Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Land 400 Phase 3: Australian IFV


2805662
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Kal said:

Lynx's ammunition

Bullshit.  May I remind you that CoA is already in contract for the Rheinmetall weapon and ammunition.  And has taken delivery of a dozen BOXER with this weapon and is firing this weapon and its ammo.  So - no way is "Lynx's ammunition" a factor - except maybe positive as it is common with in service ammo :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, 2805662 said:

New (infantry) boss for L400 at the end of the year, new guy in AHQ (black hat), new user rep in forces command (infantry - lightfighter); all setting up for an interesting evaluation. 

Rotations, one of the wasps in the jam of life...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, we have Baaaanaby Joyce back as leader of the Nationals and thus Deputy PM.  Given his serious foot in mouth disease, I anticipate an early end to RMA and an early call on the winner.    Defence do not want the next Federal Election to impact the program and with Joyce in the mix, the odds are for an early election and real prospect of delaying the overall program due to caretaker provisions and or a change in Government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DIADES said:

and what the hell, I make my call.  LYNX to win.  On merit but it won't hurt that the current Defence Minister is from Queensland...


I’ll put a beer on Redback - on merit - but Lynx, on politics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DIADES said:

 I anticipate an early end to RMA and an early call on the winner.  

I was actually thinking that would be a good idea anyway, both seem excellent options, call for sharpened pencils and start manufacture anyway.  the m113 has long been effectively a capbility gap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DIADES said:

We can debate relative merit once the decision is made and we can really share :)

 

Absolutely. 
 

I’m glad that the Rheinmetall’s MILVEHCOE is viable on the back of the business they’ve already won. Otherwise it’d be a capability Ponzi scheme! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Land 400 Phase 3 RMA path - Australian Defence Magazine

 

"Prior to the start of the user trials, a Lynx and a Redback were displayed side by side outside Defence headquarters on 12 March, both weighing in at more than 40 tonnes and towering over a well-preserved example of the M113AS4 that they’re competing to replace. The user trials will continue until October, when the project will move to a final evaluation phase.

 

Test locations include the High Range training area outside Townsville during the wet season, and the 2,100 square kilometre Cultana combined arms training area in South Australia at the height of summer.

According to Defence, the test vehicles will have been delivered to the trials “in a configuration representative of their tendered configuration with any exceptions agreed to by Defence and documented in the RMA contracts that Defence has signed with each tenderer”."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unverified reports from the Czech trials describing the LF41’s (automotive) performance as “disastrous” citing “multiple pack failures” of the Liebherr engine.

 

Anyone heard/seen anything to confirm or refute?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/5/2021 at 7:59 PM, 2805662 said:

Unverified reports from the Czech trials describing the LF41’s (automotive) performance as “disastrous” citing “multiple pack failures” of the Liebherr engine.

 

Anyone heard/seen anything to confirm or refute?

 

 

I haven't sen any such reports. All latest reports are related only to the fact at this moment it's impossible to sign the final contract before parlamentary elections which means everything will be again delayed (if no other issues come with the new government).  

 

Before there was a lot of fuss related to Rheinmetall lobbying but there were basically no reports about any technical issues of any of the contenders (which doesn't mean none issues appeared). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By Serge
      The Armored Combat Vehicle Puma started as a privat-venture betwen Krauss-Maffei and Diehl in 1983. The two first prototypes were ready first in spring 1986 with a Kuka 20mm two men turret and second in autumn with a Diehl 120mm mortar turret. 
      ACV-Puma was intented as an export armored vehicle of the 16-28 t class. 
       

       
      By 1983 original concept, it was offered with two engine options (400/600hp) to cope with the level of armor protection asked.
      The running gear was a mixt of both Leopard-1 and 2 components :
      - Leo-1 : road wheels, track support rollers, torsion bars and even the driver's seat ;
      - Leo-2 : track adjuster, cooling system components and sproket hub.
      It was possible to run the engine outside of its compartment. 
       
      In 1988, the concept was improved further :
      - the class range reached 38t ;
      - the engines offer was 440 or 750hp strong ;
      - the chassis was now available in two length (5/6 road wheels) and  hight/low profil hull (20cm).

      The ACV-Puma was a contender at the Norwegian IFV programme from 1991 and the Turkish 1987 relaunched TIFV programme.
      Norway chose CV-90 and Turkey, the AIFV.
      (If anyone have information about how it was a serious contender, I'm interested)
      It was also evaluated by the Swiss army in 1991. I don't know if it took part to the Char de grenadiers 2000 programme. 
       

      In 1983´s concept, the difference betwen the low profil hull and the 20cm higher hight profil hull was obtained by a "box shape vertical raised" rear compartment. With the 1988's design, the front slop is now different to achieve a better ballistic protection. 
       
      When considering documentations of this period, it's important to note the mine/IED protection was not a priority like today. 
       
      I'll post soon a scan showing general layout of the troop compartment. It's a Marder/BMP old fashion one with soldiers facing outside. 
       
      Even if it was not a success at exportation, I think ACV-Puma must be known because of both :
      - the outdated combat beliefs of the 80's (still vigourous today) ;
      - and advanced proposal  such as the differential hull length from the drawing board. 
       
      I have a question :
      Does anyone known if a 6 road wheels chassis was ever built ?
    • By delfosisyu
      I can't read russian or ukraine language so the range of information is very limited for russian AFVs.
       
       
      I'd like to have information about how fast turrets of soviet IFVs rotate.
       
       
      Especially BMP2, BMP3, BTR-82
    • By Belesarius
      http://www.janes.com/article/53057/boxer-the-favourite-for-lithuanian-ifv-buy
       
      30mm Cannon and Javelins for armament.
      Is that the first vehicle mounting the Jav?
       
    • By Belesarius
      http://www.janes.com/article/52476/german-army-receives-first-production-standard-puma-aifv
       
      30mm with airburst capability, and supposedly better mine protection than a Leo 2.
       
×
×
  • Create New...