European Armour

[merocaine]

Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (CR2 MET): 327/385
Saxon: 579/622
Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle (all variants): 735/794
Spartan: 452/478
Scimitar: 303/328
Striker: 47/48
Samson: 48/50
Samaritan: 46/50
Sultan: 196/205

Thats still pretty impressive for an Island. I heard there's cuts in the pipe line does anyone know what they are?

 

[.pt]

Enough of that employment and economical stuuf, it makes me depressed
Back to topic, and to answer Merocaine, wich makes a good point, i would say that of course we cannot only look at numbers, but we have to start somewhere, yes?
If we dont know whats available how can we then proceed to distinguish what has real military worth. For example, take Greece with those huge numbers of tanks, how many of them are really serviceable, and of those how many can we consider to be 1st line, updated and capable tanks? And also what to say about the units that operate them? Do they train properly, is their doctrine any good, etc etc.
As for those European forces, what is your opinion, will they really work? and even if the concept proves to be good, will they ever be used in a real life situation? Its just that in EU, theres a lot of diferences in foreign policy in several countries, i wonder if politically these things will take off.
As for the airlift question and other means of transport and force projection, that really is a relevant question, so what can anyone say about that A400 military transport thing? Will that be some kind of Solution?
And i´m still waiting for the data on some countries, so that we can have a complete picture.
thanks to everyone.
.pt

 

[Whiskyjack]

United Kingdom.

At 21 April 2006, this were the numbers of disponibility of MBTs & IFVs said by Adam Ingram [Minister of State (Armed Forces)] in the House of Commons:

Name: Operationally deployable/Total Fleet size

Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank (CR2 MET): 327/385
Saxon: 579/622
Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle (all variants): 735/794
Spartan: 452/478
Scimitar: 303/328
Striker: 47/48
Samson: 48/50
Samaritan: 46/50
Sultan: 196/205

Edit: Added link

I know that the UK is going to 5 armoured regiments of 44 tanks each, with 5 recon regiments and I believe that there are 8? warrior battalions.

 

[Waylander]

A400M is no strategic airlift solution.
Not enough range and the biggest which fits into it is a Puma IFV without extra armor.

 

[Grand Danois]

A400M is no strategic airlift solution.
Not enough range and the biggest which fits into it is a Puma IFV without extra armor.

On the other hand, not even the US deploys MBT's by air. Not in significant numbers...

 

[Whiskyjack]

A400M is no strategic airlift solution.
Not enough range and the biggest which fits into it is a Puma IFV without extra armor.

Realistically, when moving the heavy stuff the EU needs Ro-Ro Ships. I know the UK has 6, in a commercial lease deal I think. How about the rest of Europe? Then or course there is rail as well.

I'm not sure if this is off topic, as moving armour would seem to be important?

 

[Waylander]

For sure deploying MBTs by plane is not very economical.
The Puma was just an example to show how much material fits into an A400M.
The range is another thing which makes the A400m more a tactical transporter than a strategic one.
The railway system in europe is one of the best in the world and I think germany alone would have enough transportation capabilities by train to transport nearly all ground forces left in europe.

 

[Grand Danois]

Realistically, when moving the heavy stuff the EU needs Ro-Ro Ships. I know the UK has 6, in a commercial lease deal I think. How about the rest of Europe? Then or course there is rail as well.

I'm not sure if this is off topic, as moving armour would seem to be important?

No, no! Not off topic - we're just treading water until somone coughs up the numbers for Italy

Well, Denmark has two RORO's on permanent lease and also has the two Absalons plus a stake in the SALIS An-124's.

In the EU/NATO context there are logistics coordination centres.

CO-ORDINATION CELLS/CENTRES
5. In order to enhance co-ordination, as a starting point, an overview is needed of all existing and planned co-ordination cells/centres and possible initiatives, including reference to their responsibilities and tasks. These are both multinational and national organisations:

Multinational
• The European Airlift Centre (EAC) at Air Base Eindhoven has declared its services to the EU. Its primary function is to maximise the utilisation of airlift capability.

• The Sealift Co-ordination Centre, co-located with EAC, has declared its services to the EU. Its primary function is to maximise the utilisation of sealift capability.

• A Strategic Air Lift Co-ordination Cell (SALCC) is planned to operate by mid 2005. It will be co-located and embedded with the EAC. The SALCC will be the tasking authority for the use of the Strategic Airlift Interim Solution (SALIS) contract.

National
• The Greek Sealift Co-ordination Centre in Athens has declared its services and available assets to the EU. Its function is to “co-ordinate, charter and monitor” sealift capability.

It should be noted that all these organisations have also been made available to NATO.

In the field of land transport there are no multinational centres. Further study is needed to assess whether a strategic multinational land transport co-ordination centre is required.

http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/MILITARY CAPABILITY COMMITMENT CONFERENCE 22.11.04.pdf

Except for SALIS I don't know the status of these centres, though.

 

[Grand Danois]

For sure deploying MBTs by plane is not very economical.
The Puma was just an example to show how much material fits into an A400M.
The range is another thing which makes the A400m more a tactical transporter than a strategic one.
The railway system in europe is one of the best in the world and I think germany alone would have enough transportation capabilities by train to transport nearly all ground forces left in europe.

Range is a much better argument. But I do think that the A400M is a HUGE improvement over the current, almost nonexisting, capability.

 

[KWSN-Men]

For example, take Greece with those huge numbers of tanks, how many of them are really serviceable, and of those how many can we consider to be 1st line, updated and capable tanks? And also what to say about the units that operate them? Do they train properly, is their doctrine any good, etc etc.

Can't talk about other countries, but I can talk about Greece. The M-48A5 MOLF and the Leo 1A5 are quite capable. The M-48's have had work done on them and the optics are up to level to the Leo 1A5, so I would say both maybe not 1st line tanks, both surely capable. The M-60's, have good armor but are slow and not so effective. So they are meant to be the first to suffer the attack and hold until the better ones come swarming from the second lines. Avalability on the Leo 1's is very good, on the M-48's quite good and the M-60's average I would say.

The whole training and defense is based on the fact that on the Greek-Turkish borders, the Greek side is mountainous, deep and narrow and the Turkish side is the exact opposite. In fact, even if you gave us tanks for free, we would not have where to put them on that front, the firepower gathered is enormous.

 

[Gladius]

I know that the UK is going to 5 armoured regiments of 44 tanks each,

AFAIK the Royal Armoured Corps is organized with the Regiment/Squadron system right?
Well, in spain we have two system in use, the Cavalry Regiments (with M-60A3TTS & VRC-105 Centauro) are organized with the Regiment/Squadron scheme (3 Armored Cavalry Regiments, 3 Light Armored Cavalry Regiments & 1 Light Cavalry Regiment), but the Armored and Mechanized Regiments (Leopard 2) use the Regiment/Battalion/Company system (1 Armored Regiment [2 Tank Bons 44 Leo 2 each] & 4 Mech Regiments [only one of them with a Tank Bon 44 Leo 2] plus two independent Tank Battalion [50 M-60A3TTS] asigned to the Brigades: San Marcial V and Urgel IV).

Now, with the Army reform established by the Royal Decree 416/2006, the situation will change to the following one:

2 Armored Regiments
2 Mech Regiments
3 Independent Mech Bon
2 Armored Cavalry Regiments
3 Light Armored Cavalry Regiment
1 Independent Tank Battalion

Realistically, when moving the heavy stuff the EU needs Ro-Ro Ships. I know the UK has 6, in a commercial lease deal I think. How about the rest of Europe?

The Spanish Army owns two Ro-Ro ships permanently lended to the Navy. The Navy have also the two Newports (to be replaced by the SPS/BPE) and the two Galicias LPDs for this tasks. However like on many other countries the Ministry of "Fomento" have the competences to mobilize any civilian ship of any civilian maritime company in Spain, to complete the needs of maritime transport of the Spanish Armed Forces and the Ministry of Defence.

 

[swerve]

No, no! Not off topic - we're just treading water until somone coughs up the numbers for Italy

Well, latest figures I have, from 2003 -
186 Ariete
378 Centauro
There were still 619 Leopard 1 listed then, but I know that number has reduced greatly. The Italian army must now have the smallest heavy armour component in proportion to its size in Europe.

Dardo - only 27 in 2003, but were being delivered at a good pace. 200 now? How many on order?
PzH 2000 - how many?

As for armour-capable transport & amphibious ships, here's an incomplete list.
UK:
1 Ocean LPH (not capable of landing heavy vehicles, e.g. tanks. Can carry light armour) (ca 20000 tons)
2 Albion-class LPD (ca 18000)
4 Bay-class LSD entering service (16000)
6 Point-class ro-ro ships (13000)

France:
2 Mistral-class LHD (20000)
2 Foudre-class LSD (12000)

Italy:
1 Cavour light carrier with secondary amphibious capability building (27000). Light armour only?
3 San Giorgio small LPD (8000)

Spain:
1 LHD building (27000)
2 Galicia/Rotterdam LPD (14000)
2 ex-US Newport LST (8500) (to retire)

Netherlands:
1 Johan de Witt (enlarged Rotterdam) LPD (17000)
1 Rotterdam/Galicia LPD (14000)

 

[Gollevainen]

Realistically, when moving the heavy stuff the EU needs Ro-Ro Ships. I know the UK has 6, in a commercial lease deal I think. How about the rest of Europe? Then or course there is rail as well.

In the baltic (mostly between finland and sweden and finland and estonia) there are nearly 20 commersial carferrys which are in fact a RO-RO ships...

 

[swerve]

In the baltic (mostly between finland and sweden and finland and estonia) there are nearly 20 commersial carferrys which are in fact a RO-RO ships...

And a lot more elsewhere (North Sea, Aegean, English Channel, Irish Sea, etc). They might need some deck strengthening to carry Leopard 2, Challenger, PzH2000, etc, (anyone know for sure?), but could carry any other military vehicle with no problems.

 

[merocaine]

Originally Posted by Gollevainen
In the baltic (mostly between finland and sweden and finland and estonia) there are nearly 20 commersial carferrys which are in fact a RO-RO ships...

And a lot more elsewhere (North Sea, Aegean, English Channel, Irish Sea, etc). They might need some deck strengthening to carry Leopard 2, Challenger, PzH2000, etc, (anyone know for sure?), but could carry any other military vehicle with no problems.

This is starting to come together! lets invade someone!!:drunk1

 

[Waylander]

I think we should start wih some noce little Islands. Maybe Cuba....

 

[merocaine]

I think we should start wih some noce little Islands. Maybe Cuba....

beautiful at this time of year I hear

 

[swerve]

I think we should start wih some noce little Islands. Maybe Cuba....

Cape Verde first, for practice. And they'll probably be very happy to be conquered, because they'll immediately qualify for regional aid, starting with a new airport & lots of hotels. Well, the Canaries are getting crowded - we need more winter beaches. :fly

 

[Grand Danois]

Naw, Cap verde has already been done.

Exercise Steadfast Jaguar 06: the NRF concept test

I vote for cuba! They have more beaches and rum!

 

[Waylander]

Not to mention the beautifull girls.
And we are also able to show the US how to do this right.