SysFla - Germanys future short range AA System

[JoaMei]

http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/img/product/rde_sysfla.jpg

Currently in the design phase, the SysFla is intended to meet the future air defence needs of the German armed forces. It should begin replacing current Bundeswehr systems starting in 2010. The SysFla concept incorporates every element of an advanced air defence system: low-altitude radar, antiaircraft cannon, the latest guided missile technology, highly survivable platform vehicles (e.g. GeFaS), as well as weapon systems with integrated active and passive sensors. The Germany's current Leflasys light air defence system will be maintained and/or upgraded within the framework of the SysFla project.

Main features

Complete air defence system
Designed for maximum survivability
Combines antiaircraft guns and guided missiles
Advanced air defence command and weapon engagement system
Active and passive sensor systems

http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/index.php?fid=4230&lang=3&pdb=1

Seems to be a combination of LFK NG and Skyranger Gun:

http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/index.php?fid=2050&lang=3&pdb=1

http://www.diehl-bgt-defence.de/index.php?id=560&L=1

[muck]

This thing looks like so ugly it was designed by Hotwheels!

Anyways, it only has to do its job.

[nickless]

That thing looks like it's completely useless for smaller countris because they wouldn't be able to turn it without accidently invading their neighbours...

[Saubaatzi]

looks like a SdKfz.
and it's definitely not ugly!

[muck]

The GeFas looks even worse...


http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Gefase.jpg

[nickless]

The SysFla is bades on the GeFas, but it looks like the changed the design quite a bit.

[ZoneOne]

It looks like a green and white Bat-Mobile with missile pods on top.

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/5057/batmobileresizezp8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[JoaMei]

Well, all the design Features are there for a certain reason. Maximum crew protection against Mines, IEDs, Smallarms, RPGs.

Not to make it look good.

[muck]

For sure, but check out the GeFas, with that long nose it must be a hell to drive that thing, especially in urban environment and especially in populated urban environment - in a peacekeeping mission foreign personnel should do without running civilians over. And with that wheelbase it probably lacks of a sufficient climb rate as well.

[little icebear]

If you ask me, the family of "Geschütze Fahrzeuge" made in Germany has already become much too big.
Seems like a logistic nightmare to me. I fail to see why we would need so many platforms...

[JoaMei]

The GeFas long Nose is the main feature for Mine protection. No matter how big the IED is or be it 5 anti Tank Mines stacked on each other, it will just blow away the Nosewheels and leave the passengers unharmed.

[jonosk]

Strange looking peace of war fighting car.

[Rittmester]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again. I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American casualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs.. Are you tired of just making good sedans?

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Gefase.jpg

[muck]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again. I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American caualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs.. Are you tired of just making good cars?
That is probably at least partially a result of good vehicle design as well. I remember the shape of that "Dingo" that struck a heavy anti tank mine a year ago...One would have expected the entire vehicle to be ripped into pieces now but it was actually quite ok, the crew survived with minor injuries.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again.

:cantbeli: From last weekend (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2996522&postcount=75)

http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/2112/33556688bk7.jpg

Workers at the Naval Weapon Station, in Charleston, S.C., prepare Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAP, for departure to Iraq and Afghanistan, Friday, Jan. 18, 2008. The MRAP is a type of armored vehicle designed to survive attacks from IEDs and ambushes


http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/4148/33556731oe9.jpg
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5479/33556696et4.jpg

Shipping and receiving worker James Brown, of Beaufort, S.C. directs the movement of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAP, as they depart for Iraq and Afghanistan from the Naval Weapon Station, in Charleston, S.C., Friday, Jan. 18, 2008. The MRAP is a type of armored vehicle designed to survive attacks from IEDs and ambushes




I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American casualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs..
I'm not trying to be provocative here, but did it ever occur to you that the small number of German casualties might be more a function of the size of their deployment, their AOR, the types missions they are willing to accept.

Quite honestly, I think we (the US) has adapted rather quickly to the changing environment of Iraq. Remember we are having to maintain the ability to fight an conventional war as well as a conventional war.

Back on topic
Why does Germany need this AD system? Wouldn't more MRAPs be a better investment?. A system like this is meant to deter an enemy's CAS aircraft and given the reluctance of the German populace for all things military, when would a need for a system like this arise?

Even the gun, an Oerlikon Contraves 35 mm revolver gun, for use against a sophisticated enemy it's probably wonderful but it seems less than ideally suited for threats encountered in a low-intensity conflict, such as mortars. Link (http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/index.php?fid=3953&lang=3)


In some cases, the US has even modified dedicated AAA vehicles to be used in an escort security role. Link (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=83378)

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4606&d=1143246488

[Laworkerbee]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again. I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American casualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs.. Are you tired of just making good sedans?

Maybe just maybe because the Germans are not in hot areas such as the Americans are....ever wonder about that?

Go choke yourself.

[muck]

I'm not trying to be provocative here, but did it ever occur to you that the small number of German casualties might be more a function of the size of their deployment, their AOR, the types missions they are willing to accept.
That is of course true. However, even the few incidents that took place in Afghanistan (around 15 or see I think, number without suicide attacks on vehicles) could have taken more casualties. The Dingo and the Fuchs have proven themselves.


Back on topic
Why does Germany need this AD system? Wouldn't more MRAPs be a better investment?. A system like this is meant to deter an enemy's CAS aircraft and given the reluctance of the German populace for all things military, when would a need for a system like this arise?
"Bundeswehr" literally translated means "Federal Defense (Force)". At least on the paper this army is still tasked with protecting the homeland with its troops, and their protection again would demand anti aircraft capabilities. I guess the US AA systems have not seen combat for a longer time as well.


Even the gun, an Oerlikon Contraves 35 mm revolver gun, for use against a sophisticated enemy it's probably wonderful but it seems less than ideally suited for threats encountered in a low-intensity conflict, such as mortars. Link (http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/index.php?fid=3953&lang=3)
German camps in Afghanistan become frequently attacked with mortars, but mainly with 107mm rockets. Several skyguard systems were ordered to shoot them out of the sky, but the money for them was put on hold for a bunch of useless projects like MEADS. Pretty insane if you ask me...

[California Joe]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again. I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American casualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs.. Are you tired of just making good sedans?

Were you born retarded or have you just been practicing a lot till you're really good at it?

[muck]

Errare humanum est.

[Chulo]

Clever design.. I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again. I mean, the Germans haven't had 0,1% of the American casualties from IEDs and mines, still the number of creative designs.. Are you tired of just making good sedans?



hey, maybe u should know more about what u are talking about instead of looking like an idiot

Hummer is the civilian version of the M998 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV or Humvee) - and the armed forces have NOT shipped out Hummers to Iraq for military use.

The HMMWV is a multipurpose vehicle not a mine resistant vehicle. Your comparison is the same as saying "Look how low casualty rates from IED the Korean tanks have are when compared to casualties from American helicopters"

[Chulo]

http://www.rheinmetall-detec.de/img/product/rde_sysfla.jpg






The GeFas looks even worse...


http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Gefase.jpg

back on topic..
i though of the Half track as soon as i saw it

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2672/16th251germanhalftrack1zj3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[muck]

It definitely looks a bit like a Wehrmacht's "SdKfz", yes. But do you see the front side of the track hovering in the air? The wheelbase of the GeFas looks even longer. The climbing rate must be really crappy.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

"Bundeswehr" literally translated means "Federal Defense (Force)". At least on the paper this army is still tasked with protecting the homeland with its troops, and their protection again would demand anti aircraft capabilities. I guess I'm just curious how the Generals sold this one to the legislators. The big PUMA order is probably alright; I think IFV have a great deal of versatility. But a new SHORAD system? Why not more Dingos, Fuchs, or even Boxers.


I guess the US AA systems have not seen combat for a longer time as well. True enough, but that's why some Avenger systems were converted to security vehicles to be used in Iraq. Link (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=83378)

I think the Marine Corps has retired their LAV-AD (a move I think might be ill-advised; the Israelis and Russians have used AD guns which can elevate steeply in MOUT situations)




German camps in Afghanistan become frequently attacked with mortars, but mainly with 107mm rockets. Several skyguard systems were ordered to shoot them out of the sky, but the money for them was put on hold for a bunch of useless projects like MEADS. Pretty insane if you ask me...PAC-3 is an investment in the future. Maybe Germany should increase it's military budget to fund both.

[little icebear]

I guess I'm just curious how the Generals sold this one to the legislators.

Not at all. I wish they would ask the troops. We do have quite a number of multi-role capable designs by now...
I see ´em all ordered... in low quantity for high prizes...

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Not at all. I wish they would ask the troops. We do have quite a number of multi-role capable designs by now...
I see ´em all ordered... in low quantity for high prizes...

The US does this from time to time to, so I can't be too harsh.

[muck]

I guess I'm just curious how the Generals sold this one to the legislators. The big PUMA order is probably alright; I think IFV have a great deal of versatility. But a new SHORAD system?

That may be exaggeration, but most armament deals here in Germany appear to go the way that someone sees something new or is directly contacted by the industry, attends a viewy demonstration, is reminded ten times a minute that the purchase of the new gear will save so and so many jobs, then goes straight to the respective chief of branch and yells "I want that!!!". Then the chief of defense' job is to put everything into the purchase schedule which in the end becomes no reality.
I mean, we're purchasing this crap but have only one damn single C-IED cell in Northern Afghanistan. We're purchasing spy satellites but don't even have transport planes which can reach Afghanistan.

The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

[muck]

Not at all. I wish they would ask the troops. We do have quite a number of multi-role capable designs by now...
I see ´em all ordered... in low quantity for high prizes...
Yeah, they purchase something here, something there, and what they buy often ends like the Mungo: A timebomb on wheels because its high affinity to overturnings in rough terrain.

[muck]

Found the numbers: 19 attacks on German mechanized patrols at all, resulting in 21 casualties.

[Rittmester]

Errare humanum est.

A furore normanorium libera nos domine

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

I'm not directly saying US response is slow, but you made a strategic blunder in 2003 by not preparing for this IED-type of warfare. -Or you wouldn't assign Humvees without armor as f.ex. escorts in the early phase of the war. I would counter by saying that I have a hard time finding in the historical record any major power making preparations for an unconventional conflict prior to a conventional conflict. The British, French, German, Italians have all had colonies and I don't think many made early preparations for an insurgency.


Now, its taken 5 years to develop, produce and deploy these (above) more capable vehicles.Which for a large land army structured and equipped to fight the Cold War, seems quite rapid.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

German camps in Afghanistan become frequently attacked with mortars, but mainly with 107mm rockets. Several skyguard systems were ordered to shoot them out of the sky, but the money for them was put on hold for a bunch of useless projects like MEADS. Pretty insane if you ask me...

You could buy one of our Centurion (http://www.raytheon.com/products/centurion/) C-RAM systems. Based on the Phalanx, and already in use.

[muck]

but it takes them very little time to turn around and respond to the troops needs.
Definitely wrong. What we currently witness is more a kind of buying frenzy than a real reasonable plan to equip our troops in a suitable way.


(...)
Not to be delayed need for action in the range of ballistical protection
Recovery vehicles requested, request not granted
Request for MOWAG Eagle IV vehicles, request not granted
Only 80 out of more than 260 G-Wagons fullfill security requirements
Only one C-IED team for the entire Northern sector
Terrible lack of EOD capabilities

That is the report of the 14th German contingent! The first IED targeting a German soldier went off in 2002, the first suicide bomber killed Germans one year later. I doubt we did it much better than the Americans.

The Dingo was designed to face the landmine menace on the Balkans, by the way. The Fuchs did not receive any special design to face landmines or a IEDs at all, we can be happy that they have proven themselves nonetheless.

[muck]

You could buy one of our Centurion (http://www.raytheon.com/products/centurion/) C-RAM systems. Based on the Phalanx, and already in use.
I've just read that we're actually going to buy a system of that kind, NBS C-RAM according to Rheinmetall DeTec. Skyhield is the overall system they wanna have, apparently the NBC C-RAM will be installed in Afghanistan in late 2009. That is even earlier than it was reported several months ago, but it is still a long time till 2009...
But they will only purchase two systems. Two systems for six encampments?

[James]

nevermind.

[Rittmester]

I would counter by saying that I have a hard time finding in the historical record any major power making preparations for an unconventional conflict prior to a conventional conflict. The British, French, German, Italians have all had colonies and I don't think many made early preparations for an insurgency.

As they were mainly facing rifles or even spears at the time(s), sure. But invaders in general do face sneeky partisans/insurgents: look at every significant occupied territory in the present and previous century.
This high and logical expectancy should be combined with the present technological level to ensure the outmost efficient countermeasure.

But it's easy to topple everything when you're an insurgent, as you just put 3x152mm IED shells together instead of a single. It's unfair, but the coalition has no choise (political and psychological) but to make larger and more expensive vehicles that will also be blown up. I hate it too, and hope that the new vehicles will save more lives.

I got an infraction notice for the first thread.. My first.. There's obviously nerves in this subject, so I'll give it a miss

[California Joe]

You got an infraction, from me, for this bit of wisdom: "I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again."

I'm assuming English is not your first language, and while you write it well, your post makes assumptions and shows a certain arrogance and lack of awareness about combat that leads you to believe that the United States military has no problem with frivilously sacrificing the lives of our service members.

[Rittmester]

You got an infraction, from me, for this bit of wisdom: "I'm puzzled by how much effort ze Germans put into crew safety, while the US keeps letting their Hummers blow up time and time again."

I'm assuming English is not your first language, and while you write it well, your post makes assumptions and shows a certain arrogance and lack of awareness about combat that leads you to believe that the United States military has no problem with frivilously sacrificing the lives of our service members.

Well, that "arrogance" is in my view more recognizable as a political satire than an attack on the general American army. I might have made that more clearly in my text (that was perhaps a sloppy sentence). But, being that there are more ways than yours to interpret it, I believe a "what do you mean?" is a more civil way to put it straight. After all, you put up a pretty hefty barrage instead (speaking of infractions).

I am not one of the usual suspects when it comes to flame baits. And my statement is not all that far from an average assumption that has derived from actual and unfortunate facts. I have observed some of the debate in the US concerning the Humwee's poor safety record and the initial lack of sufficient body armor, and still believe a critical portrait is legit. The invasion lacked a plan B that took insurgency into consideration. This must have been a pre strike issue in the Pentagon, but politics and economics may have hushed this down. That makes it a political issue that is not related to the mindset of the servicing personnel or the US population.
Being critical towards the failing deciding elite is far more favoring the soldiers than to quietly ignore grave mistakes that do cost lives among the brave. Democracy at work..

[Chulo]

Well, that "arrogance" is in my view more recognizable as a political satire than an attack on the general American army. I might have made that more clearly in my text (that was perhaps a sloppy sentence). But, being that there are more ways than yours to interpret it, I believe a "what do you mean?" is a more civil way to put it straight. After all, you put up a pretty hefty barrage instead (speaking of infractions).

I am not one of the usual suspects when it comes to flame baits. And my statement is not all that far from an average assumption that has derived from actual and unfortunate facts. I have observed some of the debate in the US concerning the Humwee's poor safety record and the initial lack of sufficient body armor, and still believe a critical portrait is legit. The invasion lacked a plan B that took insurgency into consideration. This must have been a pre strike issue in the Pentagon, but politics and economics may have hushed this down. That makes it a political issue that is not related to the mindset of the servicing personnel or the US population.
Being critical towards the failing deciding elite is far more favoring the soldiers than to quietly ignore grave mistakes that do cost lives among the brave. Democracy at work..

your comparison between a light multiuse wheeled vehicle and weapons system platform highlights your ignorance