BAE Systems has confirmed its bid submission to provide the CV90 to the Czech Ministry of Defence for the BMP II replacement programme.

The firm say that in partnership with state-owned defense integrator VOP CZ s.p., the team’s offer will ensure the production and delivery of the CV90 MkIV Infantry Fighting Vehicle “on schedule and to budget”, as well as “support the sovereignty of the Czech Army and Czech industry” in the service and future development of the vehicle.

BAE Systems Hägglunds, the manufacturer of the CV90, has delivered multiple CV90 export programmes to European customers.

“We are confident that the advanced capabilities of the offered CV90 MkIV is the best choice for the Czech Army, to protect its soldiers and secure the future of its nation’s defense forces as well its defense industry,” said Tommy Gustafsson-Rask, managing director of BAE Systems Hägglunds.

“BAE Systems’ successful industrial cooperation goes beyond the mechanical assembly of the vehicle or the creation of new factories. Our offering is based on Czech defense industries playing a high-value and strategic role in the development, production, training, and support of the vehicle and all its variants.”

On their website, BAE say that the CV90 MkIV offer also includes the most recent turret configuration designed to provide increased capabilities through the integration of the latest generation of sensors and active survivability systems, added weapon capabilities, and enhanced crew and squad ergonomics.

“Built on combat-proven experience and data analysis from the CV90’s seven existing users, the improved CV90 MkIV turret also reduces the cognitive load on crews through greater use of A.I. to meet the growing needs of the modern battlefield.”

The CV90 is in operation with seven nations: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands with close to 1,300 CV90s of numerous variants in service.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
31 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
andy a
andy a
6 days ago

Am I the first to say, should the UK have saved billions and bought this of the shelf? if so couls have spent the spare cash on more challangers

Marked
Marked
6 days ago
Reply to  andy a

Of course. Being the UK though we prefer to spend billions and have nothing to show for it.

Something Different
Something Different
6 days ago
Reply to  andy a

I don’t get why we don’t go for these to replace warrior and for the Ajax programme. I know they get a lot of criticism (and rightly so) but BAE is British (I know, to an extent) and this is a proven mature design.

Pmichael
Pmichael
6 days ago

ASCOD is also a proven design. But the lack of British quality management and mishandling the moderate domestic technology insert can even break the most proven basic design.

Ron5
Ron5
6 days ago
Reply to  Pmichael

Ajax has been so developed from ASCOD, it’s virtually a new design and as so, unproven.

Pmichael
Pmichael
6 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

The technology insert part of Ajax would have been happened with any other design as well. But claiming CV90 is proven while ASCOD isn’t is plain wrong.

pete wait
pete wait
5 days ago
Reply to  Pmichael

Suspension does not seem to be proven for weight gain, perhaps there was no room in the floor for larger torsion bars and bigger rotational dampers?

DaveyB
DaveyB
6 days ago
Reply to  andy a

It is a BAe product and therefore would probably have been excluded on that basis alone. The CV90 was offered as part of the FRES competition, but ASCOD beat it. I can’t find any details as to why CV90 lost out to ASCOD. But judging by the CV90’s combat performance in Afghan, it did alright. ASCOD has yet to see combat service. Perhaps it was down to cost? The other moot point is the Warrior upgrade. Notwithstanding that BAe who are the design organisation of Warrior, repeatedly told the MoD that it would need a new turret along with a… Read more »

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  DaveyB

MOD Procurement is a paperwork Exercise, you must hit each point of the tender document. or get discounted for non-complience. YOU COULD HAVE the best design, yet fail because you didn’t comply. if firms comply Cheapest always wins. public money.

YOU KNOW SOMETIMES YOUR GETTING A PUP, but there is nothing you can do.

CV90s and ASCOD are very similar at design and sold by salesmen and not engineers who build them.

But Spanish hull build seems to be an issue,

Ron5
Ron5
6 days ago
Reply to  andy a

Yes @andy, quite correct. However the British Army heads and their buddies in Whitehall were determined to award the contract to anyone but Bae. They did not wish to continue the monopoly Bae had on British fighting vehicles even though what had been produced were world leaders when they were first built: Challenger, Warrior, CVT. Bae at their own expense had built a prototype vehicle based on CV90 and associated testing facilities. That real vehicle was entered into the competition. But the army gave the win to a company with zero experience or facilities to build, based on a stack… Read more »

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
6 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

Exactly. Well said Ron5

simon
simon
6 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

Warrior was designed and built by GKN. CVT was designed and built by Alvis when it was part of Leyland. BAE only ended up with all when it brought out Alvis

Ron5
Ron5
5 days ago
Reply to  simon

Yes including all the staff that created those vehicles. Only the company name changed.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
2 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

GKN another company like so many that’s a mere shell of what it once was. Alvis there’s another from the grave yard I always remember how when the British army was running Volkswagen post war they offered it to Wolseley (amongst others) who said they saw no merit in the companies products whatsoever. The rest is history as is Wolseley and it’s ilk.

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  Ron5

No BAEs slowly closed all these firms and lost that workforce, its easier and cheaper for them to purchase a design than design it themselves. Supa gluing bolt heads onto ships is a prime of how far they fell. buying firms in the USA, BAEs makes Bradleys in the US. ????

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  simon

Agree with BAEs couldn’t design and build a pedal car, unless they brought into a firm cv90 was a Dutch design.

David Barry
David Barry
7 minutes ago
Reply to  Johan

Gen? Dutch? Or Scandic?

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
2 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

You can just imagine the French deliberately ignoring their own domestic companies for a foreign competitor can’t you and then watch another foreign competitor buy up that thwarted domestic business effectively destroying their own domestic capacity altogether to build military equipment as will happen when Bae inevitably sell their share to Rhienmetall. All done in the name of competition over a long term plan when some of those behind this still think we can act as if we can mimic the US set up when in reality we are far too small a market to simply do that. As you… Read more »

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Agree, BAEs created from nothing, paid nothing for it, abused their position for many years, then slowly allow the workforce to run down and numbers dwindle. then sell their factory sites which they paid nothing for £ms. WHAT WAS THE LAST DESIGN to come out of BAEs from its UK design offices,

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  Ron5

Dont get me wrong BAEs is more interested in selling off old factory sites for housing and other uses. than it is making tanks.

as EX BAEs out of Dunsfold, look @ all their ex-sites sold off. and they did piss in their own market.
MAR4 ended in a bitter pissing contest and they lost the prime contractor status,

John N
John N
6 days ago

I struggle to see how this can be seen as ‘new’ news, the Czechs have had a competition running to replace BMP-2 for a number of years now.

In fact there was a short list announced back in December 2018 which included Lynx KF41, Puma, ASCOD and CV90, a year later Puma withdrew.

Ron5
Ron5
6 days ago
Reply to  John N

The news is that on Sept 3, Bae submitted its bid to the Czech competition. If you read the article, it says that.

Peter S
Peter S
6 days ago

In 2010, BAE had become persona non grata with the Cameron government, largely because of the Nimrod shambles. In a an act of more than usual stupidity by Cameron, the BAE proposal to build CV90 in the UK was rejected. It now seems likely that AJAX is beyond rescue, at least within the already overpriced contract. ( There is more detail on its problems in an article on Battlespace). The sensor pack weighs 6/7 tons, so losing a lot of overall weight may not be feasible It would seem more sensible to return to upgrading Warrior but without installing the… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
2 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

Cameron being a total incompetent, now there’s a novelty from a man who forgets what nominal football team he supports and I used to think politicians in the 80s and 90s were distinctly average, they seem like giants these days by comparison. I guess what can you expect when a PM never had a real job out of Uni and the mock jobs he did have were through nepotism rather close to his home.

Jonathan
Jonathan
21 hours ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Come on we’ve all forgotten our children and left them down the pub at some point……ummmmm ok that man was not top of the shelf.

Johan
Johan
13 hours ago
Reply to  Peter S

oh Cameron was a total tool, but he got played by BAEs and he called them out, it was a huge pissing contest, over MRA4 not working and needed more money to make it work. £2b and they didn’t work, went from 21 aircraft to 9. so Cameron called their bluff. BAEs retaliated by threatening existing platforms “which was seen as Blackmail” BAE hand their fingers in the gearboxes of Invincible Class, Airframe Ext Hours of Harrier. and used this as the bargaining chip, AND Cameron called it, and removed their Prime contractor status, and just to compare 9 P8s… Read more »

Cripes
Cripes
6 days ago

CV90 would be a good successor to Warrior. In particular, it was designed to operate in harsh northern European weather and terrain. Unlike Warrior, it has been progressively developed and is now on Mk 1V, with any wrinkles long since ironed out. And it has a stabilised 40mm or 35mm cannon. No serious players mix tracks and wheels in an armoured infantry battle group, as a cannot keep up with b on road and vice versa cross country. Boxer in the armoured brigades is an aberration and one that has come about because the head shed has had this decade–long… Read more »

stu
stu
5 days ago
Reply to  Cripes

just had a look at the cv90 why dont we just buy aload of these . and stop f—ing around

monkey spanker
monkey spanker
3 days ago

Hindsight is a beautiful thing with regards to Ajax. When they get to the bottom of what is causes such massive issues hopefully we will have a better idea of what or who caused it.
Been looking at cv90, kf21, lynx and puma recently. What’s the major differences between lynx and puma? I’m guessing I’m missing the obvious but just they seem very similar

Jonathan
Jonathan
20 hours ago

The mod and army do seem to have over complicated this procurement of an armoured fighting vehicle. Sometimes in procurement you have to first look at the market place and see what you domestic market place can easily provide. If these off the shelf options are an OK fit you procure the one that works for you and develops your own market. Asking a market place to bid on something that does not exist is a quick way to pissing money away and not getting what you need when you need it.

David Barry
David Barry
1 minute ago

Czech forces
Put them behind Spitfires and Hurricanes – they ace it.
Give them Lee Enfields and BRENs (I know) they waste it.
Utmost respect for their fighting ethos.