KNDS is not the main contractor, Artec is, who then subcontracts to KNDS and Rheinmetall. Ownership is separate from contracting, there are probably more companies involved in the Boxer’s construction than just KNDS and Rheinmetall.
I said that it WASN’T a Bundeswehr Boxer.
KNDS gives a combat weight of 38.5 tons for Boxer with the 600 kw engine. So the MGS must have the 600 kW engine.
After all, their parent companies are KNDS and Rheinmetall, so the KNDS and Bundeswehr websites are more reliable than the outdated ARTEC GmbH website, which hasn’t been updated since 2022.
I don’t know why you are obsessing on this point, the Bundeswehr website and KNDS talk about the same Boxer A2.
Sure, there are some minor differences between the Boxer A2 used by the Bundeswehr and the Boxer A2 promoted on the KNDS website, but in the end they are the same Boxer A2.
Why don’t you take into account the extra weight of the turret?
As already mentioned before, the maximum weight of the Boxer A2 is not 36.5t.
36.5t is the combat weight.
ARTEC GmbH has already successfully tested weights of up to 41t with the Boxer A2, so the weight does not help in any way to prove that the Boxer MGS is a Boxer A3.
Most importantly, the Boxer MGS was first unveiled in September 2020, before the Boxer A3 was in production and none of the Boxers were equipped with the TE21 engine. That brochure is simply promoting future possibilities.
That’s also what the developer answered before, that the Boxer MGS is based on the A2, not the Boxer A3, and therefore has a 530kW TE20 engine.
The TE21 engine has been available for longer than the A3. The TE21 engine has been available from MTU from at least 2014, the Boxer has been advertised with the TE21 engine from 2017, the UK rejoined the Boxer program in 2018 and placed orders for 523 Boxers in November 2019. The Boxer MGS was unveiled in September 2020, only after the TE21 was available for the increased weight of the turret. Could a 3105 turret be mounted on a basic A2 hull? Probably, but at that point you are exceeding the combat weight of the hull. Therefore it must be modified to A3 standards.
This is supported by the fact that the combination of features of the Boxer MGS hull is not found on any production Boxer, so it does not conform to A1, A2 or A3 specifications. It’s a hull used for internal testing/tech demonstration by Artec.
The problem here is that what is advertised does not mean that it is actually on the Boxer, the developer has already clearly answered that the Boxer A2 is equipped with TE20.
In the test I was referring to, the mission module had been replaced with a ballast, but other than that, there were no other modifications, so that is incorrect.
Existing hulls were already able to handle the extra weight well enough, we need to distinguish between max weight and combat weight.
And how do they know the Boxer MGS is on an A2 hull? What is their evidence for this?
That doesn’t mean it will be able to perform under combat conditions at that weight though.
Artec, Rheinmetall, or KMW do not make any such distinction in their material. Nor do they say that combat weight is greater than 36.5 kg for the A2 or greater than 38.5 kg for the A3, which is unlike what they do for speed or range.
Boxer MIV for the British Army will be the first version of the vehicle equipped with Rolls-Royce’s MTU 8V 199 TE21 engine, delivering 600 KW, 70 KW more than the MTU engines in previous versions of the vehicle.
MTU also mentions this, they say that the Boxer MIV is the first vehicle with TE21.
Please don’t take issue with the wording Rolls-Royce MTU here, I don’t want to quote yet another source saying MTU is acquired by Rolls-Royce.
Boxer A2 is fully tested in 41t configuration. They just said that the customer didn’t want that much weight.
It climbed a 60° slope, crossed a 2.2m gap, and pass over 1m vertical obstacle, it wasn’t enough for you?
People here are saying that the “Boxer A2 has a 36.5t “maximum” weight and the Boxer A3 has a 38.5t “maximum” weight, so the Boxer MGS, which is currently 38t, is based on the Boxer A3.”
However, both the Bundeswehr and the KNDS state that 36.5t is the “combat” weight for the Boxer A2.
And, as keep mentioning, ARTEC GmbH has already tested the maximum weight in 2021 on the basis of the existing Boxer A2 hull and successfully demonstrated that the vehicle can hold up to 41t.
There is no evidence that this was a standard A2 hull, for all we know it could have modifications to support that weight, or it could itself have been to A3 standard.
While Artec very clearly says that the maximum gross vehicle weight is up to 38.5 t.
This is further reinforced by a September 2024 article from European Security & Defence:
The A3 will be fitted with a more powerful 600 kW (804.6 hp) MTU 8V199 TE21 diesel engine and will have an uprated suspension, modified braking system, and reinforced wheel hubs, allowing it to accommodate a higher gross vehicle weight (GVW) of 38.5 tonnes
This is the confusing part, how is it 38 tonnes if the tires themselves can only support 4.5 ton new each according to Michelin? They did drive this thing around with the initial driving tests and it did its thing just no live firings.
The only information that makes sense is they can change to ZL tires for an additional 0.5 tonnes per tire for a maximum weight of 40 tonnes.
Same thing with the engine, the managing director also said the te21 is just an up rated version of the te20, not a newly built engine. It makes no sense to use Britain as a source for the engines, when this was stated in 2020 and apparently the te21s have been supposedly in use since 2011 Afghanistan deployment from what I’ve seen on forums online English and Russian alike.
I think we all understand for good reason this stuff might be classified but it just does not connect at all in a lot of ways. IBD classified their website advertisements for AMAP back in 2018-2019, the links remain but they’re locked the same when GmbH and rheinmetall has with pdfs about the skyranger protection level.
The vehicle may be as I mentioned previously much stronger than advertised.
Rolls Royce is a partner in modifying them, not the direct manufacturer as the MTU is based from the Mercedes Benz OM 500, uprating it for military use. As previously mentioned the te20 to te21 is a modification onto the te20 for uprated power. Probably new turbo chargers if you want my honest opinion if you look at the technical data and the MD of ARTEC mentioning “software” updates.
That’s not the point of this article, TE21 engines for Boxers outside of the UK will be produced somewhere other than the UK, probably Germany. The article simply states that TE21 engines for UK Boxer MIVs will be produced in the UK.
We only need to look at the part about the Boxer never having been equipped with a TE21 engine before the Boxer MIV, which MTU itself mentions.
A3 was unveiled in Jan. 2020, making it very well likely it is an A3. If you watch the MANAGING DIRECTOR OF ARTEC, explains the maximum weights for the A1, A2, and A3.
Then he goes onto explain that the MTU is merely an UPRATED 530KW to 600KW with minor fixes, mechanical parts and software. 4:30 into the interview.
Is there anymore you need than that? Rolls Royce merely supplies the military upgrades on the OM 500 to uprate it as previously mentioned.
Boxer A3 was not unveiled in 2020, even in the IAV2020 video they say “will be”. Boxer A3 was first built in June 2022 and delivered to the UK for testing purposes.
Boxer A2 production continued until 2021, and all vehicles in between are A2 variants.
I don’t know why Rolls Royce keeps coming up here, I only quoted the MTU article.
In that article MTU clearly states that none of the Boxer variants were fitted with the TE21 engine before the Boxer MIV, is this hard to understand?
“In the UK for the first time”, “The british”, does not equate to Germany/German army not having them.
Notice here how KMW signed a contract and Rolls-Royce is delivering “Engine components”. Rolls Royce isn’t building an engine, they’re uprating it. And they only specify, “for the british army”, not german army. No where does it state the German army DOES NOT have TE21’s.
In the second image also states BAE is supplying the engines as well, so I’m not sure how you missed that part, and Rolls Royce is just assembling them in this article meaning BAE already is building TE21 engines.
There was no Boxer series in the UK in the first place, so the reference is to all Boxer variants.
Boxer MIV for the British Army will be the first version of the vehicle equipped with Rolls-Royce’s MTU 8V 199 TE21 engine, delivering 600 KW, 70 KW more than the MTU engines in previous versions of the vehicle.
As literally mentioned earlier, they say that the MIV is the first version of the Boxer to be equipped with TE21, with the previous Boxer being equipped with TE20
Boxer MIV for the British Army will be the first version of the vehicle equipped with Rolls-Royce’s MTU 8V 199 TE21 engine, delivering 600 KW, 70 KW more than the MTU engines in previous versions of the vehicle.
You either don’t know, or are deliberately ignoring, that RBSL produces Boxers for the British Army.
Also, where does it say that BAE produces the engines? You might want to read the quote properly.
Watch the interview at 7:28, the MD clearly also states the UK will be producing the actual Boxer themselves with a 92%/8% split from the UK/GmbH, because BAE is supplying the OM-500 engines which are produced by Mercedes Benz.
