Jump to content
Crusty

Rheinmetall to propose Puma IFV Australian land 400 tender

Recommended Posts

Looks an interesting vehicle, also of interest is that they expect GD and LM to team up and submit to the trials a vehicle developed for the British army, which must be AJAX, it'll be interesting to see how it fares.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/february_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/rheinmetall_to_propose_puma_infantry_fighting_vehicle_for_australian_land_400_phase_3_tender_11602162.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the record price tag the Puma usually is associated with, the Germans probably could have saved themselves from the trip to Down Under. Too little Bang for too big Coin.

Have never been a fan of the Puma myself.

Also, technical "superiority" compensates for numerical inferiority only to a certain degree - and not beyond. I do not know how big or small the Australian Army's troop level is - but I know its a damn big place they need to negotiate even if just counting the coastal areas.

I never expected much international demand for the Puma - if any. It simply is too expensive.

Finally, the CV-90 series is a design they have experience with now. The Puma is unproven. And - again, too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CV90 is close to its weight growth limit already. And vehicles tend to stay in service a looong time, and they only know one direction for the weight development. Also, the Puma offers a substantially higher protection level. But in the end, who knows which factors will be considered decisive in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the Puma is was out of weight-growth potential, before leaving the prototype phase...which is kind of a record ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finally, the CV-90 series is a design they have experience with now. The Puma is unproven. And - again, too expensive.

Not quite sure who the "they" is.

"We" in the ADF don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not quite sure who the "they" is.

"We" in the ADF don't.

I think he means it have been used both in Peace and war by a lot of countries like Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Netherlands and Denmark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you need a vehicle that you can (almost) transport with an A400M, the Puma is your choice :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if you need a vehicle that you can (almost) transport with an A400M, the Puma is your choice :-P

What A400M...? ;)

:bigsmile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What A400M...? ;)

:bigsmile:

For example the one thats constantly shipping troops and material from Germany to Bamako(Mali)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never expected much international demand for the Puma - if any. It simply is too expensive.

I have never seen a quoted 'Recommended Retail Price' for any military vehicle. Where is it published?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Puma IFV is superior to the CV90 on all accounts, first and foremost because it has an unmanned turret. basically what this means, is that the crew is not exposed to danger when the vehicle is in a hull-down position. it's similar in design to the T-15 Armata and kurganets

although the Armata is heavier.

Puma IFV also has a revolutionary engine, the MTU-890, which is the worlds most compact AFV engine, delivering a staggering 206Nm per liter, compared to the MTU MB-873 in the leopard 2A4, which only delivers 166Nm per liter of cylinder volume.

the CV90 engine similarly only delivers 164Nm per liter of cylinder volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
when the M2/3 is fased out the good Ole' US of A should look at this as a replacement.

I suspect that maybe politically unpalatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol,why?they looked at the CV90.

Well if you had a Bradley assembly / maintenance plant in your district / state, I suspect you'd want a home grown replacment.

But that's enough from me before it goes too political.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last two projects to replace the Bradley were cancelled

I don't think the US military are in any hurry to replace the Bradley

As for the ADF they have a lot of options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have never seen a quoted 'Recommended Retail Price' for any military vehicle. Where is it published?

If you google for search terms of comparing IFVs and costs, you will find many sites and discussions where usually the common IFV models in use get compared. The prices for every model vary from source to source but usually within one site or source the Puma is listed with 30-40% higher costs per unit than any other. I also still am not convinced of the turret and armament, especially the secondary. The Puma has taken heavy flak from beginning on for its high costs. That the program suffered so many setbacks, namely with the turret and armament, did not help to justify these exhausting spendings. The Marder was maybe the best of its kind when it was released, certainly claimed to be the best protected in its class. Still, AFAIK the Germans failed in getting it sold to anyone else. Beside the weight, it too was too expensive in its time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they built the tam tank/IFV for the Argentinians its basically a marder.

Both vehicles would make great additions to the next upgrade. LoL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the Puma IFV is superior to the CV90 on all accounts, first and foremost because it has an unmanned turret. basically what this means, is that the crew is not exposed to danger when the vehicle is in a hull-down position. it's similar in design to the T-15 Armata and kurganets

although the Armata is heavier.

Puma IFV also has a revolutionary engine, the MTU-890, which is the worlds most compact AFV engine, delivering a staggering 206Nm per liter, compared to the MTU MB-873 in the leopard 2A4, which only delivers 166Nm per liter of cylinder volume.

the CV90 engine similarly only delivers 164Nm per liter of cylinder volume.

Well I might add that:

The CV is a combat veteran in both Afgan, and Africa conflicts.

Has given stellar performance.

Is wide spread, thus common within NATO supply system.

And Has better ground pressure for those difficult place one might find it self in.

Not taking away from German engineering, however, we first should see how this new AFV does before giving into to the sales pitch. If it preforms within the same great service as it's predecessor then we have a winner :luxhello:, but lets wait and see how all this new stuff works in this platform first :wink2:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my brigade has personal in the "training of trainers" course. 1st batch of Pumas are to be delivered mid 2016...then i can give some 1st hand feedback

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how does the Puma compare to the Marder in the armor cat.?

4-5 times thicker side and rear protection, and completely mine resistant.

armor is also completely modular like this picture shows:

gZ23bZT.jpg

floor armor thickness can be seen in this picture:

Sch%C3%BCtzenpanzer_Puma_(Kampfraum).jpg

front hull armour can be seen in this picture:

Ml8ASA5.jpg

no other western IFV comes even close to that kind of thickness.

even the heaviest protected CV90 is glass compared to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×