Leonardo and Rheinmetall have officially established a 50:50 joint venture to drive forward European military vehicle production, with a primary focus on equipping the Italian Army.

Announced on 15 October 2024, the new company, Leonardo Rheinmetall Military Vehicles (LRMV), will be headquartered in Rome, with operational facilities based in La Spezia.

The companies aim to become a central player in European defence vehicle development and production, pending final regulatory approvals expected by early 2025.

The joint venture’s initial goal is to develop and deliver a new Italian Main Battle Tank (MBT) based on Rheinmetall’s Panther KF51 platform and the Lynx Armoured Infantry Combat System (AICS). This collaboration will play a key role in Italy’s Army modernisation programme, which envisions the procurement of over 1,000 armoured vehicles in 16 different variants.

These will include anti-aircraft, anti-tank, and reconnaissance configurations, all based on the modular design of the Lynx platform.

Armin Papperger, CEO of Rheinmetall, emphasized the importance of the joint venture, stating: “We are creating a new heavyweight in European tank production… primarily addressing the Italian market but also targeting other nations in need of modernising their combat systems.” Leonardo CEO Roberto Cingolani added: “This is a significant step towards the creation of a European defence system based on shared platforms, aiming at international competitiveness.”

The Italian MBT and AICS are positioned to meet both domestic military requirements and international demand, especially from European partners looking to modernise their defence capabilities.

The partnership will see Leonardo taking charge of developing mission systems, electronics, and weapons integration, while Rheinmetall contributes advanced vehicle platforms. Final assembly and testing will take place in Italy, with 60% of the project’s activity occurring domestically.

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
33 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jonathan
Jonathan
4 months ago

its very interesting I’m not sure where the Italian defence budget is getting all this money from for capital investment..but they are really spending..they are planning to spend around 20billion dollars on a brand new MBT and brand new Infantry fighting vehicle ( meaning they will have more MBTs and IFVs than the British army as they move to a 400 MBT force) …when you consider how much money they are spaffing on their surface fleet, ( they are going to have more modern escorts than the RN in the late 20s and 30s) a modern subsurface fleet as well… Read more »

Last edited 4 months ago by Jonathan
FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
4 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Wouldn’t it be rational for the BA/MoD to join in this effort at some level? The Italians are evidently cooperative in the GCAP initiative, and Rheinmetall is apparently a reasonable partner of BAES in the CR-3 programme. The level of participation could span the spectrum from observation to full partnership, based upon developments and contract negotiations. Realize the Germans have a checkered track record, but there is always the possibility that they have learned from past mistakes. 🤔😳😉🤞

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Not a bad idea.

Rob N
Rob N
4 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Why did BAE get a 49% share of its joint venture with Rheinmetall when the Italians got 50/50? The Panther has a non-NATO standard gun 140 mm are we now all expected to move to this gun? The Panther also is not well suited for battle persistence willa small amount of ammunition and room taken up by drones. Not sure the Panther would be good for the UK it smacks of the over expensive, over sophisticated German tanks of WW2. Also I think our armour is better. Also our hydrogas suspension is better. The Panther base design comes from the… Read more »

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

With you on joint defence projects to many arguments and delays 😟

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

Panther do not have a 140mm gun.that is French project , if it will have a different one will be 130mm but i doubt Italians will go for it.

Peter S
Peter S
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

It is just a leopard 2 with a new turret.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy
4 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

We just developed a new tank turret, someone should ring the Italians and save them the bother…

Paul T
Paul T
4 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

And CR3 is just a CR2 with a new Turret 🤔.

JOHN
JOHN
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

We definitely need to join in and help create a European tank
CH3 needs to be the technology tester and we move on to “above”

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

We are already observors on the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System tank (MGCS) project which also has interest from Holland, Belgium, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain and Sweden. 

We could also have interest in this Leonardo-Rheinmetall project… or develop a tank with Reinmetall alone, building on the CR3 work.

Germany’s chequered past? – not WW2, surely? They have been allies since 1955 when they joined NATO.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
4 months ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Actually, a reference re German participation in multiple development programmes. However, now that it has been mentioned not certain re reliability of former East German government and military functionaries.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Ah, OK. I think it is bad luck that a handful of projects with German participation did not work out such as US-GE MBT70, but many more did work out such as FH70, Boxer, Tornado, Typhoon.

I had not heard that former East German staff were an issue.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
4 months ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Actually, not certain how various intelligence services view any residual employees from formerly Soviet occupied Eastern European bureaucracies or ethnic Russian populations (e.g., each Baltic state Hungary, various locales in the Balkans, Hungary, Turkiye, etc.). Strictly speculation, but would be willing to wager that MI-5/MI-6 (and other services) may have a rather fuller agenda (re)vetting individuals from at least nominally aligned NATO states. Would imagine that an ex-KGB Col., who has since become the ruling despot of a nuclear armed state, might be interested in infiltrating opposition states. 🤔😳😉

Simon
Simon
4 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

I thought most East German armed forces personal ( in terms of officers anyway) were retired after re unification

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 months ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

Graham. Significant OT news I thought you’d be interested in. Reading on Gabs UKAFC Twitter. He understands there is an Army internal plan called “Wavell” regards IFVs and Boxer/Ares. Seems they are seriously looking at putting a Turret on ARES and ordering these as an IFV, with 7 dismounts possible as one turret they are looking at is NP. Would that mean a section reorg? How big is a section currently? NATO is letting nations know they want at least a 30mm on infantry vehicles, be it Boxer or ARES, but the Army wants ARES turret. Alongside this, if it… Read more »

Dragonwight
Dragonwight
4 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

It is interesting. Their defence budget is what 1.46%. They are the second most indebted country in Europe with debt to gdp of 137%. A deficit of 7.2% which they hope to reduce to 5.2% by 2028. By all accounts they are broke.

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Note that big part of that money is reinvested in their industries, including the F35 Cameri facility.

Peter S
Peter S
4 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Not sure of your numbers. Italy is currently modernizing just 125 Ariete MBTs which will remain in service until 2035. They have been spending> 60% of their budget on personnel for years with only @20% on equipment purchases. But some of their decisions have been impressive. For less than a third of the cost of the QEs, they have acquired 2 flexible F35 carriers, albeit with lower theoretical aircraft numbers. They are only buying 20 F35B. The biggest difference between Italy and UK or France is the absence of any expenditure on nuclear. They also have the second largest manufacturing… Read more »

Hugo
Hugo
4 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

Your point about the Italian carriers is a little misrepresenting seeing as they were bought over 10 years apart 1 at a time.

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  Hugo

There are some talks they will go for an evolved Trieste and will not get the 3 more dedicated amphibious ships they were to get.
I think they realised amphibious warfare is not that realistic for them.

Hugo
Hugo
4 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Who’s talking about this? And Triestes aren’t cheap

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

A total of 90 F-35s are already on order by Rome, including 60 conventional takeoff F-35As for the Italian Air Force and 15 short takeoff vertical landing F-35Bs each for the Italian Air Force and the Italian Navy. 

The additional batch includes 15 F-35As for the Italian Air Force and five F-35Bs each for the two services.

So if approved they will have 40 F-35B instead of 30.

Sam
Sam
4 months ago
Reply to  Peter S

If interested in Italy’s force structure and modernization efforts, check out Pax Americana on YouTube.

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I think it’s us Brits who just need to wake up 😟 ⏰

maurice10
maurice10
4 months ago

Today, Germany is the only serious European MBT manufacturer with the capability to build them in significant numbers. The UK needs to join this consortium if allowed and make a significant contribution to the CH3 replacement.

Paul T
Paul T
4 months ago
Reply to  maurice10

Many countries in Europe have the capability to produce new MBT’s – it depends on how you define ‘ significant numbers ‘.Don’t forget that many Leopard 2 customers in Europe built their own.

maurice10
maurice10
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul T

In the main, you are talking about franchising German MBT design and engineering.

Rob N
Rob N
4 months ago
Reply to  maurice10

I am sure the UK could design and build a new tank if it wanted to… after all we did invent the thing.

Pleiades
Pleiades
4 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

Which as you should know, unless you’re a child, means nothing now…

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
4 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

Unfortunately, probably a wide political/economic chasm between the terms “could” and “would.”

AlexS
AlexS
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul T

Many countries in Europe have the capability to produce new MBT’s 

Who? the French will have to get from start , Leclerc production stopped long ago. UK same. Italians same…production stopped in 90’s

These are all countries that lost significant know how in tracked vehicles. Italians and French at least developed tanks destroyers and wheeled IFV’s.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
4 months ago
Reply to  maurice10

BAE is already linked to Rheinmettal in RBSL for CR3. I am sure other AFV work will follow for them.
But we need to join many consortia to keep options open.