My idea's to upgrade the Dutch military.

[Firn]

Like the Belgians...

Well 24 or 0...
Tanks: 56 or 0...
Only a small step.
.

I must correct me, and accept the truth. An NATO army of a 11 million nation without artilley and tanks....

Is the largest gun then a 90mm cannon mounted on a LIV aka LAV III? -> Sorry I must correct me, there are 14 light towed 105 mm howitzers. I apologize to all Belgium members that I have cast the shadow of doubt on their mighty artillery.


Actually I support a low spending under current cirumstances, but such a restructure, words fail me. I can understand when Slovenia with their two millions ditches the old WP tanks. but Belgium....

Don't get me wrong, it is a good army to keep peace with - until somebody starts a war in earnest.

 

[IPA35]

And we are going the same way.

I hope my list would change that if some more bright politicians take power.
You still disagree?
1 or 2 pages back, some minor changes and it is not over expensive IMO.

EDIT:
Italy will have the best european fighter fleet in the future with both high numbers of EF and F-35

 

[Firn]

And we are going the same way.

I hope my list would change that if some more bright politicians take power.
You still disagree?
1 or 2 pages back, some minor changes and it is not over expensive IMO.

I will take later perhaps a look.

EDIT:
Italy will have the best european fighter fleet in the future with both high numbers of EF and F-35

But the army will be almost completely be made of Southerns. Sicilian, Apulian and Campanian Alpinis, great mountaineers, climbers and skiers :freeze

Just joking -mostly.

Only the mostly Alpine regions and the Appennino was traditionally the recruiting ground for the Alpini, which were considered the "better" and "hardier" soldiers and the only ones truly suited for the warfare in the mountains. There are some good arguments for such recruitment areas and some good - especially in an professional army - against it. With 70% of the recruits from the centro-sud (mostly southerns with less than ideal education) the traditions will surly get lost. Nothing tragic, just a fact. Overall the great reduction of the Alpini is a mostly good factor for my region.

 

[IPA35]

Haha...
Been only once in Italy, very pretty but quite poor I believe.

I'm still think of a vehicle for the Marine Corps and maybe a vehicles for the Airmobile brigade.
An IFV, available in AT, support and mortar versions.
Preferably the same type for both branches.
Amfibious (marine corps).

-Patria AMV (could replace current Sisu's).
-Wiesel 2 (not for marine corps and a bit old)
-BDM-3 (russian but alot of versions and air dropable)

 

[Firn]

Haha...
Been only once in Italy, very pretty but quite poor I believe.

It depends where you go. It is not a accident that all the guys from the South go into the army, while in the North they don't. The north-south devide is real and it is stark. My region is rather wealthy and is the most expensive in Italy.

I'm still think of a vehicle for the Marine Corps and maybe a vehicles for the Airmobile brigade.
An IFV, available in AT, support and mortar versions.
Preferably the same type for both branches.
Amfibious (marine corps).

-Patria AMV (could replace current Sisu's).
-Wiesel 2 (not for marine corps and a bit old)
-BDM-3 (russian but alot of versions and air dropable)

It depends a lot how the forces should be organized.


The AMV is a modern AFV platform , seemingly functional and well received. Its baseline is amphibious, but the better armored IFVs which the Poles use (at a glance successfully) in Afghanistan are not. It seems that right now everybody seems to get heavier armored vehicles or versions. The Canadians for example also want and LAV-H instead of their more and more worn out LAV III, which is has still proven its worth. All in all it is rather unlikely that the Dutch will decide for a "light" AMV just for a capability which is not seen as not so relevant compared to armor. The Croations payed 112m € for 84 vehicles - 1,3:1. We don't know what the deal all contains.

The new Boxer has been ordered in relative large numbers (200) by the Dutch army. It is by far the best protected wheeled platform on the market and not 20 cm longer and broader than the AMV. It seems to have convinced the Dutch MoD. All in all there would be many advantages to operate a single fleet of heavy wheeled AFV. It could be very well suited for a MFV and an IFV both with or without a manned turret. The German MoD calculates 891 m € for 282 Boxer - 3,1:1. We don't know what is included here.

So best if we give them both the same system (IFV, AT, support and mortar).

The great problem here is airmobility, or to which degree the MoD wants to have it...

 

[IPA35]

Now the mechanised brigades should have Boxers, to replace the Sisu and certin versions of the YPR. (And Bushmasters!)
And AT CV90's (60-80) and CV90's with AMOS. (24)

But for the Marine Corps I'm looking for a IFV, that could be a wheeled one like the AMV or tracked but it has to be amfibious.

For the airmobile brigade only has Sisu for peacekeeping (should be replaced by Bushmasters) and airmobile 'cars/buggies'.
They should have some light (air) mobile armour much the the marine corps.

So best if we give them both the same system (IFV, AT, support and mortar).

 

[Firn]

I remember now that there are also RWS which can take a 35mm machinecannon (similar to the one carried by the CV9035NL, I hope), a coaxial 7,62 and ATGMs. The Puma turret would also be a top choice for an large RWS.

While I still have to look at the technical details it seems to me that such a remote-controlled "turret" or large weapon station has truly some great advantages. On the Boxer (or AMV) it would allow for an APC with great firepower against AFV and other targets and still with 8 guys in there (additional cannon ammunition should be stored outside). Durning mounted operations 1 or two guys from the infantry squad will help to operate the sights. In Overwatch the driver and the commander should be able to do it mostly alone. It would be of course mixed with lighter RWS stations on other Boxers/AFVs, for example with the excellent GMG. Of course I don't know how much this toys cost.

 

[IPA35]

Yes, that would be usefull.
A turret is maybe more traditional and the RWS is a bit fragile it seems, however if possible it wiuld be great if we could fit is on the CV9035 somewhere with Spike missles, however I don't know if that's too big or impossible to fit.

The Boxer, I would order the 200 (not the optional 40) or 250 Boxers, but in some more versions as planned.
It is however an APC, no IFV, as there are no plans to give it a turret or a heavy weapon except for a 120mm mortar.
I would buy more Bushmasters instead of a huge number of Boxer's.

If you look at the structure, the airmobile brigade has a towed morar brigade.
I would like to see them replaced by self propelled mortars, but ones that can be carried by chinooks.
Hmm, maybe armour doesn't really fit there role and they should only have Bushmasters for peacekeeping?
And then the 120mm's should stay and we might be able to fit 81mm on LSV's.

The Puma turret is good as it can carry the Spike-LR, but it would be better if we could fit Spike's on the CV90 turret and use it for the other IFV aswell.

EDIT: We also need to increase the transport capability...
The C-17 is not a real options, certainly not if we want to buy other things (as we want, right?).

The newest hercules is an option but the hercules is not really new and maybe a little bit small.
So maybe we should buy the A400M (2 or 4).
And something light like the C-27J (4).

A total of 30 Chinooks and a total of 40 NH90's.
Some more if you want to replace the Cougar.

 

[Firn]

A total of 30 Chinooks and a total of 40 NH90's.
Some more if you want to replace the Cougar.

That is a rather huge amount, and very expensive to buy and to operate

As I wrote in the MFV thread the Boxer would certainly would be an excellent basis for a turreted mortar. It offers a lot of space and is very well armored, especially against mines. I would fit almost perfectly into the conflict in Afghanistan as part of a bronegruppa of Bushmasters and maybe Vikings and would be a great support weapon in conflicts against heavier forces.

 

[IPA35]

But it's not an IFV...yet.

Buy 6 extra NH90's and retire 17 cougars and 3 Agusta Bell 412's.
(And the planned 21 Lynx's).

24 Chinooks, I made a mistake sorry.
And 46 NH90's.

 

[Firn]

But it's not an IFV...yet.

Buy 6 extra NH90's and retire 17 cougars and 3 Agusta Bell 412's.
(And the planned 21 Lynx's).

24 Chinooks, I made a mistake sorry.
And 46 NH90's.

As I wrote with the large RWS with the 30 mm cannon the changes to the module should be relatively small compared to a classic turret. Up to 40 mm cannons should also be possible according to manufactor. We will see...


A picture of the Sampson by Tony Williams.

 

[IPA35]

All good to mount on Boxers and Bushmasters, but IFV's

Boxer MRAV / GTK / PWV - Wheeled Multirole Armoured Vehicle - Army Technology

Dutch vehicles may be fitted with the Thales Nederland Twister remote-controlled weapon station which includes the Albatros third-generation thermal imaging sight.

Under an order placed in January 2008, Dutch vehicles will be fitted with the Kongsberg Protector weapon control system, also fitted to US Army Stryker vehicles, armed with a 12.7mm machine gun.

The Boxer does not have a turret, is too heavy and lacks the amfibious capability.

The UK left the programm becaus it tto heavy and not fast enough BRB

 

[Firn]

All good to mount on Boxers and Bushmasters, but IFV's

Boxer MRAV / GTK / PWV - Wheeled Multirole Armoured Vehicle - Army Technology



The Boxer does not have a turret, is too heavy and lacks the amfibious capability.

The UK left the programm becaus it tto heavy and not fast enough BRB

I think we have to ask the question:" What is an IFV?"

Let us look at what Lieutenant Benjamin Richard, 2 Platoon Commander, A Company, 1 PPCLI, a veteran of Afghanistan has to say about the LAV III

In the combat operations context, the main role of the LAV vehicle is to serve as an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). To this end, it is imperative that infantry leaders differentiate between armoured personnel carriers (APCs) and IFVs:

An infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) is a type of armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) used to carry infantry into battle and provide fire support for them. IFVs are similar to armoured personnel carriers (APCs), designed to transport five to ten infantrymen and their equipment. They are differentiated from APCs ("battle taxis") by their enhanced armament, allowing them to give direct-fire support during an assault, firing ports, allowing the infantry to fire personal weapons while mounted, and usually improved armour.12

In accordance with this definition, the LAV is inarguably an IFV and platoon
commanders should therefore employ it as such.

So the lightly armored LAV III with his 25 mm gun in the turret is seemingly an IFV. What is then a far better armored Boxer with a 30 or 40 mm cannon plus a 7,62mm MG plus two Spike ATGM in his RWS who supports his section in the same way?

P.S: I'm not the only one who thinks that the UK would have been far better off with such a capable AFV which was considered too heavy than with the nonexisting and expensive FRES. And at least the MoD is right now retiring easily deployable and too vulnerable vehicle after easily deployable and too vulnerable vehicle. A decent IMV like the Bushmaster with decent armor would have proven an acceptable compromise. But they went from Wolf to Vector to Viking....

... with dire consequences

RIP


P.S: And already in 2006 the commanding officer in Afghanistan wanted Tanks, IFVs and SP Howitzers

 

[swerve]

P.S: I'm not the only one who thinks that the UK would have been far better off with such a capable AFV which was considered too heavy than with the nonexisting and expensive FRES.

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. FRES is a set of requirements, not a vehicle, or even a set of vehicles. The requirements cover a wide range, far more than could be met by Boxer, or any other single vehicle, & the intention is (or was - some parts of the project have been postponed indefinitely) to buy a range of vehicles. There is no FRES development project: it's a purchasing project - and a grossly mishandled one.

 

[IPA35]

An IFV's is a vehicles to delive troops to battle and to participate in the battle.
And APC is only a transport, useually with some light weapons.
Enough for patrols.

But is the Boxer amfibious, and can it house a turret without having to start a whole new developmet programm and/or something only 1 country buys?
And would it be a better IVF that its competition.
(AMV, BTR-3, Stryker and comparable vehicles.)

And what's the best solution to equipe the CV90 with Spike's?

 

[Firn]

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. FRES is a set of requirements, not a vehicle, or even a set of vehicles. The requirements cover a wide range, far more than could be met by Boxer, or any other single vehicle, & the intention is (or was - some parts of the project have been postponed indefinitely) to buy a range of vehicles. There is no FRES development project: it's a purchasing project - and a grossly mishandled one.

Yeah, I was drifting perhaps too eagerly on the roads trodden by sophistry or mere rethoric. Still some Boxers instead of a grossly mishandled purchasing project would have been fine too.

@IPA35: I think I have given my fair view on the topic, and I learned quite a bit through it and leave it on my account there. Anyway I wish a good development of the issue

 

[IPA35]

Ok, thanks.

I'm sorry if I've ruined your time

You are right, but I cannot find info about the Boxer's amfibious capabilities.

We could use a native built RWS, maybe we could experment with the Bunkfaust too.
Maybe the Samson for a number of Boxers.

EDIT: Oh, silly me:
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product250.html

 

[Beatmaster]

Correct me if iam wrong, but to my understanding it is a army a very expensive time consuming proces to rebuild and reorganize a army.
Also maintaining one costs loads and loads of money.

As you can read on the website mindef.nl the dutch goverment values a more proffesional and multifuctionial army, and if its possible without paying HUGE amounts of money.
This is something that will eventually breakup the quality of the dutch army.
For now the dutch do fine they are a very capable hightech middel class army.
They might not have the numbers but they do have the skills and systems that make up for it.
On the other hand having:
PS: This list is from 2005/2006 i could not find a updated list on a short notice^^ so its a bit outdated

102 x Leopard 2 A6 battletanks, Leopard 1 Rescue/Repair/Bridgeconstruction.
1200+ x YPR-765 A1, CV9035NL, Boxer, , NBC "Fuchs", Fennek LVB/MRAT/AD/stinger
137 x 83 pieces Patria XA-188 GVV, 54 pieces Bushmaster 208 x LSV
36 x Pantserhouwitser 2000NL

Multirole Strikeplanes 92 x F-16 AD/CAS (AirDefence of CloseAirSupport configuratie)
29 x Apache AH-64D
Transporthelikopter 33 x 3 x SAR AB-412SP, 20 x Chinook CH-47D, 17 x Cougar Mk2
Tanker/transporter 9 x 2 x KDC10, 1 x DC10, 4 x C-130H/C-130H-30 2x Fokker 50,
20 x Westland Lynx (ex MLD)
VIP toestel 5 x 1 x Gulfstream IV, 4 x Alouette III
13 x Pilatus PC7 trainer
4 x total 16 launchers MIM-104 Patriot, 4 x total 16 launchers MIM-104 Patriot (Updated configuration)

Fregat 6 x 4 x LCF (LCFregat), 2 x M (Multipurpose)
2 x Hr. Ms. Amsterdam and Hr. Ms. Zuiderkruis
2 x Hr. Ms. Rotterdam (Landing Platform Dock type) en Hr. Ms. Johan de Witt
Submarine 4 x Walrusklasse
Minehunter 10 x Alkmaarklasse
Hydrografisch schip 2 x Snellius klasse
1 x Hr. Ms. Mercuur
1 x Hr. Ms. Pelikaan

Not bad, most of these systems are updated to current standarts and some parts are the top of their class.

Small wish list?
Add 54 pieces Bushmasters to the already 54 in use total: 108
Add 30 Leopard 2 A6 battletanks to the 102 in use total: 132
Add 30 more Pantserhouwitsers 2000NL to the 36 in use total: 66
Add 2 or 3 more Hercules transport planes
Add 20 more Apache AH-64D to the 29 in use total: 49
Add 2 LCFregats to the 4 already in use total: 6
Add a few complete sets of MIM-104 Patriot or similair systems to the list.

This is just a list that with current and future nato missions in mind may come in handy.
Offcorse you can go to a detail level and talk about what the dutch army needs and what it should not need, my point here everyone has wishlists some are pure fantasy and some are just needed but non the less it costs lots of euros/dollars.
Why would a nation like the netherlands have a army like it did have during the cold war?
For nato missions? yes there they could use some extra's to make life mutch easyer.
I do hope the dutch goverment takes the time to think what road they should head regarding the army because we all can agree that downgrading is always bad.
Currently the goverment cuts funds but they also raise funds to update current systems and the do some serious changes inside the very structure of the dutch army.
And on these matters iam just a noob but to my understanding i think that the dutch army is preparing to merge or integrate with some other nations like germany and belguim all 3 army's are virtually one the work extreemly close together.
Some time ago there was a rumor that the EU likes to make 1 army where every member takes a specific roll into that suits them the best to their capabilities, i do not know or this ever would happen, but it seems to me that Germany, Belguim and the Dutch are just doing that.

Just a tought or its true dunno but it would explain some major changes to all 3 army's because the dutch are ditching exactly the gear the other 2 have enough from and the buy or upgrade exactly that what the others lack.

Let me know what you think about this

 

[IPA35]

Sorry, back from Berlin...

First of all we only have 56 Leo's left, 24 PhZ's, and about 72 F-16's.

So for me the total of tanks should be around 100-120 so every brigade has 50-60 tanks, wether all active or not.

We do not have significant longer range AT capebilities, so we should buy 40-60 etra CV90's armed with 2 Spike's. (and or rearm current ones).
We should also buy aditional CV90's with AMOS, not a large number but 24-36.
Buy 36-48 HIMARS, with multiple weapons, and when the AMRAAM version is availabale we could equippe the air defence unit with them (army not AF).

Then 300-400 Boxer's (ditch Patria) including an IFV version, to be used by the marine corps.
A large RWC or a turret. (preferably 35mm bushmaster and 2 Spikes.)
And the mortar version for both the army and marine corps.

A total of 100 bushmasters for peacekeeping and as movers, all with a RWS.
We could experiment with the Bunkerfausts on both APC's.
(See pages back for more things I forget)

2 extra LCF's and sell the last to M-classe frigates.
Then 4 OPV's but with some more armament, a bit like the Braunschweig.
A little AA (Stinger, Aladin or a missles CIWS like RAM or StarstreakCIWS).
And some AS missles (preferably the RBS15 as I want the Gripen).
The planned JSS.
Thomahawk and SM-3 for the LCF's.

Join the Australian sub development plan for 4 subs (to replace current but in the very near future and maybe we could modernise 2).

The Marine Corps should get the Boer mortar and IFV.
And there own towed artillery like the M777A2. (12-24 pieces).

85 Gripen NG
36 F-18SH or EF. (If the F-18 then they should be wired as th australian ones so they cab be converted to growlers.)
3 Erieye radars (on EM145).
6 or more P-99 (EM145 maritime patrol version).
4 A400M's as they are more modern then the Hercules. (you might want to sell the oldest 2 hercules's we own.)
4 C-27J's for paradrops and light transport (maybe we could arm them).
24-26 Chinooks.
Upgrade all Apaches.
40-50 NH90's to replace the Cougars and Lynx's.

About 24 UCAV's with the mantis as favorite.
MAYBE 4 Globalhawks.
Small UAV's like ScanEadle and Aladin for all branches.

I really (REALLY!) don't hope for an EU army.
*Cough* The EU should become a freetrade organisation again *cough*, sorry no politics.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I think:
*additional Apache would be useful, as tiger still isn't operational, plus there aren't exactly lots of these types avalible (france and UK will have most of the EU share?)
*Bushmasters- 108 total would seem to be a reasonable improvement and cost little.
*Additional Leopards - again its not a massive issue to add some more to use overseas but that massive tank battle in europe doesn't look like happening.

I think 36 SH is a bit much then going out and getting the gripens. Halve your SH buy to 16(wired for EF), then purchase F-35 with additional cash. Eventually replace SH with some advanced UAV in ~2020.

A400M doesn't look like a project you would willingly buy into now. Better off to get some additional C-130 and pick up C27J. Know what your getting into and get it now. Plus C-130 and C27J have shared logistics.