UK Army Halts Ajax Vehicle Use After New Soldier Illnesses, £6.3 Billion Program Faces Renewed Scrutiny

The British Army has temporarily suspended the use of its new Ajax armoured vehicles following reports of approximately 30 soldiers falling ill with noise and vibration-related symptoms during a recent training exercise on Salisbury Plain. This latest setback comes just weeks after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) declared the £6.3 billion program had achieved Initial Operating Capability (IOC).

Former Downing Street aide Dominic Cummings sharply criticized the program on social media, stating, "After many years and many billions, the only recorded injuries inflicted by AJAX will be on British soldiers." He further suggested that the "best way out now is for all the AJAX to be given to UKR where drones will blow em all up pronto," implying the vehicles' unsuitability for modern combat and the MoD's flawed procurement process.

The Ajax program has been plagued by an eight-year delay and significant cost overruns, with the first vehicles now arriving years behind the original 2017 schedule. Previous trials were halted due to excessive noise and vibration, leading to numerous soldiers suffering hearing loss and other injuries, with some requiring long-term medical monitoring. Defence Minister Luke Pollard had recently asserted that the program had "left its troubles behind" and that the vehicles were safe for deployment.

Despite these assurances, the recent incident led to an urgent Electronic Safety Notice, banning all use of the vehicle for training for two weeks while an investigation is carried out. The MoD stated the suspension was initiated "out of an abundance of caution." The program aims to deliver 589 Ajax and variant vehicles by 2030, replacing the Army's ageing fleet of tracked reconnaissance vehicles.

The controversy surrounding Ajax is exacerbated by its perceived relevance in an era dominated by drone warfare, as highlighted by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Critics, including Cummings, question the efficacy of such heavy armoured vehicles against cheap, effective drones, suggesting the program represents outdated military thinking and a waste of taxpayer money.