RE: [OT]Wither Canada? And Australias Abrahms

--- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:

> G'day,
> 
> > The longer 55 caliber version was introduced on the Leo2A5.
> 
> Reviews I've read said it was the Leopard2A6.
>

A quick scan of the top internet seach hits says the same thing,
however all of the books I have say it was A5.	<shrug>

Best description:
Encylopedia of Tanks and Armored Fighting Vehicles, Ed. Chris Foss,
2002, p248

[about the Leo 2A5] "The most important of these [improvements] is a
lengthened 120mm gun extended from the previous 44 calibres to 55
calibres"

"Sweden will licence manufacture the Leopard 2A5, while Spain will
produce the Leopard2A6, a private-venture export model similar to the
Leopard 2A5, but with extras such as air conditioning, an auxilliary
power unit and yet more protection."


> > I still don't understand that.  I understand the objection to DU
> > ammunition (don't agree, but understand) but I don't understand the
> > objection to the HA package.  <Shrug>
> 
> For the same reasons given with the munitions Aussies just don't go
> for DU.

"Firing our DU penetrators at the enemy contaminates the envionment",
how can that be applied to the armor?  "Firing our DU armor panels at
the enemy contaminates the envionment"?

> The widely available stats I could get access to seem to show
> (I'm not an armour expert so may have misunderstood) that the latest
> versions of the Leopard give the same degree of protection as the
> M1A1 and are comparable with the M1A2 even though the Leopards don't
> use DU (how that manage that without also being super heavy I don't 
> know). The one weak spot in the comparison does seem to be in the
> glacis - ok major weak spot for a tank!
> 

>From the same book, p51:
"In 1984, the M1 IP (Improved Protection) was introduced with heavier
armour.  This armour was included in the M1A1 as well as an integrated
NBC system and many improvements to the fighting compartment.  The
M1A1HA (Heavy Armour) version was first delivered to units in Germany
in 1988."

"The M1A2 was the last production version.  Most changes were internal"

"An option on export M1A2s is the German MTU883 diesel powerplant"

It's not clear whether the M1A2 has the same armor as the M1A1 or the
HA package as standard.

> Given or media (not 100% reliable source) says the US government
> houses are complaining about the lack of equipment on the ground in
> preparation for entering Iraq how likely is it that tanks would just 
> be handed off to the Aussies to use?

I can imagine a scenario where the forces tagged for a particular set
of prepositioned stocks are not all available; some being busy
elsewhere, or an infantry-heavy unit sent in place of an armor-heavy
unit.  In these cases, it is plausible (I don't know likely) to offer
some of the stocks to entice an allied contribution.

J