The Army’s £6.3 billion Ajax armoured vehicle may never be deemed fit for combat, MPs have warned, after years of delays and persistent concerns over the impact of noise and vibration on its crew.
The system was initially expected to enter service in 2017 but has been repeatedly hit by setbacks over crew safety. Although the vehicle was finally cleared for operations last November, an exercise had to be halted within weeks because soldiers experienced symptoms linked to noise and vibration.
“MPs warn £6.3bn Ajax armoured vehicle may never be fit for combat due to noise and vibration concerns.”
Westminster’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said there were “unrealistic expectations” about how soldiers could safely operate the armoured vehicle in a war zone. In its report, the committee noted that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) asserted there were “no safety concerns about Ajax provided it was operated and maintained correctly within its design parameters”. Soldiers had been instructed to carry out maintenance checks every time they stop the vehicle, but the MoD “did not explain the practicality of this for soldiers operating Ajax for long periods in combat”.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the PAC chairman, said: “Our thoughts are with all those soldiers who reported symptoms from noise and vibration after operating these vehicles, and we were frankly astounded to hear officials explain that proper use of Ajax requires maintenance checks every time it is stopped. This is frankly an insult to intelligence, and much good may this advice do our fighting men and women if called upon to operate Ajax in combat. The MoD must now explain how it will make Ajax fit for purpose, and how much this will cost.”
The committee said: “It remains a matter of concern whether the Ajax armoured vehicle is fit for purpose. Armoured vehicles which injure soldiers when they are operated outside rigid parameters will be of little use on the modern battlefield.”
Ajax is manufactured by General Dynamics in Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales. The MPs demanded to know how much the firm is willing to pay for “delays in delivering a vehicle that is fit for purpose”. The committee also noted that the department discussed a potential package of “Ajax 2” improvements, but warned there is a risk that it ends up spending even more than planned “in the hope of salvaging something from the Ajax programme”.
The MPs were also scathing about the impact of delays in the publication of the government’s defence investment plan (DIP), originally due last year but which may now not appear until July. Sir Geoffrey said: “Those responsible may argue there are good reasons…”