@@WorksOnMyComputerImagine road rage with that thing, just hop in the gunner seat and pont the turret, they'll definitely apologize for cutting you off, no middle fingers this time!
When I first heard about the Boxer decades ago, I was very skeptical about the modularity concept. I thought it is mostly a useless gimmick because no army would ever swap such modules out to turn for example a command post vehicle into a ambulance or something like that. I was right about that, but I missed the point. The point is not to turn military vehicles into transformers that would switch roles on the battlefield. The point was that now Rheinmetall/KMW can offer any kind of military vehicle to any customer and have it all based on one common platform that comes off one assembly line. That is absolute genius and I didn't realize that in the beginning. Now, no matter what country/army needs a new verhicle, the Boxer can compete. It can be the answer to any problem any military force has, especially now that they also developed a tracked transport module. You need a APC? Boxer got you covered. You need a short range air defense system (SHORAD)? Just get a Boxer with the SHORAD module. You need a field radar system? Just slap one on to a Boxer. And on top of that now there are also third party companies that are developing and offering their own Boxer mission modules. Apparently there are already 3 or 4 modules with different 120mm mortar systems by different manufacturers being offered, so the Boxer is becoming its own military industry eco system that can be used as a middle man between smaller manufacturers who maybe can't develop their own full vehicle but can develop a mission module and the customer looking for a new vehicle. The whole concept is so ingenious that in a world where military contracts are always given to the best option and where neither corruption nor national interests (wanting to support homegrown companies) were a factor, Boxer would have to win basically every tender and get all the contracts in the next 30 years or so. And even with all those other factors determining who gets a contract, Boxer still has a leg up because they can not only offer to produce the thing in the customer's home country, but they can even offer that some company in that country can develop and provide their own mission modules to the project.
Yeh all good points . With battle damage , if one vehicle had track damage and another vehicle turret damage you could quickly get one vehicle up and running . I am really interested to see how the tracked chassis comes along . That could open up whole new avenues of modularity . In ukraine where tracked vehicles only good in winter muddy times, I was thinking its possible to order 500 modules and then have 500 chassis each of wheeled and tracked allowing one to use the 500 modules 12 months of the year mud rain or shine . I think its a great system. Would like to see a similar design but for much less tonnage vehicles
@@gOtze1337 Ergänzung: Der Boxer hat ein Leergewicht von 25,2 t und der Airbus eine Nutzlast von bis zu 37 t. Nicht nur das Missionsmodul kann beim Boxer leicht ausgebaut und separat transportiert werden, sondern auch Teile der Panzerung.
"The point is not to turn military vehicles into transformers that would switch roles on the battlefield." was that ever the proposal? Aside from field swaps for repairs, I always thought of it as something you'd do out of the field based on your ahead of time mission parameters so that e.g. you wouldn't have a bunch of boxers with howitzer (RCH 155) or anti-air (skyranger) on a counter-terrorism op, but those *would* be available if the mission required them.
This category of vehicle is an excellent weapon when used as it was designed for. I’m a retired US Army Infantryman and fought in a couple wars in my 26 years of service. Mechanized Infantry vehicles are never intended to engage enemy tanks, especially in close contact as we’ve seen the Ukrainians use modern APC’s western countries have given them to fight Russia. I was surprised how a Bradley chewed up a T-72 tank and killed it which is a rare engagement. The AT rounds from the Bushmaster gun does very well at close range which is one of the reasons why the Bradley was able to get some of his rounds to penetrate the T-72 and all that’s needed is a couple rounds to get in there and rip things up in a nasty way. As for the TOW missile, it’ll kill whatever’s thrown at it (Soviet era vehicles, including current upgraded variants). The only chance Russia has against any western military is to fight in an organized manner and keep moving on the battlefield, this static war we’re watching in Ukraine is ridiculous and it’s as if the Russians grabbed people off the street or from prisons and tossed them on the front lines and told to “shoot that way”
They also showed one variant at the Eurosatory 2022 with tracks and a 120mm autoloader cannon. It's named RCT120 but at the moment there are not many information about it.
It’s because Rheinmetall focused on export because for the past years Germany wasn’t really interested in buying weapons. Doesn’t mean we can’t produce them, but just not yet
@@steveyoutub76 It takes Rheinmetall almost more than six months to set up a production line for munitions. How long do you think does it take them to set up a new production line for Boxers? Sure Germany could wait but their number 1 priority right now is speed.
@@wudruffwildcard252 The Australians probably didn't overcharge them, considering they are not in a hurry, since they don't share a continent with russia.
All these kinds of videos about vehicles are always about the weapons, etc. But I hardly see any videos where it is very important with a vehicle. The driver and his place...
I read the UK is to get 500plus of various versions of the Boxer. I also read that they and the Swedes were going to see if a Mjolnar (spelling?) turret with 120mm mortar can be made to fit. The 155mm version looks unwieldy surely that hull would be better suited to a 105mm (similar to the Abbot) fitment. As for Ajax - I understand there is one unit now issued with it and have experience no further problems -though after spending what they have on it they would say that wouldn't they?
@@uweinhamburg When do you foresee this then? As the owner of the only crystal ball on the planet you should really share these dates with us. Incidentally - Have you seen the size of this machine?
This is a recurring issue with regards to various armed forces and new kit, they all say that there new kit is the best in the world but they always forget that by the time it’s been fully integrated into service it’s already outdated
Great Britain is replacing their Warriors infantry combat vehicles with the infantry combat version of the Boxer. Ironically, they are replacing their current tracked reconnaissance vehicle with a tracked vehicle, Ajax.
Australia does not use the Boxer in any APC role, it is used as an Armoured Recon vehicle, while 1st armoured, 2 Cav and 2/14th all have a dismounted element, this is not their primary role
Has a different role, for a start the REDBACK has tracks,not wheels and will be employed in the Australian Army primarily in the APC role. Perhaps you are confusing BOXER with LYNX ?
@@donaldmatthews7226 A Boxer has a range in excess of 1000 km with one fuel load. No tracked vehicle comes even remotely close to that, so no. Boxer is certainly the better recce vehicle, also a lot quieter.
No chance all those minus the boxer have been retired due to better platforms and technology being available, even the challenger 2 is being upgraded to mark 3 status. the boxer will serve alongside the Ajax series as the backbone of British Armour for decades.
The Saracen was almost a concept before its time and should have been developed and re-designed with each evolution. It never fulfilled its potential because nobody had the vision to do so. Much of the rest of what you list has been considered obsolete. The world has moved on.
@@Scaleyback317 obsolete but fast and manoverable upgrade for Britain Put missles and chain gun's on each platform. Heavier armour these platforms are better than light skinned land Rover range Rover
Ukraine ordered 36 Boxer with the RCH155 Howitzer in Germany. It is a significant improvement to the PzH 2000 and will replace it. This RCH 155 howitzer is the first of its kind to be able to fire on the move and hit the target precisely. The turret is unmanned and the system works fully automatically.
You poor Russians. I really feel sorry for you. For many decades the only thing you could be proud of was your military and your weapons and now the whole world learned that your military and your weapons are garbage too and what you thought you knew about them was just propaganda lies. That must really hurt and I understand why you guys go around to write comments like that on TH-cam and other sites. It is a pity because Russians had potential. There are many good Russian mathematicians, programmers and chess players and the such, but their potential was wasted because their country was taken over and run by a bunch of mafia goons. A empire run by the kind of people who maybe would run a brothel and a strip club in any other country. That is why there is no Russian IBM, no Russian Microsoft, no Russian Apple, or anything really. All those Russian programmers are doing is writing viruses and scamming people on the internet. No wonder your enemies call you "Orcs". It really seems as if you can not build and create anything, just destroy things and fuck with things other people created. I wish I would see any hope for Russia after the Putin regime is gone, but unfortunately what little hope for a better future there was left has all been sold to China now.
This is not an "Australian" block 2 version, but a further development of the first batch, which is already being manufactured in Germany and the Netherlands for their orders. The A2 version has improved passive protection and is already included in more than half of the German Boxers delivered. The Bundeswehr gets the Boxers from Australia because the Lance Turret is also manufactured there for the Australian Army. It's simply easier to build the models with identical equipment on the same assembly line. This means that Rheinmetall does not have to change production at the other plants in the Netherlands and Germany.
Looks great.,
You know truth is I wouldn't mind owning a couple of these for personal use.
You would always get a parking space.
@@WorksOnMyComputerImagine road rage with that thing, just hop in the gunner seat and pont the turret, they'll definitely apologize for cutting you off, no middle fingers this time!
When I first heard about the Boxer decades ago, I was very skeptical about the modularity concept. I thought it is mostly a useless gimmick because no army would ever swap such modules out to turn for example a command post vehicle into a ambulance or something like that.
I was right about that, but I missed the point.
The point is not to turn military vehicles into transformers that would switch roles on the battlefield. The point was that now Rheinmetall/KMW can offer any kind of military vehicle to any customer and have it all based on one common platform that comes off one assembly line.
That is absolute genius and I didn't realize that in the beginning.
Now, no matter what country/army needs a new verhicle, the Boxer can compete. It can be the answer to any problem any military force has, especially now that they also developed a tracked transport module.
You need a APC? Boxer got you covered.
You need a short range air defense system (SHORAD)? Just get a Boxer with the SHORAD module.
You need a field radar system? Just slap one on to a Boxer.
And on top of that now there are also third party companies that are developing and offering their own Boxer mission modules. Apparently there are already 3 or 4 modules with different 120mm mortar systems by different manufacturers being offered, so the Boxer is becoming its own military industry eco system that can be used as a middle man between smaller manufacturers who maybe can't develop their own full vehicle but can develop a mission module and the customer looking for a new vehicle.
The whole concept is so ingenious that in a world where military contracts are always given to the best option and where neither corruption nor national interests (wanting to support homegrown companies) were a factor, Boxer would have to win basically every tender and get all the contracts in the next 30 years or so.
And even with all those other factors determining who gets a contract, Boxer still has a leg up because they can not only offer to produce the thing in the customer's home country, but they can even offer that some company in that country can develop and provide their own mission modules to the project.
The Modular System is the only way it can be Airlifted by the A400M.
Yeh all good points . With battle damage , if one vehicle had track damage and another vehicle turret damage you could quickly get one vehicle up and running .
I am really interested to see how the tracked chassis comes along . That could open up whole new avenues of modularity . In ukraine where tracked vehicles only good in winter muddy times, I was thinking its possible to order 500 modules and then have 500 chassis each of wheeled and tracked allowing one to use the 500 modules 12 months of the year mud rain or shine . I think its a great system. Would like to see a similar design but for much less tonnage vehicles
@@gOtze1337 Ergänzung: Der Boxer hat ein Leergewicht von 25,2 t und der Airbus eine Nutzlast von bis zu 37 t. Nicht nur das Missionsmodul kann beim Boxer leicht ausgebaut und separat transportiert werden, sondern auch Teile der Panzerung.
"The point is not to turn military vehicles into transformers that would switch roles on the battlefield." was that ever the proposal? Aside from field swaps for repairs, I always thought of it as something you'd do out of the field based on your ahead of time mission parameters so that e.g. you wouldn't have a bunch of boxers with howitzer (RCH 155) or anti-air (skyranger) on a counter-terrorism op, but those *would* be available if the mission required them.
This category of vehicle is an excellent weapon when used as it was designed for. I’m a retired US Army Infantryman and fought in a couple wars in my 26 years of service. Mechanized Infantry vehicles are never intended to engage enemy tanks, especially in close contact as we’ve seen the Ukrainians use modern APC’s western countries have given them to fight Russia. I was surprised how a Bradley chewed up a T-72 tank and killed it which is a rare engagement. The AT rounds from the Bushmaster gun does very well at close range which is one of the reasons why the Bradley was able to get some of his rounds to penetrate the T-72 and all that’s needed is a couple rounds to get in there and rip things up in a nasty way. As for the TOW missile, it’ll kill whatever’s thrown at it (Soviet era vehicles, including current upgraded variants). The only chance Russia has against any western military is to fight in an organized manner and keep moving on the battlefield, this static war we’re watching in Ukraine is ridiculous and it’s as if the Russians grabbed people off the street or from prisons and tossed them on the front lines and told to “shoot that way”
Danke für das Video und die Information. Es war ein Genuss
Thank you for watching)
@@spotlight9864 com from my heart
What an incredible Fighting Vehicle !
They also showed one variant at the Eurosatory 2022 with tracks and a 120mm autoloader cannon. It's named RCT120 but at the moment there are not many information about it.
the stryker has problems with the recoil from the 105 mm gun, hmm.
@@steveyoutub76 That's partly because it's wheeled, this boxer is modified to have tracksas such it would be a more stable platform
@@steveyoutub76 The Stryker is a complete different vehicle. The Boxer is 2 times heavier then Stryker.
Boxer tracks? are you sure?@@liljon0111
@@bertnl530no wonder it’s called the boxer if it’s heavy like that
Looks very good and sure a good weapon agains Drohns and Infanterie.
Yes great Video with a lot of informations :)
Thank you for watching)
Amazing that Germany is now buying 123 Australian Boxer, because they can't produce enough on their own!
It’s because Rheinmetall focused on export because for the past years Germany wasn’t really interested in buying weapons. Doesn’t mean we can’t produce them, but just not yet
of course they could produce enough in germany if they wanted to
@@steveyoutub76 It takes Rheinmetall almost more than six months to set up a production line for munitions. How long do you think does it take them to set up a new production line for Boxers? Sure Germany could wait but their number 1 priority right now is speed.
@@wudruffwildcard252 The Australians probably didn't overcharge them, considering they are not in a hurry, since they don't share a continent with russia.
Maybe they are busy with „something else“ 😉
Idk why do they seem to function better than tracked tanks on off-road performance.
Off-road cane mean from flat dirt to to a bunch of uneven spicy rocks mud.
There's something about an 8-wheel drive truck with a huge gun that just tickles my brain
Meantime there is a version by KMW which is a normal modular boxer on tracks.
Brilliant
Definitely my next shopping trolley.
All these kinds of videos about vehicles are always about the weapons, etc. But I hardly see any videos where it is very important with a vehicle. The driver and his place...
It can attack tank from 4km distance.
It looks cool, but I recommend adding a skirt for the wheels
Austin Powers Boxer, Yeah Baby Yeah.
I read the UK is to get 500plus of various versions of the Boxer. I also read that they and the Swedes were going to see if a Mjolnar (spelling?) turret with 120mm mortar can be made to fit. The 155mm version looks unwieldy surely that hull would be better suited to a 105mm (similar to the Abbot) fitment.
As for Ajax - I understand there is one unit now issued with it and have experience no further problems -though after spending what they have on it they would say that wouldn't they?
Excellent choice for future UK street wars - building to building in narrow roads...
@@uweinhamburg When do you foresee this then? As the owner of the only crystal ball on the planet you should really share these dates with us.
Incidentally - Have you seen the size of this machine?
This is a recurring issue with regards to various armed forces and new kit, they all say that there new kit is the best in the world but they always forget that by the time it’s been fully integrated into service it’s already outdated
I think this is my favorite vehicle now.
Ukraine 🇺🇦 need these BOXERS!
Great Britain is replacing their Warriors infantry combat vehicles with the infantry combat version of the Boxer. Ironically, they are replacing their current tracked reconnaissance vehicle with a tracked vehicle, Ajax.
It must be amazing if Australia chose it.
It has.
like the Tiger Attack Helis and NH 90 Helis ?? Yeah pretty amazing duh ...
@@mofaz1968 They are helo's this can handle the outback.
Amazing 🤩
Philippines Armed Force should get this instead of the guarani
Australia does not use the Boxer in any APC role, it is used as an Armoured Recon vehicle, while 1st armoured, 2 Cav and 2/14th all have a dismounted element, this is not their primary role
Cool as.
and then along comes a $1000 drone-borne RPG projectile… and the high tech becomes redundant, blind and unusable….
2:05
What do I think? AS21 Redback, hands down better!
Has a different role, for a start the REDBACK has tracks,not wheels and will be employed in the Australian Army primarily in the APC role. Perhaps you are confusing BOXER with LYNX ?
Nope, same role, Australia just chose different vehicles for each role. Both can perform both roles, recon and ifv, can they not?
@@donaldmatthews7226 A Boxer has a range in excess of 1000 km with one fuel load. No tracked vehicle comes even remotely close to that, so no. Boxer is certainly the better recce vehicle, also a lot quieter.
Boxer
Saracen
Scorpion
Scimitar for the protection of Britain.
Challengers
Chieftains
These platform would help protect Britain
No chance all those minus the boxer have been retired due to better platforms and technology being available, even the challenger 2 is being upgraded to mark 3 status. the boxer will serve alongside the Ajax series as the backbone of British Armour for decades.
The Saracen was almost a concept before its time and should have been developed and re-designed with each evolution. It never fulfilled its potential because nobody had the vision to do so. Much of the rest of what you list has been considered obsolete. The world has moved on.
@@Scaleyback317 obsolete but fast and manoverable upgrade for Britain
Put missles and chain gun's on each platform.
Heavier armour these platforms are better than light skinned land Rover range Rover
targetshowing
Howitzer attachment is too heavy for the rear tires. Needs hydraulic ground stabilizers.
Tyres weak spot
You better research that, as you are very wrong.
So how many Boxers altogether have been sent to Ukraine so far?
Ukraine ordered 36 Boxer with the RCH155 Howitzer in Germany. It is a significant improvement to the PzH 2000 and will replace it. This RCH 155 howitzer is the first of its kind to be able to fire on the move and hit the target precisely. The turret is unmanned and the system works fully automatically.
Is it a Chocolate Box on wheels the only combat it's seen is in Afghanistan not exactly a peer2peer adversary
The expert speaks. Clueless.
Really incredible but im still saying that the swiss piranha V and IV are better in pretty much every way
Will the Boxer burn 🔥 in Ukraine?
You poor Russians. I really feel sorry for you. For many decades the only thing you could be proud of was your military and your weapons and now the whole world learned that your military and your weapons are garbage too and what you thought you knew about them was just propaganda lies. That must really hurt and I understand why you guys go around to write comments like that on TH-cam and other sites.
It is a pity because Russians had potential. There are many good Russian mathematicians, programmers and chess players and the such, but their potential was wasted because their country was taken over and run by a bunch of mafia goons. A empire run by the kind of people who maybe would run a brothel and a strip club in any other country.
That is why there is no Russian IBM, no Russian Microsoft, no Russian Apple, or anything really. All those Russian programmers are doing is writing viruses and scamming people on the internet.
No wonder your enemies call you "Orcs".
It really seems as if you can not build and create anything, just destroy things and fuck with things other people created.
I wish I would see any hope for Russia after the Putin regime is gone, but unfortunately what little hope for a better future there was left has all been sold to China now.
Still destroy by nuclear
Oh really. I'd go back to picking peanuts out of poo if I were you buddy.
They are buying the australian block 2 version. Which is a major improvement over the standard model
This is not an "Australian" block 2 version, but a further development of the first batch, which is already being manufactured in Germany and the Netherlands for their orders. The A2 version has improved passive protection and is already included in more than half of the German Boxers delivered. The Bundeswehr gets the Boxers from Australia because the Lance Turret is also manufactured there for the Australian Army. It's simply easier to build the models with identical equipment on the same assembly line. This means that Rheinmetall does not have to change production at the other plants in the Netherlands and Germany.
I miss a 120mm variant