Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Gun Ready

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gun Ready

  1. Same with the AEV 2 Canada (armoured engineer vehicle Wiesent 2 not Bergepanzer 2!). Also this attached armour was developed, qualified and manufactured from KMW! Ask FFG whether one part is from IBD.
  2. Who told you that KMW is not developing its own special armour. This statement is pure speculation. Even if they are not doing high promotion (to whom should they do it unless to their potential customers) they have it in their companies slogan: "protects your mission". And believe me, the Leopard 2 A4M CAN protection comes solely from KMW and not any part at all was from your hotly favoured company IBD.
  3. @SH_MM It seem that you believe that IBD Deisenroth has the only and best armour solutions for Leopard 2 tanks! One may even think you are sponsored by this company to promote their solutions. But let me give some statements: Rumours in the protection community are saying that IBD reaches the end of the line as Ulf Deisenroth, the brilliant armour developer, passed by in 2015 and his wife and his two daughters want to sell the company (what they partly did with Chempro and ADS to Rheinmetall). Yes, he did great work for Leopard 2 protection but that's over since the Swedish MBT122 program. The following developments like for Singapore, Evolution, Revolution, Indonesia and Poland had been "poor man" solutions mainly for Rheinmetall and retrofits with a lot of compromises! No development was performed with KMW any more and there might be a reason: KMW developers prooved own protection kits like for A4M Canada, their bridge layer and the AEV 2 Canada for FFG. So, the time of MEXAS and AMAP solutions are definitely gone for new Leopard 2 designs. The Swedish IBD office does not exist any more and the former employees are spread away, FYI.
  4. 2A6 are 2A5 turrets which just got the L55 barrel. The 2A6M got mine protection in addition and the 2A7 got some additional features like auxiliary power supply.
  5. Hopefully not as they are an integral part of the complete armour package! They L2A5 got the internal packages changed to "D" technology.
  6. As far as I understood the integrated modules had not be changed due to lack of money! Correct?
  7. @Valryon with your estimation the add-on armour of the 2PL is just 4 tons as the 2A4 is 55 tons. So the Hungarian Army did the better choice with the 2A7+ having protection as the 2A5 at the turret, frontal protection at the chassis as the Danish 2A5 and mine protection. All this with less than 64 tons. Of course this is a much more expensive solution and can be done only by the OEM in a new built tank but is best for the threat of today and tomorrow! Congratulations to the Magyars.
  8. The photos of the Leopard 2 PL from Valryon show that the chassis is still kept at the Leopard 2 A4 configuration. That add-on armour on the turret looks to be more for all-around protection against RPG and not so much against frontal HEAT protection. The total weight of that vehicle would be interesting to know. Has anybody some figures?
  9. My German friend was on Foerderkreis Deutsches Heer symposium at KMW on 7th November and told that German procurement agency is now forming with their French counterparts a MGCS common office. This is to be located somewhere in Germany. They defined five key technology domains calling them: effectors, mobility, survivability, SDRI & targeting and C3I. Hope to get more information on the individual domain content. Getting interesting now to see how slowly they are starting....
  10. Alanch90, do you have reliable fotos or sketches of Svinets-1 or -2? I found no fotos with a clear type allocation to 3BM-59 or 3BM-60! When was the DOI of these rounds?
  11. Really very nice fotos from Leopard 2 A4. It is a pitty that this tank cannot withstand a possible threat of today. The Polish Army needs some upgrade to more than the Leopard 2 A5 they also have in use and not a downgrade to the PL version!
  12. It's the Unterlüss production line, isn't it? And the foreground chassis with glacis add-on, hatch and mounting plates for side armor looks like for Leopard 2PL, or?
  13. Thank you for your detailed explanations, very helpful. I like to address a few questions you may be able to answer: First, what German Leopard upgrades did Rheinmetall? Second, why do you think Rheinmetall has good changes to win the MGCS contract. According to my info they have to share a contract with KMW anyhow as German authorities want to have a share between the two both as long as possible like with Boxer and Puma.
  14. The Lynx KF41 is an AIFV and not a MBT! Up to now Rheinmetall did only different Leopard 2 modifications, not more. The only customers for the moment are Indonesia and Poland. They are doing great guns and fine ammo and they should stay with these things.
  15. Sorry, as a Newbie I got a little be confused with replying correctly.....
  16. I daubt that Rheinmetall can do a successful counteroffer to a KNDS tank as they are no tank developers as KMW and Nexter
  17. Thaks for these very interesting answers. Especially the 130 mm development will be traced by me (as Gun Ready) very attentively! Will see under what cicumstances a production of 400 to 800 tanks will be financed by Polish government.
  18. Is something known about the new tank proposed by PGZ? Could the EMBT be an interesting concept for Polish MoD as this tank has a 120 mm NATO standard caliber, an autoloader and the high mobility and reliability of Leopard 2 well known to Polish Army?
  19. If Poland likes to join the official MGCS program, a few years have to we waited until the French and the German authorities really made up their mind how this next generation MBT should look like. Rheinmetall can offer in the meanwhile a lot of hypothetical concepts.
×
×
  • Create New...