I have been informed that they had to fine tune the gun trunnions and inertia valves and it shouldn`t be a issue, Challenger 2s still slated for this upgrade correct?
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Uh. Those Danish Leo 2's haven't been deployed yet. They are currently standing by as rapid reaction reinforcements for contingents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A qualified guess would be to expect them deployed to Afghanistan in August as the contingent adds c. 200 troops to its numbers.
The tank unit would consist of 4 leo2A5DK plus an APC and a recovery vehicle. 34 soldiers are assigned to the unit.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
No problems with this programme!
Does anyone know what they are doing with the old Leopards?
NZ? Private sales? Storing them?
NZ? Private sales? Storing them?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #388
They've got an old Centurion on the range at Singelton where grunts learn to shoot the 84mm Carl Gustav (and probably Javelin now) so I don't see why a couple of Leopards couldn't be used at Mt Bundy for some training activities.
Hook a few up as a "giant" remote control vehicle for the first shot or 2 would be a valuable training aid to I'd imagine...
That old Centurion is looking like rusted Swiss cheese now from all the HEAT hits. It could probably do with replacement by a Leopard as well.
I doubt it's got too many Javelin holes in it though - you don't have to fire the Javelin live to qualify on it, you can just use the simulator (2/14's is 9RQR's old Pipes and Drums hut at Enoggera!), so I doubt many Javelins head down-range each year.
I for one am very sad to see the Leopards go. They may be largely obsolete but they're a beautiful tank. Wonder if the Abrams will get the same paint job?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #390
True, I think Javelin's are only live fired during "fire power" demo's or whenever they can scab some rounds off the Americans...That old Centurion is looking like rusted Swiss cheese now from all the HEAT hits. It could probably do with replacement by a Leopard as well.
I doubt it's got too many Javelin holes in it though - you don't have to fire the Javelin live to qualify on it, you can just use the simulator (2/14's is 9RQR's old Pipes and Drums hut at Enoggera!), so I doubt many Javelins head down-range each year.
I for one am very sad to see the Leopards go. They may be largely obsolete but they're a beautiful tank. Wonder if the Abrams will get the same paint job?
I saw that old Centurion years ago. It had a heap of "holes" in it back then. I doubt it's even recognisable AS a Centurion these days...
It certainly IS a shame they are getting rid of the Leopards. There is a whole list of armoured engineering vehicles that we are SUPPOSED to have in our Orbat but of course never have. They are even tendering to buy a new armoured "route clearing" vehicle. Something the Leopard could do well enough I'd suggest, with minimal modifications.
But anyway, they seem dead keen on getting rid of them, so that's what WILL happen...
That's something I find really interesting but never came to my mind before.
Were do you get your hard targets from?
I think that this old centurion is not the only hard target on your ranges but unlike european countries or the US you don't have luxury of huge amounts of hard targets ranging from WWII to cold war equipment.
Do you buy them? Or dou you get them for free, maybe from the US or UK.
Were do you get your hard targets from?
I think that this old centurion is not the only hard target on your ranges but unlike european countries or the US you don't have luxury of huge amounts of hard targets ranging from WWII to cold war equipment.
Do you buy them? Or dou you get them for free, maybe from the US or UK.
saw a doco this morning while pulling a sickie on megafactories and it featured the rebuild facility for the M1 in the US and most of the tanks going through at the time of filming were ours as they had kangaroos on the turrets. The opposition should watch it they really are like new vehicles very comprehensive rebuild.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #393
Actually we keep quite a bit of our former inventory in warstock. Quite a number of Centurions and M113's have been placed in same. I'd be surprised if quite a few Leopards won't be there too.
Out of 91 gun tanks actually purchased, only 60 odd were ever issued to 1 Armd Regt and the School of Armour. Where are the rest???
Sold at your local black market?
Ok centurion sounds like a reasonable hard target for bigger calibres while M113s are more for smaller calibres or LAW like weapons.
Has anybody an idea of how often hard targets are used instead of classical paper/wooden/whatever targets in Australia?
And another question.
Are training rounds used by Abrams or live ammunition. Most of our ranges for example are restricted to training rounds while on swiss ranges live rounds are normal due to the surrounding mountains.
With so many free land I would think that it is easy to find unrestricted ranges in Australia.
Ok centurion sounds like a reasonable hard target for bigger calibres while M113s are more for smaller calibres or LAW like weapons.
Has anybody an idea of how often hard targets are used instead of classical paper/wooden/whatever targets in Australia?
And another question.
Are training rounds used by Abrams or live ammunition. Most of our ranges for example are restricted to training rounds while on swiss ranges live rounds are normal due to the surrounding mountains.
With so many free land I would think that it is easy to find unrestricted ranges in Australia.
Black ops. Definately to a shadow and covert division of the Army. They will all be painted black and supported by black trucks and black humvees, its just the way it goes.
Or like waylander said, blackmarket. Ever wonder how you can awlays see governments spending on new equipment, over and over? simple, sell the excess to someone else and buy different toy for photo op.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Nah, I think they were just mislabeled and misshelved. Try checking behind the Vegemite...Black ops. Definately to a shadow and covert division of the Army. They will all be painted black and supported by black trucks and black humvees, its just the way it goes.
Or like waylander said, blackmarket. Ever wonder how you can awlays see governments spending on new equipment, over and over? simple, sell the excess to someone else and buy different toy for photo op.
Seriously though, it sounds like the ADF might be engaging in something like stocking a 50% surplus of equipment for deployable units. If that is the case, (or had been the case) that would allow a degree of flexibility in the event there is an outbreak of war. Given the cost and high tech of current mil equipment, as well as the increase in destructive capability of modern weaponry, units can be decimated before replacements can be acquired. If the vehicles, etc are already in warstock inventory, then additional or replacement units can be raised that much sooner.
It then becomes a question of balance, like whether it is better to spend AU$X for a 2 sqd unit with possible replacements in warstock, or just have a 3sqd unit available for deployment...
-Cheers
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #397
How many M113's have we sold overseas?Black ops. Definately to a shadow and covert division of the Army. They will all be painted black and supported by black trucks and black humvees, its just the way it goes.
Or like waylander said, blackmarket. Ever wonder how you can awlays see governments spending on new equipment, over and over? simple, sell the excess to someone else and buy different toy for photo op.
How many Centurions did we sell overseas?
How many M2A2 and "Pack" 105mm Howitzers have we sold overseas?
Both have been replaced within various units with different "toys" over the years.
It is not a conspiracy theory. Australia DOES maintain a warstock of military equipment.
If you require further proof, consider the fact that over 75,000 F-88 Steyr rifles have been produced at Lithgow. How many personnel in ADF again?
Where are the rest I wonder?
I believe they are in blokes jack trunks or at the bottom of rivers!
All jokes aside. There is heaps of gear in warstocks! You here of the ADF scrapping some of it from time to time!
The comparison between the Leopard 2A6 and M1A1 AIM is not exactly accurate or fair. Firstly the Australian Army clearly identified in the Land 907 Operational Concept Document that they were looking for a “Tier II” tank capability. A “Tier I” capability was defined as a tank with a hunter-killer sighting system like the M1A2 SEP and Leopard 2A6. The actual shortlist taken to Government for the ‘second pass’ decision was the M1A1 AIM up against the RUAG Panzer 87 WE (Swiss Leopard 2 upgrade). The M1A1 AIM won out despite having higher operating costs (a loss of 20% in track km and main gun firings on the fixed operating budget compared to the Panzer 87 WE) because of superior protection and Network Centric Warfighting (NCW) capability.
Secondly its wrong in an Australia or outside of Western Europe context to give much credence to the Leopard 2’s deep fording capability (something that the Leopard 1 has as well so Australian Army is very familiar with it). The lack of rock bottom river beds and high level surveying data of river beds outside of the old NATO versus Warsaw pact Central Front scenario make using this capability outside of West Germany extremely difficult. Bridge weight limits as a problem for MLC60/70 MBT mobility are overstated. Most highway bridges in Australia are designed for Gross Vehicle Weights (GVW) as high as 120 tonnes so can take an MBT and a Heavy Tank Transporter (HTT). Other bridges tend to be only MLC20/30 GVW and easily avoidable with Engineer bridging capability (if extant).
The M1A1 AIM actually has far superior traditional protection to any version of the Leopard 2 (including upgrades). Thanks to its full compartmentalising of ammunition away from the crew. Also the benefits of the TUSK upgrade can be provided to the M1A1 AIM improving side, rear and bottom protection. Top armour could be added just like with the Leopard 2A6 for bomblet protection. Since bomblet protection will be added to the Army’s new self-propelled 155mm artillery hopefully it will go on the M1A1. The M1A1 AIM also has an under armour commander’s machinegun, something the Leopard 2 doesn’t (the Swiss Panzer 87 WE does) which provides considerable additional protection to the guy who has to provide top cover against insurgents.
While the M1A1’s gas turbine cops a lot of flak and burns more fuel to be significantly costlier it does have some advantages. It is much quieter making the tank stealthier (noise is a significant factor in detecting tanks), starts up quicker and easier and requires less maintenance. That being said the new MTU Europaks are formidable engines. But for 1970 technology the AGT-1500 ain’t that bad.
When one considers that the cost difference in operating a full regiment of M1A1 AIMS (and all supporting training) compared to Panzer 87 WEs is only AUD 6 million a year (0.03% of our annual defence budget) with its superior protection and NCW it’s a much better option.
PS Australia does not warstock that much stuff anymore. Most of it get’s scrapped. The L5 105mm pack howitzers were scrapped. Also any vehicle placed as a target on a range has to be environmentally cleared which means removing all fluids any harmful materials, tested so it won’t start fires if hit, etc, etc. Except for places like JCTC its really not worth the trouble. Better just to shoot at purpose designed targets.
There was some talk that the Leopard AS1s would be supplied to Afghanistan but Defence has formally denied this. They will probably end up as scrap.
Armoured engineering vehicles: Armoured Mine Clearers (AMC), Armoured Vehicle Specialist Engineers (AVSE) and Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridges (AVLB) will emerge in the next DCP 08-18 in Land 907 Phase 2 and Land 144 Phase 2 and will be M1 hull based and acquired from the USG by FMS.
Secondly its wrong in an Australia or outside of Western Europe context to give much credence to the Leopard 2’s deep fording capability (something that the Leopard 1 has as well so Australian Army is very familiar with it). The lack of rock bottom river beds and high level surveying data of river beds outside of the old NATO versus Warsaw pact Central Front scenario make using this capability outside of West Germany extremely difficult. Bridge weight limits as a problem for MLC60/70 MBT mobility are overstated. Most highway bridges in Australia are designed for Gross Vehicle Weights (GVW) as high as 120 tonnes so can take an MBT and a Heavy Tank Transporter (HTT). Other bridges tend to be only MLC20/30 GVW and easily avoidable with Engineer bridging capability (if extant).
The M1A1 AIM actually has far superior traditional protection to any version of the Leopard 2 (including upgrades). Thanks to its full compartmentalising of ammunition away from the crew. Also the benefits of the TUSK upgrade can be provided to the M1A1 AIM improving side, rear and bottom protection. Top armour could be added just like with the Leopard 2A6 for bomblet protection. Since bomblet protection will be added to the Army’s new self-propelled 155mm artillery hopefully it will go on the M1A1. The M1A1 AIM also has an under armour commander’s machinegun, something the Leopard 2 doesn’t (the Swiss Panzer 87 WE does) which provides considerable additional protection to the guy who has to provide top cover against insurgents.
While the M1A1’s gas turbine cops a lot of flak and burns more fuel to be significantly costlier it does have some advantages. It is much quieter making the tank stealthier (noise is a significant factor in detecting tanks), starts up quicker and easier and requires less maintenance. That being said the new MTU Europaks are formidable engines. But for 1970 technology the AGT-1500 ain’t that bad.
When one considers that the cost difference in operating a full regiment of M1A1 AIMS (and all supporting training) compared to Panzer 87 WEs is only AUD 6 million a year (0.03% of our annual defence budget) with its superior protection and NCW it’s a much better option.
PS Australia does not warstock that much stuff anymore. Most of it get’s scrapped. The L5 105mm pack howitzers were scrapped. Also any vehicle placed as a target on a range has to be environmentally cleared which means removing all fluids any harmful materials, tested so it won’t start fires if hit, etc, etc. Except for places like JCTC its really not worth the trouble. Better just to shoot at purpose designed targets.
There was some talk that the Leopard AS1s would be supplied to Afghanistan but Defence has formally denied this. They will probably end up as scrap.
Armoured engineering vehicles: Armoured Mine Clearers (AMC), Armoured Vehicle Specialist Engineers (AVSE) and Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridges (AVLB) will emerge in the next DCP 08-18 in Land 907 Phase 2 and Land 144 Phase 2 and will be M1 hull based and acquired from the USG by FMS.
We shoot a lot of live ammunition. With only 51 tanks in operational service at any one time (1 Armd Regt and School of Armour) the Leopard AS1s fired 7,400 105mm rounds per annum. M1A1s will fire less (unless called upon to deply in which case pre-deployment training will use a lot more ammo) but will have more extensive use of 12.7mm sub cal firings.
There are pictures you can download of both tanks on the Mt Bundy (near Darwin) range together. Its very flat (unlike Switzerland) and very big...