via Resboiu.ro
German Parliament approved a proposal to develop a new generation of tanks, program will be included in the medium-term planning of the German Ministry of Defense.First make sure you check out Resboiu's website. Interesting stuff. This catches me off guard. The German Army just received its first Leopard 2A7's and they're already off and running for a new MBT. Great planning. The partnership with France gives me pause. I've seen articles stating that the French are on the verge of giving the go-ahead for an updated LeClerc MBT and even if they give the go ahead to merge industries I don't see them going for the German practice of a heavy, yet mobile vehicle.
The decision comes amid tense of "Ukrainian crisis" situation where the number of Leopard 2A6 tanks 225/7 that the Bundeswehr aims to maintain operational would become suddenly rather inadequate.
The explanatory memorandum of document speaks of great importance that the armored units have German Army, they must be supported in the future by equipping a new generation of tanks, especially since the German military industry would be able to deliver such of product.
Development of the new tank could be the subject of cooperation between France and Germany, followed sometime around March 2030 Leopard becomes operational.
The French emphasize expeditionary type forces too much for a partnership to be practical. Still this bears watching. If nothing else it will give us a clue into Western Europe thinking on the direction of future armored vehicles.
Really? this is not a new... news. The Leo 3 is not, how to say, replace Leo 2 but to support and maintain the ability of German industry of design and produce high tech weaponry. And the cooperation with France will be mainly on paper, as you know an EU "integration" stuff.
ReplyDeleteI have to say i have hard time seeing any know how French can offer the Germans besides maybe autoloader technology in all other fields of heavy armor tech Germans are probably more advanced. French would also be likely to look for a 45 ton tank while the Germans would be aiming for the 60ton tank. One thing that makes new development hard is the numbers gone are the days when Germany military alone bought 1500-2000 MBTs reality now looks more like 250-400tanks all others have to aim for export this is the only part where cooperation makes sense as french could take another 250+ but lessons from euro projects show things get very expensive as soon as you allow for politically fair shared development & production.
ReplyDeletei wouldn't be so dismissive of French armor. i think thats old way of looking at things. the LeClerc has advanced armor, reduced crew, great mobility and its a heavy medium. the trend is toward lighter vehicles and while MBTs might never get down to 40 tons the desire to move below 60-80 tons is everywhere.
DeleteThe French fully intend to not fight the next big war on French soil.
DeleteThat is their motivation, hence expeditionary.
In terms of tank components ,Germans have top powerpacks, cannon ,optics so am hard pressed to find an area where french are ahead (like i mentioned probably autoloaders and maybe turrets) of then not because French are bad but because Germans are so good. In the end much of the success will hinge on the customer and specs they lay out. Future tanks might be back towards medium tank but considering that german Puma IFV is near 35t i would expect tank to end in 50+ tons .
DeleteCommenting on Mr, T for a second, just because in the past IFV tended to be a fraction of the weight of a MBT doesn't mean it will remain that way. the Polish Anders and PL01 concepts the stated goals of the Armada series form Russia and the Merkeva Namer as well as the aborted GCV are showing that the line between MBT and IFV in weight and protection is blurring. The Past logic of a 20 ton IFV to a 55+ton tank was based on the Idea that a enemy would never waste a anti Tank shell or missile on a Troop transport. History has proven that logic flawed. The Puma IFV may have a 35 metric ton weight but with add on armor it can crank up to a 45 metric tons. 45 metric tons is equal to the base weight of the JGSDF's Type 10 MBT and just short of the Russian T90 MBT.
DeleteWhat I think we will see on Leo3 is a tank that will be about 40-50 Metric tons. Form the French Leclerc it will have a fully integrated Auto loader mated to a new generation of gun from the germans perhaps in a unmanned turret with remote controlled secondary weapons, Modular Armor ( like the LeClerc) perhaps a descendant of the current AMAP with a Active hardkill system fully active suspension, a advanced German power pack with Hybrid drive.
Germany, In deed Europe as a Whole has a need for some degree of expeditionary as they are more likely to be used in peace keeper roles. But NATO and the EU as a whole lack the US Logistical ability if they can cut down the weight of there armored vehicles well keeping protection then they can use what Transports and Connectors they have to get there forces on station.
Tanks are obsolete platforms and their worst enemy is logistics, UAVs, artillery and anti tank missiles, not other tanks. Leclerc tanks are almost in hibernation and just few of them are operational. French army is more in to wheeled vehicles.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/UOLTbWmr88k
http://youtu.be/YEI9AOhScMY
http://youtu.be/ui3nHSj9Ag4
http://youtu.be/nK7-f3MnvU8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlwsoXsjtzo&sns=em
DeleteTanks are not obsolete, its just that ony 1 nation in the Western World is actually planning and trying to make possible an Invasion of another country while the rest are content just defending their territories with bare minimum and politically acceptable force structures in the age of crazy economics which is reducing the necessity of a Tank. Come D-Day and even Canada will/has leave 105MM centauro's behind and saddle in Leopards. And thats a fact jack.
Deletethat isn't necessarily so. India is prepared to cross into Pakistan to secure nuclear weapons via ground assault in conjunction with Western Special Forces. that's a fact. additionally lets broaden that spectrum a bit. one nation has the means to do the bulk of the lifting when it comes to invading another country (out of necessity) while the others will glob onto the effort while sending token forces. lastly we also know that if you look at ALL nations each of them are prepared to act forcefully in limited way to cross borders of their rivals for whatever reason. want the list? China is prepared to take disputed territory from Japan, Philippines, Vietnam, India and others. India is prepared to assault China, and Pakistan. as unlikely as it may be, we see S. Korea prepared to assault Japan, Japan prepared to assault S. Korea. Russia is prepared to assault Poland, Poland is prepared to do likewise etc...the list goes on.
DeleteNot every one like to wastes the money.
Deletehttp://youtu.be/KR2mseKQkmY
The Main battle Tanks is not obsolete. Any Platform can be beaten and your Kornet launcher can be trashed. It's that the Tank has to be used in it's proper place, Proper time and with proper tactics. the Russians are still planning on Buying tanks even have a new design and plans for more T90's which they just upgraded, The Chinese are making and selling brand new tanks and IFV's the indians are buying the latest Russian tanks, ISIS is using Syrian tanks Against both the Syrian government and Iraqi army. Turkey just designed a new tank, Indonesia just bought new tanks, the Us is designing a new version of the Abrams, Pakistan is testing the latest Chinese tanks.
DeleteHorseshit.
DeleteTanks as stand alone weapon systems are obsolete and were as far back as the first Bazookas and Panzershrecks were fielded. Tanks are part of a combined arms mechanized force with infantry and artillery. Once you start thinking they are stand-alone platforms, they start getting nailed by ATGWs and guided artillery. It's a lesson that keeps having to be re-learned, over and over.
Solomon, were you responding here to me or SuperRhino ?
Deleteheck you could say that as stand alone weapons they were obsolete as far back as World War 1 battle of Flers when the first tanks hit the first tank berm and then charged headlong into artillery fire.
Deletebut there a damn site more survivable then infantry alone. you need them mixed with IFV's and other platforms including Artillery, Air support, and Unmanned systems
The Germans need France more than some people here think. One quick thought about German Politicians and their anti-weapons export policy with Human Rights mumbo-jumbo thrown in between and a lot of countries would want andditional asurances that France can provide.
ReplyDeleteThe Germans will ride the same horse with whatever knight is willing to share R&D, just like they did on the MBT-70. They will then apply that R&D to their own vehicle, allowing them to reserve internal funding for systems which they believe are important to retain national control over.
ReplyDeleteBecause they are stupidly insistent on the ability to go through the front slope, the Germans have fixated on a 'next gen', 140mm, tank rifle design which they believe will put a ding in any armor system out there, without the need for a guided round ala Sniper/LAHAT.
This gun was form/fit tested it on the 2A4 and which found that massive monoblock turret wanting.
Autoloading/UMT tech gets men out of the turret and lets them push the Big Trunnion required for the mount in their place.
It may also allow them to reduce or at least /shift/ weight around the passive protection scheme to control King Tigeritis weight issues.
SInce few tanks can shoot back at aircraft (and then only helos) the question becomes why Germany, master of the economic basket case that that is the EU trade zone with new countries joining the bankruptcy relief list every month, finds it necessary to have tanks to begin with when she has all of Poland as her buffer zone and the Russians show no particularly interest in overrunning Western Europe as we do the Ukraine.
The answer (of course) is that Germany is still playing the WWII game of 'Lebensraum in The East' though now it would be couched in far more polite terms as 'economic development opportunities' in a unified Europe.
As the Tawalkana division chief said: "At the beginning of the campaign I had 200 tanks, after thirty days of air war, I still had 170, after one hour with the 3rd Armor, I had 10." Ground actions tend to be decisive as you can't maneuver out of contact with a threat which has a 70-80% hit rate, even at extended range. Thus the determinator of dominance in a ground fight is whose rounds kill the most when they hit. Bigger Caliber Wins The Overmatch condition here while the lighter weight nature of Russian tanks in general argues against the "See, now my ***k is as long as yours again!" likely counter.
The U.S., with their power mad Globalists, will overlook this Greater Reich throwback behavior as long as it allows them to put SM3IIa/b into positions overlooking the Russian missile fields to essentially declaw The Bear's nuclear capabilities while putting it in a position of slow starvation from lack of (breadbasket) food.
It was for these two reasons that the Russians seized the Crimea (to cut off an easy Seaborne Invasion axis solution to the logistics problem of resupply in the vast Ukrainian depths) and why they _WILL_ nuke the Ukraine to self-lighting parking lot levels (and any army which goes into it) rather than lose it to The West and thus tank warfare is largely moot unless you do something like air drop them to seize specific objectives and then rapidly put them into a nuclear dispersal dispositions to avoid counter targeting.
Obviously, this requires a different concept of armored warfare than the one the Leopard 3 will espouse.
The NATO position over the Ukraine has Twilight 2000 written all over it.
And most Americans, in their strategic blindness as total world geopolitical ignorance (ask one to find the Ukraine on a map) will just moo-ve along the abattoir chute to their own destruction.
In their Rush to One Ring us (right through the nose), the NWO Saurons and Sarumans of this earth are pushing an agenda that amounts to a global suicide pact.