schnuersi said:

It would be news if somebody actually ordered some of these. It would be the first time somebody bought a tank on IFV chassis since the TAM. At least from memory. Maybe there are more and more recent ones but I can not remember any.

I think the new Indonesian/Turkish Modern Medium-Weight Tank (Kaplan/Harimau) is based on the Turkish Kaplan IFV chassis, but with a lot of changes (including relocating the engine to the hull rear).

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/kaplan.htm

schnuersi said:

The Ukraine is desperate for weapons and gets funding from abroad mybe they take some? But so far they only seem to be intrested in Leopard and old soviet designs. They don't even care for Lynx IFV but requested Marders.

I think there's a sense that they may have gotten about all the ex-Soviet kit that's freely available and are moving on the the simplest, least challenging Western kit to be had (hence the US offering M113s rather than M2s, for example).  

NATO nations are also still proposing a bunch of three-sided swaps where ex-Soviet European states get older NATO kit (and hopefully a few months to train on it) in exchange for passing off their ex-Soviet gear to Ukraine.  So, Slovenia gives up their M-84s (Yugo T-72s)  and gets Leopards and Marders.  Or the Poles get Challenger 2 and give up their last T-72s.  Which means Poland ends up with three of the four main NATO main battle tanks -- Leo 2, M1, and CH2.  All they need now are some Leclerc and they have four of a kind.  I don't envy their logistics and training people.

taschoene said:

I think the new Indonesian/Turkish Modern Medium-Weight Tank (Kaplan/Harimau) is based on the Turkish Kaplan IFV chassis, but with a lot of changes (including relocating the engine to the hull rear).

Wich such radical changes its not really the same chassis anymore. Its more like the tank and the IFV share some parts.

The numbers are also really low.

One of the problems of these tank on IFV chassis is that their silhouette allways is really large for a tank of its weight.

taschoene said:

I think there's a sense that they may have gotten about all the ex-Soviet kit that's freely available and are moving on the the simplest, least challenging Western kit to be had (hence the US offering M113s rather than M2s, for example).

I don't think this really makes sense. The upgraded Leo1 have the same FCS as the Leo2. The old FCS of the original Leo1 is conciderable more complicated to use than the one of the Leo2.
Neither the Leo nor the Marder share any parts or consumables with the equipment the Ukraine has. Except for the fuel. The capabilities of the Marder and Leo and the mode of operation they are designed for is very different to what the Ukrainians are used to. If you have to train crews, maintenance and leaders from practically zero there IMHO it makes little sense to use old stuff.

taschoene said:

Or the Poles get Challenger 2 and give up their last T-72s.

Or they get more Leos or M1s.

taschoene said:

NATO nations are also still proposing a bunch of three-sided swaps where ex-Soviet European states get older NATO kit (and hopefully a few months to train on it) in exchange for passing off their ex-Soviet gear to Ukraine.

I am aware of that. I am not sure it makes sense to give them older stuff. This would be a great opportunitiy for production over the next couple of years. Something that would really help the industry. This way it would make sense to ramp up production and open new lines and facilities.

Marder training according to a German general takes about a week. build a lynx in that time?

graylion said:

Marder training according to a German general takes about a week.

Sorry but that is incorrect.
Somebody stated some time ago that a Leopard gunner can be trained in a week. Because the FCS is so easy to use. Somehow this turned into its possible to train anyone within one week on any AFV.

Even for the Leo 2 it is incorrect IMHO. Speed up gunner taining took three month back in the days when we still had the draft. Regular was four month. Just for basic operation. The combat level training for the crew was an additional four month. All in all it took 8-10 month to train crews to a level where they would get their "ready for field service". With pre trained people who have been AFV crewmen befor my educated guess is its possible to train them in two month. If corners are cut and if they don't have free time.
BUT thorough commander training takes conciderable longer.

The Marder and Leo 1 is older and training takes more time. Less automation. A lot is directly linked to the training and experience of the crew. Especially the gunner and commander.

graylion said:

build a lynx in that time?

The actual "build" time is quite low. A few days. IF all parts are on stock.

During the hight of the Puma production the rate was around three per week. They weren't in a hurry back then. Organising a production run is what takes time. Once the assembly is up and running the output is pretty high.
BTW the Leo1 and Marder that are in storage and could be given away are not in ready to use condition.  At the very least they would have to be refurbished. Which also takes time. The needed parts also are not on stock. So time for organisation is needed as well.
This is why I think it might be a more sensible alternative to train them on new equipment. Meanwhile build it while the crews are training. Of course this could have started weeks ago allready. Seems like a missed opportunity to me.

My source: https://www.dw.com/en/why-isnt-germany-supplying-ukraine-with-heavy-weapons/a-61553273

schnuersi said:

taschoene said: Or the Poles get Challenger 2 and give up their last T-72s.

Or they get more Leos or M1s.

The actual deal being proposed is that the UK will provide Challenger 2 to Poland and Poland will deliver their T-72s to Ukraine.  Poland already has Leo2 and has ordered M1A2 SEP V3.

that's been clarified. UK troops with challengers as a stopgap

graylion said:

My source: https://www.dw.com/en/why-isnt-germany-supplying-ukraine-with-heavy-weapons/a-61553273

...and a few lines above the statement of one week General Laubenthal states "extensive training" is needed. I know Gen. Laubenthal personally. More than 20 years ago he was my company commander. He served in the armored corps, is a tanker and generally a very good officer and leader.

If a paratrooper with no experience with AFV claims he knows better I have serious doubts.
Even more so since these claims are conflicting with my experience. An AFV is not a new rifle.
I am aware of the claims that its all not a big deal and in one or two weeks the Ukraine can field brigades with Marders and Leopards. Which in my experience and knowledge is simply a load of crap. Most likely politically motivated. Yes, Ukraine needs help but we need to face the sad reality that what was fucked up over at least the last decade can not be undone in weeks.
For example i know that the vehicles we are talking about are not anywhere near ready to use. I actually have seen them some time ago. I also was part of a Leopard crew and did train crews for several years. I have an engineering background and now work for the MoD. It can not realisitically be done. Most likely taking the current supply situation into account it would take at least half a year. This IMHO should be done or at least tried. But that is above my paygrade.