JasonJ

OH-1 Ninja. Put in a little money to put life in the production run again and for the latests gizmos and then good to go.

Tonymapmaker put Japan in the same color boat as Greenland, Indonesia, Mexico, Ethiopa, and so on..

Germany - bulk of money source. France - overall design leader. UK - international/political buffer. Italy - design support to France's role. Greece - image of little guy can help too.

LastDingo-chan. This is TN. The guts of the site would be thought of as being made up of posters that are/were tankers or other professions or other sorts of military background. LD had many opportunities before he got hit with the ban hammer for unprovoked personal insults. It was not some sort of short term unfair moderator action. That dude couldn't get off it. Even if one wants an active board again, it's not worth selling the soul of it to just get cheap activity.

A JMSDF naval vessel entered the Arctic Ocean for the first time in early September. The ship was the trainer JS Kashima with a crew of 310 personnel. It carried out flag signal communication training with the US Coast Guard before entering the Bering Strait. Immediately aftetwards, it proceeded through the strait and passed north of the Arctic Circle (66 degrees, 33 minutes) and navigated within for 30 hours. https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201121/ddm/005/010/087000c

Details about the Swedish program on the CV9030 have not been made on the site so can't assume first to go. But that was not a Finnish program. Finland hasn't initiated their own IFV program so it can't be intepretated as them not wanting amphbious. They still put amphibious capability in their Sisu Pusa 180, 185, and the Patria. They seem to be working on the amphbious capability for the heavy version of Patria as well. Back to Poland.. terrain is one of the most influential factors of a military campaign. Furthermore Poland is relatively small so it lacks strategic defense depth.

Well of course CV9030 is not amphibious. A look into the selection program by Finland and the development of the CV9030 by Sweden may provide information about those choices and maybe amphibious view is provided. It may be "our IFV will only be expected to operate on the mainland and relying on bridge making engineers" or it may be for Sweden "we'd liked to include amphibious but we have limited budget" or for Finland "we'd like other options on the market that include amphibious but there aren't any and we don't have the funds to make our own ATM". Sure APC and IFV are different.

Is that the description for the 6x wheel Caesar or the 8x wheel Caesar? 6x Caesar is light enough to fit in a C-130H. If your description is for the 8x Caesar then it seems Archer has many advatages since even weight are around same class.

It would be worth considering that before Patria, the Finnish developed APC that went into full production was the Sisu Pasi XA 180 and 185. It was also fully amphibious and the design seemed to even sacrifice armor in exchange for amphibious capability given that the latest version meant as a brief stop-gap until Patria came out, the XA 203 gives up amphibious for improving protection a little. The Sisu Pasi 180 and 185 most likely didn't have the same level of financial support as the Patria but still got amphibious incorporated into the design. So the Finnish seemed to always have a desire

Even Croatia picked up APCs with amphib capability.

"Don't take it personal" is a funny statement to make. Why say that. The Finnish Army still procured many Amphibious capable vehicles despite what you said about them not finding much use with that function from the BMP. But I'm not Polish. Or Finnish.

Pardon my posts.

Well for IFV design, sure there are compromises in a design but maybe not enough attention has been given to Poland's terrain. As pointed out before, there are many rivers in Poland. Even if the main river Vistula runs fast, that would still leave many other rivers. If a large part of the country is marshlands, then that would suggest slow moving fanning out water, not tight speed rivers. So then comes a point I recall often being stated about IFV designs in other threads.. the most important role of the IFV is getting infantry from point A to point B, not engaging other AFVs unles

But they had experience with 1,000 BMP-1s already and so maybe they want to retain that amphibious capability in their next IFVs. Poland defense planners probably have their rivers mapped out in detail but if so then naturally aren't going to make such river crossings locations known to the public. Amphibious design can't have that much of design cost on a total package. One more thought, surely bridging forces would be more effective in the job of river crossing but they are big, probably easy targets, and time and planning is needed to lay down a crossing. So it may not always be available.