Do WOLF-class vehicles have a future in the field?

[Falstaff]

As some of you may know the Bundeswehr is in the acquisition process for several thousend new GFF ("Geschützte Führungs- und Funktionsfahrzeuge", something like "protected command and utility vehicles"), among them the small GFF class 1 vehicles, which are intended as a replacement for the WOLF (mercedes-Benz G model) vehicles. The contenders can be seen here.
While the WOLF remains a useful vehicle because of it's very good off-road characteristics and small size it doesn't reach the required protection levels, even in the up-armoured MSS ("Modularer SplitterSchutz", modular splinter protection) and MSA ("Mudulare Schutzaustattung", modular protection equipment) variants, especially against the background of the deployment in Afghanistan.
Now the following has happened: A friend of mine who works at the BWB (which is our procurement agency) told me that the "Frettchen" was a complete wreck after just 800km of trials and that is wasn't very well made at all. Researching this I found confirmation here (german). But I also found a letter of inquiry from the Liberal Party to the government, concerning the deployment of protected Bundeswehr vehicles in Ahghanistan (link).
One of the questions was: Is it true, that a decision conerning the development and acquisition of GFF class 1 vehicles could not be made because none of the provided trial vehicles could fulfill the Bundeswehr's requirements [...]?
The government's answer to this is that the trials have not ended yet and there will be a new assessment based on mission requirements .
One must not even read between the lines... So called "little inquiries" are never launched if you don't know the answer, the sense of it being to embarass the government.
So I'm wondering: If none of the vehicles can fulfill the requirements, do vehicles in this class have a future on today's battlefield at all?
Perhaps this class of vehicle is just too small to provide sufficient protection levels along with the required robustness and off-road capabilities.

 

[gf0012-aust]

So I'm wondering: If none of the vehicles can fulfill the requirements, do vehicles in this class have a future on today's battlefield at all?
Perhaps this class of vehicle is just too small to provide sufficient protection levels along with the required robustness and off-road capabilities.

well, australia has just ordered a significant number of G-Wagens to replace the landrovers etc....

it becomes an issue of doctrine - in our case (in general) G-Wagens would not be used in contested areas and are utility vehicles. supacats are what would be deployed into contested space for combat roles.

 

[StevoJH]

well, australia has just ordered a significant number of G-Wagens to replace the landrovers etc....

it becomes an issue of doctrine - in our case (in general) G-Wagens would not be used in contested areas and are utility vehicles. supacats are what would be deployed into contested space for combat roles.

Ok, i'm curious, what is the difference between a G-wagon and a Land Rover that stopped them from just ordering more Land Rovers to replace the current fleet as each vehicle reached x number of years old or x number of km's (eg, NSW police replace their cars after 40,000km IIRC).

 

[Falstaff]

In order to clarify my posting a bit: of course the GFF 1 class vehicles are intended to replace the G-wagens in contested areas, not in general.

it becomes an issue of doctrine - in our case (in general) G-Wagens would not be used in contested areas and are utility vehicles. supacats are what would be deployed into contested space for combat roles.

So Australia decided to use a somewhat bigger vehicle for such duties. I would be interested in the reasons why.

Interestingly, the Luftwaffe decided it didn't need the GFF 1 class vehicles due to the "expected performance" of these vehicles and opted to go for the GFF 2 class vehicles directly, for which recently the MOWAG Eagle IV was chosen.
On the other hand, the french army chose the Gavial for the PVP-programm. The Gavial is also a contender for the GFF 1 class.

 

[kato]

The GFF and GTF programs are obviously not intended to fully replace unarmored vehicles.

The 23,000 number in the Tagesschau blog is BS. Future mix is supposed to be roughly 50/50 armored/unarmored in the Bundeswehr, with about 7,500-8,000 vehicles each. This in light of severe downsizings in a lot of rear units, regarding the number of their vehicles.

As for the FDP question... in my opinion that's mostly because the requirements for GFF1 are sort of "tighter". After all, there'll be some 2,500 or so GFF1 procured, preferably of a single class. With GFF2 and GFF3, requirements are a bit more flexible, and there are even multiple classes being procured in these.