Kal

Military track (in peacetime) is friendly to all road surfaces simply as load is distributed so well compared to wheeled vehicles.  Exceptions are when the midden intersects the ventilator and we revert to steel track and even rubber pad or band track does rip up bitumen if you pivot turn.  Less damage on dirt as less traction. (less resistance to pivot)

Never (personally) had an issue with tracks tearing up roads. T130, Diehl 513, T150F: never damaged the roads I operated on, in Australia & overseas. Re. Dirt tracks, we’d normally parallel them if we thought we’d damage them by repeated traffic. 
 
We’d also road run Leopard AS1 (similar MLC as AS21/KF41) with no issues regarding damage. Can’t imagine composite rubber track would be any more aggressive than conventional track using rubber pads. 

Modern slat armour is about 10kg per square metre coverage. (See hawkei above).  It also has electric cunning to defeat more modern rpg.  So weight is almost inconsequential, but maintainability and robustness could be an issue.  As both redback and lynx come with ironfist's radars, the obvious option to up armour for pre deployment is simply to plug in larger/ and or additional launchers for the APS....so perhaps that is the future.  But guessing the australian army conservatism, i would expect both.   Additionally i would expect users of either/both lynx and redback to eventually add some hull APS launchers, tied to the turret's radars.

RWS
 
EOS is claiming roughly 12,500m. 5,500m and 4,500m for both thermal and day vision for dectection, recognition and identification (respectively).

SEOSS-2 Specs:
 
Ranges for Thermal channel (NATO 2.3x2.3 target)
 

Yeah, tracking. The original ASLAV stuff used actual rebar. Inefficient weight-wise. It was also very vulnerable to damage due to it being overly rigid. Simply showing an alternative that’s current generation. 
 
Also, to quote the press release: “The vehicle boasts an advanced layered protection system including Elbit’s active protection system, Plasan’s world class armour and a structure designed to protect occupants from the effects of blast.”

T-14 doing demo at closed part of Army expo

That is half a recovery flat tow A frame.  Each vehicle carries half so they have some intrinsic ability to recovery each other.

The MTU 883 is not at all smaller than the AVDS 1790. The engines are approximately the same length, similar width (though the 883 is square and the AVDS is trapezoidal in section and a tad wider at the top), and with the cooling system on top similar height (though the MTU has a more optimised slope for hiding behind the glacis). You would note, that the engine compartment on the Merk 4 is not notably shorter than the same on the Merk 3.
Likewise, the Renk 325 transmission that goes with the 883 is slightly fatter than the Renk 304 which goes with the 1200 HP AVDS 1790, so there's no real room saved in the engine compartment. Definitely not the approximately 60 cm you'd need to cram in another seat.
I would also question the tactical utility of being able to seat more people in a Namer, as it already carries a full infantry squad.
 
The IDF don't appear to have said anything about it yet, but they tend to keep quiet anyway.

EOS's team redback launch blurb. https://www.eos-aus.com/hanwha-launches-the-redback-in-australia/
 

EOS's team redback launch blurb. https://www.eos-aus.com/hanwha-launches-the-redback-in-australia/
 

Another video of the AS21. This video shows some footage of the 3rd prototype moving, along with it being loaded for shipment to Australia last month. There is also the same footage from the video posted by DTR in this one as well.
 
 

AS21 rollout:
 
 

latest K-rumors
model AS21

ADBC : 네이버 블로그 (naver.com)  page 4, google foo translate
 
they seem to suggest, Korea can offer bomblet protection like the Germans (Puma) and assume that Lynx will offer bomblet protection.
they seem to suggest, Korea did not have the tech to have the hull blast protection required, but that only Israel's Plasan and Germany's IBD do.  Obviously Plasan feeds into Redback.
seemed to suggest, Redback's 42 tonne combat weight can rise to 47 tonne.
they seemed to suggest that (주)삼양컴텍 (samyangct.com) is involved (an armour company supply both Korean tank, and K21 IFV armour 'glove')
 
there is also an obvious error where they mix up Rafael for Elbit.
 
 

latest K-rumors
model AS21

Thats not up-armour.  Thats the exhaust line treatment.

The 3rd AS21 prototype has left Korea and is en route to Australia. It departed from Masan Port on the 18th.
 
According to the press release (machine translated), "prototype 3 will be officially delivered to the Australian Army in the middle of next month along with the 1st and 2nd units sent to Australia in July, and will be used for a full-fledged test evaluation from February." (Link: https://www.news1.kr/articles/?4155699) 
 

 

>Boagrius
On the prior page of this thread (page 26) I referenced EOS's Mopoke.  EOS-Mopoke-Full-Spectrum-CUAS-Capabilities-Web.pdf (eos-aus.com)
Mopoke-CUAS-Brochure-AUS-SIGNED-OFF.pdf (eos-aus.com)

Each of EOS, Hanwha, Rheinmetall and presumably Elbit would have decent vehicle mounted solutions for close in anti air applications.
 
Russia's pantsir would be the global base reference, The Hanwha Biho is probably the western base reference https://www.hanwha-defense.co.kr/eng/mobile/products/antiaircraft-artillery-biho.do
 
 
and biho 2 would be a hard to beat next gen unit.
 
 
 
 

Each of EOS, Hanwha, Rheinmetall and presumably Elbit would have decent vehicle mounted solutions for close in anti air applications.
 
Russia's pantsir would be the global base reference, The Hanwha Biho is probably the western base reference https://www.hanwha-defense.co.kr/eng/mobile/products/antiaircraft-artillery-biho.do
 
 
and biho 2 would be a hard to beat next gen unit.
 
 
 
 

On the topic of the dreaded Mk30-2, this popped up:
 
https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1339154663741001734


 
Am guessing it will get pitched to Army as a VSHORAD solution if it hasn't already. If the gun isn't seen as a problem it looks decent.
 
 

http://proceedings.ndia.org/1590/11839.pdf
 
The MK 30-2 is a gas-operated machine cannon recently chosen as the main armament for Germany's next-generation Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the Puma. This cannon features a double belt feed system with "first round select". A key feature of the MK 30-2 gun is its ability to fire Air Burst Munitions (ABM), using the highly precise AHEAD programming technology. Other key characteristics include a rate of fire of 200 rounds per minute, the capability to fire single shots, and the potential for an emergency firing mode.  
 
Rheinmetall's latest development is the new Wotan 30mm x 173 machine cannon. This externally-powered weapon system has been specifically designed for use in the latest generation of vehicle mounts and remote weapons stations). The Wotan features a unique chainless bolt drive system that accepts two belt feeds and fires at an adjustable rate of between 1 and 200 rpm. Other unique new features include a 100% mechanical hang fire safety, horizontal ammunition feeding and transfer between the bolt and barrel, and the ability to use all NATO standard links, including both the US-standard MK 44 link and the MK 30-2 link.''
 
point is, that is a lot of vendor lockin,  users of MK 30-2 links Army Guide (army-guide.com) are really sparse compared to MK 44 links Mk44 Bushmaster II - Wikipedia  (yes, low effort web links, but it paints the picture)
 
so it appears the Lance turrets can use either Wotan30 or MK30/2 ABM
https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/systems_and_products/weapons_and_ammunition/direct_fire/medium_calibre/index.php
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Further weight discussion page 19