Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Ummm ... Don ... you did it again.

USMC AAV/SU program cancelled.
https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-ma...programme.html

I'll ask you to recall it was your idea not mine to include the AAV/SU in the OOB.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Whatever....it's now been renationalized and will not show up in the game
--it will likely be removed altogether before the next patch and if not....who cares..its re-nationalize and if slots are need down the road they can be re-used.

*I* added it as it was presented as a done deal. Yes that has happened before in the past as we try to stay on top of things but that frequently bites us...so I remain supremely disinterested in posts about the latest prototypes. I remain on the fence about many of the Russian entries but will leave them as is until we know more

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It’s mad I am pretty sure USA has spent well in excess of $100 billion on canceled projects since Vietnam!!!
Wonder what the country would be like if it had been used on the public sector instead, infrastructure schools etc.
Policing maybe more Americans are murdered each year than have died in the last 10 years of conflicts if I recall correctly.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Nothing really new there. Lots of cancelled projects during WW II and while I can't think of anything specific I'm sure there were a good many during the American Civil War.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

As I’m on vacation from all the FUN I’ve been having from work these past several months now I think free “milk and honey” for all here with the canceled DOD project money!! I thought it was still in the evaluation stage still. However it doesn’t surprise me ethier, and it’s ashamed because the CORPS needed the darn thing.

Have to spend the extra money on issues with the F-35, of which a F-35B crashed recently within the last 3 weeks I believe it was. Thankfully from initial reports no one was injured.

Pat
Darn IPAD ARYE 2 is too stupid to multi-task and do ‘Smilies” also!?!

Back on Vacation somewhere in upper Va. SHhhh!

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Portuguese Army will receive 139 Spanish made Armoured Vamtac Uro ST5, first allready arrived and was presented this week.
They will replace the Armoured Hummer in RCA (Central Africa Republic)

Thanks

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Is this a different vehicle than 730 ? very similar name but different it seems

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Its the latest version:

https://www.janes.com/article/83702/...5-4-4-vehicles

http://www.fuerzasmilitares.com/Foll...07-06-2016.pdf

The best articles are in spanish, not here.

Thanks

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

OK....it's in the OOB now

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It has V-shaped hull, add-on armour
More Photos

Thanks

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Hey everyone,

I haven't been active in a long while but, I check in on the forum every week. I still keep track of updates to military vehicle and oob changes.

I just came across this article and thought I would post it.

Russian IFV to be upgraded with 57mm AA guns as main armament:

https://www.armyrecognition.com/weap...57mm_guns.html

Cheers

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

"approved an armor development concept."...... means to me ( having been fooled more than once about things like this.... ) that this is going into the early testing phase. As time goes by we'll see if anything comes of it but I seriously doubt if they will be in service ( IF they pass field trials.....)before 2025

one of the things we are looking at this year is potentially adding the ability to damage some of the peripheral systems like "sights, heat imagers and other outside equipment"... we will see what might be possible once we get to that point.

as for
you can do that now using an mid 80's era ASU-57 using SABOT on a side shot on a 2018 era Abram or T90 as well... so this is nothing new but going from 30mm rounds to 57 mm round will cut down on the amount of ammo carried.

You can knock out a Tiger tank in WW2 with a 6 pounder ( 57mm ) as well..nothing new

more on this..... a report from 2014
http://warfaretech.blogspot.com/2014...om-russia.html

according to that article, the initial test turret system carried enough ammo for under 1 minute sustained fire (20+73) but with autocannon we simulate bursts of fire so something like that might carry about half the rounds ( bursts ) as a 30mm vehicle

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

The round size is the issue, 57mm is not twice the size of 30mm probably closer to 3 times the size so ammo loadout is an issue.
That said despite the reduced ammo loadout France discovered putting a remote turret with advanced fire control on was more effective as it required less ammo expenditure for a kill.
Then there is telescopic ammo, cant see Russia going to the expense.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

If with the 57 mm a "tactical burst" is 4 rounds for that vehicle/gun combo then if the ammo loads indicated in that article are correct the vehicle would carry 24 in a 12/12 split as rough guesstimate based on sketchy info at best

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Don,
If you will allow it, it's inline with what I've done in the MBT forum, the following...
A1. BRAZIL/ADD/NOV 2018/GUARANI VBTP-MR/COPY UNIT 576/REMOVE UT-30/ADD/REMAX TURRET with 12.7mm + 7.62mm + SMOKE GRANADE LAUNCHERS 76mm x 4/SYSTEM INFO REF. 2// Ref. 2 contains FURTHER system specs.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...rani_apcs.html
http://ares.ind.br/new/en/land-systems/remax.php
https://www.armyrecognition.com/braz..._pictures.html

Does the above format make it easier?

It feels good to be doing some of this again!! But then CINCLANTHOME is in VA. for the GD's "Sweet 16" on Monday!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt: Wait a minute, there's another one of those "ANEMIA" things again, sorry, just informed this one is authorized.
Director of the Censor Dept.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

So there is no 30mm version ?
that seems to be the VBCI whereas the 12.7mm version is VBTP but I don't see anything about the 30mm version in service

So how do we get from March 2014 to Nov 2018 ?

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Don,

For 03/2014 UNITS 576 & 577 with UT-30, they are good as I submitted them. Also with 13 at 03/2013 my thinking was and I believe this came up when submitted in my last "Patch Post" they were enough to stand up a unit, my thinking now is a "company" of them if you will.

The following from ref below...
"Aug/Sept 2014: State of the program. At the end of September Iveco delivered the 100th of a total of 128 vehicles to be delivered by the end of 2014 (16 pilot VBTPs, 86 evaluation vehicles + 26 addons). The 2015 budget sets aside BRL 200M ($82M) for 56 vehicles.
An entry on the Brazilian Army’s weblog explained in August how the Guarani was “finally operational.” The 33º BI Mec (Batalhão de Infantaria Mecanizado – Mechanized Infantry Battalion) received its 1st 13 vehicles back in March 2014 and should have 42 of them by 2015. They are being tested in the southern state of Paraná near Paraguay and seem to meet expectations. The vehicle can cross streams as expected, though it has a slight tendency to sink further on its right due to the engine’s position.
Sources: Defensa.com: “Iveco Latin America construye el blindado VBTP-MR Guaraní número 100” | Exército Brasileiro: “Guarani finalmente operacional” [in Portuguese]."

From SIPRI Israel to Bazil timeframe 2000-2017 with no REMAX showing...
"Israel
R: Brazil (216) UT-25/UT-30 IFV turret (2010) 2014-2016 (30)
$260 m deal; UT-30 version; for VBTP-MR IFV produced in Brazil"
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-brazil-06048/

Why no REMAX? Well to start with they should have them already, again from ref above...
Oct 24/12: REMAX RWS. Elbit’s Brazilian subsidiary Ares Aeroespacial e Defensa Ltda. announces a $25 million contract to supply its stabilized REMAX remote weapon stations to the Brazilian Army. This is the 1st production order, and deliveries will be made from 2012-2014.

They didn't get them because of Brazils economic crisis (There he goes again about economics! Well it matters you can't afford to but it or maintain w/o a good economy. Look what happened to the ROOKIVALK AH of the SANDF, grounded the whole fleet for 18 months, long enough that I made the case at the time to change it's dates for that period of time and we did. When the economy improved they had enough financing to not only get them flying again but also accomplished a significant upgrade to them as well, also entered in the game.

The cost to South Africa? Well they were going to show case them at the opening/closing ceremonies when they hosted the "World Cup" and couldn't. There were at least 3 countries of record (Turkey being one of them and bought the AW-129's (From memory.) instead.) looking to buy it during this time, and timing is everything, and they didn't. To this day, and this is one of the best AH helos out there, none have been exported.

More on Brazils issues...
https://www.thebalance.com/brazil-s-economy-3306343

This is just one part of the formula I use in submitting dates. Not always right but, generally pretty close.

Don I hope this answered your question,, and if you missed it, also in the first ref above, they did an update dated last fall I believe, showing the contracts were signed for the REMAX. This along with my last post should work for the VBTP-MR with REMAX as submitted. I think you might have missed "COPY" UNIT 576.


Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

https://www.armyrecognition.com/army...army-2018.html

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.w...rt-ammunition/

Even for Armata T-15 there has been some testing with 57mm weapons.

In game we have IMHO too low T-15 protection values in comparison with T-14 tank. Remember that we are talking about the same shared platform. The only difference is that the chassis is "inverted". The rear of the tank with the engine, in the IFV is on the front. The front of the tank is the back of the IFV but there is a door for the soldiers. So there is obviously a difference in armor values but in my opinion in game there is too much difference between the two models

From http://www.military-today.com/apc/armata_heavy_ifv.htm

"The T-15 Armata is one of the most protected, if not the most protected IFV in the world. It seems that in terms of protection it is superior to most heavy armored personnel carrier and heavily-armored vehicles such as German Puma IFV.

It has newly-developed base armor, made of steel, ceramics and composite materials. Also it has Malakhit add-on explosive reactive armor, that is claimed to be of new generation. A front-mounted engine provides additional protection."

In my opinion, like Namer has armor values similar to Merkava, ARMATA T-15 IFV should have protection values similar to ARMATA T-14 TANK

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I keep thinking about how happy the guys in M3's and Sd.Kfz. 251's were that they weren't in an unarmored truck, and now we have "APCs" with almost as much armor as a top tier MBT.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well I guess I'll kick off 2019 with the first post in TO&Es with a couple of FYI stories. The first was brought up in Amit's (Gingertanker) IDF OOB Thread with Don and the next is for my MARINE friend lest she thinks I forgot about her. After all you can't keep a good rivalry down, now can you!?!

Israel: NAMER IFV test fired SPIKE LR from new turret. The launcher can fire two of these missiles that can be reloaded from within the unmanned turret protecting the crew. I estimate the following: 1) It will carry at least eight missiles and I see the distinct possibility it could be ten based on the fact again, this is an unmanned turret. 2) There are still other system checks to be done, so I believe we could possibly see it in service as early as 10/2019 but I feel it'll be closer to 12/2019. It'll also be "armed" with the TROPHY HV. Note: Ref. 3 is unusually a little behind in it's reporting, however, it's still an outstanding source on the progression of the NAMER.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/dece...v_armored.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/augu..._10208171.html
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...the-usa-06620/

Also on EITAN I know I posted some info on this to include the IDF OOB Thread and gave a FOC projected date. I just didn't have a chance to verify when I did that, so, I don't know if some of that decision was based also on the following ref. If so my apologies in advance. From the ref. (Now deleted when this posts.) below...
"Israel’s new Eitan armored personnel carrier is in final field testing with the Nahal infantry brigade. Its series production is scheduled to start in 2021. Once the Israeli army has received enough Eitans to replace the last of their old M113s, the vehicle will be made available for export."
https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...n_in_2021.html

USMC: Well the CORPS has been chasing their tail on a replacement for the AAVs for almost a decade now. Even the ACV Program has had many developmental issues to include changing mission requirements etc. The process has now been settled and the first step of possibly three has begun with the ACV 1.1 with the BAE Systems vehicle having won the competition. From ref. 1 below...
"U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command at Quantico Marine Base are ordering 30 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACVs) and accompanying vetronics to replace the Corps's ageing fleet of Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAVs). A $140.4 million contract has been signed with BAE Systems Platforms & Services segment in Sterling Heights, Michigan. Expected delivery of the first vehicles is fall 2019 and the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force’s 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion out of Camp Pendleton, Calif., is expected to be the first to get them the following year."
So depending if everything goes alright, then USMC SYSCOM will be conducting the OPEVAL and possibly IOC evaluations. I feel though the IOC/FOC will be done by the "3rd AAB".
So I'm projecting FOC 01/2021. Oh that'll include the Grenade Launcher also being equipped.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/dece...s_to_usmc.html

Also this I believe I had gotten this fixed with Don already as I've been posting on the CORPS LAV-AT for some years (Since around 2011/2012) now. I believe as in the game now we had changed the date to reflect the following ref. and others at the time. If not Oops! and :doh:. Will check this later in the morning. In the meantime here's on of the better refs. on the topic...
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...killers-07373/

Looking at the "TYPE" now I remember this was a "minor" PITA at the time. Anyway LAV-AT2 as we had to call them, UNIT 018 01/2018 is good as entered.

Well I did say "a little later this morning.". and that last was well, a little later. ;)

Happy New Year everyone!! :D

FOLLOW UP ON THIS POST!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Chinese companies are floating preliminary HIFV concepts:

Concept of NORINCO VT-4 Heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicle (HIFV) displayed at IDEX 2019. Noticed the shared chassis with VT-4 Main Battle Tank, which would provide the vehicle with significant protection and mobility.

It's a long way from actual production; just here to show you what NORINCO is thinking about in the East....

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

This is by way of an UPDATE concerning the AJAX. JANE's is reporting with the following ref. the same thing I reported using a different source before the end of the year, where I submitted a START date change to the right to JUNE 2020 I believe it was.

From the article "British Army crews will begin trialing the turreted reconnaissance version of the Ajax family of armoured vehicles during the third quarter of this year, according to the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD)." That's in 2019. And...

"...the ministry told Jane’s that the first squadron-sized sub-unit will be equipped with the full complement of the variant in early 2020 ahead of the initial operating capability (IOC) being declared the following July."

I took a gamble on FOC being reached at that time (As submitted.) because the UK has been staying ahead of schedule in the testing program to date. Apparently it's meeting expectations and proving very reliable thus far.

Please remember I have no access to the game or my notes at this time. I will endeavor in the meantime to recover that post which I think is in the MBT Thread that also contained a START Date change for the Israeli ENTAN.
https://www.janes.com/article/87527/...s-by-september
https://des.mod.uk/what-we-do/army-p...-support/ajax/
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-gb...-vehicles.html

Ref. 3 (Manufacturer) is indicating trials will be ongoing until 9/2020.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I found the "offending" post to my last, it's in the IDF OOB project by GingerTanker on Pg. 8 Post #80 of this forum. Though tracking for EITAN not so much for the AJAX. So much for "crystal balls" especially when overcome by newer references (For both that also pushed them back.) since that post was submitted last Nov.

Just following up is all.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Looks like this morning I'll be brief for a change as I have some pressing issues to take care before I hit the rack. While looking into the Turkish M-60 variant issue I came across the following from Ref. 1 and their coverage of IDEF 2019.

IDF EITAN is still in the Prototype/OPEVAL phase. First "Iron Fist Light Decoupled" (IFLD) has been selected for the EITAN. The reference is also stating that the USA has just ahead of the IDF, chosen the same system for the BRADLEY AFV.
https://armyrecognition.com/august_2...on_system.html
https://armyrecognition.com/israel_i...res_video.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

USA unit 887

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

First, Don thank you for your last reply previous this post.

This next is a "good news, bad news" story. First the good news as Australia has "down selected" the Rheinmetall Lynx KF41 IFV to compete against the Hanwha Defense' Redback IFV from South Korea in the LAND 400 Phase 3 competition.
https://www.janes.com/article/91297/...fv-requirement
https://www.armyrecognition.com/sept...3_program.html

If the BOXER competition (LAND 400 Phase 2.) from a couple of years ago is any indication, that'll take a year. Further testing and modification by the ADF with any additional contract issues, that could possibly add another 6 months.

Bottom-line for the ADF, they want them in the field by early 2026, and there you have the "Bad News" for us.

More on the REDBACK but, note the company site does not mention the 40mm MG or APS, however, on newer articles both are noted as available on the net. I provide it because it has more of the data we need to build it.
https://www.hanwha-defense.co.kr/eng...illery-as21.do
https://www.armyrecognition.com/sept...n_m113as4.html

I expect as I was asked to look into for the ADF BOXER, which ever they choose it'll have the largest MG the type is designed and tested to carry. So I believe then, whichever will carry the 40mm and APS.

My pick I feel has to go to the LYNX KF41. The main reason for this is the BOXER faced tough competition during the Phase 2 part of the LAND 400 Program and won it handling. Now Rheinmetall is embedded and established in Australia in the production of the BOXER.

But the AS21 REDBACK is an excellent IFV but, I'm not sure it's quite as good as the LYNX and again, also for the reason stated in the prior para.

JAPAN has selected it's 3rd competitor in it's APC/IFV competition the Patria AMVXP (This is still a concept vehicle).
https://www.armyrecognition.com/sept..._in_japan.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/finl...cept_data.html

The others are the...
https://www.weaponews.com/news/65354...-vehicles.html

Note Japan's MAV is the "cousin" if you will to the MCV I submitted for the last patch which is a "gun carrier". I see the MAV has "similar lines" to the BOXER at a "quick" look.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

This just as a "heads up" concerning the UK AJAX. Janes in reporting with the UK having only five AJAX's as test beds, the 6th is now delayed along with the first production set.

UK MOD still is hoping for JULY 2010 IOC date for the AJAX.
Not sure where we're at with the AJAX but, I remember we did a push back (Or discussed it.) on it within the last couple of years, so this might not be an issue at this time.

However, reporting now as JANE's is the only one doing so at this moment. Also due to shorter (And only because I like this word.) nature of their posts expiry date.
https://www.janes.com/article/93758/...h-army-delayed

Back to whatever it was I was doing. :)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It's July 2020 right now. I may push it forward or not

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Don,
Don't push it forward, that's in line now for the "projected" IOC date, the real issue here is will we need to "push it back" for FOC.

Also see Post #472 above on this page. That was convenient for a change! :rolleyes:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Sorry if someone has already made a request

Could you add
EBRC Jaguar for France and Belgium

Source:
https://www.armyrecognition.com/fren..._pictures.html

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/terre/act...n-et-le-jaguar (in French)

https://www.defense.gouv.fr/actualit...ffon-et-jaguar (In French)

https://defpost.com/belgium-orders-3...ored-vehicles/

Thanks

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

We are tracking it since program inception. It's probably about 2-3 years out from FOC at this point which is why it's not in the OOB.

I see you used Army Recognition, which the web tracking site "ALEXA.com" (I believe.) has declared it the #1 Defense site on the web.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/marc...alexa.com.html

Also submissions are closed for the next patch. And the Andy/Don "TS Skunk Works Project" is probably by now in the "testing phase" for the next patch release.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

EDIT: Sorry should've been more specific in this earlier. I was referring to possible FOC for France.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

quote........."The new vehicles will be delivered to Belgian Land component between 2025 and 2030 and will replace its Piranha IIIC armored personnel carriers, Pandur I reconnaissance vehicles and Dingo 2 infantry mobility vehicles.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

From JANE's it might provide some insight and a little general "tactical" doctrine data as well.

So what you have here is a brief on the French "Scorpion" modernization program.

Enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rrD...o#action=share

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yep its just a reference that i get using these website form google.
Welp i'm to late now for requesting additional unit
But i thanked for the attention you gave to me
Cheers:)

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Apparently the USMC decided to cancel the ACV1.2 (a fully tracked, more seaworthy variant of the ACV1.1) due to the ACV1.1 being able to handle sea-state 3 conditions (the current AAV can handle sea state 4). There are plans for an ACV2.0 sometime after 2025 with higher water speeds and capable of sea state 4.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R42723.pdf

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well good thing then that we don't have something else to rip that we put in before it was made operational. That is why EFVP is still in the OOB but not active.....as a reminder

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

We also have the advantage of dealing with shorter future time frames then we did. Even with the extension to 2025 we're only looking a few years into the future.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

And with all that is going on ALL of these future projects may be put on hold or cancelled

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I have to agree, the financial strains "Corna" this is putting on the world economy's is huge! It's not now going to happen by tomorrow (Which means another HUGE drop of the Dow.) as hoped, but, we're about to approve the largest economic stimulus bill in the history of the U.S.

Our current National Debt (U.S) is sitting around 23.3 Trillion Dollars, this bill will equal 8.58% of the current debt at 2 Trillion Dollars. That bill is designed to ONLY cover a period of 10 -12 weeks. If there's no improvement of the current situation a follow-up bill might be revisited.

We can absolutely see a reduction and or "slow down" in defense acquisitions around the world if this is not resolved in the next few months.

The money for the current Defense Authorization bill has already been allocated for this Fiscal Year (Until 30 SEP 2020.) but, that being said, the Department of Defense does represent the second highest "individual component" (This includes the Overseas Contingency Operations of our budget. Pays for wars etc.) behind Social Security the electrify "third rail" of politics here.

Logic follows that behind social programs, the defense budgets of most countries especially in parts of Asia and Europe will find themselves in the same situation as us potentially.

And you have to wonder what's going on in Russia as, at least here there's not much news except for the current "Oil War" between Russia and neighboring countries against Saudi Arabia and oddly in regards to the last OPEC.

By all appearances Oil in Russia is going for about $55.00 per barrel which is about 3 to 4 dollars less then they budgeted for. Oil and some other national resources is what's paying for their defense budget. I still am not seeing ARMATA/T-50 and ARMATA IFV (T-15) before 2025, especially with this these issues currently going on in Russia.
https://www.rbth.com/business/331683...ussias-economy
https://guidetopetersburg.com/corona...ent-situation/
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/...arch-22-a69117

So we might see a "blood bath" in some OOB's. And in line with this Thread, AJAX wasn't isn't even to start IOC until this Fall. How will this affect that? It's too soon to tell except, you can bet I'll be watching this and other programs very closely over the next several months.

I devoted 15 years of my career concerning financial issues relating to our sailors.

If you are investing for your retirement, "stay the course" there's a reason it's called "dollar cost averaging" and this is a good time to be invested if your "time horizon" until retirement is still few years off.

I hope everyone (And your families.) can hang in there, it will end hopefully in the next few months. As many of my former compatriots (Sub Folks) are posting "Self Isolation" at home is nothing!! We are home with our families, we can eat what we want, we can look out the windows, we can watch TV, access computers, listen to music, read a good book, use a phone, we even watch Sunrises and Sunsets and so much more!!

We couldn't (And still can't.) do most of any of that on a Submarine.

And like working on a Submarine the DOD expects me to come to work and I'll be there for the duration. As I know many of you out here have to do the same.

Stay Strong!!

As a CO once told me and in writing "I was the conscious of the command."

I don't assume that role here, but I hope you know where I'm coming from.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

The last info I found on Ajax was late summer so the date in the OOB has been adjusted to September. If it's correct or changes is irrelevant as the OOB is going out with it entering service 9/120

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I hinted at this in the AAR: Walking Dead Thread however, thankfully I remembered in the last couple of minutes it came from JANE's and is therefore perishable on the web to non-subscribers.

I had already posted in this Thread in late 2019 that the AJAX Program was way behind schedule and wouldn't be ready for OPEVAL until SEP/OCT 2020. Everything that could go wrong has from money, to technical and equipment issues associated with the AJAX.

They currently they operate at least 6 Pre-Production Prototypes, below from SEP/OCT 2019.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/scou..._pictures.html
https://battle-updates.com/update/mi...icle-news-564/

I will continue to track this closing. I would use while you can since at a minimum we're looking at a START to the right of where we are now or the deletion there of.

JANE's has "scooped" this so far, but as I get more (Which could be in a few minutes.) but as it "hits" my other sources I'll post them as they become available.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...1-e7a41a7aa603

Nothing more current then JANE's as posted above. The 2nd Ref above is from mid-JAN 2020 and verifies 6 Pre-Production Prototypes as well as providing other dates now "out the window".

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Same thing with the South African Badger

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...f-5abbf162ef0d

I have now pushed the start date into the future

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yeah, you got ahead of me on that. I already knew for sometime about BADGER as well but, just didn't have the time to seek out more data on how bad that situation had gotten until I looked further looked into after I saw the same JANE's article myself.

Seems like mid 2022 to mid 2023 seems where the data shows some including these are where we've had to push some other equipment including tanks i.e. ALTAY, ARMATA etc., The impact of COVID-19 (Along with all the other normal issues in development of these programs.) is going to play havoc on Defense Budgets (Already has.) which is projected to have an impact on ours as well for the upcoming 2021 Fiscal Year.

All we can do is watch and see how far the "pendulum swings" on some of these programs over the next couple of years.

All I have on BADGER some contain interesting data on the MG making it unique. Also one of the refs. shows the configuration of the different turrets that will be fitted on the BADGER. I believe a couple of the prototypes are of the ATGW type.
By date order Oldest to Newest...
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/moder...-africa/Badger
("According to Denel, the first battalion of 88 vehicles will be completed in 2019. The entire production order is set to be complete by 2022".)
http://www.military-today.com/apc/badger.htm
(Expected in 2019.)
https://www.defenceweb.co.za/feature...adger-vehicle/
https://www.defenceweb.co.za/feature...ombat-vehicle/
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...f-5abbf162ef0d

This next I came across during my BADGER search on the RATEL Program for those interested.
https://www.forecastinternational.co...fm?ARC_ID=1166

Well that at least let me clean out some files that aren't staring me in the face any longer! ;)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Every time we try to get ahead of things it goes wrong somehow. The badger issue is deeper than just the IFV. We have an ATGM version, and APC version and an SP mortar version and they had all started 1//113 but the mortar and Missle variants show being turreted here.........

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/moder...-africa/Badger

Which was not the info we had when it went in and all the armed variants are turreted including the Section variant APC

.....and the mortar version is not 120mm....it's a 60 mm DLS breech loader but it carries 256 bombs ( 255 is the largest number we can use but "close enough" ) you won't run out of ammo with one of those

wonderful........

I will push them all forward and adjust the formations and I doubt this will be the last time that happens

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Why Don and I enjoy OOB work so much...
Looking back at Post 493 above on the BADGER, Ref 1/6 variants, Ref 2/5 variants and Ref 4/9 variants.

Carry ranges from 6-10 troops (Though that ref did indicate it would be a tight fit @ 10.) for the "Section" variant.

Now I'll lean on Ref 1 for those numbers as listed on the bottom of their article as 4 crew + 7 troops.

The "Support" variant won't have a ammo issue as well, it'll only carry a two man dedicated ATGW team attached on very one of the type, also from Ref 1. 5 less seats/troops make a lot of room for extra 30mm rds. and whatever their ATGW teams carry.

I'm leaning on Ref 1 for the BADGER because of the listed Bibliography though the refs are all good, the one that caught my eye was the following: "Smit, A. 2018. Interview with Badger, project manager Denel. Date 9 Feb. 2018."

This is why, though I compared them against my sources, this ref. was so important to me in unraveling the SADF MBT issues as submitted for the last patch, it was the SADF and SA industry interviews that were important to me plus they also included/used a couple of others I had independently researched myself.

So here's that Ref 1 again.
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/moder...-africa/Badger

It's always good to have a "tie breaker" if the situation warrants.

The bright side is it's only, actually now 4 years behind schedule. better then ARJUN at 30 years I suppose!?! :rolleyes:

Daughter is "kidnapping" CINCLANTHOME for a week so I'm off to bed to send them off.

Thanks Don!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

How is the game mimicking the CROW system, the remote-operated weapon platform that keeps the gunner inside the vehicle? The system has been put on some M1A2s, or at least the battalion I was before retiring had them.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

An RWS on an APC would be modelled by a coax type MG, some stabiliser, some FC and some night vision. In other words the APC has a "turret" like a tank does. The coax type MG rather than an AAMG will not lose shots for being buttoned if the APC is suppressed (though some APC with an RWS may still have a class 4 AAMG).

An RWS may of course also have an AGL (coax or the main weapon), or a small autocannon or HMG.

Tank MG for an "RWS" might swap out a class 4 AAMG for a coax or MMG class weapon. Tanks already have the FC, RF, Stabiliser and vision post the 50s.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well I learned a new "term" from this next article from which I've been preaching on for years concerning the ABRAMS. Simply because a piece of equipment has been accepted for "fielding" doesn't make it so until a set number of units or unit it appears in this case, are fulling equipped with said piece of equipment.

I believe that process took almost 10yrs for the ABRAMS M1A2 SEP 2 with 6-8 Battalions being fully equipped at FOC.

And we're several years into it with ABRAMS M1A2C/SEP 3, with still more years to go, at least 2 more by my calculations.

So the new term I'll be using IAW the USA is First Unit Equipped or FUE. This is the first time I've seen FUE in a ref. but if there's one thing I've learned about JANE's, is they don't lie. So there you have FUE.

So the story concerns the STRYKER 30mm that FUE has been pushed from they say late FY 2022, and I'm assuming last QTR., that would've meant JUL-SEP 2022 planned FUE.

According to JANE's it'll now be earliest FY 2023 2nd QTR. MAR/APR 2023 for FUE/FOC.

Contract still has not been awarded as the companies are still competing for the contract. RAYTHEON, whom some thought they had the "inside track" to get the contract has dropped out. This is bad for any country "generally" for any military equipment.

The service will want a "wash out" to include why they dropped out i.e. funding, technical, future earnings to offset R&D and PROTOTYPE costs issues etc. some or all, bottom-line it simply delays the process or I've seen can cancel the project (However that won't happen here and I've seen projects restarted that were "DOA" only to be revitalized sometimes years later: India's ARJUN anyone?)

Anyway here's your ref...
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...b-43d052efe123

And before anyone says anything, please remember, we're only talking about a weapons system here literally, and not a fully redesigned/RESET MBT.

AJAX: Don't normally like using "blogs" however I found this conversation interesting especially in that MOD awarded what would amount to normally be "follow on" contracts before they even had a PROTOTYPE. If true that's a real stupid move due to the risks involved that we now know have. MOD you get the :doh: :trophy: again if true-incredible!?!
https://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=107840
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27...n#.Xx_Kd1qSmUk

Still looks like JANE's has the lead on this but, the second ref discussing where their at with the C&C variant doesn't leave me with a "warm fuzzing" picture concerning when we'll see them. But for now still sticking to my dated suggested earlier.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

which "STRYKER 30mm" are you referring to ?

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Stryker DVHA1 with turret mounted 30 mm XM813 cannon. System (Stryker Dragoon) falls under the Medium Calibre Weapons System (MCWS) Program.

2/25/2019
https://www.defensedaily.com/army-lo...strykers/army/

5/23/2019
" The service spent 18 months to put together its Stryker Dragoon using off-the-shelf solutions such as the remote turret from Kongsberg in Norway and the 30mm cannon from Orbital ATK, now owned by Northrop Grumman.

The vehicles were shipped off to Europe for a year-long evaluation.

Feedback from the evaluation suggested some improvements are needed, particularly related to situational awareness. The turret for the cannon takes up a lot of roof and hatch space and also affects how equipment is stowed, for instance."
https://www.defensenews.com/land/201...m-integration/

6/22/2020 Congress involved over evaluation process and that 2 of 6 competitors have dropped out of the evaluation process. The question as I noted independent of this article in my last post, is WHY?
https://www.defensenews.com/congress...ouse-proposal/

2/20/2020 Related story concerning the USA canceling the Optionally-Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) (Replacement for BRADLEY.) (Also called and POSSIBLE consequences to STRYKER DRAGOON Program.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...030mm%20cannon.

Look for an improved BRADLEY M2A4 from 2/10/2019
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...are-dead-44082

Now all of this makes perfectly good sense to me for what JANE's reported in my last post from last night. I can see a possible longer delay for STRYKER DRAGOON as the timing couldn't be worse, we're in a Presidential election cycle.

Regards,
Pat
:capt: