Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) and Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT)

[Serge]

2 hours ago, phasers on stun said:

EMBT is not MGCS. Given the lack of LeClerc h/w in Europe outside france, and the plethora of L2 hardware in field, who is going to pull the trigger first to take on all that ILS risk ?

 

Leclerc, even in English. 

[DIADES]

18 hours ago, Serge said:

Leclerc

yep cos a person....General Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque

[N-L-M]

 

[Alzoc]

The Bundestag finally unlock the funds for the design studies of the MGCS.

 

About damn time :/

 

Seriously the Bundestag is a major hindrance on every single military project.

That the deputies have a right to look at what the federal government is doing military wise is normal and healthy.

But that they systematically obstruct pretty much everything based on petty regional interests at the detriment of the whole (be it their country or the EU at large)...

 

Anyway see you in two years (hopefully) for the technology demonstrators.

[XDrake]

https://www.janes.com/article/95812/germany-and-france-sign-mgcs-framework-agreement

Germany and France sign MGCS framework agreement.

https://esut.de/2020/04/meldungen/20255/deutsch-franzoesisches-abkommen-zum-neuen-kampfpanzer-mgcs-unterzeichnet/

According to this article two of the five phases of the project have been completed already.

[Gun Ready]

Now industry as an ARGE (KMW, Nexter, Rheinmetall) signed the contract with BAAINBw today, see https://www.bmvg.de/en/news/contract-concluded-future-decisive-ground-combat-system-258470

 

[Gun Ready]

Any news at the French side? Press release DGA? Or with newspapers?

[David Moyes]

 

 

• First, a visual synthesizing the French vision of the program
• Manned & autonomous “system of systems”, panoply of means of fire, collaborative combat, etc. (+ camo similar to #Scorpion)
• To be agreed with Rheinmetall, supporter of a single system concept

[Gun Ready]

Has anybody any news on MGCS or EMBT???

It is sooo silent with this two project! Do they still exist or are they dead?

 

[Alzoc]

2 hours ago, Gun Ready said:

Has anybody any news on MGCS or EMBT???

It is sooo silent with this two project! Do they still exist or are they dead?

 

 

EMBT nothing, and we probably won't hear anything else about it, the market for second-hand and/or upgraded Leopard 2 is still going strong and the EMBT makes little sense from an economical standpoint.

Ultimately it was just a project to show that Nexter and KMW were playing nice together, but Rheinmetal has created big waves by saying that they intend to take control of KMW and by extension of the MGCS program (which the French side was not exactly happy with).

 

On the MGCS the last new I saw was mid october to say that 200 millions € would be engaged in 2021 to produce 14 Main Technological demonstrator (basically technological bricks) that are to be ready by 2025 for integration in the different platforms of the MGCS.

 

https://forcesoperations.com/200-me-pour-le-programme-mgcs-en-2021/

 

On parallel the preliminary design studies are still going on should run for 18 months (they started around may 2020).

The goal is to finish the demonstration phase by 2025 and to have a demonstrator for the complete system between 2024 and 2027.

 

https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/news/latest_news/index_23936.php

https://forcesoperations.com/mgcs-le-1er-contrat-detude-darchitecture-systeme-enfin-notifie/

 

Following who's doing what and within which time frame is a bit of a headache on this program (at least for me), but as I understand it right now they are focusing on developing the various technological bricks that'll be integrated in the system while the two government try to sort out a list of common requirements for the system. Then once we have a working prototype you'll have the  politicians and industrials of the two country bickering between each others to see who gets to produce what.

 

Don't expect to see a prototype before 2025.

At best we'll get a list of requirements, some infos on the various technological bricks and maybe some design concepts in the meantime.

[Zadlo]

3 hours ago, Gun Ready said:

Has anybody any news on MGCS or EMBT???

It is sooo silent with this two project! Do they still exist or are they dead?

 

There are some rumours that EMBT will be shown on MSPO 2021 as a result of cancelled Eurosatory 2020.

[Gun Ready]

Makes sense to show something against the K2PL. The question whether EMBT is the right stuff to promote. I doubt!

[Beer]

5 hours ago, Gun Ready said:

Makes sense to show something against the K2PL. The question whether EMBT is the right stuff to promote. I doubt!

 

IMHO EMBT will come too late for being considered by the Poles. 

[Gun Ready]

Forces Operations did IMO a very interesting article about MGCS, the French and German MOD, Leopard 2 and the user nations Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway, how to approach UK and Italy for MGCS and KNDS efforts in Poland with EMBT. 

 

https://forcesoperations.com/suede-pays-bas-italie-etc-ces-pays-que-lallemagne-souhaite-integrer-a-mgcs/

 

[Alzoc]

Some artist models on the French vision for the MGCS :

 

Three different versions:

 

• Canon which shows a large caliber coax which seem to have en independent elevation (so back to the AMX-30)
• C² : Command and Control which seem to have a 40mm
• Missile: Same autocanon as a secondary than the canon version, 6 missiles ready and no RCWS

 

 

Found on a video from DGA: https://scorpion-future.fr/

 

Not much change from previous drawings:

On 5/29/2020 at 11:44 AM, David Moyes said:

 

 

• First, a visual synthesizing the French vision of the program
• Manned & autonomous “system of systems”, panoply of means of fire, collaborative combat, etc. (+ camo similar to #Scorpion)
• To be agreed with Rheinmetall, supporter of a single system concept

[delete013]

On 1/3/2021 at 5:39 PM, Alzoc said:

Some artist models on the French vision for the MGCS :

 

Three different versions:

 

• Canon which shows a large caliber coax which seem to have en independent elevation (so back to the AMX-30)
• C² : Command and Control which seem to have a 40mm
• Missile: Same autocanon as a secondary than the canon version, 6 missiles ready and no RCWS

 

 

Found on a video from DGA: https://scorpion-future.fr/

 

Not much change from previous drawings:

These designs seem to stray from the usual good practices of tank building. Bulky, tall and with little space for suspension. Armour on the "cannon" seems equal to that of a c2(IFV?). How is that justified?

[Sturgeon]

4 hours ago, delete013 said:

These designs seem to stray from the usual good practices of tank building. Bulky, tall and with little space for suspension. Armour on the "cannon" seems equal to that of a c2(IFV?). How is that justified?

I ask that question of your parents every day.

[SH_MM]

 

[Serge]

I don’t know why but it smells like the NH90. 

[Alzoc]

I just hope that once the German federal elections are over, the Bundestag will stop to mess with both the MGCS and the FCAS simply because of internal politics.

Those programs are more important than that...

 

Heck even when the industrials manage to find a new agreement to make room for a new partner, they can't even be bothered to secure funding for said agreement

 

Edit: I don't usually link to Sputnik news but for once they made an adequate summary of the clusterfuck from the French PoV

 

 

[roguetechie]

On 4/7/2021 at 4:46 AM, delete013 said:

These designs seem to stray from the usual good practices of tank building. Bulky, tall and with little space for suspension. Armour on the "cannon" seems equal to that of a c2(IFV?). How is that justified?

 

Which best practices are you specifically on about?

 

Let's start with your bulky complaint:

 

You do know that NERA is a thing right and that due to the specifics of how nera works it tends to be very mass efficient but comparatively massive right?

 

Now let's go to the tall thing:

 

How exactly are you getting that they're especially tall? I see the opposite TBH but I wouldn't even want to speculate on the height since there's nothing to gauge the scale by.

 

What about little space for suspension:

 

Gonna be honest here, this one blatantly makes it clear that you're just bitching to bitch with no actual grounding for any of it.

 

And Last, you're talking about the armor package of CONCEPT DRAWINGS.

 

You have no grounds to speculate about any of this at all.

[delete013]

6 hours ago, roguetechie said:

Which best practices are you specifically on about?

Low silhouette, sloped plates where possible, small or narrow cross-section of turrets. More or less how late cold war tanks were designed.

6 hours ago, roguetechie said:

Let's start with your bulky complaint:

 

You do know that NERA is a thing right and that due to the specifics of how nera works it tends to be very mass efficient but comparatively massive right?

Good, so it is the composite armour that needs space.

6 hours ago, roguetechie said:

Now let's go to the tall thing:

 

How exactly are you getting that they're especially tall? I see the opposite TBH but I wouldn't even want to speculate on the height since there's nothing to gauge the scale by.

Maybe it is not so tall, or at lest, the crew capsule is lower under the bulky armour. You might notice though that there is a flat window before the driver and there seems not much space for armour. It looks like driver's shot trap on a challenger 2. The hull itself is tall relative to vehicle width and there seems to be a superstructure that adds to the weight. All this are vulnerabilities that were attempted to be solved by tilting drivers chair back and lower the hull. Is that simply gone now?

6 hours ago, roguetechie said:

What about little space for suspension:

 

Gonna be honest here, this one blatantly makes it clear that you're just bitching to bitch with no actual grounding for any of it.

I think that part is my most credible observation. The hull is very low. The final drive housing extends almost all the way to the track. Where is suspension travel supposed to go? It looks more akin to Churchill's suspension.

 

6 hours ago, roguetechie said:

And Last, you're talking about the armor package of CONCEPT DRAWINGS.

 

You have no grounds to speculate about any of this at all.

Sure, I merely asked why is it so. Maybe I don't know something.

[delete013]

1 minute ago, delete013 said:

there seems to be a superstructure that adds to the weight

..to the height. [why can't I modify my posts?]

[Lord_James]

5 hours ago, delete013 said:

Low silhouette, sloped plates where possible, small or narrow cross-section of turrets. More or less how late cold war tanks were designed.

In what world? Have you seen 1980s and 1990s designed tanks? They’re almost all boxes with fat turrets (M1 Abrams, Leopard 2, Leclerc, Challenger, Type 90, Ariete). 

[Beer]

Even the T-90A and M and Oplot-M have boxy turrets which are intentionally as wide as possible because there is a very good reason for that.