Kal

Agree about using existing technology for the evaluation, but pointing out for future growth, this tech's progression is open ended not closed ended.
 
Also, has reservations that a cold country track maker will choose the right compound for a hot country

https://www.jlv.com.au/cable-belt-conveyors.html
The soucy patch reminds me of cable belt conveyors.  Not the cheapest solution but they are the long distance champioms of conveyors.  31km between drives is possobly not even physically possible with a segmented steel solution with shear connections.
 
Point is, rubber tracks are technology with lots of development potential.  With an end point generally superior to metal tracks with rubber pads.

https://www.truppendienst.com/themen/beitraege/artikel/power-on-rubber-tracks/?L=0&cHash=04cf0983460b323b3979a8d0fe241097
 
Norwegian perspective on rubber tracks with comparisons for a 42 tonne weight class leopard 1 tank...

https://www.truppendienst.com/themen/beitraege/artikel/power-on-rubber-tracks/?L=0&cHash=04cf0983460b323b3979a8d0fe241097
 
Norwegian perspective on rubber tracks with comparisons for a 42 tonne weight class leopard 1 tank...

Hanwha has received a restricted request for tender for the 30 x K9 & 15 x K10, not a contract. They have the tender period to detail, formalise, schedule, and price their offer. Nothing in Commonwealth Procurement Rules/Guidelines (can’t recall which are which, atm) obliges the Commonwealth to accept Hanwha’s offer and go into contract. It’s by no means a done deal. 

Yes, no protection against 30 mm APFSDS. AEP-55 Volume 1 (1st edition) also specifies no 25 mm APFSDS threat.

China is still using 30 x 165 mm APDS; the 30 x 165 mm APFSDS is supposedly only supplied to their CIWS. Russia also has not adopted 30 x 165 mm APFSDS rounds yet, with many units (at least this was supposedly the case a few years back) still using AP ammunition.

I disagree strongly :) both will pass under hull and under track and that is all that matters.  Rheinmetall has been building mine blast structures for a long time.  Rheinmetall BOXER in the L400 Ph2 RMA drove off the test area under its own power after an under hull blast.
 
The hard parts (for both teams) are EFP and IED side attack blasts.

depends on mine blast timing and extent of repair required.  Certainly Rheinmetall has enough in country capability to repair if time permits.  Pretty sure the mine blast vehicles have no other role in RMA.

We will see real offered configurations at Land Forces Conference in Brisbane in June 21

I'm not surprised, amongst other things,  Elbit in Victoria,  Rheinmetall is in Qld  and the borders are locked down hard between states due to Covid19 (and Victoria is basically 95%+ of Australia's wave 2 infections)
 
EOS in Canberra had their own problems https://themarketherald.com.au/electro-optic-systems-asxeos-future-plans-drastically-altered-by-covid-19-2020-04-30/
''
One week before formal deliveries could commence, the delivery chain was broken in multiple places due to a national lockdown and the impact of COVID-19.
A total of five essential EOS technical staff from Australia had to leave the country within 24 hours or be stranded due to airport closures and quarantine.
All accessible airports were closed to normal commercial passengers and freight. The EOS production facility, located in a secure industrial zone, was locked down by military police, along with all other defence plants.
Approximately 50 per cent of EOS local staff were forced into quarantine. The military test facility required for live firing was closed and the designated delivery points within military bases were cut off by military base closures

it has 4 of these,  I don't know if they are real or just place holders, but it sure looks looks like iron vision to me.
 
On EOS's T2000 pdf they indicate the laser warning and IronVision sensors are co-located.
https://www.eos-aus.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Turret-Launch-Brochure-WEB.pdf
 
 
 

I'm not surprised, amongst other things,  Elbit in Victoria,  Rheinmetall is in Qld  and the borders are locked down hard between states due to Covid19 (and Victoria is basically 95%+ of Australia's wave 2 infections)
 
EOS in Canberra had their own problems https://themarketherald.com.au/electro-optic-systems-asxeos-future-plans-drastically-altered-by-covid-19-2020-04-30/
''
One week before formal deliveries could commence, the delivery chain was broken in multiple places due to a national lockdown and the impact of COVID-19.
A total of five essential EOS technical staff from Australia had to leave the country within 24 hours or be stranded due to airport closures and quarantine.
All accessible airports were closed to normal commercial passengers and freight. The EOS production facility, located in a secure industrial zone, was locked down by military police, along with all other defence plants.
Approximately 50 per cent of EOS local staff were forced into quarantine. The military test facility required for live firing was closed and the designated delivery points within military bases were cut off by military base closures

in this piccy, my untrained eye can see
2 set of IRON VISION sensors
2 set of IRON fist's radar
1x ELBIT commander sight
and a fore hull mounted Hanwha camera
 
still to come are the EOS RWS sensor packages.
 
why place iron vision sensor there unless intent is to use them?
 
edit
and the birds eye photo add 2 more sets of IRON VISION sensor and IRON fist's radar, so 4 of each, thats 360 coverage.
+ driver''s reversing camera

screenshots

 
 

Seriously?  The exhaust just points straight out the right forward of the hull?  I mean, yes, that is exactly what it does but in this day and age?  No way that will meet the detection requirements as shown.  Cannot be the intent.

I disagree with you. 

L to R: .224 Zoomer Magnum, .22 Rapier, .237 Antidote, .257 Flap, .283 Fudd.

One of the Kampfpanzer 3 proposals, this one is from Maschninenbau Kiel. IMO it was the best one:
 

 
Three men crew, autoloaded gun in overhead installation (this concept was tested on the VTS1 testbed based on the Marder hull), frontal protection against 120 mm KE (DM13 prototype at the time) and 120 mm HEAT-FS rounds along a 60° arc.
 

 
Like on the VTS1, the gun cannot be rotated by 360°, instead traverse is limited to 120° (-60° to +60° from the hull centerline). This was seen as sufficient by the West-German military, as this allowed a single tank to cover an area of 3,640 meters in 1,000 meters distance.
 

 
As Burlington-type composite armor wasn't adopted at the time, the all three KPz 3 proposals relied on spaced armor.
 

 
There were different exact configurations of the proposed vehicle with different crew and engine arrangements. But AFAIK all were designed with the same protectiion level and main gun (120 mm smoothbore gun prototype from Rheinmetall).



Source: Object-477's weibo blog.
 
The VTS1 ("Versuchsträger Scheitellafette 1" - testbed overhead gun mount 1):
 

 
At the same time Sweden created a similar prototype based on a Marder leased from Germany as part of the UDES-19 project.
 

 
 
 
 
 

While waiting for the competitors to continue their work, I got bored and decided to produce a design at the other end of the scale:

This is the Maxcat, an experimental heavy wheeled AFV which uses a rather insane hydraulic drive system which uses three engines to power the 14 individually-articulating road wheels (each provided with hydraulic motor). The drive system is a power hog, and requires the use of an elaborate hydraulic control system to make it all work. The final wrinkle is that the inner set of wheels need a complex geared torsion bar system to provide the correct amount of travel using stubby torsion bars. 
 
The results are impressive, however: the Maxcat sports a 120mm/L60 gun with the same ballistics as the pre-war M58 (including a useful APDS round based on the one used in the old British L1A2), and has impressive survivability thanks to the large distances between the outer hull and the major components. The hull front has respectable KE resistance (260-350mm RHA equivalent depending on the angle and the region targeted) and frankly insane CE resistance (well over 1000mm of RHA equivalent in some places). The turret front is actually less protected over all, but still manages up to 270mm/750mm KE/CE resistance depending on the angle and area hit. The brow armour is also notable, and gets around 300mm/>1000mm KE/CE resistance against attacks from the front. The Maxcat weighs in at just under 70st unloaded, and hits the minimum range requirement by dint of six massive fuel tanks with a maximum capacity of just over 1150 gal. It hits 90km/h on roads, and will try to do the same offroad if the driver is foolish enough to open the throttle.
 
With all of the above, the Maxcat is designed to be an MBT in all but name - meant to take on all comers head-on and win. It would probably be an expensive, resource-devouring maintenance queen at base, but while out in the field it would be an unholy terror to anything foolish enough to get in its way.  

I was able to cut 8" of hull height and over 3100 lbs of weight without negatively impacting crew working volume:

Greetings all, I've been pulled on as a judge for this one, so none of the following should be construed as competition so much as... encouragement.
 
This is the Mogcat:



 
It's designed to exactly nail the minimum specs, while being relatively easy to produce and long-legged. It sports a 3"/76mm main gun, a bunch of machineguns and the sort of conveniences you'd expect from a late-40s design (gunner's panoramic sight, wet ammo racks, internal firefighting equipment and smoke launchers). It's otherwise very bare-bones, and comes in at all of 10.3st/9.3mt.
 
I'll add further specs as this goes along, but for the moment all you have to know is that this is the minimum, lowest bar that I can think of. This thing is intended to be the product of unimaginative minds working at what passes for the ordinance department in the Lone Free State - men who spent their lives designing incremental improvements on machineguns and recoilless guns, and think that their lightweight 3" gun is a world-beating novelty.
 
For what it's worth; what I would like to see is something that grabs the requirements by the balls and works out a way to wring something that can beat @N-L-M's Norman design in a reasonably fair fight out of the thin gruel that the Provisional Government has put out. Remember that the Texans don't know what they don't know - their official line is that the arrival of Deseret light tanks is some sort of shocking revelation. But they aren't stupid - the smarter engineers will already be looking at what they could do with their given automotive and gun tech, and what was achieved in the pre-war era, and are probably staying up late at night worrying about their conclusions.
 
Update 1:
I had a think last night, and decided to swap out the turret crew to a commander-loader and gunner configuration instead of the T-34-esque commander-gunner and loader configuration (now included with the rest of the pictures).
 
Here's a bonus picture of the vehicle in travel configuration - turret rearward and gun in cradle:

 
Update 2:
Here's some more stats on the vehicle, in the prescribed units...
 
Description
The Mogcat is a 6x6 armoured scout car designed for mobility and extended operations. The design boasts an innovative engine, drivetrain, suspension package and gun, all built with an eye to ruggedness and light weight. The Mogcat's 3-inch cannon is able to provide useful anti-armour (APHE and HEAT-FS) and anti-infantry (HE, canister and shrapnel shell) firepower, while the plethora of machineguns it sports allows it to tackle dismounted infantry and light vehicles with confidence. The combination of purpose-built drivetrain components, long operational range and firepower makes the Mogcat a strong contender for the present production contract.
 
Major dimensions and mass
Crew: 3 (driver, commander-loader, gunner)
Length: 16'/9" (hull), 19"/4' (gun forward)
Width: 6'/7"m
Height: 9'/6"m (top of commander’s cupola)
Unloaded weight:  8.7 ton
Loaded weight:  10.3 ton
Ground pressure: 4900lb/ft2 (unloaded, muddy ground) to 5785lb/ft2 (loaded, muddy ground)
Axle loading: 3.4t/axle loaded
 
Mobility
Engine: 4-cylinder turbodiesel, 732cu displacement, 200-280HP
PWR: 19.4HP/t loaded, detuned
Ground clearance: 17.7"
Max road speed: 60mph
Max offroad speed: 20mph
Operational range (on road/offroad): 850mi/500mi
 
Protection
 
Armour:
2" LOS on hull front (1" RHA @ 60°)
0.8" LOS on hull sides with 30° angle (0.8" RHA @ 90°, 0.5"mm @ 45°)
0.6" RHA on hull rear
0.5" LOS on hull bottom (0.4" RHA @ 45°)
2" LOS on turret front (1.8" RHA @ 30°)
2" CHA mantlet
0.8" LOS on turret sides with 30° angle (0.6" RHA @ 25°)
0.6" RHA on turret rear
0.4" RHA on roof
0.4" RHA on turret floor
2" RHA turret neck ring and splash guard
0.4" Aluminium turret basket, skeletonised
 
3.2" smoke dischargers (2 reloads).
Fuel tanks on driver’s sides improve protection against threats from the front.
Ammunition stowage in wet racks in turret bustle, turret floor and driver’s compartment.
Internal fire control system (BCF canisters in engine compartment and fighting compartment, driver has access to removable CO2 extinguisher).
 
Firepower
 
Turret ring diameter: 4'/5"
Main gun: 3" L/40 medium-pressure gun, 12" recoil travel
Ammunition stowage: 50 rounds main gun ammunition stowage
+30/-10 degree elevation.
Ammunition:
3"x15.2" cartridge (3.7" base, 19lb max all-up weight)
APHE: 13.9lb, 2425ft/s, 3.5" RHA penetration at 1000m
HEAT-FS: 15.4lb, 2295ft/s, 9.8" penetration
HE: 13.7lb (1.35lb fill), 2460ft/s, 0.4" RHA penetration
APFSDS (spindle-type, 15L/D ratio, maraging steel penetrator): 1.5lb, 5900ft/s, 6.5" RHA penetration at 1000 yards.
Secondary weapons:
.30 cal coaxial MG (600 rnds)
.30 cal gunner's MG (600 rnds)
.50 cal commander’s MG (500 rnds)
 
Additional features
 
Long-range transistor radio.
Vehicle intercom system.
Ancillaries (fire tables, gunner’s quadrant, traverse markings etc) for indirect fire missions.
Commander has access to panoramic sight (x1) and telescopic sight (x4) for target acquisition and lay-on.
Turret traverse is electric (30 degrees per second rotation).
Fume extractor on main gun
Large hatches in hull rear allow easy servicing of engine and gearbox.
Storage lockers in hull rear flanking the engine for personal/supplies stowage.
Hydraulic jacks on the hull bottom between the first and second wheels and at the rear make changing tires easier.
 
Update 3: I reworked all the images.

No, definitely a 1 or 2.
The merkava 3, 4, and Namer have individual swing arms, the mounts for which are these large bases built into the hull side. The lack of such mounts means it must be a Merk 1 or 2, where the arms are attached to the bogies which are mounted to the hull.

This is a Namer hull, but the idea is the same. There are a few pics of merkava 3s with the swing arm ripped off where you can see it more clearly but my Google fu is weak.
In the pic posted earlier there's no sign of these swing arm hub bases.

http://msmsjec.blogspot.com/2016/08/super-bainite-high-hardness-steel.html
Commercial Super Bainite Steel is low alloy –4.7% (Si Mn Cr Mo) –0.8% C -with no Al, Co, Ti, Ni.
Proof Stress at 0.2% (0.2PS -Rp0.2) is -1673 MPa
Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS) (RMm) is -2098 MPa
Elongation (El) is 11% Reduction of Area (RA) is5%
Charpy Notch Impact number 5 Joule -based on a 10mm x 10mm specimen at room temperature
Vickers Hardness (HV30) of 690HV30 Brinell (10 mm Ball, 3000 kg load) of 574HBW Rockwell C (20 degree cone 150 kg) of HRC 57
Available in a fixed width of 1250mm up to 5.5m length  and two gauges 6.3mm & 8.5mm.
 
Made as a Pearlite -easy to process
Ballistic mass efficiency of 2.5 in a perforated steel armour system
 
increasing the Carbon, and or adding Al,Co are the main ways to improve this steel.  The key takeaway is that this is a lower cost/ lower performance version

Phase 2
 
https://www.eos-aus.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/R400BrochureAUS_WEB.pdf
 
https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/land-amphibious/5330-commonwealth-signs-land-400-phase-2-rws-contract
 
So will it have M230LF?