• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Re-arming the Bundeswehr: Which Projects?

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
45
Just a thought that occurred. The German Armed Forces have been massively downsized since the end of the Cold War. Assuming a
decision were taken to re-arm to meet current threats what projects would be back on the table? Or what stuff would you like to see?
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
uk 75 said:
to meet current threats
This part leaves no other choice than to answer: None.

Every development project lasts too long to bear fruits in time to meet "current threats".

They could buy what's in service, what's completing its already long ongoing development very soon and so on.
This would include new-built Leopard 2s, upgrades of almost all Eurofighters, better missile mix for area air defences (Patriot, SM), re-introduction and upgrade of Gepard etc.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
Well, if it's crash programs your looking for, how about these for the Heer, to start with;

The Panther
:

The Leopard III program truly reactivated, including the superheavy element (separately the Zobel would also be quite useful):


And of course, the G-11:

 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,663
Reaction score
39
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Define "current threats" first and you will have somewhere to start.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,196
Reaction score
115
Can't see anyone wanting to revisit the G-11. Germany just standardized on the G36 and there's no pressing reason to change that. The current sense is that if anything, 5.56mm might be too small (the Turks just adopted another7.62mm infantry rifle), and super high velocity small caliber options like 4.7mm don't seem credible at all.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
74
Re-arming ?
I would make sure first, that the Bundeswehr equipment works properly
Do lack of Money or spare parts, the Bundeswehr is on edge of collapsing !

next to that
Replacement of Transall with Airbus 400M
Replace the HK G36 assault rifle by better one: G11*


* the Belgium FN P90 prove the G11 principle twenty years ago
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,196
Reaction score
115
How does the P90 prove anything about the G11? They're totally different in role, ammunition, and operating mechanism. P90 is a submachinegun, at best effective to 200 meters, while an assault rifle needs another 100 meters or more (if experience in Afghanistan is any guide). It fires conventionally cased ammo, not caseless. And the mechanism is straight blowback, not the clockwork rotary of the G11.
 

JohnR

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
353
Reaction score
2
Start buying back all the Leo2's they flogged off?!?!
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
TomS said:
Can't see anyone wanting to revisit the G-11. Germany just standardized on the G36 and there's no pressing reason to change that. The current sense is that if anything, 5.56mm might be too small (the Turks just adopted another7.62mm infantry rifle), and super high velocity small caliber options like 4.7mm don't seem credible at all.
The G11 was built for 3-round bursts at extremely high RoF, similar to the late Kalashnikov designs which had super-fast 2-round bursts.
It makes sense to compare three 4.73 mm bullets to one 5.56 mm bullet for this reason.

In the end, this approach would have yielded no more firefight endurance (time till ammo runs out) than a G3.
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
JohnR said:
Start buying back all the Leo2's they flogged off?!?!
Most of them are in NATO countries, so this wouldn't improve the security situation at all.
One wouldn't want to to buy back the likely poorly maintained Chilean Leo2s.

TomS said:
How does the P90 prove anything about the G11? They're totally different in role, ammunition, and operating mechanism.
I suppose he was hinting at the similar magazine idea.

Anybody who thinks about small arms other than man-portable AT weapons in the context of European arms racing against a threat doesn't have a realistic idea about what's important in major European warfare in my opinion.
The Bundeswehr could introduce the K98 as standard rifle and it wouldn't change much.
Just a hint: Most failed assaults in WW2 failed because of indirect fires before the infantry fight even began.
You don't get to see many movies about how battles are being won by the artillery coordinator working with map and phones in a makeshift HQ in a living room, of course. You get to see movies about machinegunner teams, infantry squads rushing and stuff. This is also the experience of soldiers and former soldiers who learned this way of combat at least in basic.
That's why people have such unrealistic expectations and unrealistic emphasis.
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
I'd like to add a fact to show how off the infantry-centric perspective on peer state warfare in Europe is:

The 1943-1945 German army GHQ (OKH) expert on lessons learned (Middeldorff) reported during the 50's in a book that the majority of Soviet infantry losses on the offense during that period did not happen during the assault, but because German artillery was shelling the readying red army troops in their marshalling areas. It was at least a very major facet of the ground war.

Army arms racing would thus be about very much, but new infantry equipment would be close to last priority.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
A few more thoughts:

The full procurement and deployment of MEADS needs to happen yesterday, especially given the abject failure of the SysFla (System Flugabwehr) program. A replacement for the foolishly retired Gepard SPAAGs is also urgently needed. Arguably, the Bundeswehr also needs something along the lines of the old Liberty system.

Cluster munitions and landmines are a must. However, so as long Germany (alongside other NATO countries) remains a signatory to the Oslo Treaty (CCM) and the Ottawa Treaty, it will be all too clear that Germany and NATO in general are not serious about rearming. Putin of course knows this well.


On an aside, shouldn't this topic be over in Alternative History and Future Speculation?
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
74
lastdingo said:
TomS said:
How does the P90 prove anything about the G11? They're totally different in role, ammunition, and operating mechanism.
I suppose he was hinting at the similar magazine idea.
Yes i was referring on Magazine idea
the concept for G11 assault rifle was highly controversial
next the magazine concept and loading mechanism, the Caseless ammo was critiqued political and media in that time.
in 1990 the G11 program was canceled do high cost, change of world politic and Germany reunification
irony in same year FN Herstal present the P90 sub machine gun.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
45
Grey


I put the subject in the bar because it is more future history speculation, though it also touches on what Germany might have done differently since 1990.


Germany has a huge budget surplus and a capable arms industry. If NATO is to rearm to contain any future Russian adventurism, Germany holds the key.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
164
The last news from the Ministry of Defence may just fit into this discussion:

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/comeback-der-panzer-von-der-leyen-setzt-auf-den-leopard-13453829.html

For short:
The reform of the Bundeswehr, signed in 2011 called the number of Leopard 2 MBTs to be reduced to 225. Still yet
around 280 are still kept in service. And this number should not only be kept, but in the face of the latest events
in the Ukraine and the demands of some easterly states, (maybe !) even increased by re-activating a batallion,
that still is in storage.
In the moment, the heavy assets of the Bundeswehr are heavily charged, because the quite low number has to
support all training, so attrition is high and serviceability is low.
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
988
Reaction score
28
Germany is going to have to open the taps up on their military in light of the shift Russia has taken.


Certainly this means expansion of the Heer and a return to heavy armoured divisions aiming to project force in defence of Poland, the Baltic states (in cooperation with Sweden and Finland) and Romania/Moldova.


So yes more and improved tanks of the existing type will serve adequately, as will their heavy artillery in the forms of self propelled guns and rocket batteries. On that latter front, modern guidance systems make them a cheaper force multiplier than the cost/time of expansion of the Luftwaffe. Though that too will have to happen and two strongest contenders are Typhoon with CFTs and F35-As.


On the rifle issue....currently the US and anglo-french efforts are looking at a new lightweight machine gun, either with cased telescoped rounds or with caseless rounds. Though both are in standard NATO 5.56mm and I think I read somewhere the 7.62mm as well.
So the decisions on this will impact any future infantry rifle design. I understand the USMC is holding out for the caseless varient and if successful one can imagine a revised G11 type weapon using the standard 5.56mm round being a front runner in any contest for a new rifle.
Canada has been researching a new rifle using the cased telescoped round.


Its more likely that in the light of experience we'd see a move up to 6.5mm or 6.8mm rounds though.


Sadly it looks like France is considering license of the Croatian bulpup rifle.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
Jemiba said:
Our friends over at MilitaryPhotos.net are a bit sceptical, however some of their comments got me thinking. If the government & high command could ever sort out the mess that is the Puma program and finally get it into service in serious numbers, some of the Marders being retired (including around at least 400 already retired examples still in storage) could be rebuilt to something like the Bradley LOSAT carrier (perhaps with the later and unfortunately larger MGM-166 rather than the original LOSAT, given that time is at such a premium). As a short term emergency stop gap while armor capabilities are being rebuilt, such a system could prove very useful, especially if things really go to hell in the very near future.


Image credits as per sources.
 

Attachments

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
45
Politically the European cover needed for German rearmament is important. Public opinion in France, Czech, Poland, not to mention Germany will be happier if the Balkan Cross and German flag were to be replaced by either the European or NATO emblems.
This would not stop Mr Putin painting any reformed German units as heirs to Barbarossa and a clear and present threat to Russia.
 

Hot Breath

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
196
Reaction score
0
GTX said:
Define "current threats" first and you will have somewhere to start.
I find it interesting how people seem to have avoided talking about this point for some reason. Instead they just start rabbiting on about this rifle or that tank and ignore what they would be used for, if they had them. Why? Is it easier to talk about tanks than about the reasons why you might need them?

Personally, I cannot see a Russian "horde" thumping across the North European Plain to get to Antwerp. Its just not going to happen as long as NATO maintains a large air force with advanced weapons and Short Range and Medium Range Missiles with nuclear warheads.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
The problem with that very rosy view is that these days NATO neither has large air forces, nor short range or medium range nuclear armed missiles of any description with the exception of the French [ASMP], but those are sub-strategic rather than tactical weapons & strictly for France's own defence as part of it's 'warning shot' doctrine. In fact NATO is short of just about everything but paper and hot air (no pun intended!).
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
164
Hot Breath said:
... Is it easier to talk about tanks than about the reasons why you might need them?
In a forum, that is devoted to the technology and NOT the politics ....clearly yes !
I would recommend reading the Forum Rules: ( http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,21728.msg216898.html#msg216898 )

Not to be misunderstood, this doesn't mean, that we have no political opinion, or aren't allowed to,
or should have all the same one ... It's just, that there are other and better suited places to discuss
politics. There you probably will face refusal, if you try to talk about,say, the technological development
of German tanks after WW II.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
In case ye haven't already heard about this latest fiasco: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/german-army-forced-to-lay-down-weapons-due-to-overtime-limits/
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
Grey Havoc said:
http://www.defencetalk.com/german-military-gets-a-personnel-boost-67455/
http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=31817&p=1242442

A sticking plaster at best, and that may be being optimistic.
And, in other news from earlier this month: Germany to push for progress towards European army (ft.com, registration may be required.)

To say that this will not end well is probably a polite understatement.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=19797

Too little, too late I fear.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/23/germany-considers-plan-to-bring-back-conscription/

Only considering, and only on a 'temporary' basis. Alas for the German government, denial is still a river in Egypt.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/31/germany-says-nato-defence-spending-targets-unrealistic-rex-tillerson/
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
Grey Havoc said:
https://global.handelsblatt.com/politics/sticker-shock-at-defense-ministry-over-new-corvettes-751111
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
33
lastdingo said:
I'd like to add a fact to show how off the infantry-centric perspective on peer state warfare in Europe is:

The 1943-1945 German army GHQ (OKH) expert on lessons learned (Middeldorff) reported during the 50's in a book that the majority of Soviet infantry losses on the offense during that period did not happen during the assault, but because German artillery was shelling the readying red army troops in their marshalling areas. It was at least a very major facet of the ground war.
Interesting!
Can I enquire as to the source please?

Regards
Pioneer
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,990
Reaction score
194
Via Tank-net: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/germany-beefs-up-tank-fleet-with-832m-acquisition

Still a long way to go, especially with that disaster of a Defence minister that they have...
 

Kadija_Man

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
1,915
Reaction score
24
Grey Havoc said:
Via Tank-net: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/germany-beefs-up-tank-fleet-with-832m-acquisition

Still a long way to go, especially with that disaster of a Defence minister that they have...
How is Ursula von der Leyen a "disaster", exactly? ::)
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,308
Reaction score
66
Enlighten me. She is part of a coalition government. A coalition entails compromising, subject to parliamentary approval. She is part of the decision-making process - no all-deciding authority making all defence decisions.
 

Anderman

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
149
Reaction score
3
And she is only defense minister for the last three and a hald years....
 

Kadija_Man

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
1,915
Reaction score
24
Grey Havoc said:
You are joking, right?
Nope. Why do you consider this politician a "disaster", please. Is it because she has done something specifically wrong or...?
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
Kadija_Man said:
Grey Havoc said:
You are joking, right?
Nope. Why do you consider this politician a "disaster", please. Is it because she has done something specifically wrong or...?

The disaster is not really in what she has done (she is from the CDU, they rarely do anything, and what they do is rarely well-advised), but in what she didn't do.

The few things she did were unimpressive if not wrong direction. Her background is family, women, youth politics - and what little emphasis she had was on making service more comfortable, particularly for women. In my opinion the exact wrong way of trying to make a volunteer army attractive. Fine for the air force, counterproductive for the army which needs to focus on attracting enough physically strong if not aggressive recruits, not just as many questionably motivated recruits as possible.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,196
Reaction score
115
lastdingo said:
The few things she did were unimpressive if not wrong direction. Her background is family, women, youth politics - and what little emphasis she had was on making service more comfortable, particularly for women. In my opinion the exact wrong way of trying to make a volunteer army attractive. Fine for the air force, counterproductive for the army which needs to focus on attracting enough physically strong if not aggressive recruits, not just as many questionably motivated recruits as possible.
They seem to be OK finding questionably motivated recruits as long as they're neo-Nazis and would-be terrorists.

Sorry, that's a bit glib, but this recent incident certainly suggests the Army needs to focus on more than just finding strong aggressive men.
 

Kadija_Man

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
1,915
Reaction score
24
lastdingo said:
Kadija_Man said:
Grey Havoc said:
You are joking, right?
Nope. Why do you consider this politician a "disaster", please. Is it because she has done something specifically wrong or...?

The disaster is not really in what she has done (she is from the CDU, they rarely do anything, and what they do is rarely well-advised), but in what she didn't do.

The few things she did were unimpressive if not wrong direction. Her background is family, women, youth politics - and what little emphasis she had was on making service more comfortable, particularly for women. In my opinion the exact wrong way of trying to make a volunteer army attractive. Fine for the air force, counterproductive for the army which needs to focus on attracting enough physically strong if not aggressive recruits, not just as many questionably motivated recruits as possible.
Ah, OK, as has been noted, the recent German army scandal was created well before this woman was assigned to the Defence portfolio as far as a I can tell and is just one of a succession of scandals about neo-Nazis/Terrorists who have been recruited. I'd suggest what they don't need is more aggressive recruits but rather more mature, sensible and motivated recruits and as far as I can figure out, one way of doing that is to make the Army attractive to them by improving the conditions under which they serve.

It could also be a case that because she is from one particular party, the one you appear not to support that there could well be some bias in your perception of her abilities and her performance. Remember, while she may be Minister of Defence, a great deal of the decisions that she administers are made outside of her portfolio.
 

lastdingo

Blogger http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
578
Reaction score
2
Website
defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de
Kadija_Man said:
It could also be a case that because she is from one particular party, the one you appear not to support that there could well be some bias in your perception of her abilities and her performance. Remember, while she may be Minister of Defence, a great deal of the decisions that she administers are made outside of her portfolio.
I'm not exactly enthusiastic about the earlier ministers of defence either.

Again, it's not so much about what she does as about what she doesn't do.
I can easily believe that 99% of what she did in this office is acceptable.

TomS said:
(...) suggests the Army needs to focus on more than just finding strong aggressive men.
That's trivial.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
826
Reaction score
60
Not certain how many tanks the German army have but by 2020 the British army will have three TANK regiments with Ajax being introduced for the remainder of regiments that will be maintained,approximately 120-130 Challenger 2's.

How this will integrate into a European defence system I do not know. Pathetic really, but then it is the policies of politicians that shape these topics and their conclusion.
 
Top