Mil News Western Europe Military News

[TheKiwi]

Pre-2018 built NH-90s grounded for reconditioning of tail rotor assembly ()

Well, at least they discovered that before one fell out of the sky. What's curious is that again, it seems to be a problem created by a third-party supplier. Airbus really needs to get its act together.

Oh consider me shocked! Shocked I tells yer that the white elephant would have anything else stop working on it.

 

[muck]

So the french want cavalry, the Germans want a blocker.

What’s our likely situation, the uk would back the blocker 100%.

You can use apc etc for cavalry, you have to have a heavyweight team.

It’s a system with a 40 year life, make it adaptable......

Granted it might be the reason why I'm neither a general staff officer nor an engineer in the defence sector, but I actually fail to see where their issue lies (it's probably just about the money)
The Germans want a main battle tank, fine. MBTs do rarely come alone, though. You're right, they're adaptable. Usually, they'll spawn at least a dedicated recovery variant capable of keeping up with the armoured columns and retrieving damaged vehicles from the battlefield without sacrificing a reasonable amount of protection.
In other words, that new Franco-German vehicle is very likely going to start a whole new family anyway. Why not add a light tank version to the mix? The technology should already be there, considering how quickly e.g. the Puma IFV can switch weight classes and roles with addon armour.

 

[Mordoror]

So the french want cavalry, the Germans want a blocker.

What’s our likely situation, the uk would back the blocker 100%.

You can use apc etc for cavalry, you have to have a heavyweight team.

It’s a system with a 40 year life, make it adaptable......

You can make it adaptable but only within a limited range
The weight, engine power (and size), the chassis, the armor, the FCS and stab have to be more or less fixed
And the initial choices are impacting the doctrine of use
And no, you can't do cavalry with APCs .....not in our agressive reco/probing and outflanking doctrine. Not enough survivability nor firepower
We don't restrict our cavalry to reco and short range exploitation
That's a cultural difference

 

[Fluff]

You can make it adaptable but only within a limited range
The weight, engine power (and size), the chassis, the armor, the FCS and stab have to be more or less fixed
And the initial choices are impacting the doctrine of use
And no, you can't do cavalry with APCs .....not in our agressive reco/probing and outflanking doctrine. Not enough survivability nor firepower
We don't restrict our cavalry to reco and short range exploitation
That's a cultural difference

I know, and that seems to be the nub of the problem. Sounds like your going back to an amx30, while Germany want a Maus.....somehow I cant see a solution appearing, any compromise is going to be just that.

surely a solution is that your heavy armour takes the new one, and your mid/calvalry take M8 or similar. Space for both then.

 

[Mordoror]

I know, and that seems to be the nub of the problem. Sounds like your going back to an amx30, while Germany want a Maus.....somehow I cant see a solution appearing, any compromise is going to be just that.

surely a solution is that your heavy armour takes the new one, and your mid/calvalry take M8 or similar. Space for both then.

I dunno
Globaly, features of western MBTs (aside the fanboy chestbeating) seem close to each others for the latest generations and differences seem marginal
I mean the cross country capability of a Leclerc or Leo2A6 dont seem so different
Ev3n if one is classified as a cavalry tank and the other as a blocker
Same with frontal armor, gun etc. But this has come with batches and addon and there is a limit about up to which level upgrades are doable.

My feeling is that France wants a lighter tank (50 class) while Germany are about heavies 55t class.
10% in weight difference in the initial project is not few
Even if future evolutions will see convergence.

Other issue is about the war environment
France wants net-o-centric tank with associated drones and probably links to the Scorpion program to be used as agressive reco "en force " system.
While Germany, for the same space would probably like more protection or ammos.

Compromise would indeed be modulars boxes but it would make the program mire expensive....even if in the end it could be a money winner if modularity is correctly implemented.

 

[muck]

There's a German term I'd highly recommend for a career as an international loan word… the eierlegende wollmichsau (egg-laying wool-producing milk-giving sow) – a jack of all trades but master of none sort of imaginary creature. Budget constraints have given birth to many eierlegende wollmichsäue over the years, all marked by cost-overruns and most by unkept capability promises.

On due deliberation, surely it would be better to develop two different vehicles then and just co-produce technologies and parts that can go into both. The weapons and sensory equipment, the armour technology, the engine and so on spring to mind.

After all, you do see a lot of MBT 70 DNA in both the Leopard 2 and the M1 Abrams, and though the vehicle got cancelled it helped to lower the development costs of the follow-up projects. Imagine the same trajectory, but under common management. The tax payers of both countries could save a lot of money.

 

[Fluff]

There's a German term I'd highly recommend for a career as an international loan word… the eierlegende wollmichsau (egg-laying wool-producing milk-giving sow) – a jack of all trades but master of none sort of imaginary creature. Budget constraints have given birth to many eierlegende wollmichsäue over the years, all marked by cost-overruns and most by unkept capability promises.

On due deliberation, surely it would be better to develop two different vehicles then and just co-produce technologies and parts that can go into both. The weapons and sensory equipment, the armour technology, the engine and so on spring to mind.

After all, you do see a lot of MBT 70 DNA in both the Leopard 2 and the M1 Abrams, and though the vehicle got cancelled it helped to lower the development costs of the follow-up projects. Imagine the same trajectory, but under common management. The tax payers of both countries could save a lot of money.

See European agreement.

Then the UK could come in, wanting another 5 tons of armour and a tea urn. We could negotiate on the armour, a little.

 

[Mordoror]

There's a German term I'd highly recommend for a career as an international loan word… the eierlegende wollmichsau (egg-laying wool-producing milk-giving sow) – a jack of all trades but master of none sort of imaginary creature. Budget constraints have given birth to many eierlegende wollmichsäue over the years, all marked by cost-overruns and most by unkept capability promises.

On due deliberation, surely it would be better to develop two different vehicles then and just co-produce technologies and parts that can go into both. The weapons and sensory equipment, the armour technology, the engine and so on spring to mind.

After all, you do see a lot of MBT 70 DNA in both the Leopard 2 and the M1 Abrams, and though the vehicle got cancelled it helped to lower the development costs of the follow-up projects. Imagine the same trajectory, but under common management. The tax payers of both countries could save a lot of money.

I agree.
That's also and in accordence with you the best solution but:
From a political pov it would end again as a failed european project so this is a no no ( moreover when the shares are also taking in consideration the FCAS futur fighter)

Nobody wants another cancelled project
Our armies will be force fed a mongrel thing that will suit none of our doctrine....a bit like...well always.

 

[PEMM]

Finland:

The Finnish Defence Forces has received the total delivery of the Main Battle Tank Leopard 2A6.

In 2014, Finland made the decision to procure altogether a hundred used surplus Leopard 2A6 main battle tanks from the Netherlands. Now all the procured main battle tanks have been received, serviced and in good condition with the procurement project proceeding as planned.

- We put this new equipment into training use promptly with very good experiences. The conscripts have been motivated in using the new equipment and the trained MBT crews have been able to put their skills to test in demanding and versatile international training exercises including the exercises Arrow and Northern Wind. It has been excellent to see how in such a short time these tanks were introduced into operational use and the type of striking effectiveness that has already been achieved, Colonel Peltoniemi summarises.

In accordance with the procurement purchase plan, the first MBTs arrived in Finland in May 2015. The main battle tank procurement also included acquisition of spare parts, training simulators, special tools and testing equipment as well as an ammunition lot. Prior to being fielded into service, the MBTs undergo national modifications as applicable. The value of the contract was a total of 199,9 million Euros.

Puolustusvoimat on vastaanottanut kaikki Leopard 2A6 -taistelupanssarivaunut

maavoimat.fi

 

[Fluff]

The whole world is buying leo’s, I’m not holding much hope for the joint development with France.

 

[PEMM]

In case of Finland you should remember that, first A4's and then A6's, were both suprlus bought for lower than 50% price of new vehicles.

 

[muck]

The whole world is buying leo’s, I’m not holding much hope for the joint development with France.

The tanks bought by Finland have maybe twenty years of service life left in them, and the A6 is already not the most modern iteration anymore. The upgrade of the German Leo's to the A7V standard is to be completed in 2026, but the program has a runtime of only 10 to 15 years (i.e. 2045-ish). The Swedes, the Swiss, the Austrians and many other armies operate fleets based on the A4 or A5. And you can't upgrade those vehicles forever, the A7V has already ballooned up to about 65 tonnes.

The point being, there's a lot of Leopard tanks out there that will need replacing during the early 2040s, and that's when the Franco-German vehicle is supposed to enter service.

 

[PEMM]

The tanks bought by Finland have maybe twenty years of service life left in them, and the A6 is already not the most modern iteration anymore.

Finns tend to use this gear a bit longer than intended.

For example Finland will just start tp phase out last T-55M's as the Leopard 2A4's took their place, some artillery is from the 50's, BMP-1's, MT-LBV still going strong etc.

 

[muck]

All armies do to some extent, even America's. I was just referring to the point where you can't postpone getting a replacement anymore.

Turkey has lost some Leos as of late. They were older models, and there's some indication the Turks made tactical mistakes (e.g. using them as oversized field guns in stationary emplacements), but it goes to show the A4 has become vulnerable to modern anti-tank weapons.

 

[Fluff]

The tanks bought by Finland have maybe twenty years of service life left in them, and the A6 is already not the most modern iteration anymore. The upgrade of the German Leo's to the A7V standard is to be completed in 2026, but the program has a runtime of only 10 to 15 years (i.e. 2045-ish). The Swedes, the Swiss, the Austrians and many other armies operate fleets based on the A4 or A5. And you can't upgrade those vehicles forever, the A7V has already ballooned up to about 65 tonnes.

The point being, there's a lot of Leopard tanks out there that will need replacing during the early 2040s, and that's when the Franco-German vehicle is supposed to enter service.

I should clarify, I mean I doubt the new tank will be what France wants, it will be more like a new Leo. Not a lighter version. I believe there will be a new tank. And uk will have to choose between us or German, next time.

 

[PEMM]

Finland:

Defence Forces continue to upgrade Pasi armoured personnel carriers

Minister of Defence Antti Kaikkonen has authorised, on 28 October 2019, the Defence Forces Logistics Command to procure supplementary life-cycle upgrades from the Finnish Patria Land Oy for XA-180 armoured personnel carriers (Pasi) as of the beginning of 2020.

Life-cycle upgrades will be used to modernise 139 XA-180 armoured personnel carriers. Modernisation ensures that the capability, condition and technical life cycle of the armoured personnel carriers will extend into the 2040s. Their electric systems will be upgraded, power transmission components will be improved and suspension and external coating will be renewed. Seats with security belts will also be installed in the vehicles.

total value including VAT is approximately EUR 35 million.

Frontpage

Ministry of Defence of Finland

www.defmin.fi

The vehicles will retire much later than the first crews that operated them. However the price is very competitive.

EDIT: I hope they add a proper heater.

 

[muck]

Speaking of the devil…

German Army takes delivery of first Leopard 2A7V ()

Though built around used A5's and A6's, the A7V includes improvements that had not been ready for series production on the A7's release and as a consequence, might be considered the pinnacle of evolution of the Leopard 2 series. The vehicle features additional armour, a new drive train, a new NBC protection and air conditioning system, updates to the stabiliser and fire control computer, and a new C4I suite.

The German fleet is to comprise 104 A7V, 20 A7, and 204 A6M.

 

[Fluff]

Still relying on A7V ? Best we get our mk1’s out of storage.

 

[BravoZulu]

UK:
In 2021, HMS Queen Elizabeth will deploy with two frigates, two destroyers, a nuclear submarine and support vessels.
Commodore Michael Utley, Commander United Kingdom Carrier Strike Group, is reported by Save The Royal Navy here as saying that HMS Queen Elizabeth will be escorted by two Type 45 destroyers, two Type 23 frigates, a nuclear submarine, a Tide-class tanker and RFA Fort Victoria.
The ship will also carry 24 F-35B jets, including US Marine Corps aircraft, in addition to a number of helicopters.
Prior to the deployment, it is understood that the Queen Elizabeth carrier strike group will go through a work-up trial off the west Hebrides range sometime in early 2021.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-queen-elizabeth-carrier-strike-group-to-deploy-in-2021/

 

[muck]

This lengthy article () on the Main Ground Combat System speaks of squabbles between France and Germany on the one hand and Poland on the other. Apparently, the two states have mostly rebuffed Polish offers of cooperation. A Polish defence analyst is quoted as assuming France wished to punish Warsaw for a cancelled helicopter deal, whereas Germany is said to have questioned the know-how of Poland's defence industry.

(Sounds like a terrible business strategy to me. And absurd considering how Rheinmetall is engaged in many bilateral projects with Polish companies.)

Most notably though, the article states "military brass" wishes not for a "heavy main battle tank" but a "game changer" incorporating elements like "support vehicles", "robotics" and "high-speed guided missiles". No detail is given on who formulated these requirements nor if the aforesaid support vehicles are to be understood as unmanned ground vehicles (i.e. "robot wingmans") or chassis derivatives. The vagueness could be entirely accidental, although it might also be interpreted to mean the French doctrine has prevailed.