Re: FV4034 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (British Army)
Posted: 21 Jan 2019, 14:49
Is it slightly concerning that both upgrade teams are now working as one... Or do I need to take my tin foil hat off
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
There is no confirmation that they are yet.Little J wrote:Is it slightly concerning that both upgrade teams are now working as one... Or do I need to take my tin foil hat off
Nothing to do with the UK end of things. Thats all Sweden.Ron5 wrote:What about CV90?
3 of the 4 teams bidding Land 400 Ph3 would then be "working together" on CR2 LEP. I don't believe that for a second.Little J wrote:Is it slightly concerning that both upgrade teams are now working as one... Or do I need to take my tin foil hat off
Lord Jim wrote: have a session asking those involved what is the state of the Army's AFV re-equipment plans as many seem to be up in the air or moving so slowly they almost appear to be standing still.
- nothing for the tanks ( a motley collection)Lord Jim wrote: Given what the Poles paid for theirs including the upgrade
Let's play this one for the 11th time ( a first for this forum? Where is that Naval Architect that used to preach 'Religion' on TD... has he retired; you know building ships and doing the military fitting out cannot be separated... called modularity these days )Ron5 wrote:What about CV90?
Sorry about not seeing what your question was about. A lot of the little bear with a little brain quotes have been flying about... latelyRon5 wrote:I was inquiring [...]
the tie up between Bae & Rheinmetal.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Is this a game of 5... to be reduced?
No, it was the German side (Rheinmetall, as for staying in AFVs) that was under pressure and went into the agreement,
RetroSicotte wrote:
Where does it say about the CR2 upgrade?
What else is there, to play for?
so:
GD, Atlanticist ( )
BAE, Atlanticist ( )
KNDS, not-so-so Atlanticist
Second hand from who though?Lord Jim wrote:As for proposals for the CR2 upgrade, I still think we could do a lot worse than getting second hand Leopard 2 and having them upgraded either by the OEM or Rheinmetall who have their own upgrade package. Given what the Poles paid for theirs including the upgrade, spares and so on it would be interesting to see if we could get enough vehicles to meet the Army's needs from roughly the existing programme budget. Around 120 should do? Then we wait for the next generation platform to come along either from the US or Europe in the 2030s.
e 5 mln a piece vs. our £700 mln divided by X ( the MoD being very coy about what "X" will be)RetroSicotte wrote:cost the Poles as much as the Challenger upgrade program alone just to try and fix to bring up to a certain standard.
That 5 mil apiece is only the tip of the iceberg for them, unfortunately. They've had to pay a lot more to constantly fix problems related to their fleet being made up of "whatevers" from the old A4 variations.ArmChairCivvy wrote:e 5 mln a piece vs. our £700 mln divided by X ( the MoD being very coy about what "X" will be)RetroSicotte wrote:cost the Poles as much as the Challenger upgrade program alone just to try and fix to bring up to a certain standard.
I'm not aware of a round that only the A7 can use. Maybe you know something I've missed there, but the DM63 can be used in any Rm120 I think. It's basically a DM53 with changed internals to the round. As I said, maybe there's something I dunno about its other ammunition. (Data linked one to the A7 perhaps?)ArmChairCivvy wrote:You are obviously more "glued in" on this than I am; why did the German contract to get their tanks (already sold back to the manufacturer, for export) back into service stretch for so long... 3-4 years?
I am suspecting that the rounds that only the A7 can handle have something to do with it
... and that could have something to do with the latest Ch2 LEP news, as well
Yes its does. BAE UK still control the purse strings and get the final say on development of new vehicles and systems. A fact that has hamstrung and driven the Swedes crazy multiple times at least since the introduction of the CV90 MKIII .RetroSicotte wrote:Nothing to do with the UK end of things. Thats all Sweden.Ron5 wrote:What about CV90?
That is a damn good question. I'm guessing right now the management at Hägglunds and maybe also Bofors is frantically scrambling to find potential new owners.....everything to avoid coming under kraut influence......because the Swedes know all to well what happens when under german ownership!Ron5 wrote:What about CV90?
But not what Rheinmetal got. This is a different thing entirely to BAE in Sweden, Rheinmetal/BAE in the UK has no say over it, only the "core" BAE.MikeKiloPapa wrote:Yes its does. BAE UK still control the purse strings and get the final say on development of new vehicles and systems. A fact that has hamstrung and driven the Swedes crazy multiple times at least since the introduction of the CV90 MKIII .
Ahh...you've been listening to Damian again i see ..(or Sturgeons House forum....they are equally bad!).....isnt it funny that the Poles seemingly had/has all these problems with their A4s yet when you actually talk to polish tankers they cant recognize any of these issues. And why havent we heard anything about these seemingly "YUUUGE" problems from all the other users of the A4 model, Finland, Sweden(STRV121-no longer in use), Spain, Chile etc..?RetroSicotte wrote:That 5 mil apiece is only the tip of the iceberg for them, unfortunately. They've had to pay a lot more to constantly fix problems related to their fleet being made up of "whatevers" from the old A4 variations.ArmChairCivvy wrote:e 5 mln a piece vs. our £700 mln divided by X ( the MoD being very coy about what "X" will be)RetroSicotte wrote:cost the Poles as much as the Challenger upgrade program alone just to try and fix to bring up to a certain standard.
It's been a complete mess.
,For example, the A4 had three separate armour models
No such thing......that hull is the same in all models, save for the placement of the return rollers, which changed once in the pre A4 versions.....meaning there are 2 configurations, but with the same rollers, track and everything so it has no impact on maintenance or operation whatsoever.two separate hull models
There is a grain of truth to this, but it isnt really the layout that differs but only the design of the internal disc brakes (used at speeds <20mph) which became stronger in newer transmissions......was changed again in some A5 and A6 models (Leo2A5DK, Strv122, and Leopardo 2E, Leo 2A6HEL)....none of which has much impact on operations.three separate transmission layouts (despite having the same one!),
This is complete hyperbole from a moron (damian)who doesnt have any actual experience on the Leopard 2 or any tank for that matter and who gets 99% of his information from 2nd or 3rd hand sources or the internet ......whatever variations exist is at worst minor and inconsequential.countless variations in internal systems from major to minor.
And what "huge errors" would that be, i wonder? Also like to know what was only partially fixed.RetroSicotte wrote:There is zero worth getting the ones before the 2A5, their base hull is riddled with huge errors that the 2A5 (partially) fixed
No offence , but i'd take what the poles have to say with a truck load of salt!.....especially knowing the likely source.and are a massive mishmash of minor variations that have cost the Poles as much as the Challenger upgrade program alone just to try and fix to bring up to a certain standard.
Maybe.....for now at least......However having thrown their lot in with Rheinmetall and OCCAR/ARTEC, BAE UK have no interest in protecting their Swedish subsidiary and the germans are hell bent on gaining consolidation and complete dominance in the european land defence business. If i were head of Hägglunds i would be calling SAAB right about now.RetroSicotte wrote:But not what Rheinmetal got. This is a different thing entirely to BAE in Sweden, Rheinmetal/BAE in the UK has no say over it, only the "core" BAE.MikeKiloPapa wrote:Yes its does. BAE UK still control the purse strings and get the final say on development of new vehicles and systems. A fact that has hamstrung and driven the Swedes crazy multiple times at least since the introduction of the CV90 MKIII .