THE Australian Armys ageing Leopard tanks will be replaced by refurbished second-hand U.S. M1A1 Abrams tanks under a $550 million deal.
Defence Minister Senator Robert Hill said the tanks would be upgraded to zero miles and zero hours condition, making them as good as new.
He said Australian Army technicians would inspect the pool of used U.S. M1A1 tanks and select the best 59 for refurbishment.
The first Abrams will arrive in 2007
That's a bit of a relief truth be told. At the moment, we're packing an awesome force of some 90 Leopard I's. Yes, that's right, Leopard I's. 1960's technology.
Even if it's to take 3 years, it's still a step in the right direction. If my application is successful, I'll feel a lot safer with a bunch of M1A1's rather than Leopards between me and the bad people
With the state of affairs concerning attack helis(apache), you could not pay me enough cash to get in a tank....if the opposing force had hellfires/mavricks and the proper launch platform. Tanks are like shooting fish in a barrel for the attack choppers. Now if you own the skies and need not worry about choppers raining on the tank parade, they seem safe enough
Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.
Originally posted by brembo With the state of affairs concerning attack helis(apache), you could not pay me enough cash to get in a tank....if the opposing force had hellfires/mavricks and the proper launch platform. Tanks are like shooting fish in a barrel for the attack choppers. Now if you own the skies and need not worry about choppers raining on the tank parade, they seem safe enough
The only people we're likely to fight are either technologically inferior or we'll be fighting in conjunction with the US, who tend to be fairly adept when it comes to air superiority. Indeed, I believe US naval air alone is superior to nearly every airforce on the planet
If we're ever against anyone with a sizeable and maintained force of attack helicopters without US support though, we're screwed pretty much anyhow.
WWII- no way I'd like to be in a tank. From what I understand, 1v1, 2v1, even 3 or 4v1, Shermans vs German tanks, the German tank had a fair chance of being the only tank rolling away from the battlefield. Shermans only helped because there were so many of them and they were so fast... like little tin cans filled with explosives. Argh. No way would I want to be in one.
Yeah the Germans had a vastly superior tank. The gun is what made em so damn effective, just ripped thru the Shermans. I believe the flip side to that was a Sherman had to pretty much go after the tracks to disable a Tiger, and that left the gun still working...yikes.
I talked to a WW2 vet, one of his jobs was to run towards the Tigers with a satchel of explosives, and attach it to the tank. It was plenty to blow the tank sky-high, problem was that the tank inhabitants were none too happy to have him come knocking. He got cut up pretty bad and sent home, think he still has some NAZI metal in his body. Tough old codger.
Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.
Them abrams are some bad mothers. I got to drive one for a short distance once. There were quite a few in my unit in the army. But I drove a Bradley all the time. Now that is a death trap.
My son ... ask for thyself another internet connection, for that which I leave is too slow for thee
Originally posted by schlurpee Them abrams are some bad mothers. I got to drive one for a short distance once. There were quite a few in my unit in the army. But I drove a Bradley all the time. Now that is a death trap.
Army was considering getting a couple of hundred light armoured vehicles, similar to what Canada is purchasing I believe. We've already got hundreds of the things, what we're lacking in is something that won't blow up if it gets hit by an RPG.
It's not likely, thankfully, we'll need something like the abrams anytime soon. However, if we do, it'd be much better to actually have a few rather than a whole bundle of cars with tin plating
That's a bit of a relief truth be told. At the moment, we're packing an awesome force of some 90 Leopard I's. Yes, that's right, Leopard I's. 1960's technology.
Even if it's to take 3 years, it's still a step in the right direction. If my application is successful, I'll feel a lot safer with a bunch of M1A1's rather than Leopards between me and the bad people
You are correct, the Leo I was a heck of a tank in its day, but the Abrahms is the king of the battlefield now. I spent 24 years in armor and waited about 17 years of that for the M1 to be fielded. It was worth the wait.
Originally posted by schlurpee Them abrams are some bad mothers. I got to drive one for a short distance once. There were quite a few in my unit in the army. But I drove a Bradley all the time. Now that is a death trap.
Schlurpee,
The Bradley isn't a M1A1 but it isn't a M113 either.
Originally posted by brembo With the state of affairs concerning attack helis(apache), you could not pay me enough cash to get in a tank....if the opposing force had hellfires/mavricks and the proper launch platform. Tanks are like shooting fish in a barrel for the attack choppers. Now if you own the skies and need not worry about choppers raining on the tank parade, they seem safe enough
The attack helicopter is wicked in its own right, but they have their vulnerabilities also. War isn't a pretty thing but I'd still go into combat in a tank. Helicopters cannot take or hold ground and don't have the long term shock effect of a tank.
The Bradley isn't a M1A1 but it isn't a M113 either.
Yep, decent firepower but I always thought it's profile was way too big/tall. It was designed to take out BMP's, but up against a decent tank I thought it was just a big target. Still susceptible to RPG's and mines. Oh well, it kept me safe enough I guess......
My son ... ask for thyself another internet connection, for that which I leave is too slow for thee
Originally posted by SGTMAJRET The attack helicopter is wicked in its own right, but they have their vulnerabilities also. War isn't a pretty thing but I'd still go into combat in a tank. Helicopters cannot take or hold ground and don't have the long term shock effect of a tank.
Might outta qualify my statement. I would be sacred to death to face the USA while perched in a tank. Way too many tank killers in the US arsenal.
Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.
Originally posted by vinnie If we're ever against anyone with a sizeable and maintained force of attack helicopters without US support though, we're screwed pretty much anyhow.
Until the new replacements for the Blackhawks arrive, Vinnie. French they are and awesome. Demonstrations were held here at RAAF Garbutt last year. One crashed but that didn't stop the deal apparently.
