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
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
