Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts

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 Various other vehicles such as the VBCI 2 were initially also offered to the Australian military, but the bids were withdrawn when it became clear that a solution based on military of the shelf (MOTS) components was favored.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.  

Sunday, October 16, 2016

The Ukraine develops the Otaman family of wheeled vehicles

At the Ukranian Arms and Security 2016 (Зброя та безпека 2016) exhibition, the new Otaman 6x6 and 8x8 wheeled vehicles were presented for the first time. The two vehicles have been developed by the company Practika.

The Otaman concept was first presented in March at the Indian Defexpo 2016 by the Ukranian state-owned military agency UkrOboronProm. The Otaman concept takes existing military trucks such as the ones manufactured by GAZ, KRAZ, Ural or Zil and adds a protective plating made of armor steel (RHA) and an internal kevlar liner to it. According to Army Recognition's coverage of Defexpo 2016, this would allow to transform a typical 4x4 truck into a 7.5 tons heavy APC with a crew of two and a capacity of up to 12 soldiers. The vehicle would be powered by a Hyundai D4DB engine with only 130 horsepower maximum output and be protected in accordance with the STANAG 4569 level 2 certification; optionally this can be raised to level 3. Another option for the 4x4 Otaman concept was adding a manually or remotely operated weapon station with a heavy machine gun as armament for self-defence.


The six wheeled version of the Otaman was presented in the configuration as self-propelled 122 mm gun. According to Russian sources the gun is the old Soviet-designed 2A18 howitzer from the 1960s, which has also been used on the tracked 2S1 Gvozdika self-propelled gun. This gun has a range of about 15 kilometres with conventional and 21 kilometres with rocked-assisted ammunition. It is suited for general fire support operations, to take out fortified positions and to engage lightly and medium armored vehicles.


The combat weight of the six-wheeled Otaman version is 16,000 kilograms. It is not clear if this is a reference to the specific variant with 122 mm gun in a turret or the baseline vehicle. Unlike the 4x4 and the 8x8 versions of the Otaman, the 6x6 Otaman seems to employ a newly constructed chassis. The baseline variant of the 6x6 Otaman is meant to be a pure armored carrier vehicle. The vehicle is powered by a German Deutz engine with an output of 290 or 320 horsepower. According to the datasheets of the exhibition, the engine is linked to a transmission manufactured by the Alission - this might be a typo and refer to the US company Allison instead, which provided transmissions for various military vehicles.

The vehicle's protection is provided by it's welded steel construction. This protects against small arms and assault rifle ammunition only. The interior might be fitted with a spall-liner made of kevlar or other poly-aramides. Via the installation of an applique armor kit, the ballistic protection can be raised to meet STANAG 4569 level 4 (all-round protection against 14.5 mm AP ammunition from 500 metres distance).
Aside of the self-propelled gun and the armored personnel carrier, the specifications sheet from Arms and Security 2016 also mentions a possible infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) variant, an armored recovery vehicle (ARV) variant, a mobile command post vehicle aswell as a mortar carrier.

The 8x8 version of the Otaman is apparently based on a rebuild BTR-60, but is also offered as modernization option for the BTR-70. The Otaman 8x8 is offered with the same Deutz engine and Alisson (Allison?) transmission as the 6x6 variant. It is however lighter, with a combat weight of only 13 metric tons. The 8x8 is not offered with an optional applique armor kit. Apparently the drivetrain and/or suspension of the BTR-60 is not capable as supporting as much weight as the counterparts used on the six-wheeled chassis.


The Otaman 8x8 was presented in the configuration as mortar carrier with a 120 mm mortar mounted in the rear compartment. The same six variants as available on the 6x6 Otaman - APC, ARV, command post vehicle, mortar carrier, IFV and self-propelled gun - are also offered based on the 8x8 vehicle.


Rebuild BTR-70 in 2015
Already one year earlier a rebuild of the BTR-70 was presented at the Arms and Security 2015 exhibition. The vehicle was known under a different name and apparently made by a different company. Apparently the Ukranian defence industry is not capable of designing new vehicle by itself or the budget is too limited for it. Instead Ukrainian companies and volunteer units like the Azovets brigade, keep upgrading and redesigning old vehicles.

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

New T-64 version with unmanned turret in the making?

According to Ukrainian newspaper "Defense Express", a new version of the T-64 MBT is being developed.

A first 3D rendering of the new tank, image taken from SNAFU Solomon's blog
The new version of the T-64 will supposedly be more advanced and better than the current T-64BM Bulat main battle tank (MBT) operated by the Ukrainian Army. Like the T-14 Armata the new T-64 version will utilize an unmanned turret. The crew of three (commander, driver and gunner) will be moved into the hull, an armored bulkhead behind the crew compartment separates the crew from the highly explosive ammunition stored in the standard T-64-style autoloader.
It has been claimed that the Azov volunteer brigade is responsible for the development of the new T-64 version. The Azov unit already developed the Azovets urban combat vehicle based on the T-64 chassis.
Details of the new tank upgrade
The new T-64 version will feature a remote weapon station (RWS) with a 12.7 mm heavy machine gun (HMG) located on top of the turret bustle. Like on the T-90MS, the commander's independent periscope also functions as main optronics for the RWS. The turret features four banks of smoke grenade launchers, each holding 4 smoke or multi-purpose grenades. Apparently the RWS can also be fitted with up to four smoke grenade launchers. The tank is protected by composite armor and additional Duplet heavy ERA. The ERA is also fitted to parts of the turret, something that hasn't been done on the T-14. Unlike the T-14 however the upgraded T-64 is not fitted with an active protection system (APS).  As main armament the tank will feature a 125 mm smoothbore gun, probably the localy built KBA3 or KBM1M tank gun.
At a weight of 39 metric tons the upgraded T-64 will be a lot lighter than the T-14, however the overall physical size of the tank seems to be quite a bit smaller. However it seems that the hull height had to be raised in order to make enough room for enough space for the seats, controls and equipment for the crew of three. There are also only two sets of containing three vision blocks each, thus either the commander or gunner can only utilize the optics fitted to the turret. The T-14 Armata's design includes a seventh vision block at the hull.

PS: As the cover of Defense Express reveals, despite the new turret the vehicle will keep an IR illuminator like the original T-64.

Thursday, July 30, 2015

Ukraine receives upgraded T-80 tanks

According to Jane's IHS the Ukrainian army has taken over the first 8 T-80 tanks modernized by Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau (KMDB) on 15th July 2015 (15 days ago, I am certainly having troubles writing .

The tanks are fitted with Kontakt reactive armor and will serve for "anti-terror operations", which means that they are intended for fighting in the East-Ukraine against the separatists. Other sources than Jane's (i.e. Ukrainian sources) claimed that these tanks were for an air-mobile unit, which does not take part in any combat operations in the east of the country.

The "new" tanks for the Ukranian army
The Ukrainian ministry of defence however has stated, that these tanks will serve with n unit of the airborne forces.
Other than adding Kontakt ERA, other not further mentioned changes were done to turret and hull structure.

Source: Jane's IHS


This tanks show in which a desolate situation the Ukrainian army is - the T-80 used are outdated and the modernization is a joke. They are far worse than the modernized T-64BM Bulat or the current T-84-based Oplot tanks.
The use of Kontakt-1 ERA (which does provide only very limited amounts of protection compared to more modern ERA systems) and the retaining of the old infra-red sights certainly shows that the lack of money and/or production capacity in the Ukraine is a real problem. These tanks were "modernized" (refurbished seems to be more appropriate) to a technology level of approximately 1984!

That said, it appears that tank vs tank combat is highly limited in the Ukrainian conflict. Still viable protection against rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank missiles is not offered by the modernized T-80 tanks.
The fire control unit of the old T-80(B) is probably accurate enough against structures and infantry, when firing from slow move (25 kmph) or from static positions..

Pakistan prefers Oplot?

According to rumors spread on the internet, Pakistan recently trialed the latest version of the Ukranian Oplot-M main battle tank and the Norinco MBT-3000. Supposedly, the results were in favor of the Ukranian tank.

The Oplot MBT in Pakistan
The Oplot-M main battle tank is made by the Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau in the Ukraine. It is protected by composite armor and heavy Duplet reactive armor along the frontal arc, while ERA protects the flanks. It is also fitted with the Varta proteciton system (an improved version of the Shtora system of the Soviet Union), which already has been adopted on the Al-Khalid.
The main armament consists of a modern 125 mm KBA-3 smoothbore gun, which is fitted with a T-80-style autoloader. The Oplot-M also features a modern fire control unit with thermal sights for both gunner and commander.
The Oplot is powered by a six-cylinder 6ТD-2 multifuel diesel engine, which provides an output of up to 1200 hp.

More detailed information can be accessed on the manufacturer's website.

The Chinese MBT-3000 was claimed to be very similar to the current version of the Al-Khalid and seen "as not much of an improvment". Given the relationship between the Al-Khalid (which started as a modified Chinese Type 90 design) and the MBT-3000 (which is a modified Type 90/Type 96 tank design) this seems to be plausible.

The Chinese MBT-3000, supposedly tested in Pakistan alongside the Oplot.



Author's opinion: I don't know if these rumors are true, but it seems to be reasonable to choose the Oplot-M over the MBT-3000. At least the Oplot-M seems to be a more advanced and better design.
However it is rather questionable if the Ukraine is able to manufacture enough tanks for Pakstain (they already have troubles with the Thailand deal) and also wether the Ukraine is willing to agree on a local production (which seems to be demanded by Pakistan).