>MoD confirm they will not accept Ajax until issues fixed

>MoD confirm they will ‘not accept’ Ajax until issues fixed
>The Ministry of Defence say they “will not accept a vehicle until it can be used safely” and that they “cannot determine a realistic timescale for the introduction of Ajax into operational service”.

Should have bought Lynx moment

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ok

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How much have they already paid for that meme project?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Isn't it like 4bn pounds already?

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >be Bong
    >buy and Ascod
    >fuck it up royaly

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What do you expect, buying an upgraded Spanish/Yank bargain bucket knockoff from the 1980s. We used to MAKE tanks, now we buy the shittiest cheapest crap we can from other countries. 🙁

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      seriously out all of the fighting vehicles in Europe how the fuck did our MoD settle on THIS

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because they are idiots

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        because picking the Puma would (in the minds of the high rank people in the armed forces) mean kneeling to germans and old cunts at the MOD are physically unable to do this. this is also why we won't have an actually good service rifle from HK or FN either.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Won't bow to Germans
          >Means we won't get a rifle from FN
          ???

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          FN is from Belchum

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why would they swap from a domestic IFV riddled with problems to a foreign IFV riddled with problems?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They bough the boxer and specifically bought HK to fix the La80.

          Jesus Christ anon. They went for Ajax because its better for their needs than Puma and you fucking Germans (larping as bongs) need to get over it.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >They went for Ajax because its better for their needs than Puma and you fucking Germans (larping as bongs) need to get over it.
            Not him but
            I don't think you're aware of how long the Ajax has been in development, anon.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Final design was finished in 2014.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                When did it start?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Why would you ask a question when you can just google it?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because I'm asking it for your education, not mine.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You presume I dont know when it started?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Puma wasn't even offered. And Ajax is quite the abortion of a vehicle concept. A Recc vehicle doesn't need to be 40t, it's not supposed to actually engage anything. It can also not operate as IFV because it can't carry a troop of soldiers, so they invented the 'strike' concept.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >their redesigned their entire army around the Ajax

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Thinking more about this, it feels like the whole land vehicle program was a "pig trough" thing.
              You have Rheinmetall with the Boxers, BAE with the legacy vehicle upgrades, and GD with the Ajax. All three major foodgroups present. Only one's who's truly losing from this arrangement is the taxpayer.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's retarded because the UK already operates the Boxer, and they seem to be decently happy with it. Just buy more of the same from the same people, it's an IFV not rocket science

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The MoD tied themselves in knots trying to explain why they need an IFV (from a completely different company, as well) to perform reconnaissance.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Somewhere there is a 19D who is suddenly roaring with laughter and has no clue why.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah what the fuck were they thinking?
                >parts commonality is... le bad!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                As I said in my previous post, feels like it was a feeding trough deal for weapons companies. It made no sense to bring in GD as a third company when they were already working with two others.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                When Australia is the more reasonable country

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Those Bastards could have been in service a long time ago if

                >the Bongs didn't leave the Boxer program for a then later canceled national program
                >use the contract option for more Boxers

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://youtu.be/KA4CG6-OJio

                Those Bastards could have been in service a long time ago if

                >the Bongs didn't leave the Boxer program for a then later canceled national program
                >use the contract option for more Boxers

                Why don't the MoD just get more of those Boxers? BAE is also involved.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because they are retarded. There's even a tracked Boxer now which would just be a better Ajax... it's modular so they could even make their own turret if they really want to use that gun all that much.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Recon by definition is engaging the enemy then running away.....
              Recon should be exclusively done by MBTs

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >They went for Ajax because its better for their needs
            Their needs being: receiving kickbacks to spend on whores and coke.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You're saying those are not valid needs?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They are but they don't make for a good IFV.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The Bongs can always just buy the CV90 from BAE and call it a day.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >kneeling to germans and old cunts at the MOD are physically unable to do this
          They don't seem to have a problem with the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Yank

      The ASScod has nothing to do with the US.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Santa Barbara is a General Dynamics subsidiary. So the Ascod is US by association.

        Also yes, the Ajax was retarded. It's nearly 10 tons over what the Ascod bodyplan is supposed to carry. And, pretty obviously, the hull improvements didn't do jack shit to alleviate the issue.
        Should've picked a hull with a higher base weight rating.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Honestly, after so many years of development why cant we produce a decent domestic design. 4 billion spent for a failed project, you can design one from the ground up and set up production for that kind of money

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why the wearing motorcycle helmets lmao

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well, it's not safe to crew

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Should just hire KMW to fix it

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    article pls

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Rheinmetall Lost, chud.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >British Military Procurement
    Whenever I feel bad about our MIC all I have to do is look at the track record of the British MOD when it comes to acquiring new weapons.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ynr the SA80
      >ynr the L96A1

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I remember a bunch of bigwigs having quite a spergout when HK were called in to unfuck the SA80. They literally pulled the British version of "nono, gun is fine".

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          My dad hadnt long been out the Army when it was introduced and he remembered his first time using it during reservist refresh course. Apparently it was such a piece of shit most of the guys still in didnt think itd last long before adopting something else.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A friend's dad was in when they made the switch, said everyone in his regiment held on to their L1A1's for dear life when they started giving out the SA80's. To the point that they only made the switch because one of the brass came in and said "Stop fucking about, hand them over".

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >ditch the Ajax meme
    >fire whoever was involved in choosing it in the first place
    >go ask KNDS to manufacture tracked Boxers in Britain (together with the wheeled Boxer you already buy from them with which they share most parts)
    >???
    >profit
    Call me a kraut shill, you know I'm right.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I still wonder how the Boxer procument actually happened, skipping the selection process and just getting Boxers after two failed replacement programs was a uncharacteristically wise decision.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the idea of the Ajax itself wasn't stupid, the main problem is that they remodeled it twice. Once to fit all the new shiny electronics for the "Scout" part and second time to add even more shit. add on that they uparmored it, went obesely overweight and then started shaving the armor, it only could end in this disaster. that and BAE getting excluded because of the previous Project Nimrod cancel

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Biggest problem was that each remodel added more weight to a hull whose initial max weight rating was 30 tons. The Ajax came in at about 38, with plans to further bloatmax it to 42.
      There's no way that would've worked.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yea thats what I meant and then they started to shave the hull to get the weight down.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Gee. Reminds me of the development history of the Panther, just in peacetime rather than wartime.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Every tank gets heavier in development. nowadays people who aren't retarded keep that in mind with initial designs. Back then it was all new though.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Ascod had a weight reserve back when it was initially designed. It just so happens that said reserve had already been used by the latest versions, before they decided to pile even more weight on it by turning it into the Ajax.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically they would have been better off buying Korean.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >nearly 11 feet tall
    >42 tons

    why

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Feature creep on a fairly obsolete vehicle.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      To mog MBTs

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous
      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        For people wondering like I was:
        Size comparison between Boxer MRAV, AMV 35, Abrams and ASLAV.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      because nobody want's to be the one who has to explain that the IFV that got BTFO by a MBT was not really meant to survive a hit by MBT. Sandbox wars and no wars in long time lead to western countries be really casualty averse, so we wen't full on on protection. That then means that the IFVs weight almost as much as a tank, and cost the same too. Weight and all the additional features bolted on to them then lead to most countries having like 50 IFVs in total. Also because armored vehicle manufactring is heavy industry and because of national pride, each country makes their own, or at the very least modifies existing one to the point of ridiculousness. CV90 with some modernizations, javelin launcher, and a optional APS would do 99% of what these current projects do, and actually exist too.

      At least Pooland realized now is not the time to get bogged down in procurement hell and just buys existing shit.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      because weight doesn't matter anymore, and height isn't the problem it used to be. If your enemy has access to LRF/FCS in their vehicles and weapon systems the likelihood you're going to get hit even with a very small tank isn't much better than a big one.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    British have always sucked at IFV development. See the warrior as an example

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Warrior made sense in context, but they kept using it, without any major upgrades, past its best before date.
      And, of course, they eventually decided on a late upgrade package, only to cancel it a couple years later.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Warrior never made sense in any context. Stabilized guns and dual feed technology were mature technologies when the warrior was designed.
        >inb4 the fighting vehicle was designed to take slow, well aimed shots from a hull down position instead of being able to maneuver effectively

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the turret is lifted wholesale from a vehicle so small and shit that they couldn't fit an autoguns electrics inside it
          that nobody managed in the dozens of update attempts to just fucking put a better turret on it and do nothing else is astounding even for the MOD, and the cost of it was even worse

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No warriors were ever exported. Kuwait bought warriors but demanded the turret be completely replaced by an American turret

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            akshually

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              yeah and how many of those are in the inventory

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I meant that there was an attempt, just that they cancelled it, because lmao

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                if the LEP is the one I'm thinking of it's because it was overbudget by like, 100x and the BAE rep literally laughed in the faces of, during a recorded metting, the MPs and officers that tried to investigate what the fuck was happening

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >A total of £430m had been spent so far. No in-service date had been set, but the demonstration phase was due to finish in 2021. In June 2020 the House of Commons Defence Select Committee described the project as running over three years late and £227 million over budget.

                Seems like it was "merely" twice overbudget when it was eventually shitcanned.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's gonna be a Nimrod 2.0

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                money well spent, thank god for two decades of austerity or we would have to cut back on paying the arms monopolies money to not do what we ask them

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the BAE rep literally laughed in the faces of, during a recorded metting, the MPs and officers that tried to investigate what the fuck was happening
                Based tbh

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wait, the Warrior's turret design was recycled from the Scimitar?
            That would explain why it's so undersized.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the LEP getting cancelled right before the Ajax problems popping up. absolute bruh moment

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You think that’s bad, take a look at british MANPADS

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Cope vatnik

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why do you keep posting this? It was never confirmed to be shitstreak. Don’t reply to me without proof of your claim that the UKranian MOD confirmed it was fartqueef

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Three clearly visible detonations within the aircraft instead of a blast-frag proximity warhead like every other fucking MANPADS

          Vatniks really love to beg for proofs of things that are evident to anyone with eyes, don't they?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            > >Three clearly visible detonations within the aircraft
            I’m sorry but you aren’t qualified to judge this based on this grainy footage. Besides the tail section that was hit houses flares so it can’t be definitively said. Can you post some proof please.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Vatnik needs permission from dear leader to use his eyes.
              Yeah, checks out.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There aren’t 3 small explosive darts featured in the video posted. It looks nothing like starstreak

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There are though. Proofs posted, vatniks btfo as always.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No there absolutely aren’t. With the prescience of flares in the tail of the helicopter a judgement can’t be made from the grainy footage. Perhaps an MOD statement that is widely used as evidence of starstreak bagging it’s only kill can be posted. We’ve heard a lot about how the UKranian MOD confirmed it. Just post that to BTFO the haters

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes there are though. It's right there, it's so obvious. Some flares going off obviously wouldn't lead to the tail going off too, it's obviously Starstreak. Proofs posted, haters BTFO.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That’s not proof? And a manor exploding and setting off flares could absolutely knock the tail off. It’s right there in the video ffs. Imagine having to shill this hard to attribute a single kill to the starstreak. It’s pathetic

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's obviously proofs, there's no need to act schizophrenic just because you hate the British or something.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not obvious if it’s so heavily contested. Sorry but starstreak just hasn’t earned the benefit of the doubt like the stinger or IGLA

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's not heavily contested though, only FAS addled vatniks deny it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It is heavily contested. Only Thales executives and British tabloids deny that

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Drunken russians are not a 'heavy' criticism kek.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I’m not Russian at all I’m from the US

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Comrade John Smith from Georgia Oblast here!

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                One state south

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Nah.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Americans can’t be critical of British tech!
                Delusional

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                My friend, you are not American. You will never be American.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                cope

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Grainy picture of random card is not proofs, you are not qualified to say that this is not just printed onto index card. Post proofs. You can't.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                delicious cope. jokes on you as the ukranian MOD has confirmed I’m American.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                BTFO

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Where is the proofs? Post SSN.

                >posted 1 minute and 3 seconds apart
                yikes

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >N-no, only one person can make fun of me at a time!

                Sorry comrade.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Where is the proofs? Post SSN.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're literally responding to warriortard. Stop.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Warriortard is Armatard.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not convinced, but maybe. Either way my point stands.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Should have bought CV90 moment
    there fixed that for ya

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is very big. They almost never do this, its always a depressing tale of extending the contract and actually paying the supplier a bonus effectively just to do what they were supposed to do.

    Glad someone put their foot down finally.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Uh mate, if you make changes to the product you want multiple times, and then demandd arbitrary criteria before its "finished" then yea, you have to pay extra

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Bradley>warrior
    Stinger>starstreak

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Water wet

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Have General Dynamics UK any previous experience of designing IFVs?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They cloned the Ascod hull from General Dynamics Spain (Systemas Santa Barbara).
      Only problem is they should've done a thorough redesign (sort of what they eventually did for the Griffin light tank).
      However, either because that wasn't originally budgeted for by the MoD, or because they didn't give a fuck, they just stuck with the original bodyplan, which was for a vehicle 8 to 10 tons lighter.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's just corruption tbh. The army didn't want the Challenger 2 either.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    General Dynamics isn't going to get many more UK Gov't contracts for the foreseeable future tbh

    They should be forced to pay back the money they wasted on this shitty programme

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Given that BAE never paid back one penny of the money they wasted on the Warrior upgrade package, GD would just laugh in their faces.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah man we'll just go ask the other companies in the war industry to do the job
      oh wait we made them/had to conglomerate them because america subsidised theirs haha, now we don't have a choice but to use the same three companies that all know it'll be their turn to swindle us next

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Your MIC operates the same way practically every other MIC operates. The only thing you have to complain about is lackluster results.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Rheinmetall seem to be on track with the Boxers.
        It's just that the MoD seemingly hates sourcing stuff from them, unless they have literally no other option.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Just buy a finished product instead of being a gay nancy that has to have some special deal.

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nearly as bad as the warrior.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Should have bought Lynx moment
    The vehicle based on the vehicle that is was introduced 10 years ago, is still not operational and will only be operational in 10 more years?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Take a step back for a second, try to write that in english.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      During the time spent by GDUK wasting the bong taxpayer's dime with this shitpile, Rheinmetall came up with 2 (two) generations of the Lynx.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >shittalking Ajax
        >with Rheinmetall as your poster boy
        Go read about Puma, go read about how far behind it is, and then come back here and apologize.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Puma got fucked by a combo of factors. One of them was Rheinmetall not having designed a blank-slate IFV in 30 years (a lot of the original Marder design guys had retired), but also the kraut gov constantly low-balling them (a modern classic), and changing their minds about requirements during development (another modern classic).
          The Lynx exists because RM learned from that, and decided to create something they can sell off-the-rack, rather than fiddle with the capricious design requirements of various governments.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        KF31 is a Marder with an upgrade package, not a real KF41 Lynx

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There are apparently vibration problems? If so, what is cause?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Being 10 tons over the orginal design weight leading to wacky resonance frequencies

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Adding weight without reworking the suspension. Messing with the engine but not reworking the mounts. Also the PPP was a problem too.

      Its not as big a problem as suggested, its still embarrassing though.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        People don't tend to realize that most of this stuff takes three times longer than it could to cut costs on expensive educated labor.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Have you ever been involved with work that has politicians, bureaucrats, professional military sorts, and all sorts of committees?

          Shit takes long for a reason

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Its not as big a problem as suggested, its still embarrassing though.

        Quite the fucking problem because they don't know how to fix it without starting from scratch.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Quite the fucking problem because they don't know how to fix it without starting from scratch.
          This is incorrect. They did a whole report on it, which I summarized, and the solution is simply more dampeners, new engine mounts, better PPE.

          The problem is that this takes time and money, politicians dislike that, and the English press is carnivorous.

          Puma got fucked by a combo of factors. One of them was Rheinmetall not having designed a blank-slate IFV in 30 years (a lot of the original Marder design guys had retired), but also the kraut gov constantly low-balling them (a modern classic), and changing their minds about requirements during development (another modern classic).
          The Lynx exists because RM learned from that, and decided to create something they can sell off-the-rack, rather than fiddle with the capricious design requirements of various governments.

          Doesnt really matter. The point is that if you leave a weapons company alone they can shit out a vehicle in no time at all, but once governments get involved things drag on for decades. The Germans or Brits could choose Lynx tomorrow and neither of them would have one in full service by 2030.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >This is incorrect. They did a whole report on it, which I summarized, and the solution is simply more dampeners, new engine mounts, better PPE.

            That's wrong. They straight up said that they don't know if the problem can be fixed.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Thats wrong. They said they dont know if they can save the program, citing time and cost.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >better PPE
            Better PPE isn't a solution. If you work in construction and have a machine/procedure that routinely injures people you need to change the thing causing it, PPE is not a solution in and of itself

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              PPE injured the crew as well anon.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Its not as big a problem as suggested
        Anon, it literally physically injures the crew.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Thats a talking point, not a substantive argument.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What kind of problem would be bigger? Vibrations strong enough to instantly kill the crew and/or disassemble the whole vehicle?

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they literally could have just bought Chinese

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      no sane Non-Latam nation will ever buy chinese

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >GD.
    >Fucking up.
    I'm shocked. They're too used to being thrown billions by the the DoD for just existing, other countries can't afford failed programs like this, I doubt GD is going to see much action outside of the US after this debacle.

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Time to just can the whole thing. It wasn't a particularly good idea in the first place.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    CV90 probably sounds like a good idea at this moment in time.

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's over

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why can't they just put the ajax turret on a griffin iii?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      different internals. the "current" Ajax has internals made for reconnaisance and strike, aka shit ton of electronics. the Griffin III on the other hand is a troop carrier with a fucking 105mm gun turret.

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >an entire thread where almost no one points out that Ajax isn't an IFV or meant to replace the warrior

    it does highlight the problem that its meant to be for light and fast recon but its a massively obese, loaded down with armour that wouldn't save it on a conventional battlefield and bigger than a lot of IFVs let alone the tiny and fast scimitar it is replacing.

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Has there actually been a european weapons procurement in the last 30 years that didn't inevitable wind up with this sort of bullshit?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Boxer went unironically decently well

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The boxer is old, but even still I recall controversy early on. Cost overruns and delays.
        I don't trust european arms dealers, they spent too long with a "milk the taxpayer" mentality never expecting the prospect of a real war or taking a multipolar world seriously, and now they're actually worried about the new eastern bloc they've got too many bad habits to break, to many useless people in the wrong positions, and whatever experience they actually had in the doctrine-development cycle has degraded so far they may as well all be new entrants.

        There are a few exceptions, OTO at least seems to have people who genuinely like engineering naval guns, but for the most part they've all gotten very good at a game that doesn't give points for delivering actual capability in a timely and cost-effective manner.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I recall controversies, because it was initially a French/German project with the UK joining in, then as usual the French left. And also UK insisting on keeping the weight down for airlift capabilities, which is fair enough. But overall I would say it went "decently" fast and well, for a completly newly made vehicle.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You mean to say it went decently by the standards of european defence contractors.
            Which is kinda making my point.

  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Ajax failed due to the frogs screwing up the CTAS40 gun. Same with the Warrior. Frogs are going to replace the 40mm gun on their shitty Jaguar with a .50 cal because of this. I swear fuck these bitch ass surrender monkeys. Better buy the new kraut IFV, me bloke told me you can brew a quick tea and cook a cheeky sausage inside.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      are they really going to replace the CTAS gun? any written source for that?

Your email address will not be published.