Why can't Britain build a decent tank?

Key Concepts

• Ajax Armored Vehicle: A heavily armored reconnaissance vehicle intended for the British Army.
• Noise and Vibration Issues: The primary problem plaguing the Ajax program, leading to soldiers falling ill.
• Procurement Cycle (CADID): Concept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-Service, Disposal – the standard process for acquiring military equipment.
• Fudging the Procurement: Merging the Demonstration and Manufacture phases of the CADID cycle for Ajax, leading to problems being discovered late.
• Initial Operating Capability (IOC) & Full Operating Capability (FOC): Milestones in military equipment deployment. IOC signifies basic operational readiness, while FOC means full deployment and capability.
• Manned Ground Reconnaissance: The role Ajax is designed to fulfill, involving gathering intelligence on terrain and enemy activity.
• CVRT (Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance Tracked): The older family of vehicles Ajax is intended to replace.
• General Dynamics: The company manufacturing the Ajax vehicles.
• Defense Readiness: The overall state of a military's ability to engage in combat operations.
• Ammunition Stockpiles & Spare Parts: Critical enablers for sustained military operations.
• Strategic Defence Review (SDR): A periodic assessment of a nation's defense capabilities and future needs.

Ajax Armored Vehicle Program: A Deep Dive into Procurement Failures and Readiness Concerns

This summary details the significant issues surrounding the British Army's Ajax armored vehicle program, exploring its troubled development, the impact of its technical failures on soldiers, and the broader implications for the UK's defense readiness.

1. The Ajax Program: A Troubled Genesis and Current Crisis

The British Army's acquisition of the Ajax heavily armored reconnaissance vehicle has been marred by significant problems, culminating in the suspension of its use after 31 soldiers reported falling ill. These illnesses, characterized by symptoms like tingling hands and ringing ears, occurred during the "iron fist" drill, leading to its immediate halt. This setback follows weeks after the Minister for Defense Readiness, Luke Pollard, declared the fleet safe. The program, costing £6.3 billion, has been plagued by issues for nearly two decades.

A whistleblower at General Dynamics, the manufacturer, has accused management of attempting to shift blame onto soldiers to conceal the fact that multiple vehicles are unfit for purpose. This sentiment was echoed by a General Dynamics employee's ill-advised Facebook post, which suggested technical issues stemmed from crew incompetence, sparking considerable anger.

The saga has led to parliamentary scrutiny, with Mr. Pollard appearing before a commons defense committee to address the ongoing inquiries into what has gone wrong.

2. Technical Issues: Noise, Vibration, and Soldier Health

The core problem identified with the Ajax vehicles is excessive noise and vibration. While armored vehicles are inherently noisy and vibrate, especially when firing or operating in rough terrain, the Ajax's issues are reportedly severe enough to cause illness.

• Nature of the Problem: The noise and vibration were not constant and occurred in various operational states (acceleration, deceleration, rough terrain, firing). This variability made it difficult for engineers to pinpoint the exact cause and when it would manifest.
• Mitigation Attempts: Instead of solving the root cause, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) implemented workarounds:
  • Noise: Crews were provided with enhanced hearing protection.
  • Vibration: Crews were given improved pneumatic seats.
• Effectiveness: These measures did not fully resolve the problems, leading to continued issues of "vibration fatigue" and soldiers becoming ill.

Dominic Nicholls, a former soldier and defense analyst, stated, "They vibrate and they're noisy, especially when you fire a gun and especially in a tank. But they shouldn't make you sick. No, I mean, I I was on tanks for years. They don't make you sick." This highlights that the current situation with Ajax is beyond the expected discomfort of operating armored vehicles.

3. Procurement Process Failures: A Flawed Framework

The protracted development and subsequent problems with Ajax are attributed to fundamental flaws in the procurement process.

• Extended Requirement Definition: The requirement for a new reconnaissance vehicle, initially known as FRES (Future Rapid Effect System), has been in development for approximately 20-25 years. During this period, the MOD repeatedly added new requirements, such as thermal cameras and ground sensors, complicating the design.
• Distraction and Funding Diversion: The prolonged engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan diverted attention and financial resources away from programs like Ajax.
• Broken Procurement Cycle (CADID): The standard procurement cycle (Concept, Assessment, Demonstration, Manufacture, In-Service, Disposal) was compromised. For Ajax, the Demonstration and Manufacture phases were merged.
• "Fudging" the Process: General Dynamics UK was selected as the supplier, and the company was essentially committed to the manufacturing phase before the vehicle had been fully demonstrated to meet all requirements. This "fudging" of the process, done for speed due to the program's long gestation, meant problems were discovered and had to be retrofitted during manufacturing, akin to "trying to fix the wings of a plane that's on fire in the air."
• Over-complicated Requirements: The army's initial requirement document for Ajax was excessively complex, containing around 1,200 statements of requirement, over ten times the average for similar military equipment contracts at the time.
• Redesign of an Existing Platform: While based on the successful Spanish-built Ascot vehicle, the Ajax required significant modifications to meet British Army specifications, effectively turning it into a redesign with inherent risks.
• Underperformance and Communication Breakdowns: A "lessons learned" report identified underperformance by General Dynamics, defense procurement agencies, and breakdowns in communication with scientific and technical bodies. The army's project management was also deemed inadequate.

4. The Role of Manned Ground Reconnaissance and the Need for Ajax

The Ajax is intended to fulfill the crucial role of "manned ground reconnaissance." This capability is vital for:

• Infantry Battalions and Armored Regiments: Providing close reconnaissance to gather information on terrain and enemy movements for commanding officers.
• Detecting and Slowing the Enemy: In defensive operations, reconnaissance vehicles screen the unit, detect enemy positions, and can initially engage to slow them down.
• Informing Offensive Plans: In offensive operations, reconnaissance units identify enemy locations, enabling commanders to plan attacks effectively.
• Formation-Level Intelligence: Reconnaissance regiments operating at brigade and divisional levels gather deeper intelligence for commanders to plan further ahead.

The vehicles Ajax is meant to replace, the CVRT family (including the Scimitar), entered service in the 1970s and are now obsolete. While drones are increasingly important, they are limited by weather and evolving anti-drone defenses. Manned reconnaissance remains essential, with drones potentially cooperating with or being launched from these vehicles.

5. The Ajax Saga and Britain's Defense Readiness

The issues with Ajax raise serious questions about the state of Britain's combat readiness.

• Stop-Gap Measures: The army is currently using Warrior armored vehicles as a stop-gap for reconnaissance roles, which are more capable than the obsolete CVRT but lack the advanced digital systems and surveillance gear of Ajax.
• Ammunition and Spare Parts Shortages: A 2022 House of Commons Defense Committee report highlighted that the army lacks sufficient ammunition stockpiles and spare parts for high-intensity warfare.
• Medical Support Deficiencies: The same report indicated that medical support is also below required levels.
• Limited Brigade-Level Exercises: For a decade, the army did not conduct full brigade-level exercises for its heavy forces, impacting the training of a generation of commanders. While these exercises have restarted, the gap in experience remains.
• Comparison to Cold War Era: Ben Barry, a former armored infantry brigade commander, contrasts the current situation with the Cold War era, when the army was at its peak capability and could deploy a 10,000-strong brigade to Bosnia with full combat support, logistics, and medical provisions. He expresses doubt that the British Army could deploy a similar force to Ukraine with the necessary enablers today.
• NATO Commitments: Britain's contribution to NATO's high-readiness land forces typically involves a brigade headquarters and one heavy battle group, not a complete brigade, unlike other NATO allies. This suggests a potential shortfall in deployable heavy forces.

6. General Dynamics: A Reputable Manufacturer Facing Scrutiny

General Dynamics is a major Western armored vehicle manufacturer with a generally strong track record. They are the original equipment manufacturer for the M1 Abrams tank and have produced successful light armored vehicles (LAVs). Their Ascot vehicle, on which Ajax is based, has reportedly served without issues in other armies.

However, the Ajax program has led to scrutiny of their UK operations. General Dynamics has stated they are working with the MOD to deliver the vehicles and fix defects, emphasizing their commitment to soldier safety and investigating the employee's comments.

7. The Debate on "Buying British" vs. Off-the-Shelf

The Ajax program reignites the debate about the UK's tendency to prioritize domestic manufacturing over purchasing proven off-the-shelf solutions from overseas.

• Cost and Delays: Buying British can be more expensive and lead to longer development times.
• Strategic Importance: There is a political and economic imperative to maintain a domestic defense industry, supporting jobs and high-technology sectors.
• Compromises: This can sometimes lead to compromises in capability or reliability, as seen with the historical tolerance of less reliable British equipment to keep state-owned factories operational.
• International Examples: The success of collaborative European programs like the MLRS M270 rocket launchers and the A400M freighter (despite initial delays) are cited.
• Armed Forces Preference: The armed forces themselves would likely prefer quicker, less expensive overseas acquisitions, but defense ministers and treasury officials often lobby for UK manufacturing.

8. Conclusion: A Systemic Issue Affecting Defense Readiness

The Ajax saga is presented as a symptom of broader systemic issues within the UK's defense procurement and readiness. The program's failures in procurement, management, and delivery have drained resources, created capability gaps, and undermined confidence in the army's ability to meet modern threats.

The current inheritance of the army is described as having significantly less capability than at the height of the Cold War, with ongoing procurement costs and the expense of the nuclear deterrent further straining conventional forces. The projected timeline for a fully modernized warfighting force by 2035 is considered too long, given the current geopolitical climate and Russia's rapid military rebuilding.

The situation is alarming, particularly in light of potential Russian aggression in Europe. While specific units like the 16 Air Assault Brigade and the British battle group in Estonia are noted as being well-trained and ready, the overall picture for the heavy land forces, particularly concerning ammunition, spare parts, and medical support, is one of significant concern. The narrative suggests a need for urgent reform in defense procurement and a realistic assessment of the UK's capacity to engage in high-intensity conflict.