Memorandum from the Ministry of Defence
INTRODUCTION
1. The MoD has outlined a two track approach
to meeting its armoured fighting vehicle requirement. In the short
term it has an urgent need to respond to the pressing need on
current operations and is upgrading the current fleet of its medium
weight armoured vehicles. In the longer term it needs to equip
UK Armed Forces with new medium weight armoured vehicles that
will be effective across the full spectrum of operations including
rapid intervention, enduring Peacekeeping and Peace Enforcement
and supporting high intensity, major combat operations. The FRES
programme is the response to this longer term requirement.
2. FRES will deliver a fleet of wheeled
and tracked armoured vehicles capable of meeting these needs,
of operating across the spectrum of operations and protected against
the most likely threats. They will be designed to operate more
freely than heavy armour forces in theatres with poor infrastructure
and to be able to exploit the opportunities offered by the UK's
developing Network Enabled Capability. [1]FRES
will deliver increased capability with higher levels of strategic
deployability, survivability and lethality than our existing lighter
armoured vehicles, with the potential to further enhance its capability
as new technology becomes available. The combined effect of maximising
commonality at sub-system level and increased reliability through
a programme of reliability growth trials will contribute both
to a coherent operational capability, and to minimising logistic
and training requirements.
REQUIREMENT
3. The Army currently consists of heavy[2]
and light forces. Heavy forces are optimised for major combat
operations against a technologically mature opponent, although
they have utility across the spectrum of operations. They are
a potent force, but are relatively slow to deploy and their sustainment
imposes a heavy logistic burden. Light forces, typically equipped
only with soft skin vehicles, offer rapid deployment and flexibility,
and are particularly well suited to operating in complex environments
(such as built up areas, jungles and mountains), but they have
limited protection and endurance. Within the heavy force there
are a number of lighter armoured vehicles[3]
which have historically provided an acceptable level of capability,
either by avoiding direct confrontation with the enemy, acting
in conjunction with heavy forces and suppressive indirect fire,
or by limiting their deployments to the relatively benign environments
of Peace Support Operations. [4]
4. The Balanced Force concept seeks to create
medium forces—offering better protection and firepower than
light forces but without the deployment, logistic and mobility
penalties associated with heavy forces—in order to support
expeditionary operations in a wide range of theatres. FRES will
provide over 75% of the armoured vehicles to this medium force
and provide the basis of a Small Scale airportable Focused Intervention
capability. It will also constitute some 55% of the heavy force,
replacing Saxon, Combat Vehicles Reconnaissance (Tracked) and
elements of the FV430 series.
5. In the future, some medium weight vehicles
will have the firepower to defeat enemy armour. Other FRES vehicles
will rely on emerging technologies such as Defensive Aid Suites
and reduced probability of detection via signature management
in order to survive in the direct fire zone. [5]Current
experience has shown that the proliferation of more capable weapons,
optimised for short range attacks and for use in complex environments,
will make it unlikely that medium weight vehicles will be able
to avoid encounters with the enemy. They will therefore need appropriate
levels of protection, although the concept of "medium weight"
will continue to preclude the highest levels of protection.
6. This is a complex and challenging set
of requirements and a careful balance is required to achieve the
quickest possible timescale for an acceptable capability. Rapid
deployment is required and a portion of the vehicles need to be
air-deployable by A400M and C17 aircraft, which places limits
on vehicle weight and levels of armour protection.
NUMBERS, ROLES
AND FAMILIES
7. The programme is planning on delivering
over 3,000 vehicles in up to 16 battlefield roles. The total capability
is expected to comprise three families of vehicles; Utility, Reconnaissance
and Heavy. An incremental approach to capability delivery is envisaged
and the current planning assumption is that the Initial Operating
Capability (IOC) will equip a Mechanised Infantry Battalion with
the first elements of the Utility fleet. There will be a phased
approach to delivering the full capability thereafter.
8. On present plans, the IOC is expected
to comprise the first deliveries of the Protected Mobility, Command
and Control, Light Armoured Support, Medical, Repair and Recovery
and Driver Training variants. Other elements of the Utility fleet,
to be delivered in later planned increments include specialist
communications, electronic warfare and sensors vehicles.
9. The requirement describes a range of
Reconnaissance roles including Scout (for Formation and Close
Reconnaissance, Ground Based Surveillance, Indirect Fire Control
and Formation Reconnaissance capability, as well as Medical and
Equipment Support vehicles.
10. The Heavy family covers Fires and Manoeuvre
Support roles. Included in the Fires will be the Direct Fire and
Indirect Fire Support roles; Manoeuvre Support covers the earth
moving, obstacle breaching and bridge laying roles. As with the
Utility and Reconnaissance families, the heavy family vehicles
will have its own repair and recovery capability and a driver
training vehicle.
THE INITIAL
ASSESSMENT PHASE
11. The initial Assessment Phase (iAP) was
approved in April 2004. The iAP focuses primarily on the Utility
roles whilst ensuring that any decisions regarding the Utility
Vehicle Fleet are taken within the broader context of the full
capability and take full account of commonality and coherence
across the fleet.
12. The objectives for this phase are to
define the requirement and identify options for meeting it, to
understand and where necessary mitigate technical risk and to
recommend an optimum acquisition strategy. The work is being done
under the strategic direction of the Integrated Project Team who
are leading a team that includes Atkins Defence, an independent
Systems House (SH), who provide much of the technical effort and
Defence Science and Technology Laboratories, who are leading the
programme of supporting analysis.
13. Progress has been maintained against
all three of the objectives of this phase.
— To date all decision milestones
on the development of requirements and assessment of options to
meet it have been met.
— An acquisition strategy is being
developed to incorporate the Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS)
and take account of the views of industry.
— Technical risk reduction work
(the Technology Demonstrator Programmes) has been launched and
is making good progress.
14. The iAP was originally scheduled to
complete in November 2006. This has since been extended and it
will now run until July 2007 to take full account of the outputs
from the Technology Demonstration Programme (TDP) contracts which
were awarded later than originally planned, due to a variety of
cost, technical and intellectual property issues, now satisfactorily
resolved; and also to conduct some further risk reduction work
into issues that have emerged in the earlier stages of the iAP.
15. These TDPs address the risks associated
with the key characteristics of armoured vehicle design including
Physical and Electronic architectures and Survivability. Also
included in this first tranche of nine TDPs is the development
of a new gap crossing capability. This technical risk reduction
work will serve as a means of assessing and, where necessary,
accelerating the maturity of candidate technologies in order to
determine if they are applicable to FRES. The TDPs are proceeding
well and are due to deliver their outputs on time against the
contract schedules. A list of the individual TDPs being conducted
during the initial Assessment Phase is at Annex A.
ASSESSMENT PHASE
16. The approval cost of the initial Assessment
Phase is £113 million. The current estimate to complete the
Assessment Phase for the Utility roles is £120 million, following
the decision to extend this phase. The preliminary scoping and
planning work for the Assessment Phases for the Reconnaissance
and Heavy roles has begun but substantial work is subject to further
Departmental approval. The assessment phase spend for the Reconnaissance
and Heavy roles has yet to be decided but is expected to be several
hundreds of million pounds.
IN SERVICE
DATE
17. As the Committee has recognised the
ISD will not be set until the Main Gate business case is approved.
Assessment Phase work does include exploring innovative ways of
accelerating the programme to achieve the earliest practicable
date for entry into service without compromising acceptable programme
risk or long term change capability.
25 September 2006
1 Including enhanced Situational Awareness and the
ability to exploit enabling capabilities outside the FRES force. Back
2
Including current armoured and mechanised brigades which, although
differing in detail, are both characterised by Challenger 2 and
Warrior AFVs. Back
3
Saxon GWR, CVR(T) and FV 430. Back
4
The assumption that all Peace Support Operations take place in
benign environments is no longer valid. Back
5
Reconnaissance vehicles trade protection for small size, reduced
vehicle signature and the ability to access the most marginal
of terrains, all of which enhance their survivability and effectiveness. Back
| 
