Talk:List of equipment of the British Army

Future equipment
Should the Future equipment section include equipment that has been/is being trialled, as I'm sure the Army trials hundreds of different things? I think it should just include equipment that has been ordered/planned to be in service. BritishSpaniard (talk) 03:41, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

C8 SFW/L119A1
Why no mention of it? Spartan198 13:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

You mean apart from here? TangoSixZero (talk) 21:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Javelin Wrong?
The page lists the "FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank weapon", but when you click the link the page for that says "For the British Javelin missile see Javelin surface-to-air missile." So either somebody has put the wrong Javelin down on this page, or the British Army uses the American missile as well and the page needs to list both. Which is it?
 * It's right. Javelin SAM is gone now and been replaced with Starstreak, and the FGM-148 has been adopted. King nothing 17:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, we still have Malkara, SS11 and Swingfire listed as ATGM and I doubt any of those are still kicking about either so confusion is inevitable. If we're going to have historical missiles in one catefory, perhaps we should note them in others... 62.196.17.197 (talk) 12:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Uniform
If I'm not mistaken, current uniform was modified in 2000 and is known as Soldier 2000. The DPM remained the same. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Rob cowie 18:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Not last time I checked. What's your source? The entire uniform section is really in need of a clean up and perhaps a separate page. Currently it reads like part promotional brochure, part enthusiast's ramblings.

For example: "At least six different disrupted pattern materials (DPM) are in use by British Armed Forces." This is completely untrue and the source cited is an airsoft enthusiasts' website.

Soldier 2000 is a fiction drempt up by surplus stores and Airsofters note the document's date.

Soldier 2000 is a name used by shops, its not an actual official british army system.134.36.93.46 (talk) 15:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

L85A2
It says here that it is regarded as the least reliable, when it contradicts it with saying the 62,000 rounds were fired without a stoppage?, the mood from most people who have fired it and the previous models is that it is very reliable when compared withe the L85A1. King nothing 13:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Light support weapon
"the L86A2’s LSW's accuracy is so great that it’s primary role within many infantry sections has shifted to that of a marksman's weapon"

yeah its true. It was never a good LSW anyway, but the heavier barrel and weight in particular makes it much better as a designated marksmans weapon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.93.46 (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

GPMG
The last sentence of this section reads: "The General Purpose Machine Gun can be used as a light machine gun (bipod) or heavy machine gun (tripod)". The first sentence of the next section states: "The heavy machine gun of the British Army is a version of the M2 Browning".

This is obviously contradictory.

I would suggest changing the sentence to something like: "The General Purpose Machine Gun can be used as a light machinegun (with bipod), or medium machine gun (with tripod) - known as the 'Sustained Fire'(SF) role in modern parlance".

84.130.74.226 22:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the Minimi light machine gun need two men to man it if you are using the belt feed. 12 June 2006
 * No King nothing 14:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Cadets
Why is there jibberish about Cadets after a few of the Weapon descriptions. The Article is about the British Army, not about untrained civilian Cadets.

Because the cadets are run and funded by the TA, which is the army - for the purpouse of army recruitment134.36.93.46 (talk) 15:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Run and funded by the TA? where did that gem of wisdom come from? RFCAs (ex TAVRA) support the real estate for both organisations but TA budgets are nothing to do with the cadets. Cadet officers hold TA Gp 'B' commissions - the same as UOTCs - separate from real TA with no callup obligation and no MATTs requirement, nothing to do with the TA chain of command. NetherSarum (talk) 16:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Should we create a Specification Template?
I am more than happy to create a specification template so that each weapon/item could be grouped?

Whats the watches thoughts on this? "TheNose | Talk" 16:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

If each weapon already has a main specification page then why not just link to that? This page can then include only the use/role within the British Army? --Mlongcake 11:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Helmets as Small Arms?
Why are we including Helmet Mk6 under Small Arms and Support Weapons?

Also, is a Four-man fire team really a weapon? --Mlongcake 11:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Question on HK MP5s?
I've heard that they were made Royal Small Arms. Are they being made by BAE Land Systems or are they being bought straight from HK? 70.68.55.148 05:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Cougar/Mastiff
The Cougar and Mastiff point to the same page. Is this correct and should there be separate entries for both? Better to put Cougar/Mastiff or something? David.j.james 12:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision of Article
Hi, I'm suggesting that we need to have a complete revision of this article and decide what template we wish to adopt and what range we want the subject to cover. I'd like to see the following points addressed - 1. Removal of withdrawn kit like RGGS and LAW80 - They're not used anymore and this is an article on modern kit. 2. Appropriate referencing - the British Army Website is not sufficient as this is badly out of date (still talks about Soldier 95 ffs.) 3. Creation of a Personal Equipment Section. To include clothing, helmets, CBA (+osprey/kestral), PLCE, etc. I know it's not as gucci as talking about the shiny guns and tanks, but it is one of the most vital. 4. Running out of ideas. Anyone else....

Vance2038 16:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

195.128.251.55 18:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)sy philis - should we be removing mention of northern ireland operations from this page as they are now offically over?

Vance - Combat Soldier 95 is still current for Numbers 8 and 9 dress. Soldier 2000 is a surplus store and Airsoft term for some of the new/revised items (eg the new field jacket).

on the local blacklist''
 * http://www.army-technology.com/projects/springer-all-terrain/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist
 * http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mbt_law/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist
 * http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/machine_guns/fnherstal/press32.html
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist
 * http://www.army-technology.com/projects/future/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

✅ This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Outdated References
This page is about modern equipment of the British Forces, not that from the era of the SLR and SMG, references provided should reflect this. 80.1.107.208 (talk) 16:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)


 * There are many examples of kit that was used in the Falklands that are still used today. Land Rovers, CVRT, RFA Argus, Invincible Class Carriers, Seawolf, FV432, M2 Browning, L16 Mortar, L118 Light Gun, Rapier, Lynx...the list only goes on. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Stinger ever left service from the confirmed and referenced entry into service that it had. I already asked that you didn't turn this into an edit war but you've already insisted on that. Discuss it here first before going to alterations and clogging the page. Until evidence emerges that proves otherwise to the known entry into service, no assumptions should be made. Additional source was found picturing Stinger crates on Gulf War Land Rovers.

Special forces weapons
Is it really necessary to include the special forces weapons? I ask this because there are almost no reliable sources on the net which provide accurate information on UK special forces weapons. The bulk of special forces equipment is classified and highly secretive, therefore we will never know the full extent of their armouries. In my opinion, I think we should stick to the standard issue weapons that are used by the regular forces and not mention speculation about special forces weapons. What do you guys think? Antiochus the Great (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Another thing, is that some of the weapons listed under the special forces section are also used by other units in the British Army, such as the L119A1 which are used by some units in the Parachute regiment and the ARWEN 37 which is also used by the regular army for riot and crown control. So some of these weapons should be merged with the other tables as they are not exclusively used by the UKSF. Antiochus the Great (talk) 13:53, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I merged the Special Forces weapons into the existing tables for assault rifles, shotguns, sniper rifles etc. Best to keep weapon types in their respective categories, especially since some weapons like the L119A1 or the HK417 are used by regular army units as well as special forces.Antiochus the Great (talk) 16:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree with the folding them in like that, as you are correct that some of them aren't UKSF in use. I think so long as we have plausable information of them having been in use it's worth keeping around, but they aren't massively important. No-one really uses wikipedia to look for special forces rumours after all. You mentioning this does remind me that I have to readd the HK53 at some point, as I found numerous photographic proofs of it in use with Close Protection Teams. Just yet to get around to it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFuzzyOne (talk • contribs) 21:22, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

TPz Fuchs
As far as I can tell, the British Army's TPz Fuchs and the Joint CBRN Regiment were disbanded, with the RAF taking complete control of the UKs Chemical and Biological warfare department. The TPz Fuchs is also no-longer listed at the official British Army website. I think it is about time we remove the vehicle from the list. Antiochus the Great (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The Fuchs is still with the Army though. This article misreads the numbers (They say 2 of the 9, it's really 2 in testing, 9 in storage) but it has the story (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10123657/Defence-chiefs-to-reverse-cuts-to-meet-Syrias-chemical-weapons-threat.html) After Syria, the cut was reversed. They're considered a minor specialist vehicle though, which is why it's not on the British Army site, same reason that the Minewolf, HMEE and suchlike aren't on it. CBRN isn't a job they like to advertise too much because of its "unpleasant" implications to potential recruits. (Which in the end, is all the website is). I think it's absolutely worth keeping them alongside a note saying that they were cut to storage but are being looked at again in light of events. That at very least is known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFuzzyOne (talk • contribs) 21:18, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, that makes sense, thanks for explaining that to me TheFuzzyOne. Antiochus the Great (talk) 11:39, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Not a problem, thanks for chatting it out. Better than some random edit wars I've seen! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFuzzyOne (talk • contribs) 13:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Fuchs was removed but supposedly now reninstated. https://www.oppex.com/notice/TED_2f5391193cb9dd3553e346fd887941a5

Phd8511 (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

There are no more Alvis Shielder in service
Alvis Shielder is no longer in the ORBAT. That document is oudated. And no that parliamentary info is only in 2010Phd8511 (talk) 10:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC).

Shielder has been removed
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/381064/MOD_AR13-14_webversion.pdf

See page 158.

Phd8511 (talk) 12:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

At least reference from official sites
and not blogs!

Phd8511 (talk) 19:30, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

New Numbers
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/50-million-armoured-vehicles-fleet-support-contract-awarded

Challenger 2: 227

Challenger Recovery Vehicle: 75

Bulldog: 880

Warrior: 781

Panther: 398

Trojan: 33

Titan: 33

CVR(T): 654

Phd8511 (talk) 17:57, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Modern equipment of the British Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090903110330/http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/DesignSelectedForFutureArmouredVehicleForBritishArmyfres.htm to http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/DesignSelectedForFutureArmouredVehicleForBritishArmyfres.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Delete Warthog please
http://www.janes.com/article/58712/british-army-ditches-warthog-armoured-vehicle

News says British Army has ditched the Warthog.

Viking
is only in service with the Royal Marines not the Army anymore. Warthog, as per parliamentary Q&A, has been withdrawn from the BA's service.

Cantab1985 (talk) 08:30, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Tables
I made some extensive changes (i.e clean up) to the vehicle tables in an attempt to bring them more inline with the guidelines at WP:MOSFLAG, MOS:TABLES and MOS:LIST. I also brought the aircraft table fully inline with WP:AVLIST. Cheers. Antiochus the Great (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Modern equipment of the British Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140113201031/http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1687 to http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1687
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160108160959/http://bmpd.livejournal.com/951792.html to http://bmpd.livejournal.com/951792.html
 * Added tag to https://ttps%3a//data.gov.uk/data/contracts-finder-archive/download/1343331/7f65635d-4400-4a15-bdf7-1a9294429f9c%20%26cd%3D1%26hl%3Den%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dsg
 * Added tag to http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/land/vehicles/2015/10/11/uk-army-extend-life-challenger-2-new-tank-too-costly/73410010/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:55, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Black Hornet Nano
Why nothing on the Black Hornet Nano? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JessPavarocks (talk • contribs) 02:43, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * http://www.janes.com/article/72202/british-army-retires-black-hornet-micro-uav Black Hornet retired anyway. JessPavarocks (talk) 06:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of equipment of the British Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119164824/http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf to http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716220915/http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.com/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm071113/text/71113w0010.htm to http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.com/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm071113/text/71113w0010.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140306041951/http://www.2wglobal.com/www/newsFeatures/newsShowPages/show_wwwpress.jsp?newsRepository=wwwpress&oid=21146 to http://www.2wglobal.com/www/newsFeatures/newsShowPages/show_wwwpress.jsp?newsRepository=wwwpress&oid=21146
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119164824/http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf to http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of equipment of the British Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140113201031/http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1687 to http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=1687
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119164824/http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf to http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/285986_ARMY_VEHICLESEQUIPMENT_V12.PDF_web.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

L110A3 and L130A1 light machine guns?
I was looking at the list of British weapon L numbers and noticed that "L130" is "missing" (there are others, but that's beside the point). For whatever reason, I looked it up, and found this and this, which lists an "L110A3 Light Machine Gun" and an "L130A1 7.62 mm Light Machine Gun".

Obviously, the L110A3 is a 5.56 mm Minimi Para variant, though what's different about it, it doesn't say, and I couldn't find anywhere else (although it is listed on this very article). I did find this, which lists upgrades to the L110A2: Savit collapsible buttstock, Picatinny rails on the top cover and handguard, et cetera. It doesn't, however, mention a different designation (which could be because it's from 2012). (There is also this Arma 3 mod that lists an L110A3 (with similar upgrades), but whether they've assumed it has a separate designation, have insider info or what, I don't know.)

As for the L130A1, I also couldn't find anything on which 7.62 mm light[weight] MG it is, but the one that comes to mind is the Minimi 7.62, which is in service with the army.

If anyone has any definitive sources, it would be great to hear it. Thanks in advance, RadiculousJ (talk) 18:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Removing the LMG
http://www.monch.com/mpg/news/land/2980-precision-vs-suppression.html

PRECISION VS SUPPRESSION The British Army has dropped the 5.56mm x 45mm Light Machine Gun (LMG) from the infantry section, pending confirmation from the Army Headquarters later in the year, a senior source has disclosed.

Addressing delegates at the Future Soldier Technology conference in London on 13 March, Lt.Col. Nick Serle, Commanding Officer of the British Army’s Infantry Trials and Development Unit (ITDU) explained how the LMG was being replaced with an L85A2 or A3 assault rifle, also in 5.56x45mm calibre. The news follows consideration of multiple methods to suppress targets in a firefight over the past two years.

Sammartinlai (talk) 11:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

AX-50
Has anyone got a better source for the AX-50 being adopted? Because the one provided keeps pinging my antivirus' web shield. LostCause231 (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Challenger 2 numbers
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2018-06-11/152074/

The Ministry of Defence has purchased 386 Challenger 2 tanks plus 22 driver training tanks based on the Challenger 2 chassis. Of these, 80 have been disposed of through commercial means.

Sammartinlai (talk) 06:02, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

UK doesn't use White White phosphorus smoke grenades
L84 White phosphorus smoke grenades

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/574700/response/1363563/attach/4/20190510%20FOI2019%2005357%20Lai%20L84%20White%20Phospherous%20Grenades%20response%20O.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

BlueD954 (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

MAMBA LCMR sought
https://ted.europa.eu/TED/notice/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:307119-2019:TEXT:EN:HTML&WT.mc_id=RSS-Feed&WT.rss_f=Materials+and+Products&WT.rss_a=307119-2019&WT.rss_ev=a

BlueD954 (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

2020 Updates
It is about time that this article had a good scrubbing and was really bought up to quality. Currently there is a lot of statements that have no source (apart from personal experience), or dodgy sources (e.g. Daily Star). These are not compliant with Wiki policies and really need to be fixed. I'm also re-scrubbing the main British Army page to ensure it stays as GA level and it would be good to have this page compliment the main one. I intend to cut out anything unverifiable and try to cite references for personal experience - this may mean some things get moved/changed and differ from what serving members see day to day. Please discuss any issues here and we can discuss what is and is not included. Stingray Trainer (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Are you still working on verifying information? I just noticed that the Glock is being mentioned as a double action pistol which is technically incorrect and I was wondering if this is coming from a source or not. One of the sources immediately following that statement does not support that particular detail and the other does not seem to be available online.


 * 2A02:8388:C80:6280:B003:8309:5FBB:B60D (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Accuracy International AW.png

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * EPLS mk 3 vehicle.png (discussion)
 * Gmg-wmik.jpg (discussion)
 * Hk417 sas.jpg (discussion)
 * Hk53.jpg (discussion)
 * Pe8 plastic explosive.jpg (discussion)
 * Sig mcx blk.jpg (discussion)
 * T7eod.jpg (discussion)