Serge

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   Another pic of Ofek

This is not the Ofek but a Pereg (popy).

This is a maintenance and repair vehicle.  I can’t remind the full name of the platform but I can search. 

LOL. 
make my day. 

We will have fun soon :

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/india-revives-near-dead-ficv-new-tender/

Rafale is selected by Switzerland. 

 Once more, we are forwarding in a strange direction. 

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/texelis-and-cnim-team-for-new-engineer-vehicle

14 minutes ago, Sovngard said:

@Serge

 

I’m closer to the third one.

13 minutes ago, Beer said:

Well, it's the the military who sets the requirements. The manufacturers only offer solution to those requirements.

Yes. 
But the very problem with the Stryker is that it was supposed to be an interim AFV. So, it must be very difficult to express any request. 

This kind of integration is not a serious one. It’s a last minute welding. 

About the EBRC Jaguar reconnaissance vehicle. 
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=5622665497774689&id=127131997328094

A new video about the Borsuk IFV :

Yes. 
If the RT20 was the Kongsberg proposal, you’re right. This turret was designed for chassis which can’t support heavy solutions. 
So, it’s hard to believe in the Oshkosh capability to integrate an APS or ATGM. 

This bar armour is laser cut. 
It’s light. But it’s ugly too on the Jaguar. 

3 hours ago, VPZ said:

There already was variant of ARV with small crane.

 

The Chata’p was not adopted. 
This prototype was one of both Namer demonstrators. 
Priority was given to the heavier Achzaka. 

5 hours ago, Newtonk said:

Odd, that crane does not look too sturdy, and why would you carry a spare wheel on the roof when it is so far from the ground? Still, an interesting discovery.

The purpose of the crane is just to manipulate spares, not a power pack. 
This is a combat repair vehicle. 

What’s that ?

5 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Well, Ajax carries no dismounts and Ares just four, so there are no problems with the Puma's available space.

 

I was considering the size of soldiers. 
it was designed to carry 85% of a population, not 95%. 
So, the troop compartment is too low. 

5 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Even if Puma replaced the Warrior, it wouldn't be a dramatic issue. The US Army also transports 8/9 men squads with the Bradleys, which only provide seating for seven dismounts... they just distribute the squads on multiple vehicles.

  Reveal hidden contents

The worst organisation. 

They have better to purchase a Lynx. 

1 minute ago, mr.T said:

Jaguar hardly seems to be low cost or maximum efficiency driven , its seems to be packing all the bells and whistles they could add. 

Can you quote a whistle ? Just one of them. 

29 minutes ago, TokyoMorose said:

 

How could it possibly be 'safer'?

This way, hatch opened, the driver head is kept under the highest point of the chassis. So, the driver is better protected against driving accidents and the turret can keep turning. It’s important for security on roads too.

This point was regarded as a priority over armoured protection. 

Quote

 

1 hour ago, Beer said:

I wonder why modern military vehicles tend to have so unnecesarily compicated shapes of everything. To me it just feels very wrong and unefficient design. 

The Jaguar is a specific design with very French inputs.

-1 : French cavalry considered video sighting is not mature enough. So, optical backup sight was asked for both the gunner and the tank commander. 
-2 : the DGA procurement agency introduced special requirements. The most noticeable one is the bubble like driver hatch. At the beginning, the driver hatch was supposed to be a Leclerc MBT one. But DGA asked a 10RC one. They think it’s safer when driving opened hatch. This choice is the worst because of its complexe impact on armor. 

49 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

Aside of the budget issues, the Puma would be the perfect solution for the British military, as it is optimized for air-transportablity via A400M. In that sense it would fit much better to the British Army than the German one...

Yes. And they will carry 85% of the infantry. The 15% left will follow running. 

It’s not an MRAP drive line. 
Not the best available but not an MRAP one. 

4 hours ago, N-L-M said:

Are you sure? That sounds rather extreme.

The Arjun MBT program started in 1972. 

https://www.google.fr/amp/s/www.armyrecognition.com/defense_news_june_2021_global_security_army_industry/india_plans_to_procure_1700_future_ready_combat_vehicles_to_replacce_t-72m_ajeya_tanks.amp.html
 

The first operational unit is scheduled in 2071.