Numbers again…this time regarding CTA 40mm cannons…

A couple of weeks ago, the UK moved forward by purchasing 515 CTA International CTA 40mm cannons for both its upcoming SCOUT SV vehicles, and its Warrior Armoured Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs)/Armoured Personnel Carriers (APC). The cannons are part of the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (also see page 184 and related pages of this this National Audit Office (NAO) appendix .)

There was some confusion on my part if the number of cannons ordered was sufficient to meet the requirements of both the future SCOUT SV and Warrior fleets. A twitter chat (this specifically) revealed the actual number. According to Nicholas de Larrinaga , “The order for the cannons is evenly divided between the two vehicles, with 245 cannons destined for the turreted versions of the Scout SV and the Warrior CSP vehicles…the remaining 25 cannons would be used for “ammunition qualification, trials, and training”.”

Going back to another report of de Larrinagareport of de Larrinaga’s , 245 SCOUT SV variants would be of the turreted kind. This includes, “198 Reconnaissance and Strike variants, designed to operate as armoured cavalry; 23 Joint Fire Control variants, for use by artillery forward observers; and 24 Ground Based Surveillance variants, equipped with a man-portable radar system.” So that’s pretty interesting. I didn’t expect the Joint Fire Control vehicles and the Ground Based Surveillance to be equipped with a cannon, since their role is not that of infantry support or light armour attack. I suppose these two variants will hold less 40mm ammunition that the main Reconnaissance and Strike variants, or their overall tonnage would be huge.

Anyway, it seems like cannon order for the SCOUT SV matches the number of turreted SCOUT SV ordered. The trouble I see, is with the Warrior APCs. The NAO appendix above and this news release states that there will be 380 upgraded Warrior vehicles in the future. That certainly doesn’t match 245 CTA 40mm turrets. But according to the twitter debate that I had with Nick, not all of the 380 vehicles will be of the conventional FV510 Infantry Section Vehicle. Some will still be V512 Mechanised Combat Repair Vehicles, FV513 Mechanised Recovery Vehicles (Repair), FV 514 Mechanised Artillery Observation Vehicles (not the same as the SCOUT SV Joint Fire Control vehicles, or maybe a duplication), or even FV 515 Battery Command Vehicles (more unlikely). Some of them will be converted to the Armoured Battlefield Support Vehicle (ABSV). So altogether, 135 out of the new 380 ariors will be of these variants and won’t receive the CTA cannons. They may, as in the past, receive dummy cannons, well not the ABSV.

So 245 turrets warriors. But wait, the old Army 2020 report (now no longer found but there’s a soft copy), say that there will be a basic number of 14 Warriors per Rifle Company in each of the 6 Warrior Armoured Infantry Battalions. (This is also confirmed in this slightly inaccurate ORBAT and page 85 of Charles Heyman’s book The British Army: A Pocket Guide, 2012-2013). 14 x 3 equals 42 per battalion. 42 x 6 equals 252 warriors across all 6 battalions (Rifle Companies only). That’s a shortfall/deficit of 7 warriors with(out) CTA 40mm cannons. If we include the Warriors in the Manoeuvre Support Compamny and Battalion HQ, the shortfall/defict is even worse. Heyman’s and Armedforces.co.uk ORBATs give 57 x Warrioprs per battalion. Even if e cut down by considering the support Warrior variants and the ABSV, I would wager say just over 50 Warriors with turrets needed per battalion. This gives a shortfall of 55 or so Warriors !!!!

Ok maybe my figures are off and that 245 cannons fits perfectly well for all six Warrior Armoured Infantry battalions. Also it’s worth noting that even in major conflicts such as Operations Granby, Tellic and Herrick, not all Warrior Armoured Infantry Battalions were deployed at once.

I’m not the kind to fuss around with exact numbers, but surely there’s a mismatch here?

Advertisements

British Army Vehicles OSD–Out of Service…

More often than not, the House of Lords doesn’t churn out interesting defence or foreign affairs-related debates or questions-answers. A recent question by Lord Moonie however, breaks the norm. Check it out below :

Armoured Fighting Vehicles
To ask Her Majesty’s Government which of the following vehicle types are still in service with the British Army and what were or are their anticipated out of service dates: Challenger 2, Driver Track Training Vehicle, Challenger Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicles, Trojan, Titan, Warrior, Saxon, Samson, Spartan, Scimitar, Samaritan, Sultan, Snatch Land Rover, FV430, Mastiff, Jackal, Vector, Bulldog, and Panther.

The out of service dates of the vehicles specified are as follows:

Vehicle Type Planned Out Of Service Date
Challenger 2 2025
Driver Track Training Vehicle 2025
Challenger Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicle 2040
Trojan 2040
Titan 2040
Warrior 2025
Saxon Out of service
Samson 2026
Spartan 2026
Scimitar 2026
Samaritan 2026
Sultan 2026
Snatch Land Rover (1, 1.5, 2 and Vixen variants) Out of service
Snatch Land Rover (2A and 2B variants) 2024
Snatch Land Rover (Vixen Plus variant) 2024
FV 430 Out of service
Mastiff 2024
Jackal 2030
Vector 2015
Bulldog 2030
Panther 2037

Well, the above say “anticipated Out of Service Dates (OSD)” but planned may well just be actual. Whatever it is, the table raises worries for the whole Army 2020 and Future Force 2020 equipment plans. Reaction Force (RF) vehicles seem to be leaving pretty early–Challenger 2 and its “Driver Track Training Vehicle” will be OSD by 2025, along with the British Army’s only Armoured Personnel Carrier, the Warrior. These two vehicles are part of the Armoured Infantry (AI) Brigades in the RF. Of course both variants are to upgraded–the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP)and the Challenger 2 Life Extension Programme (LEP). Neither programme is completed and both are facing challenges. A key issues is also the firepower of the Challenger 2 tank–the L30 rifled gun is great, but eventually it should be replaced with something like other NATO armies smoothbore guns in order to tackle adversaries such as the Russian T-90 or the new Armata tank.

Moving down, the Mastiff was to continued be part of the “Heavy Protected Mobility Regiments”. The Mastiff 2 or 3 vehicle is great but the table says “bye bye” to it by 2024. Mastiff is to be replaced by the yet-to-be-shown Utility Vehicle (UV). UV was originally FRES UV, which was to be a similar design to the FRES SV (now SCOUT SV) vehicle. So it is crucial that the UV programme stays on track, or either the Mastiff 2/3 continues beyond 2024.One positive note from above is that the Bulldog armoured/mechanised vehicles will stay at least till 2030. Originally the FV 432, these upgraded vehicles serve as mortar carriers in the Warrior Armoured Infantry Regiments, possibly troop-carrying vehicles for Support Companies and medical armoured vehicles in the Medical Armoured Regiments. If the UV vehicle fails to materialise, perhaps the Bulldog could be an interim. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps… Bulldog may also help as an interim vehicle until the Armoured Battlefield Support Vehicle (ABSV) is finalised. A Warrior without its 30mm/40mm gun, this vehicle is suppose to act as a mortar launching vehicle/sniper/anti-tank troop carrier, recovery and repair and even medical evacuation vehicle. Another programme that must be kept on track.(Also see page 184 of this NAO report regarding the ABSV).

The CVR (T) family will all go by 2026 but they have a stated replacement in the form of the SCOUT SV variants. This heavy armoured infantry fighting vehicle seems to be on track, but one may never know. The Royal Engineers (those supporting the RF) may heavy a sigh of relief as their vehicles wont go out until 2040. These mine clearing, route-clearing vehicles are great, not just in conventional warfare but counter-insurgency (COIN) operations. The Challenger 2 recovery vehicle will still stay around till 2040, so maybe the upgraded Challenger 2 will. Or its successor…

Moving down to the Adaptable Force (AF) vehicles, we see that the Jackal Vehicle (and perhaps its longer Coyote variant) will bow out by 2030. So the Light Cavalry Regiments are fine for a while. Jackal/Coyote is also used in the Mastiff/UV regiments, so that’s also not too bad. They are also crucial reconnaissance vehicles for the Royal Marines and the 16th Air Assault Brigade/Air Assault Task Force. This is especially so for the 16th AA Brigade/AATF, since this unit no longer has Scimitar vehicles supporting it. The lighter-than-the-SCOUT-SV (or even ABSV) Panther Command & Control  vehicle appears to have long “shelf life”, OSD-ing only in 2037. Some commentators I have talked to says this is an over-exaggerated target date. Exaggerated or not, it ensures that AF (and possibly some RF battalions) have some Command and Control vehicles. Panther is nice, though a new variant or vehicle should be procured. One that allows more command staff to sit at the back–2 at the back is far too little. What else? ah, of course the hated Vector vehicle gets OSD this year, 2015. One of the many creations or Urgent Operational Requirements (UORs) during the Afghanistan Campaign, it wasIED-prone despite its supposed armour and hated by troops. It’s supposed replacement is the Truck Utility Medium Heavy Duty. Hopefully it will far better in conflict–if it is used in conflict.

Conclusion: The table above, if the data is correct, means the upgrading programmes for the Challenger 2, the Warrior, the UV programme and even the SCOUT SV programme need to be on track. The Defence Equipment and Support (DES) will have lots of pressure on their hands. With a highly possible defence budget decrease, some numbers of these upgrades will be cut, as seen in this IHS Janes report regarding the Challenger 2. That’s pretty sad. Many other key vehicles such as the AS-90, the Alvis Stormer (for the Starstreak HVM), the Foxhound Light Protected Mobility vehicle aren’t in the above table. It would be interesting to see their OSDs, as they are part of Army 2020 or Future Force 2020.

Update: I made and received an FOIA regarding other other key Army 2020 vehicles. Part of the FOIA (I will not publish the full document) is reproduced below.

A search for the information has now been completed within the Ministry of Defence, and I can confirm that information in scope of your request is held. The answers to your questions are in the table below:

Vehicle Out of service date
FUCHs 2020
Warthog 2024
L131 AS-90 Self Propelled Artillery 2030
M270 GMLRS 2030
Alvis Stormer 2026
Ridgback Battlefield Ambulance 2024
Husky TSV 2024
Foxhound 2030

Well it looks like the major artillery pieces for 1st Artillery Brigade’s Close Support regiments will stay on till around 2030. There is a high probability that the UK will replace the M270 GMLRS with whatever the US Army replaces theirs with, or even buy the (better) HIMARS. As for the AS-90, well I would recommend they just improve the calibre or the type of artillery shell.

The UOR bought from Singapore, (yes Singapore, an ex-British colony), the ST Kinetics Bronco ,or Warthog in the British Army, will will serve in the Watchkeeper WK450 regiments–they act as launching platforms. More specifically, they will probably be allocated in 47th Regiment, Royal Artillery (RA), the regiment for RF brigades. The Bronco/Warthog served well in Op Herrick, and transferring it to a UAV role, is well, the least they could do. With an OSD in 2024, the RA or rather DES needs to find a replacement vehicle or work with ST Kinetics to extended the lifespan of this vehicle. Possible replacements could be the BvS 10 Viking (which means ordering more), or using the yet-to-be seen Utility Vehicle (UV).

The earliest vehicle about to exit is the FUCHS (in 2020). This as stated in an earlier post (or here) returns to be be the primary vehicle of Falcon Squadron, Royal Tank Regiment (RTR). With CBRN being a hot issue for UK defence (or rather suggested as a key topic by the HOC Defence Select Committe), nine FUCHS vehicles will be refurbished. Yet, with the vehicle predicted to be OSD by 2020, it possibly has no replacement (a A letter by the RTR Commandant suggests it may be replaced by a UAV ). I personally would want a FUCHS-like vehicle replacement for the FUCHS, possibly a modified UV.

Next, the Alvis Stormer will bow out in 2026. Although not spelt out directly in the Army 2020 document, it is used to give mobility for the Starstreak HVM missiles in 12th Regiment Royal Artillery. I can’t immediately think of what can be used to replace the Stormer; the SCOUT SV base for example is too heavy for a mobile SAM platform. Thy might want to buy the US AN/TWQ-1 Avenger vehicle from the US or mount them on Coyotes. The wheeled ambulance, the Rigdback Ambulance exits in 2024. Don’t worry, the UV medical variant might replace it, maybe. The Husky TSV, another piece that sprung up from Afghanistan, is important to both the RF and AF units. I hope there’s a replacement in the works, or it gets extended beyond 2024. Finally, the good ol’ Foxhound, which will dominate six regiments/battalions in the AF. 2030 eh? Matches its friends the Jackal and perhaps the Panther. Still sometime to think of a better replacement, hopefully one that can sit more than four soldiers.

OK folks, that’s it for now!

Musings of the Foxhound Regiments/Battalions

Towards the end of the Afghanistan Campaign, the British Army fielded the Foxhound or Force Protection Ocelot vehicle as one of its final means to protect personnel from Taliban/insurgent Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). In its 2012 Army 2020 brochure, Foxhound was stated to be part of the 1st (United Kingdom) Division or the Adaptable Force (AF). In total, six infantry regiments would become Light Protected Mobility Regiments, with troops primarily mounted in these vehicles (more details below). Each of them will be paired with an Army Reserve (AR) (formerly Territorial Army) battalion. These Light Protected Mobility Battalions will be :

1) 2 YORKS, paired with 4 YORKS (4th Infantry Brigade)

2) 2 R ANGLIAN, paired with 3 R ANGLIAN (7th Infantry Brigade)

3) 1 R IRISH, paired with 2 R IRISH (7th Infantry Brigade)

4) 1 WELSH GUARDS, paired with 3 R WELSH (or any of the Guards regiments on rotation) (11th Infantry Brigade)

5) 3 RIFLES, paired with 5 RRF (51st Infantry Brigade)

6) 3 SCOTS, paired with 7 SCOTS (51st Infantry Brigade)

Now, the 2012 brochure gave only a vague idea idea what a Foxhound/Light Protected Mobility Battalion would be like. It showed the generic Infantry structure: 3 Rifle Companies, 1 Support Company, and missing but needed, a Headquarters company. That’s fine. Yet, unlike the Armoured Infantry (Warrior) and Heavy Protected Mobility Regiments, no number of vehicles per Rifle Company is specified. (These mentioned regiments have the long standing 14 vehicles per regiment). The Foxhound/Light Protected Mobility unit is a new British Army unit. Looking at the not-so-updated armedforces.co.uk website (see this), there is no former equivalent to a Light Protected Mobility Infantry unit. The Warrior Armoured Infantry remains, and the Mechanised Infantry Regiments/Bulldog Regiments will be the Heavy Protected Mobility/Mastiff unit. Each of these will have a basic 14 vehicles per Rifle Company. But there is no stated number in the 2012 or 2013 Army 2020 brochures/documents.

There was a MOD news article that stated more Foxhounds were purchased, bringing the total to 400. There could be less in service, as there usually are with British Army/MOD numbers. But let’s assume for the moment that there are enough for all six regiments (excluding the paired AR units). Let’s do Assumption 1: 14 Foxhounds per Rifle Company. That means plus Support and HQ Companies, multiply by six, say about 300 needed. That rests comfortable within the 400 figure. But wait, this ignores the number of personnel in each Foxhound Rifle Company. A 3 September 2012 written question by the very active Scottish National Party (SNP) MP Angus Robertson revealed a rough number for Army 2020 units. Foxhound battalions would have 581 men. However, this number includes “All unit strengths include other arms attached to the units such as Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, Royal Army Medical Corps, Adjutant General Corps (Staff and Personnel Support), Royal Logistic Corps, Royal Army Physical Training Corps and Royal Army Chaplains Department personnel.” Another written question by the same MP revealed a figure of 505 men, excluding personnel from other branches.

Now, the official General Dynamics Lands Systems (GDLS) Ocelot or Foxhound and the Army Recognition datasheet says a Foxhound Protected Patrol Variant/Vehicle (PPV) seats a 2 (driver and commander) and 4 troops/personnel/passengers. I assume with confidence Army 2020’s Foxhound regiments will be the PPV variant and not the recce or utility variant (perhaps these still will be used). Now, one section in the British Army’s infantry consist of eight men, although a Warrior armoured infantry section is seven (eight I guess if you counted the vehicle commander .) A Mastiff 2/3 can hold up to eight soliders, but I’m guessing it will be seven like with the Warrior section vehicle. (It might be less, since the Combat Capability for the Future document said 30 men in 4 Mastiffs.). Given a 2+4 configuration for the Foxhound, that covers half to three-quarters of a section, depending if you consider the driver and the vehicle commander as part of the section. There would be at least two to four soldiers missing, possibly making it two (2) foxhounds per section, meaning at least six (6) Foxhounds per platoon. Giving that there might be only two platoons of Regular Army platoons per Rifle Company (if we trust the Combat Capability document.).

That means at least 18 Foxhounds per Company, 54 per Rifle Company…that will almost burst the 400 vehicle mark. So ok, 1 Foxhound is 1 infantry section of 6 soldiers the most. Maybe the driver may have to dismount for close combat operations–I can’t imagine the section being just five men! So that reduces to three (3) Foxhounds per platoon, six (6) per Rifle Company, 18 per battalion (excluding Support Companies), and at least 108 for all six regiments. That’s not bad.

I’m not sure if the AR platoon joining each Rifle Company will mount on a Foxhound or a maybe a RWMIK (Revised Weapons Mounted Installation Kit) vehicle (which sits only three.). Nah, could be be a Foxhound. I can’t imagine them “torturing” the AR platoon by making them walk…There is still a fourth Regular Army Platoon in each Rifle Company, but its not mounted on Foxhounds. Instead as the 2 YORKS November 2014 update states, the third platoon in each Rifle Company will be a re-roled as a machine gun platoon (“re-roling the third platoon in each rifle coy as a machine gun platoon”). Following from the Combat Capability document, this machine gun platoon (possibly using the Heavy Machine Gun while the normal Foxhound gets a GPMG) will be mounted on RWMIK vehicles.

This mention of AR platoon shows that the The Foxhound Light Protected Mobility unit is unique and one of the distinguishing features of the Army 2020 concept. The Army Reserve ORBAT shows that AR infantry units will contain three companies, down from four. Beyond just providing a platoon to Foxhound they have to provide “sections to Support company [platoons]”. This is very general–is it one section of AR troops to the assault pioneer, reconnaissance, sniper, mortar and anti-tank (Javelin) platoons, or some of these units. This pairing would mean an increase in the overall Foxhound Light Protected Mobility unit to beyond the basic 505 or 585 figure.

This of course assumes that the AR infantry units attached to the regular Foxhound units are at full (100 %) staffing. As noted above, I can’t see the AR platoons/personnel walking on foot while the regular army guys (and girls) ride on Foxhounds and other vehicles. After all, the Combat Capability document states “Initially, all PM vehicles will be held in the Regular [Light Protected] battalions but as capability increases it may become possible to transfer elements to Reserve units.” So maybe they will get to ride on Foxhounds. But more crucially, the AR personnel have to be there to fill the gaps. Foxhound or no Foxhound, or even if there’s no other vehicles like the Ridgeback or Husky , the AR troops numbers must be there, especially for the Support Company. I can’t imagine deployments where there aren’t enough pioneers, reece, sniper, mortar, or anti-tank troops. (If there’s no AR Rifle platoon no so bad, since there’s 2 x Foxhound platoons and 1 x machine platoon in the regular force.)

I wish the British Army updates it’s website to inform interested people like me on the Foxhound Light Protected Mobility battalion.

One Company: The central unit for the British Army’s external engagement

So Army 2020 plans are slightly changing (I’ll blog about that later). But first, a short post on British Army deployments. To the average observer, hey there’s x or y regiment deploying for training or military engagement. People would assume it is a whole brigade/battalion-sized unit deploying for the operation/exercise. Nope. It’s actually (usually) one company-sized unit that deploys. Let’s take a look:

1) This article does clarify that only 1 Squadron (Royal Armoured Corps terminology), D Squadron of the Queen’s Royal Lancers was deployed. Some may it’s the full QRL but it is highly likely just one squadron given the number of vehicles and troops stated.

2) This one explicitly says it’s just one squadron from the 26 Engineer Regiment, namely 30 Armoured Engineer Squadron.

3) Even in the British Army Training Unit Suffield (BATUS) area in Canada, it’s just one squadron that’s deployed per regiment. You may say the tweet just shows just D squadron but the whole of the Queen’s Royal Lancers deploy. More often that not, it is one squadron from each unit type–armoured/light infantry, armour, armoured cavalry, Combat Service Support etc that forms a Battlegroup or Lead Armoured Battle Group (see the 2012 Army 2020 leaflet).

4) For overseas exercises like Exercise Silver Arrow, it’s also just a Company that deploys/is deployed. In this case, Chindit Company, 2nd Battalion the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment. (Same exercise here). For Exercise Rapid Trident, it was not the whole of the Light Dragoons, but just B Company. (See also this tweet, same exercise). In Exercise Jebel Tarik, the Light Dragoons again only deployed B Squadron, while in EX JEBEL SAHARA, C Squadron was sent.

5) Training with the UK’s closest ally, the United States (US), also involved one squadron from the (really) rapid deployment unit, the Parachute Regiment. In this case, B Company, 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment “integrated” with a Brigade Combat Team (BCT) from the 82nd Airborne Division. One UK Company with one US BCT (US BCTs, even airborne/infantry are larger than normal brigade-sized units).

6) The news and social media has been writing much about Exercise Black Eagle, the British Army’s Lead Armoured Battlegroup’s training with the Polish Army in Poland. Battlegroup is the key term here–in British Armed Forces’ definition, its one unit, plus others. In this case, it’s not even one full brigade. Rather, it’s “an armoured squadron of Challenger 2s, two Warrior armoured infantry squadrons and protected mobility infantry company” (see this link . There’s actually more than that, but it’s not the topic here). The Armour squadron mentioned is C Squadron, the King’s Royal Husssars. (Ok, this link says it’s D Squadron. And for 1 R WELSH it is at least A Company, definitely 1 Platoon)

7) The lead Air Assault Task Force is not made up of all the units of 16 Air Assault Brigade. It’s not even made up on all the units of 2nd or 3rd Battalion, the Parachute Regiment. Rather it consists of companies/squadron-sized units from 16 AA, plus one, yes only one parachute-trained Rifle Company from either 2 or 3 PARA. In the latest Salisbury Plain Exercise, this was C Company, 3 PARA. Even the Lead Armoured/Mechanised task force in Exercise WESSEX STORM consists of a company-sized unit leading a battlegroup. In this case, it’s the Left Flank, 1st Battalion the Scots Guards (Left Flank is the name of a Rifle Company within 1 SCOTS).

8) Most recently, G Battery, 7th Royal Horse Artillery Regiment, partnered with the US 82nd Airborne Division’s Artillery to improve inter-operability so that both airborne forces can deploy together. See this link.

So the British Army’s exercises or deployments aren’t about whole Brigades/Regiments/Battalions. They are Company-sized units. What does this mean for the British Army in the future?

1) It obviously mean the onus is on the company. I’m not sure when the British started deploying their units via single companies–it could have been before or after the 2010 SDSR–but this certainly means the British Army and the UK armed forces overseas engagements rest with a company-sized unit.

2) It means that Majors (Major is the basic rank for British Army Company) and Warrant Officer Twos (W02s) (sometimes Warrant Officer One (WO1)) are give great responsibilities–they have to be the read to lead their units/be ready to move (RTM) and have to ready to engage with international partners/allies or even be ready to engage adversaries. Majors, ther 2ICs (Captains most definitely), and their RSMs will have to act as ambassadors during military engagements/training exercises (see example 8). They will have to be ready to talk to British media, foreign media regarding a range of military and non-military topics. As leaders of only a company, they will have to quikcly learn how to work with foreign militaries, especially those with different standard operating procedures (SOPs). I believe in most other militaries, only Lieutenant Colonels and above have the academic and army training to work seamlessly with other armed forces. This is not to say all British Army Majors and senior non-commissioned officers (SNCOs) are not able to work with other armies. However, since companies may or will be the main unit of defence engagement, their OCs and leaders must quickly learn how to engage and related with others

3) It means a hundred plus (depending of the size of the company) soldiers themselves have to learn how to engage with other militaries or citizens (suppose they get deployed for non-combat duties). They have to learn culture, languages, SOPs, even simple manners. Which every company/battery/squadron deployed overseas must train its men to know how to work with other armies/armed forces.

4) It means as a company they will have to present themselves with the image of at least a battalion/regiment to their foreign counterparts. I mean, given the size of British Army/Royal Marine companies/squadrons, they have to show their counterparts/allieds they are still a viable force. Of course as mentioned, this company may travel as part of a larger Battlegroup–they “tailored” unit in British Army’ operations. They may be complemented by HQ staff, support arms and others. Even so, they still need to present themselves as a force. And, should conflict break out, UK companies would be the first to deploy now, especially given the Army 2020 concept of A) the Lead Air Assault Task Force, B) The Lead Armoured Task Force/Battlegroup C) and NATO’s new Very High Readiness Task Force.

More points to be added later