It doesn't make sense unless it was included as some sort of political sweetener to encourage Australian government to select Boxer in the first place.
The German production line is currently in full swing but that is expected to switch to the UK, so plenty of capacity in Germany to build their boxers at home.
Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
-
SiVisPacemParaBellum
- Junior Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 16 Dec 2022, 15:58
- Has liked: 1 time
- Been liked: 2 times
Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
Germany wants the exact same Version which is currently under production in Queensland. Why would we set up a new production line if there's already one available?
Apart from that: Germany will order around 160 RCH155 this year, another 3-digit-amount of Boxers with the PUMA turret, JFST units + possible engineering + ambulance units.
The Bundeswehr will end up with +1000 Boxers on the long run.
Some +150 Boxers don't matter in this context.
Apart from that: Germany will order around 160 RCH155 this year, another 3-digit-amount of Boxers with the PUMA turret, JFST units + possible engineering + ambulance units.
The Bundeswehr will end up with +1000 Boxers on the long run.
Some +150 Boxers don't matter in this context.
- These users liked the author SiVisPacemParaBellum for the post:
- RunningStrong
-
Lord Jim
- Senior Member
- Posts: 7304
- Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
- Has liked: 325 times
- Been liked: 365 times
Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
We need to have an open mind regarding the numerous variants of Boxer Mission Modules that haver been or are being developed. In theory we cold adopt one or more of these and gain considerable capability mileage as a result with only a small amount of British kit required like radios. This is the core reason I strongly believe we should double down on Boxer and use it to replace as many legacy very old platforms still in service with the British Army.
Tracked Boxer is an interesting option. Obviously it is designed to be able to use any of the Mission Modules that have been developed for its wheeled Cousin. Maybe it could be used to augment the Vikings in any BCT allocated to the far North in Norway of Finland. Could a tracked RCH155 be the used as a solution for the Army's replacement of the AS-90, being able to be swapped to the wheeled chassis if travel distance and logistical requirements deem a wheeled platform more applicable. The flexibility of have both a tracked and a wheeled platform using the same Mission Modules and having substantial commonality in its chassis could prove beneficial moving forward.
Mission Modules I believe we should be looking for or developing are:
- Cavalry variant with CTA40 and ATGW.
- SPAA platform with both medium Autocannon and VSHORAD SAM.
- Combat Engineering platform for Royal Engineers.
- Long Range Precision Strike Launcher with Brimstone 2/3 or similar weapon system.
- Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridging platform.
- IFV variant with unmanned turret mounting CTA40 and up to 2 ATGW.
- Mine Layer with multiple AT Mine Launchers.
- EW platform.
- Logistics Platform with half sized DROPS sledges
- REME variant capable of carrying and changing Power Packs up to that installed in Challenger 3.
- C41 Signals and Data Hub/Relay variant.
Other varieties of Mission Module will surely become required as time goes by, such as a variant with a directed Energy Weapon System as well as a Mobile Gun Solution with capabilities similar to the Italian Centauro 2. Ideally I would like the British Army's manoeuvre warfare Brigades equipped in most cases with three Platforms, these being Boxer, Challenger 3 and Ajax.
Tracked Boxer is an interesting option. Obviously it is designed to be able to use any of the Mission Modules that have been developed for its wheeled Cousin. Maybe it could be used to augment the Vikings in any BCT allocated to the far North in Norway of Finland. Could a tracked RCH155 be the used as a solution for the Army's replacement of the AS-90, being able to be swapped to the wheeled chassis if travel distance and logistical requirements deem a wheeled platform more applicable. The flexibility of have both a tracked and a wheeled platform using the same Mission Modules and having substantial commonality in its chassis could prove beneficial moving forward.
Mission Modules I believe we should be looking for or developing are:
- Cavalry variant with CTA40 and ATGW.
- SPAA platform with both medium Autocannon and VSHORAD SAM.
- Combat Engineering platform for Royal Engineers.
- Long Range Precision Strike Launcher with Brimstone 2/3 or similar weapon system.
- Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridging platform.
- IFV variant with unmanned turret mounting CTA40 and up to 2 ATGW.
- Mine Layer with multiple AT Mine Launchers.
- EW platform.
- Logistics Platform with half sized DROPS sledges
- REME variant capable of carrying and changing Power Packs up to that installed in Challenger 3.
- C41 Signals and Data Hub/Relay variant.
Other varieties of Mission Module will surely become required as time goes by, such as a variant with a directed Energy Weapon System as well as a Mobile Gun Solution with capabilities similar to the Italian Centauro 2. Ideally I would like the British Army's manoeuvre warfare Brigades equipped in most cases with three Platforms, these being Boxer, Challenger 3 and Ajax.
- These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post (total 2):
- wargame_insomniac • zanahoria
Re: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
Considering that the Army is struggling to get any increase in the budget and seems like current one is not enough to cover all its wishes, I doubt that "double down on Boxer" is a good idea. Not to mention that even those 623 ordered are scheduled to be delivered only by 2032.
Tracked Boxer itself is still in testing and testing with 155mm is even further away. So it is hard to expect that it should be a viable option for MFP. Also KMW will probably go with current Boxer RCH155 as offer for it, unless tracks are specifically required. It is also hard to expect that there will be so many unused Boxer platform, both wheeled and tracked that you can swap modules as you wish would not be economically viable.
Wishes are one thing, but where will the Army find the money for all of that.