Bundeswehr Restructuring

[kato]

100 billion fonds full project list

• Chapter Military Procurement
  • Title : Procurement of clothing and personal equipment
    • assigned 45 M€ in 2022, 1.932 B€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects : Helmet Communications Gear ; Combat Boots ; Night Vision Devices ; IdZ-ES infantry system
    • Note : This is in addition to 2.4 billion being spent this year on general new personal equipment from the regular budget.
  • Title : Procurement Dimension Command Capability / Digitalization (Force Branch CIR)
    • assigned 10 M€ in 2022, 20.742 B€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects : DLBO-Basic, DLBO-BMS ; TAWAN ; computing center cluster ; SatComBw Level 2 and 3 ; German Mission Network 1 ; German Mission Network 2 ; PRC-117G radios
    • Note : German Mission Network 1 is mobile tactical HQs for the Army, German Mission Network 2 is the new Navy HQ in Rostock. DLBO and TAWAN is about tactical battlefield management and effectively communications gear planned to be rolled out to 25,000 combat vehicles and 155,000 individual soldiers.
  • Title : Procurement Dimension Land (Force Branch Army)
    • assigned 10 M€ in 2022, 16.600 B€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects (definitive) : Puma 1st Batch Upgrade ; Heavy Weapons Carrier Infantry ; Main Ground Combat System ; Airmobile field hospitals
    • Projects (wafty) : Successor IFV Marder, Successor APC Fuchs; Successor APC Bv206, Successor airmobile vehicles / airborne platform
    • Note 1 : They semi-bailed on fixing down particular solutions for those projects in the second item above, supposedly mostly due to internal differences in the army over whether to switch to a wheeled Stryker-style medium brigade concept.
    • Note 2 : Main Ground Combat System within the fonds is only planned to be financed until a certain deadline and then moves back to general budget.
  • Title : Procurement Dimension Sea (Force Branch Navy)
    • assigned 10 M€ in 2022, 8.806 B€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects : K130, F126, U212CD, Future NSM ship-to-ship/shore missile, IDAS submarine-to-air missile, SONIX, multi-purpose combat boats, successor RHIB 1010
    • Note : SONIX is likely a new underwater surveillance system, the combat boats are CB90-style boats for the naval infantry. The big-figure projects at the beginning above are being transferred over from the general budget, where they did already have some money assigned to them, but were not necessarily fully financed. The 8.8 billlion is in addition to what is already assigned there, and may or may not cover realizing options within those contracts.
  • Title : Procurement Dimension Air (Force Branch Air Force)
    • assigned 10 M€ in 2022, 33.408 B€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects : Development and Procurement Eurofighter ECR ; Successor Tornado - Component Procurement F-35 including armament ; CH-47 heavy transport helicopter ; H145M light combat helicopter ; ground-based air defense (V/SHORAD, Patriot regeneration, medium and long range) ; space-based early warning system TWISTER ; procurement additional maritime patrol aircraft ; armament Heron TP ; space surveillance system and control center Level 2 ; "air control systems and various radars" ; Future Combat Air System
    • Note 1 : Twister is a EU PESCO project.
    • Note 2 : Future Combat Air System within the fonds is only planned to be financed until a certain deadline and then moves back to general budget.
• Chapter Military Research and Development
  • Title : Research and Development Artificial Intelligence
    • assigned 5 M€ in 2022, 422 M€ from 2023 onwards
    • Projects : LaSeRONN, MobiRONN, AI-based surveillance of large areas
    • Note : Those first two are about robust navigation under navigational warfare conditions, i.e. under hostile interference with positioning information.

The above lays out approximately 82 billion Euro. The remaining 18 billion come from funds already assigned to projects that are being transferred into the special fonds, see also above note under Navy. Offhand the MGCS and FCAS financing is only for 3-4 years before shifting these back over to the regular budget; funds assigned here seem to be to finance initiating particular current development steps, and only those.

You may notice that ammunition is not being mentioned. Ammunition procurement, where possible is internalized to one of the above specific projects (e.g.: additional torpedos go with the new submarines; IAI missiles for Heron TP go specifically there). Otherwise it is being financed from the general budget. It is broadly planned to spend 2 billion Euro annually from the regular budget on increasing ammunition stocks over the next 10 years.

[Tarond]

I don't get it, why they want a new Successor for IFV Marder and APC Fuchs. Aren't Puma and Boxer the successors?

[Albany Rifles]

Thanks for the breakdown Kato. In US DOD procurement we have some of the same freedom regarding disbursement of funs. A PM here can shift money between projects within his portfolio however he/she sees fit. They just have to be willing to handle any of the questions and oversight which may come their way.

[kato]

I don't get it, why they want a new Successor for IFV Marder and APC Fuchs. Aren't Puma and Boxer the successors?

There is a line of thought within the army currently to possibly move to creating a number of socalled "medium brigades" with a similar concept to US Army Stryker Brigade Combat Teams. This is mostly pushed by Inspector General of the Army GenLt Alfons Mais.

If that plan is realized then a number of mechanized infantry battalions would switch to a wheeled IFV as their Marder replacement instead, while those battalions that are already equipped with Puma would remain in Heavy Brigades.

However this is considered somewhat controversial within the Bundeswehr, so they kept it neutral for the project description - a Marder successor can therefore be either more Puma or such a wheeled IFV (which would likely turn out to be a Boxer with the unmanned turret of a Puma).


The Puma upgrade is mentioned separately since this is just the recently approved project to bring all currently used Puma to the same build standard (called Puma S1).


---

For Fuchs Boxer is not the full replacement. It only replaced Fuchs in select functions for which Fuchs has been kind of a quick fix at the time 30 years ago (motorized infantry, combat medical and command/comms vehicles in combat battalions), and which since then had been expanded with Fuchs being rebuilt between variants to serve in those roles. Those Fuchs that were freed up from those functions when Boxer were bought were promptly reused in roles in which previously M113 had been used; hence why there are still close to 1000 Fuchs in service now.

For most remaining roles in which Fuchs needs to be replaced Boxer is considered too large; effectively you need only about half the payload that a Boxer could carry. The intention for the Fuchs successor is to procure an armoured 6x6 vehicle to replace the remaining Fuchs and other armoured medium wheeled vehicles (primarily Dingo) used in a variety of roles, with possibly up to 1600 vehicles to be bought in total.

[kato]

Thanks for the breakdown Kato. In US DOD procurement we have some of the same freedom regarding disbursement of funs. A PM here can shift money between projects within his portfolio however he/she sees fit. They just have to be willing to handle any of the questions and oversight which may come their way.

For the Bundeswehr the problem has always been the socalled "budget remains". Effectively, the budget assigns the money in an annual fashion based on projected financial need of a project for that year. However, if the project can not spend this money - due to e.g. development delays or similar - they have this still left over at the end of the year. This money then falls back to the general federal budget, but the Bundeswehr is allowed to keep a certain share (up to 10% i think) and regularly uses that to plug holes in other projects, typically for the small stuff where they don't need outside approvement. However this also means that the main project will need that money again later, effectively a minor cost overrun in that project that is actually used for other stuff.

Offhand this procedure was developed as a compromise when in the first year unspent expenditure was left over right after the Bundeswehr was founded - 1957 - chancellor Adenauer at the time simply went and claimed he had authority to reassign that money - 3.5 billion DM - in full to defence again (in addition to approved budgets for the new year), without any parliamentary oversight or checks and balances.

In the special fonds law this whole thing is explicitly removed. If the money for a specific project can not be spent it simply goes back to the pot to be drawn again for that project (and only that) later on.

[Albany Rifles]

For the Bundeswehr the problem has always been the socalled "budget remains". Effectively, the budget assigns the money in an annual fashion based on projected financial need of a project for that year. However, if the project can not spend this money - due to e.g. development delays or similar - they have this still left over at the end of the year. This money then falls back to the general federal budget, but the Bundeswehr is allowed to keep a certain share (up to 10% i think) and regularly uses that to plug holes in other projects, typically for the small stuff where they don't need outside approvement. However this also means that the main project will need that money again later, effectively a minor cost overrun in that project that is actually used for other stuff.

Offhand this procedure was developed as a compromise when in the first year unspent expenditure was left over right after the Bundeswehr was founded - 1957 - chancellor Adenauer at the time simply went and claimed he had authority to reassign that money - 3.5 billion DM - in full to defence again (in addition to approved budgets for the new year), without any parliamentary oversight or checks and balances.

In the special fonds law this whole thing is explicitly removed. If the money for a specific project can not be spent it simply goes back to the pot to be drawn again for that project (and only that) later on.

Those are the rules here for major weapons systems and construction. For things like software systems they have more freedom of movement since so many of our software systems are commercial off the shelf (COTS). These changes came about during the last major acquisition update (thanks F-35) and Congress also said "no more custom software for business processes.

[kato]

For things like software systems they have more freedom of movement since so many of our software systems are commercial off the shelf (COTS).

For the Bundeswehr, they invented their own (state-owned) commercial general contractor for anything IT.

Basically, if it's a generic software or hardware product, then the procurement agency effectively hands the project off to BWI. While BWI as a government entity has to run tenders and such, they can and will pretty much assemble a product inhouse from multiple subcontractors.

Even if its a definitive product that's being bought from a standard Bundeswehr contract but that e.g. needs to be hooked into the IT infrastructure then it's BWI that handles the whole process from ordering to end-user roll-out. Depending on system - especially if it's something civilian - they may also handle the early life support and later on user helpdesk.

BWI in many cases is also the end user itself (they run all non-military IT for the Bundeswehr), so it's all sorta internal within a company operating to commercial rules. Their procurement section typically handles around 100 projects worth around 1 billion per year.

[Albany Rifles]

Yeah, in the US a major contractor usually serves as a lead system integrator (LSI) for whatever commercial software is the approach the government decides to take to fill a need. Both our retail and wholesale supply, maintenance & financial subsystems are integrated into 2 programs...LMP for wholesale, Global Combat Service Support - Army (GCSS-Army for retail...both use SAP as their main software users employ with an Oracle data base sw and a DOD & Treasury financial software. Each system selected different vendors to be their LSI to make these 3 or 4 programs to interoperate to make a functional system. In the case of GCSS-Army they did development and deployment for our government PM Office...I ran the deployment piece...and our LSI hired some subcontractors to execute it but we worked through the LSI for development & deployment. As the systems are being upgraded to SAP S4 HANA each PM office selected new LSIs. I won't deploy this upgrade as I moved on to the Army's munition system to finish my career. It's the last of the old standalone systems with custom code (32 years old!) and they needed expertise to upgrade to an enterprise environment....very simple task. I figured some sharp up & comer needed to tackle S4 HANA roll out to enhance their career and I get to go out in a rocking chair job as ease into the sunset.


And then Putin invades the Ukraine, we are shipping ammo to them and deploying like crazy and I haven't worked so hard in decades!!!

Come on January 2023!!!

[kato]

Regarding potential Fuchs successors:

Germany today signed a statement of intent with Finland to join the "Common Armoured Vehicle System" programme.

https://www.patriagroup.com/newsroom...icle-programme

CAVS is a joint development and procurement programme of Finland, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia since 2018 to have Patria develop a 6x6 wheeled APC that effectively combines the older XA-203 model with current technology from their XA-360. First deliveries of a basic APC variant occured in November 2021, the programme in my opinion is primarily about potential customers giving Patria technical packages to see whether they can implement it on the vehicle. So far Finland has ordered 160 vehicles, Lithuania 200 vehicles.

[kato]

For Eurosatory Rheinmetall has presented the final development state for TSWA, i.e. the "turret-independent weapon station" for Puma.

https://twitter.com/RheinmetallAG/st...63773483171840

The system was already presented in this version in October last year (on a Puma), and will be rolled out backfitted on all Puma from 2023 on.

TSWA is mounted on the back of a Puma and intended to assist disembarking troops by first clearing out the entire rear 180-degree sector behind the vehicle out to small arms range. For that purpose the system consists of effectively two separate 40 mm grenade launchers with 18 shots each, one for 40x280 nonlethal ammunition (flashbang and irritant) and one for 40x46 lethal ammunition (MV HEDP or programmable airburst). Both launchers use regular off-the-shelf ammunition. The nonlethal ammunition can also be fired to short range to cover a 360-degree arc around the vehicle.

Operationally TSWA is controlled by one of the disembarking troops in the back, who gets his own optics package - with thermal imager and laser rangefinder - to find his targets. The launcher is fully stabilized and can thus fire while the vehicle is moving.

TSWA has been a couple years in the making, basically since the first Puma prototypes. Initial versions were comparatively simple and consisted of a trainable six-shot 76mm grenade launcher.

[kato]

The territorial defense regiments being stood up will be placed under a new separate command, the "Territorial Command of the Bundeswehr" which will be established this October.

The command will also take over the role of "National Territorial Commander" from where it's currently hooked up with the general-in-chief of the Joint Support Force SKB, as well as the functions of the current "Territorial Tasks Command of the Bundeswehr" within SKB. The commander of the latter unit - Major General Carsten Breuer - is also the planned first commander of the new unit, so they're basically just taking his current command and are branching it out a bit.

Socalled "enabling" forces - forces within the portfolio of the territorial command other than infantry - will remain within the SKB and will be expanded (by about 2000 men). The new command effectively has OPCOM of these troops. These are, with rough current size:

• The Military Police Command with three regiments - 23 distributed companies plus 9 reserve companies; expansion will be another company
• The NBC Defense Command with three regiments - 12 active plus 12 reserve companies; expansion will be another two companies
• "mobile logistics troops", i.e. primarily the RSOM staging battalion and possibly other forces within the Logistics Command; expansion with another battalion

The Territorial Command itself will additionally have

• 16 "state commands" (one for each state), primarily for liaison to individual state governments
• the 5 "home protection regiments" (infantry) with total 52 companies, reserve
• the Multinational CIMIC command and the civil-military cooperation centerl of the Bundeswehr (same unit) plus battalion-size support force
• the German elements of the Multinational Operational Command and NATO JSEC command (same unit)plus battalion-size support force

JSEC is a command directly subordinate to SACEUR that basically coordinates all movement of NATO forces and supplies within Europe. I.e. this command is responsible for moving that US division landing on the Atlantic Coast over to the front on the East. The only other equivalent command in NATO is JFC Norfolk, which handles the transfer of those troops and goods over the Atlantic.

• First primary function of the overall Territorial Command is to establish the German forces to support JSEC, i.e. to secure and operate routes through the country, establish convoy supply centers, operate NBC decon points in the rear area and handle the whole traffic. The command "accounts" for all German Host Nation Support to Allied Forces in wartime. In addition it will also be the "Staging Command" for deployment of German national forces within a NATO deployment.
• Second primary function is to take command of forces in national emergencies, with its own regiments as core available troops. This includes establishing 24/7 available personnel for a national crisis response advisory group for the government.
• The latter is derived from experiences with the handling of the Covid pandemic and with Bundeswehr assistance in floods last year. Maj.Gen. Breuer previously was called upon as commander of the crisis response staff for the Covid pandemic by chancellor Scholz.

Functionally the command is considered equivalent to the Bundeswehr Mission Command, which performs the same staging and control function for regular "peacekeeping"/"stabilization" deployments outside wartime, outside NATO. Due to this stated "equivalence" - and having JSEC under it with a Lt. Gen - the commander will definitely be promoted to Lt. General.

The command per official decree - public order by MoD Lambrecht and Bundeswehr Inspector General Zorn - is being established in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

[Albany Rifles]

Sounds similar to our US Army Reserve Command & National Guard Bureau in function if not in form.

[kato]

To some extent, yeah.

The Bundeswehr Logistics Command and the US 21st Theater Sustainment Command actually have an official partnership agreement since 2015 as their functionality is equivalent to some extent.

There's some functional difference compared to the US Army Reserve Command in that e.g. the Bundeswehr Territorial Command does not have any medical units nor a general reserve training/school system (usable for expansion) under its direct purview.

For medical this is partially because there is so far actually no "dedicated" reserve for the purposes of the Territorial Command in the medical force branch, and the Medical Service would use its reservists to instead (considerably) expand its active hospitals in wartime.

[Albany Rifles]

To some extent, yeah.

The Bundeswehr Logistics Command and the US 21st Theater Sustainment Command actually have an official partnership agreement since 2015 as their functionality is equivalent to some extent.

There's some functional difference compared to the US Army Reserve Command in that e.g. the Bundeswehr Territorial Command does not have any medical units nor a general reserve training/school system (usable for expansion) under its direct purview.

For medical this is partially because there is so far actually no "dedicated" reserve for the purposes of the Territorial Command in the medical force branch, and the Medical Service would use its reservists to instead (considerably) expand its active hospitals in wartime.

Makes sense...I mean the Bundeswehr is pretty much set up to play a home game where as the US is set up for expeditionary warfare.

[kato]

Current revised plan OrBat and ToE for Jäger bataillons, i.e. light/medium infantry:



Tactical Symbols and text should be mostly legible.

The yellow box is the current planned introduction of Boxer CRV (Australian model: 30mm and SPIKE LR2 launcher, no dismounts) as a fire support element in the heavy company.

A bit interestingly the ToE lays out plans of how the infantry battalion will be equipped with UAVs, i.e. with a Mikado UAV at platoon level in infantry platoons, an Aladin drone system at company level in the heavy weapons platoon - and the whole thing effectively doubled with the same numbers again in a recce platoon in the heavy company. To my knowledge this broadly matches US plans, including by specs of UAVs - although the US Army has so far been pretty unsuccessful at finding a Mikado equivalent ("Short Range Reconnaissance Program"). RABE, mentioned with the recce platoon, is a light recon UGV.

The red box is the Infantry School's proposal of adding another platoon of Boxer CRV to each infantry company for integral fire support, cutting the heavy weapons platoon's anti-tank squad (with dismounted SPIKE LR2, carried on Dingo 2 MRAPs).

The main purpose of this seems to be to free up the already introduced Boxer CRV in the heavy company to act as a self-contained roving fire support company engaging motorized and mechanized forces in "overstretched areas" (part of their portfolio with Step 1 already) instead of also having to support the infantry companies.

From accompanying text it is likely that iteratively there would be a Step 3 and Step 4 required in the near future, which would a) replace the M113 mortar carriers and b) effectively redesign the heavy weapons platoon around the use of midsize UGVs for support of dismounted platoons in environments unsuitable to a Boxer CRV for fire support.


Also, yes, that's a ton of PzFst and WIMI 90 in that battalion. I.e. PzF3 anti-tank and RGW90 anti-structure munitions. The numbers in that case are for rockets, not launchers.