Clan_Ghost_Bear

The Lynx will, if selected by the Army, have an electric drive from Allison.

https://www.allisontransmission.com/company/news-article/!details/2021/02/16/allison-transmission-partners-with-american-rheinmetall-vehicles-to-produce-the-propulsion-system-for-lynx-omfv-offering

Challenger 2 Owner's Workshop Manual from Haynes

I believe that is the wheeled prototype for the Future Combat Systems program, which ended up losing to the tracked variant.

14 hours ago, alanch90 said:

AI as commander? That's even more daring than having AI replacing a gunner or a driver in my opinion.

Don't think there's any indication of that other than this dude saying so with no source on twitter.

New North Korean tank, from their parade.

At about 32 seconds in, you can see the Lynx being shown to the Army has 7 roadwheels per side, rather than 6. 

40 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

How many units did participate? Five?

2 Leopard 2A4s (One of which came in first) and 2 2A6 from Greece, along with the Abrams.

https://veteranos.gr/protefse-o-oulamos-tis-chchi-ttht-ston-diagonismo-armaton-tank-challenge-2020/

Something similar to the SETC, but with Greece only. The US unit took 2nd place.

https://www.defence-point.gr/news/oriaka-alla-mprosta-apo-ton-us-army-ellinikos-oylamos-armaton-tis-211-ema-foto

Clearer image of the TARDEC Abrams replacement that came out some time ago.

20 minutes ago, Beer said:

How about ammo stowage of that concept?

Maybe it has a secondary ammo storage in the rear hull, that replenishes the bustle magazine? It's what they did with the M1 CATTB.

It seems many people are forever stuck in 2012 when it comes to talking about the F-35.

2 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

IMHO, the army is pressing ahead with requirements that literally nobody thinks can be delivered on

Which requirement do you feel is too difficult? They dropped the airlift requirement from 2 per C-17 to 1.

7 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

I´m argentinian. This is gonna cause a political uproar. 

I'd assume from Argentina being flat broke, or is it something different?

https://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/argentina-stryker-infantry-carrier-vehicles

Strykers to Argentina, potentially.

https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iai2007.pdf

5 hours ago, Rico said:

One main point I see why 2A7V could not be an option is weight. Driving in heavy snow with ~70t could be tricky

Any chance of them going with the EMBT?

Seems silly to completely ditch tanks. What happened to the Marine MPF buy?

https://insidedefense.com/insider/jette-says-original-competitors-intend-recompete-omfv

11 competitors have reached out to the Army about the new OMFV.

58 minutes ago, skylancer-3441 said:

IIRC there are like one single render published on GDLS proposal

Do you have it perchance? 

26 minutes ago, DIADES said:

So when did they last win new platform work?

If MPF counts as new enough. Though neither BAE nor GDLS has shown much of anything new in the ground vehicle world lately, mostly because there's been no necessity. I think BAE's last new showing was this:

Just now, TokyoMorose said:

That's just the contract legalese, actual vehicle requirements are tab 2 of attachment 0045, which I have not found.

Sorry about that. Would be interesting to know what the specific requirement was that made it unattainable.

3 minutes ago, TokyoMorose said:

I would bet money if I had it, that the requirements list was in the recent DoD tradition; being simply absurd and couldn't be met reasonably - and everything else is saving face for that

Not sure if this has been posted here before, but googling around I found the draft RFP:

https://imlive.s3.amazonaws.com/Federal Government/ID229292510237748546949630439132667118527/DRAFT_NGCV-OMFV_RFP_(W56HZV-18-R-0174).pdf

A new MICV for Japan's Ground Self-Defense Force. Appears very similar to the Type 89.

Was there anything about OMFV in that presentation?