Galileo Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 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 ). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted March 7, 2017 Members Share Posted March 7, 2017 Interesting. And I always thought that there would be a public bidding process, per European public procurement laws. Silly me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 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? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade334 Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 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. 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. Edited March 7, 2017 by Renegade334 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Well, there is no project and not bidding process startet yet...guess the industry is just doing some adverticement 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade334 Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 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). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 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... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) PS.: just check the kmw website, if they had scored a big deal like that...it would already be listed. Nexter Webpage is silent too... Edited March 7, 2017 by Grenny 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted March 7, 2017 Members Share Posted March 7, 2017 ...which gives such statements from a minister a particular haut-gout... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ssnake said: ...which gives such statements from a minister a particular haut-gout... I'm sure Rheinmetall will keep a copy of that announcement...just in case they 'll lose in the bidding process. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 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 March 7, 2017 by Marko 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 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....) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 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.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 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... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Each country designs their own tank but the other country handles the manufacture and sales. Do 3 shots and then think about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK-DDAM Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 well at least the engine and hull is gonna be german otherwise wed see alot of reversing german tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 3/12/2017 at 3:49 AM, DK-DDAM said: well at least the engine and hull is gonna be german otherwise wed see alot of reversing german tanks. french hyperbar engine is a quite decent engine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.