Showing posts with label Germany. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Germany. Show all posts

Sunday, January 14, 2018

Marders to Jordan (part 2)

The German company Rheinmetall announced on the 13th December 2017 that the Kingdom of Jordan is set to receive a second batch of 25 second-hand Marder 1A3 IFVs, that were originally operated by the German Army. The delivery of the vehicles will start in the first quarter of 2018. A first batch of a total of sixteen Marder 1A3 IFVs was already handed over to the Royal Jordanian Army in December of 2016.

Marder 1A3s of the first batch delivered to Jordan
The Marder 1A3 is an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) currently in service with the armed forces of Chile, Germany, Indonesia and Jordan. The Argentinian military operates the TAM family, which is based on the Marder design. The Marder IFV is armed with a 20 mm MK 20 Rh 202 gas-operated autocannon with a maximum rate of fire ranging between 800 and 1,000 rounds per minute. As secondary armament the vehicle is fitted with a 7.62 mm MG3 machine gun and a launcher for the Milan anti-tank guided missile (ATGM). The Marder's propulsion is provided by a liquid-cooled MB 883 V6 engine from MTU, which delivers 600 horsepower at 2,200 rpm. It is coupled to a semi-automatic RENK HSWK 194 transmission. The Marder 1A3 has a combat weight of about 33.5 metric tons and reaches a top-speed of 65 kilometres per hour (km/h). Its spaced armor provides all-round protection against fire from 12.7 and 14.5 mm heavy machine gun, while the frontal arc is protected against medium calibre ammo including 30 x 165 mm armor-piercing ammunition. The Marder 1A3 is not fitted with an underbelly armor plate for protection against mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

The Royal Jordanian Army is receiving the German-made IFVs as part of a military aid, which was started by the Federal Republic of Germany in the last two years in an attempt to improve the stability of the region by enabling the militaries of some Middle Eastern countries to fight better against insurgents and terrorists. Aside of a first batch of Marder 1A3 IFVs, Jordan also has received 600 RGW-90 hand-held recoilless guns, surveillance equipment, 56 vans and 70 trucks. Like the first batch of Marders, the second one was also ordered by the German government, rather than being ordered by Jordanian officials. Rheinmetall states that the contract - awarded in October 2017 - has a total value of more than €17 millions and includes completely refurbishing the vehicles to a (near) mint condition, painting them with a desert camouflage pattern (understood to be similiar to the single-tone "desert yellow" used on many US combat vehicles), spare parts, ammunition and tools, technical documentation aswell as support and training for the crews and local maintenance personnel.
Originally it was planned to deliver all 50 Marders meant for Jordan until end of 2017. There currently is no official explanation for the delay, it might however be related to politicians having troubles allocating the budget for the deal or the negotiations with Rheinmetall taking longer than expected.

An upgraded Marder 1A3 could be fitted with additional armor, an unmanned turrets and a more powerful engines.
There are a number of upgrade possibilities to enhance the protection, firepower and mobility as well as options to reconfigure the Marder to another role. The Marder can be used as APC, light/medium tank, tank destroyer, surface-to-air missile carrier, fire support vehicle, command post vehicle, ambulance vehicle, fire-fighting vehicle and as mortar carrier. Different upgrade paths such as the Marder CCV and the Rheinmetall Lynx infantry fighting vehicle have already been mentioned in the blog post regarding the first transfer of Marders to the Royal Jordanian Army.

Saturday, December 16, 2017

Addendum: Puma IFV performance in Czech trials

The latest issue of the InfoBrief Heer, a newsletter from the Förderkreis Deutsches Heer e.V., includes an article on the performance of the Puma infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) in the Czech trials written by Mathias Kraus, Head of Sales and Marketing of the company Projekt System & Management GmbH (PSM). The Förderkreis Deutsches Heer e.V. is a club and lobby group consisting of members of the military, politics and industry that is focused on the German land forces and its military procurements. PSM is a joint-venture between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KWM) and Rheinmetall, the two companies that together manufacture the new IFV and various other armored fighting vehicles (AFVs).
 
Puma climbing a slope during the Czech trials
According to the article, the trials consisted of three parts: static trials, dynamic trials and firing trials. Static trials were focused on gathering data regarding size, weight, ergonomy, protection, armament and optics. The dynamic trials included driving along a test track and determining factors affecting the mobility of the vehicle, such as top speed on road and cross-country, maximum fording depth, the ability to drive along (side) slopes and the ability to climb over smaller obstacles. The firing tests included firing at targets at a distance of 1,200 and 1,800 metres. Given the armament and optics of modern infantry fighting vehicles, this is far below the maximum effective range of the 30 x 173 mm guns used on all of the tested IFVs (the German Army requirement for the Puma was an effective gun range of 3,000 metres), but it might be a valid representation of the combat range expected in the Czech Republic; during the Cold War the average distance for tank-vs-tank combat in Central Europe was estimated to be between 1,000 and 2,000 metres according to different studies from NATO and Warsaw Pact countries.

IFV Production line in Germany
Each IFV fired a burst of five rounds against each target; therefore each contender for the BMP-2 replacement fired overall 40 shots on eight targets that had to be hit. At the day of the firing tests, the weather was supposedly extremely windy, making it rather hard to hit the targets. The Puma IFV missed three shots and hit all of the other 37 rounds, thus every target was hit more than once, most of them were hit five tims. The other contenders - BAE Systems' CV90 in two variants, the ASCOD 2 from General Dynamics and Rheinmetall's Lynx IFV - all missed at least one of the targets. In fact Mr. Kraus claims that the second best IFV managed to score only about half as much hits as the Puma, which based on the other information should be about 18 to 19 hits on targets.
Due to the high complexity and sophistication of modern armored fighting vehicles, relability is often a problem, specifically if it is an untested AFV or new variant of an existing design. In case of the Czech trials, except for the Puma - the only IFV tested in a production variant - all IFVs had some sorts of issues with the reliability of some major components. The ASCOD 2, both CV90 variants and the Lynx all had to repeat at least one of the tests, because parts broke down or malfunctioned. That doesn't mean that the Puma IFV had no issues - it only means that there weren't any major troubles during the tests that required the components. Smaller/less important parts of the IFV still might have failed, as the statement from the article only speaks about the reliability of components relevant to the tests.
A difference between the Puma and the other contenders was the fact that the former was a production vehicle for the German Army, fitted with all equipment and tools required by the military. This included a battlefield management system and radios, which were absent on (some of) the other IFVs tested as BMP-2 replacement.

Model of a pre-series Puma IFV with MELLS
Already a long time before the trials, the governments of Germany and the Czech Republic decided to deepen their defence cooperation. On the 15th of February 2017 the ministers of defence of both nations signed a memorandum of understanding regarding this topic, which also includes the Czech 4th Rapid Deployment Brigade being subordinated to the German 10th Tank Division. Last but not least one should not forget that the source of this information: the head of sales from PSM should hardly be considered an impartial observer; still there are reasons to believe that he didn't blatantly lied or greatly exaggerated the performance of the Puma and the problems of the other contenders. In the end 50% of the company PSM is owned by Rheinmetall, which offered the Lynx IFV as alternative to the ASCOD 2, CV90 and Puma. Thus if Mr. Kraus lied in regards to the lower accuracy and reliability of the other options, he also would have lied about the Lynx which most likely would result in him loosing his job (negatively reporting in the press about a product from the company that writes part of your paychecks won't make your employer keep you).
Meanwhile the MELLS dual-missile launcher for the Spike-LR anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM), which should be compatible with the improved Spike-LR II due to both variants of  using the same interfaces, is being tested in the WTD 41 technical centre in Germany.

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

The market for wheeled 8x8 is not saturated (yet)

There are multiple ongoing procurement programs in Asia and Europe regarding the adoption of modern 8x8 wheeled vehicles for use as ambulance vehicles, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, mortar carriers and other roles. While Australia and supposedly also Japan are looking for a new 8x8 vehicle, Germany is upgrading the Boxer MRAV and adopting further variants. The British Army is requiring the largest number of new 8x8 vehicles, but various Eastern European countries including Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia are also interested in new wheeled combat vehicles. This means that vehicles such as the Advanced Modular Vehicle (AMV) from Patria, Artec's Boxer MRAV (multi-role armored vehicle), the Pandur II and Piranha V from General Dynamics European Land Systems, and "underdogs" on the international market such as the Terrex 3 and the French VBCI might be adopted in larger numbers by the militaries of multiple countries in the near future. The US-based company Textron and a Turkish company are also bidding in some tenders.

The Boxer CRV and AMV-35 are being evaluated during the LAND 400 program
A key factor for the developments on the global 8x8 vehicle market might be the decision of the Australian military in the LAND 400 program, which is expected to be made in early 2018. The phase 2 of LAND 400 included four of the most advanced current 8x8 vehicles - variants of the Boxer, the Patria AMV, the LAV 6.0 and the Sentinel (Terrex 3) - i.e. vehicles that are relevant for any military considering to buy a new eight-wheeled armored personnel carrier (APC), infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), or Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV). Various other vehicles such as the VBCI 2 were initially also offered to the Australian military, but the bids were withdrawn when it became clear that a solution based on military of the shelf (MOTS) components was favored.
Currently only the Boxer CRV and AMV-35 remain in the competition. Based on the prototypes being tested in Australia, it appears that both consortia are betting on very different strategies. While Rheinmetall showcases the Boxer CRV as a very customizable high-end offering including all of the latest gadgets (including active protection system, remotely operated weapon station, anti-tank guided missile launcher, accoustic sniper detection system, laser warners, situational awareness system, etc.), the BAE-Patria joint-venture focuses with the AMV-35 on a more affordable offering, presumably trying to impress with a higher cost effectiveness compared to the Boxer.

The VBCI was already tested in the UK during the FRES project
The British military is considering to buy the Boxer MRAV for the Mechanized Infantry Vehicle (MIV) program, as mentioned by various news sources over the last year. The number of vehicles to be purchased within the £3 billion project is varying by source from just 300 up to 900. While there are several options offered by the arms industry to the UK, the British Army has not yet decided wether it wants an open tender or prefers a direct government-to-government (G2G) deal with Germany for buying Boxers. The advantage of open competition is that the best solution can be found, be it the overall cheapest solution, the most capable vehicle or the jack of all trades. On the other hand the budget of the British Army has shrunken dramatically - and is expected to shrink further thanks to the Brexit - so that English newspapers suggest that an open evaluation of multiple contenders might be too expensive (and with Brexit potentially resulting in additional tolls to be paid also too time consuming). A decision wether to buy the Boxer MRAV or have an open competition is expected at the end of 2017.

By painting a Boxer in the Union Jack pattern, Rheinmetall reminds the UK of the British participation in its development
If the Boxer CRV is chosen by the Australian Army over the AMV-35, this could have positive effects on its chances in the United Kingdom according to German speculations. First of all, there would be greater interoperability between the ground forces of two commonwealth nations, something that is assumed to be desirable. Furthermore the British Army could argue that the Australian tests already have proven the superiority of said vehicle, circumventing open competition in order to rush a vehicle in service. While this in general would also work with the Patria AMV, there are no news reports on the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) thinking about purchasing the AMV instead of having an open tender.

The Boxer RCH 155 mounts an AGM instead of a mission module
Supposedly the UK is also looking for a self-propelled artillery gun (SPG) variant of the vehicle purchased under the MIV program. The Boxer MRAV is the only modern 8x8 wheeled solution that has been showcased with a 155 mm gun, i.e. the artillery gun module (AGM) from Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) mounted instead of a mission module. The long L/52 gun barrel of the AGM and the high level of protection provided by the Boxer's drive module makes this solution in some aspects better than the current tracked AS-90 self-propelled gun.
At the DSEI 2017, various manufacturer's presented their potential offers for the MIV program including the Piranha 5 from General Dynamics, the Patria AMV XP, the VBCI from Nexter, and  two different Boxer variants from Artec. Rheinmetall painted one Boxer with the Union Jack, while KMW focused on showcasing the modularity of the vehicle with an IFV variant. Aside of the benefits that the modular design enables, the German companies also mention that the UK would have full intellectual property of the Boxer due to its history (being designed in a multi-national project that used to include the UK), allowing them to create and sell their own vehicle variants without any interference from the Germany.

The Japanese military has presented a prototype of their indigenous 8x8 APC
Supposedly Japan is also interested in adopting a more modern 8x8 vehicle compared to its old and lightly protected Type 96 armored personnel carrier. Mitsubishi has already created and showcased a prototype vehicle based on components from the Type 16 Maneuver Combat Vehicle (MCV). However Japan is known to have a somewhat deep military cooperation with Australia, which is why the country of islands is observing the decisions LAND 400 program - apparently some sources suggest that the Japanese Ground Self-Defence Force (JGSDF) might be interested in having a certain degree of interoperability with the Australian Army.
According to the German website hartpunkt.de, defence industry insider sources claim that the Japanese military requested informations on the performance of the Boxer MRAV, specifically regarding its armor protection and modularity. It is worth mentioning that in July 2017 Germany and Japan signed an agreement for cooperation in the arms industry/technology sector. Back then it was reported that Japan was primarily interested in German protection technology, i.e. technologies regarding special armor and potentially also active protection systems. The Japanese news service Asahi Shimbun specifically mentioned that this technology was meant for a "troop transport carrier" (i.e. an APC or IFV). Negotiations regarding the agreement started already in 2015; both countries agreed to not disclose the exact content of the contract. In September 2017 a German-Japanese military technology forum was held in Tokio, which included more than thirty German defence companies.

The Boxer A1 saw combat in Afghanistan
The Bundeswehr recently decided to upgrade all current Boxers to the new A2 configuration, which features changes to both the drive module and the mission module, such as installing a new satellite communication system, fitting an improved driver vision systems, adopting a new storage arrangement, making changes to the cooling and exhaust system of the vehicle, improved protection and adding a secondary control panel for the FLW 200 remote weapon station. A contract for the upgrade of 124 armored personnel carriers, 72 ambulance vehicles, 38 command post vehicles and 12 driver training vehicles was announced in July 2017. All new Boxers that have been and will be ordered by the German Army will also be delivered as Boxer A2 or in a follow-up configuration.

According to the German website hartpunkt.de, the German Army plans to use the Boxer as base for a heavy vehicle for the joint fire support team (JFST) units. This Boxer JFST variant would be equipped with a high quality sensor package, probably the mast-mounted BAA II surveillance and reconnaissance platform from Hensoldt Optronics, that is already being used on the light JFST vehicle on the Fennek 4x4. Rheinmetall as member of Artec also offers a number of sensor platforms for ground vehicles, such as Vingtaqs II system that is operational with the Norwegian and Malaysian militaries. Alternatively the greater payload and internal volume of the Boxer could be used for a larger sensor package, which could in theory also include a larger ground surveillance radar unit. A Fennek can carry only the equipment for either ground-to-ground coordination or ground-to-air coordination, each Fennek JFST vehicle is hence specialized on either role. The Boxer has enough room to hypothetically carry the equipment for both tasks, although it hasn't been decided if a single Boxer should be used for both roles. The Boxer was chosen over a competiting design based on the PMMC G5. Unlike current JSFT solutions from the UK and the United States, the Boxer is not expected to be fitted with a direct fire gun or anti-tank missiles. There is a requirement for about 20 to 30 Boxer heavy JFST vehicles.

JFST vehicle based on the Fennek 4x4
Currently there are also plans for a fire support variant of the Boxer for the Jäger units, according to Inspector of the Army Jörg Vollmer, who is in charge of the German Army. The plans see the fifth (heavy) company of each battalion receiving Boxers with direct fire guns.
The exact type of armament has not been specified, but given earlier reports it seems likely that the interest is focused around the 30 x 173 mm calibre, i.e. the same MK 30-2/ABM main gun as used on the German Puma infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). The vehicle might as well be fitted with a launcher for the Spike-LR anti-tank guided missile (ATGM).

A so called "PuBo" - Boxer with RCT 30 (Puma turret)
Currently the German military is said to consider different turret options and still has to decide wether a manned or an unmanned system is favored. It is understood that the choice - if the informations regarding a 30 mm calibre are correct - is limited to KMW's Remote Controlled Turret 30 (RCT 30; essentially a Puma turret) and the Lance Modular Turret System from Rheinmetall. Both these turrets have their own unique advantages and drawbacks. The RCT 30 is already in service with the German military and hence provides advantages in regards to training, logistics and spare parts. Furthermore it appears to be more heavily armored than the Lance turret, as it is can be fitted with additional roof armor against shaped charge bomblets; while Rheinmetall manufactures similar armor, there hasn't been a prototype of the Lance turret featuring such improved roof armor. The unmanned nature of the turret makes it smaller and lighter. However unmanned turrets have worse situational awarness than their manned counterparts.

A Boxer with Lance turret being demonstrated at a Rheinmetall facility in Germany
The Lance turret on the other hand is available in either unmanned or manned configuration, but it seems likely that only the latter is being considered, as this was already installed on several Boxer prototypes including the Boxer CRV. It is larger than a Puma turret and also heavier, when fitted with a similar armor package; however in theory it can also adopt larger calibre guns such as the 35 x 228 mm Wotan 35 chain gun. The Lance turret suffers from being fitted with several Rheinmetall-made components, which have not been adopted yet by the German military, albeit the modular construction might allow to change them. For example the turret is fitted with either one or two stabilized electro-optical sensor systems (SEOSS); one for the gunner (and one for the commander respectively), but the German Army relies on optics from Hensoldt Optronics for the Puma and several other combat vehicles.

The Belgian Army operates several Piranha DF90 fire support vehicles with 90 mm gun
In theory the German military could choose a lighter or heavier weapon station from various manufacturers. Just looking at the offerings from the two companies involved with producing the Boxer MRAV shows a wide variety of possible alternative armament options. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann showcased the FLW 200+ on the Boxer a few years ago, which is an enhanced variant of the currently used FLW 200 remote weapon station (RWS),  that can accept the 20 mm Rh 202 autocannon with 100 rounds of ammunition. The 500 kilograms heavy FLW 500 RWS can accept 30 mm autocannons such as the M230LF chain gun from ATK, a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun and an optional missile launcher. Rheinmetall has developed the Oerlikon Fieldranger 20 RWS, which is armed with a 20 mm Oerlikon KAE autocannon; however this is not chambered in the 20 x 139 mm calibre as the Rh 202, for which the German Army should still have lots of ammunition - instead it uses the slightly less powerful 20 x 128 mm calibre.
Given that the new Boxer variant is meant as a fire support vehicle, one could wonder why the armament choice is supposedly focused on the 30 mm calibre, when other vehicles of the same type are often fitted with larger guns. E.g. the Belgian Army has adopted a number of Piranha IIICs with a 90 mm Cockerill gun for direct fire support, while a Rosomak prototype was fitted with the Cockerill 3105 turret. The Boxer with a much higher maximum gross vehicle weight - the latest available variant can support up to 38.5 metric tons and can be fitted with a 800 horsepower engine - should have no issues accepting a low-profile turret with a 120 mm smoothbore gun (such as the 120 mm L/47 LLR from Rheinmetall).

Aside of the exact turret choice, a number of other questions remain. A key question revolves around the role of the Jäger (light mechanized/motorized infantry) compared to the Panzergenadiere (mechanized infantry). Traditionally only the Panzergrenadiere are making use of infantry fighting vehicles, while the Jäger are limited to "battle taxi" style vehicles, which also affects the doctrines of these units. However putting a gun on an armored personnel carrier (APC) doesn't mean that it has to be employed like an IFV. Another decision yet to be made is focused on wether the Boxer fire support variant will carry a dismount squad or not. If a dismount squad is carried, it needs to be smaller in order to compensate for the ammunition storage, the gun operator(s) and the turret basket (in case a manned turret is chosen). Regardless of the decision, a contractt is not expected to be made before 2019. Then the Boxer fire support vehicles could enter service in 2021. A total of about 100 vehicles is required based on the current amount of German Boxer APCs.

The Vilkas is a Boxer IFV variant with the Samson Mk 2 RWS
The Bulgarian military is planning to purchase about 600 new 8x8 vehicles in several different variants for three new battlegroups. Among the demanded variants are also a mortar carrier and an infantry fighting vehicle. Supposedly the bidding process for this military procurement started already in May, with six vehicles being offered to win contract worth more than €500 million Euro. Artec is offering the Boxer, despite the fact that currently no operator has ordered a mortar carrier variant and not a single prototype of this is known to exist - the modular design however would enable a fast creation of such. It is also not known which turret will be offered for the IFV variant.
While the Boxer MRAV is extremely expensive compared to other solutions - in Lithuania the initial offer was claimed to be more than twice as costly as the Stryker ICV proposed by General Dynamics - the vehicle's superior performance (specifically the higher level of protection) resulted in the Lithuanian Army opting for it. The military prefered the Boxer MRAV, the politicans wanted a cheaper solution. In the end the Vilkas variant of the Boxer, mounting the cheaper and slightly less capable Samson Mk 2 RWS instead of the Puma's RCT 30 turret, was chosen.
General Dynamics European Land Systems (GDELS) offers the Piranha V vehicle family. An IFV variant of the Piranha V fitted with Rafael's Samson Mk 2 RWS was demonstrated on the 27. April at the Military Poligon Tylbleto in Bulgaria. The demonstration lasted three days and included live firing tests with the 30 x 173 mm Mk 44 Bushmaster II gun. The Samson Mk 2 RWS features two separate set of sights, a 30 mm autocannon, a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun and a pop-up launcher for two Spike-LR missiles. It was also fitted to various IFV prototypes provided to the Czech Republic.
 
Patria AMV with 120 mm NEMO mortar system
While KMW as part of Artec is suggesting the Boxer to Bulgaria, the French company Nexter - a joint-partner of KMW - is offering an unknown configuration of the VBCI or VBCI 2. While not produced yet, Nexter already showcased scale models of a mortar carrier variant of the VBCI back in 2013. These models featured a large roof hatch with a two-piece door atop of the rear compartment. Inside the rear compartment an unspecified semi-automatic 120 mm mortar - similar to RUAG's Cobra mortar and the MO 120 mm R2RM from TDA Armaments - is mounted. As IFV the VBCI 2 can be fitted with a 25 mm autocannon in a one-man turret or with a two-man turret mounting a 40 mm CTAS gun. In theory unmanned turrets and other calibres are also available, but they have not been fitted to known prototypes of the VBCI 2.
Patria is offering versions of the Armored Modular Vehicle (AMV), although more details have yet to emerge. The wide userbase of the AMV has resulted in various different variants, so often multiple AMV versions are available for the same role. I.e. there are infantry fighting vehicles based on the AMV mounting the Hitfist turret from Leonardo (after acquiring Oto-Melara), the LCT30 turret from Denel Land Systems, and the BMP-3 turret, while prototypes were equipped with the unmanned MCT-30 turret from Kongsberg, the E35 turret from BAE Systems and the new 40 mm CTAS-armed turret of the Warrior WLIP upgrade. Likewise there are multiple 120 mm mortar variants with the Polish Rak mortar, the NEMO turret and the AMOS turret, while South-Africa has ordered a 60 mm breech-loaded mortar turret for some of its AMVs. 
Supposedly two further competitors are interested in getting a deal for equipping the new Bulgarian battlegroups: Textron and an unnamed Turkish company. There is some confusion regarding Textron here: Textron is not known for offering 8x8 vehicles, although it is not directly specified that a 8x8 vehicle is required. The US company was contracted to deliver about 17 M1117 Guardian armored security vehicles (ASVs) to the East European country in 2014; a further batch of ten vehicles was ordered in mid-2017. According to the Bulgarian news website dnevnik.bg, Textron and Rheinmetall have partnered to offer an unknown 6x6 vehicle for local production in Bulgaria.
As for the Turkish contender, this most likely is either FNSS offering a variant of the Pars or Otokar offering a variant of the Arma. Given the recent political tensions between various European countries and Turkey, it seems unlikely that a Turkish contractor would be chosen - the Czech Republic rejected all Turkish tracked IFVs due to the instable political relations.

The Scipio IFV
Two years ago in 2015, the Slovakian Army ordered about 30 Rosomaks (a Polish variant of the Patria AMV) fitted with the locally made Turra 30 turret from EVPÚ. Apparently the contract was scrapped according to different reports, which is why Slovakia has shown interest in buying a total of about 100 - some sources mention a lower number of only 81 - new 8x8 vehicles. Furthermore a total of 404 modern 4x4 vehicles are required by the army. The official requirements for the procurement project are not known, but they include a larger number of contenders. Deliveries of the first vehicles are expected to start in 2018 and last until 2029; it is however possible that the earlier date is only valid for the 4x4 armored cars.

The Corsac 8x8 is an IFV based on the Pandur II
General Dynamics European Land Systems is understood to offer a variant of the Pandur II. The Pandur II is an evolution of the Austrian-designed Pandur I, that is currently only manufactured in other countries. The militaries of the Czech Republic, Indonesia and Portugal operate various versions of the Pandur II. Due to its relatively low weight - the currently procuded models have a combat weight of only 24 metric tons - the overall level of armor protection is rather limited. While fitting applique armor allowed to meet the STANAG 4569 level 4 requirement for ballistic protection, i.e. all-round protectiton against 14.5 mm AP ammo fired from close range, the protection against mines was rather limited. Only in October 2017, the Czech military annonced that the latest 20 Pandur IIs in the mobile command post variant have managed the qualification for STANAG 4569 level 4b mine protection, after being fitted with the new BOG-AMS-V seats.
Last year GDELS presented a variant of the Pandur II co-developed with the Slovakian MSM Group, which is known as Corsac and features the same Turra 30 turret as the Scipio, mounting a 30 x 165 mm 2A42 autocannon, a coaxial MG and two 9M113 Konkurs (AT-5 Spandrel) ATGMs. However this armament can be replaced by Western alternatives such as the 30 x 173 mm Mk 44 Bushmaster II gun from Aliant Techsystems and Rafael's Spike-LR ATGM.
The Corsac IFV is powered by a 450 hp Cummins ISLe HPCR diesel engine and has a combat weight of only 19.8 metric tons, which is apparently related to the armor package fitted to the prototype. Top speed is quoted as 115 kilometres per hour on roads, but the vehicle is amphibious and can swim at a speed of up to 10 kilometres per hours. The basic ballistic protection reaches only STANAG 4569 level 2, but applique armor kits for level 3 and level 4 are available - the vehicle was never presented without bolted-on add-on armor. The Corsac has room for six dismounts and a crew of two or three. It seems likely that GDELS could offer the same enhancments as found on the Czech Pandur IIs to reach a STANAG 4569 level 4 mine protection.
One of the other two known offers supposedly made to Slovakia includes the Patria AMV, possibly in the same configuration as originally ordered with the Scipio. If these vehicles will also be made in Poland (like the Rosomak and Scipio) or be made in Sweden is currently not known. Artec is offering the Boxer MRAV to the Slovakian Army - again it is unknown which exact variant is offered.

Meanwhile Slovenia is said to intend purchasing about 50 wheeled IFVs for its military. Previously the military of Slovenia ordered a total of 135 AMV vehicles in different variants. The AMV is locally known as Svarun. The order however was halted in 2012, after issues with the funding aswell as other political issues arose, which resulted in only thirty already delivered AMVs becoming operational with the Slovenian Army. Given this fact and that the southern neighbour Croatia is already operating the AMV in larger numbers, it seems likely that the Patria AMV has an advantage over potential competitors. Potentially Artec, General Dynamics, Nexter and ST Kinetics might be interested in competing for the contract.

The Piranha 5 has already been purchased by Denmark and Spain
The Romanian Army will adopt General Dynamics' Piranha 5. In October 2017 the company announced that an initial batch of 227 vehicles will be manufactured by the Bucharest Mechanical Factory, which is owned by the Romanian state's Romarm Group. For handling the production of the Piranhas, GDELS will create a joint-venture in Romania. The military of the Eastern European country already ordered 43 older Piranha IIICs in five small batches starting in 2008.
It is not known what effect this decision will have on the development of the Agilis, a 8x8 wheeled vehicle to be locally manufactured in Romania. It is/was developed by a joint venture of the Romanian Ministry of Economy and the German company Rheinmetall. A total of 7 variants was to be made, while 80% of the work was planned to be done locally - only the engine and other drivetrain components would be imported. Hundred percent of the intellectual property of the Agilis would belong to the state of Romania, allowing easy export and local upgrades. The plans saw a total of 628 Agilis vehicles - 161 amphibious APCs, 192 heavier armored non-amphibious APCs, 24 medevac/ambulance vehicles, 90 CBRN reconnaisance vehicles, 40 mobile command posts, 75 mortar carriers and 46 recovery vehicles - to be made between 2020 and 2035, with further 4x4 and 6x6 options possible. 

The BTR-4MV1 feautres bolt-on armor modules
The state-owned Ukrainian company UkrOboronProm has presented a new version of the BTR-4 8x8 wheeled vehicle known as BTR-4MV1, which has been developed to NATO standards. This vehicle is designed and manufactured by the Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau and features improved armor protection over its predecessor. The BTR-4MV1 uses modular bolt-on armor that allows the vehicle to reach the STANAG 4569 level 4 and 5 (if desired) - this means the armor can provide allround protection against 14.5 mm AP ammunition and protection against 25 mm rounds along the frontal arc. The new system also allows fitting explosive reactive armor (ERA) to the vehicle in order to resist shaped charge weapons such as the HEAT warheads of rocket propelled grenades (RPGs). The modular nature of the armor elements allows replacing damaged ones, thus reducing the time and costs required to repair a damaged vehicle.

The BTR-4MV1 is armed with a 30 mm autocannon
The weight of the BTR-4MV1 is claimed to have only increased by 2 to 3 metric tons, thus the vehicle would 23-24 metric tons with some more growth potential left. In terms of mobility nothing has changed, the vehicle uses the same suspension, the same German Deutz diesel engine and an Allison transimisison just like the original BTR-4. Due to the usage of low density/high volume armor in some sections of the vehicle, the BTR-4MV1 retains the amphibious capabilties of the original design, reaching a top speed of about 10 km/h in water and 110 km/h on land.
A key difference compared to the BTR-4 can be seen at the vehicle's front. The large windscreens have been eliminated in favor of better armor protection. Commander and driver can now only see the exterior through a number of vision blocks. A number of cameras mounted along the vehicle's surface however provide the crew with a 360° situational awareness. The BTR-4MV1 retains the same weapon station as used on some of the earlier models, including a 30 x 165 mm autocannon, a dual launcher for missiles and a machine gun. There is only one set of optic on the weapon station, therefore the vehicle cannot be used for hunter-killer operations.

Saturday, May 13, 2017

Austria won the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2017

Two days ago the Strong Europe Tank Challenge (SETC) 2017 ended. The winning platoon comes from Austria, one of the first time participants. The soldiers of the Austrian Bundesheer deployed the 1980s' Leopard 2A4 main battle tank (MBT), beating last year's winner Germany. In the challenge held from 8th to 11th of May, teams from Austria, France, Germany, Poland, the Ukraine and the United States tried to show their skill in a number of different disciplines. These included offensive actions, defensive actions, target recognition/identification of thirty allied and enemy targets, estimating the range to a target without using the laser rangefinder, accurately reporting targets in a simulated urban area and firing crew weapons (pistols or submachine guns). Also part of the SETC was to recover a tank with simulated damage from an NBC attack, evacuating and treating wounded, calling for fire support by artillery/aircraft and precision driving along a pre-defined track. Crews also had to endure a physical fitness test. In comparison to last year the scoring was changed.

The confirmed rankings are:
  1. Austria (Leopard 2A4)
  2. Germany (Leopard 2A6)
  3. United States (M1A2 SEP v2)
As expected, the top ranks were occupied by the Leopard 2 tanks; last year the three top-scoring teams were all operating the Leopard 2 tank. That the older Leopard 2A4 managed to beat the sixteen years newer Leopard 2A6 gives a lot of reasons to speculate. It shows that the Leopard 2A6 tank (just like the Leclerc and M1A2 MBTs) probably could not make full use of their more advanced optics, as no night operations were tested. The Leopard 2A4 - fitted with only a single, older thermal imager - should perform a lot worse than these tanks. The limited range during firing trials also makes it impossible for the German and French crews to make full use of their longer barreled main guns.

The crews of the four Austrian Leopard 2 tanks with their trophy
However there is also another major factor for the Austrian victory: crew training. The Strong Europe Tank Challenge is not meant to be an evaluation of the technical characteristics of a main battle tank, but instead tries to measure how well a platoon from a country can perform with it's own equipment. The Austrian crew won, because they were the best trained crew (or rather: they could make the most use of their training).
Based on a photo from a score sheet, that was taken during the competition, the Austrians managed to perform best in calling for fire, the highest scored part of the competition. The Austrian crew got 696 of 700 possible points, while other teams such as the Germans and the Poles got only 500 and 450 points respectively. The Leopard 2s managed to get the best results in offensive operations, which might be related to the high quality and performance of the Leopard 2's fire control system (FCS) and optics. The platoons manning the Leopard 2A4 and the Leclerc tanks both managed to get the fastest time in the precision driving challenge; both these tanks happen to have the highest power-to-weight ratio of the competing models. This should give some of the tank designers a reason to think, if upgrading the engines shouldn't be a priority for the future, specifically after armor upgrades lead to an increase in combat weight of tanks like the M1 Abrams and the Leopard 2 by more than seven metric tons.

The score sheet during the competition
According to the US Army's own news report, there were different 12 events/challenges in the SETC 2017, which allowed for a total score of 1,500 possible points. However official data from the Austrian Army (scores during the competition, not all teams have finished the same amount of tasks) and the photo from a score sheet during the competition suggest that there were more than 1,500 possible points.
Unconfirmed rumors from an Ukranian websites suggest that the French team with the Leclerc MBT managed to get the fourth place, while the Ukranian platoon - operating an upgraded version of the T-64BV tank (sometimes described as T-64BM) - got the fifth place. These tanks were fitted with new radios, GPS systems and night vision optics before being send to SETC 2017. Apparently the crews managed to beat other Ukranain soldiers with T-64BM Bulats and T-80BVs in a national competition before being send to Germany. Supposedly the Polish team with the Leopard 2A5 was on the last place, something that has been blamed on poor training; last year the Poles managed to outperform all but the Danish and German crews. Based on the score sheet from during the competition the Polish crews apparently underperformed in the recovery of a damaged vehicle in a CBRN scenario, in precision driving, in calling for fire, in identifying vehicles and in determining the range. Other claims to justify the poor performance of the Polish platoon say that the fire control system of a single Leopard 2A5 broke in such a way, that the crew couldn't repair it. However the Polish press claims, that they managed to get the fourth place, beating the French and the Ukranian squads - it might be possible, that after the challenge a modifier was added to compensate the lack of a single tank.
According to claims from the US website Stripes.com, all scores are rather close to each other.

The trophy and the awards for first, second and third place
In 2017 the US Army had only one single platoon competing in the Strong Europe Tank Challenge; previously two US platoons tried their best to win the trophy. Back then the M1A2 SEP v2 tanks managed to only secure the fifth and sixth place, beating out only the M-84s of the Slovenian platoon. For the second time in a row, the US Army used the most modern of all tanks (the M1A2 SEP v2, which first entered service in 2011), but again failed to beat at least some of the Leopard 2 users with much older hardware. This means that the either the training of the US tank crews is lackluster, or that the M1A2 SEP v2 still requires some work in order to reach the same level of performance as the older German designs. Based on the very few known scores, the US tank platoon did perform slightly worse in offensive actions (gunnery, target spotting) than either German-speaking team, while also being a lot worse in precision driving. Specifically the offensive actions should be among the events, that are most affected by equipment.

The runner-up of the SETC 2016, Denmark, couldn't afford to participate. The Strong Europe Tank Challenge is rather expensive, it not only requires sending four tank crews, but also four tanks, to Southern Germany. Denmark instead decided to compete at the Worthington Challenge in Canada and the Nordic Tank Challenge in Scandinavia; both these competitons require only two crews, while tanks can be leased.
Next year Sweden will compete in the Strong Europe Tank Challenge, probably with an upgraded version of the Strv 122; there are hopes that the United Kingdom with the Challenger 2 and Canada with the Leopard 2 (2A6 or 2A4M) will also be part of the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2018.  

Thursday, April 27, 2017

Leopard 2: Poland wants more; Germany and Turkey opt for upgrades

According to a news report from Defence24.com, the Polish Army is interested in buying more Leopard 2 main battle tanks (MBTs). Poland originally received 128 Leopard 2A4s for an extremely low price, a decision made in Germany in order to build up better political relationships between the two countries, which previously due to the second World War and previous conflicts had been terrible. A further 119 Leopard 2 tanks (including 105 relatively modern Leopard 2A5s) were ordered in 2013, after Germany (falsely) decided to downsize it's tank force. These second-hand tanks also were extremely cheap, costing only €180 million.
 
The Leopard 2PL is an upgraded Leopard 2A4 with AMAP armor, new optics, electronics and an APU
Given this history, it seems very unlikely that Poland is going to order newly built Leopard 2 tanks, which would cost between €5 and €11 million per vehicle, depending on variant and other parts and services being part of the contract value. Buying new tanks also would delay the introduction into service by some years, however the tanks could be more capable than what currently is possible with upgrading older vehicles - in order to keep upgrades cheap, most Leopard 2A4 users try to limit the weight of a modified version to 60 metric tons (above this limit the torsion bars need to be replaced, which requires some welding on the hull). 
Thus Poland is most likely looking to buy second hand Leopard 2A4 tanks for a much a lower price - before Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula, used Leopard 2A4 tanks were sometimes sold for less than one million Euros per tank.
If Poland purchased Leopard 2A4 tanks, these MBTs then should be upgraded to the modern Leopard 2PL standard, which features enhanced surivability, firepower and slightly improved mobility. A thick AMAP composite armor module at the turret front boosts the frontal turret protection to a level comparable to the Leopard 2A7, while optics and modifications to the gun, improved drive system and a computer unit to program the 120 mm DM11 HE-airburst ammunition boost the tank's lethality.

A possible source for these second-hand tanks might be Norway; recent reports suggest that Norway is considering giving up it's small tank force (originally ordered 52 Leopard 2A4s, 46 left operational) in favor of a more mobile infantry-focused doctrine. Small infantry units should take out enemy tanks by using anti-tank guided missiles and other weapons. This is however only one of three options being considered by the Norwegian Army, in the end the tanks might be kept operational.
Finland might also be able to sell slightly less than a hundred Leopard 2A4 tanks, after purchasing 100 ex-Dutch Leopard 2A6 MBTs in 2014. Some of the 139 Leopard 2A4s originally bought by Finland have been relegated to reserve units, while others were converted into bridge layers, support vehicles or cannibalized for spare parts.
A third option for getting Leopard 2A4s at a low price might be Spain. Originally Spain leased 108 Leopard 2A4 tanks from Germany, which later were purchased by the Ejército de Tierra (Spanish Army), after Germany had downsized it's own military significantly and had no need for further tanks. Spain has offered the tanks to the Czech Republic and to Peru; however they were rejected due to being in a bad condition and thus requiring costly factory-level maintenance.
It is currently unknown what buying more Leopard 2 tanks means for the fate of the PT-16 tank developed by the Polish industry. It might result in no PT-16 being bought by the Polish Army, however the current government plans to increase the size of the military dramatically (together with it's budget), which might allow to upgrade some of the older T-72 and PT-91 tanks to the PT-16 configuration.

Leopard 2A5 of the Polish Army
Due to Russia's politics towards Eastern Europe (predominantely annexing Crimea and supporting the rebels in the civil war in Ukraine) being considered an aggression and inacceptable, NATO has increased it's focus on conventional warfare, shifting away from focusing on international peace-keeping, peace-making and anti-terror operations. To react faster and better in case of a Russian aggression, the Polish Army has moved some of it's currently most advanced tanks - the Leopard 2A5 - closer to it's eastern border. The tanks originally belonging to the 34th Armoured Cavalry Brigade located in Zagan (a city close to the German border) have been moved to the 1st Tank Brigade, which is stationed in Wesola, a place close to the country's capital, Warsaw. Likewise the PT-91, an enhanced, local version of the T-72 featuring ERAWA armor and improved electronics, will be used to replace some other tanks in the 1st Tank Brigade. Previously the unit was equipped with obsolete T-72M1 tanks.

The ADS system utilizes pre-warner radars, optronic sensors and box-based countermeasures
Meanwhile ADS Protection GmbH, a German company owned by Rheinmetall Defence and it's partner IBD Deisenroth Engineering, has suggested to the German military to adopt it's Active Defence System (ADS), a box-based active protection system (APS) capable of defeating (depending on exact variant) anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) - including top-attack weapons, RPGs, EFPs, aswell as HE(AT) and APFSDS ammunition fired by main battle tanks. A report following an investigation on the system was presented to the German Defence Commitee at the end of March. Due to the commitee working in private, it is not known what the result of this report are. According to an earlier report in a news magazine, the system could enter service in 2018 or 2019, when ordered in 2017. The system manages to exceed the NATO STANAG 4686 requirements for active protection systems (intercepting more than 85% of incoming projectiles for a reduction in penetration capacity by 50%), defeating over 95% of incoming threats during testing.
On the 26th April of 2017, the German parliament finally approved a contract to buy and upgrade 103 Leopard 2A4 tanks, which are currently owned by the German defence industry. Previously the contract was delayed due to disputes between the two companies Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and Rheinmetall, which could not agree on how the contract value would be split between them. Most of the tanks will be upgraded to the new Leopard 2A7V configuration, an upgraded variant of the Leopard 2A7, while the other tanks will be converted to support vehicles or repurposed in another way. The Leopard 2A7V will feature a stronger 20 kW auxiliary power unit (APU), enhanced armor protection, superior optics and improved communication systems. It might also feature the improved L/55A1 tank gun, that allows to operate at higher pressures. Together with new ammunition, this is said to improve performance/penetration by 20% compared to the current gun.

Leopard 2's originally produced with old armor package can be identified by the welded ammo hatch (red arrow)
After loosing several Leopard 2A4 tanks in combat against terrorists, Turkey is trying to improve the protection of the tanks. Depending on production batch, the 2A4 version of the tank is either fitted with a first, a second or a third generation armor package. At least some Turkish Leopard 2A4 tanks are most likely fitted with the oldest and weakest armor option, because they belong to the earliest production batches. These can be identified by the ammunition hatch located in the left side wall of the turret; it was closed (by welding steel ontop of it) when the tanks were upgraded to the 2A4 configuration.
According to the Military Technology Magazine, Turkish sources claim that a about 80 MBTs were used in the operation "Euphrates Shield", of which 43 were Leopard 2A4 tanks. Based on available data about 7 to 14 Leopard 2A4 tanks were hit by anti-tank guided missiles, damaging or destroying the tanks. Due to IS propaganda filming the same tank from different angles and pretending that this would be different vehicles, the exact kill number might be inflated.

M60A3 fitted with ERA from Roketsan
Currently 40 Leopard 2A4, 40 M60A3 and 120 M60T MBTs of the Turkish Army are planned to receive an upgrade to improve the protection against ATGMs, after two M60T tanks were already fitted with a remote weapon station (RWS) and laser warners. The M60T is meant to receive an active protection system; given that the Akkor APS is still in development, Turkey plans to buy an existing system. Furthermore the M60A3s and Leopard 2A4s are to be fitted with a new ERA kit from Roketsan (scheduled to be tested on a Leopard 2A4 first), a fire supression system, a close proximity surveillance system and the same upgrades as the two M60Ts received (which are laser warners and a SARP RWS). The upgraded Leopard 2A4 tanks are also meant to receive an APS, just like the M60T Sabra tanks. Which APS will be chosen is unknown, but Rheinmetall has complained about Germany blocking several weapon exports to Turkey; this might include the AMAP armor package used on the Turkish Leopard 2NG upgrade and/or the ADS active protection system.

The Leopard 2 tanks from Germany, Denmark and Poland did enjoy great success in the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2016, hosted by the US Army on the Grafenwöhr site located in Germany. This year's competition is scheduled to take place between the 7th and 12th of May. Denmark, Italy and Slovenia won't return after participating last year, however Austria (with Leopard 2A4s), France (with the Leclerc MBT), Romania (with the TR-85M1) and Ukraine (most likely using an upgraded T-64 version) join last year's competitors Germany, Poland and the United States. Let's see how the Leopard 2 can handle the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2017.

Friday, March 10, 2017

Leopard 2 projects

In April 2015 the German Army announced it's plans to increase the operational Leopard 2 fleet by 103 tanks. Since then not a lot has happened, as revealed in official documents and in newspaper articles from the Februrary of 2017. At least some of the tanks are currently owned by the German defence industry, so the government has to buy them back - but no contract has been signed within nearly two years of planning. The Leopard 2A4 main battle tank (MBT) is an improved version from the mid/late 1980s of the original Leopard 2 tank. By modern standards it has outdated armor, a short gun with inferior armor penetration and range, while lacking of modern electronics, optronics and relying on the more dangerous hydraulic systems instead of using electric drives. 

Leopard 2 tanks in long-term storage

Original reports from last year expected 84 of the new tanks to be upgraded to the Leopard 2A7 or the improved Leopard 2A7V configuration. The costs for buying and upgrading the tanks are expected to be about 760 million Euros, the contract might be signed before summer of 2017; if not the whole program might be delayed by another year due to the German elections in September 2017. The reason for the current delays is a disagreement between the two companies Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and Rheinmetall. Current workshare plans see about a third of the work (and the money) going to Rheinmetall, but the company demands more. Rheinmetall acquired the military division of Maschiennebau Kiel (MaK) in 1990, which was responsible for manufacturing 45% of all German Leopard 2 tanks. Rheinmetall is also a major subcontractor for the main armament, delivering the L/55 smoothbore gun for the tank.
KMW on the other hand doesn't want to share any more work and money with the much larger competitor, which has decided to invade KMW's core business by offering Leopard 2 upgrade since 2010. The company has a much more specialized portfolio than Rheinmetall, pretty much offering combat vehicles and remote weapon stations (RWS) only.

PERI R17A3

Meanwhile the upgrade of fifty Leopard 2A6M to the so-called Leopard 2A6M+ configuration is under way. This is an inofficial name only, which is supposedly used to differentiate between upgraded and stock Leopard 2A6M tanks. After the upgrade the 2A6M+ designation will be dropped and all vehicles will be refered to as Leopard 2A6M. The commander's sight will be replaced by the new PERI R17A3 incorporating a third generation ATTICA thermal imager, which was first adopted on the Leopard 2A7 in 2014.

The Leopard 2A6M+ can be identified by the bulge for the ultracaps and the spaced armor above the SOTAS-IP system

The SOTAS-IP multi-media communication system from the French company Thales is installed in the Leopard 2A6M+. Aside of the Leopard 2A7 tank, it is also used on the Boxer armored personnel carrier (APC) and the Puma infantry fighting vehicle (IFV); it is also part of the IDZ soldier system. To deal with the increased power demands, the tank is fitted ultra capactiors, which can deliver energy faster and increase the stability of the electrical power supply. The Deugra fire supression system has been reactivated using the extinguishing agent DeuGen-N FE36 (for a certain period of time the fire supression system was not utilized due to the previous extinguishing agent violating environment laws). The upgrade also features new digital control panels for the crew.

At the IDEX 2017 military exhibition two variants of the Leopard 2 were present: Rheinmetall demonstrated a prototype or testbed of the, currently in development, Leopard 2PL tank, while KMW presented the Leopard 2A7Q, which has been refered to as Leopard 2A7+ or Leopard 2A7 QAT by numerous other sources. Rheinmetall is also delivering the Leopard 2RI to Indenonesia, which features greatly enhanced armor protection, air conditioning and other features.

Leopard 2PL with MSSA

The Leopard 2PL is an upgraded Leopard 2A4 tank meant for the Polish Army. It is based on the modular MBT Revolution upgrade, which has been renamed to Advanced Technology Demonstator (ADT). The tank features improved armor protection by adding thick AMAP composite armor modules to the turret, supposedly increasing protection level beyond the Leopard 2A5 level. New optics with a Polish-made third generation thermal imager and Jenoptik's electric turret drives are also part of the upgrade. Changes to the fire control system (FCS) allow the usage of the programmable 120 mm DM11 high explosive (HE) ammunition and the DM63A1 APFSDS round with temperature independent propellant and high penetration capabilties.
A new addition of the vehicle presented at IDEX 2017 is the MSSA (main sensor slaved armament) remote weapon station, which does not have it's own optics and is coupled to the commander's independent sight. It is not part of the upgrade of the Polish Leopard 2A4 tanks. The installation of the MSSA also means that the digital SEOSS sight is utilized instead of the PERI R17A3.
Rheinmetall is in the process of bidding for an upgrade contract of the Turkish Leopard 2A4 tanks, which suffered heavy losses in Syria - or at least ISIS wants us to believe that. The company is also part of a joint venture that is trying to get the contract for producing the new Turkish Altay MBT.

Leopard 2A7Q at the IDEX 2017

The Leopard 2A7Q is a version of the MBT made for the Qatari Army. It is based on the Leopard 2A7+ demonstrator from KMW, thus it includes a number of changes currently not found on the German Leopard 2A7, such as the additional hull armor kit, the passive bomblet and top-attack protection on the roof and the FLW 200 RWS. The Leopard 2A7Q is fitted with a modified APU, which is even running when the vehicle is standing still in order to power the air conditioning system. The Barracuda camouflage system of the Leopard 2A7Q is having longer skirts, which reduces dust clouds when driving through the desert. According to unconfirmed rumors an unknown nation has purchased (or ordered) a large number of Leopard 2 tanks from KMW. An indicator for the validity - or maybe the origin - of this rumor is a sheet of paper being attached to the Leopard 2A7Q at IDEX 2017, which contained the text "SOLD".

After the purchase and upgrade of the Leopard 2A4 tanks, the German Army will have 103 Leopard 2A7(V) tanks in service. 48 Leopard 2A6M(+) and 152 Leopard 2A6 will supplement them. Seventeen Leopard 2A5 will remain at the combat training centre, being the last vehicles fitted with the short-barreled L/44 gun. Thirty-two Leopard 2 tanks (including 20 of the re-purchased Leopard 2A4) tanks will be kept for conversion to combat engineering vehicles, bridge-layers and other variants. Two Leopard 2A5, two Leopard 2A6, two Leopard 2A6M and one Leopard 2A7(V) tank will remain at the German military procurement office, the BAAinBw as reference and for tests, trials aswell as upgrade proposals. On the long run all tanks should be converted to a single version in order to keep logistics at a reasonable level.

For the Leopard 2A7V many technologies and features have been considered, but the only known demonstrator from KMW is a rather conventional upgrade. All Leopard 2A7 tanks are meant to be upgraded to the 2A7V configuration until 2022. What exactly will be changed is unknown, but apparently the engine will remain the dated MB 873 Ka-501 from MTU. It's very reliable and fuel efficient, but bulky by modern standards. Instead of replacing the engine, the powerpack and drivetrain will be modified - in particular the transmission and the side drives - to improve the mobility of the tank. If this allows to reach the original requirement for the Leopard 2A7V - regaining the mobility of the 10 tons lighter original version of the Leopard 2 - is questionable at least. The drivetrain also will be strengthened to deal with the high weight, while the APU's power output has been raised to 20 kilowatts.

The Leopard 2A7+ prototype includes a hull armor kit

The Leopard 2A7V will feature enhanced armor protection, which might be limited to the installation of a hull armor kit. However the basic Leopard 2A7 is already fitted with connectors, which allow fitting additional armor packages to the sides of the hull and turret when required. The composite armor modules at the upper front plate (the glaics) are about 45 mm thick; including the slope this boosts armor thickness from aproximately 328 milimetres to 697 milimetres. The relatively thin glacis relies on it's extreme slope; against highly sloped armor most shaped charge warheads fail to fuze, while APFSDS penetrators have a tendency to break, which greatly reduces the penetration performance. At the hull nose and lower front plate, the increase in armor thickness is estimated to be about 200 to 300 milimetres. This is a considerable improvment compared to the original Leopard 2 hull.
While thickness and shape are similar to the MEXAS-H hull armor of the Strv 122, Leopard 2A5DK, Leopard 2A6HEL, and Leopardo 2E, the size and locations of the mounting bolts has been altered. This might imply a change in armor composition, a more modern version (using newer AMAP technology) would offer better resistance to penetration or lower weight for a given protection level.
 
The ATTICA thermal sight will replace the WBG-X

The Leopard 2A7V upgrade is said to include improved main optics for the gunner - the old first generation WBG-X thermal imager would be replaced by a third generation ATTICA device. The SPECTUS sight from Airbus (originally developed by Zeiss, but the military divison was sold to Airbus) provides the driver with IR night-vision aswell as a thermal image. A new camera system for better situational awareness was fitted to the KMW demonstator vehicle at Eurosatory 2016. The FLW-200 remote weapon station is also expected to be part of the Leopard 2A7V upgrade. It can be fitted with (heavy) machine guns and automatic grenade launchers. Denmark supposedly will upgrade at least some of it's tank to a similar configuration.

Last year the company Rheinmetall announced, that the new L/55A1 gun will be delivered to the first costumer in 2017. According to the company, the launch costumer will be the German Army, implying this gun will be part of the Leopard 2A7V upgrade. The L/55A1 smoothbore gun is an enhanced Rh 120 L/55, which can handle higher pressures: This will result in an increase in performance (penetration and range) by 20% according to earlier data from the manufacturer.

The new 130 mm smoothbore gun from Rheinmetall

On the long run the Leopard 2 and the French Leclerc MBT will be replaced by the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS), a next-generation tank for which Rheinmetall developed a 130 mm smoothbore gun with 50% improved penetration capabilties. The MGCS is a co-development between Germany and France, but other countries are expected to join the development. Rumors - or speculation from random forum users - suggests that the turret might be developed in France, while the hull would be made in Germany. These speculations seems to be rather questionable, although the French know-how in autoloader-design might be an important aspect for the MGCS. The conception phase for the Main Ground Combat System is expected to end in 2017, after that the development of first prototypes would start. In the timeframe from 2025 to 2030 the first vehicles should be ready.