Put Leopards in Afghanistan stuff HERE

[George Wallace]

At the current time, and with the questions as to 'stability' in that Region, I think it is a bad idea.  There is quite a leap between arming them with the same small arms as we use and arming them with the same 'heavy' AFVs that we are using. 

 

[GAP]

What everyone who writes about stuff like this forgets is the vast infrastructure it takes to field and maintain the equipment....The initial gift is nothing to what the maintenance costs would be in people and $$

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Not trying to hijack but I noticed a throw away line in that article that stated "the Afghans are natural warriors." It gets picked up in a lot of threads that the media use....sort of the way they did in Iraq before 1990 of the Republican Guard being elite troops.....is it in fact true that the Afghans are natural warriors?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I am no expert, but I can be sure that giving them the leo C2's is a bad idea. Far better to give them rebuilt T-55's with a decent FCS. They have people that have grown up on Soviet equipment and now how to fix it. The equipment will be simpler and easier to maintain.

 

[geo]

+1 Colin,

Giving the ANA complex electronic/mechanical equipment - that is obsolete AND where parts are in short supply.....just doesn't make sense.

T55s, T62s make more sense - in the long run.

 

[TCBF]

+1 Colin,

Giving the ANA complex electronic/mechanical equipment - that is obsolete AND where parts are in short supply.....just doesn't make sense.

T55s, T62s make more sense - in the long run.

+2

- The world will run out of Leopard 1 spares long before it runs out of T55 or T62 spares.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The world will run out of Leopard 1 spares long before it runs out of T55 or T62 spares.

In fact, the CF is already looking, via MERX.

 

[McG]

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_10/iss_4/CAJ_vol10.4_03_e.pdf

 

[tomahawk6]

The echelon concept is rather interesting and according to the article is working well. One glaring need according to the author is the ability to add a plow or other implements to the Leopard 2. Good read.

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_10/iss_4/CAJ_vol10.4_03_e.pdf

 

[geo]

T6 ... think it was brought up in one of the Leopard threads that the plows and rollers we were using for the Leo 1 didn't fit the Leo2s - needed someone to bodge something together.... with or without the help of the OEM.

Have been reading that the German manufacturers are somewhat astonished at the mileage we have been placing on those Leo2s...
It will be interesting to see how well they will hold up in such an operational environment.  I figure that this is where the German Mfg & the German army will get their money's worth out of lending us some of their 1st line vehicles.

 

[TCBF]

T6 ... think it was brought up in one of the Leopard threads that the plows and rollers we were using for the Leo 1 didn't fit the Leo2s - needed someone to bodge something together.... with or without the help of the OEM.

Have been reading that the German manufacturers are somewhat astonished at the mileage we have been placing on those Leo2s...
...

- Our C1 plows/rollers were Isreali built - reverse engineered from Russian designs that they found abandoned in the desert.  I am sure IAI could do it again - for a price.

- These are the same Germans who were astonished at the mileage we put on the Leopard C1s in the 70s/80s/90s.  No news there.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Slight tangent.

I think all manufactures of our equipment are astonished at the milage we rack up on them (i.e. the engine hrs on our hercs)

Back to our regularly scheduled topic.

 

[McG]

- Our C1 plows/rollers were Isreali built - reverse engineered from Russian designs that they found abandoned in the desert.  I am sure IAI could do it again - for a price.

It is not about making the ploughs/rollers fit the Leopard 2.  The tank is the problem in that it cannot support the additional weight. (Does make one wonder how Jane's got its stats for the TWMP as they are cited as being for when mounted on Leopard 2).

 

[ironduke57]

It is not about making the ploughs/rollers fit the Leopard 2.  The tank is the problem in that it cannot support the additional weight. ...

Huh? That would be new to me and I  can´t see why this should be the case. Can you say where you got this information from?

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[McG]

From the project staff.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

My understanding is that the Leo2A6M is already to heavy with the mine protection up front. I suppose the equipment would work on a regular Leo2A6 if fitted with attachment points?

I wonder if this issue will speed up the purchase/lease of more engineering vehicles?

 

[X-mo-1979]

From the project staff.

Interesting.
We were told the hold up is some high esh EME guy's worried about what it would do to the vehicle.

Flag the darn torsion bars.

 

[McG]

I wonder if this issue will speed up the purchase/lease of more engineering vehicles?

Maybe, or maybe Treasury Board will tell us that we should have considered the tank breaching capability up front (when we gave the dollar value for what we are buying now).  I have been told that, in the past, TB has adopted a position of it is not their problem when the CF plans wrong.

We were told the hold up is some high esh EME guy's worried about what it would do to the vehicle.

Well, it is EME guys in Ottawa that run projects.  However, the question of “how do we make this work” is all the way back to the KMW engineers in Germany.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

This is starting to look like a mess.....

The Leopard 2 was never designed to have attachments such as plows and rollers, that role was always envisioned by the Germans to be the job of Engineer vehicles.

Having said that, once the different variants of the Leopard 2 started exceeding 62 tons, new torsion bars were developed, and are used on the Swedish 122 and the Leo 2 EX.

It's obviously not impossible to mount stuff on the front, the PSO variant is based on the 2A5 and has a plow, so it is certainly within the realms of possibility.

Using our new tanks for parts for the fleet in the'Ghan, different factions fighting over what will become of our tanks.....like I said, it looks like a mess.

 

[McG]

It's obviously not impossible to mount stuff on the front, the PSO variant is based on the 2A5 and has a plow, so it is certainly within the realms of possibility.

The blade on the PSO is not an earth moving blade and as such is very light.  It is intended to push aside physical barriers and I am told (1 degree of separation from a German operator of the prototype) that it is relatively limited even in that role.