• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Extreme heat in army tanks endangers troops; forces use tank blanket to keep troops from baking

In the article that you translated, it referred to the twenty tanks that we may be leasing (may...who knows) as an "A6M" variant.  At least one other article posted in this thread also referred to them by that designation.

However, perhaps this "A6M" is the production version of the PSO which was a demonstrator?  I personally would not know nearly as much as several of the members on this site.
Perhaps it may be the proper title for the A6EX?

I'm just saying that in the articles, they DID say specifically what tanks are in question.

Edit:  according to...wikipedia...it seems like the A6M gets the "M" just because of the mine protection it employs.  So it would make sense that if we are looking at getting Leo2s with more mine protection, that we go straight for the "M" model.
 
Hi
Thanks for that :D
I believe that the A6M may indeed be the production model of the A6, "M" for "Minen" or "Mines".

If one thing I've found when translating, is that I focus so much on translating, that I miss those details :D

 
Hi.

My first post here. I hope my english is understandable.

If they really lease 20 A6M from the BW then they will be the standard Version. There are only one or two Leo PSO demonstrators for show´s and possible buyer´s( The same for the A6 EX).  And BTW the Leopard PSO demonstrator has "only" the 44cal cannon. It is much more practical for MOUT operations for which the PSO is designed for.

Regarding the A6M equipment. I know from german tanker´s that at least some of the normal A6 are not equipped with AC´s and APU´s.

And regarding the 80 A4´s. You can still upgrade them later to every variant you want and they are now much cheaper then new tank´s.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
No worries, "Captain Scarlet".  (sweet name by the way  ;D)

ironduke, it was perfectly understandable to me.  Good points.  At least to me.
Does anyone know the approximate cost for an A4?  and perhaps (slim chance) the fee for upgrading them to a more modern A-whatever?
I'm just curious to know whether down the road IF (if, if, if...) we get these and later decide to ugrade them it will cost us less, or more than than it would have, had we purchased the more modern ones in the first place.

Sorry for the highjack...carry on.
 
Thanks, BTW could it be upgraded to 55cal?
Click to expand...

Sure, but IMO it isn´t a good idea and would be against it´s design goal. The 55cal is around 130cm longer then the 44cal and that is troublesome in urban area´s.

@Koenigsegg The cost for an used A4 is normally around 350.000-400.000 euro. An new A6 can cost up to 6.000.000 euro. (I am not at home ATM and so I haven´t all my information at hand.)

Regards,
ironduke57
 
Oh my...

So it seems to me (a youngster civilian) like we could be getting a, uh... pretty good deal here.
(compared to what we currently have.  which have served us well, and treated us right.  But are about 75 years old, when they should have retired and moved to florida at 65.)
 
The price is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.  Agreed that while the L55 is awesome in terms of firepower, the L44 is nothing to sneeze at either!
In terms of protection, the A5 or A6 are both far superior to the venerable Leo 1.

In terms of mobility, the A5 or any variant of the Leo 2 is outstanding.  Quite the tank. 

Having said all this, this is just a rumour, and as stated by the PAFFO in the article quoted earlier, DND is always looking and checking on "stuff".  It amounts to nothing that they look for "stuff".  It only counts when government says "launch" on whatever they decide for us to have.
 
As we did with the Nyala could we not just get these on an IOR? If memory serves me correctly we just had them shipped directly into theatre on an IOR.  ???
 
Small hijack re: Grape huts and thermobarbaric

The RPO-A Shmel is issued to airborne and marine assault troops to destroy strongpoints (for example bunkers) or lightly armoured vehicles. In Afghanistan the weapon was used to clear Mujahideen from caves. It is also claimed that the RPO-A could have peaceful applications as it can be used to destroy ice jams in rivers, break up potential snow avalanches or extinguish fires by the blast effect.Someone want to pass this on to good ole Jack
http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/jidr/jidr010104_3_n.shtml

See also:
A 'Crushing' Victory: Fuel-Air Explosives and Grozny 2000: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/fuelair/fuelair.htm

and the offical Canadian point of view

From the Directorate of Army Doctrine:The Threat from Blast Weapons: http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_04/iss_3/CAJ_vol4.3_05_e.pdf




 
2nd hand Leo2A4s offered for something like 300,000$/ea was being thrown around last summer.  A much better deal when compared to the cost of a new Leo2 A6

I believe the bolt on armour plates we added to our Leo1C2s are part and parcel of the mine protection & enhanced armour now available to the A6s
 
    Check out this YouTube vid on the Leopard 2 ...  :eek:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMa9MhSSqzk&mode=related&search=

 
 
There is a flaw in that article. It stats that the A5/A6 have a new turret. That´s wrong. It is the old turret with some modification´s and add-on armor on the front and the side´s.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
Just a Navy guy here, but I couldn't help notice the large difference between the price of the Leopard 2 4s and the Leopard 2 6s. Would it be correct to assume that that the version 6 tanks are 20 times better than the version 4 tanks? Do the technological differences merit such a price increase?

Perhaps we are getting the version 6 tanks because the germans want to make new tanks? Anyways, those 20 leopard 2 6s represent roughly 400 leopard 2 4s! I guess the army plans on using the leopard 2 4s in wars that don't use tank mines? Give me a break.

Anyways, we should buy every used tank on the market(The Danes, Swiss and Norweigians). The Germans don't need to practice tank making!

 
Bubbles said:
CASR article: http://www.sfu.ca/casr/bg-leopard2-afghan.htm
Click to expand...

Has anyone else noticed that CASR has gotten increasingly obnoxious with its commentary as of late? 

At one point they correctly called the Liberals to the carpet for not buying anything and for generating the rust-out that's so prevelant.

However, since Harper has been in power, they have repeatedly found ways to complain about everything single procurement decision he's made or is even exploring.

The most arrogant was the editorial they did on the possible purchase of the C-17 in which they used the term "wrong-headed" and bandied about the term "neo-con". 

Up until this point I have been fans of both Diane and Stephen for their dedication and coverage of all things military, but their partisan-sniping is unworthy of any respect.


Matthew. 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Poor equipment for troops is a Canadian tradition
2
Replies
22
Views
30K
Journeyman
Journeyman
George Wallace
Threats to Security from surrounding failing States
Replies
4
Views
10K
Edward Campbell
Edward Campbell
Colin Parkinson
German Troops Bemoan 'Critical' Deficits in Training and Equipment
Replies
1
Views
3K
GAP
G
Yrys
Test-driving an improved, if slightly used, Leopard tank (CBC)
Replies
2
Views
4K
Yrys
Yrys
shorinsakka
Test driving new Leos - CBC News
Replies
4
Views
4K
geo
geo
Back
Top