Jump to content

The Leclerc MBT successor will be a French-German one


Galileo

Recommended Posts

The head of the DGA (General directorate for Armament), told journalist today that the successor of the french MBT will be a co-production from France and Germany.

 

The turret will be french and the hull/motor german, it will be produced by KNDS (corporate merger of Krauss Maffei Wegmann and Nexter ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're going to screw it all up!  The Germans will want something purely practical, the French will want something uniquely French, and in the end we'll get a load of crap ala MBT-70.

 

The Germans should cook up their own Tiger-3 (cough) I mean Leopard 3, and it'll come out all square, cubic, Teutonic, and then they can all act real innocent while they start lining them all up on the border pointing East, ask Putin how things are going with his neighbors, build WAY more than they actually need, sell them off to their neighbors really cheap after a few years, and maybe ask if Poland wants to "come with next time stuff happens"...Or something...

 

The French should fix the darn Leclerc and name it the 'Jeanne d'Arc' or something and then..............Do whatever it is the French military is up to these days....Which is...I don't know...Wait for the world to forget that they have an aircraft carrier and stuff, then go to strange places in Africa that most people don't know exist and beat up on terrorists, or something?

 

 

Seriously though, has this ever worked out well, other than the Panavia Tornado?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmmh. They're referring to the [tentative name] Mobile Ground Combat System (MGCS) that is slated for something around 2030 or so. It'll be the first tank to use the new 130mm/L51 currently being developed by Rheinmetall.

 

fpUO1Mkl.pngh.png iq8UpQ0l.pngh.png
 
As stated in the above leaflets, the Leopard 2 will retain a 20% more powerful Rh120/L55 (the turret's architecture is incompatible with the larger 130mm and its mandatory autoloader), while the MGCS will get the 130mm/L51. Note that the picture aboves are that of a (Leopard 2A4) MBT Revolution, not a MGCS.
 
 
 
tqifpTz.jpgh.jpg Q4NeDV2.jpgh.jpg


sCiYf7h.jpgh.jpg sb6Yqiy.jpgh.jpg EDjCBkS.jpgh.jpg

 
 
Edited by Renegade334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Renegade334 said:

Well, it seems there won't be ANY bidding process at all. KNDS and Rheinmetall have already been tapped in for the task (see first post).

No, they haven't ...they have no contract what so ever. It may happen in a few years, but only after a bidding process. Otherwise BAE for example could sue for a nice and juicy compensation from FR/GE MoD's...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always believed there should be a Nato research facility for new weapons development.

Share the costs and expertise etc

But There's a whole myriad of reasons Nato nations don't.

Defence contracts mean jobs and big investment.

 

 

Edited by Marko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Galileo said:

The replacement is schedule for 2030-35 so there is a lot of time for them to create a joint committee , spend a lot of euros for at the end get 2 different MBT each one produce in each country.

Just like in the other "successfull" multinational projects (Tiger, A400M....)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2017 at 4:02 PM, Marko said:

I have always believed there should be a Nato research facility for new weapons development.

Share the costs and expertise etc

But There's a whole myriad of reasons Nato nations don't.

Defence contracts mean jobs and big investment.

 

 

 

 

Are you Mad??!!

If there was a combined facility, NOTHING would get done.

It'd be worse than a UN mandated mission....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hedgehog said:

 

 

Are you Mad??!!

If there was a combined facility, NOTHING would get done.

It'd be worse than a UN mandated mission....

 

I'm tempted to agree with this.

A big part of the problem is that, quite frequently, different nations seem to have different concerns at the same time.

 

One country wants to keep costs down because their army is always broke, another country wants the crew to live through anything so survivability features are top importance, and another country is willing to take some losses, they want something able to take on a T-64/72/etc, they want lots of them, and they want it delivered NOW...

 

That's not always going to be the same vehicle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you are between a rock and hard place on this.

 

Either you design something by Committee and have enough buyers, spread across the member countries to make the unit price reasonable.

 

Or you build it yourself and then the exact same people who complain about the "design by committee" multi-national approach then complain about the high unit price of doing it yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hedge the price of new AFV designs have sky rocketed.

Let the military professionals agree what there requirements are going to be gun size engine size etc

force the designers/ manufacturers in to fixed price contracts and keep the bloody politicians out of the whole process as much as Possible.

As things stand the whole process of tendering is a joke 

do you really think the french would buy a completely german design when they have the ability and skilled work force.

To do it themselves same goes for the germans english etc 

Hopefully lessons were learned from the euro fighter co-op debacle the unit cost of the euro fighter was far to high 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Saturday, March 11, 2017 at 9:45 PM, dejawolf said:

at this point a modular european tank is probably the best option. then individual nations can decide what they want and don't want on their tank.

Never say this dirty word again! When a defence official or industry say "modular" ...you can shout  "Bullsh't!!" right then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Grenny said:

Never say this dirty word again! When a defence official or industry say "modular" ...you can shout  "Bullsh't!!" right then

 

dunno, boxer MRAV is pretty modular. the other option is a common platform like Armata.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...