Kal

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
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A large part of the ammunition compatibility discussion isn’t (just) about who makes it. In Australia, it’s also about interoperability. Literally the ability to give & take ammunition from coalition partners and their military logistic chains.
 
This requirement has been regularly exercised in East Timor, Iraq, & Afghanistan. In the most egregious case, ASLAV crews airlifted into Baghdad in 2003 literally purchased - in cash - 25mm ammunition from US Army Bradley crews so that they could leave the airport with more than small arms ammunition. 
 
Australia’s most consistent coalition partner, regionally and farther afield, is the United States. The Mk-30/2 cannot consume US DoD 30x173mm ammunition.
 
That alone should have excluded the Mk-30/2 from consideration. The capability manager (AHQ), the contestability folks, and Land Explosive Ordnance SPO (LEOSPO) of CASG all failed to identify & address this all the way up to or before contract signature.
 
Rheinmetall were smart to exploit this lack of (very basic) technical knowledge on behalf of the customer.  

There is similar discussion ongoing here in CZ. The reason is we have Bushmaster II on Pandurs and from logistical point of view the Rheinmetall MK-30/2 simply is a problem and it makes no sense to pretend it is not. 

if you want i could link seek ads for elbit and eos Elbit Jobs in All Australia - SEEK  Eos asx Jobs in All Australia - SEEK  
 
in all seriousness, at a distance the Redback and the Lynx seem both good items,  both comparable enough that if the products were switched (ie Lynx were to be Hanwha and Redback were to be Rheinmetall) it wouldn't change much,  a very different story to phase 2 where the Boxer was obviously the better vehicle for Australia's needs.  The problem is that by going with Rheinmetall again, as a country we will just be asking to be screwed on price for any and every upgrade.  Rheinmetall is smart, they will look us up and down and work out a price high enough that some other project in defense gotta be cancelled when we need an additional feature that was not part of original contract.  So even though I'm now a Queenslander i still think the Redback is the better option for Australia.
 
look, I'm no longer impartial, I had to wait until EOS was large enough before my super allowed be to allow me to buy into it,  so i got some EOS shares now in my super,  the choice as I see it, is that either Australia gets the Lynx but can't afford the later upgrades to counter UAV goodness, or Australia gets the redback and both affords and will soon enough get the upgrade to counter UAV goodness, some including freaking lasers. EOS-Mopoke-Full-Spectrum-CUAS-Capabilities-Web.pdf (eos-aus.com)
 
because if War comes our backyard, the UAV content will make Nagorno-Karabakh seem like stroll in the park.
anyone will be able an purchase export equivalent to www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma3ya_lqCLM
 
 
 

I think Hanwha’s Victorian presence is a given due to the SPH (AS9 & AS10) work package. “Not a single dollar invested” is one of those hyperbolic, unprovable statements that I habitually challenge because I loath them. 
 
Yes, Rheinmetall has developed the MILVEHCOE - after winning several substantial contracts. Defence paid handsomely for that investment. The Australian taxpayer footed the Bill for the MILVEHCOE, not Rheinmetall. There’s no reason that Hanwha (courtesy of the Australian taxpayer) could not make a similar or superior investment, were they to win a similar contract. 
 
Personally, I see capricious German export controls & their potential effect on Australian land combat power, to be a substantial risk to Australian army capability. Putting our eggs in one basket, with a government who’s foreign policies are frequently not aligned with ours, is potentially the dumbest thing that the Australian government could possibly do. 

actual Requirement is FPS-4136 and it reads as you suggest.  But not a Requirement to be met as it is classified as "Advice"  So, no can fail!

Yep. The dreaded Advice clause. Interesting, but has no standing from a criticality perspective. 

Google gave
3.4.4.2.1 Main Weapon - General
...
'The Vehicle is required to suppress enemy vehicles at a distance of 2000 metres for 3 minutes to allow for another friendly unit to position and engage the enemy vehicle. It is assumed that the Vehicle main weapon will fire 9 rounds every 10 seconds during suppression and after three minutes still have ready rounds available.'
 
 

That looks like “notes to tenderers” not a requirement per se. I assume it’s importance is “important”. 

But - where do you put the ammunition?  This is the eternal question in turret design.  30 to 35 does not sound like much but it would result is a drastic drop in stowed kills.  The 35 is bigger in dia and longer and heavier.  These parameters directly impact how many rounds can be carried.  They also indirectly impact.  Heavier, bigger round means more difficulties in stowage and feed and case ejection

Agreed. That’s why I said that there’s the possibility of a calibre upgrade - i.e. larger calibre hub - over the life of the L400 vehicles. 

For those not familiar - Ph3 roles are divided into two groups.  Infantry Fighting Vehicle - Direct Fire High Survivability Lift (IFV-DFHSL) which is all the turreted roles and Infantry Fighting Vehicle - Specialist Support (IFV-SS)  The IFV-SS spec covers Ambulance, Recovery, Repair etc.
 
DFHSL and SS are two completely separate Specifications.
 
So, when we talk remotes on a turreted vehicle:
The RFT version of the IFV-DFHSL spec has an overarching Requirement:
FPS-2359 3.4.4.4 Lethality - Remote Controlled Weapon.  This has about a dozen child Requirements.  In summary, must have a remotely controlled weapon so a RWS or MSSA.

they don't - explicitly.  It about overall system lethality.  Will try and dig the reqs out.

http://www.amtjets.com/pdf/Titan_specifications.pdf
 

Not sure about perfomance of this missile, but loitering AA missile possible purpose is to area denial for UAV. Missile is being fired when drone is spotted in area, but exact location is unknown, IMO.

from physical version of Mittler Report issue on KF41 Lynx (low-res scans are posted on htka.hu forum)
 
So, I've made couple of comparisons, to the best of my ability

Where there is tropical deforestation, plantations tend to follow, eventually.
 

What about Centurions? Long Tan formed the justification for the deployment of a squadron of tanks into the Task Force AO. 
 
You’ve been to New Guinea recently? Deforestation has changed it a lot. Sure, there’s mountainous & jungle-covered terrain, but wherever there’s people & farms, there’s a lot of cleared areas with excellent fields of fire. 

M113s don't count
 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-14/chinese-data-leak-linked-to-military-names-australians/12656668
 
Apparently australia has 35,000 citizens worthy of chinese intelligence.   No doubt this breaks all sorts of Australian privacy laws, but how to enforce it.

https://dambiev.livejournal.com/2051671.html
 
 

 
 

Fire extinguisher system for AS21.
do we have an equivalent for the lynx?
 

Ajax IFV has 3 crew and six dismounts.  Other members of the Ajax family have the crew/dismount numbers you mention.

The 2 are not mutually incompatible,  added boost to achieve required power rating combined with new emissions verifications is probably sufficient to consider it a new engine, even if it is 95%+ common by parts

Nah, I never said that! 
 
No appliqué on the turret, but that belly armour! Thickest I’ve ever seen!