What went wrong?

Germany will not purchase any more Puma infantry tanks until they have proven themselves to be reliable, Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht said on Monday after several of the vehicles were put out of service during a recent military drill.

"The recent failures of the Puma infantry fighting vehicle are a major setback," Lambrecht said in a statement

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >it’s real
    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/puma-tank-failure-is-heavy-setback-germany-defence-ministry-2022-12-19/

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So the Puma sucks ? Why don't they adopt the Boxer or the VBCI ?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Boxer isn’t very good either. It’s main gimmick is modularity but that’s actually a drawback. Imagine having to replace an IFV with an ambulance modular. The IFV crew is left playing with their cocks because they don’t have a chassis anymore.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Boxer isn’t very good either
        You're talking out of your ass, it's the next best 8x8 to Stryker DVH
        >It’s main gimmick is modularity
        it's extremely well protected and has the full suite of weapons and electronics
        >but that’s actually a drawback
        no it's not you ignorant lardball
        >Imagine having to replace an IFV with an ambulance modular. The IFV crew is left playing with their cocks
        you forgot the existence of the maintenance pool vehicles

        what the modules allow is a fast turnaround time at depot level because instead of waiting speciically for IFV #297 to be repaired, the IFV crew can just grab the next available chassis and next available IFV module in the repair stream and go

        >Here, it is indeed necessary to take a precise look at what exactly has led to tanks having to be passed around in a fully equipped unit. Is it due to the Puma's maintenance-intensive nature, too few spare parts, a lack of maintenance capacity, or perhaps even misguided planning on the part of the troops, who for whatever reason were unable to adequately synchronize the necessary times for technical service and training operations?

        >The mass of evidence that is now becoming public increasingly indicates that the Puma must be ascribed the attribute of bruiser rather than breakdown tank. If the operational capability of a system suffers from the fact that insufficient spare parts are available, maintenance personnel are lacking, insufficiently qualified or inexperienced, there are planning deficiencies in the use of the system or the system is used contrary to the specifications, then it is not due to the technology alone, then the causes are anchored in the system. This is further reinforced by the fact that, according to reports, there are Puma units in the Army with very good clearances - despite training operations. The probability is high that at the end of the investigation it will have to be determined that the Puma was used as a buffer for the mistakes of others.

        >what exactly has led to tanks having to be passed around
        disingenuous; he knows very well that this is the motor pool vehicle system most European armies adopt; bunch of different units using the same set of vehicles for training rather than a particular set assigned to their unit

        Also, why don't they follow the example of the French and British armies and adopt the 40mm CTA ? It's literally the best IFV cannon round as of now, it's as powerful as a Bofors 40mm and yet it only take slightly more space than 25mm.

        Boxer predated the CTA forty

        [...]
        why do you lie?

        >But only until recently, when the 18 Pumas mentioned in the introduction failed completely. A week after the failures became known in the media and the Puma was once again dubbed a breakdown tank, the situation is slowly becoming clearer as to what actually happened at the firing practice center. According to an article in the FAZ, which is not disputed by either the BMVg or the Army, the damage situation of the 18 tanks is completely inconsistent.

        >Moreover, the majority of the technical problems are said to be easy to fix and partly due to prescribed but not performed technical service. In addition, a statement by the division commander is contradicted in the sense that the vehicles were not used during the exercise itself, but were heavily stressed in the run-up to it, in that they were passed around from platoon to platoon or from company to company for any exercises. Experienced soldiers know very well that this always ends in a less than careful handling of the material. According to the FAZ article, only two of the 18 systems actually showed major damage.

        >this always ends in a less than careful handling of the material
        indeed, the "not my ride not my problem", "it's a rental" issue
        solvable by making those cunts not take shortcuts with maintenance

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the absolute delusional cope in here concerning anything german from pavels hahahaha

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >So the Puma sucks
      No, the problems are absolutely exaggerated.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No they aren’t. They deadlined 90% of their active vehicles on excersize. And Germany is pretty lax with its maintenance. They won’t deadline for small problems like the Americans would.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No they’re pretty major problems. Production has come to a grinding halt to see if the problems can be worked out

          why do you lie?

          >But only until recently, when the 18 Pumas mentioned in the introduction failed completely. A week after the failures became known in the media and the Puma was once again dubbed a breakdown tank, the situation is slowly becoming clearer as to what actually happened at the firing practice center. According to an article in the FAZ, which is not disputed by either the BMVg or the Army, the damage situation of the 18 tanks is completely inconsistent.

          >Moreover, the majority of the technical problems are said to be easy to fix and partly due to prescribed but not performed technical service. In addition, a statement by the division commander is contradicted in the sense that the vehicles were not used during the exercise itself, but were heavily stressed in the run-up to it, in that they were passed around from platoon to platoon or from company to company for any exercises. Experienced soldiers know very well that this always ends in a less than careful handling of the material. According to the FAZ article, only two of the 18 systems actually showed major damage.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Here, it is indeed necessary to take a precise look at what exactly has led to tanks having to be passed around in a fully equipped unit. Is it due to the Puma's maintenance-intensive nature, too few spare parts, a lack of maintenance capacity, or perhaps even misguided planning on the part of the troops, who for whatever reason were unable to adequately synchronize the necessary times for technical service and training operations?

            >The mass of evidence that is now becoming public increasingly indicates that the Puma must be ascribed the attribute of bruiser rather than breakdown tank. If the operational capability of a system suffers from the fact that insufficient spare parts are available, maintenance personnel are lacking, insufficiently qualified or inexperienced, there are planning deficiencies in the use of the system or the system is used contrary to the specifications, then it is not due to the technology alone, then the causes are anchored in the system. This is further reinforced by the fact that, according to reports, there are Puma units in the Army with very good clearances - despite training operations. The probability is high that at the end of the investigation it will have to be determined that the Puma was used as a buffer for the mistakes of others.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Here, it is indeed necessary to take a precise look at what exactly has led to tanks having to be passed around in a fully equipped unit. Is it due to the Puma's maintenance-intensive nature, too few spare parts, a lack of maintenance capacity, or perhaps even misguided planning on the part of the troops, who for whatever reason were unable to adequately synchronize the necessary times for technical service and training operations?

            >The mass of evidence that is now becoming public increasingly indicates that the Puma must be ascribed the attribute of bruiser rather than breakdown tank. If the operational capability of a system suffers from the fact that insufficient spare parts are available, maintenance personnel are lacking, insufficiently qualified or inexperienced, there are planning deficiencies in the use of the system or the system is used contrary to the specifications, then it is not due to the technology alone, then the causes are anchored in the system. This is further reinforced by the fact that, according to reports, there are Puma units in the Army with very good clearances - despite training operations. The probability is high that at the end of the investigation it will have to be determined that the Puma was used as a buffer for the mistakes of others.

            This is from a blog of a rheinmentall executive. I posted Reuters. Germany paused their planned purchases of puma until its issues can be sorted out. When that is is unclear

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >This is from a blog of a rheinmentall executive
              no it's not, it's from a professional journal:
              https://soldat-und-technik.de/2022/12/mobilitaet/33604/schuetzenpanzer-puma-pannenpanzer-oder-prellbock/
              >I posted Reuters
              you posted a screenshot of a headline. Reuters is no military professional journal and I'm pretty sure their article doesn't go in depth about the actual technical problems. You're free to prove me wrong though.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                German defense minister paused orders of puma. The problems are deeper than we thought

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >German defense minister
                doesn't give a shit about the military and is only in this position due to party politics
                >The problems are deeper than we thought
                the Puma itself is likely fine, the problem is the military as a whole, number of spare parts, number of actual vehicles, how vehicles are assigned to units, etc.
                the article I posted goes in-depth, the screenshot and bait question you posted doesn't, bc you don't actuall care about the topic
                >paused orders of puma
                symbol politics to act like she's doing something instead of actualy addressing the army's problems

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This is a disaster. Pretending it’s not isn’t any good for the future of the puma program. This should have never come to light before the Australians made their decision

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Is the Lynx less of a disaster ? The Puma can't even fit soldiers that are 6ft+.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >imagine believing every dimwitted cope headline

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >German blogger does damage control
                It must be worse than we thought

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No they’re pretty major problems. Production has come to a grinding halt to see if the problems can be worked out

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Germany already owns 400 Boxers.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What is that?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A 10/10 German girl

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, I think it's their latest military minister, kek.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Isn't Von der Leyen the one who started the G36 scandal ? Didn't every user of the G36 except Germany found her claims about the rifle's accuracy being utter bullshit ? I know the Latvians and the Spaniards tested it and found no problem.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          We upgraded them to our standards hence why it's not a plastic peace of shit like Germany ran but more of a proper rifle now
          t. Lithuanian

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What are the upgrades ?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              it's just the current version HK offers instead of the older one that Germany bought 20+ years ago

              This is a disaster. Pretending it’s not isn’t any good for the future of the puma program. This should have never come to light before the Australians made their decision

              >Pretending it’s not isn’t any good for the future of the puma program
              what we discuss on here is completely irrelevant
              all I'm saying is it looks like the problem lies more within the bad state of the German army than with the Puma itself, as the article I posted suggests
              >This should have never come to light before the Australians made their decision
              idk whether it impacts their decision, Lynx and Puma are not the same vehicle and the Australians get to test the Lynx extensively
              and it whether military matters like this should be brought public is debatable, might be relevant to national security, but Germany is secure in NATO anyway. This way at least it might cause public attention which forces politicians to improve the situation (but this is likely wishful thinking).

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            more like

            t.delusional dimwit

            german soldiers all said the g36 was a perfect rifle, HK even won the court case against the german state which is why they're suppying the new rifle too

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Also, why don't they follow the example of the French and British armies and adopt the 40mm CTA ? It's literally the best IFV cannon round as of now, it's as powerful as a Bofors 40mm and yet it only take slightly more space than 25mm.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Meanwhile Ajax has had a solution to it's problems implemented and has resumed trials.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Note: The cable fire was caused by some fuck-up caused by a recent upgrade plus a lack of maintenance since the recently uograded vehicles were heavily overused and shared among troops with little to no maintenance and thus warned the nickname of "wanderwhores."
    If you lurked these threads before you'll have heard it come up.
    What remains is that you morons still fell for fake news.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]
    Note: The cable fire was caused by some fuck-up caused by a recent upgrade plus a lack of maintenance since the recently uograded vehicles were heavily overused and shared among troops with little to no maintenance and thus warned the nickname of "wanderwhores."
    If you lurked these threads before you'll have heard it come up.
    What remains is that you morons still fell for fake news.

    Honestly this sounds like some heavy cope to me.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      See the link and translate either that ir check the linked articles.
      You are wrong, the anon from vefore was right. You fell for fake news.

      [...]
      [...]
      >it's just the Bundesfags downchecking vehicles for a screw loose
      if true, this just shifts the problem to Bundesfags being Bundesgays

      The bundeswehr has plenty of issues but this was the MoD and media fucking up by taking things out of context and misreporting them. Angloid media then fantasised about them "breaking down."
      Perhaps deliberately.
      You are at fault if you blindly believing it. How have you not learned not to trust journies during Obama's first term already?
      They literally always lie.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >rant rant rant OBAMA rant
        I'm prepared to be even-minded, but your attitude isn't doing you any favours

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Angloid media
        Obsessed.
        Can you blame them? Look how much material you have given them over the past 10 years. Everyone likes a good clown to laugh at.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]
    Note: The cable fire was caused by some fuck-up caused by a recent upgrade plus a lack of maintenance since the recently uograded vehicles were heavily overused and shared among troops with little to no maintenance and thus warned the nickname of "wanderwhores."
    If you lurked these threads before you'll have heard it come up.
    What remains is that you morons still fell for fake news.

    >it's just the Bundesfags downchecking vehicles for a screw loose
    if true, this just shifts the problem to Bundesfags being Bundesgays

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Puma broken
    >Eurofighters grounded
    >90% of helicopters grounded
    >Tank fleet broken
    >German troops leaving Afganistan were stranded because there transport was broken, they called for the replacement...but that too was broken
    >Guns replaced with brooms
    >Turns up to NATO exercises in cars and pretends they are IFVs and Tanks
    >All submarines broken
    >Navy non existent
    >Can't deploy anywhere near a decent amount of hardware and manpower anywhere but in its own Barracks at a stretch

    The above is/was all true at some point. Cut the cope Dennis, the German military is an embzrresment and should be kicked out of NATO.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >All vehicles except two didn't have real issues

    Real enough to have their deployment cancelled, why are you pretending that your god awful bureaucracy doesn't matter? we all know you cuck yourself during wars because of it.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *