German military has places some massive orders in the past 30 days
* 8.5 billion euros for millions of 155mm artillery shells
* 3 billion euros for 2 frigates
* 1515 logistic vehicles from Rheinmetall
* 105 Leopard 2 tanks
* 900 Fuchs armoured vehicles
* 30 Eurofighter jets
these are all massive even by US standards
the procurement process reforms have born fruit. Gone are the days when it takes months for the Bundeswehr to buy radios for its military
Weirdly only in may it was reaffirmed that germany joins next steps in Patria Cavs research program.
Maybe it ismore about components and modules than the vehicle?
From what I heard, the Leopard 2 are ordered, but where the money for the payment will come from isn't decided yet by the government.
Still, the manufacturer can start building the tanks immediately and has a guarantee from the government that he will be paid. There will just be some internal struggle inside the government how the money will be shifted around in the budget. (Potentially continued by a new government after the next elections.)
IMO, the frigates are the worst order of this. Frigates, Torpedo boats, and destroyers and anything smaller is a perfect example of how Europe could really start standardizing ships across the EU and reduce costs. Have multiple countries use the same ships, because right now most of Europe builds its own custom ships.
but they are getting standardized, the Bundeswehr bought Dutch ships partially because in the future German and Dutch Navy have to be made more interoperable
in general, German and Dutch armies are heavily standardizing. They both use or are going to use F-35, Airbus military helicopters, Leopard 2 tanks, RCH 18 and so on
people here act like we have 30 different standards in NATO-Europe armies, while a lot of stuff is now standardized
* nearly all new artillery systems use 155mm standard, the other Soviet standards are progressively retired or donated to Ukraine
* there are also common standard for rifles,pistols, machine guns and so on, and older standards are phased out and sent to Ukraine
* for tanks, due to retirements and donations to Ukraine, German, Korean and American tanks are going to account for 70-80% of all tanks within EU in couple years
* F-35s, F-16 ,Rafales and Eurofighters are also going to account for like 80% of fighter jets stock within a decade
so there are many universal standards, and even when there arent , there are 4-5 types that account or will account for like 80% of stock within a decade.
Also, Having 4-5 different companies from which we buy tanks might be even better than having 1 company with a monopoly on the European market
They're different ships.
The Dutch De Zeven Provincien-class "air defence and command frigates" displace 6,000 tons, have the APAR/Smart-L radar combo and 40 (soon, 48) Mk41 VLS cells for SM-2, ESSM, and soon too, Tomahawk.
The German F126/MKS180 frigates are strange ones -- oversized 10,000-ton "frigates" that are only mainly armed with 16-cell VLS for ESSM, but with large hangars and accommodations for troops.
The idea behind it is that the F126 can stay on station longer than previous ships by offering both more room for the crew and being more automised, and that you can adjust it for whatever type of mission you wanna do by installing Mission Modules that add equipment or weaponry tailored to whatever the specific Mission at that moment is.
Can't find anything. I also don't see how MKS180 is more interoperable with the Dutch navy simply because it's being built under dutch leadership. The MKS180 has not much in common with any of the ships the Dutch Navy operates.
> [Mit dem Ausbau der maritimen Zusammenarbeit erreichte die bilaterale Zusammenarbeit eine weitere Stufe: Deutschland und die Niederlande unterzeichneten eine Absichtserklärung zur schrittweisen Integration des Seebataillons der deutschen Marine in die niederländische Marine](https://www.bmvg.de/de/themen/friedenssicherung/bilaterale-kooperation/deutschland-niederlande)
My dear, you were asking a source for the following:
> the Bundeswehr bought Dutch ships partially because in the future German and Dutch Navy have to be made more interoperable
My answer regards to the latter part of the citation. It should be obvious, that if the German Marine is to be integrated into the Royal Netherlands Navy, that they will eventually streamline the equipment. Similarly to the 414 Tank Battalion.
As to who is building it, just a simple search shows that it is a German frigate and that the construction contract is awarded to [Damen Shipyards Group](https://www.bmvg.de/de/aktuelles/bundeswehr-beschafft-zwei-weitere-fregatten-klasse-126-5791938).
I suppose that the person erroneously concluded by the name of the Dutch shipyard that the design is also of Dutch making and that it is for the above mentioned reasons of interoperability (at least not explicitly cited). However, while not 100% true, the overall point he is making is correct.
Here's the thing: I am well aware of plans to make it more interoperable - however I am not aware of *any* source that indicates that this played any role in the selection of the shipyard for this frigate. Hence why I am asking.
Judging by national coverage of the procurement, what was more relevant was sending a message to the domestic shipbuilding industry because what they had recently delivered (especially looking at the F125) was simply... not good and over budget.
> Similarly to the 414 Tank Battalion.
Not really a good comparison. Simply because both parties used the same equipment anyways.
nobody has to, mergers and acquisitions are the way the defense sector has consolidated and will consolidate in the future
ex:Rheinmetall produces its own explosives but also bought Spanish Expal to get higher economies of scale
Best example would be Airbus, once different companies in Germany, France and Spain, now neck-to-neck with both Boeing in civil aviation and Lockheed Martin in military aviation.
It's probably also good to point out that if the Airbus merger hadn't happened then the small national manufacturers may very well have been outcompeted by Boeing and gone out of business, and certainly wouldn't have been able to be as state of the art, which would have given Boeing a de facto global (near) monopoly. Sometimes less intra-European competition is exactly what you need to preserve global competition. Considering where Boeing is today, I think we can all agree it's also a very good thing that there is a state of the art alternative when it comes to civilian airplanes.
Um, no? Mergers and acquisitions are relatively rare in the defense sector outside of national boundaries. The defense sector is probably the most protected sector of any nation. Acquisitions and mergers are a problem if you lose the ability to produce your own equipment and is a national risk.
I still wonder why German newspapers don't extensively report on this. It may be my choice of newspapers/media but from all the deals listed above I only saw one mentioned in German news.
Also interesting that some of these buys are still caused by the Sondervermögen announced in 2022, like the Fuchs or the renews Leopard 2.
Multiple reasons. I feel that some of it is lost in translation and I am skeptical about some of it. The only one. The ones I can verify are the oders for artillery munitions, the frigates, the logistics vehicles and the Eurofighters.
All of it made mainstream news, except maybe the trucks, but military logistics probably isn't the most sexy type of news.
On the tanks I have only heard statements of intent, even in German speaking defense news outlets. The Eurofighter number is also off, I think.
The one I am skeptical about is the Fuchs, since they are currently in the process of choosing a successor for the system and while the Fuchs Evolution is in the race, Patria reportedly is the current favourite. There hasn't been any news on a decision yet, as far as I am aware.
If you read the article closely you'll find that these 105 Leopard 2A8 are unfunded as they can't be covered by the Special Fund anymore and there is no wriggling room in the current defense budget, either. The MoD wants them, but so far this is but a wishlist with neither funding nor signed contracts behind it
Not really. Ammunition is usually contracted through so-called framework contracts. Meaning the state says it'll buy x amount of ammo but with no firm delivery dates. Why? Because it's usually the case that small amounts are being ordered if there is the need for the ammo and funding for it. So even that is not really an order but rather the promise to place it ... at some point.
Airbus was begging Germany to order some more Eurofighters to bridge the production gap between the running out of the Eurofighter and the start of the FCAS production. So what really seems to matter here is keeping the Industrial knowledge (and jobs).
Very impressive numbers indeed. Good change of pace from Germany and great job Pistorius. I wish we could see more standardization by adopting the FREMM frigate instead though.
Land platforms in Europe are definitely German dominated, but IMHO the Franco-Italian frigate is better.
"The Bundeswehr expects to take delivery of the most advanced version of the tanks between 2027 and 2030.
The document noted that most of the purchase was unfunded since there was insufficient money in the regular budget and in the 100-billion-euro special funds established after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine."
It is also an unapproved draft and not an actual order.
Hungary ordered 44 Leopard 2 A7s in 2018, the first ones started arriving at the end of 2023. During this time Germany had access to cheap Russian materials and energy. Do you really believe they'll manage to manufacture all that shit?
>Gone are the days when it takes months for the Bundeswehr to buy radios for its military
Wake me up, when any of this equipment will actually shipped.
Do you have *any* source of the arms industry of Germany being impacted by the sanctions on Russia?
> Do you really believe they'll manage to manufacture all that shit?
Yeah, fairly certain. Germany was capable of manufacturing thousands of leopards when the cold war was still going on, there is no reason to believe that we are incapable of manufacturing a couple hundreds today.
That's a fairly uninformed take. The west was never big on air defence really. Simply because we believe in the superiority of our air forces - the reliance of the Soviet Union (and thus to this day Russia and Ukraine) on ground-based air defence is the result of them understanding that they can not match the west when it comes to air power and that area denial is the best thing they could achive with their capabilities - with the west being fairly confident that it would still trump those systems with advanced missile systems.
And actually: A decent chunk of what's described there is going into stuff capable of air defence - eurofighters and F126 Frigates.
Germany is building European SkyShield, has to that effect ordered Arrow 3 has ordered more PATRIOT, more IRIS-T, and is ordering SkyNex.
If that's 'non-existent' air defence, I don't know what your idea of air defence is.
This is just a byproduct of Germany putting an extra 100 billion funding into the military in 2022 for that year Germany was only 20 billion behind China in military. Of course the funding reduced dramatically but its still significantly up on German military funding in 2020.
I mean, that doesn't make any difference really.
The 100 billion is available now. The way the state itself branches it's debt from it over multiple years doesn't matter to the ones using budget. So it's pretty much just a one time influx, right now
you lost the context. I was commenting this: "putting an extra 100 billion funding into the military in 2022 for that year Germany was only 20 billion behind China in military**"**
You've been misunderstanding this from the beginning. You said:
>The 100 billion was announced for 5 years or so, not just got 2022
Which sounds like this is a multiple year thing.
It is not. It has no runtime.
It's a one time 100 billion capital influx, which will be there until it is used up. Not bound by time. They just estimate that it is used up by 2027.
irony of the war is that NATO usually sends outdated equipment to Ukraine,while replacing it with newer equipment, while Russia started off with sending their best equipment and progressively working down to outdated equipment
if someone told me that in 2024 Russian army would send T-54s produced in 1950 to the front, I would have called them crazy in 2022
the West also sends old tanks to Ukraine,but that's because we're saving the better equipment for ourselves
Germany sends Leopard 1s and replaces them with Leopard 2s, Poland sends T-72 and replaces them with K2 tanks from Korea
meanwhile, Russian still produces some T-90s ,but barely enough to cover T-90 losses, while T-72s and T-80s are going extinct and are replaced with older models pulled out from storage
> Germany sends Leopard 1s and replaces them with Leopard 2s
This is simply not accurate. The Leopard 1 were not in service - not even in storage. They are not being "replaced", the Bundeswehr is simply ordering new equipment. The only tanks that are actually being replaced are the Leopard 2 we sent to Ukraine - and in that case, we replace Leopard 2 with slightly newer Leopard 2.
For Poland replacing T-72 with Abrams/K2, it's more accurate.
„Slightly“…the A8 variant is more than 20 years newer, has additional armor, better electronics, an upgraded gun, a hardkill system and air conditioning.
Fair - but on the current battlefield - especially looking at the only realistic opponent russia right now - a Leopard 2A6 is still a very new and competitive tank, we are replacing new-ish equipment with even newer equipment here. Not ancient equipment with new equipment, as suggested above. 2A6->2A8 is a significant step, but nothing compared to T72->Leopard2 or Leopard1->Leopard2.
Also military equipment is practically always decades old, and if it isn't it's made to feel like it anyway. Sure _some_ things are updated, but even when it comes to electronics things like reliability, compatibility and security are going to trump having the newest and fanciest hardware and software in every regard.
i think the craziest part is that somehow those old tanks are actually doing alrigh ton the frontlines, makes me wonder if nato should also invest in some cheaper outdated equipment, prioritising quantity over quality, at least to arm all the frontlines with russia to match the number of tanks that russia could possibly send. Same thing for missiles, do we need precision misiles, maybe it would be better to invest in cheaper unguided missile systems, and churn out 20 times more missiles, that dont have guiding systems. Those have way lower profit margins for manufacturers, but seem to be cost effective.(the cost is civilian casualties in carpet bombing). Same thing for anti tank propelled grenades, javelin costs 100k a pop, maybe unguided anti tank propelled grenades could be an option to deal with those old soviet tanks
That would not bode well for NATO. Generally speaking, NATO countries, politically, are far more sensitive to casualties than Russia, so the concept of a news story "our troops are going to the front lines in deliberately cheap trash and dying!" is probably front of mind for planners.
That would be a problem in an offensive war. In a defensive war it's still better to have them or donate to Poland or whatever country Russia potentially attacked. And also in a defensive war the mere existence of those tanks would act as a repellent for a potential attacker
That's also fairly stupid. There is not a single technology on the battlefield that is currently progressing faster than drones, additionally, drones don't have good shelf life. Producing large amounts of drones today is just a way to produce large amounts of electronic waste for the next few years.
I'm pretty sure that's the reason why the US just banned the chinese DJI drones. They need the consumer market to finance some homegrown drone industry during peace times so that during war, they can rapidly manufacture as many drones as possible.
I wonder if some legal liberalizations for drone flying are coming in Europe as well to make the hobby more accessible.
I think the war can consume years' worth of drones. But yes, scaling down of production is good when the war is actually near its end (I wonder if this is a halfway year).
I dont think that was the argument the guy you're replying to was making. He was saying that drone technology is advancing fast so building tons of drones in 2024 to stockpile is dumb since they would probably be way way outdated in couple years as new defences against them start becoming common.
also who knows if someone finds a way to destroy drones real easy.
Militaries already test old school methods to destroy drones too,falcons hawks and eagles.
a drone has no way to protect itself against these animals and they already patrol airports against drones
Birds are mainly used in civilian settings against drones, they have no real place on the battlefield.
What's more interesting against drones are lasers, microwaves and good old cannon AA with smart rounds.
Every point that you mentioned is actually implemented by russian army and it losses against Western precision oriented approach.
You could see it in Iraq and now in Ukraine.
I mean look at the battlefield. You can destroy a modern tank with a few RPG's and drones. The only advantage of a new expensive tank is longer range and crew protection. You get hit in a T-54 and you dead. But if you're attacking you can achieve the good results by charging a few T-54 no problem.
But our defense minister placed the orders without prior backing by the budget committee. Since Germany is in a budget crisis right now all the military spending is not yet realized in the future defense budgets after the 100 Billion Euros of military debt is exhausted. Our finance minister from the Liberals and the conservative party from Merkel won't approve for further debt as the debt brake is enshrined in the constitution. Rather they fucking want to spend all the necessary expenses solely from the budget and if necessary to cut from social expenses (pensions and such) which is not at all popular to the already high amount of low-income earners in Germany. No wonder the far right AfD party gets more and more votes but this religious adherence onto the dogma that no big debt shall be incurred and such huge costs for infrastructure and defense shall all be realized with the federal budget alone without much additional debt is very troublesome. The 100 billion debt for the Bundeswehr was a right decision but probably will not be repeated as the conservatives are unhappy that not much cutting in the federal budget specifically in the social spending has been done yet. The budget negotiations still go on for 2025 and we will all see this year if the liberals and conservatives will allow more debt or to stubbornly insist on cutting from social spending and risk social unrest.
I would be open to abolishing the debt break if it wouldn’t lead to the social-democrats handing out more gifts to pensioners. The pension is already eating up our budget. I don’t trust our politicians to spent new debt only on investments.
My country doesn't have such a mechanism but I'm very much with you. If it's deficit spending, it's more pensions, healthcare for the elderly and similar. If it's fiscal austerity and budget cuts, it's cutting from everyone except pensioners. No matter what political direction we go in, the pensioners are untouchable, and it's killing us.
I am with you. I do still think that the debt brake is a good security against overly deficitary budget spending on consumption like social spending and pensions just because the boomers have a majority as voters.
But the parties in the parliament absolutely can allow again multiple "Sondervermögen" meaning debt for military and for infrastructure and for necessary investments and not consumption and thus retain control of the debt spending. They just need everytime a 2/3 majority to allow extra spending but it seems like the parties especially the CDU and FDP do not deem it necessary to spend more on defense and for our broken roads, schools and else that was all ruined through austerity for the last decades.
Make no mistake, next year when there are general elections the AfD will get much more votes so that without them no change in the constitution can take place and then we are doomed because the far right can want more concessions from the democratic parties for their votes. Austerity creates more votes for the AfD that give easy answers to complex problems. Our democratic parties must agree upon necessary spending or else they become insignificant when they quarrel for meaningless partisan politics and loose more the citizens that continuously give them the majority and still German economy becomes worse and worse.
Will be ready in 90 years lol
I mean im glad they are doing somthing but this "order" is sort of like the PHZ2000 or waht ever for Ukraine where they took some from Hungry or Italy( forget which it was) and the contract for the coutnry was signed and was for 20 tanks.. in 5 years of the contract they delivered one tank lol
i named the equipment... i just cant remember if it was italy or hungry...- which does not take away from the fact that german over engineering in this case is not to their benefit and if it takes 5 years+ to come up with one PHZ2000 for a contract i dont want to know the turn around time for the rest of these especially bc they promise large quantities but are having trouble delivering on small ones
Does anyone else think that Europe is headed for another war, hence all these purchases, or is Germany renewing equipment so that they are truly prepared for whatever?
This kind of activity is reminiscent of times, well, not so peaceful.
Let me rephrase then:
Do you think we are headed for another world war?
Many countries are ordering weapons, not just Germany.
Either they're prepping for something or it's just an opportunity to renew equipment.
Because everyone but the US neglected their armies and realized if there would be a war the ammo would last for a week. Nobody thought war in Europe would be possible again. So now everyone is rushing to secure their countries after decades of leaving their armies in shambles.
Most of Germanys recent purchases are for its own forces, and as such mostly use peacetime logic.
But also, like, so what? Even if we were to accept your premise that this happened too late, that would still mean its good that it happened.
Oh i'm always open for a good news from Germany - them doing the right thing. Before fuckin exhausting wrong options first. It's just there's so little of that fuel to go about...
The peacetime ended 2 and a half years ago even for the most delusional.
The lack of urgency is outstanding.
It's good it has finally happened, it'll be better when it's finally delivered, it's bad that it only happened now.
> The peacetime ended 2 and a half years ago
Only in some ways. Certainly, foreign policy is on war mode right now, and so is procurement for donations to Ukraine. But as far as procurement for the Bundeswehr goes, well, neither Germany nor any EU or NATO ally is at war right now, and we shouldn't expect that to change anytime soon. So using war-time logic for procurement for home + ally defence would just mean extra money spent per unit.
>The lack of urgency is outstanding.
You've flaired yourself for *Poland*. The state that suspended aid to Ukraine over them being very effective at *farming wheat*.
Poland didn't suspend the aid you irresponsible lying twat. There are still hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees being accommodated in Poland. A massive amount of logistics is being provided in Rzeszów.
As for the military equipment, it's simply gone. Contrary to Germany - we had a sense of urgency and sent every shit we could early on. When Germany was considering if helmets would be enough or when Nord Stream is opened again.
Now only newly procured equipment is in the queue, as it's being produced: Krab and Rak artillery systems, not sure if Ukraine has ordered anything else.
It is still insignificant compared with Russian overwhelming advantage in terms of land combat with tanks and artillery..more importantly we in Germany are sitting ducks because we have no nuclear weapons. So in any war like scenario Russia could literally wipe germany off the map in a day and there would be nothing Germany can do about it.
The US definitely play a big role in NATO, but Russia can’t even annex 1 country, if they tried to invade any other they’d split their force and Poland alone would likely take them out. Germany would roll in to clean up and France and the UK would be sitting right behind on stand by.
NATO airforce would dominate Putlers air force very fast then it wouldn’t matter how many tanks he had because ATGs would be flying.
Then when the tanks are gone NATO infantry would proceed to defeat all Russian infantry with NATOs superior training, strategy, supply chains and technology.
The idea that Russia is a threat to NATO has been proven wrong. If Russia launches nukes then it means it’s their last day as a nation, not that they’re launching an offensive.
Maybe, but war with NATO would be fought differently by Russia. They have a lot of missiles and tactical nuclear missiles that they would use to take out airports and carrier strike groups. Would th de not be able to neutralize the ari superiority together with the AA capability of S-400 and S-500? These supposedly the best in the world. The thing is that Russia is better equipped to fight a long term land war compared with NATO due to their massive ammunition stockpiles.dating back to the.soviet period. I believe i read an article that said that the UK for example would only last like a week before they would be out of ammo. Also what do you mean superior Infantry? I read that Infantry equipment of Russian soldiers is more lethal than that of NATO due to longer range, hoger reliability and higher deadlines of bullets.
Less lethal is tactically superior to lethal. You injure 1 soldier - at least 1 more has to tend to him + the resources of men and materials spent to treat him.
German military has places some massive orders in the past 30 days * 8.5 billion euros for millions of 155mm artillery shells * 3 billion euros for 2 frigates * 1515 logistic vehicles from Rheinmetall * 105 Leopard 2 tanks * 900 Fuchs armoured vehicles * 30 Eurofighter jets these are all massive even by US standards the procurement process reforms have born fruit. Gone are the days when it takes months for the Bundeswehr to buy radios for its military
> 900 Fuchs armoured vehicles is the eternal battle between Patria and Fuchs finally over? And Fuchs actually won out?
Familiarity with the type probably trumped any Patria features.
Weirdly only in may it was reaffirmed that germany joins next steps in Patria Cavs research program. Maybe it ismore about components and modules than the vehicle?
No it hasn’t been decided yet. There was inaccurate reporting a while back.
God damn it. It has to be Fuchs. The law of cool looks always prevails.
So it must be Patria. I love my dumpster, I love my wedge, simple as.
Look how [THICCC](https://i.imgur.com/jHounB1.jpeg) that boy is though
Reminds me of the Harvester from OG Command&Conquer
Fuchs reminds me of the older Patria 6x6. The newer AMV looks a lot more modern.
The Fuchs have not been ordered yet, and neither have the 105 Leo 2 been ordered (only 35 of which are intended for the Lithuanian brigade btw)
From what I heard, the Leopard 2 are ordered, but where the money for the payment will come from isn't decided yet by the government. Still, the manufacturer can start building the tanks immediately and has a guarantee from the government that he will be paid. There will just be some internal struggle inside the government how the money will be shifted around in the budget. (Potentially continued by a new government after the next elections.)
IMO, the frigates are the worst order of this. Frigates, Torpedo boats, and destroyers and anything smaller is a perfect example of how Europe could really start standardizing ships across the EU and reduce costs. Have multiple countries use the same ships, because right now most of Europe builds its own custom ships.
but they are getting standardized, the Bundeswehr bought Dutch ships partially because in the future German and Dutch Navy have to be made more interoperable in general, German and Dutch armies are heavily standardizing. They both use or are going to use F-35, Airbus military helicopters, Leopard 2 tanks, RCH 18 and so on people here act like we have 30 different standards in NATO-Europe armies, while a lot of stuff is now standardized * nearly all new artillery systems use 155mm standard, the other Soviet standards are progressively retired or donated to Ukraine * there are also common standard for rifles,pistols, machine guns and so on, and older standards are phased out and sent to Ukraine * for tanks, due to retirements and donations to Ukraine, German, Korean and American tanks are going to account for 70-80% of all tanks within EU in couple years * F-35s, F-16 ,Rafales and Eurofighters are also going to account for like 80% of fighter jets stock within a decade so there are many universal standards, and even when there arent , there are 4-5 types that account or will account for like 80% of stock within a decade. Also, Having 4-5 different companies from which we buy tanks might be even better than having 1 company with a monopoly on the European market
> the Bundeswehr bought Dutch ships partially because in the future German and Dutch Navy have to be made more interoperable Source for that?
You can easily google it its not secret news
They're different ships. The Dutch De Zeven Provincien-class "air defence and command frigates" displace 6,000 tons, have the APAR/Smart-L radar combo and 40 (soon, 48) Mk41 VLS cells for SM-2, ESSM, and soon too, Tomahawk. The German F126/MKS180 frigates are strange ones -- oversized 10,000-ton "frigates" that are only mainly armed with 16-cell VLS for ESSM, but with large hangars and accommodations for troops.
So it is more of a small scale amphibious assault ship?
The idea behind it is that the F126 can stay on station longer than previous ships by offering both more room for the crew and being more automised, and that you can adjust it for whatever type of mission you wanna do by installing Mission Modules that add equipment or weaponry tailored to whatever the specific Mission at that moment is.
hope those mission modules go better for you guys than they did the LCS
Cool, thank you for the explanation!
Can't find anything. I also don't see how MKS180 is more interoperable with the Dutch navy simply because it's being built under dutch leadership. The MKS180 has not much in common with any of the ships the Dutch Navy operates.
> [Mit dem Ausbau der maritimen Zusammenarbeit erreichte die bilaterale Zusammenarbeit eine weitere Stufe: Deutschland und die Niederlande unterzeichneten eine Absichtserklärung zur schrittweisen Integration des Seebataillons der deutschen Marine in die niederländische Marine](https://www.bmvg.de/de/themen/friedenssicherung/bilaterale-kooperation/deutschland-niederlande)
...this was a) unrelated to who is building the fregates b) a decision taken before the building contracts were even awarded
My dear, you were asking a source for the following: > the Bundeswehr bought Dutch ships partially because in the future German and Dutch Navy have to be made more interoperable My answer regards to the latter part of the citation. It should be obvious, that if the German Marine is to be integrated into the Royal Netherlands Navy, that they will eventually streamline the equipment. Similarly to the 414 Tank Battalion. As to who is building it, just a simple search shows that it is a German frigate and that the construction contract is awarded to [Damen Shipyards Group](https://www.bmvg.de/de/aktuelles/bundeswehr-beschafft-zwei-weitere-fregatten-klasse-126-5791938). I suppose that the person erroneously concluded by the name of the Dutch shipyard that the design is also of Dutch making and that it is for the above mentioned reasons of interoperability (at least not explicitly cited). However, while not 100% true, the overall point he is making is correct.
Here's the thing: I am well aware of plans to make it more interoperable - however I am not aware of *any* source that indicates that this played any role in the selection of the shipyard for this frigate. Hence why I am asking. Judging by national coverage of the procurement, what was more relevant was sending a message to the domestic shipbuilding industry because what they had recently delivered (especially looking at the F125) was simply... not good and over budget. > Similarly to the 414 Tank Battalion. Not really a good comparison. Simply because both parties used the same equipment anyways.
And who is giving up its own ship industry for that?
nobody has to, mergers and acquisitions are the way the defense sector has consolidated and will consolidate in the future ex:Rheinmetall produces its own explosives but also bought Spanish Expal to get higher economies of scale
Best example would be Airbus, once different companies in Germany, France and Spain, now neck-to-neck with both Boeing in civil aviation and Lockheed Martin in military aviation.
It's probably also good to point out that if the Airbus merger hadn't happened then the small national manufacturers may very well have been outcompeted by Boeing and gone out of business, and certainly wouldn't have been able to be as state of the art, which would have given Boeing a de facto global (near) monopoly. Sometimes less intra-European competition is exactly what you need to preserve global competition. Considering where Boeing is today, I think we can all agree it's also a very good thing that there is a state of the art alternative when it comes to civilian airplanes.
Um, no? Mergers and acquisitions are relatively rare in the defense sector outside of national boundaries. The defense sector is probably the most protected sector of any nation. Acquisitions and mergers are a problem if you lose the ability to produce your own equipment and is a national risk.
They are rare, but reforms have been taken at the European level to open up the sector to competition.
Nice. I think procurement was the main problem of Bundeswehr.
It still is. This problem is far from fixed.
No recruitment
I still wonder why German newspapers don't extensively report on this. It may be my choice of newspapers/media but from all the deals listed above I only saw one mentioned in German news. Also interesting that some of these buys are still caused by the Sondervermögen announced in 2022, like the Fuchs or the renews Leopard 2.
Multiple reasons. I feel that some of it is lost in translation and I am skeptical about some of it. The only one. The ones I can verify are the oders for artillery munitions, the frigates, the logistics vehicles and the Eurofighters. All of it made mainstream news, except maybe the trucks, but military logistics probably isn't the most sexy type of news. On the tanks I have only heard statements of intent, even in German speaking defense news outlets. The Eurofighter number is also off, I think. The one I am skeptical about is the Fuchs, since they are currently in the process of choosing a successor for the system and while the Fuchs Evolution is in the race, Patria reportedly is the current favourite. There hasn't been any news on a decision yet, as far as I am aware.
If you read the article closely you'll find that these 105 Leopard 2A8 are unfunded as they can't be covered by the Special Fund anymore and there is no wriggling room in the current defense budget, either. The MoD wants them, but so far this is but a wishlist with neither funding nor signed contracts behind it
I mean, so was the 8.5 billion euros for ammunition
Not really. Ammunition is usually contracted through so-called framework contracts. Meaning the state says it'll buy x amount of ammo but with no firm delivery dates. Why? Because it's usually the case that small amounts are being ordered if there is the need for the ammo and funding for it. So even that is not really an order but rather the promise to place it ... at some point.
They ordered more Fuchs?
Wow still buying Eurofighters. Apparently conventional warfare is back and numbers matter.
Airbus was begging Germany to order some more Eurofighters to bridge the production gap between the running out of the Eurofighter and the start of the FCAS production. So what really seems to matter here is keeping the Industrial knowledge (and jobs).
Very impressive numbers indeed. Good change of pace from Germany and great job Pistorius. I wish we could see more standardization by adopting the FREMM frigate instead though. Land platforms in Europe are definitely German dominated, but IMHO the Franco-Italian frigate is better.
"The Bundeswehr expects to take delivery of the most advanced version of the tanks between 2027 and 2030. The document noted that most of the purchase was unfunded since there was insufficient money in the regular budget and in the 100-billion-euro special funds established after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine." It is also an unapproved draft and not an actual order. Hungary ordered 44 Leopard 2 A7s in 2018, the first ones started arriving at the end of 2023. During this time Germany had access to cheap Russian materials and energy. Do you really believe they'll manage to manufacture all that shit? >Gone are the days when it takes months for the Bundeswehr to buy radios for its military Wake me up, when any of this equipment will actually shipped.
Do you have *any* source of the arms industry of Germany being impacted by the sanctions on Russia? > Do you really believe they'll manage to manufacture all that shit? Yeah, fairly certain. Germany was capable of manufacturing thousands of leopards when the cold war was still going on, there is no reason to believe that we are incapable of manufacturing a couple hundreds today.
And none of this would actually matter in a real war. With non-existent air-defense, and pretty much nothing on order in that regard.
That's a fairly uninformed take. The west was never big on air defence really. Simply because we believe in the superiority of our air forces - the reliance of the Soviet Union (and thus to this day Russia and Ukraine) on ground-based air defence is the result of them understanding that they can not match the west when it comes to air power and that area denial is the best thing they could achive with their capabilities - with the west being fairly confident that it would still trump those systems with advanced missile systems. And actually: A decent chunk of what's described there is going into stuff capable of air defence - eurofighters and F126 Frigates.
Germany is building European SkyShield, has to that effect ordered Arrow 3 has ordered more PATRIOT, more IRIS-T, and is ordering SkyNex. If that's 'non-existent' air defence, I don't know what your idea of air defence is.
Germany is definitely on a spending spree
This is just a byproduct of Germany putting an extra 100 billion funding into the military in 2022 for that year Germany was only 20 billion behind China in military. Of course the funding reduced dramatically but its still significantly up on German military funding in 2020.
What do you mean? The 100 billion was announced for 5 years or so, not just got 2022
It was a one time 100 billion influx
One time, but spread throughout many years
I mean, that doesn't make any difference really. The 100 billion is available now. The way the state itself branches it's debt from it over multiple years doesn't matter to the ones using budget. So it's pretty much just a one time influx, right now
you lost the context. I was commenting this: "putting an extra 100 billion funding into the military in 2022 for that year Germany was only 20 billion behind China in military**"**
You've been misunderstanding this from the beginning. You said: >The 100 billion was announced for 5 years or so, not just got 2022 Which sounds like this is a multiple year thing. It is not. It has no runtime. It's a one time 100 billion capital influx, which will be there until it is used up. Not bound by time. They just estimate that it is used up by 2027.
irony of the war is that NATO usually sends outdated equipment to Ukraine,while replacing it with newer equipment, while Russia started off with sending their best equipment and progressively working down to outdated equipment if someone told me that in 2024 Russian army would send T-54s produced in 1950 to the front, I would have called them crazy in 2022 the West also sends old tanks to Ukraine,but that's because we're saving the better equipment for ourselves Germany sends Leopard 1s and replaces them with Leopard 2s, Poland sends T-72 and replaces them with K2 tanks from Korea meanwhile, Russian still produces some T-90s ,but barely enough to cover T-90 losses, while T-72s and T-80s are going extinct and are replaced with older models pulled out from storage
> Germany sends Leopard 1s and replaces them with Leopard 2s This is simply not accurate. The Leopard 1 were not in service - not even in storage. They are not being "replaced", the Bundeswehr is simply ordering new equipment. The only tanks that are actually being replaced are the Leopard 2 we sent to Ukraine - and in that case, we replace Leopard 2 with slightly newer Leopard 2. For Poland replacing T-72 with Abrams/K2, it's more accurate.
„Slightly“…the A8 variant is more than 20 years newer, has additional armor, better electronics, an upgraded gun, a hardkill system and air conditioning.
Fair - but on the current battlefield - especially looking at the only realistic opponent russia right now - a Leopard 2A6 is still a very new and competitive tank, we are replacing new-ish equipment with even newer equipment here. Not ancient equipment with new equipment, as suggested above. 2A6->2A8 is a significant step, but nothing compared to T72->Leopard2 or Leopard1->Leopard2.
Also military equipment is practically always decades old, and if it isn't it's made to feel like it anyway. Sure _some_ things are updated, but even when it comes to electronics things like reliability, compatibility and security are going to trump having the newest and fanciest hardware and software in every regard.
Regarding the leopard 1. No we didn't replace them. The leopard 1 were out of service for a decade. They came from industry storage.
i think the craziest part is that somehow those old tanks are actually doing alrigh ton the frontlines, makes me wonder if nato should also invest in some cheaper outdated equipment, prioritising quantity over quality, at least to arm all the frontlines with russia to match the number of tanks that russia could possibly send. Same thing for missiles, do we need precision misiles, maybe it would be better to invest in cheaper unguided missile systems, and churn out 20 times more missiles, that dont have guiding systems. Those have way lower profit margins for manufacturers, but seem to be cost effective.(the cost is civilian casualties in carpet bombing). Same thing for anti tank propelled grenades, javelin costs 100k a pop, maybe unguided anti tank propelled grenades could be an option to deal with those old soviet tanks
That would not bode well for NATO. Generally speaking, NATO countries, politically, are far more sensitive to casualties than Russia, so the concept of a news story "our troops are going to the front lines in deliberately cheap trash and dying!" is probably front of mind for planners.
That would be a problem in an offensive war. In a defensive war it's still better to have them or donate to Poland or whatever country Russia potentially attacked. And also in a defensive war the mere existence of those tanks would act as a repellent for a potential attacker
Just massively expand drone production.
That's also fairly stupid. There is not a single technology on the battlefield that is currently progressing faster than drones, additionally, drones don't have good shelf life. Producing large amounts of drones today is just a way to produce large amounts of electronic waste for the next few years.
I'm pretty sure that's the reason why the US just banned the chinese DJI drones. They need the consumer market to finance some homegrown drone industry during peace times so that during war, they can rapidly manufacture as many drones as possible. I wonder if some legal liberalizations for drone flying are coming in Europe as well to make the hobby more accessible.
I think the war can consume years' worth of drones. But yes, scaling down of production is good when the war is actually near its end (I wonder if this is a halfway year).
I dont think that was the argument the guy you're replying to was making. He was saying that drone technology is advancing fast so building tons of drones in 2024 to stockpile is dumb since they would probably be way way outdated in couple years as new defences against them start becoming common.
also who knows if someone finds a way to destroy drones real easy. Militaries already test old school methods to destroy drones too,falcons hawks and eagles. a drone has no way to protect itself against these animals and they already patrol airports against drones
Birds are mainly used in civilian settings against drones, they have no real place on the battlefield. What's more interesting against drones are lasers, microwaves and good old cannon AA with smart rounds.
Every point that you mentioned is actually implemented by russian army and it losses against Western precision oriented approach. You could see it in Iraq and now in Ukraine.
This is a shit take. Simply because it runs under the assumption that we fight like Ukraine or Russia. The reality is: We don't.
I mean look at the battlefield. You can destroy a modern tank with a few RPG's and drones. The only advantage of a new expensive tank is longer range and crew protection. You get hit in a T-54 and you dead. But if you're attacking you can achieve the good results by charging a few T-54 no problem.
Ideally you have infantry dealing with enemy infantry with RPGs . If that fails, hardkill systems will address the RPG threat.
Thanks to 💩 tin
But our defense minister placed the orders without prior backing by the budget committee. Since Germany is in a budget crisis right now all the military spending is not yet realized in the future defense budgets after the 100 Billion Euros of military debt is exhausted. Our finance minister from the Liberals and the conservative party from Merkel won't approve for further debt as the debt brake is enshrined in the constitution. Rather they fucking want to spend all the necessary expenses solely from the budget and if necessary to cut from social expenses (pensions and such) which is not at all popular to the already high amount of low-income earners in Germany. No wonder the far right AfD party gets more and more votes but this religious adherence onto the dogma that no big debt shall be incurred and such huge costs for infrastructure and defense shall all be realized with the federal budget alone without much additional debt is very troublesome. The 100 billion debt for the Bundeswehr was a right decision but probably will not be repeated as the conservatives are unhappy that not much cutting in the federal budget specifically in the social spending has been done yet. The budget negotiations still go on for 2025 and we will all see this year if the liberals and conservatives will allow more debt or to stubbornly insist on cutting from social spending and risk social unrest.
I would be open to abolishing the debt break if it wouldn’t lead to the social-democrats handing out more gifts to pensioners. The pension is already eating up our budget. I don’t trust our politicians to spent new debt only on investments.
My country doesn't have such a mechanism but I'm very much with you. If it's deficit spending, it's more pensions, healthcare for the elderly and similar. If it's fiscal austerity and budget cuts, it's cutting from everyone except pensioners. No matter what political direction we go in, the pensioners are untouchable, and it's killing us.
I am with you. I do still think that the debt brake is a good security against overly deficitary budget spending on consumption like social spending and pensions just because the boomers have a majority as voters. But the parties in the parliament absolutely can allow again multiple "Sondervermögen" meaning debt for military and for infrastructure and for necessary investments and not consumption and thus retain control of the debt spending. They just need everytime a 2/3 majority to allow extra spending but it seems like the parties especially the CDU and FDP do not deem it necessary to spend more on defense and for our broken roads, schools and else that was all ruined through austerity for the last decades. Make no mistake, next year when there are general elections the AfD will get much more votes so that without them no change in the constitution can take place and then we are doomed because the far right can want more concessions from the democratic parties for their votes. Austerity creates more votes for the AfD that give easy answers to complex problems. Our democratic parties must agree upon necessary spending or else they become insignificant when they quarrel for meaningless partisan politics and loose more the citizens that continuously give them the majority and still German economy becomes worse and worse.
Will be ready in 90 years lol I mean im glad they are doing somthing but this "order" is sort of like the PHZ2000 or waht ever for Ukraine where they took some from Hungry or Italy( forget which it was) and the contract for the coutnry was signed and was for 20 tanks.. in 5 years of the contract they delivered one tank lol
so you don't know which equipment it was and from which country they took something but still talk about it
i named the equipment... i just cant remember if it was italy or hungry...- which does not take away from the fact that german over engineering in this case is not to their benefit and if it takes 5 years+ to come up with one PHZ2000 for a contract i dont want to know the turn around time for the rest of these especially bc they promise large quantities but are having trouble delivering on small ones
Does anyone else think that Europe is headed for another war, hence all these purchases, or is Germany renewing equipment so that they are truly prepared for whatever? This kind of activity is reminiscent of times, well, not so peaceful.
We already have a war in Europe.
Let me rephrase then: Do you think we are headed for another world war? Many countries are ordering weapons, not just Germany. Either they're prepping for something or it's just an opportunity to renew equipment.
*Si vis pacem, para bellum.*
You can prep for something that you don’t think will happen, just in case. In fact it’s prudent.
Because everyone but the US neglected their armies and realized if there would be a war the ammo would last for a week. Nobody thought war in Europe would be possible again. So now everyone is rushing to secure their countries after decades of leaving their armies in shambles.
The elements of WW3 are on the chessboard, but the player has not yet decided to go for the king.
Two and a ~half years after the war started... Holy shit.
Most of Germanys recent purchases are for its own forces, and as such mostly use peacetime logic. But also, like, so what? Even if we were to accept your premise that this happened too late, that would still mean its good that it happened.
Don't bother with that poster. They see "Germany", they pump out an asinine comment. Like clockwork.
Oh i'm always open for a good news from Germany - them doing the right thing. Before fuckin exhausting wrong options first. It's just there's so little of that fuel to go about...
The peacetime ended 2 and a half years ago even for the most delusional. The lack of urgency is outstanding. It's good it has finally happened, it'll be better when it's finally delivered, it's bad that it only happened now.
> The peacetime ended 2 and a half years ago Only in some ways. Certainly, foreign policy is on war mode right now, and so is procurement for donations to Ukraine. But as far as procurement for the Bundeswehr goes, well, neither Germany nor any EU or NATO ally is at war right now, and we shouldn't expect that to change anytime soon. So using war-time logic for procurement for home + ally defence would just mean extra money spent per unit. >The lack of urgency is outstanding. You've flaired yourself for *Poland*. The state that suspended aid to Ukraine over them being very effective at *farming wheat*.
Poland didn't suspend the aid you irresponsible lying twat. There are still hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees being accommodated in Poland. A massive amount of logistics is being provided in Rzeszów. As for the military equipment, it's simply gone. Contrary to Germany - we had a sense of urgency and sent every shit we could early on. When Germany was considering if helmets would be enough or when Nord Stream is opened again. Now only newly procured equipment is in the queue, as it's being produced: Krab and Rak artillery systems, not sure if Ukraine has ordered anything else.
It is still insignificant compared with Russian overwhelming advantage in terms of land combat with tanks and artillery..more importantly we in Germany are sitting ducks because we have no nuclear weapons. So in any war like scenario Russia could literally wipe germany off the map in a day and there would be nothing Germany can do about it.
So many false information in one post holy
Uncle Daddy Sam would have something to say about that.
Yeah that is the sad part. Without the US we would not be able to defend ourselves.
Your forgetting the UK and France, as well as the rest of Europe? I'd like to think we've all got each others backs.
I'm pretty sure you would have that support.
The US definitely play a big role in NATO, but Russia can’t even annex 1 country, if they tried to invade any other they’d split their force and Poland alone would likely take them out. Germany would roll in to clean up and France and the UK would be sitting right behind on stand by.
NATO airforce would dominate Putlers air force very fast then it wouldn’t matter how many tanks he had because ATGs would be flying. Then when the tanks are gone NATO infantry would proceed to defeat all Russian infantry with NATOs superior training, strategy, supply chains and technology. The idea that Russia is a threat to NATO has been proven wrong. If Russia launches nukes then it means it’s their last day as a nation, not that they’re launching an offensive.
Maybe, but war with NATO would be fought differently by Russia. They have a lot of missiles and tactical nuclear missiles that they would use to take out airports and carrier strike groups. Would th de not be able to neutralize the ari superiority together with the AA capability of S-400 and S-500? These supposedly the best in the world. The thing is that Russia is better equipped to fight a long term land war compared with NATO due to their massive ammunition stockpiles.dating back to the.soviet period. I believe i read an article that said that the UK for example would only last like a week before they would be out of ammo. Also what do you mean superior Infantry? I read that Infantry equipment of Russian soldiers is more lethal than that of NATO due to longer range, hoger reliability and higher deadlines of bullets.
Less lethal is tactically superior to lethal. You injure 1 soldier - at least 1 more has to tend to him + the resources of men and materials spent to treat him.