From: Should Canada adopt the LAV III as its sole armoured vehicle?

[Eland]

Not to dampen our armour friends.  But has anyone taken the time to really look at the actual upgrade.

Remember the pictures of our first kick at the CAT trophy in Germany using borrowed Leopard 1A1‘s, Belgique I believe, they had the original round frying pan turret.  Our tankers won.

Weren't the 1A1's leased from Germany until the Leopard C1's (which were actually 1A3 models) came on stream?

Tadda, if you examine the turrets of the up grade to the C2, it is a 1A1 turret with a complete add on of angular bins and armour add on‘s.

You are correct - to a point. The C2 turrets are actually surplus 1A5 turrets we acquired from Germany. The 1A5 turrets are distinguished by better armour, the result of using different types of steel, even though the basic turret design is the same as the 1A1. The 1A5's also received successive upgrades to the fire control system over time. Before they were surplussed, they had received what would be a final upgrade to the EMES-18 fire control system, which was what was installed in the first iteration of the Leopard 2.

We may have made them look aesthetically pleasing and give our iron fist the impression of new kit, but in reality folks, we have stepped back two generations for a turret.

Yes and no. Yes, because relative to modern MBT's the Leopard C2 is, without its add-on armour, almost antediluvian. Its fire control system is circa 1984, which is at least two generations behind. The 1A5 was a front-line tank in the German Army for only a relatively short while - in effect a stop gap between the 1A4 (which has the square turret) and the then soon-to-arrive Leopard 2. Once the Leopard 2's arrived, the 1A5's were relegated to reserve status.

Without add-on armour, the Leopard C2 is not much more than a tracked, heavy fire support vehicle with marginal anti-armour capability. At best, this configuration could cope with the clapped-out and poorly-crewed T54's, T55's and 'monkey model' (i.e. export version) T72's you are most likely to find in failed states like Afghanistan and former Soviet republics or former client states.

No, because with the MEXAS add-on armour system and upgraded ammunition, the Leopard C2 is probably functionally equivalent to an early Leopard 2 and capable of taking on anything up to and including a T72 and possibly early versions of the T80 without reactive armour.

Next up, with our shrinking Bge capabilities and the advent of the LAV family, there was talk of Two light Bge (LAV) Gps, with one back Heavy (tracked).

I have my doubts.  Especially with the rumours of a Bge being disbanded.

Not to be pedantic here, however, the proper abbreviation for 'brigade' is 'bde'.

 

[George Wallace]

Very well done Eland.  You just answered a six year old post.

 

[geo]

True George.... But at least he took the trouble to read the whole thing instead of jumping in with his boots on.

 

[George Wallace]

Any reason that you are now digging up six year old posts?

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

It's Devil's Night, when old threads rise from the grave to stalk us.  I'm holed up in an isolated farmhouse beseiged by three threads about snipers and one about how to join the JTF. 

 

[Kirkhill]

With geo on this one guys.

We often dismiss people who bring up these subjects by telling to go read 50 pages of historical posts.  Eland has.  Not necessarily a bad way to ressurect a topic

 

[TCBF]

"...short while - in effect a stop gap between the 1A4 (which has the square turret) and the then soon-to-arrive Leopard 2. Once the Leopard 2's arrived, the 1A5's were relegated to reserve status."

- Not quite.  The 1A5 was the "Recce Tank" used in the "Heavy Patrols" of the German Divisional Armoured Recce Battailions (Panzer Aufklarungs Bataillon).

Once that darn Ronald Reagan won the Cold War, the BRD absorbed the DDR, including the DDR military.  The Germans did the kid in the candy store thing with their Mig 29 and T-72 Regiments, then got back to being logical again, rationalized their field force and cascaded surplussed Leopard 2s into their PzAufKlaBns (in 1992), thus rendering the 1A5s up for us.  We dithered, of course, just like with the subs.  It's a miracle we have any friends left.

 

[geo]

And tehre are a bunch of T72s in Canada today (in east german colours) that date back to the bad old days of the Iron Curtain.

 

[Eland]

Any reason that you are now digging up six year old posts?

No reason, other than failing to pay attention to the date of the post which started the thread!  :-[
My bad. Mea culpa maxima an alla that good stuff. Still, it was fun addressing the item anyway!  :blotto:

 

[Eland]

"...short while - in effect a stop gap between the 1A4 (which has the square turret) and the then soon-to-arrive Leopard 2. Once the Leopard 2's arrived, the 1A5's were relegated to reserve status."

- Not quite.  The 1A5 was the "Recce Tank" used in the "Heavy Patrols" of the German Divisional Armoured Recce Battailions (Panzer Aufklarungs Bataillon).

Once that darn Ronald Reagan won the Cold War, the BRD absorbed the DDR, including the DDR military.  The Germans did the kid in the candy store thing with their Mig 29 and T-72 Regiments, then got back to being logical again, rationalized their field force and cascaded surplussed Leopard 2s into their PzAufKlaBns (in 1992), thus rendering the 1A5s up for us.  We dithered, of course, just like with the subs.  It's a miracle we have any friends left.

Thanks for the education, TCBF. The information I had was incorrect. I should have done my homework before posting.

Speaking of the 'kid in the candy store' state the Germans were in post-1989, I understand the Swedish Army picked up some MT-LB and BMP-1 APC's from the former DDR at roughly the same time. Something I read a while back noted that the Swedes weren't happy with the safety or effectiveness of the main gun on the BMP. The ammunition was of particular concern. So they attempted to mount a new turret with a low-pressure gun on the existing BMP-1 hulls and discovered that the hull wasn't strong enough to accommodate it. In the end, the Swedes went with the existing turret system and developed improved ammo for the main gun.

Quite some time has passed since then and the Swedes have gone through several force restructuring initiatives, so I don't know if the BMP-1's and MT-LB's are still in their inventory. What little info I've been able to obtain off the web seems to indicate the Swedish are still using the BMP-1.

As for "it's a wonder we have any friends left", I agree. When the LUVW SMP contract was let, most of the prospective bidders bowed out in abject frustration because of delays, obfuscation, constantly changing rules and goalposts and general indecision on the part of the government and DND project managers. In the end, the only contractor left standing was Mercedes, and that's basically why we got the G-Wagen. As an aside, it's interesting to note that the plant which builds the G-Wagen is located in Graz, Austria and happens to be connected to Magna Corporation (owned by none other than Frank Stronach, who hails from Austria), which basically brokered the G-Wagen deal.

Political meddling to favour a contractor with connections to the Liberals? I dunno. You be the judge.

 

[sandyson]

3 yrs ago when tank militia units, were re-roled as recce; I strongly argued with brigade against the change for my SherH.  With historic examples, modern urban geography, and munition and aircraft costs; the infantry were shown to still need mobile direct gun fire support. The unit should not therefore (at that time)  be re-roled but rather continue the tank role with a view to maintaining minimum urban tank-infantry skill sets within the militia.  The brigade commander acknowledged the logic, but the demise of the tank had been decided years before.  I take considerable satisfaction that some of the very people who wrote-off tanks are now having to find parts for them. 
Nevertheless, before Canada procures a new tank, a new generation of "armour-set" must be developed.  This will be a combination of active electronic intercept combined with inactive but sophisticated plate.
With international turmoil increasing, the need for this R&D should be recognised by national leadership. Of course it won't.

 

[geo]

sandyson... all valid points & I feel for ya - butting heads with the brass hats...
given that we will deploy to other theatres with our other allied friends, R&D compatibility and delivery of products in a timely manner means that we'll be buying off the shelf products mfg in other countries.  If we are lucky, we'll be able to talk the developer into working on their next project with us as a partner..

 

[vonGarvin]

Its fire control system is circa 1984, which is at least two generations behind.

The fire control system on the Leopard C2 is definately NOT from circa 1984.  Without going into detail, it is one of the best FCS for tanks out there (and I am indeed comparing it favourably to the M1A2 SEP.)
OK, "some" detail.  It is on par with the FCS of the Leo 2A5.

 

[KevinB]

3 yrs ago when tank militia units, were re-roled as recce; I strongly argued with brigade against the change for my SherH. 

???  relevance?  there are no reserve tanks...

 

[geo]

( Cougars & grizzlies)

 

[vonGarvin]

( Cougars & grizzlies)

Cougars and grizzlies are to "tanks" as shotguns are  to howitzers: not even in the same league, but unknowing civilians will call them both "guns"

 

[geo]

VG...
as res is to reg.....

when troops are told they are "armoured" and are only given the AVGP, they do the best they can with the best they can get their hands on....

At present time, there aren't too many currently qualified tankers out there......

 

[MPIKE]

Sandyson- I feel your pain..

At present time, there aren't too many currently qualified tankers out there......

and there never will be with "legacy crew" comments like this....

How did we get here?........

Quote from: George Wallace on November 30, 2006, 20:56:52
Even the stripped down Coyote version is too much for the Reserves to handle.

If they had trouble maintaining their wheeled fleets of Iltis, LSVW, MLVW and Milcots, how are they going to maintain any variant of Bison, Coyote or LAV?

I've become more concerned with skills lag with the re-role decision as I have seen it come full circle.  Factor into the equation, that the powers that be threw in a 2 year ATV trial to keep my unit occupied and its hard not to be alarmist.  There are very few of us left who know what the fundamentals of gunnery are outside of a C-6.

Now bring into the picture, new talk about pulling RSS from Res units for operational requirements etc. (maybe this will be a nil issue as there was a train of thought that saw the job as a sentence or a sqn problem child penalty box). A stop-go with the Leo finds LWFA looking for Res augmentees forcasting for crew positions. The split between RES/REG tankers was blown further apart when you add no common vehicle platform.

Anyone in the know in the Corps that can shed some light into the notion for anyone taking ownership and coming up with some solutions??rather than continually stating the obvious? 

and GW before using the subtle "toon" jabs let's remember we had guidance/direction into this valley. 

Was the Cougar too much for the PRes?(by MCG)

&

Cougars and grizzlies are to "tanks" as shotguns are  to howitzers: not even in the same league

No but if you honestly believe this then you are adding to the current state of affairs.. :

 

[George Wallace]

and GW before using the subtle "toon" jabs let's remember we had guidance/direction into this valley. 

Thanks JA.  I guess you haven't been keeping up on these threads, so just keep your tongue in place before jumping to these conclusions...... you are right out of 'er.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Piker,

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest here, but having been on both sides of the fence, I happen to agree with GW on this on one. A reserve unit would be hard pessed to do more than the most basic D&M on Coyote and LAVIII, never mind tanks, if they had them in their possesion. You have no mech, FCS or rad techs. Look what we have to do now to get simple radios and machine guns fixed. You'd soon find 3/4 of your Sqn at workshops in Pet, relegated to last in line status. These things don't fix themselves......and we haven't got the resources to do it ourselves. Hell, even the Regs no longer have the resources.

For the rest. This is not a Reg vs Res thing. It's simply reality. You don't have to like it, but until we get the resources, including, men, money, equipment, time, the proper role, training, mandate, job legislation, yada yada, you're just smashing your heads against a cement wall, hoping someone will notice and stop you. Don't hold your breath.