David Moyes Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Yes. British Ajax uses Lockheed Martin UK + Rhenimetall turret with CT40. Australian Ajax has a General Dynamics designed turret with 30mm: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted April 25, 2019 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Just waiting for the inevitable conflation of UK AJAX variants (Apollo etc.) with the Australian offerings (AJAX Fitters etc.). Was interesting to hear the rationale being that GD didn’t want to dilute or confuse the AJAX brand. Apparently the GD turret has yet to be released in the public domain & differs from what has been illustrated to date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIADES Posted April 27, 2019 Report Share Posted April 27, 2019 On 4/26/2019 at 8:40 AM, 2805662 said: the GD turret Very keen to see this. Prior GD turrets (LAV25) were cheap and cheerful basic bits of gear. Well out of date in all respects. GD has had a hiatus and I am sure that the new turret will reflect lessons learned and be an effort to leap over LANCE. Will suit 50mm of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylancer-3441 Posted May 2, 2019 Report Share Posted May 2, 2019 http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com New issue of DTR become available - with article on weight of Land 400 Phase 3 contestants compared to other IFVs and tanks (btw, according to author's math, T-15 HIFV weigths about 46-47 metric tons), and whether it's a problem or not; two page poster on how Lynx KF-41 consists of proven components from elsewhere; and Nicholas Drummond's article on NGCV-OMFV where he forgot about US Army's HFM/ASM program from late 80s-early 90s, - if he ever knew about it in the first place - so according to him NGCV-OMFV is only third attempt to replace Bradley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted May 2, 2019 Report Share Posted May 2, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 https://adbr.com.au/hanwha-asserts-prime-credentials-for-resurrected-sph-project/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 It's interesting they've enabled the use of the Spike as an anti-air missile (anti-helicopters?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 29 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said: It's interesting they've enabled the use of the Spike as an anti-air missile (anti-helicopters?). Same with MELLS for the Puma (and from what it seems also Lynx). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clan_Ghost_Bear Posted May 18, 2019 Report Share Posted May 18, 2019 US is listed as a potential export partner. Looks like the AS-21 is competing for NGCV then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted May 18, 2019 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2019 9 minutes ago, Clan_Ghost_Bear said: US is listed as a potential export partner. Looks like the AS-21 is competing for NGCV then? Yep it was on display at AUSA last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylancer-3441 Posted July 5, 2019 Report Share Posted July 5, 2019 Several pics related to AS21 Redback have appeared on twitter and elsewhere over the last couple of days from latest DTR 2019-07 http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/#folio=50 - and also from EOS pdf presentation - photos of mockup (mockups?) - or whatever that is - of EOS T2000 turret: and also more pics of unfinished hull (next to that turret or outside) - from DTR twitter https://twitter.com/DTRmag/status/1146928739671928832 (originally from Hanwha facebook page) and from one of bemil.chosun.com blogs (although it seems to me that some of the latter were originally posted on instagram): Spoiler David Moyes, Serge, Zyklon and 2 others 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted August 29, 2019 Report Share Posted August 29, 2019 http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/?iid=165217#folio=4 BAE to offer "completely new" version of CV90. Serge 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted September 16, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 (edited) Rheinmetall & Hanwha through to the Risk Mitigation Activity. https://gallery.mailchimp.com/ebe687fe800f7d0f2f28fa168/files/1088f6cf-cb97-4812-a471-a1e933125641/DTR_Special_Bulletin_16_Sept_2019.pdf Kinda glad CV90 is out. Also, not too unhappy that AJAX isn’t progressing - lots of legacy from the British Army that isn’t needed by the Australian Army. Edited September 16, 2019 by 2805662 Serge and SH_MM 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 Hell froze over. Lord_James 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted September 16, 2019 Report Share Posted September 16, 2019 13 hours ago, 2805662 said: Also, not too unhappy that AJAX isn’t progressing - lots of legacy from the British Army that isn’t needed by the Australian Army. Why do you regard it as too much British ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted September 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2019 5 hours ago, Serge said: Why do you regard it as too much British ? AJAX is very much an ASCOD II that’s been optimised for British Army service. Lots of requirements that aren’t applicable to the Australian Army - no point in paying for someone else’s desirements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted September 18, 2019 Report Share Posted September 18, 2019 it seems to me, my 2 favoured options are proceeding to the next round. some thoughts the EOS T2000 turret seems quite wide, probably wider than lance turret. also the EOS R400 can be configured with combined M230 LF/ 7.62 GPMG https://www.eos-aus.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/EOS-Brochure-R400S-Dual.pdf although considering main turret weapon is also 30mm cannon, its kinda redundant to add a M230 LF up top, but it could make sense, if it can quickly return fire to ATGM teams. (to be clear, M230 is not default on land 400 phase 2 or 3.) both the lynx and the redback seem very competent upgrades for Australia, especially compared to what they are replacing. getting an 'Australian' turret would be a major boost for local industry, although I suspect it has a lot of Israeli and Korean supervision, it should provide aussie ownership for additional growth without paying eurpoean companies whatever they think the upgrades are worth (as opposed to whatever the upgrades cost) also, logistically useful that the redback has commonality with the Abrams transmission and the K9's engine. since the K9 is coming to Australia (on again, off again, on again) and Australia has Abrams, thats a plus. i do wonder if 8 lynx will be priced like 9 redbacks, ie same price per dismount, but more bang per firepower buck from redback, vs 9 dismounts from lynx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted September 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2019 I can see that T-2000 turret being back cast onto the Phase 2 vehicles, a possibility called out in the Phase 3 RFT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 3 hours ago, 2805662 said: I can see that T-2000 turret being back cast onto the Phase 2 vehicles, a possibility called out in the Phase 3 RFT. not a chance that Rheinmetall will walk away from the 133 Lance turrets on order, but DOD may have a lot more room for negotiation for remaining turrets, particularly as EOS will be common between MRAP , APC, IFV and Tank for ADF. the T2000 turret is a 2 man turret, but just do a quick visual between the Namer turret (page 12 ) and the T2000 turret. hmmm, re arrange/expand the layout for 2 man operation, throw an EOS R400 where the mortar sits, and drop one of the sights because its redundant due to EOS fire control system (FCS), sensors, and user interface from the EOS Remote Weapon Station (RWS). the T2000 looks new, but is a nice optimum of battle tested components between EOS, Elbit and ATK https://www.defence.nioa.com.au/supply/view/6/8/supply/weapon-systems/orbital-atk-medium-calibre-chain-gun-systems Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 'firepower with 30-40mm high performance cannon, 30mm lightweight cannon, and up to two 7.62mm GPMG' https://www.eos-aus.com/defence/ so 4 guns + missiles can be on T2000 turret for a single mission. (actually its more, there is piccy out there where the EOS R400 has whats looks like M230 LF + 7.62 GPMG + MK 47 all installed together) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted September 20, 2019 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Kal said: not a chance that Rheinmetall will walk away from the 133 Lance turrets on order, but DOD may have a lot more room for negotiation for remaining turrets... I don’t think Rheinmetall will get much of a say in the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 18 minutes ago, 2805662 said: I don’t think Rheinmetall will get much of a say in the matter. That will depend on the precise wording of the contracts. But if phase 3 goes to Hanwha/EOS, then a clean swap of additional boxer hulls in lieu of the 133 lance turrets would be a pragmatic option. (And one that Rheinmetall would resist). Just how much $$$ did Rheinmetall consider those Lance 1 turrets to be worth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 I don't understand this obsession with the T2000 turret. Aside of a new steel shell and a few components made by EOS, it is largely the same turret fitted to the Elbit/STK Sentinel II that was rejected during the LAND 400 Phase 2 program. That just changing some electronics to something Australian-made is being depicted as a game-changer seems rather questionable. DIADES 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIADES Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 30 minutes ago, SH_MM said: I don't understand this obsession with the T2000 turret. Aside of a new steel shell and a few components made by EOS, it is largely the same turret fitted to the Elbit/STK Sentinel II that was rejected during the LAND 400 Phase 2 program. That just changing some electronics to something Australian-made is being depicted as a game-changer seems rather questionable. For once, you and I completely agree. Just more lipstick, same pig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIADES Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 Seems to be some confusion about the relationship between Phase 2 and Phase 3 of LAND 400. Phase 3 has just seen down select. That means 12 months before RMA starts. 12 months for RMA and 12 months for CoA to digest the results. The decision on the Acquisition contract for Phase 3 happens in 3rd quarter 2022. Phase 2 is already in Acquisition. There is no possibility of retrospective changes to Phase 2, Zero chance of radical change like using the T2000 on BOXER. Even if that were contractually possible, turrets are not plug and play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.