09 September 2009
The moral of the story is that we are choosing between a Swedish and an Austrian / Spanish vehicle. The MoD by diddling about for years has effectively killed the British AFV industry as most major armies have already re-equipped and few export opportunities exist. The old CVRT was agreat export success. Another own goal!!!!
John Walkley - Budapest Hungary
11 September 2009
About time too, the cv90 seems to offer everything that is required of FRES-sv and more.
Its a shame we cant produce something in house but with the MOD moving the goalposts every few days and the resultant increase in costs, buying as much as possible off the shelf has to be the way to go.
tim dainton - romsey
20 September 2009
Don't get too excited about the CV90. While BAE are considered the political favourite, rumour is abound that their cannon/turret combination is far from complete - STILL unable to fire on the move. Trials early next year may drive a stake through BAE's plans!
Darren - UK
22 September 2009
With all do respect for the previous comment stated here, the CVRT was a success for political reason, like most foreign military sales are such as the Eurofighter/Tornado to Saudi Arabia.
Second, which ever is chosen, it will end up being manufactured in the UK with BAE Systems Land Systems in the North being responsible for the land systems.
Third, for all that nationalistic propaganda, the CV90 belongs to BAE Systems, and officially British company that is more American than anything else.
Finally, the entire contest is in favour of BAE, since the only true adversary and far better product - the KMW Puma - cannot be delivered on time.
Personally, if the IFV is made in the UK it doesn't matter where the design comes from. The best MUST come first.
To me the worse is to give the British soldier a second class vehicle just because it has an Union Jack stamped on it. The CV90 is inferior to the KMW Puma.
David - UK
05 November 2009
BAE's MTIP2 turret (which is identical to the SV turret as far as the weapon system is concerned) fired from a moving vehicle at a moving target in front of MoD and Army top brass at Lulworth in January. It got a round of applause.
GD hasn't even shown a vehicle, let along a moving one. BAE's has been firing at Shoeburyness and doing mobility trials at MIRA.
As for Puma, it's a good vehicle but has an unmanned turret (which the Brits don't like, especially for recce) and is v expensive.
Surly Bonds - Lancaster
05 November 2009
David, we're discussing a scout vehicle here not an IFV. The Puma is huge - over 40 tons when up-armoured. This CV90 vehicle is being touted as a replacement for the Scimitar and is, in my opinion, too big for a scout vehicle. The CV 90 is roughly the same size and weight of a Stingray or Vickers VFM% light tank.
Pete Arundel - S-o-T
13 December 2009
The CV90 is too big for the recce role, but thankfully this is being addressed by actually making the the whole design smaller. As far as I am aware this takes shape in the form of shortening and lowering the chassis, don't know about what they'll do with the width though.
Sean - Netherlands