skylancer-3441 Posted December 19, 2018 Report Share Posted December 19, 2018 similar slide was in DTR's article on KF41 which became available back in June: On 6/12/2018 at 11:19 AM, skylancer-3441 said: pictures from that pdf: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted December 19, 2018 Report Share Posted December 19, 2018 Maybe the new Griffin II chassis can have an impact on the GDLS proposal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted December 19, 2018 Author Report Share Posted December 19, 2018 22 minutes ago, Serge said: Maybe the new Griffin II chassis can have an impact on the GDLS proposal. Theyre all AJAX derivatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted December 20, 2018 Report Share Posted December 20, 2018 Yes, but the Griffin II is a low profil chassis. It’s very different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted December 22, 2018 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2018 On 12/20/2018 at 10:49 PM, Serge said: Yes, but the Griffin II is a low profil chassis. It’s very different. That’s my point. GD is offering AJAX-based variants only. They have been stressing the proven, low risk nature of their family of vehicles from the outset. Griffin (any variant) haven’t been accepted into service by any country and haven’t been subjected to a customer’s engineering & qualification processes like the AJAX families. Apart from being from the same OEM, it has no standing within the context of Land 400 Phase 3, as far as I can see. What “impact” are you suggesting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted December 22, 2018 Report Share Posted December 22, 2018 I think because both Griffin-Il and III are an evolution of the Ajax, the proposition for Land-400 can gain from them. They can integrate some details, but GDLS-A can propose a low profile of the Ajax chassis for long term need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted December 22, 2018 Report Share Posted December 22, 2018 Yep. The superstructure is rarely ever meaningful when talking about cost and ease of production, let alone risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted December 22, 2018 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Mighty_Zuk said: Yep. The superstructure is rarely ever meaningful when talking about cost and ease of production, let alone risk. For a rational customer, I’d agree. However, the strength of GD’s potential offering is that, with the exception of the IFV hull (arguably the simplest of the family), they are offering a fully mature, technically certified & qualified family of vehicles, as accepted by the British, from whom the majority of standards & procedures used by the Land Engineering Agency (LEA) are derived from (Def Stans & DEF(AUST)s). Deviation from already-qualified vehicles undermines this narrative, which is “Low Technical Risk/Military Off The Shelf”. Let’s look at some decisions that GD have made so far regarding production. - hulls will be manufactured as ‘green’ hulls in existing facilities (so as not to risk perceived technical maturity). - hulls won’t use Australian steel (so as not to risk perceived technical maturity). Based on the above, and that nowhere in the L400 RFT is a requirement for calibres above 30mm, Griffin 1-3, whilst interesting, and illustrative of design capabilities and future options, aren’t really relevant to the L400-3 activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylancer-3441 Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 from IAV 2019 - what appears to be the same model as one which was shown back in September, but this time it's yellow-ish desert-ish instead of tri-colour camo) (from this tweet https://twitter.com/gduknews/status/1087673769571831808) (from this tweet https://twitter.com/nicholadrummond/status/1087726889618288640) and from this article https://defense-update.com/20190121_iron-fists-aps-for-the-australian-boxers.html Quote IF-LC is also included in the AJAX based tracked vehicle General Dynamics Land Systems UK (GDLS-UK) propose to the Australian Land 400 Phase 3, intended to replace the M113s in the future. A model of that vehicle was also unveiled by GDLS at the #IAVevent. Photo: Defense-Update The AJAX proposed for Land 400 Phase III uses a manned GDLS turret that mounts an ATK 30mm cannon and a missile launcher. In addition to the two IF-LC active protection units the turret also uses dual, multi-sensor EO targeting system (note the protected, rotating commander sight) and the acoustic sensor behind it. Photo: Defense-Update Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Images from article: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Is it just me, or does anyone else get a vibe of a very busy turret on this one as well? Not Bradley tier, but you know what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 So, the Aussies want an evaluation of only the Iron Fist LC for the Boxer, because it's the only one meeting weight requirements. This means the Phase 3 vehicle will have to use it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted January 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 7 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said: So, the Aussies want an evaluation of only the Iron Fist LC for the Boxer, because it's the only one meeting weight requirements. This means the Phase 3 vehicle will have to use it as well. No necessarily. Not even the 30mm gun has to be common across the phases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 23, 2019 Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 3 hours ago, 2805662 said: No necessarily. Not even the 30mm gun has to be common across the phases. So the whole commonality thing is now gone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted January 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said: So the whole commonality thing is now gone? Apart from GFE, there’s no commonality requirement across the phases of L400. CASG wasn’t reigned in enough before RFT release, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 New issue of DTR is out: http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/?iguid=de7f04cc-f697-4547-8ddf-1281221a1de9 Serge 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted February 11, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2019 On 1/22/2019 at 9:39 AM, skylancer-3441 said: what appears to be the same model as one which was shown back in September, but this time it's yellow-ish desert-ish instead of tri-colour camo It is. The model shipped to Australia in September painted green, I helped out a mate by repainting it the day before the tradeshow (Land Forces) into the camouflage, after DVD in the UK, the model was repainted into the desert scheme and will (likely) appear at IDEX this week in Abu Dhabi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIADES Posted February 16, 2019 Report Share Posted February 16, 2019 Commonality is required on several key items. These include the gun and Spike. These are stated in the RFT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted February 16, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2019 23 minutes ago, DIADES said: Commonality is required on several key items. These include the gun and Spike. These are stated in the RFT The gun is *not* common between phases. The caliber is. DIADES 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted February 21, 2019 Report Share Posted February 21, 2019 Serge, Lord_James, VPZ and 2 others 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted March 1, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2019 More of Rheinmetall’s submission has made it I to the public domain. 120mm Nemo mortar Protected amphibious vehicle: skylancer-3441 and Clan_Ghost_Bear 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valryon Posted March 1, 2019 Report Share Posted March 1, 2019 New turret from EOS and Elbit Systems. Brochure Serge, skylancer-3441, 2805662 and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted March 1, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2019 5 hours ago, Valryon said: New turret from EOS and Elbit Systems. Brochure Apparently that’s the turret being offered by Hanwha on the AS21. Valryon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted March 1, 2019 Report Share Posted March 1, 2019 Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted March 2, 2019 Report Share Posted March 2, 2019 Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.