For the British MIV program, looks like the government is de

Neat little presentation by GDLS on their options.

http://www.generaldynamics.uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/GDUK-MIV-1.pdf

File: Piranha V desert trials.jpg (2MB, 4000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4000x3000px

No love.

File: ob_d7e281_vbci-2-2015-copyright-nexter.jpg (124KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1024x682px

>>32086976
Didn't the Brits help develop the VBCI 2?
I bet they go for that

File: mfc-acv-04.jpg (503KB, 1303x690px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 1303x690px

>Lockheed Martin possibly teamed with Patria
Oohhhhhhhhhhhhhh boy
Because that went so well the last time they teamed up which resulted in LM taking the Patria AMV data and then dumping Patria to make their own OC Donut Steel IFV for the Muhreens
And then they still lost to designs from Singapore and Brazil

>>32089188
No.

Nexter developed the VBCI 2 on feedback from what the British wanted in FRES-UV.

>>32089236
You do know companies move on with business. Patria doesn't act like a prime contractor in most circumstances.

Also, ACV's down select involved a Singaporean and Italian design.

Terrex 2 and SuperAV from Iveco.

Don't know where you pulled Brazilian from. Unless you're referring to the Guarani which is a licensed SuperAV.

>>32087951
>Lockmart copy pasting another company's work
How the mighty have fallen

>>32089554
That's a General Dynamics vehicle, well Mowag's specifically.

>>32086976

Is the boxer realy that good?

I can't believe that the germans didn't overengineered it.

File: Boxer APS and RWS.jpg (3MB, 3870x2590px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3870x2590px

>>32090620
Yes, but it's also the most expensive.

It's also a contender for Australia's next recce vehicle along with the Patria.

Terrex 3 and the LAV 6.0 didn't make the shortlist there.

Honestly, as a Brit, If all else was equal, I would rather go for the VBCI 2, simply because I would like to see more Anglo-French defence cooperation, both in procurement, and in operations.

Unfortunately, I doubt the French will offer as good an offset deal as the Germans. I also like the adaptability of the Boxer, and the ready integration with the Spike missile. If that Spike integration could also include the Spike NLOS which has proven so useful in Afghanistan, that would be gravy.

>>32090687
The Poms and Frogs are cooperating heavily in missiles, UCAVs and mine countermeasures at the very least.

I don't think Spike is quite relevant, the MoD hasn't asked for it or any other missile on the market for any vehicle and the MIV doesn't envisage direct combat as one it's roles.

Protected mobility, command & control, repair and recovery.

>>32090729

That is why I specified the NLOS version. It was used in Afghanistan under the name EXACTOR extensively by the British Army, at first in relative secrecy.

http://www.janes360.com/images/assets/640/27640/Special_report_EXACTOR.pdf

It has a 25 km range, so it isn't a direct combat weapon, but was used as precision fire support. In fact it was operated by the Royal Artillery initially. I doubt many would be so equipped, but keeping a dozen or so of these systems would be something useful to have.

Does it say when they'll be delivered?

Probably not whilst I'm serving

File: 1985-lotus-esprit-1.jpg (238KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 800x533px

>>32086976
>>32087951
>>32089188
>>32089236
WEDGE AESTHETIC

>>32090767
2019-20 onwards I believe.

>>32090756
With what money. The Scout-SV/MIV/Warrior WCSP/ABSV/MRV-P programs have all been bare bones as fuck.

>>32090838

>With what money. The Scout-SV/MIV/Warrior WCSP/ABSV/MRV-P programs have all been bare bones as fuck.

They already have bought launchers and hundreds of Spike NLOS missiles, the point is that it isn't a new capability they have to buy, it's taking what the already have and sticking it on an 8x8 they are getting anyway.

>>32091159
There's no listed requirement or doctrine calling for it and with any possible integration costs it's just wishful thinking.

I wouldn't be surprised if Exactor was retired without replacement.

>>32091210

According to Janes, Exactor is being considered alongside the MLRS as part of the future of rocket artillery in the British Army. The reason I suspect Spike NLOS would make sense on MIV is precisely because I doubt they are getting spending the money to get anything completely new, while Israel has already adapted Spike NLOS on numerous platforms (trailers, 4WD, APC, tank chassis, helicopters, naval) so integration work is likely to require minimal risk and investment.

http://www.janes.com/article/64091/uk-royal-artillery-looks-to-recapitalise-its-equipment

>>32091341
You're of the opinion that the procurement office makes forward thinking and rational decisions.

They don't.

>>32086976
>What should they do?
Get the best
>What will they do?
Get the cheapest.