Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Serge said:

Like both Australian and Czech Army competitions ? SPz-Puma on the one hand, SPz-Lynx on the other one.

 

The Puma is a joint venture, because back then the market looked very different and both companies lacked the available systems to create an own solution. The decision was also supported by politics. Back when the Puma's predecessor project was under way, there were four teams bidding, each consisting of multiple companies. KUKA, Henschel, Wegmann, etc. were all still their own companies, rather than being purchased or merged into KMW and Rheinmetall. KMW is also not involved in the Lynx.

 

This situation with the EMBT is  very different for KMW: they already have a product for the market and have zero competition (for example the Czech Republic has the choice between the M60 Sabra upgrade or Leopard 2 tanks... not really a hard choice). You can read the interviews of the German newspapers with the KMW managers - they do not want to keep developing the EMBT into a proper product, but see it as a gesture towards politics: KMW wants to become prime contractor for the MGCS, where Rheinmetall is currently in a better position. The governments of France and Germany have revealed that a German company will be in charge of the MGCS, while a French company will serve as prime contractor for the next-generation aircraft system of both countries. Given that Rheinmetall has more technology and is about 10 times larger than KMW, KMW feels the need to appease politicians by creating the EMBT.

 

18 minutes ago, Serge said:

The very drawbacks of the E-MBT is the balistic hole between turret and chassis. Once solved, we will be able to compared the quality of E-MBT and A7...

 

Yes, that is the only problem of the EMBT compared to a  Leopard 2A7... :rolleyes:

 

O5B3Yhp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Serge said:

 

So vintage.

Swedish first and foremost.

You just don't give CAD and armor composition to potential customers... Otherwise, you would lose the intel warfare and give away your Achilles heel.
At best you give them quotes with protection levels but thats about it (rough estimates or minimal protection offered under certain angles).

So these drawings are what the swedish army thought the armor protection was with their best indigenous layouts.
This hasn't been made by Giat Industries for sure, the silhouette of the crew compartment should be a smaller with such angle. There is a dead space that hasn't been taken into account by the swedes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It reminds me the feeling of the GIAT Industrie team when it saw the Leclerc returning from mobility trials. 

It was so damaged, they considered Swedish Army tried to simply broke the chassis. From the very beginning, they wanted the Leopard-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Serge said:

It reminds me the feeling of the GIAT Industrie team when it saw the Leclerc returning from mobility trials. 

It was so damaged, they considered Swedish Army tried to simply broke the chassis. From the very beginning, they wanted the Leopard-2.

Dunno what they've done...
But for sure they left behind the car with G.I. workers and went full throttle. The technicians who were there were forced to REWORK the HULL. The suspension resisted the shock(s?) but the bolt holes were badly damaged. It took them a whole night with the tank on hydaulic lift to fix everything...
At the time, the T1s sent there were equipped with instrumental suspension to gather data. The swedes managed to go up to 1400 bars in the nitrogen spheres (STAT members, who were not gentle people, didn't even go beyond 900 bars)...
The incident got sent back to the higher ups and the president of G.I., with the support of the swedish industrials*, made a formal complaint.
* At the time rumors were circulating that the swedish army was going to adopt the Leopard 2 no matter what; swedish industrials were left behind with no options. (Sauce : "La gabegie" by Pierre Chiquet Ed. Albin Michel)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Letters of intention signed for both the MGCS and the SCAF.

 

No big surprises, the MGCS will be developed by KNDS under German lead and the SCAF under French lead.

 

The MGCS will be integrated into the French Scorpion program as well as into the German HEER system.

However the schedule was slightly changed:

 

Initially a prototype was due for 2020, a development contract for 2025 for the first deliveries in 2030.

Now a "common demonstration phase" is due for mid-2019, a review of the necessary evolutions in 2022, detailed operational requirement in 2024 for a deployment in 2035.

 

I'm not sure about the coherence of the new schedule but anyway.

 

Apparently KNDS will also be working on a Common Indirect Fire System (CIFS) aimed to replace the Caesar, the LRU (M270) and the Pzh 2000 around 2030 as well.

All those vehicles (bar the M270) are relatively recent, so I don't know if they really need a replacement so soon but at least it will allow to have something ready for the export market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fun thing with it is that it show how huge the Leopard 2 hull is compared to a Leclerc.

The turret looks ridiculously small on top of that hull.

 

They really need to use a more compact powerpack for the MGCS.

Or if they keep the same size make it more powerful (the idea of 1700 hp powerpack with capacitors to power a laser APS was being thrown around in 2017).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alzoc said:

The fun thing with it is that it show how huge the Leopard 2 hull is compared to a Leclerc.

The turret looks ridiculously small on top of that hull.

 

They really need to use a more compact powerpack for the MGCS.

Or if they keep the same size make it more powerful (the idea of 1700 hp powerpack with capacitors to power a laser APS was being thrown around in 2017).

 

Somethink like this, for L2 mbt. 

5EzNuqMgV4E.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Walter_Sobchak
      I realized that we don't actually have a thread about the British Chieftain tank.  
       
      I posted a bunch of Chieftain related stuff on my site today for anyone who is interested.  The items include:
       
      Magazine Articles
       
      1970 article from ARMOR
      1970 article from IDR  - Chieftain-Main Battle tank for the 1970s
      1976 article from IDR - The Combat-Improved Chieftain – First Impressions
      1976 article from IDR - Improved Chieftain for Iran
       
      Government reports
       
      WO 194-495 Assessment of Weapon System in Chieftain
      WO 341-108 Automotive Branch Report on Chieftain Modifications
      DEFE 15-1183 – L11 Brochure 
      WO 194-463 – Demonstration of Chieftain Gun 
       
      WO 194-1323 – Feasibility study on Burlington Chieftain
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      Bundeswehr Weasel and British Light tank Mark IV
       

    • By Belesarius
      http://www.janes.com/article/52476/german-army-receives-first-production-standard-puma-aifv
       
      30mm with airburst capability, and supposedly better mine protection than a Leo 2.
       
    • By Mighty_Zuk
      Welcome to Mighty Zuk's place of mental rest and peace of mind. This is my realm. 
      I've decided it would be best to ditch the old Merkava thread for 2 reasons:
      1)It does not feature any bunched up information in its main post, and valuable information is scattered across different posts on different pages. 
      2)Many AFVs that are not related to the Merkava, or related but are not it, appear in that thread with improper representation. There are other AFVs than the Merkava, and it would be better to refer to them in a general way.
       
      As time will go by, I will arrange this thread into a sort of information center. 
       
      I will take up a few first comment spaces to make sure proper amount of information can be stacked up on the front page and for easier access for everyone.
       
      [Reserved for future posts - Merkava]
×