they seemed to be moving away from tracked vehicles because technology has moved on. tracks are much slower than wheels and harder to repair and wheels can tackle harder terrain now.

I don't think it is "cheap" but price is always an important criterium. The Boxer is already in use or ordered by the Forces, so they can score on combined driver training and parts compabilty Another advantage is that it doesn't need lowloaders or trains when quick transfers are necessary. You loose long times being in open spaces loading or unloading the vehicles. It can move dispersed, in small groups on different routes and different times, where trains and tracks are vulnerable targets. A lower price brings an important advantage in endurance. Ordnance is expensive and without ordnance the system is worth nothing. So in one way it is important to have a mix of expensive and less expensive grenades for different purposes, but also the system can not be to expensive. The more expensive is not always better.

There is not much bouncing and if there is it is corrected automatically. Otherwise the RCH 155 could not fire while driving

@@85daniel indeed modern tanks have stabalising equipment. this isn't new stuff, there is a video of a german leopard driving over bumps with a pint of beer on the barrell and it doesn't spill a drop. that was from the 80's i think.

@@dimwitsixtytwelve Wheeled vehicles can't handle soft/ boggy ground in the same way as tracked vehicles because they are prone to get bogged in up to their axles and need to be recovered by dedicated vehicles making them an easy target for counter-battery fire! It doesn't take long to get bogged in.

The Boxer IFV can be divided into 2 parts, one mission module that contains the personnel etc and the other part includes the chassis and powerpack etc. The whole vehicle can be taken into a workshop and have its mission module swapped out for a different one to change its role. Now, whilst it's ok for an IFV to do this, it's possible that someone within the MOD has incorrectly thought that this could apply to the RCH and have a load of RCH modules sitting in storage waiting to be swapped over as and when needed! the problem here is that the RCH cnassis is an entirely different beast and putting an RCH Module on a non-RCH chassis is a disarster whait to happen! The MOD is potentially investing in an unproven system (yet again) with all the potentail cost overruns etc instead of buying a quasi off the self system. I suspect that of the planned 100+ systems the BA wants, it will be luckk to get 30 operational systems at any given point in time and the rest will be in storage be it in ether module or as a whole vehicle/ parts!

@@simonallen6427 sounds about right.

These vehicles have been specially made with extremely good armour so they should be able to take a few hits from drones before actually getting damaged

Drones are a risk. But don’t let the picture in Ukraine confuse you. Ukraine doesn’t have air supremacy, like NATO would acquire quickly in ANY conflict (barring against China, but hard to see how a NATO-China conflict could arise). Once you have air supremacy everything has to move far, far back. Also don’t confuse the static picture in Ukraine, which enables small drone teams to get close to the front line, with what a NATO/Russia conflict would look like. Drones are a risk. But the conflict in Ukraine is misleading lots of people into believing that nothing will survive against them on a modern battlefield.

Very true.

That is why we must invest in excellent electronic countermeasures and shoot down capabilities when facing the inevitable autonomous drone systems.

@@Trooptalk17 The main reason why the Boxer RCH was chosen is because it has a common platform with the Boxer IFV, with all the Logistics support that goes with it, making it the cheapest option, The Boxer RCH has the same level of armour protection to is IFV cousin, which is saying much during a direct fire mission because at least the AS90 et al has a chance to withstand a 125mm round through the front Glasis plate as a posed to a hot knife through butter with this vehicle!

Like stated in the video, they only purchased 14 because they are just a filler till the permanent artillery systems come into service. If they purchased lots of them and then the permanent ones come in a year later then that’s a waste of money.

@@Trooptalk17 Right!!!! I thought it was because the Country is broke and run and inhabited by idiots. Any other excuses?

The archers are a temporary infill for the Artillery Gapped solution and will no doubt be sold/ donated to a third country when the AS90s replacement enters service!

The UK are purchasing 116 boxers not 14.

@@Trooptalk17 Prepare for disappointment on those 116 boxers, also have some recovery vehicles ready to constantly pull them out of the mud

@@Trooptalk17 Granted this is an aspiration, how many will see service though?