Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Clan_Ghost_Bear last won the day on July 21

Clan_Ghost_Bear had the most liked content!

About Clan_Ghost_Bear

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

498 profile views
  1. Didn't the Puma have some problem with space in the troop bay? They might have to raise the roof a bit as well.
  2. Did you manage to speak to the Puma people? Seems odd that they want to bid for NGCV with the Lynx already in play.
  3. Looks somewhat less ambitious than the first concept for it.
  4. No mention of the Decisive Lethality/Optionally Manned Tank/ whatever they're calling it this week?
  5. Journo claiming that General Dynamics will actually have two Strykers at their booth. Possibility that some other stuff was missing from their AUSA announcement? 🤔
  6. https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/news/latest_news/index_21632.php The Weasel and the 130MM cannon will be at AUSA next week. The Lynx prototype will not be present, but Raytheon will have some sort of digital feature on it.
  7. According to the article, they still have a chance to win the final production contract The General Dynamics vehicle delivered to the army is their final product.
  8. https://breakingdefense.com/2019/10/bradley-replacement-army-risks-third-failure-in-a-row/ Some neat things from the article on GD's OMFV >The suspension is a totally new design. The engine and transmission are totally different. Drive train is different. Exhaust placement is different >3+5 crew/passengers, all in the same compartment in the hull >360 deg. awareness from cameras >APS integrated into vehicle
  9. No offense but this is a tad hard to believe. Raytheon was working on the bid during mid-August, and selecting Textron to manufacture would've been difficult to do in a week. Possible but not likely.
  10. If they made another prototype and shipped it to Raytheon back in March/April when the RFP came out, they'd have been fine. Just the stupidest way to lose a potential 3500 vehicle contract.
  11. If GDLS was able to meet it, then how is the problem with the requirement set and not poor performance on behalf of the other contractors?
  12. No idea why, with several large orders in play, they haven't built more than just the one prototype.
  • Create New...