StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)

[2805662]

Apparently Hungary has selected the KF41 Lynx as it’s new IFV. 

[Rico]

Scource or rumor?

[2805662]

6 minutes ago, Rico said:

Scource or rumor?

https://mcusercontent.com/ebe687fe800f7d0f2f28fa168/files/353d7d1e-9bc1-4c3c-84f3-7741e51edd2f/Special_Bulletin_18_August_2020.02.pdf

 

 

[Rico]

Interesting but hard to tell how much quality is behind the decision. The Czech tested IFVs at least (maybe HUN had access). Hungary seems to buy a lot of German vehicles (which is quality stuff for sure) but it doesn't seem a real competition. I like what Australia is doing. Building prototypes, add their requirments and test against them.

[SH_MM]

Hungary aims for higher interoperability and integration with the Bundeswehr.

[skylancer-3441]

 

https://legiero.blog.hu/2020/08/17/elougrott_a_magyar_hiuz

 

 

from this Czech article advertising KF41 modularity

https://www.czdefence.com/article/lynx-kf41-modular-ifv-for-full-spectrum-of-operations

- renders of 3 versions (for Czech army), including IFV with turret which looks somewhat different (compared to well-known Lynx prototype)

 

 

 

 

 

...

>>IFV with turret which looks somewhat different

...featuring, among other things, equipment which was identified as Rheinmetall Vingtaqs II

...so, this render up there appears to be representing not IFV, but reconnaissance version

[Beer]

4 hours ago, Rico said:

Interesting but hard to tell how much quality is behind the decision. The Czech tested IFVs at least (maybe HUN had access). Hungary seems to buy a lot of German vehicles (which is quality stuff for sure) but it doesn't seem a real competition. I like what Australia is doing. Building prototypes, add their requirments and test against them.

 

According to this article (in Czech) Rheinmetall will build a factory in Hungary as a joint venture with Rába to build the Lynx in Hungary (the investment in the factory shall be around 2 bln Euro). The number of vehicles to be produced for Hungarian army is said to be around 200. The article also states that in 2019 Hungary was the largest military customer for Germany overall.  

https://www.armadninoviny.cz/madarska-armada-kupuje-nemecka-bojova-vozidla-pechoty-lynx.html

 

There is still no decision on Czech side but it shall be done soon. From what I can say the situation is quite different than with Hungary. There is certain resistance in the army against buying German hardware because German foreign policy is being seen by many as  rather unpredictable and inconsistent. For several reasons incdluding this one I personally give higher chances to Ascod. 

[Jägerlein]

1 hour ago, Beer said:

[...]There is certain resistance in the army against buying German hardware because German foreign policy is being seen by many as  rather unpredictable and inconsistent.[...]

This was literally my first thought when reading it. If this thing does not go below the radar because of the Factory is in HU and the Bundestag - well mainly the opossition - want's to have a word about exporting such things to "Orban's regime" it might get messy like certain Turkey deals. But it might as well slip through since it were the days of Sigmar Gabriel as Minister for Economy which damaged the German reputation in this area the most. And these days are gone.

[SH_MM]

22 minutes ago, Jägerlein said:

This was literally my first thought when reading it. If this thing does not go below the radar because of the Factory is in HU and the Bundestag - well mainly the opossition - want's to have a word about exporting such things to "Orban's regime" it might get messy like certain Turkey deals. But it might as well slip through since it were the days of Sigmar Gabriel as Minister for Economy which damaged the German reputation in this area the most. And these days are gone.

 

Hungary had no issues buying Leopard 2A7+ tanks, Panzerhaubitze 2000 SPGs, Wisent ARVs and Leguan AVLBs under the same German government. I expect no problems with the Lynx order.

[heretic88]

2 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

Hungary had no issues buying Leopard 2A7+ tanks, Panzerhaubitze 2000 SPGs, Wisent ARVs and Leguan AVLBs under the same German government. I expect no problems with the Lynx order.

 

While our relations with Germany arent the best in terms of ideological questions, (primarily because we reject migration and western liberalism) in terms of economic questions, there are almost zero problems.

But actually, this decision to buy the Lynx is quite surprising. It was already certain that we'll buy an IFV from Germany. But most people were certain that it will be the Puma. A smaller minority voted for the Boxer. 

[Jägerlein]

11 hours ago, SH_MM said:

 

Hungary had no issues buying Leopard 2A7+ tanks, Panzerhaubitze 2000 SPGs, Wisent ARVs and Leguan AVLBs under the same German government. I expect no problems with the Lynx order.

You are probably right. My concern is just a bit fueled by the recent - since early July - ramp up in negative press about Orban including two articles about "Hungary militarizing with german weapons" inter alia in Der Spiegel. Usually nobody cares about weapon exports inside the EU and Covid is probably to present for such a thing to draw attention.

[DIADES]

On 8/18/2020 at 3:55 PM, Rico said:

I like what Australia is doing. Building prototypes, add their requirments and test against them.

and so do I   But, Hungary direct purchase will have massive impact on L400.  Hungary will receive vehicles in 2022.  The L400 Ph3 RMA runs to late 2021.  Australian government decision process takes place over 2022.  Hungary as the lead customer carries a lot of risk away from Australia and has prospect to reduce pricing too.

[Zadlo]

2 hours ago, DIADES said:

Hungary will receive vehicles in 2022.

 

In 2024...

[Rico]

9 hours ago, DIADES said:

and so do I   But, Hungary direct purchase will have massive impact on L400.  Hungary will receive vehicles in 2022.  The L400 Ph3 RMA runs to late 2021.  Australian government decision process takes place over 2022.  Hungary as the lead customer carries a lot of risk away from Australia and has prospect to reduce pricing too.

 

Yes, having some more users will definitely be a plus for you down under.

 

And I am pretty sure that Lynx was a bit in front of Redback (my feeling) up to now since Australia seems to do good work with RLS (Boxer, MAN trucks etc.). Further Korea (my opionion as well - many will see it different) was allways good in doing better copies of existing vehicles (K9 - M109; K2 - Leo2/Leclerc, normal cars as well) but I am not so sure if you what to go with something really new. Besides RLS has many good vehicles as references, too.

 

I will follow the testing phase of L400 and maybe this will prove my opionion wrong but I won't be surpised if Boxer and Lynx will work side by side in many countries in 10 years.

[Voodoo]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

 

Yes, having some more users will definitely be a plus for you down under.

 

And I am pretty sure that Lynx was a bit in front of Redback (my feeling) up to now since Australia seems to do good work with RLS (Boxer, MAN trucks etc.). Further Korea (my opionion as well - many will see it different) was allways good in doing better copies of existing vehicles (K9 - M109; K2 - Leo2/Leclerc, normal cars as well) but I am not so sure if you what to go with something really new. Besides RLS has many good vehicles as references, too.

 

I will follow the testing phase of L400 and maybe this will prove my opionion wrong but I won't be surpised if Boxer and Lynx will work side by side in many countries in 10 years.

 

Calling the K9 a copy of the M109 is a bit of a stretch.

[DIADES]

22 hours ago, Zadlo said:

In 2024..

Got a source?  I can't remember where I got 2022 from

 

[DIADES]

22 hours ago, Zadlo said:

In 2024...

OK, yes  "The first deliveries of the Lynx are expected to commence in 2024-2025 and would reach the expected operational capability in the Hungarian forces by 2026-2027." 

 

https://eurasiantimes.com/hungary-inks-deal-with-german-rheinmetall-to-manufacture-lynx-armored-vehicle/

 

But still before Australia

 

[2805662]

15 hours ago, Rico said:

 

Yes, having some more users will definitely be a plus for you down under.

 

And I am pretty sure that Lynx was a bit in front of Redback (my feeling) up to now since Australia seems to do good work with RLS (Boxer, MAN trucks etc.).

 

I will follow the testing phase of L400 and maybe this will prove my opionion wrong but I won't be surpised if Boxer and Lynx will work side by side in many countries in 10 years.

I’m leaning toward Hanwha, tbh. Rheinmetall owns too large a chunk of the ADF land vehicle fleet, plus the German government’s policies on arms exports are a bit capricious due to local political alliances. Lastly, Rheinmetall’s implementation of “Australian Industry Capability” to date hasn’t been what it was meant to be. With K9 & K10 being purchased (it beat the PzH2000 in completion during Land 17-1C before a GFC-induced cancellation in 2012), so long as Hanwha turns up and doesn’t fumble, L400-3 is theirs to lose (imo). 

[DIADES]

2 hours ago, 2805662 said:

“Australian Industry Capability”

Rheinmetall has an actual massive new facility in Queensland.  Hanwha has not spent a dollar in Australia.   Plus, although Hanwha did win the Land 17 selection, the primary reason that procurement did not proceed was that Army does not want the K9...  it was not the GFC that cancelled that deal, it was Army telling CASG to bugger off

 

[SH_MM]

There also seems to be a big capability difference between AS21 Redback and KF41 Lynx. It will be interesting to see which vehicle will be selected.

[2805662]

3 hours ago, DIADES said:

Rheinmetall has an actual massive new facility in Queensland.  Hanwha has not spent a dollar in Australia.   Plus, although Hanwha did win the Land 17 selection, the primary reason that procurement did not proceed was that Army does not want the K9...  it was not the GFC that cancelled that deal, it was Army telling CASG to bugger off

 

Familiar with the new facility in Brisbane. Hanwha’s proposed facility in Geelong is about the same size. Easiest way to double the AIC bit would be to select Hanwha. Spread the love. 
 

It’s true that CDG - not Army - slow-rolled L17-1C approval (thanks to a certain LTCOL), but the the culminating point was the RAAF proposing canning of the “AS-9” to pay for the purchase of long-lead items required for the conversion of their 12 x F/A-18F+ to EA-18 before the production of those parts went defunct. Army & CDG choose to agree rather than fight. Wound up being redundant when the purchase of the EA-18, rather than the conversion of the F+, occurred. Was intimately involved in that whole thing. 

[2805662]

2 hours ago, SH_MM said:

There also seems to be a big capability difference between AS21 Redback and KF41 Lynx. It will be interesting to see which vehicle will be selected.

What do you base that statement on? They look like almost fungible items to me. 

[DIADES]

18 hours ago, 2805662 said:

Was intimately involved in that whole thing. 

aha!  so we can thank you!

 

I have seen nothing to suggest Hanwhas conversion of an old Ford factory is anything like the Rheinmetall facility which is all new,  has the largest EMIEMC chamber in Australia, a medium caliber firing tunnel and various obstacles along side a bloody big shed.

[DIADES]

22 hours ago, SH_MM said:

capability difference between AS21 Redback and KF41 Lynx.

I don't see much capability difference?  The Redback does have a modern suspension while LYNX has an utterly conventional torsion bar setup.  The Redback T2000 turret is a marketing exercise - old Elbit sub-systems, EOS lipstick.  Pig lipstick, lipstick pig etc.  The LANCE turret is state of the art but immature.  The Redback transmission is in some respects inferior to the Renk used in LYNX but not a killer issue.  The Redback has a proper engine from MTU while LYNX uses a crane engine...  The details of Redback look a bit light on.  The exhaust is a joke and it looks very cramped inside.

 

But in paper capability terms - same gun, same arnour spec, same APS etc.  I expect Redback to be better cross country at speed and LYNX to out shoot Redback.   I would love to be involved with the trials!

 

 

[SH_MM]

21 hours ago, 2805662 said:

What do you base that statement on? They look like almost fungible items to me. 

 

Really? To me both offers look to be quite different based on their specifications and used components.

 

When Hanwha released first informations regarding the AS21 Redback, it was reported (by Defence Technology Review, MONCH, Jane's and other news outlets), that the weight of the prototype was about 40 tonnes. IIRC the gross-vehicle weight was supposed to be around 43 tonnes. Now a lot has changed since then and the Redback's combat weight has grown from 40 to 42 tonnes, but I don't believe that gross-vehicle weight was massively increased. At least with the rubber band tracks from Soucy they are limited to 42 tonnes.

Meanwhile the KF41 Lynx has a combat weight 44 tonnes as presented at Eurosatory 2018 and a gross vehicle weight of 50 tonnes, which translates to better armor protection and more growth potential in the future. Rheinmetall already stated that they have designed an add-on armor kit for urban combat, raising the vehicle's weight to 48 tonnes... can the AS21 match that?

 

Furthermore the Lynx has the advantage of its modularity. In the past people always downplayed the Boxer's modularity compared to just procure multiple variants of the same vehicle in a Stryker-like fashion, but it has been cited as one of the reason speaking for the Boxer during LAND 400 Phase 2. The modularity allows faster upgrades, easier repairs, in-field conversions and keeps life-cycle costs down.

 

The Lynx also seems to have a more future-oriented power pack, being fitted with the state-of-the-art Renk HSWL 256C transmission coupled to a modern Liebherr engine with 10% more output. The Redback's engine design will be close to 40 years and its transmission design will be close to 60 years if it entered service around 2030... in my opinion that is not ideal. The same applies to the exhaust and cooling system. The Lynx's design takes attention to cooling the exhaust gases and to redirect them to the vehicle rear in order to minimize the thermal and noise signature, while the AS21 Redback simply has an exhaust pipe sticking out of its side. Generally the AS21's design doesn't seem to pay as much attention to signature reduction.

 

Then there are further small differences that might not be that relevant, but at least have influenced my opinion on the vehicles, for example the turret choice for the prototypes. I understand that the turret choice is not set in stone and that the designs will change - for example by including different missile launchers, integrating active protection systems, etc. - but I am really wary of the EOS T2000 turret. While a lot of Australians on different web froums and in social media have declared it to be a perfect turret, aside form the fact that it looks cool I have not seen any real fact why it should be much better than the original Elbit UT/MT30 turret it is derived from. And the MT30 turret was offered during LAND 400 Phase 2, loosing to the LANCE 1.0 design. So the EOS T2000 not only needs to close the gap between its predecessor and LANCE 1.0, but also needs to beat the newer LANCE 2.0 turret... that seems like a lot too much to ask from the first turret design by EOS.

 

There are also the differences between Mk 44 Bushmaster II and Mauser MK 30-2/ABM (electrical driven vs gas-operated, dispersion), missile load-out (current Lynx prototype has four ATGMs vs two in the EOS T2000), the way the air-burst ammunition is programmed (where Rheinmetall's external programming allows using more types of ammunition such as AHEAD/KETF), etc.

 

I am by no means an expert on Australian defence procurement policies, the involved politics and the exact relevance of the difference to the requirements. Maybe the Australian military doesn't care about higher armor protection, when both vehicles manage to hit the baseline requirements. Maybe the LAND 400 Phase 3 IFV's inherent growth potential is also not seen as relevant, given how long M113 and ASLAV managed to stay in service. Maybe sharing parts with the Abrams and a potential K9 Thunder variant for the Australian Army (though one has to wonder if the old decision still holds value with Boxer RCH 155 and the PzH 2000 NDV being near market ready) is seen as more beneficial than sharing ammunition and parts with the Boxer CRV; I cannot say that.

 

1 hour ago, DIADES said:

The Redback does have a modern suspension while LYNX has an utterly conventional torsion bar setup.

 

You make that sound as if torsion bars couldn't be modern. That's not true.

 

1 hour ago, DIADES said:

The Redback has a proper engine from MTU while LYNX uses a crane engine... 

 

Liebherr managed to beat MTU for the German Marder 1 engine replacement. They did not offer a crane engine.

 

1 hour ago, DIADES said:

But in paper capability terms - same gun, same arnour spec, same APS etc

 

Currently both use different guns; Mauser MK 30-2/ABM and Mk 44 Bushmaster II. The armor specifications are also different; both managed to meet the Australian protection requirements, but this is not an upper limit for protection.