Very modular vehicle, very good design.
Would even say it's only marginal "worse" (after international standards) than a Boxer.
But many people, especially regarding the Merkava series (and the sweet fighting turtle Mk. 4M) doesnt understand that Israelis are building FOR THEIR OWN and don't care about exports.
It has to fit first and foremost Israeli doctrine(s).
Do you know how many Namer in APC & IFV variants will be in the heavy brigades?
Imo, classic APC variants in such strong vehicles are a waste...
12.7x99mk, 40x53mm or even 30x113mm as RCWS on such strong vehicles aren't fitting them, ONLY in special command, logistic other support versions.
Otherwise go always on IFV variants.
I don't know about being worse than a Boxer buy I think we will never agree because we like our country's designs so much.
But what really matters, both in the Boxer IFV and the Eitan IFV, the turret and FCS, are both Israeli Elbit turrets and systems.
It's again down to the question of what's better, AMAP or Iron Fist + reactive armor.
There's going to be 60+ Namera (engineering version, currently only 20 in a single battalion) in the 3 combat engineering battalions, 100+ Namer in the Golani brigade, 100+ in the Tzanhanim brigade (They're both already fitted with them), around 100 are planned for Givati as well. Not sure about the IFV version.
Eitan will first enter the Nahal brigade, it will replace all the M113s so it will be produced more in mass.
Namer are a part of Israeli doctrine, to protect the soldiers at all costs and serve as true frontline troop carriers. Designing and creating the production lines for a new IFV like Eitan is a hard mission for a small country like Israel, especially as it incorporates many new technologies. creating a production line for an APC that's based on a pre-existing tank with many common parts is much easier.
Many Namers will probably be fitted with the new 30mm turret but I don't have the numbers or the date in which it's going to happen.
