Nah. There was an interim Dual Mode brimstone with a SAL seeker, before Brimstone 2. It was only in service on Tornado GR.4 however.
You can tell them apart because the DMB had a yellow HE band for the rocket motor from the original Brimstone, positioned about mid-way along the rear fins.
And Brimstone 2 has a brown Low Explosive band which is positioned towards the front of the fins, for the larger IM-compliant motor.
There’s also some construction differences around the front fins, where the main warhead is located - you can probably see the additional screws
What we have ingame for all aircraft using Brimstone, is the interim Dual Mode Brimstone with the smaller motor, even though IRL they were all expended on Tornado GR.4 operations and replaced by Brimstone 2 before Eurofighter integration or any exports of Brimstones with SAL seekers.
Yes but that’s because its a Mk.20 Bidder with a dual mode. So you lose your range for speed in high speed mode, or you’re just a Bidder.
Its even slower than the Tigerfish, but not so slow that its functionally useless like the slow-mode Bidder. This hits 28 knots, SSN’s can go to 30 and new ones have speeds of ~35knots, but diesel electrics won’t exceed 20 and by the time you fire a torpedo a competent Commander should’ve set up an ambush well within the range of the torpedo so the SSN won’t have time to accelerate away.
It wasn’t a good torpedo, and equally, was one of the several torpedo’s the US saw the brief sheet for and begged us to just order one of theirs or even just license one resized to fit our 533mm tubes.
I’d err on the side of caution with the reporting recently. pretty much everything on Ajax the past day or two has been extremely poor quality journalism (one of them had something along the lines of “we stood near tank and it was loud???”).
Ajax is plagued with sensationalism and false reporting because of the problems it’s had, so it’s really hard to decipher what is and isn’t true, but this recent wave is suspicious.
Errr no, that’s just stating a fact that Ajax sucks (genuinely keen to see what substantiation there is and if anyone else picks up that article, Sky can sometimes overly embellish stuff)
The headline being ‘troops in hospital’ is a teeny bit OTT.
Things I’ve heard about Ajax. I’m not in the services so this is pure second-hand/third-hand stuff that has likely been dumbed down so a civvy like me can understand it.
In terms of tech it is absolutely loaded with toys and gadgets. Not quite F-35 levels of battlefield awareness but not a million miles off.
40mm is a better weapon than RARDEN - if nothing else because of the ammunition choices available in 40mm.
Mobility is good. Certainly for the size/weight of the thing ‘it can shift’.
One point I heard was that if Ajax were being tested in the 1970s - the issues of crew comfort/noise wouldn’t even enter the equation. In fact, AFVs weren’t even tested for interior DB levels until the 1990s if I recall. However, by the standards of the 2020s - SOME crew really don’t do well with it, motion sickness, etc.
It is also replacing the Warrior - which was an incredibly good vehicle with decades of service under it’s belt. Ergo, some very big shoes to fill and thus not a great deal of sympathy from some quarters when these issues arise.
Add in a good dose of MOD Procurement Incompetence and you get Ajax. It’ll probably turn out okay in time, but late and costing more than originally specc’d. Like most British weapons systems, then…
Report from a sky defence correspondent “it has a gun” I genuinely had to stop and laugh
However in fairness she released more on her twitter with her overall impression and that was that it was a failure and didn’t suite the army’s more evolved requirements however they were putting on a brave face and were going to go with it and just make it work as best they could.
I mean while I’m not green I’m in the mob, so… from what I hear Ajax is still sketch as whatsit.
Both of which are fortunately saving graces. The CTA 40 is definitely a weapon system I want in on (any chance the RN could bin off the ASCG 30mm for the CTA 40mm?)
As for the situational awareness, again, I really hope so, because otherwise this is one massive fat waste of money.
As far as I’m concerned now it works it’s fine but the requirement was short sighted and CV-90 is better in every way from all angles as a consideration both as a package and as a individual vehicle.
CV-90 would’ve also been actually exportable from the UK with our turret British built hulls etc but nobody in their right mind is going to buy Ajax or any of its derivatives
On this note whilst Thales Rapidfire is good a Bofors 40mm is better in every way and we own Bofors too and that includes a Thales rapidfire with LMM too Bofors 40mm still wins
notwithstanding the fairly massive public whinge episodes on it. There’s also the EBRC with the CTA40 iirc, and that thing can also be converted more (if the French wanted it to be)
That’s not even why its not so exportable. Its the complete travesty that the vehicle development has been noone is going to invest in something like that compared to CV-90 that’s been as smooth as butter.
Not to mention that any advantages Ajax may or may not have had (because there had to be some justification bar the government bribes/corruption that meant Ajax got chosen), the new CV-90 MK.IV hull and upcoming MK.V hull have both surpassed any ASCOD modification theorised or realised.
CV-90 also does this great thing where it carries troops as well as being a scout vehicle whilst being 15% smaller than Ajax. PUMA does the same thing which is why despite it’s flaws I still think its a respectable but overspecialised vehicle.
