• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Germans and Dutch Buying Boxer Light? Armoured Vehicle

Kirkhill

Puggled and Wabbit Scot.
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
8,203
Points
1,160
GTK Boxer for the German Armed Forces 
 
(Source: Krauss Maffei Wegmann; issued Dec. 13, 2006)

The German Army has won Bundestag approval to order 272 Boxer armoured vehicles; the Netherlands will buy 200 (Krauss Maffei Wegmann photo)MUNICH --- Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) welcomes today's decision of the German parliament (Bundestag) in Berlin to procure 272 highly protected Boxer vehicles. It has set with this decision an especially important procurement milestone towards a European-developed armored transport vehicle involving border-crossing production with the Dutch partner. The Dutch armed forces will procure 200 Boxer vehicles as well.  ....

The Boxer is an optimally protected, highly mobile transport vehicle of high payload capacity and can be deployed reliably even in extreme environments. Its comprehensive protection against mines and ballistic threats is based on the most advanced technologies and guarantees maximum crew survivability. High mobility, stealth design, modern observation equipment, an effective self-defense armament, the smoke grenade launcher as well as the standard NBC protection and environmental control system are further key features enhancing survivability in critical situations. 

With its consistent modular construction, the BOXER represents an ideal, highly flexible system platform for a variety of different missions. Its high payload capacity, combined with a large, fully protected interior, permits the integration of complex kits and offers future-oriented growth potential. Proven powerpack and suspension components ensure superb off- and on-road mobility in any situation. Rapid availability in out-of-area missions is guaranteed by its airportability on the Airbus A 400M.  ....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.16851726.1133540294.Q5BzxsOa9dUAAHeSPdQ&modele=jdc_34

Just check out the Crew Commander on this beast.  And the size of those ruts in the track.  This is a MASSIVE vehicle.

 
quite a bit like the LAV when you get down to it............
 
sides are straight up and down......like the Bison.
I thought the LAV III was given sloped sides to address that "problem"... so is it a problem?
 
Looking at that machine....my first thought is it's a perfect chasis for adding a hydraulics system to it and a small blade similar to how logging skidders operate. 

Of course to house the hydraulics you'd loose some crew space so I'm not sure if it's a no-go for light duty engineering...

 
They have already got that (blade & hydraulic & auger) figured out on the LAV & Bison variants.  don't see much of an advantage of boxer over LAV
 
don't see much of an advantage of boxer over LAV

Beyond, perhaps the Mass of 33,000 kg.  Better momentum and better anchor.  Of course, all that mass acts straight down into those 3 foot deep ruts.  :)

Specifications Notes
Crew 2 -
Cruise Speed 22 mps (43 kt)  -
Height 2.4 m (8 ft)  -
Length 7.9 m (26 ft)  -
Max Range 1,050 km (567 nm)  -
Max Weight 33,000 kg (72,751 lb)  -
Min Weight 25,000 kg (55,115 lb)  -
Passengers 9 -
Payload 8,000 kg (17,637 lb)  -
Power (shp) 710 hp -
Span 3.0 m (10 ft)  -
Max Speed 29 mps (56 kt)  -
Wheels 8 -

http://www.deagel.com/Multirole-Armored-Vehicles/Boxer_a000567001.aspx
 
It'd be nice if you could fit a 6-way blade onto the machine.....but then you're talking a dedicated engineering machine that is probably better handled via a convential bulldozer.  You loose the personal capacity....but if you need to move that much dirt grab a DH-6 and do it properly.  If you just need to knock a hole in something a more convential blade will do it....or use explosives.

I wonder what sort of ground they were operating on and how many passes they had made before creating the ruts shown in the pictures.  Short of swamps I rarely see that kind of rut with loaded industrial civilian machines.
 
I'm probably going to regret saying this, but my uncle is a heavy equipment operator, and he thinks that it would be pretty top heavy with a crane stuck on the top.
rip it apart boys (and girls)
 
geo said:
quite a bit like the LAV when you get down to it............

Yeah, but I could fit SO many more radios in this one  ;D
 
Seems like quite the transformer though..................

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/
 
At the risk of sounding cynical here, but what do the Germans need more armoured vehicles for? Not like they're really using what they already have...
 
Big Foot said:
At the risk of sounding cynical here, but what do the Germans need more armoured vehicles for? Not like they're really using what they already have...

Dat vas not verry nice!  ;)
 
bigfoot.
You have to consider that the Germans, in order to encourage R&D and maintain production capacity "in country" must continue to throw contracts out there & purchase.

Once the taxpayers have funded the R&D, the German Mfg can export the technology & make a bundle on the taxpayers' back........ again.
 
Right, I forgot, the military is about making a buck. lol. I guess I am just cynical.
 
Big Foot et al:

Gents, before continuing to snipe at the Germans for their lack of combat in Afghanistan, let's remember that there are a lot of Bundeswehr soldiers there that would love to get into combat with the Taliban just as much as our troops are.  I have a number of friends who are officers in the Bundesheer, all combat arms, who wish they were allowed to do night patrolling, take aggressive action and use their capabilites to bring the fight to the enemy.  Military forces have to follow their government's orders; the Bundeswehr of all organziations remembers this all too well and its employment, sometimes down to tactical details, is VERY strictly controlled at very high levels.

Let's not forget the many places where our soldiers were hamstrung by orders and policies from higher (DESERT SHIELD/STORM, UNPROFOR, IFOR/SFOR, Op APOLLO to name a few) and not permitted to act as aggressively as other nations or take the lead in combat.  Ask older 8th Hussars of the bitterness and disappointment engendered by the decision not to send them to DESERT STORM but relegate them to guarding Kasernes in Germany while VII Corps went to battle.  Does anyone else here remember feeling the sting of shame after having to explain to UK or US allies overseas why the Canadian Forces were 'not allowed' to do things or go places that other countries were?  When you have felt that shame, Big Foot, you will know better than to make comments like "they are not using what they have" - we were a country in that same boat until just recently.  Reading your profile, it does not seem that your cynicism is based on any real experience.

There are threads on this site from people who served on Op ATHENA Roto 2 decrying the Germans and their lack of professionalism, all of which are true of the unit and individuals in that time and place.  I'm not so sure that all Canadian soldiers are paragons of virtue, professionalism and soldierly skills such that we can look down our nose at others and paint an entire military force with the same brush- you can find good and bad everywhere.  In addition, I do believe that at a strategic level, Germany fulfils its part of NATO's collective security requirements in terms of acquiring and maintaining first-line, modern equipment, forces and funds allocated in sufficient quantity far more than Canada does. 

In terms of "making a buck", coutries need to keep defence industry viable - look at the decline of Canada's shipbuilding industry and the "JSS issues" discussed elsewhere here as an illustration of this need.  In addition, let's remember the follow-on industrial benefits that accrue to the civilian sector by having an effective and modern defence capability.  Expanding view outwards from just defence into second and third order industrial effects will let you see that R&D for armoured vehicles worth is a little more than "making a buck".

I do not see the Bundeswehr, US Army, USMC, IDF, UK Army, RN, ADF, RAF, JSDF or any other military force as the be-all and end-all of military forces - all have strengths and weaknesses.  However I do see a trend creeping into many posts demonstrating a lack of objectivity and maintaining a view that the Canadian Forces has suddenly become far superior to others on all levels based on recent accomplishments in Afghanistan.  While there is no doubting the skills, efforts, sacrifices and combat effectiveness of our soldiers there it does not give us carte-blanche to adopt a collective sense of moral superiority.
 
CSA105,  I am not sniping at the German military... never have, never will.
I am somewhat cynical with respect to the politicians who make decisions that oft fails to pass scrutiny.

The professional armies that are deployed on NATO missions are just that, professional.... the politicians are the amateurs.

Also,  I fail to understand why you would have had to appologize to anyone about anything the Cdn Gov't has done.  Was there merit in going to Iraq???.... I dunno and the US has never provided an adequate explanation to support their case.  At 1st they say it is to get the WMDs.... then they change it to "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people!.  So - which is it this week?

Call me jaded.
 
Back
Top