Com-Central.net

Neil_Baumgardner

www.kmweg.com/gb/press....php?id=56

New armored infantry fighting vehicle presented to the public
04.05.2006
Munster. The public got its first look at the German ArmyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s new PUMA infantry fighting vehicle today during the ArmyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s fifty-year anniversary celebrations in Munster. In the presence of several hundred guests including politicians, the military, industry, and the media, the initial prototype gave a strong impression of its importance for current and future military missions.

PUMA successfully meets military requirements for a vehicle with high strategic and tactical mobility while still offering its crew the highest possible protection and outstanding firepower. This vehicle gives soldiers the ability to react immediately to new challenges while exhibiting flexibility and the appropriate level of intensity.

During the anniversary celebrations, Co-Managing Directors of PSM GmbH (responsible for producing and developing PUMA) Dr. Peter Hellmeister and Rainer Huth stressed the following: Ã¢â‚¬Å“PUMA is a joint effort between our countryÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s land systems industry and the Army that fully expresses GermanyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s technological leadership in ground fighting vehicles. In international comparisons, PUMA offers a previously unavailable level of performance, especially with regards to the safety of soldiers in the vehicle.Ã¢â‚¬Â?

The German Army is expected to order 410 vehicles with a total value of approximately 3 billion euros. The political decision about series production of this armored infantry fighting vehicle is expected in 2007. An order was already placed at the end of 2004 for delivery of five pre-production vehicles as well as logistics and training services.

PUMA is based on a completely new vehicle design that reflects the armed forcesÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ new mission profile. New types of missions aimed at peacekeeping and peacemaking require a highly mobile weapons system that is ready for international deployment yet still provides the highest possible protection. PUMA gives its crew a level of protection against threats like mines and anti-tank weapons (widespread in the
worldÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s crisis regions) that was previously unavailable in a comparable vehicle.

PUMA offers two different levels of armor. The Level-A version is suitable for transport in the upcoming A400M transport plane. Despite its high armor protection it is rapidly deployable to a variety of locations. Ã¢â‚¬Å“At 31.45 metric tons total weight, the Level-A PUMA will fully meet the customerÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s specifications for transport in the A400M,Ã¢â‚¬Â? according to Rainer Huth and Dr. Peter Hellmeister. At Level-C, rapid on-site adaptation with modular elements gives the vehicle the best protection against mines, hollow charges, and medium-caliber weapons that is currently available. Roof elements are also adaptable to shield the crew against bomblets.

The newly developed powerful 800-kW high-density power motor, decoupled running gear, an unmanned turret, and programmable munitions are additional ways that the PUMA sets new global standards for armored vehicles. More than thirty years after the German Army commissioned the original Marder infantry fighting vehicle, the new PUMA is serving as the founding member of a new category of high-performance vehicles.

PSM GmbH of Kassel, Germany is the prime contractor handling development and production of PUMA. PSM is a 50/50 joint venture between Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall Landsysteme, two of EuropeÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s leading systems providers for armored wheel and track vehicles.

Neil_Baumgardner

Another hi-res picture.

Neil

Jinx

800 kilowatts = 1072 horsepower!

Surprised

Is that a 30mm cannon?

Neil_Baumgardner

Yes, its a Mauser MK30-2/ABM cannon.

Here is the brochure:

www.psm-spz.com/upload...uma_gb.pdf

And more pictures I have been able to find from the PSM website:

You can find more data sheets at www.psm-spz.com/en/dow...s_list.php

Apparently there will be one at Eurosatory, so hopefully I will get some good shots there Wink

Neil

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

Huh! Its not often we seen new full-up tracked armor these days (mine-proof armored truck designs, by comparison, seem to sprout like daisies!). I recall seeing preliminary promotional material on the Puma something like 18-20 years ago. Its a far cry from the 'good old days' that saw the progress from the PzIII to the Tiger II in only 5 years!

buglerbilly · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 147

More images with troops..............All via friend Wolftrap in Germany

It's sure cosy in there! Rolling Eyes

Regards,

BUG

BryanWilson · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 27

Looks like the Puma doesn't have firing ports. Is this something that they have found to be unecessary? Don't know how useful firing ports were in combat on any IFV.

Neil_Baumgardner

Am I right in thinking that only the prototype or A0 model Bradleys had firing ports, or something like that?

Neil

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

Firing ports were one of those Cold War ideas where it was envisioned that sealed-up APCs would be driving over a nuclear wasteland (meaning central Europe) where it would be too hot for troops to crawl around on the irradiated ground during combat. Then the likelyhood of fighting tactical nuclear wars diminished and the lethality of the ubiquitous RPG became apparent. Thinking now is if you're close enough to be within rifle range of the enemy you're too close to be sealed-up inside of your APC.

Yeh, it does look like the firing ports were covered over on the Bradly starting with the A1... with the exception of the rear ramp firing port, I think - thoughI'm not sure if any current Army rifles can fit through the port. Maybe the carbine?

Neil_Baumgardner

The M231 "Firing Port Weapon" was based off the M16 for use in the Bradley.

According to this, the M231s are still around, used for self-defense, etc. I wonder if anyone on here with first-hand knowledge can confirm or deny this...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_M231_FPW

By the look of it, I doubt an M16 or M4 could be used in its place at least unless you removed the hand guards...

Neil

Chris_C

- mike_Duplessis

Yeh, it does look like the firing ports were covered over on the Bradly starting with the A1... with the exception of the rear ramp firing port, I think

The applique armor on the M2A2 did away with the firing ports, but they did indeed retain the two in the rear ramp.

Dontos

- Neil_Baumgardner

The M231 "Firing Port Weapon" was based off the M16 for use in the Bradley.

According to this, the M231s are still around, used for self-defense, etc. I wonder if anyone on here with first-hand knowledge can confirm or deny this...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_M231_FPW

By the look of it, I doubt an M16 or M4 could be used in its place at least unless you removed the hand guards...

Neil

Neil

I did the Unit Armorers Course back in 85, and the M231 Port Firing Devise was one of the weapons in the course. It is similiar to the M16 in looks, but actually quite different. The barrel was heavy duty with no hand grips. No sight post since it locked into the vehicle mount. It has a triple recoil/ buffer spring to assist full auto firing. It is designed to fire Tracer ammo only to assist with (BOT or Burst on Target) aiming. The vision block had no aiming marks so one just walked the tracers on target.

It was not designed to be fired dismounted, only in the 'ball' firing port mount.

Haven't seen the weapon since. I figure it is still in the inventory.

Don

Joe_D

Hi everyone,
It's still around. Usually just sits in the arms room. I worked with an 11B a few years ago who said it was great for clearing trenches. The high rate of fire (I think over 1000 rpm) and full auto feature were why. He put an assault sling on it and issued one per squad for when they trained MOUT and trench clearing. From what I remember he said there we two per track in the arms room. Makes sense since all the side ports are now covered. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't it fire from an open bolt? Hence the high rate of fire.

Joe D

buglerbilly · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 147

it was great for clearing trenches. The high rate of fire (I think over 1000 rpm) and full auto feature were why

And in slightly over 1 and a half seconds you'd have an empty gun! Shocked

NOT too sure whether I'd want something that only held 28-30 rounds run out that quick....................the "climb" of the gun durimg hand-held firing must be something to behold (via a telephoto lens from far, far away)....... Wink

Regards,

BUG

buglerbilly · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 147

Specifics
The M231 is different in many ways from a standard M16. The original RIA FPW fired from an open bolt, with an extremely high rate of firing (1,050 rpm). The Colt XM231 introduced a special buffer and spring assembly, with three springs nested one within the other. This was done to allow the rate of fire to be lowered to 200 rpm, because the theory at that period was that, using all tracer magazines, if the high ROF was retained troops would exhaust their magazines before the weapon was brought to target. The original RIA FPW had an 11 in (280 mm) barrel, while the Colt prototypes and the production M231 both had 15.6 in (396 mm) barrels. Initially the FPWs had no locking mechanism and had flip up sights, along with a metal wire stock akin to that on the M3 SMG, to allow the weapon to be used outside of the vehicle more effectively. Later this was dropped, and a new handguard introduced with a screw type locking mechanism to fix the weapon into the port. Late XM231s had no rear sights either. By the time the M231 was finalized the wire stock had been done away with as the weapon had a tendency to unfasten itself from the firing port and the stock was deemed to be dangerous in the confines of the vehicle. The firing rate had also returned to a higher rate of 1,100-1,200 round/min.

These weapons are all capable of only fully automatic fire, with the special FPW upper receiver "locking out" any additional movement of the selector switch with a special side plate that extends down to the lower receiver. These weapons are retain a 65% commonality with standard M16 rifles.

You could always fit a C-MAG (100 rounds in drum magazines) but I'd still doubt the barrel could sustain much life at such volumes of fire.

Regards,

BUG

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big