Laser Shark

The 100th refurbished and upgraded CV90 has been delivered to the Swedish Armed Forces:
 
 
The RENO of 172 Strf 9040 (IFV), 40 Sripbv 90 (FCV), 22 Epbv 90 (FOV), 12 Bgbv 90 (ARV)  and 16 Lvkv 90 (AA) includes the following changes:
 
https://plsadaptive.s3.amazonaws.com/eco/files/event_content/CY59uoNfwTShAV6orby6TYDsGNTmYrADO5auSTX2.pdf
 
Although not mentioned in the list above, the ARV variant also gets a Saab Trackfire RWS. All upgraded vehicles also get a "D" added to their designation (e.g. Strf 9040 D, Bgbv 90 D etc.).

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

The 100th refurbished and upgraded CV90 has been delivered to the Swedish Armed Forces:
 
 
The RENO of 172 Strf 9040 (IFV), 40 Sripbv 90 (FCV), 22 Epbv 90 (FOV), 12 Bgbv 90 (ARV)  and 16 Lvkv 90 (AA) includes the following changes:
 
https://plsadaptive.s3.amazonaws.com/eco/files/event_content/CY59uoNfwTShAV6orby6TYDsGNTmYrADO5auSTX2.pdf
 
Although not mentioned in the list above, the ARV variant also gets a Saab Trackfire RWS. All upgraded vehicles also get a "D" added to their designation (e.g. Strf 9040 D, Bgbv 90 D etc.).

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

Just a couple of updates to the last few posts…
 
It has been confirmed that the 20 additional CV90s for the Norwegian Army will be CV90RWS variants based on rebuilt Mk I hulls. We still do not know the composition of the upcoming order, but unless they decide to add additional variants to the Norwegian CV90 family, there are only two to choose from, namely CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle) and CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier). This also means a third order of (between 20-40 vehicles, if I have to guess) CV9030 MkIIIb will also probably take place sometime in the next years
 
Regarding the upcoming lawsuit between Rheinmetall/Rheinmetall Norway and the Norwegian state, more details have been revealed here as well. The article is pretty long, but I’ll translate the parts that I found to be the most relevant:
 According to Oslo district court, it was discovered that the original spring charged sensor mast could be a safety hazard for personnel inside the vehicle. The updated version, however, is claimed to be too sensitive to harsh environments to fulfil the Norwegian requirements.  This issue can apparently be fixed by switching to an electronically stabilized camera, which Rheinmetall Norway had originally intended to be a part of the system but abandoned for reasons that are not specified in the article. Because of these as well as other delays, the Norwegian side concluded that it would take several years  until the system could be delivered, and that’s why they decided to terminate the contract in 2018. For these reasons, the Norwegian state will also be suing Rheinmetall for 76,6 MNOK, as well as the cost of acquiring a new sensor system!  
Rheinmetall & Rheinmetall Norway are refuting the claim that the updated solution would not fulfil the Norwegian requirements. They are also pointing out that their solution has been found acceptable by both the Norwegian Border Guard (fitted to their border installations) and the Malaysian Armed Forces  (on the AV8 Gempita). They are also claiming that most of the delays were caused by an incompetent Norwegian project management failing to come up with clear and comprehensive requirements, demanding several changes after the contract had been signed, as well as attempting to but failing badly at coordinating the CV90 project/BAE Systems Hägglungs and the Vingtaqs II project/Rheinmetall Norway (according to Rheinmetall, a better solution would have been to let Hägglunds handle the CV90 part of the Vingtaqs II project, as had been planned initially). In another article, Rheinmetall have also been really leaning into the angle that incompetency is running rampant in the Norwegian Defence Material (and its predecessor in the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organization) by pointing to various acquisition projects that have been problematic (NH90, Archer etc.). To prove this, they’ve also issued a request to be able to go through the documentation of all Norwegian acquisition projects in the later years, but the court did not allow this, stating that it would be sufficient if Rheinmetall can prove that the project management have been incompetent in this specific case. (On a sidenote, one would think it that might not be the smartest idea to attack the entire agency from whom you’ll be competing for contracts in the future, but it certainly did not stop Rheinmetall Norway from winning a contract on the delivery of new soft-mounts for the M2A2Ns.) For these reasons, Rheimetall claim that Norway did not have the right to terminate the contract, and are demanding that the latter pay a refund at the discretion of the court (calculated to be at around 125 MNOK).  

There apparently is a Boxer ammunition resupply variant, though it seems to follow a different concept than the ones available for M109 and K9. There also was a design for an ammunition resupply vehicle for the Panzerhaubitze 2000 (designed when KMW competed in the Crusader program in the United States), but it probably is a dead design with blueprints rotting in some old company archive.
 

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

1

It is a more controversial article. While ESuT publishes some very interesting and well written articles, sometimes they also rely on less accurate sources and rumors. E.g. the unit that supposedly complained about the lackluster reliability of the Puma doesn't actually operate it yet...
 
The Marder lifetime extension has been approved and - after new engines already have been ordered - the Bundestag approved the purchase and installation of new ATTICA-GM thermal imagers this week. While I personally wouldn't dislike a two systems solutions, the CV90 seems to be rather unsuited for the German Army based on several factors (it would hardly solve any of the Puma's real problems like the reduced carry capacity and restricted interior height and in ~2002 it was deemed impossible to modify the ASCOD's and CV90's designs in such a way that they could meet the protection criteria, which lead to the creation of the Puma IFV), but only act as an expensive shortcut to negate some of the teething problems. A new firmware is already being rolled out which is supposed to eliminate/limit the software issues.
 
The idea that the CV90 would be favored in Germany falls into the same category as ESuT announcing that the Wiesel 1 might be fitted with a 27 mm revolver gun or that LANCE turret already had been selected for the heavy fire support  variant of the Boxer - i.e. they are just speculations and indiviual opinions.

So, according to ES&T, the Bundeswehr is losing patience with the Puma and are considering replacing the entire fleet if the operational readiness is not proven in the coming year.
 
As for what might replace it, BAE Systems Hägglunds should appreciate this part of the article:
“In briefings of the Army Command, the CV90 has so far been mentioned as an alternative and favorite. But the Lynx would certainly be a candidate as well, as it has the DNA of the puma and at the same time learned the lessons from the problems of the puma in the Bundeswehr.”
 
I remain unconvinced, however, that this is something that could actually happen. With 330+ vehicles already delivered, the Bundeswehr is almost certainly way too deep in the Puma project to get rid of them simply because they fail to meet a readiness goal in the coming year(s).
 
@SH_MM care to take a jab at this one?

A video about the event, from TV news. (beware: hungarian gibberish) A little bit of additional info: we also bought 5 ARVs and + 3 bridgelayers
 
 

Recently refurbished NM-116 outside the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum in Oslo:
 

 
Some info:
 
This vehicle is part of the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum's collection, and has been on display at Setermoen for several years, despite being in need of refurbishment. Major Geir Lyftingsmo (Chief of vehicles and engineering equipment at the Norwegian Armed Forces Museums) organized a collaborative project between Panservenner ("friends of armoured vehicles"), the Historical Military Vehicles Association (HMKF), Veteran meets Veteran and the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum, and on July 2, a newly refurbished NM-116 was handed over to the museum.

Torgeir Løvold, chairman of Panservenner, says the project was successful, and that over 400 hours have been spent on the job. The project required tenacity and patience. The museum would like to thank everyone involved for their efforts. A thanks also goes to the Norwegian Armed Forces competence center for logistics and operational support (FKL) for the transport of the vehicle.

Following the success of this project, the partners have already embarked on the next project, an NM135 which they plan to make ready for the next Veteran's Day.
 
http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Forsvarsmuseet/Stridsvogn-paa-museet

Recently refurbished NM-116 outside the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum in Oslo:
 

 
Some info:
 
This vehicle is part of the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum's collection, and has been on display at Setermoen for several years, despite being in need of refurbishment. Major Geir Lyftingsmo (Chief of vehicles and engineering equipment at the Norwegian Armed Forces Museums) organized a collaborative project between Panservenner ("friends of armoured vehicles"), the Historical Military Vehicles Association (HMKF), Veteran meets Veteran and the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum, and on July 2, a newly refurbished NM-116 was handed over to the museum.

Torgeir Løvold, chairman of Panservenner, says the project was successful, and that over 400 hours have been spent on the job. The project required tenacity and patience. The museum would like to thank everyone involved for their efforts. A thanks also goes to the Norwegian Armed Forces competence center for logistics and operational support (FKL) for the transport of the vehicle.

Following the success of this project, the partners have already embarked on the next project, an NM135 which they plan to make ready for the next Veteran's Day.
 
http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Forsvarsmuseet/Stridsvogn-paa-museet

Recently refurbished NM-116 outside the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum in Oslo:
 

 
Some info:
 
This vehicle is part of the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum's collection, and has been on display at Setermoen for several years, despite being in need of refurbishment. Major Geir Lyftingsmo (Chief of vehicles and engineering equipment at the Norwegian Armed Forces Museums) organized a collaborative project between Panservenner ("friends of armoured vehicles"), the Historical Military Vehicles Association (HMKF), Veteran meets Veteran and the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum, and on July 2, a newly refurbished NM-116 was handed over to the museum.

Torgeir Løvold, chairman of Panservenner, says the project was successful, and that over 400 hours have been spent on the job. The project required tenacity and patience. The museum would like to thank everyone involved for their efforts. A thanks also goes to the Norwegian Armed Forces competence center for logistics and operational support (FKL) for the transport of the vehicle.

Following the success of this project, the partners have already embarked on the next project, an NM135 which they plan to make ready for the next Veteran's Day.
 
http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Forsvarsmuseet/Stridsvogn-paa-museet

Recently refurbished NM-116 outside the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum in Oslo:
 

 
Some info:
 
This vehicle is part of the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum's collection, and has been on display at Setermoen for several years, despite being in need of refurbishment. Major Geir Lyftingsmo (Chief of vehicles and engineering equipment at the Norwegian Armed Forces Museums) organized a collaborative project between Panservenner ("friends of armoured vehicles"), the Historical Military Vehicles Association (HMKF), Veteran meets Veteran and the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum, and on July 2, a newly refurbished NM-116 was handed over to the museum.

Torgeir Løvold, chairman of Panservenner, says the project was successful, and that over 400 hours have been spent on the job. The project required tenacity and patience. The museum would like to thank everyone involved for their efforts. A thanks also goes to the Norwegian Armed Forces competence center for logistics and operational support (FKL) for the transport of the vehicle.

Following the success of this project, the partners have already embarked on the next project, an NM135 which they plan to make ready for the next Veteran's Day.
 
http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Forsvarsmuseet/Stridsvogn-paa-museet

Recently refurbished NM-116 outside the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum in Oslo:
 

 
Some info:
 
This vehicle is part of the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum's collection, and has been on display at Setermoen for several years, despite being in need of refurbishment. Major Geir Lyftingsmo (Chief of vehicles and engineering equipment at the Norwegian Armed Forces Museums) organized a collaborative project between Panservenner ("friends of armoured vehicles"), the Historical Military Vehicles Association (HMKF), Veteran meets Veteran and the Norwegian Armed Forces Museum, and on July 2, a newly refurbished NM-116 was handed over to the museum.

Torgeir Løvold, chairman of Panservenner, says the project was successful, and that over 400 hours have been spent on the job. The project required tenacity and patience. The museum would like to thank everyone involved for their efforts. A thanks also goes to the Norwegian Armed Forces competence center for logistics and operational support (FKL) for the transport of the vehicle.

Following the success of this project, the partners have already embarked on the next project, an NM135 which they plan to make ready for the next Veteran's Day.
 
http://forsvaretsmuseer.no/Forsvarsmuseet/Stridsvogn-paa-museet

Hungary
 

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/fremskynder-forsvarsplaner/id2704271/?utm_source=www.regjeringen.no&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS-2581966-ownerid380
 
It looks like Norway is going to acquire another 20 CV90. There is no info on what variants this order will include, but if it’s a direct purchase from the Norwegian industry, I suspect there will be more of the turretless support variants based on Mk I hulls. It was the Norwegian industry that was responsible for rebuild of these vehicles the last time, and Norway should still have more hulls available as out of the original 104 CV9030N (Mk I), 16 hulls have been upgraded to CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle), 16 to CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier), 37 have been sold to Estonia and a few have also been used in mine/IED tests. In any case, as suggested by the wording in the second to last sentence of the quoted paragraph, Norway will probably have to order more CV90s than that (and of the turreted variants as well if those aren't included in this order) if it wishes to realize the army structure mentioned in this post.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/fremskynder-forsvarsplaner/id2704271/?utm_source=www.regjeringen.no&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS-2581966-ownerid380
 
It looks like Norway is going to acquire another 20 CV90. There is no info on what variants this order will include, but if it’s a direct purchase from the Norwegian industry, I suspect there will be more of the turretless support variants based on Mk I hulls. It was the Norwegian industry that was responsible for rebuild of these vehicles the last time, and Norway should still have more hulls available as out of the original 104 CV9030N (Mk I), 16 hulls have been upgraded to CV90RWS STING (combat engineer vehicle), 16 to CV90RWS Multi-BK (multi-role mortar carrier), 37 have been sold to Estonia and a few have also been used in mine/IED tests. In any case, as suggested by the wording in the second to last sentence of the quoted paragraph, Norway will probably have to order more CV90s than that (and of the turreted variants as well if those aren't included in this order) if it wishes to realize the army structure mentioned in this post.