Canada's tanks

[Colin Parkinson]

Poland is the current example as they are planning on building tanks. To be blunt I see us buying/building German or Korean tanks more than US tanks. Partly due to costs, but also political issues. The Koreans are super flexible on how, who and what when it comes to production and modifications. The Germans are slow to make such allowances and the US is likley to see a plant in Canada as redundant or even a economic threat with associated political games. Korea might sweeten the pot as well to get a sub buy from us as well. I also ask why it's asine to buy from Poland, when we are already buying tank parts from Germany?

 

[Prairie canuck]

If we went with the Korean equipment, we could team up with Poland or someone else and share production of certain items, based on who has the best existing or easy to acquire manufacturing capability. So perhaps hull castings done in Poland, but turrets cast here. Gun tubes Poland and FCS made here, etc, etc.

All of these manufactured issues are immediately solved with the purchase of M1s and Bradleys built by our neighbour, you know, the guys with the biggest arsenal on the planet. Buy used and have them refurbished to get around all those Canadian content issues with new builds. you may be able to start the training in the US almost immediately and have deliveries start in about 6 to 8 months. Will it cost more? Maybe, but the benefits of having your parts suppliers just across the southern border will provide efficiencies that will alleviate some of those lifetime costs. If you insist on spending more money and Canadianizing them then get GDLS Canada to retrofit the M1s with Diesels (from Detroit of Course). As for the inevitable "what about restocking all the parts for a new tank)? There's no rush to fill warehouses with M1 parts as there are warehouses full of parts just hours away.

 

[suffolkowner]

More than likely we'll buy 8 2A4's from someones storage yard and fix them up enough to replace the ones we gave to Ukraine and ride the rest for another 15 yrs by that time we may be willing to look at a competition to replace them with whatever is around then

AbramsX/M1A3
Leo3
K3

discounting any Challenger or Leclerc replacement and doubting that France and Germany stick it out together

 

[OldSolduer]

More than likely we'll buy 8 2A4's from someones storage yard and fix them up enough to replace the ones we gave to Ukraine and ride the rest for another 15 yrs by that time we may be willing to look at a competition to replace them with whatever is around then

AbramsX/M1A3
Leo3
K3

discounting any Challenger or Leclerc replacement and doubting that France and Germany stick it out together

As long as it’s electric….

 

[Kirkhill]

Poland is the current example as they are planning on building tanks. To be blunt I see us buying/building German or Korean tanks more than US tanks. Partly due to costs, but also political issues. The Koreans are super flexible on how, who and what when it comes to production and modifications. The Germans are slow to make such allowances and the US is likley to see a plant in Canada as redundant or even a economic threat with associated political games. Korea might sweeten the pot as well to get a sub buy from us as well. I also ask why it's asine to buy from Poland, when we are already buying tank parts from Germany?

To me it makes sense to buy the tanks in the theater we intend to employ them.

First of all they are still just mobile pill boxes. They are heavy, bulky, with limited range and need a ton of infrastructure to support them. We are not going to be using them in Canada - that seems to be a given. We are going to using them where they are needed and the environment supports them.

They are not compatible with an expeditionary force.

On the other hand they are capabilities which an expeditionary force could fall in on.

If we want to help the Europeans then we should be learning to use what the Europeans use. If we want to help the Asians then we should be learning to use what the Asians use. If we are learning to use what the Americans use then we should just accept that we will only deploy where the Americans deploy.

 

[KevinB]

To me it makes sense to buy the tanks in the theater we intend to employ them.

First of all they are still just mobile pill boxes. They are heavy, bulky, with limited range and need a ton of infrastructure to support them. We are not going to be using them in Canada - that seems to be a given. We are going to using them where they are needed and the environment supports them.

They are not compatible with an expeditionary force.

On the other hand they are capabilities which an expeditionary force could fall in on.

If we want to help the Europeans then we should be learning to use what the Europeans use. If we want to help the Asians then we should be learning to use what the Asians use. If we are learning to use what the Americans use then we should just accept that we will only deploy where the Americans deploy.

The fact that there are more Abrams facilities in Europe than Leo is one issue you’re missing.
There are also more Abrams in Europe than Leo’s.

Canada honestly should be looking at a deal with us down here - we have 2 Corps worth of Abrams in Europe in POMCUS depots.
Simply agree to supply a Bde to Europe and use US kit, and pay a share of upkeep.

Canada missed a major opportunity for that at the CFE treaty when the US Army had to draw down and had offered the CAF to take a Bde worth of kit then if Canada would keep 4 CMBG in Europe. But Canada was busy chasing the ‘Peace Dividend’.

 

[Kirkhill]

The fact that there are more Abrams facilities in Europe than Leo is one issue you’re missing.
There are also more Abrams in Europe than Leo’s.

Canada honestly should be looking at a deal with us down here - we have 2 Corps worth of Abrams in Europe in POMCUS depots.
Simply agree to supply a Bde to Europe and use US kit, and pay a share of upkeep.

Canada missed a major opportunity for that at the CFE treaty when the US Army had to draw down and had offered the CAF to take a Bde worth of kit then if Canada would keep 4 CMBG in Europe. But Canada was busy chasing the ‘Peace Dividend’.

Fair enough. Do we get to maintain a sovereign defence policy and engage where and when with whatever we have?

 

[DBNSG]

The fact that there are more Abrams facilities in Europe than Leo is one issue you’re missing.
There are also more Abrams in Europe than Leo’s.

Canada honestly should be looking at a deal with us down here - we have 2 Corps worth of Abrams in Europe in POMCUS depots.
Simply agree to supply a Bde to Europe and use US kit, and pay a share of upkeep.

Canada missed a major opportunity for that at the CFE treaty when the US Army had to draw down and had offered the CAF to take a Bde worth of kit then if Canada would keep 4 CMBG in Europe. But Canada was busy chasing the ‘Peace Dividend’.

A peace dividend that has been spent. Over and over and over!

 

[KevinB]

A peace dividend that has been spent. Over and over and over!

TBFH by the time that the CFE treaty landed Canada had already been enjoying ‘Peace Dividends’. The M113 and AVGP’s just dinosaurs, the Leo1’s were very long in the tooth with no replacement being looked at, and the M109’s were not current versions.

Getting ~100 M1A1 Abrams, 200 Bradley’s, and a bunch of other current US Army kit would IMHO been worth the cost of keeping a Bde in Germany.
It would have also made for a very robust BtlGrp to send to FYR, I suspect the Medak pocket would have been a lot less interesting for 2VP with 25mm chain guns and TOW’s integrated into the Bradley than just a few .50’s

 

[OldSolduer]

I suspect the Medak pocket would have been a lot less interesting for 2VP with 25mm chain guns and TOW’s integrated into the Bradley than just a few .50’s

there probably would have been a very short battle then - if any at all.

 

[daftandbarmy]

It would have also made for a very robust BtlGrp to send to FYR, I suspect the Medak pocket would have been a lot less interesting for 2VP with 25mm (peacekeeping) chain guns and (peacekeeping) TOW’s integrated into the (peacekeeping) Bradley than just a few (peacekeeping) .50’s

There, 'Peaced' that up FY

 

[Colin Parkinson]

TBFH by the time that the CFE treaty landed Canada had already been enjoying ‘Peace Dividends’. The M113 and AVGP’s just dinosaurs, the Leo1’s were very long in the tooth with no replacement being looked at, and the M109’s were not current versions.

Getting ~100 M1A1 Abrams, 200 Bradley’s, and a bunch of other current US Army kit would IMHO been worth the cost of keeping a Bde in Germany.
It would have also made for a very robust BtlGrp to send to FYR, I suspect the Medak pocket would have been a lot less interesting for 2VP with 25mm chain guns and TOW’s integrated into the Bradley than just a few .50’s

Getting US equipment is a perfectly logical move in a highly inperfect world. The critics (and there will be many of them) will call it "giving up our sovereignty" and they will be easily able to convince a significant number of Canadians of that. Regardless of how much we already give up anyways. I doubt very much the Germans have any interest in us expanding our domestic armour production capabilities. But the Korean's have shown that they are incredibly flexible in the matter and we could adopt their equipment and scale up partial production/assembly here. Which means jobs, which means votes, which means political support for the idea and therefore the funding.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ukraine is using its advanced Leopard tanks as a 'nocturnal predator' fighting mostly at night and at dawn, soldier says

A tank loader and a commander with Ukraine's 47th Mechanized Brigade said the Leopard 2A6 tanks are giving it an advantage at night.

www.businessinsider.com

• Ukrainian troops praised the advanced Leopard 2A6 tank's night vision as an advantage over Russia.
• One said they use the tank as a "nocturnal predator," operating mostly at night and dawn.
• Another said the long-range night vision gives them a "close to a 100% success rate."

He said its night vision device gives visibility for up to 2.5 miles, "allowing us to effectively engage the enemy and achieve close to a 100% success rate."

Video link

https://twitter.com/x/status/1701531957509882117

 

[Kirkhill]

Ukraine is using its advanced Leopard tanks as a 'nocturnal predator' fighting mostly at night and at dawn, soldier says

A tank loader and a commander with Ukraine's 47th Mechanized Brigade said the Leopard 2A6 tanks are giving it an advantage at night.

www.businessinsider.com

Video link

https://twitter.com/x/status/1701531957509882117

It strikes me that the tanks are being used like field guns in the days of yore....

The difference being that they are faster and better armoured than Col Long's guns at Colenso.

A German work on the use of artillery stated that the Prussian artillery had been particularly effective in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 because the guns had been pushed as far forward as possible, often in front of the infantry. The same work pointed to the relative ineffectiveness of the Prussian artillery in the war against Austria when the guns had been kept to the rear. Long was a keen advocate of advancing the guns.


Attempting to save the guns at the Battle of Colenso on 15th December 1899 in the Boer War
Long resolved to move his two field batteries forward towards the river to enable them to fire more effectively on the Boer positions in the hills. Two of Long’s subordinate officers objected to this risky move. Long sent forward two scouts who returned to report there was no sign of the Boers. Long thereupon ordered the 14th and 66th Field Batteries with the naval 12 pounders to move to a position nearer the river.


14th and 66th Batteries unlimbering under Boer fire at the Battle of Colenso on 15th December 1899 in the Boer War
The two field batteries moved forward, overtaking Hildyard’s Brigade, and took up positions opposite Fort Wyllie. The guns were unlimbered and about to come into action when the Boers opened fire from the far side of the river. Along with the devastating rifle fire a Boer one pounder pom pom and other field guns fired on the British gunners. The nearest Boer riflemen in Colenso were only 300 yards to the left of the British gun line which was 500 yards from the river bank to its front.

Within minutes most of the horses of the two batteries and two thirds of the gunners were dead or wounded, including the battery commanders. Long, shot through the arm and liver, was urged to order the survivors to abandon the guns and escape. Long is reputed to have retorted “Abandon be damned. We never abandon guns.”

Battle of Colenso

Buller’s disastrous first attempt to cross the Tugela River in Natal and relieve Ladysmith, on 15th December 1899: last of the three battles of ‘Black Week’.

www.britishbattles.com

Colenso was where the Boers taught British infantry how to hug the ground.

 

[suffolkowner]

À Berlin, on doute de plus en plus de l'avenir du char franco-allemand de nouvelle génération - Zone Militaire

Lancé en 2017 par la France et l'Allemagne , le programme MGCS vise avant tout à mettre différents systèmes d'armes en réseau grâce à un "cloud" de

www.opex360.com

had another article but deleted but it looks like the Franco-German project is hitting some snags and they may end up going their own ways.

edit: think this is the gist

Germany forges pact for Leopard 2 successor in snub to Paris, Handelsblatt reports

Germany has signed agreements with Italy, Spain and Sweden on the development of a successor to the Leopard 2 tank, German business daily Handelsblatt reported on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

 

[GR66]

À Berlin, on doute de plus en plus de l'avenir du char franco-allemand de nouvelle génération - Zone Militaire

Lancé en 2017 par la France et l'Allemagne , le programme MGCS vise avant tout à mettre différents systèmes d'armes en réseau grâce à un "cloud" de

www.opex360.com

had another article but deleted but it looks like the Franco-German project is hitting some snags and they may end up going their own ways.

The French and the Germans not getting along??? Shocking!

 

[brihard]

Getting US equipment is a perfectly logical move in a highly inperfect world. The critics (and there will be many of them) will call it "giving up our sovereignty" and they will be easily able to convince a significant number of Canadians of that. Regardless of how much we already give up anyways. I doubt very much the Germans have any interest in us expanding our domestic armour production capabilities. But the Korean's have shown that they are incredibly flexible in the matter and we could adopt their equipment and scale up partial production/assembly here. Which means jobs, which means votes, which means political support for the idea and therefore the funding.

Ok but what about the inevitable Bombardier posters at Ottawa Airport trying to convince us to instead buy their tank?

 

[suffolkowner]

The French and the Germans not getting along??? Shocking!

It never made any sense to me. The French didnt need anything the Germans had to offer and weren't going to stand splitting the pie up smaller. Looks like we might end up with a bit of deja vu

Abrams = M1A3
Leo2 = Leo3
Leclerc = Leclerc 2
Ariete = Leo3?
Challenger = ???
??? = K2/K3

I think we are best to modernize our tanks the best we can and see if we can pick up some 2A4's from storage until this new generation of tanks is ready.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Ok but what about the inevitable Bombardier posters at Ottawa Airport trying to convince us to instead buy their tank?

Bombardier does not stand a chance trying to sell they could build a tank. However GDSL most certainly could, In a competition I could possibly see GDSL teaming up with SK to build/assemble K2's in Canada.

 

[KevinB]

It never made any sense to me. The French didnt need anything the Germans had to offer and weren't going to stand splitting the pie up smaller. Looks like we might end up with a bit of deja vu

Abrams = M1A3
Leo2 = Leo3
Leclerc = Leclerc 2
Ariete = Leo3?
Challenger = ???
??? = K2/K3

I think we are best to modernize our tanks the best we can and see if we can pick up some 2A4's from storage until this new generation of tanks is ready.

There will be a metric ass ton of M1A2 Abrams on the market if AbramsX is the A3…

Canada could probably make a compelling argument that there is no need to remove DU panels from them either as a nation that can do it (theoretically) themselves.