Thx

We will pray for peace of Azerbaijan.

@@American-drone You know that Azerbaijan is essentially attacking the first Christian nation on this planet right now?

@@WestfaliaStuff I hope that the fight between the two countries will be resolved peacefully.

@@American-drone Amen to that.

Good point, I often wonder where we'd get ammo in a sudden conflict

NK yes… china in your dreams

@@luckyrabbit6202 considering the recent case of Russia & Ukraine, China could be even worse.

Probably S.Korea is the most well armed forces in Asia aside from China.

@@Thelegend-op2bj if you only count army fighting vehicles, South Korea is world's 4th or 5th

May god purify China and North Korea

@@Xavier28200 Yeah, Russia is full of resources and bright minds, especially in the engineering field. All it needs is a new leader, who is charismatic as Putin but isn't as radical and erratic lol. Hopefully, the war in Ukraine will end soon and Putin will pay for the Russian and Ukraine lives lost for no significant reason. So sad to see T90s and Terminators being lost for no reason when gaijin hasn't even added them to Warthunder yet :(

@@yomamal8353 No significant reason? Ok first off the west were funnelling in weapons to Ukraine for a invasion of Russia Secondly Ukraine had been killing Russian speaking people and members of the Orthodox Church thirdly the bombing of the Donbas also the fact that Ukraine had voted for Crimea to be part of Russia but they never got it also Ukraines slow walk into NATO arms the west plan to divide Russia supply one side with weapons and see both destroy each other

???? Australian co just suppliers....bcz korea want to sell

Great you just mentioned the selection criteria. Hint: they both will be Australian made.

@@captaron Build it in Australia!?!? Ask the Navy how building a submarine worked out.

@@ducatipaso1386 you don’t know shit, sunshine.

@@ducatipaso1386 No government-owned company this time, please.

the Lynx would be built in Queensland

I think the Japanese are still under treaty since WW2, and cannot he involved in oversees military operations or even export military equipment... That's why Japanese aren't a big military exporter.... Without that treaty... I bet Japan would've been a top weapons maker in the world.

Why Austrailia cant make this equipment. And event dont have a car manufacturer. Korea can make even combat fighter and helicopter.

​@@tigerjonn ​ Wrong, I'm afraid. That "don't export weapons" Japan had scrapped that *self-limitation* years ago, still 0 sales (except for that 1 radar Philippines bought ONCE and stopped buying. That's not even a weapon and _still_ Philippines weren't impressed). Japan is too incompetent. Even more so for weapons manufacturing. The Self defense force is already too big to be just a "defense force" and surpassed the spirit of the Treaty long ago so no excuse there. (The UN did not forbid Japan from "making" weapons, just having a standing military that can attack others and the treaty says if Germany and Japan ever looks like they are going to attack another country again, all nations are allowed to preemptively attack them) Not even the Japanese consider their Self Defense Force to be any good, especially when they see anyone who goes there in this time and age are losers who can't get a regular job (and hence they have a problem of extremely old troops who can't and won't fight, since they are technically more like a type of public servant than disciplinable military). The Japanese weapons are all very specifically tailor-made to their own country's uniquely inefficient and ancient infrastructure (hell, they can't even unify their electric supply, Western and Eastern Japan require different specs for the same machine!). Plus they have limited production on lots of things that raises prices far too high, and being the only provider for most weapons, Japanese weapon manufacturers have gone lazy and would prefer to lobby their way away to making shoddy weapons because there is hardly any competitor, nor did they even think to sell to other countries, but demanded other countries to follow their inefficient standard instead. But that's not even the real problem. It's just overall industrial incompetence. Here's the typical Japanese way of doing business: steal tech, sell it and spread propaganda they did it because they were geniuses, and use the ill-gotten profits to sue the inventors to oblivion even if it takes decades and the bankruptcy of the inventor. Even if you fail, the fact that it took them decades to seek justice means you were done with the product anyway and the world believes the lie that you are competent and innovative, and will continue buying other products from you. That's the story of SONY and the theft of the Walkman from Andreas Pavel. Even hired thugs to break into his lawyer's office and steal his legal notes and evidence. 3 times. Where do you think China learned all its tricks? Japan's 1-party rule from 1955 ("The 1955 System" google it) has created a lot of corruption and illegal ties between the bureaucracy and the same political families ruling Japan since WW2 to this day (Prime Minister Abe himself started his political career in one of the ministries through nepotism, his grandpa was a class A convicted war criminal who paid off the judges and still got to be a powerful figure in Japanese post-war politics until he died). Look into history and you will find the CCP is merely Japan 2.0, and Japan nowadays is just reluctantly giving their grudge a temporary rest due to their failing economy, do not be fooled. (They STILL blame PEARL HARBOR on America, like America somehow "forced its hand" by not selling anymore oil and steel to fuel its conquest all over Asia and push towards Australia, using WMDs and anthrax germ bombs and poison gas bombs made in Hiroshima on cities all over Asia and developing nukes all along the way.) Actually, Mao Zedong's head would be on a pike if the Japanese didn't start WW2 in 1937 by invading the Republic of China, a war that killed 25 million in China alone and caused chaos and destabilization for Mao to be spared and spend time avoiding all battles and left the Republic Nationalists to do all the bleeding to save China, while Mao grew his communist influence for 12 years spreading propaganda that the Nationalists were not fighting and it is the CCP that was doing all the fighting (he even punished his own General Peng for fighting Japan for the first and final time, saying he wasted resources that should've been used to kill the upstanding men of the Chinese Republic after the Japanese weakened them). Don't be fooled by Japanese propaganda spread during the Cold War when America was pumping both China and Japan full of American tech and money to hopefully get them on their feet and fight the Soviets for America. Never worked. It's no coincidence Japan is going through 30 years of Recession right now called "The Lost 30 Years" which began right after the Cold War ended. The reason for this was America finally decided to let the American companies sue the shit out of Japanese companies for selling US tech to the Soviets in secret, despite America making them sign the COCOM treatise _precisely BECAUSE_ this was a possible risk, and the Japanese proved to be unreliable backstabbers. Their recession is a result of having to stop relying on America after all their currency shenanigans and tech theft. The entire basis of modern factory manufacturing, the computerized numerical control (CNC) invented in America in the late 40s, was gifted to Japan yet they sold to Kremlin. They were caught. They tried to sell some American semiconductor technology too, but were stopped. Suddenly the very loud and crudely made Soviet nuclear submarines, once easily detectible, became too silent to detect easily, because of this betrayal. This is just one of many examples ordinary people are woefully unaware of. Shipbuilding, microchips, imaging, consumer electronics, computers... when America backed Japan in the Cold War, they "appeared" to excel in all these things. Now all these industries, you never hear they have anything to do with Japan. Unless for disasters like Japanese-built ships breaking down like the Wakashio in Mauritius, or the Evergiven Suez Canal blockage, built by Japanese shipbuilders. Sharp electronics fell. Toshiba fell after skimping on safety measures for their supposedly "miniaturized" nuclear reactors that caused the Fukushima nuclear disaster which blew 3 whole reactors compared to Chernobyl's 1. Japanese Kobe Steel has been outed for *50 YEARS* of fraudulent data (was a big industry scandal as Toyota, Nissan, Boeing etc. all scrambled to check the integrity of their products). Olympic fell when an American CEO uncovered decades of double-booking and they scapegoated it all on the foreigner who dared to rock the boat. Nissan fell when it scapegoated all its faults onto Carlos Ghosn. When the company is in trouble, hire foreigners and then make him the scapegoat, send him to jail, and have a Japanese man retake the reins when all the work he was too incompetent for was done for him. Rinse and repeat.

Australia, South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Israel, USA together can build so fkn strong weapons.

You mean, you love BTS?

Just don’t let the Australian government know about this wonderful cooperation. Someone in power would find a way to stop that happening, or try to make a buck out of it. IMO.

Unfortunately, the top cronies of the AU government are fiercely pro-Europe in every aspects. They have often went with European made weapons despite the protest from the actual frontline users in armed forces in the past...

The Submarine Deal was rotten to the core on day one. Someone should have caught it but they didn’t.

🇰🇷🇦🇺

Yes, they are excellent engineers and design and build very high quality products.

New south korean president Promises reconciliation with japan

Koreans really do not want that. WHy? Japan is the main reason. Study history and see what jap still does.

you could consider the AS21 as a K21A1 or something considering that the hull and internal systems have alot of parallel developments

@@rrenkrieg7988 nope, different chassis, borrows things like the fcs and armor layout and other systems but the chassis is more inline with the k9 sph

@@rrenkrieg7988 I think the redback draws from AS21 A3 design being reviewed for Redback replacement, although it appears now ROK will consider the Redback.

This was NAMED for export to Australia ...

Would be a good idea for the Koreans to buy the Redback for themselves as it could instill confidence in the product for potential customers

There's some good pointers here, but next time please make them into segments. Without segmenting the text into more clear cut parts the information gets harder to digest.

@@MirZZi Thank you for the advice. I'll do that next time.

I was concerned about the rubber tracks longevity, but one of my best mates owns a tyre & muffler business. His perspective is the Koreans are making the best road vehicle tyres in the world right now, so hopefully that's transferable to these. And clearly you can't go wrong with a Rheinmettal Turret. Best of luck! Must be depressing to have built these knowing their final test will literally be seeing how large a round it will take to blow them up. Ouch! PS. We usually spell Aussi with an i, but it's slang, it's not an actual rule...

@@tsubadaikhan6332 Oh, Aussi, eh? Thanks for the tip, mate! :))

It literally looks like a fat vwrsion of Cv90

"yeah let's build more shit to kill each other, yeah who's with me yeah"

Thank you Australia

At this point it doesn't even matter which of the vehicle Austria gets, because they are both pretty much equal on capability terms. The most important part is that both variants would have the same APS (Active Protection system), and the same Spike ATGM (top-attack missile) and the same digital battle management system. So eitherway whichever variant Australia will decide to buy, it will give the Australian Army a very powerful and capable modern IFV.

@@xAlexTobiasxB except one already has the infrastructure for it in place so thats an obvious win

@@xAlexTobiasxB Capability is a secondary consideration. Support-ability and maintain-ability are likely far more important considerations. That means local supply is a big advantage, especially when consideration given to the practicality of maintaining this equipment on a wartime footing.

So basically its either or

@@MovementFAV Yep. Just flip a switch to jump between the two.

Didn’t they say it has a 200 round magazine. If so you get one minute worth of shooting at 200 rounds per minute. Something doesn’t add up?

@@kevcump62 Yes, they did say it had 200 rounds. Yes, they did say it can fire 200 rounds per min. Why doesn't that add up? I don't know what you were meaning. But I think it is relevant to tell you that unless you're trying to shoot down a helicopter, you don't go full auto. They fire in "3 to 4 round bursts".

Unfortunately, the top cronies of the AU government are fiercely pro-Europe in every aspects. They have often went with European made weapons despite the protest from the actual frontline users in armed forces in the past...

They did - it’s the LYNX

In your fantasy mind , Korea only copies from US technology and uses US software/CPU in their military applications and full stop to that.

@@amuxpatch2798 what in the world are you talking about? Oh you mean technology transfers? Oh you know, what every country does including the US? Countries negotiate the transfer of tech in exchange for certain conditions.. also, the US stole tech from Russia for it's anti aircraft systems and missile guiding systems. The us also used nazi scientists for a lot of its military programs including the flying wing concept and fighter jets. The American military isn't as clean as you think it is. Full stop to that. Also, wdym Korea copies the US? They've been making fantastic equipment for decades now with influences from the US so I'm curious to know where you got that from.

@@amuxpatch2798 Are you japanese?

Do you think Korea's potential customers will be NATO aligned Countries, or old Warsaw Pact people? The Koreans would be smart to make everything as NATO compatible as possible. If that means it looks like a copy of US, UK or German products, that probably means they're doing it right.

@@amuxpatch2798 Have you ever seen a patent application? They all start with "prior art." Nothing is invented in a vacuum. All technology is related to some pre-existing technology. Even the freakin wheel.

👍😉

How is that an offense to Europeans? Not buying German equipment is a plus in my book.

@@kamilszadkowski8864 and why?

@@roberthenze8600 More competition is always better. Currently, Rheinmetall and the German arms industry, in general, were getting a bit too far ahead of the competition. The last thing I would want to see is them getting a monopoly over most of NATO seeing as the German government could use it as a form of political pressure. "You don't agree with us then no more weapons for you" as they did with Turkey. I much rather see Polish, Ukrainian, Swedish, and Turkish arms industries with help of the Korean arms industry to catch up and provide competition. Especially since the Polish experience with the Rheinmetall so far was pretty bad.

@@kamilszadkowski8864 Yeah, the polish experience with the leopard 2 is very "bad" kek. So "bad" that they upgrading there tanks. Rheinmetall needs competition, when the US ,RUS and france are exporting wayyy more weapons. Ok, in you opinion its bad, not to supply waopons to everyone

@@Mr.Chlorophil Congratualtions. You just proved to everyone you have no idea about the topic. The modernization of Leopards 2a4 to 2PL standard is precisely what I am talking about. Rheinmetall completely fucked up this order. According to the agreement signed in December 2019, all 128 Leopard 2A4 in Polish service were to be modernized to 2PL standard until July 31, 2023, So far only 23 tanks received the upgrade because Rheinmetall failed to provide the parts. Not only this but also the whole order ended up being more expensive than previously promised. And this is not the first time when Rheinmetall fucked up like this.

Yeah, but most military vehicles have animal names.

Well naming AFVs after animals is more of a German thing…..but the South Koreans do it too. They are the only counties I can think of. The Russians don’t do it. Neither do the British, Americans, Chinese, Swedes, French, Fins, Italians, Turks, Indonesians or the Japanese

@@lustwaffe9000 Oh look, over there, a wild Abrahams. Oh and look there‘s a cute Leclerc playing with two Merkavas and a Challenger

I like your picture. You drew it?

Perhaps, KM-SAM block 2.? Or new developing block 3 seems more viable option.?

Well rly depends on how it does in trials, the problem with newer Prototypes is that most of them lack in reliability and are not field tested, so in almost all cases you face issues. The Puma which is basically a Lynx is still beeing adjusted and upgraded and it's been with the Bundeswehr since 2010. Rly depends on what the Austrailan Goverment wants, all you can 100% say is that all bidders offer a newer better IFV than the M113

@@OoOoOo-we3dn The M113 is an APC not a IFV.

@@graemesydney38 but it s beeing replaced by an IFV with far greater capabilities and more modern, sry if my statement wasn t clear im german so not the most amazing english.

@@OoOoOo-we3dn Understanding the difference means you understand that the replacement of an APC with a IFV represents a change in military doctrine and tactics more than a change or improvement in military equipment.

@@OoOoOo-we3dn The Puma and the Lynx are absolutely not the same vehicle. Rheinmetall developped the Lynx because they anticipated the export to be interesting. The Puma was a very specifically targetted vehicle for the German Army. But the AS21-Redback is a development of the K21 which has been produced since 2009. So in fact, you're at the opposite of the reality.

많이 사주십쇼

looks like even you korean got all drunk and Australian winery industry got also eliminated. South korean is just a small country and this is the reality.

@@edwardhochwand9063 No one said Australian winery industry got eliminated lol

@@edwardhochwand9063 나는 베이징의 천안문을 사랑해

I am from Europe and I have to say Auzzies make some excellent red wine (I am quite partial to the Oxford Landing wine region). And I am really spoiled for red wine ... a bit of a wine snob actually :)

@@edwardhochwand9063 amongst the world only chinese people say “south korea is a small country” lol.

I think K21 or Tigon is better fit for India considering the border issues with China. They can be dispatched together with K9s.

2 cav will be boxer - these are mainly for mech infantry

Yes you need to say whether you believe it’s very good or very bad if you are going to make statements like that. I assume you mean it is very good but many people still have poor opinions of Korean cars despite the high quality these days.

Composite rubber tracks by Soucy (Canada). Even Rheinmetall decided to offer the KF41 Lynx with a composite rubber tracks after driving tests showed it was much better.

Better would be a 120mm autocanon.

Only if the Emus don't get involved. We all know we lost that war...

Estland here- we took the CV-90´s bc the maker of this machinery is Sweden, right at our door steps, so if we need more ammo they can just air drop it in matter of hour

S.Korea now planning to make arsnal ship

Don't get excited dude.

Just like the old iron tracks.

@@timoneer392 Thank you, I'll rather just stay away from the entire continent.

Yes called StrikeShield.

StrikeShiel yes

With all due respect, Bradleys are stone-age cattle wagons compared to either KF41 Lynx or AS21 Redbacks in every way. Better situational awareness and battle data network sharing and targeting, etc.

@erik milburn. The US is looking to replace the aging Bradleys. Both IFVs mentioned here are candidates for the US replacement.

You are not reading upon what the Aussies are intending. The Land 400 Phase 2 was given to Rheinmetall Boxer CRVs which have wheels like you wrote above. The Land 400 Phase 3 on the other hand requires tracked IFVs.