The US fully tested the XM35 (isn’t it a derivative of the M68A1?) back in the Nineties, so they’d have a detailed level of understanding and comfort with the XM35, presumably. Cockerill 105? Not so much...
Would the gun be considered GFE under the program?
Also, I would’ve thought that the gun on the M8 would’ve been type classified when the platform was - i.e. why is it still the XM35 and not the M35?
Land 400 Phase 2 (the 8x8 bit) is due for consideration (“Gate 2”) by NSC (National Security Committee [of Cabinet]) in the second quarter of this year....that’ll also give Gate 1 to Land 400 Phase 3 ([tracked] IFV).
Both contenders for Phase 2 were asked in August last year to cost up a Phase 3 offering based on their 8x8 shortlist i.e. an 8x8 IFV. The Bushmaster replacement project may also be a factor...a flat-top Boxer to replace the Bushmaster would be a cost-effective option from a fleet management perspective.
DOT&E report on US active protection systems (Trophy on Abrams, Iron Fist on Bradley, Iron Curtain on Stryker):
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2017/pdf/army/2017aps.pdf
Interesting. I’ve worked with Chris Wachsberger over the years - this is the same guy that spend years trying to get unitary vision/1x optics on every weapon as “only binoculars can be used to acquire targets”.
http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/dspace/bitstream/1947/3812/1/DSTO-GD-0003 PR.pdf
analysis on what different muzzle devices do to shot dispersion: FN Minimi.