It is very unlikely that UK will hold ground against another country far from home shores
Right now the UK has deployed said tanks to Inland Europe against another country. Russia.
what 21st warfare is about is power projection, look at Spain LHD, look at Turkey LHD, look at Australia LHD, look at Egypt LHD hell even Algeria is getting one none of these have a history of power projection
Naval capabilities are an asset but they don’t hold terrain they operate at sea and push into terrain. Air power is useful. Yet boots on the ground effect the situation on the ground.
thats why UK is investing more in air and naval platforms its all about mobility
moving heavy armour around is very costly and cumbersome, Americans are doing it but thats a exception
it’s also necessary. What’s the point of The Albion class LPDs if they can only roll out Land Rovers?
The argument made here is short sighted it only considers the needs of the RN and no other aspects of potential conflicts. It reflects the same issues that have hampered British operations for decades. Right now even the existing Challanger 2s are hampered by lack of tank transports. The British army can only supply 91 HETS units. The want since 2015 is a rapidly deployment force of Division strength. 18 of those HETS are in Europe another 3 are recovery vehicles as it stands. Leaving 70 Of Those have to transport 112 Challanger 2 plus AS90, Warrior and Ajax, Briding and recovery vehicles as well.
a single Attack helicopter can take care of a entire column of tanks
Desert Storm proved that
less tanks more fighting vehicles
No it didn’t. It proved that AirPower could overwhelm an adversaries who lacked response. Attack helicopters can get chewed up by air denial systems. Heck a flack trap of heavy machine guns disabled a large number of them in 03. . They also have short operation periods where they can maintain control. A vehicle on the ground doesn’t need to RTB for Fuel after a hour of flight.
Next you lay in a misunderstanding. This wouldn’t scrap just Challanger 2 but also Warrior. Leaving only Ajax and possibly maybe Boxer. Neither was intended to serve the same role as proper Tank and IFV.
Cutting tank numbers and/or delaying upgrades until the Challenger 2 is due to be replaced is one of the best ways for the MoD to conserve money right now. The C-2 still has its uses in the sort of medium-intensity conflicts the UK has been getting into recently. As for wars involving countries with top-grade tanks, the UK simply isn't going to get into them by itself.
That doesn't mean the UK should get rid of its heavy armour, but it's not a priority right now. The Royal Navy and RAF should be the priorities.
What you are talking about would kill British armor more effectively than mothballing the whole force and reassignment to infantry.
The want is to maintain a set number of operational capacity for an armored force for rapid reaction However consistently the armored force has been at the back of the line. I get it the RNFAA needs F35, RN needs Escorts,RAF needs Typhoons and transports yet the British army is being nickeled and dimed to death.
The article that spawned this conversation’s origin has since been refuted.
Defence secretary denies plan to mothball British army tanks
