Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Laser Shark

Contributing Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Laser Shark

  1. It’s a bit grey since Øyvind Isachsen is not only the head of Kavalariklubben (The Cavalry Club), but also a senior advisor at First House who has been contracted by KMW to promote the Leo 2A7 in Norway. Thus the questions that needs to be answered are if the Kavaleriklubben members who created the website did so with KMW's approval, and from where they got the specs that are listed on it. There’s also the question of why KMW haven’t corrected this info now that they are supposedly in control of the website. Edit: According to the second in charge Jørgen Fodstad, the info came from KMW: "But it is KMW itself that has been responsible for the content on the Leopard page, he states" https://www.tu.no/artikler/lavmal-uten-like-kavaleriklubben-eide-skryteside-for-leopard-og-kritisk-side-for-black-panther/509639
  2. FN MINIMI 7,62®Mk3 is the winner of the Norwegian light weight machine gun (LWMG) contract: https://www.fma.no/aktuelt-og-media/2020/signering-av-kontrakt-pa-nye-maskingevaer If we end up purchasing 4000 Maximis, it will become the most numerous MG by far since we only acquired around 1900 of the 5.56 version and maybe around a thousand or so FN MAG. The latter is supposed to be kept as a mounted MG on vehicles and ships, but I’m somwhat unsure about if or how this purchase will affect the distribution of the 5.56 Minimis. If the organization with fire support squads and more mobile maneuver squads is kept, then I can imagine that there will probably be Maximis in the former and that the latter will keep their Minimis. In any case it seems this is the end for the MG3 in the Norwegian Armed Forces, although it’s possible that they’ll place some of the less worn out ones in storages like they’ve finally started doing with the AG3s (unfortunately too late to save most of them from being turned into scrap metal though...).
  3. I thought you would be happy so see that even the Germans are now admitting the superiority of ARgonomics?
  4. I doubt that. The German government doesn’t put their foot down on arms sales to Hungary and other countries with governments that are unlikeable from their point of view, so I don’t see why they’d do it in this scenario either. No, the decision to acquire tanks from a different source than Germany must be for different reasons IMO, and some of the more probably ones have already been laid out by other posters in this thread.
  5. If they are okay with producing Leos in Spain and Greece, it’s hard to see why they wouldn’t approve of a factory in Poland too, especially if it means securing a contract for up to 800 Leo 2A7V and denying ground to competitors like Hyundai Rotem. Heck, even in Norway, where much less is at stake, it seems KMW are perfectly willing to let the local industry get a substantial share of the work if the reports are true.
  6. @Lord_James I think his argument was that you do not deploy tanks by themselves, but rather mix them together with mechanized infantry, anti-air vehicles, mortar carriers etc. in combined arms formations. So X number of tanks, let’s say 2000, might actually be too many if you cannot raise/fund enough supportive elements for more than half that number.
  7. And now that it's been confirmed, I'd say that the K2's chances of being selected is getting comparable to that of a snowball in hell.
  8. Damian's wet dream come true if this actually happens: https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/07/09/poland-could-purchase-m1-abrams-tanks-from-us/ It's probably worse news for Hyundai Rotem than KMW, though, since a significant contract like this one would have given the former an important foothold in the European tank market.
  9. @Lord_James I think it would, but more so for Norway than Poland since they plan on acquiring about ten times as many tanks as us. So, I’d be very surprised if we haven’t reached out to them to get a feel of how serious they are about going through with this order.
  10. From statements that have been made by various Norwegian politicians, I’m very much left with the impression that getting the best possible deal for the industry is number one priority for a lot of them. That doesn’t mean that the K2 is guaranteed to win as long as Hyundai Rotem make sure that their industrial incentives are better than KMW’s. There are more factors at play here, and some of them are working against the K2. Chief among these is the fact that South Korea is not a NATO member and that Norway risks ending up as the sole European user since a Polish K2 order is not a certain deal yet. But if there is a route to victory for the K2, I strongly believe it’s through the support of the Norwegian industry, and for that you need to put as many Norwegian components as possible into the tank, even if it entails more risk.
  11. You wrote that Kongsberg claims the MCT-30/MT40 can be outfitted with an ATGM and APS. I merely pointed that this isn’t at all clear from the source you provided. In other words, you cannot use this source to strengthen your case. Yes, I’m also well aware that Javelin missiles have been attached to the side of the MCT-30/RT40 in the past, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a good solution that any military would want to adapt. On the contrary, the U.S. Army never bothered attaching Javelins to their MCT-30s, and has instead fielded Strykers with CROWS-J to complement them. And despite showing up in photos of the ACV prototype, it doesn’t seem like such a solution will be making its way into the USMC either since they have apparently acquired the lighter and more compact MT20 instead, a turret that is likely less capable of mounting such equipment. (Also, am I the only one struggling with getting my posts submitted lately?)
  12. That is something that the army may be concerned about, but they’re not the only ones who can influence the decision makers. Getting the industry on their side is also the best play Hyundai Rotem can make IMO, as it’s almost certainly going to be more decisive to the outcome of this process than the K2 possibly being more mobile in the deep snow than the Leo 2A7.
  13. Recent article about Hyundai Rotem’s efforts to secure the contract for the next Norwegian MBT. A brief summary:
  14. That’s your interpretation, and not necessarily objective truth. The PDF-document only mentions that these are options for the RT-series, which includes the RT60, and that an ATGM can be fitted to a roof mounted RWS on an MCT-30/RT40.
  15. Norway ditches the MLU of the current ARTHUR counter battery radars in favour of buying new Thales GM200 MM/C multi mission radars, which will be placed on the ACSV G5. Source: https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/group/journalist/press_release/norway-and-netherlands-partner-thales-multi-mission-radar-ground
  16. I believe this is for Qatar since it’s been reported that the VBCI deal has been cancelled in favor of the Boxer. Considering what likely motivated this move, I’m somewhat surprised that they’ve decided to keep the Kongsberg turret with its French sensors and ATGMs.
  17. The new FN Evolys: TFB article: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/05/06/fn-evolys-new-ultralight-machine-gun/
  18. I’m unsure if the 12 Wisent 2 and 6 AVLB are based on the hulls of Norwegian Leo 2A4NO*, surplus hulls acquired by the manufacturer or if they are completely new ones, but whatever the case may be, additional hulls should become available as completely new tanks (there’s going to be some even if Norway end up with a Leo 2A7NO fleet) start rolling in. * Reportedly, the Norwegian Army only has 38 operational tanks, so that leaves between 14-20 tanks/hulls unaccounted for.
  19. I have to correct myself here. As it turns out this website was actually created by “Kavaleriklubben”, an association of former and currently serving Norwegian cavalry personnel, and it’s only now that the website is being transferred over to KMW. I guess we can expect the quality of website to improve in the future referring back to @Rico’s complaints. Also, as predicted, there are now projects with the goal of extending the life of both the Leo 1 based ARVs and AEVs (Project 1043), as well as acquiring additional support vehicles on Leo 2 hull (SUP LTP M-15). Interestingly, the latter project also mentions an assault breacher vehicle ("gjennombrytingspanservogn" in the Norwegian version of this document). The Norwegian Army had plans of acquiring such vehicles back in the 90s, initially taking the form of a turretless Leo 1 with a new superstructure, a mine plough and a MICLIC launcher, but unfortunately it never got past the drawing board. If a MICLIC launcher can be fitted to the Wisent 2 Mine Clearance variant, it would probably satisfy the requirements, I think.
  20. I don’t know, I'm afraid, but I somehow doubt that Hägglunds would have bid on an M113 rebuild, which this project started out as. It's an interesting question how the M113F4 morphed into the ACSV G5, but from the little that has been written about this process, I got no better answer than FFG decided to offer it, it got selected and somehow Norway managed to stumble our way into an actual M113 successor.
  21. Ugh. I’d rather that Körner claim all of the kills than the quislings of that regiment. -------------- But anyway, it looks like FFG has finally added a page on the ACSV G5 to their website. There is some info there, as well as higher quality versions of photos which have already showed up here and elsewhere + some new ones I haven't seen before. Production of the ACSV G5 is set to start next year, with system integration and final assembly being carried out at Ritek in Levanger. By then they should be mostly finished with the 12 additional CV90RWS combat engineering vehicles and 8 multi-role vehicles, which were ordered last year. The initial contract is for 44 vehicles, but this number is expected to grow to several hundreds over the next years.
  22. KMW has established a new website to promote the Leopard 2A7NO for Norway.
  • Create New...