Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D Please click the link to watch our other British Systems videos ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LrA_rFwr_1Gk4JBymGPNxSJ Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Land videos ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LpFkS9hH3KD9uTEKBDVQZRp
Would love to know who in the MoD is getting a nice back hander from General Dynamix to buy this. They could have bought the tried tested and reliable CV90 mk IV from BaE Systems and used the turret developed for this, who knows they might have to switch yet.
As a former armoured infantry soldier, I'm pretty sure we could of just upgraded the warrior 💯. The chassis was phenomenal. Or buy the CV90. Instead millions went into the pockets of corrupts politicians and industrial fat cats.
The problem with the vehicle is actually from the headsets the crew wear inside the vehicle. The sets were pumping in sound from the vehicle damaging some of the peoples ears. There is also a problem with the turret vibrating. All in all Ajax is most likely another money laundering project.
I'm not an engineer, but from a purely intuitive, superficial standpoint, it looks like the engine and the suspension could be the cause of the problems. THe hull might also have a problem in that it doesn't sufficiently dampen vibrations coming from the suspension and the engine. I can't help but feel that it isn't necessary to ditch the entire project. Just redesign the hull, the suspension system and the engine mounts. But before doing that, it might be a good idea to put telemetry equipment in the existing vehicles to see if the sources of vibration can be pinpointed. Just my two cents.
We should have just gone with the CV90 from the get-go, a proven design with many variations with lots of expandability which the Army was looking for, used by many western and Scandinavian countries, and they are built by Bofors and Haglund's which are both well-renowned companies owned by BAE which is a British company. Not an upgrade of an existing design by the south koreans for the Australians, put forward by the Americans and built by the Spanish, now I've got nothing against the countries but I think it's not right for us.
That's Britain for you. I still can't get over them leaving the Boxer program only to buy it in the end, and the fucking paint scheme they gave that display vehicle lmfao.
General Dynamics UK were established in the UK for decades before the Ajax programme - the Avionics business in Hastings, and the UK Bowman Tactical C4I programme based out of South Wales. Apart from that - very accurate summary of the state of the programme.
We should just forget the Ajax and use it as a lesson learned about trying to buy a vehicle that was initially designed for someone else and alter it and gone for the CV90 which is pretty much everything we wanted and already in use with proven capabilities.
The best is always depends on many factors such as cultural, economic, geographical, educational, etc. So we cannot claim any best. But, we can mention our three most liked wheeled armoured vehicles, which are Patria AMV, Boxer, and Pars. And the KF-21 as a tracked one. We hope you enjoy our answer.
A beautiful aircraft. I had the privilege of flying in one when I was in the Air Cadets, 4 and a half hours flying a maritime recon mission off the Norwegian coast out of RAF Kinloss and they spotted a Russian Sub hiding under a Russian freighter. They dropped sonar bouys around it and practiced torpedo runs. It was an awesome experience for a 14yr old 😁
@@dc-4ever201 Oh man thats amazing, I never did anything that cool in air cadets. I did get to fly in a beachcraft surveillance plane. For one lap of the airfield.
Hmmmm. So they have created a loud recon vehicle that is heavy and has weak suspension. What could go wrong? They would be better off investing a fraction of that money developing technicals which can be bought at my local Toyota dealer for a few grand. heh cheers
You said the Ajax may lose certain capabilities due to them needing to be fixed , not true General dynamics is under contract to deliver the vehicle to specifications as stated by the MOD " As acknowledged by the Infrastructure Projects Authority the project remains within its approved budget and General Dynamics are required to deliver to the terms of the £5.5bn firm-priced contract,” Shelbrooke stated. Also a quote from the UK defence minister in response to being asked if General Dynamics would have to reimburse the UK if the project isn't fixed “Yes, provided liability for breach is established.” This isn't a UK problem it's a General Dynamics problem to fix or they lose the contract and they need to pay the UK back , so either we get a working good recon vehicle or we dodge a bullet and go with another option .
They should cut their losses but they'll just keep throwing money at it. They should have got BAE to integrate the 40mm in to the CV90. Some general and politicians will be making bank from going with and sticking with the Ajax.
Pretty poor power to weight ratio for these days. And it cant fire the 40mm on the move. Doesn't seem like a great combination during actual combat, has it been battle tested yet? Also, good video, thanks!
It’s worse then I thought. The only thing it seems to have going for is The sensors/recon capabilities. I wonder how disastrous it would be for them to just scrap this or relegate it to support models only
a turretless AJAX infantry fighting vehicle variant with a raised roof should comfortably accommodate 12 - 15 marines in full tactical gear . . . the raised roof will have two standard roof hatch & both hatches will be armed with a custom (compact) 25 MM GAU-12/U six-barrel rotary cannon & a 7.62 X 53 MM HMG . . .
I know what you mean but that's tracked IFV's for you they mostly look a generic shape except the new CV90 and Puma/Lynx which look more advanced with their minimal flat armour. Tbh given the problems this is having I think they should have gone with the CV90 mk IV Bae systems already have it tried and tested, but I guess someone in the MoD procurement is getting a nice backhander from the Yanks.
I wonder what the rush is to build these combat vehicles ? Rushing them into production without addressing the main faults seems strange ? Maybe WAR is on the horizon ?
Good video but I wouldn't use the term second cold war, it isn't that more of a return to pre world war 1 great power competition, not so much about ideology but resources, economy, technology, energy etc and its in this domain powers may clash.
We admitted that you got point, but the First World War was an imperial war, while the Second World War was a more ideological one. We use the world war for both. As you see 100 per cent overlap is not required for such concepts to be used. When we mentioned the Second Cold War, we mean there are lots of Proxy wars without a direct clash between the parties. The political, ideological, and technological competitions are also rising day by day. Yet, we just offer a term. We do not have an academic claim. Also, we are not alone. This concept has also started to be spoken among academics. We are open the counterarguments.
There is something really wrong here. Spain and Austria developed the really succesful Pizarro / Ascod vehicle. Why the UK army did not purchased updated versions of them. What was the point of developing such a junk?
I can't help thinking that the Ajax programme has suffered as a result of a poorly defined mission set, where by a one size fits all approach to the British Army's Tracked Amoured Fleets, was taken by the MOD through previous governments only concerned about domestic job creation and penny pinching, as apposed to genuinely procuring a proper Tracked Reconnaissance Capability and separate IFV capability for the future Challenger 3 MBT mechanised Infantry support role, that the British Army really requires.
Why buy useless vehicles? Someone get a kickback in UK for buying these useless vehicles, or there are corruption in UK Defence from the start of the contract.
stinks of the 1930s. Its 40 tons and was originally designed for 20. Look at the tracks to body ratio. The next tank should be put in front of the team at Bovington to ask their opinion before it's even signed off. They have a shed full of British failures.
well let me say, british army may buy some tanks from other countries, and keep the ajax project on going, in case there is need korean K2 mbt are available for sell, it is the best among all western styled tank for sell, at least better than leopard, the best soviet styled tank for sell is Chinese VT4, i dont think British will pay for soviet styled tank ajax project is a promising project, we expect to see ajax based artillery, anti air system and something else, and make another FV101 story
Propex find the problems are down to uk early assembly issues, it’s already successfully in service with other countries who don’t seem to have the same issues
You don't need to be an expert to see what a disaster this is. The "next generation" IFV of Brits has a torsion bar suspension!? LMAO. Here in India, we haven't considered buying anything with a torsion bar suspension since the last two decades. Even our own failed homegrown IFV replacement prototype from early 2000s had a hydropneumatic suspension.
Don't know when this post was made...the Ajax has passed most if not all field trails and all the problems have been fixed. This post was made a couple of years ago..
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos
ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D
Please click the link to watch our other British Systems videos
ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LrA_rFwr_1Gk4JBymGPNxSJ
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Land videos
ruclips.net/p/PLEMWqyRZP_LpFkS9hH3KD9uTEKBDVQZRp
Would love to know who in the MoD is getting a nice back hander from General Dynamix to buy this. They could have bought the tried tested and reliable CV90 mk IV from BaE Systems and used the turret developed for this, who knows they might have to switch yet.
Thats exactly my thoughts.
It'll be one of the here today, gone tomorrow politicians.
As a former armoured infantry soldier, I'm pretty sure we could of just upgraded the warrior 💯. The chassis was phenomenal. Or buy the CV90. Instead millions went into the pockets of corrupts politicians and industrial fat cats.
Great thoughts and 100% correct!
It's also called ... The Vibrator.
The problem with the vehicle is actually from the headsets the crew wear inside the vehicle. The sets were pumping in sound from the vehicle damaging some of the peoples ears.
There is also a problem with the turret vibrating.
All in all Ajax is most likely another money laundering project.
Damn you are at 30k now, I was here at maybe 1-2k, good fortunes to you.
What a brilliant exposition; thank you.
The Ajax programme beggars belief.
I'm not an engineer, but from a purely intuitive, superficial standpoint, it looks like the engine and the suspension could be the cause of the problems. THe hull might also have a problem in that it doesn't sufficiently dampen vibrations coming from the suspension and the engine.
I can't help but feel that it isn't necessary to ditch the entire project. Just redesign the hull, the suspension system and the engine mounts. But before doing that, it might be a good idea to put telemetry equipment in the existing vehicles to see if the sources of vibration can be pinpointed.
Just my two cents.
We should have just gone with the CV90 from the get-go, a proven design with many variations with lots of expandability which the Army was looking for, used by many western and Scandinavian countries, and they are built by Bofors and Haglund's which are both well-renowned companies owned by BAE which is a British company. Not an upgrade of an existing design by the south koreans for the Australians, put forward by the Americans and built by the Spanish, now I've got nothing against the countries but I think it's not right for us.
That's Britain for you.
I still can't get over them leaving the Boxer program only to buy it in the end, and the fucking paint scheme they gave that display vehicle lmfao.
Weapon Detective admin thanks a lot for an other useful video , well done
Could you do a video on the Cv90 family, and the leopard 1 and 2?
Too heavy to be air dropped, too light to defend itself against larger adversary.
Too much noise from track going round front drive sprockets for recon , nothing like announcing your presence !
The billion dollar question is...
Why not the BAE Land System CV90 which is better than General Dynamics ASCOD 2/AJAX?
General Dynamics UK were established in the UK for decades before the Ajax programme - the Avionics business in Hastings, and the UK Bowman Tactical C4I programme based out of South Wales. Apart from that - very accurate summary of the state of the programme.
Established , thought they just bought the avionics business in the 1990's !
Very good video and infos...well done...nn compliments
Enjoyed member-only premiere
What about “Centurion”??, is there any chance on (re-voiced and updated) of it???
Utter waste of money. This will end up like the Nimrod upgrade.
We should just forget the Ajax and use it as a lesson learned about trying to buy a vehicle that was initially designed for someone else and alter it and gone for the CV90 which is pretty much everything we wanted and already in use with proven capabilities.
They need to get some of those Ultra 4 or King of the Hammers builders to tune their suspension for High Speed Off Road use.
Excellent explanation..
According to you which is the best armored vehicle in the world right now?
The best is always depends on many factors such as cultural, economic, geographical, educational, etc. So we cannot claim any best. But, we can mention our three most liked wheeled armoured vehicles, which are Patria AMV, Boxer, and Pars. And the KF-21 as a tracked one. We hope you enjoy our answer.
Are you ever going to consider covering the Nimrod
A beautiful aircraft. I had the privilege of flying in one when I was in the Air Cadets, 4 and a half hours flying a maritime recon mission off the Norwegian coast out of RAF Kinloss and they spotted a Russian Sub hiding under a Russian freighter. They dropped sonar bouys around it and practiced torpedo runs. It was an awesome experience for a 14yr old 😁
@@dc-4ever201
Oh man thats amazing, I never did anything that cool in air cadets.
I did get to fly in a beachcraft surveillance plane. For one lap of the airfield.
Should have always went with the CV90 mk4.
Hmmmm. So they have created a loud recon vehicle that is heavy and has weak suspension. What could go wrong? They would be better off investing a fraction of that money developing technicals which can be bought at my local Toyota dealer for a few grand. heh cheers
You said the Ajax may lose certain capabilities due to them needing to be fixed , not true General dynamics is under contract to deliver the vehicle to specifications as stated by the MOD " As acknowledged by the Infrastructure Projects Authority the project remains within its approved budget and General Dynamics are required to deliver to the terms of the £5.5bn firm-priced contract,” Shelbrooke stated.
Also a quote from the UK defence minister in response to being asked if General Dynamics would have to reimburse the UK if the project isn't fixed “Yes, provided liability for breach is established.”
This isn't a UK problem it's a General Dynamics problem to fix or they lose the contract and they need to pay the UK back , so either we get a working good recon vehicle or we dodge a bullet and go with another option .
They should cut their losses but they'll just keep throwing money at it. They should have got BAE to integrate the 40mm in to the CV90. Some general and politicians will be making bank from going with and sticking with the Ajax.
Pretty poor power to weight ratio for these days. And it cant fire the 40mm on the move. Doesn't seem like a great combination during actual combat, has it been battle tested yet?
Also, good video, thanks!
It’s a piece of sh!t . 2 decades late.
plz do Lynx KF31 & KF41
Is this typical of General Dynamics?
JHR this weight - T72 is about 41-43 tons
It’s worse then I thought. The only thing it seems to have going for is The sensors/recon capabilities. I wonder how disastrous it would be for them to just scrap this or relegate it to support models only
a turretless AJAX infantry fighting vehicle variant with a raised roof should comfortably accommodate 12 - 15 marines in full tactical gear . . . the raised roof will have two standard roof hatch & both hatches will be armed with a custom (compact) 25 MM GAU-12/U six-barrel rotary cannon & a 7.62 X 53 MM HMG . . .
It looks like they updated a Bradley hull and gave it a different turret. I'm glad to hear that, just like the Bradley, it'll vibrate your teeth out.
I know what you mean but that's tracked IFV's for you they mostly look a generic shape except the new CV90 and Puma/Lynx which look more advanced with their minimal flat armour. Tbh given the problems this is having I think they should have gone with the CV90 mk IV Bae systems already have it tried and tested, but I guess someone in the MoD procurement is getting a nice backhander from the Yanks.
Its based off of the Austro-Spanish ASCOD platform.
I’d prefer a 50mm and a version for direct fire support from a L7 or 120mm.
Noise ,low speed ,over vibration, and can't fire on move .it design look like bumpy vehicle.
I wonder what the rush is to build these combat vehicles ? Rushing them into production without addressing the main faults seems strange ? Maybe WAR is on the horizon ?
@@RJFPme last war of humanity is coming.
Good video but I wouldn't use the term second cold war, it isn't that more of a return to pre world war 1 great power competition, not so much about ideology but resources, economy, technology, energy etc and its in this domain powers may clash.
We admitted that you got point, but the First World War was an imperial war, while the Second World War was a more ideological one. We use the world war for both. As you see 100 per cent overlap is not required for such concepts to be used. When we mentioned the Second Cold War, we mean there are lots of Proxy wars without a direct clash between the parties. The political, ideological, and technological competitions are also rising day by day. Yet, we just offer a term. We do not have an academic claim. Also, we are not alone. This concept has also started to be spoken among academics. We are open the counterarguments.
There is something really wrong here. Spain and Austria developed the really succesful Pizarro / Ascod vehicle. Why the UK army did not purchased updated versions of them. What was the point of developing such a junk?
It’s a mini Merkava
I can't help thinking that the Ajax programme has suffered as a result of a poorly defined mission set, where by a one size fits all approach to the British Army's Tracked Amoured Fleets, was taken by the MOD through previous governments only concerned about domestic job creation and penny pinching, as apposed to genuinely procuring a proper Tracked Reconnaissance Capability and separate IFV capability for the future Challenger 3 MBT mechanised Infantry support role, that the British Army really requires.
The US needs a new IFV
It has potential but there are so many big problems with it.
Potential for a range target, when has a recon vehicle needed a bridge layer before (38 tons) lol
SAABs Trackfire is a more potent weapon station!
Why buy useless vehicles? Someone get a kickback in UK for buying these useless vehicles, or there are corruption in UK Defence from the start of the contract.
Conservative governments here are known for their shady dealings so you are probably right.
It's a clusterfuck heaped upon clusterfuck!
stinks of the 1930s. Its 40 tons and was originally designed for 20. Look at the tracks to body ratio. The next tank should be put in front of the team at Bovington to ask their opinion before it's even signed off. They have a shed full of British failures.
What a mess, this will leave soldiers of the MOD with a sub pay vehicle for sure in years to come 🤦🏻♂️👎🤮
well let me say, british army may buy some tanks from other countries, and keep the ajax project on going, in case there is need
korean K2 mbt are available for sell, it is the best among all western styled tank for sell, at least better than leopard, the best soviet styled tank for sell is Chinese VT4, i dont think British will pay for soviet styled tank
ajax project is a promising project, we expect to see ajax based artillery, anti air system and something else, and make another FV101 story
Propex find the problems are down to uk early assembly issues, it’s already successfully in service with other countries who don’t seem to have the same issues
But, is it coming home? 😂
Nah to the finals though ⚽️ ⛔➡️🏘
Buy Rheinmetall
This is a tracked disaster.
Türklan bu
A laundry soap brand in the 70s
Heh. I think he was Achilles' friend in the Trojan wars. He was well hard and his bathroom was always sparkling clean lol.
A complete embarrassment!
Scrap it.
Rubbish armored vehicle where are the British manufacturers that supported UK for so long!
"experts" everywhere🤣😂
You don't need to be an expert to see what a disaster this is. The "next generation" IFV of Brits has a torsion bar suspension!? LMAO. Here in India, we haven't considered buying anything with a torsion bar suspension since the last two decades. Even our own failed homegrown IFV replacement prototype from early 2000s had a hydropneumatic suspension.
@@death_parade thanks for proving my point 😂
Ajax was the name of an American cleanser . Just saying ?
I thought Ajax was a soldier in the Iliad?
Ajax is the name of a Greek God. That dates back about 4000 years lol.
@@richardholmes1920 Yeah one of Achilles' friends.
Don't know when this post was made...the Ajax has passed most if not all field trails and all the problems have been fixed. This post was made a couple of years ago..