

Re: Not just one cause

Stalin also murdered 20 million Soviet citizens, so it all balances out in the end.

[David Hicklin]

Re: Not just one cause

> NATO marched right up to Russia's borders

Actually it was the other way around, the Warsaw Pact established by Russian controlled countries effectively had Russia marching up to West Germany's border.

If countries like Poland, Romania etc had been allowed to have freely democratically elected governments (plus Germany re-united at the same time) and Russia had withdrawn back to Russia, then I doubt that NATO would even have had to exist in the first place.

And that would have been the end of the cold war.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Not just one cause

Actually it was the other way around, the Warsaw Pact established by Russian controlled countries effectively had Russia marching up to West Germany's border.

If countries like Poland, Romania etc had been allowed to have freely democratically elected governments (plus Germany re-united at the same time) and Russia had withdrawn back to Russia, then I doubt that NATO would even have had to exist in the first place.

Actually, it was the other way around. NATO came first in 1949, then the Warsaw Pact was formed in 1955. After..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact

The Soviet request to join NATO arose in the aftermath of the Berlin Conference of January–February 1954. Soviet foreign minister Molotov made proposals to have Germany reunified and elections for a pan-German government, under conditions of withdrawal of the four powers' armies and German neutrality, but all were refused by the other foreign ministers, Dulles (US), Eden (UK), and Bidault (France).

So if the Soviet Union had been allowed to join NATO, then the Cold War would never have started. Then later, following the collapse of the Soviet Union & Warsaw Pact, if Russia had been allowed to join the EU, other conflicts might never have started. But then the EU economy would have been much larger than the US, which is why Ukraine happened after Nuland's infamous "fsck the EU!" leaked call. But history is full of mistakes, often caused by map makers ignoring previous history.

NATO came about as a result of US (and others) fear of Communism and a desire to prevent that spreading. Germany had been responsible for two World Wars, so also an element of containment. But then WW2 pretty much started as a result of that, and Germany's disarmament and punishment following WW1.. And now history kinda repeating itself again with Germany, France and the Baltic puppies talking up a desire to have another war with Russia within the next decade. NATO is rather keen on that because lots of money getting spent on weapons instead of other things, the US is unhappy because they're not getting as much as they want. But a stronger European military also makes sense because NATO=US, and the US at the moment is a tad unreliable & irrational.

Meanwhile, Russia watches all the rhetoric and posturing, probably thinking "Here we go again" and reminding EU leaders that per the Russian Constitution, an existential threat to Russia and the Russian Federation invites a nuclear response. And there seems to be an assumption that we can test Russia's red-lines and cross them with impunity, except of course that mistaken assumption is what lead to Ukraine.. Although that was probably the intent, ie using Ukraine as a proxy to extend Russia and weaken it. Hence why there have been no serious proposals to end that conflict and restore peace.

But such is politics. Perhaps we should donate Ajax to Ukraine and find out how well it really works in a modern conflict, but with all the drones flying around, we should already know the answer.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: Not just one cause

Rename it "Trump", paint one in Gold and present it to POTUS #47 in front of the White House.

Trump will say it's Bigly excellent and want the US Army to have it. The Brits sell it for double or triple what its cost so far.

For good measure, suggest to Trump he charge 100% import duty on them.

It worked for Musk. We'll, may be for just a little while

[Pascal Monett]

"The safety of our people is non-negotiable"

I note that he said safety, not well-being.

[Keythong]

Re: "The safety of our people is non-negotiable"

Military vehicles need to be able to tolerate shit, yet these idiot mandarins allowing such manufacturer gas-lighting, will just get more soldiers killed, because more distraction/disablement means less safety, via delayed/prevented action! More soldiers may go AWOL too, to escape these mobile coffins.

[Anonymous Coward]

The lack of safety is taken care of by infinitely cheaper drones.

Also, in the cause of pedantry, a Lt. General is an officer, not an office.

[werdsmith]

If soldier are sitting in a box with no windows, and that box is moving rapidly over rough terrain, accelerating, braking and turning then how would anyone expect them to feel?

[phuzz]

That description also covers basically every existing tank and APC etc. and presumably those don't have the same problems?

Although I wouldn't rule out some of the symptoms being the combination of a somewhat noisier and bumpier ride than the soldiers are used to, and the suggestion that they might feel ill.

[Blazde]

the suggestion that they might feel ill

Can't help but wonder this is the heart of the problem. Not that there is necessarily no problem at all, but that once a problem is perceived or expected subjectivity goes out the window. Our brains are so fundamental in filtering out noise and other nuisances that any psychological upset to that mechanism such as a prior expectation of sickness can immediately create real problems in otherwise benign environments, or massively exacerbate minor problems. Then it's not the soldier's fault. It's not the MoD's fault. The thing is just poisoned by association.

Or maybe there is a real problem and it's too difficult to measure subjectively because so many different physical sensations combine to create an overall experience and we lack the phycological models to measure and appropriately combine them all. 'Legal limits' of noise and vibrations are pretty much a laughable thing to appeal to under the circumstances. The Havana syndrome controversy might be a useful reference point, either because something unmodelable is going on, or because the fear of that causes symptoms itself.

Either way, the solution is probably just to work extra hard to make Ajax the most pleasant, peaceful ride of any military vehicle in the history of mankind and suck it up. It can't be that difficult to make significant improvements surely.

[rg287]

Can't help but wonder this is the heart of the problem. Not that there is necessarily no problem at all, but that once a problem is perceived or expected subjectivity goes out the window. Our brains are so fundamental in filtering out noise and other nuisances that any psychological upset to that mechanism such as a prior expectation of sickness can immediately create real problems in otherwise benign environments, or massively exacerbate minor problems. Then it's not the soldier's fault. It's not the MoD's fault. The thing is just poisoned by association.

Yeah quite. At this point, even if Ajax is fixed and works perfectly well (or as well as any other comparable system), it's going to have this shadow hanging over it the same as SA80. The only advantage it has over SA80 is that the green-ink crowd can't turn around and say "We should just buy a load of M16s because they only cost £250 each" (a lie btw). Even throwing our hands up and buying something working OTS with no modifications will still be extremely expensive.

---------------

For those who have faintly heard that SA80 is irredeemably shit:

SA80 A1 was a dog, much as the original M16 was (Armalite insisted it didn't need to be cleaned FFS...). They fixed the teething issues and it basically worked fine after that, being later made into really quite a good rifle with the A3 upgrades. I know that people will now want to argue about whether a bull-pup that you can't fire from the left shoulder is an appropriate choice of main battle rifle. That's an ecumenical doctrinal matter, not the topic of this (engineering) discussion. Piss off.

The early problems were a combination of design issues and user training (including train-the-trainer-training).

Having deployed with issues to Gulf War 1 and Sierra Leone, the Marines then took it out on Op Jacana in Afghanistan in 2002. Having had it work well in pre-deployment training, they then had issues in-theatre. A Sergeant wrote an interesting article about what happened next. He wrote a memo and chaos broke out. Every man and his dog from BAE to H&K and MOD Procurement landed in Oman and were told "Sort this the fuck out".

The Omani Confidence Trials in 2002 showed that broadly speaking, the rifle was reliable if you looked after it. There were recommendations for a better dust cover design and it was pointed out that issued cleaning brushes were knackered, but the Marines had not actually oiled their rifles. This was the key problem that had evaded the chinless green-ink-swilling-wankers who insisted "it doesn't matter how much you clean it before you jump out the back of a chinook because then it will be dirty". Yes. True. Not the problem. It works when it's dirty. But less well if you don't fucking oil it.

At some point, someone in Royal Marine Management had determined "don't use oil, the sand will stick to it" despite the fact that Enfield had provided a light oil that was perfectly suitable for dusty conditions (almost like they'd thought about it or something!). The old adage was probably based on the SLR which was of a substantially different design and larger calibre. Also, the maintenance handbook was 80+ pages long and nobody had actually bothered to read it. So thinning that down to a simple pamphlet for field-maintenance was a simple but significant win.

Once they started oiling their rifles, the reliability rose above that of "competitor" systems, the specifics of which were not disclosed (various Armalite type systems).

There were other tehcnical improvements which were rolled out as they went - but this was well into engineering changes like single-piece firing pins and components made out of better alloys or using new manufacturing methods. Very much tinkering and tweaking for continuous improvement. No, SA80 isn't perfect. Neither is the M16, or the Steyr AUG, or the G36 or the C7. SA80 is being phased out eventually, but that's predominantly because ROF/Enfield don't exist any more and the market has moved to an Armalite-based standards for rails, accessories, etc. Even if your rifle isn't an Armalite, the outside will probably look like one from a distance.

[Blazde]

I hear you. Everything I've heard directly about the SA80 is either overwhelmingly negative or overwhelmingly positive (wrt later variants). Considering the long active service history and all the upgrades it's hard to imagine it's very far out of the envelope, in either direction.

The SAS obviously on to a good thing letting soldiers train with many different weapons because it defuses this favouritism that otherwise develops. Maybe the MoD should have tendered a few different Ajax variants and then let squaddies decide which they liked best... genuinely it might have ended up cheaper.

[Evil Auditor]

...and then let squaddies decide which they liked best

I don't know about the decision for Ajax but troop trials are typically done during the acquisition process. Just like recently in a country in western Europe, when it had to decide for a new service pistol. Three models had been tested, one was found good and the other two failed, one with lowest rating on each criteria. Guess which one the clever boys decided to acquire? Indeed, the one that failed massively in the troop trials (it's a SIG P320 variety)

See icon ->

[Anonymous Coward]

> a country in western Europe

Denmark?

[Evil Auditor]

Switzerland in this case. Did Denmark do the same crap?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Did Denmark do the same crap?

I don't recall with any certainty, it was just a vague memory.

To be fair, I can't think of a single Western army that spends efficiently or intelligently.

[Evil Auditor]

Iceland does pretty well

[Anonymous Coward]

> Iceland does pretty well

I was about to say "so does San Marino" but it turns out they actually do have an army. A couple hundred people all in all, which is about the size of the British army in 2030 the way things are going.

[rg287]

To be fair, I can't think of a single Western army that spends efficiently or intelligently.

The concept of an army that spends efficiently is somewhat paradoxical since we're spending with the intent of that money going to waste (e.g. nuclear deterrent - acquired as a deterrent with the explicit expectation that we don't want to use it). Outside of immediate pre-deployment work up, all military training is - effectively - open-ended based on the best guesses of planners and analysts. The efficient thing - as a planet - would be to fuck them off and spend the money more usefully efficiently. Yes, obviously (and sadly), that's not entirely practical.

Nuclear deterrent is the canonical example. Conventional forces also have other uses like disaster relief or providing security at the Olympic Games when G4S don't show up, but even then - buying F35A and splitting our fleet so we can fly tactical nuclear missions (we won't) and appease the Tango Prince is just stupid. If Putin had any ability to invade Western Europe, he'd have made something stick in Ukraine by now. Russia isn't coming for us with tanks or jets. At most they could make life jolly unpleasant for the Baltics lobbing drones and missiles over the border. The larger risk is foreign influence operations that interfere with domestic politics, and sneaky beak work like endangering pipelines and undersea cables. None of which are effectively countered by a B61-armed F35A. We're rearming for Cold War style "Red Army coming through the Fulda Gap" scenarios, which doesn't really match the emerging threat.

It is however, a bit eyebrow-raising to see defence spending get rubberstamped (when the prevailing media environment demands), whilst simultaneously wringing our hands over "whether we can afford" or whether it is "good value for money" to improve public transport or develop UK sovereign energy supplies that would insulate us from the geopolitics of the middle east (yes on both counts by the way. We can afford it and would have a good ROI).

[Anonymous Coward]

> If Putin had any ability to invade Western Europe

I'm old enough to remember the cold war, where the populace (and the armies) on each side were told the other guys were coming, when in reality both of them had a defensive disposition of forces.

The only thing that has changed is that NATO has moved West significantly (to Baker's credit, he didn't lie when he said "not an inch". He kept his word by a few orders of magnitude :) ).

[Anonymous Coward]

Ask yourself this question: what interest could a vast country with huge resources have in invading Europe?

Or this question: who benefits from a rivalry between Russia and other European countries?

[Anonymous Coward]

Better solution would have been a "dry" lubricant like graphite powder, which doesn't attract dirt or sand. If that wouldn't attract a high enough markup then rebrand some of the dirt bike dry chain lubricants, the sort literally gets doused constantly in sand, mud etc

[jdiebdhidbsusbvwbsidnsoskebid]

"Or maybe there is a real problem and it's too difficult to measure subjectively"

I know you are referring to the perception of illness (and possibly the nocebo effect), but the noise and vibration conditions inside Ajax can and were measured subjectively. They showed that the early predictions based on models were wrong and underestimated the levels that crews would encounter.

[Evil Auditor]

That description also covers basically every existing tank and APC etc

It does. And, while it was some sort of "fun" to once (!) plough through rough terrain in a 60 tons battle tank at nearly 60 km/h, I was more than happy to get out of that bloody tin box. Before the sick found its exit.

[werdsmith]

That description also covers basically every existing tank and APC etc.

Regular crews become accustomed. But a load of squaddies roped in for trials will not be.

[Anonymous Coward]

Regular crews may be more tolerant but even they have limits. That sounds like an attempt to pretend the problem doesn't exist.

When regular crews are complaining - even when they can expect to be told STFU and get on with the job - that's when you know you have a serious problem which needs addressing.

[FirstTangoInParis]

I can’t even work a phone when sat in the passenger seat. I take my hat off to the squaddies who ride in that. I’m sure the comments are flying thick and fast over on ARRSE.

[Anonymous Coward]

> over on ARRSE

Just like ElReg, it's not even a shadow of its former self

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Tank Legs?

In the same way as one acquires "sea legs" and gains a certain tolerance to the motion and the associated sea sickness, perhaps part of the problem is insufficient acclimatisation?

There's probably a (static) driving simulator - they should produce a dynamic one - the technology to do is already there, on aircraft simulators - then, ensure the whole crew get time in there, not just the driver

icon: Penguins don't get sea sick

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Tank Legs?

> perhaps part of the problem is insufficient acclimatisation?

Or a problem of toxic fumes in the cabin? We've had that problem for decades in certain airliners but nobody talks about it.

[Edward Ashford]

Bad suspension response can make it much, much worse.

Some boats are sea kindly, some are unpleasant in rough weather.

GD have only had 16 years to get it wrong.

[VoiceOfTruth]

They are sitting in it wrong

All they need to do is sit different.

[Primus Secundus Tertius]

Re: They are sitting in it wrong

'sit' without an 'h' ?

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: They are sitting in it wrong

That could account for the foul air

[Anonymous Coward]

> soldiers will need to grin and bear it ... the vehicles are fine.

Nope. Wrong on several levels.

1. The air quailty and temperature stability were inadequate and would have had to be addressed at an engineering level.

2. Poor maintenance and poor training were partly to blame, and those have been addressed.

3. A soldier off their head with noise and vibration fatigue is no bloody use in a modern digitally-enhanced firefight. MoD do actually understand this.

4. Ajax is merely cleared for a further round of trials. Yes it has been returned to the board, but only back to Square One.

Stereotyped memes and fuck the truth, don'ch'a luv 'em?

[David Newall]

weasel (words)

The majority of soldiers who felt ill during this exercise suffered only temporary symptoms, according to Pollard.

Meaning some soldiers suffer permanent symptoms.

[CountCadaver]

Re: weasel (words)

Soon to be met with the warm embrace of a medical discharge from service and then a "caring" assessment by the DWP which will of course find nothing at all wrong with them.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: weasel (words)

Took my wife to a DWP assessment as she has serious spinal issues along with Fibromyalgia. DWP assessment centre is literally next to a roundabout in the middle of a city, the building is curved to go round it.

No car park for visitors. Nearest car park is 400m away. That's a LONG way for my wife on a rough pavement. Eventually found the entry door round by the bins.

Bastards kept us waiting for an hour on plastic seats, Made it obvious they thought she was lying.

Bastards!

[Jellied Eel]

Re: weasel (words)

Meaning some soldiers suffer permanent symptoms.

Problem is even temporary symptoms can become permanent. So troops are expected to de-bus, ready for combat. If they're dazed & confused, they'll be slower to disperse, find cover, charge the enemy etc and any delays can prove fatal. There's been a lot of videos out of Ukraine showing what happens when APCs unload into an environment with a lot of loitering munitions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple answer to the problem.:=)

Fit the Ajax Amoured Sickner with expensive pneumatic seats that absorb the crashing and banging about.

Much cheaper than trying to make the Ajax 'float' over rough ground etc.

I am sure Rolls-Royce could come up with something suitable/expensive.

:)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Simple answer to the problem.:=)

I think the article glossed over what an engineer deck bolt is, and why they were loose or horrors … missing.

‘An engine deck bolt generally refers to a fastener used to secure the cylinder head to the deck (the top flat surface) of the engine block. These are specialized, high-strength bolts designed to withstand intense combustion pressures and keep the head gasket sealed properly’

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oHgzyxrSomE&ra=m

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Simple answer to the problem.:=)

Or retire and buy some Toyota HiLux’s.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Simple answer to the problem.:=)

> Toyota HiLux’s.

Land cruiser. Then you hire a few Somalis to do the necessary modifications and bob's your uncle.

[The Organ Grinder's Monkey]

Re: Simple answer to the problem.:=)

RNLI have introduced exactly that on their later offshore rescue boats.

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, anonymous because I'm an MOD contractor who has worked with the various organisations that service and repair these things. Let's go back to early days:

The original hulls were out of shape, there were instances of them being up to 25mm different side to side. How the hell this happened with modern CNC equipment I have not a clue. The welding quality on the early hulls is also crap. I've seen some that look like they were welded by Stevie Wonder. (Wobbly, pits, poor weld penetration).

The alignment issues meant that various bolts and fittings had to be modified to make the standard equipment fit. From memory, there were engine mount holes in the wrong place that had to be welded and re-drilled. Engine mounts transmit a lot of vibration and are, I understand, also being modified.

The engines are a MTU V8. How they have screwed this up is beyond me as it's a fairly standard and established design. But they have been failing regularly. This may also be related to the vibration issue shaking the engine to bits.

The vibration is so bad that the electronics are shaken to bits, and the gun stabilisation system doesn't work properly on the move.

Again from memory they were supposed to be fitted with automatic track tensioners. The tensioning system is crap and requires very frequent manual adjustment. Inadequate track tension causes noise and vibration. The tracks are steel rather than composite steel / rubber. Track tensioners have been modified [and allegedly improved]. That remains to be seen with the current trials.

There have been instances of wheels snapping off at the axles [road wheels and idler wheels both]. This is at least partly a track tension issue.

The vehicle is overweight as it was based on the ASCOD platform, except AJAX is 10+ tons heavier than ASCOD 2 which puts additional strain on the chassis and the suspension isn't up to the job of the extra weight hence the bouncy, crashy ride. I'm told that on rough ground the suspension will bottom out periodically and on smoother ground it's under-damped.

Ventilation in the crew space is poor with high temperatures and contaminated air being sucked in.

None of the above is secret in any way and you can find everything I've written in the public domain.

Personal opinion only but the bloody thing is beyond economical rescue as a project.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear god, if they are that bad they should be scrapped and the original supplier fined for the bad quality ... I do hope the contracts had penalty clauses !!!

Is this another instance of a working design being 'changed' by the MOD and proving to be unusable because the original design specs are not able to extended to handle the increased weight etc ???

:)

[jdiebdhidbsusbvwbsidnsoskebid]

"the issues stemmed from vehicles being operated and maintained improperly"

Rubbish. The Dstl (MOD's own in-house boffins) were warning back in 2018 that there was a noise and vibration problem. DE&S (the bit of MOD actually buying the vehicles) said Dstl were being too boffiny and excessively picky. DE&S effectively said "look Dstl, you're not helping, can't you just sod off and let us get on with it?". Dstl were spot on.

[cd]

Starmer's entire cabinet should be forced to commute in these things.

[PhilipN]

"cold exposure"

Bunch of wimps. In our day... oh, hang on a sec...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ajax cleared for duty despite injuring troops

Ours or the enemy's?

(With political correctness being what it is these days, you never know)

[Anonymous Coward]

Piped whale song and scents of ash trees

Paint the inside a lovely lemon colour and provide doilies for the seats.

Done.

[Taliesinawen]

A bit of a design fault :o

In certain wind conditions or when the vehicle is stationary with the engine idling, exhaust gases from the engine can be drawn back into the aircon intakes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Run out of money?

The British government and its departments are absolutely useless at negotiating contracts. It implies more money would have to be spent to fix the problem

No, General Dynamics can have their shit back and we WILL have our money back... or we will do everything in our power to destroy General Dynamics unless they fix the problem at their expense.

Now how much did you say it was going to cost to fix this problem? Nothing? That's more like it.

That's my f***** tax money you are wasting Starmer. Pull your god damn finger out and tear a hole in whom ever deals with contracts at the MOD.

[TeeCee]

Can't say I'm surprised.

If I was shut inside an APC, unable to see out of the windows and then bounced around an offroad test site, I'm sure I'd puke my guts all over the interior.

Some people are just like that.

[Anonymous Coward]

The big question is:

Does it comes with a tea kettle?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The big question is:

Many tanks, certainly older ones, did come with tea making facilities.

[ComicalEngineer]

Re: The big question is:

Yes, it's known as a "boiling vessel"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_vessel

My next door neighbour is a former Driver w/o on Challengers.

My personal opinion only, but the reasons that GD got the contract are two-fold:

1/ BAe upset certain civil servants hence "anyone but BAe"

2/ pork barrel poitics - Jobs for South Wales with the demise of the steelworks.

[Strahd Ivarius]

Exclusive footing

Inside an Ajax in operations