Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Kal

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kal

  1. To some extent, families of vehicles are also divided in cost class. So namer is a fair comparison, for users who have not airlift as important.
  2. North europeans? South african? Aussie? Their hats look like different origins.
  3. So, a paper carnival, and a near paper panzer. Is there a disconnect between what australian defense thinks the world will offer. Vs what the world thinks australian defense wants?
  4. Is that a CV90 with twin 120mm mortar with a funky muzzle loading mechanism that make it look like 4 barrels?
  5. Reminds me of a boat, amphibious capacity. Even if they 'lose' the bulk of land 400 phase 3, they might still get to place 50-100 units. Its a serious contender. Can it swim 12nm?
  6. That looks a lot wider than standard kf21. Is that nera/era/ floaties on the sides?
  7. Interesting detail there for the door and armour. Any guesses as to what the panel consists of?
  8. Australia has an economy dependant upon moving kit much heavier than a namer over vast distances. A dragline bucket could scoop a namer and have room to spare. Australia would enjoy the safety benefits of a namera class vehicle. But why? The boxers are for our global peacekeeping missions, this next phase is more for defense of australia/png. What vehicles is suitable for both open desert and mountainous forrest? I suspect the korean offering is more applicable to australia than generally considered.
  9. That countryside looks a lot like Australia at the moment
  10. General engineering principle for roads is called the 4th power. Road damage is approximate to axle loads to the 4th power. So 60 tonne over 4 axles is roughly 5 times more damage than 60 tonne over 6 axles. The boxer crv also makes me cringe for road damage. Maybe israeli roads are tougher than australian roads
  11. Hmmm 4 axles carrying the weight of a Namera? Road damage
  12. Recon is best un seen, so that excludes armour anyway. CRV is about being seen, so that includes heavy armour. If australia wants recon, they probably call the airforce. If they want recon with bite, its the airforce and a spike missle. Neither really lets the locals that you have their back. CRV lets the locals know that you are also local.
  13. Agree, the storyboard for CRV is quite clear, its a heavy shield to withstand an ambush and fight back. Lightweight recon, get a drone. But yes ADF might be sleepwalking to boxers everywhere. Not a bad concept, i'ld prefer if rear axle were slighly steerable (lower tyre wear, lower street wear.)
  14. A more deadly battlefield requires tougher armour. Be it through weight or APS. Are tracks better than wheels? Thats a more fundamental question.
  15. Sure, if a win win deal could be reached. But it may not meet their particular requirements. 40mm starts being too large to cost efectively shoot at infantry, but too small to shoot at fortifications/AFVs The bigger the main round gets, the more useful the secondary gun becomes.
  16. Not surprised. After EuroTiger, Aus defense is a little touchy about ready to go hardware.
  17. Lithuanian boxers use Raphael unmanned weapon station. So thats a solution. Poland is not even allowed to add it own excellent ceramic ERA to its second hand leo 2. We had issues upgrading the leo 1. I expect the modular nature of the boxer makes 3rd party components more contracturally OK when limited to just the module, but the Germans are aggressively possessive about vehicles they "sell"
  18. 2 vehicles to be shortlisted (Because 3 is too many to understand and explain)
  19. http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/Multimedia/LAND400_CloseCombatStoryboard-9-5562.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjAlLfy0N7bAhVDNJQKHe0lCtkQFjAAegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw314kki6PRMkDsI_6MJLC17 Land400 storyboard
  20. Why place the gunners sights where a bit of gun elevation will blind it to precisely what it is shooting at?
×
×
  • Create New...