Military Review

Norway abandons Archer project

32
Norway abandons Archer projectAs stated by the Department of Defense of Norway, this country is leaving the Archer project, arguing that the terms of the contract were not fulfilled. Norway did not receive any guns despite the fact that by the end of 2013, 24 self-propelled artillery units were to be delivered by the end of XNUMX. Norway also refers to unspecified failures in meeting the operational needs mentioned in the contract. This fact is important because Norway will have to pay significant penalties if it cannot prove an important breach of contract.


The Swedish Defense Procurement Administration (FMV) responds that Archer offers similar or better quality compared to competitors at a lower price, and also provides the necessary balance between the level of protection and the weight of the vehicle. And it can be really so that nevertheless does not cancel legal questions.

Swedish FMV also announces that for its part it does not refuse to purchase its own cars. Norway and Sweden continue to cooperate in other parts of the program, including the ARTHUR artillery radar, the ODIN fire control system, ammunition, education and training.
Originator:
http://www.army-guide.com/
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Russ69
    Russ69 11 December 2013 11: 27
    +9
    "Effective" managers have become a scourge of not only Russia, but also the world ...
    1. Encoder
      Encoder 11 December 2013 11: 53
      14
      They actually got to us from there and climbed.
    2. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 11 December 2013 12: 35
      +8
      Very sad for the Swedes ... but these guns will not help them ... let them listen to the ABBA group ...
      1. Papakiko
        Papakiko 11 December 2013 16: 57
        +3
        ShturmKGB
        let them listen to the group ABBA

        And they come up with all kinds of crap for their megastore "IKEA".
        This means that "Paladins" and "PzH2000" are more reliable options.
        The idea looked too beautiful and elegant with "archer".
        I hope that many projects of our "friends" will fizzle out and fall apart. yes
    3. just exp
      just exp 12 December 2013 10: 28
      +1
      they did not become him, they were originally.
      the military always did not forget themselves when purchasing and developing equipment.
  2. svp67
    svp67 11 December 2013 11: 28
    +5
    According to the Norwegian Department of Defense, the country is withdrawing from the Archer project, claiming that the terms of the contract have not been met. Norway did not receive a single gun despite the fact that under the terms of the contract by the end of 2013, 24 self-propelled artillery installations were to be delivered.
    Interesting, interesting - "each hut has its own toys ..." but for us this is news with "+"
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 11 December 2013 11: 33
      +3
      Norway abandons Archer project


      SNOWED Norwegians.
      And if you look, from a different angle.
      And what for them (the Norwegians) in general the army ???
      1. nekromonger
        nekromonger 11 December 2013 14: 13
        +4
        IMHO gathered for the shelf to fight
  3. makarov
    makarov 11 December 2013 11: 56
    +3
    Steal-s, dear komenty, STEAL-S .....
  4. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 11 December 2013 12: 01
    +6
    But how much PR has passed around the world. Everywhere this Archer was mentioned as the most.
  5. Azzi
    Azzi 11 December 2013 12: 16
    +6
    Quote: cosmos111
    Norway abandons Archer project


    SNOWED Norwegians.
    And if you look, from a different angle.
    And what for them (the Norwegians) in general the army ???


    The Norwegians probably have a sad experience when two European powers gamble, who quickly occupies Norway. Relatively not long ago by the way.
  6. sergey72
    sergey72 11 December 2013 12: 24
    +1
    Interestingly, and the Babos already paid, will they return the Norwegians?
  7. individual
    individual 11 December 2013 12: 55
    +5
    The scourge of modern sales of products has become aggressive advertising in which the "illiquid" is packaged, which is presented as a new word in the creation of something new.
    This applies to genetically modified products, pharmaceuticals, and now products of military equipment. hi
  8. And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 11 December 2013 13: 09
    +4
    Archer - charging, shooting, on the march.

    1. Samminosh
      Samminosh 11 December 2013 13: 19
      +8
      Terran Siege Tank)
    2. Sirs
      Sirs 11 December 2013 13: 51
      +3
      something does not inspire confidence in the chassis, it would be necessary to shorten the base. And on which platforms to carry it?
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 11 December 2013 16: 06
        +3
        And what do designers see as the advantage of the location of the gun beyond the size of the base?
        In a lower silhouette about shooting with maximum elevation? So it’s not a front edge weapon.
        But the rear overhang is worthless, the weight distribution is controversial, the overall dimensions, too. Hanging guns ... hmm ... And if the slope?
        Is it really necessary to hide the gun behind the cab? While adding all sorts of mechanical lotions to extend the gun. Isn’t it easier to make a cabin with a classic driver’s position on the side and lowering the gun muzzle in the center to a horizontal level? And it’s not scary if the gun will protrude a meter in front of the bumper.
        1. My doctor
          My doctor 11 December 2013 18: 38
          0
          Quote: abrakadabre
          Hanging guns ... hmm ... And if the slope?
          Is it really necessary to hide the gun behind the cab? While adding all sorts of mechanical lotions to extend the gun. Isn’t it easier to make a cabin with a classic driver’s position on the side and lowering the gun muzzle in the center to a horizontal level? And it’s not scary if the gun will protrude a meter in front of the bumper.

          Answer. NO. not possible since see link
          http://topwar.ru/33997-samohodnaya-gaubica-fh77bw-l52-archer-shveciya.html
          where it is written in black and white:
          An interesting feature of the Archer self-propelled gun chassis is the applied architecture. The car A30D is made according to the articulated scheme, which improves maneuverability. In the front of the chassis, above the first axle and up to the articulation assembly, there is a motor compartment and a crew cabin.

          Quote: abrakadabre

          and still your question:
          And what do designers see as the advantage of the location of the gun beyond the size of the base?
          In a lower silhouette about shooting with maximum elevation?

          Answer. For transportation. see there
          The dimensions and weight of the FH77BW L52 self-propelled artillery mount allow it to be transported by rail. In the future, it is planned to use Airbus A400M military transport aircraft for this.
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 12 December 2013 11: 57
            0
            Thanks for the clarifications.
    3. ramzes1776
      ramzes1776 11 December 2013 17: 18
      +3

      The test device.
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 11 December 2013 23: 40
        +3
        The device is not just a "test" but "just a song" and in the role of a nomadic weapon is generally the best !!!!! Respect to the Swedes! A damn toad crushed me! For 20 years they brought him to mind, but made candy good
  9. ytqnhfk
    ytqnhfk 11 December 2013 13: 54
    +3
    The system pleased with the automation and the fact that it is serviced by 1 person, in fact, you need to be equal to this system for automation; everything else (dimensions) minus this system needs to be more compact or something and everything else too!
    1. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 11 December 2013 15: 05
      +1
      Let us be equal "in automation" - we will come to the same result. That is, we will spend a pedrillion of money and get nothing. Nothing at all. Well, that is, except for corporate calendars, pens with a logo and a lot of reports. There are very, very many beautiful reports. With 3D presentations ...
      1. Metlik
        Metlik 11 December 2013 15: 54
        +2
        The main plus of Archer - quickly deployed and quickly leaves the position.
        1. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 11 December 2013 16: 11
          +3
          How much faster than Msta?
          1. Metlik
            Metlik 11 December 2013 16: 29
            +2
            Quote: abrakadabre
            How much faster than Msta?

            It is not entirely correct to compare them - the chassis is different, but Archer has a deployment time of less than 30 seconds.

            Our upgraded 2S19M1 has a new ASUNO, which reduces deployment time — self-propelled guns in the division are ready to fire in one gulp after 3 minutes, and after receiving ready coordinates in 30 seconds.
            1. 77bob1973
              77bob1973 11 December 2013 20: 24
              0
              As you can see from the article, "Archer" is also not a completely autonomous system, and art is also needed. radar and fire control system.
            2. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 12 December 2013 12: 18
              0
              It’s not quite right to compare them - the chassis is different

              I do not agree with this. For the introduction on this part of the parameters: the gun of a particular selected caliber should be self-propelled and with a maximum reaction speed, that is, both deployment, aiming, etc., and leaving the position after firing. All. The rest is the proposed engineering solution and the consent-disagreement of the customer, that is, the military, with the proposed one.
              If the Swedes chose a wheeled chassis - their right. Our chosen goose - our right. However, with comparable mobility and lower mass, Archer is significantly larger in size.
              Tell me, what is the speed of leaving positions after firing for what is both systems?
        2. Cherdak
          Cherdak 11 December 2013 16: 37
          +1
          Quote: Metlik
          The main plus of Archer


          I see only one - the crew is much easier to escape from the battlefield
    2. vthrehbq
      vthrehbq 11 December 2013 16: 34
      +2
      the truck-based howitzer idea is absurd. before that, many went along this path and refused ...
      for this gun there must be too much ideal, good roads, a flat shooting area and preferably a weak enemy who is unable to deliver a lightning answer .. this only happens in films
    3. vthrehbq
      vthrehbq 11 December 2013 16: 34
      0
      the truck-based howitzer idea is absurd. before that, many went along this path and refused ...
      for this gun there must be too much ideal, good roads, a flat shooting area and preferably a weak enemy who is unable to deliver a lightning answer .. this only happens in films
    4. APASUS
      APASUS 11 December 2013 19: 37
      0
      Quote: ytqnhfk
      The system pleased with the automation and the fact that it is serviced by 1 person, in fact, you need to be equal to this system for automation; everything else (dimensions) minus this system needs to be more compact or something and everything else too!

      Without shell loading, the machine is very complicated, for this reason such tools are recognized as unpromising. And it’s impossible to get more compact for this reason.
      But the problems soon began after what appeared to be shared! At the stage of development of partners, everything was fine ..........
  10. gladysheff2010
    gladysheff2010 11 December 2013 14: 15
    +2
    As for the automation: ours aren’t asleep, but for the rest: after all, the 155-mm gun doesn’t fit in the SAAB in any way. Once again, the chassis looks flimsy.
    1. bask
      bask 11 December 2013 17: 32
      +8
      Quote: gladysheff2010
      Just the same chassis looks flimsy.

      The VOLVO A30E mining dump truck, with a loading capacity of 30 tons,SLIPPY?
      Then that is not flimsy.
      And articulated vehicle cross-country ability, the highest of the wheeled chassis.
  11. Leshka
    Leshka 11 December 2013 14: 49
    +2
    already reached Norway
  12. bubla5
    bubla5 11 December 2013 15: 13
    +2
    And if at 90 degrees in the horizon, it will overturn accurately
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 11 December 2013 16: 09
      +1
      It depends on the heading angle. If you shoot ahead ... although forward IT is not able to shoot because of the cockpit. Unless you turn on the extension of the trunk and pierce the cabin through.
      If it is exactly to the side ... Oh yes ... in that direction and the paws of the lifts something is not provided for extinguishing the rollback.
  13. ramzes1776
    ramzes1776 11 December 2013 17: 22
    +1

    Ours are only developing something similar without a crew in the tower.
    http://topwar.ru/28168-sau-koaliciya-sv-koaliciya-sv-ksh-logicheskie-vyvody.html
    1. TS3sta3
      TS3sta3 11 December 2013 17: 41
      0
      if there is no crew in the tower, what does the machine gun do there?
      1. evil hamster
        evil hamster 11 December 2013 18: 44
        0
        He is installed in the DUM there, but what is impossible?
      2. ramzes1776
        ramzes1776 11 December 2013 22: 05
        +1
        Quote: TS3sta3
        if there is no crew in the tower, what does the machine gun do there?

        And what is required for a machine gun crew in the tower needed?
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 12 December 2013 12: 22
      0
      Well, why are they only developing it. The same Mstu was tried in a wheeled version. But they refused. As far as I know, the main reason is the insufficient strength of the chassis, the artillery system was too powerful for such loads. The second reason for the decrease is the lower passability compared to the tracked version. Who knows more, correct.
      By the way, on the version you laid out, the cockpit of such an arrangement will very quickly lose glass, and the shooting operators sitting in it will have a jelly brain. Being so close to the muzzle when shooting ...
  14. PiP
    PiP 11 December 2013 18: 07
    0
    Since I have nothing to do with the 'artel', explain to the wretched ... Archer, I see the benefit when firing high-precision ammunition, but in the squares? Maybe Grad is preferable? I just can't understand the scope of this miracle ...
  15. voliador
    voliador 11 December 2013 20: 32
    +2
    It’s right that they refuse. And then in a fit of tolerance they’ll shoot where not long ago, and they will beat some homosexual laughing .
    1. sasha.28blaga
      sasha.28blaga 12 December 2013 07: 48
      0
      The most balanced comment on this article. Are they (Norway, Swedes) going to fight with "Archer" alone? What's the point in one type of weapon, if the installation was considered together with the rest of the weapon is another matter.