Joint cooperation agreements between countries is the best thing there is. No matter which country develops it, you also need the corresponding of high-end industry and jobs are also secured. In addition, when using joint projects, the costs are greatly reduced. Thats i think is the main key: cost reduction, cost reduction........
so these boxer vehicles where meant to add to the other vehicles that are now to be retired , that leaves us 700 short of where we should be so are they going to order another 700 boxers ?
The Boxer is the best in combat conditions. The British were prepared NOT to buy the best unless the UK version of this German/Dutch piece of kit is assembled in Britain.
So good that the UK joined the Boxer program again after abandoning it! Wars show every time, that a diversified and spread out production is mandatory to create a resilient supply and production chain. Rheinmetall Australia has just begun with the production of the Boxer and Germany already ordered Boxer in Australia. If the UK can ramp up production, the UK can earn money with the Boxer too!
It’s the classic conundrum that the mod has, trying to get too much out of too little and the end product that the British armed forces end up with is a piece of kit that’s good for fuck all, Well done London. 💩
the UK boxer at the moment will have no turreted variants even though their are existing variants that operate weapons systems such as 30mm and a few others both smaller and larger calibres
The advantage of the Boxer is that it's modular, you can replace the modules based on needs, from APC to AA, to IFV, and even artillery or fire support with an 105mm cannon.
The BOXER has a modular structure... which means that the base vehicle can be converted to the respective module within a very short time. Be it the 30mm or 35mm turret, as artillery or soon with a heavy 120mm gun turret. UK receives a very versatile vehicle, which can also take on various roles afterwards with different modules and without complicated conversions. That's why it's not a problem. Germany also had no BOXER with a heavy turret at first, only the variant with a light weapon system (max. 12.7mm or automatic grenade cannon). Soon we will also get the BOXER with the 35mm turret. Rather, I see the BOXER as a light battle tank. There is also a 120mm turret that turns the BOXER into a light battle tank. Or the version as artillery in 155mm. UK has all the options and is not limited to just one configuration when purchasing. This is what makes the BOXER so versatile.
They cannot even get 1 f'ing minute into the presentation about THE VEHICLE before they are talking about "jobs for the workingman". WHEN will the real "workingman" wake the hell up and stop being played like a fool by the politicians and the corporations own them?!?!
Take a track out and the vehicle is a mobility kill ....you would probably need to completely destroy at least 3 tyres on one side of the boxer to mobility kill it.
Ajax issues are being solved but at what cost? Insider info reports the new upgrades for British service have caused problems with the already in service proven platform. Sometimes it is necessary to take risks to procure cutting edge tech, but not in this case. It's the usual stupid procurement system of the MoD/HM Gov. to blame. Spending the money before fully testing the design and final product. If this happened in the private sector heads would roll and rightly so. All politicians and more importantly, civil servants involved in giving the Ajax go-ahead BEFORE the vehicles were field tested. Should be publicly humiliated, sacked and their pensions stripped. Jail an option if the c-up was deliberate. The next shower to be promoted will be very careful what they sign in the future. This is not your usual Whitehall blunder. Defence is the primary function of government and everything else is dependant on it.
@@gusgone4527 Well you can go with boxer it has anti tank cp if added the simple solution would be to order 500 boxers and 500 cv 90s you then have a good fromt line system since warrior is being retired.
@@thecurlew7403 Agreed but keep Warrior too with an upgraded turret and simplified drive train. Use them to mechanise the entire reserve infantry and various corps.
@@gusgone4527 Yea that could work theres no reason why warrior could not have an atgw these are fire and forget weapons if you arm all your ifvs both wheeled and tracked with atgw you dont really need tanks you get all in one package put a few cv90 120mm gun light tanks in amongst the battle group they are fast hard to hit and can deal with tanks.
There is also a chassis version with tracks but the vehicle is in some armys in service for years now and there were no problems with mud yet. E.g. the germans in lithuania
With Boxer and Ajax together being far superior to the now ancient Warriors, it makes sense to retire the old girl..... even though she has served the British Army well over the last 200 years....🇬🇧🇬🇧✌✌
@@seeks252 Yet the FV432 the Warrior was meant to replace in the 1980s is still in service as the Bulldog. 500 refurbished to last until mid 2020s. Not bad for a 60 year old design. Lets see how long the Army has to make the Boxer last?
@@rows10 The Bulldogs are in no way fit for service anymore, they are a piece on junk that is given to non combat arms as they didn't buy enough of the Warriors. They would struggle to stop a 7.62 round in certain areas.
@@alexorr2322 Correct: the FV432 is no longer fit for service. it was designed for a different role, that of an armoured taxi to get the infantry to a place were they could dismount in some protection, much the same as the american M113. The introduction of the Soviet BMP with a 73mm gun became the 1st IFV in 1969 meant the FV432 was outdated then. The fact it is still in use is due to defence policy, Your equipment is supplied by the lowest bidder. ie It is cheaper to update a design than buying new more effective equipment..
The UK is finished ... Scotland will be leaving the UK our place is in the EU and the UK armed forces will lose £4 billion a year in defence spending from Scottish taxpayers and London will have to move their nukes and submarines from Scotland ... they can move them to the river Thames for all i care :)
@@SaorAlba1970 actually when talking about the Scottish question. Scotland is a net negative on the UK's national income. more is spent on benefits to the Scottish people than is taken in via tax from them. in fact England would be better off if it was to get rid of Scotland Northern Ireland and Wales all of these peripherals .are a drain on England wealth simply put England doesn't need Scotland I'm Scottish by the way you. lol
Listen, the production will go up significantly, because Germany has a lot of demand for the Boxer. Germany now has heavy forces with Leopard2 and Puma, but they are creating fast deployable medium forces based on the Boxer(basically the 30mm armed Australian Boxer). And those Boxers for medium forces were never planned long term, so Germany right now is buying up all the capacity they can get. They ordered 123 Boxers in Australia and if any Boxer producing country can ramp up the production, they will profit too!
Is there currently a vehicle which parts are 100% from one land? In the USA maybe. It's too expensive and to difficult to get the know how and technic of all suppliers to one land. The alternative is a worse vehicle.
The UK is finished ... Scotland will be leaving the UK our place is in the EU and the UK armed forces will lose £4 billion a year in defence spending from Scottish taxpayers and London will have to move their nukes and submarines from Scotland ... they can move them to the river Thames for all i care :)
We need to remove mod put the.procurement of equipment for our millitary they contiuely screw it up costing mod billions and late delivery of mutch needed gear, Ajax and chally3 latest screwups. Ajax is unfit for purpose and chally is waste of time,why build a tank that outdated now time for change
@@GGG19872look man I love the chally but it’s getting kind of well shit… Like don’t get me wrong it’s still definitely usable but we just need a new design it’s such a old fucking design by now
@@caseymendell3368 it does need replacing but this new upgrade is definitely not shit, the entire turret is a new design. It brings it to around the level of a new abrams or leopard.
@@GGG19872 I mean to be honest I always thought the turret was amazing the real problem is the hull it’s A bit slower than other western tanks and the real problem is that it doesn’t have composite armour on the lower plate allowing rounds and missiles to go straight through the bottom
Sorry that Scotland will say "Mar sin leat" and taking with it the North Sea oil field. North Ireland will say "slán agat" and happily spending Irish money. Who do you want to fight with?
Nice to see the army's getting back the equipment they were asking for
Joint cooperation agreements between countries is the best thing there is. No matter which country develops it, you also need the corresponding of high-end industry and jobs are also secured. In addition, when using joint projects, the costs are greatly reduced. Thats i think is the main key: cost reduction, cost reduction........
Can we have a digital voiceover warning for the videos, please, TH-cam?
Gotta love that red white and blue camouflage????
Absolutely lethal platform
I wouldn't put "lethality and Boxer" in the same sentence. It just doesn't add up.
Uhuh, yes and no doubt you’re the expert
@@gregoryemmanuel9168 It's an armoured troop transport.
@@BritishFreedom 30mm is 30mm
@@user-py9cy1sy9u Or iow, the Warrior upgrade to a CT40 would've indeed represented an increase in lethality.
After all, 40mm is 40mm
so these boxer vehicles where meant to add to the other vehicles that are now to be retired , that leaves us 700 short of where we should be so are they going to order another 700 boxers ?
Yes
The warrior upgrade was cancelled ages ago
Such a weird world where armament is not bought on what is best in combat conditions but on how many jobs it will create.
The Boxer is the best in combat conditions. The British were prepared NOT to buy the best unless the UK version of this German/Dutch piece of kit is assembled in Britain.
So good that the UK joined the Boxer program again after abandoning it! Wars show every time, that a diversified and spread out production is mandatory to create a resilient supply and production chain. Rheinmetall Australia has just begun with the production of the Boxer and Germany already ordered Boxer in Australia. If the UK can ramp up production, the UK can earn money with the Boxer too!
It’s the classic conundrum that the mod has, trying to get too much out of too little and the end product that the British armed forces end up with is a piece of kit that’s good for fuck all, Well done London. 💩
To be fair, sitting on an island 95% of defense spending should go into Navy and Airforce! Unless one wants to invade other countries!
the UK boxer at the moment will have no turreted variants even though their are existing variants that operate weapons systems such as 30mm and a few others both smaller and larger calibres
The advantage of the Boxer is that it's modular, you can replace the modules based on needs, from APC to AA, to IFV, and even artillery or fire support with an 105mm cannon.
The BOXER has a modular structure... which means that the base vehicle can be converted to the respective module within a very short time. Be it the 30mm or 35mm turret, as artillery or soon with a heavy 120mm gun turret. UK receives a very versatile vehicle, which can also take on various roles afterwards with different modules and without complicated conversions.
That's why it's not a problem.
Germany also had no BOXER with a heavy turret at first, only the variant with a light weapon system (max. 12.7mm or automatic grenade cannon). Soon we will also get the BOXER with the 35mm turret.
Rather, I see the BOXER as a light battle tank. There is also a 120mm turret that turns the BOXER into a light battle tank. Or the version as artillery in 155mm.
UK has all the options and is not limited to just one configuration when purchasing. This is what makes the BOXER so versatile.
They cannot even get 1 f'ing minute into the presentation about THE VEHICLE before they are talking about "jobs for the workingman". WHEN will the real "workingman" wake the hell up and stop being played like a fool by the politicians and the corporations own them?!?!
Are the tyres pneumatic or solid rubber ?
They will be puncture resistant.
Pneumatic with solid rubber run-flat inserts.
Looks the business,except the tyres, Could they be shot out easier than tracks ?
They are run flat tires. Once shot you can drive for like 80km or so.
Take a track out and the vehicle is a mobility kill ....you would probably need to completely destroy at least 3 tyres on one side of the boxer to mobility kill it.
Hold the press….. Ajax massive failure, Warrior still a goer
Ajax issues are being solved but at what cost?
Insider info reports the new upgrades for British service have caused problems with the already in service proven platform. Sometimes it is necessary to take risks to procure cutting edge tech, but not in this case. It's the usual stupid procurement system of the MoD/HM Gov. to blame. Spending the money before fully testing the design and final product. If this happened in the private sector heads would roll and rightly so.
All politicians and more importantly, civil servants involved in giving the Ajax go-ahead BEFORE the vehicles were field tested. Should be publicly humiliated, sacked and their pensions stripped. Jail an option if the c-up was deliberate. The next shower to be promoted will be very careful what they sign in the future.
This is not your usual Whitehall blunder. Defence is the primary function of government and everything else is dependant on it.
@@gusgone4527 Well you can go with boxer it has anti tank cp if added the simple solution would be to order 500 boxers and 500 cv 90s you then have a good fromt line system since warrior is being retired.
@@thecurlew7403 Agreed but keep Warrior too with an upgraded turret and simplified drive train. Use them to mechanise the entire reserve infantry and various corps.
@@gusgone4527 Yea that could work theres no reason why warrior could not have an atgw these are fire and forget weapons if you arm all your ifvs both wheeled and tracked with atgw you dont really need tanks you get all in one package put a few cv90 120mm gun light tanks in amongst the battle group they are fast hard to hit and can deal with tanks.
Deep mud will probably bog it down, it's heavy and it'll sink, tracks would be better?
There is also a chassis version with tracks but the vehicle is in some armys in service for years now and there were no problems with mud yet. E.g. the germans in lithuania
The thumbnail image is not boxer
It is Finish vehicle
That’s not a Boxer on the front page!!!
Do not underestimate the British.
Absolutely. They are great in buying german engineering.
Well done Germany
british and sudan 🇬🇧🇸🇩💖💖
Sudon't
@@innouniversedoineedthis whay
I THINK THE BOXER IS A VERY DANGEROUS WEAPON.
I can only see boxer working in hot climates like Africa. Can see it getting bogged down in any temperate or wet climates.
british and sudan 🇬🇧🇸🇩
Boxer back bone of the British army not enough soldiers to fill them.
Need modern war 200,000 soldiers.
Reistate warriors APC
With Boxer and Ajax together being far superior to the now ancient Warriors, it makes sense to retire the old girl..... even though she has served the British Army well over the last 200 years....🇬🇧🇬🇧✌✌
Lol
@@seeks252 Yet the FV432 the Warrior was meant to replace in the 1980s is still in service as the Bulldog. 500 refurbished to last until mid 2020s. Not bad for a 60 year old design. Lets see how long the Army has to make the Boxer last?
@@rows10 The Bulldogs are in no way fit for service anymore, they are a piece on junk that is given to non combat arms as they didn't buy enough of the Warriors. They would struggle to stop a 7.62 round in certain areas.
@@alexorr2322 Correct: the FV432 is no longer fit for service. it was designed for a different role, that of an armoured taxi to get the infantry to a place were they could dismount in some protection, much the same as the american M113. The introduction of the Soviet BMP with a 73mm gun became the 1st IFV in 1969 meant the FV432 was outdated then. The fact it is still in use is due to defence policy, Your equipment is supplied by the lowest bidder. ie It is cheaper to update a design than buying new more effective equipment..
With so many boxers in NATO countries armies spare parts all around
Would have been cheaper to cancel box and upgrade warrior
Yeah but Boxer is better
It is cheaper to run and deploy the Boxer and it is all down to money , even though it is a mistake cancelling warrior upgrade
The UK is finished ... Scotland will be leaving the UK our place is in the EU and the UK armed forces will lose £4 billion a year in defence spending from Scottish taxpayers and London will have to move their nukes and submarines from Scotland ... they can move them to the river Thames for all i care :)
@@SaorAlba1970 actually when talking about the Scottish question.
Scotland is a net negative on the UK's national income.
more is spent on benefits to the Scottish people than is taken in via tax from them. in fact England would be better off if it was to get rid of Scotland Northern Ireland and Wales all of these peripherals
.are a drain on England wealth
simply put England doesn't need Scotland
I'm Scottish by the way you. lol
@@chrisrowland1514 I don't really like Boxer
Not too protect the world no just British isles
All of the Boxers should be completely made in the UK or the deal should be cancelled.
@Wilhelm Eley Just upgrade the warriors.
@Wilhelm Eley Go away you sad troll!
First 100 built by germans tge restvon wales
Listen, the production will go up significantly, because Germany has a lot of demand for the Boxer. Germany now has heavy forces with Leopard2 and Puma, but they are creating fast deployable medium forces based on the Boxer(basically the 30mm armed Australian Boxer). And those Boxers for medium forces were never planned long term, so Germany right now is buying up all the capacity they can get. They ordered 123 Boxers in Australia and if any Boxer producing country can ramp up the production, they will profit too!
Is there currently a vehicle which parts are 100% from one land? In the USA maybe. It's too expensive and to difficult to get the know how and technic of all suppliers to one land. The alternative is a worse vehicle.
The Titel says Boxer but the Thumbnail shows a Patria…
british and sudan 🇬🇧🤝🇸🇩
The UK is finished ... Scotland will be leaving the UK our place is in the EU and the UK armed forces will lose £4 billion a year in defence spending from Scottish taxpayers and London will have to move their nukes and submarines from Scotland ... they can move them to the river Thames for all i care :)
@@SaorAlba1970 Yeah but we will save four billion a year in hand-outs to scottyland.
We need to remove mod put the.procurement of equipment for our millitary they contiuely screw it up costing mod billions and late delivery of mutch needed gear, Ajax and chally3 latest screwups. Ajax is unfit for purpose and chally is waste of time,why build a tank that outdated now time for change
how is chally upgrade a screwup?
@@GGG19872look man I love the chally but it’s getting kind of well shit… Like don’t get me wrong it’s still definitely usable but we just need a new design it’s such a old fucking design by now
@@caseymendell3368 it does need replacing but this new upgrade is definitely not shit, the entire turret is a new design. It brings it to around the level of a new abrams or leopard.
@@GGG19872 I mean to be honest I always thought the turret was amazing the real problem is the hull it’s A bit slower than other western tanks and the real problem is that it doesn’t have composite armour on the lower plate allowing rounds and missiles to go straight through the bottom
GB out fo EU and then buy German that really make sense??? Haaaaaaaaaaa
no - we 🇩🇪 should not deliver boxer to uk.
Why does leaving the eu mean we don’t want to do business with Europe ?
Boxer is not better than any other and still expensive....... Are the Brit`s going crazy???? You can make it yourself......
Why do so many so called "defence" experts mis-pronounce Thales. Its French and it TAA-LES
Sorry that Scotland will say "Mar sin leat" and taking with it the North Sea oil field. North Ireland will say "slán agat" and happily spending Irish money. Who do you want to fight with?