Story Highlight
– Former officer lost 20% hearing from Ajax vehicle.
– Soldiers reported hearing damage from excessive noise levels.
– Trials halted for noise and vibration safety concerns.
– General Dynamics claims Ajax is extensively tested and safe.
– Investigation continues after recent injuries during vehicle use.
Full Story
The former leader of the British Army unit involved in the testing of the Ajax armoured vehicle has voiced serious concerns regarding the safety of the platform, citing significant long-term health impacts on himself and other soldiers associated with its operation. Rob Page, who previously held the rank of lieutenant colonel and now has left military service, is addressing the matter for the first time publicly, sharing his experiences from the trials conducted between 2019 and 2021.
During these trials, Page and his colleagues noted alarming levels of noise and vibration affecting the soldiers’ operational effectiveness and overall well-being. He reported that the excessive noise levels exposed service members to potential hearing damage, while the vibrations from the 40-tonne vehicle caused physical discomfort and injury, including problems in the hands, wrists, knees, and feet.
In light of these issues, Mr Page raised his concerns through the appropriate channels within the military hierarchy. He advocated for a suspension of operational testing of the vehicle, suggesting that trials should be halted until the problems associated with excessive noise and vibration could be addressed. However, his warnings appeared to be unheeded, as reports emerged indicating that further injuries to personnel occurred as recently as last month—less than two weeks after Defence Minister Luke Pollard labelled the Ajax vehicle as safe and ready for deployment.
Reflecting on the situation, Mr Page expressed frustration, stating, “It feels a bit like a repetition. But… soldier safety has to come first, and foremost.” His statements highlighted the gravity of the issue, emphasising the necessity for prioritising the safety and health of personnel involved with the Ajax.
Concerns around the Ajax vehicle were already evident during the initial testing phases in 2019. Page recalled that even from the outset of the trials, soldiers began reporting discomfort linked to the vehicle’s vibration—a problem he deemed concerning enough that immediate action was warranted to assess the risks and make operational conditions safer for the troops involved.
The pressure to integrate close to 600 Ajax vehicles into the army was considerable, especially given the immense financial investment and delays surrounding the project. The contract, awarded to the American defence contractor General Dynamics, totals a staggering £6.3 billion—but prior complications meant any revelation of safety risks was a delicate subject for senior military officials.
As the concerns surrounding noise levels grew over 2020, Page instituted measures to track the health impact on personnel associated with the Ajax. He established a health monitoring system where soldiers would report their condition before and after operating the vehicle. “That gave increasingly more evidence that like, hey, there’s a problem here,” Page stated, underscoring the escalating seriousness of the health risks.
Further complicating matters, Page became aware of sickness among a different group of soldiers at a manufacturing plant in Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales, where the Ajax vehicles were being assembled. Alarmed by these developments, he escalated his findings to higher authorities, aiming to transparently address the “noise and vibration calculator” supplied by General Dynamics, meant to determine safe operational parameters for the Ajax.
Referring to his escalating concerns, he penned a message he termed the “Chernobyl email,” invoking the infamous nuclear disaster to draw parallels between the hazards soldiers were facing with the Ajax and the grave risks experienced during that catastrophic event. “I said, look, we’ve got a known hazard that we’re exposing soldiers to with a set of controls, but I’m not confident the controls are correct,” he asserted. He likened the solution implemented by authorities at the time to a dangerous and short-sighted approach: limiting exposure time and speed in the vehicle rather than addressing the root causes of the noise and vibration issues directly.
The implications of his emails and alerts did not go publicly acknowledged at the time, as they became part of anonymous reports resulting from inquiries into the programme’s failures. Page, who dedicated over two decades of service to the army, made it clear that he believed the systemic problems with the Ajax project were indicative of broader issues in defence procurement, rather than the product of individual shortcomings.
His sentiments underscore the need for a constructive approach to mitigative measures. “What was important was getting hold of the risk and understanding it…,” he explained. He called for an engineering perspective to address the issues fundamentally, rather than masking symptoms with temporary fixes such as improved seating and hearing protection.
Once the testing was suspended, Page and a select group of soldiers underwent specialist assessments for their hearing. During this testing, Page learned that he had suffered significant health impacts, including pain levels exceeding normal thresholds due to exposure to Ajax’s vibrations, while also grappling with hearing loss estimated at around 20%. “It’s one of our core senses… losing it is a permanent disability,” he lamented, elucidating the deep personal toll that the situation had taken.
In response to ongoing concerns, General Dynamics has asserted its commitment to safety, touting the Ajax as one of the most rigorously tested combat vehicles ever manufactured. The company stated that numerous improvements and evaluations have been implemented, maintaining that noise and vibration levels are now within acceptable limits.
In tandem, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence reiterated their commitment to personnel safety and acknowledged the importance of addressing concerns as they arise. The continuing investigations and pauses in utilising the Ajax vehicle serve as a reminder of the critical need for safety and transparency in military operations, ensuring that those who serve remain protected from undue harm during their duties.
Our Thoughts
The Ajax armoured vehicle trials highlighted significant health and safety failures, particularly regarding noise and vibration exposure. To prevent such incidents, the Ministry of Defence should have conducted a comprehensive risk assessment under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, identifying potential hazards early in the vehicle’s development and testing phases. Strict adherence to the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 could have mitigated the risks of hearing loss and vibration injuries by implementing engineering controls and necessary personal protective equipment before exposing personnel to the vehicle.
Key lessons include the importance of a proactive health surveillance program and a culture that encourages personnel to report safety concerns without fear of repercussions. The repeated concerns raised by Rob Page emphasize the need for transparent communication and accountability within command structures.
Failing to address known hazards constitutes a breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, which mandates that employers ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of employees. Future incidents could be prevented by ensuring robust safety protocols, thorough testing, and continuous monitoring of the vehicle’s impact on operators’ health.
