14.1 |
Military equipment (post-conflict)
“Following
a visit to South Africa in July 2006, it was concluded by Brigadier
Moore
that the
RG31 would be a strong contender should the Army want a heavier
and
better
protected PPV. Getting the Army to want such a vehicle to the point
where
it was
prepared to allocate funding to it was the key point. I pushed to
try to make
this
happen.
“I asked
Des Browne to direct me to look into this issue.”294
565.
While
discussions about the medium weight PPV were ongoing,
Gen Dannatt
wrote to
Gen Jackson in July about the level of operational risk on
current operations.295
Gen Dannatt
was to take over as Chief of the General Staff in August. He
wrote:
“The pace
and changing dynamics in theatre have brought into sharp relief
the
concerns
that you and I have about support to current operations. In
addition,
Ministers
have recently faced difficult questions in the House. Given that
there are
some
important discussions in ECAB, Programme and Planning Strategy
Group,
and DMB in
the next few days, I thought I should set out now very clearly my
view
of the
unacceptable areas of risk.”
566.
Gen Dannatt
described four “major concerns as the Force provider”,
protected
mobility
and protected patrol vehicles being his “first and overriding
concern”.
567.
Gen Dannatt
wrote that the use of Vector, up‑armoured FV430 and Warrior
would
“provide a
balanced capability” in the short term which could be “tailored to
met the
different
demands” of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was “accepted”
that Vector
would not
provide “full protection against all threats” but it would
“increase survivability
compared
with Snatch improved protection, greater mobility and larger
capacity)” and
he believed
that there was “no immediate or practicable
alternative”.
568.
Gen Dannatt
stated that there was therefore “an urgent need to complete the
buy
of Vector
now”. While plans in place meant that that “should achieve the
immediate goal”
for
Afghanistan, it would leave forces in Iraq with Snatch “for the
foreseeable future”.
He wrote:
“How the
remainder of the PPV capability shortfall should best be addressed
will
require
further consideration. If a better PPV than Vector can be
developed, and
delivered
in the right timeframe, then clearly we should pursue this line.
However,
I reiterate
the need for a balanced capability …”
569.
“In parallel”,
Gen Dannatt thought that there was “an urgent need to complete
the
upgrade of
FV430s”.
294
Statement,
18 January 2011, pages 5‑6.
295
Letter
Dannatt to Jackson, July 2006, ‘The Level of Operational Risk on
Current Operations’.
93