autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3189
    MEMBERS
  • 181120
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Aussies choose Boxer   General Army topics

Started 15/3/18 by autogun; 2235 views.
In reply toRe: msg 18
autogun

From: autogun

1-Dec

First KF41 Lynx in Australian Colours:

This is the bit which caught my attention:

The Lynx and Redback beat both General Dynamics Land Systems’ AJAX and BAE Systems’ CV90 in the Australian competition with the AJAX rumoured to have been eliminated as “not fit for purpose” and the CV90 as too costly.

Whatever can they mean?  scream

Mr. T (MrT4)

From: Mr. T (MrT4)

1-Dec

Lynx41 as the new kid on the block was easiest to adapt to Land400 requirements, Ajax (ASCOD) and CV90 are both relatively old designs.  Lynx is quite surprising in the way that it builds upon Marder and not the Puma platform. Both Lynx and Ridgeback have 1000+HP powerpacks, 8-9 dismounts and most realistic potential to carry around the heaviest armor package..

Ajax lacks the number of dismounts, while others boast 11-12 man crew+dismounts Ajax with 9(3+6) is not really fit for purpose not to mention if it has to go around 43tons in the heaviest package its underpowered.

If anything the puzzling part is how did BAE package the CV-90 to be considered to. expensive.

DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

2-Dec

@Autogun they mean Ajax is an overpriced, old POS which isn't fit for purpose.

The purpose of L400.3 is an IFV which has capacity for 8 dismounts. Ajax isn't and hasn't.

DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

2-Dec

Ajax is 3+4 dismounts. ASCOD wasn't proposed, but the Ajax recce variant with hypothetical modifications was tendered. The modifications invalidated all the certification for protection levels, etc. so that was not acceptable, as Army would need to bear the cost of recertifying every component.

The Ajax "tender" was an imaginary product based on an absolute dumpster fire of a program and we are well off for eliminating it from a program for a MOTS IFV.

TOP