OK, the Australian Defence Force is now equipped with the M1A1 Abrams (mainly based in Darwin with 1st Armd Regt, with some for training purposes down at the School of Armour at Puckapunyal, Vic- I saw a couple down at the Avalon airshow)- but WI the Defence Dept had instead decided to go for alternative MBTs like the Challenger 2 or Leopard 2 ?
ADF goes with Challenger 2 or Leopard 2
- Thread starter Melvin Loh
- Start date
MacCaulay
Banned
They'd be paying much less for gas and maintenance.
No shit. I'm an American through and through, but the Abrams is fucking expensive to operate and a bitch to maintain. Yeah, it's a supertank and there's nothing on the planet that could top it in a one-on-one battle, but when are the Australians going to be faced with that?
When I was in the CF, the Leopard 2 was extremely reliable, mostly because it had a regular engine and not that jet engine derivative that the M1A1 had.
Personally, I think the Australians probably could've bought some more Leopards for what they paid for the Abrams'.
I think the regiments operating Challenger IIs would take you up on that.
We may have been able to pick up a batch of Leopard 2A4s cheaper than the M1s (post-Cold War fire sale)... but factoring upgrades to a similar standards as the M1A1s; reconditioning to sort out wear and tear and complications in the event of foreign deployment (i.e. not being able to leverage off US logistics) I'd expect things to work out as if not more expensive than the M1A1 buy.
Dure
Banned
1) In blue on blues Abrahams has fired on Chally II at lesss than 300 yards and failed to penetrate or (significantly) injure the crew. So either the gun is shite or Chally II is a supertank above.
2) Australia is big. The Abrahams needs a lot of those armoured bowser thingys to go any significant distance. Did anyone add in the cost of those to the 'extremely cheap' purchase price.
2) Australia is big. The Abrahams needs a lot of those armoured bowser thingys to go any significant distance. Did anyone add in the cost of those to the 'extremely cheap' purchase price.
What the…
Blue on blue tank fire AT 300 YARDS? How the hell did that happen, I'd love to see more on that!
Urrghh, we've had this debate before, and it always comes down to the financial savings and spare parts we get in buying American.
Yet pro-Abrams people won't hear a word about the notion that foreign purchasers of the M1A1 are being subsidised by US taxpayers to achieve this bargain. In fact, if the sales of these machines were governed by WTO rules there's probably a 50/50 chance Australia would have the British tank.
Uh oh. The Fanboys don't like anyone questioning the over-complexity of these beasts--you're in for trouble if you don't agree with them that the end result is that ABRAMS IS TEH SUPER TANK!!!
Yet pro-Abrams people won't hear a word about the notion that foreign purchasers of the M1A1 are being subsidised by US taxpayers to achieve this bargain. In fact, if the sales of these machines were governed by WTO rules there's probably a 50/50 chance Australia would have the British tank.
Dure said:
The Dean said:
Uh oh. The Fanboys don't like anyone questioning the over-complexity of these beasts--you're in for trouble if you don't agree with them that the end result is that ABRAMS IS TEH SUPER TANK!!!
Again, nobody has realized that all these tank debates are utterly pointless because it all comes down to which country you're from. Americans go for Abrams, Brits the Challenger, Russians with the T-series, and Germans/Canadians love their Leopards. I have never once seen any progress made with these arguments. Besides, whatever tank the ADF goes with won't make any difference considering the Australians haven't sent any tanks anywhere but Afghanistan, where tank models don't make much difference as long as they're modern enough.
The sad thing is that without export sales, it's likely BAE will close the tank plants - meaning no more British tank development.
Not that BAE (which also makes the M1 series) will mind that too much
Not that BAE (which also makes the M1 series) will mind that too much
Look on the bright side...
If it had been the USAF, they'd have blue-on-blued the Abrams as well...
MacCaulay
Banned
They've got Chobham armour.
An Abrams also can't penetrate another Abrams. They found that out when one gut stuck in some mud in Desert Storm. So I suppose to the Abrams is better than the Abrams. Unless that rips a hole in the space-time continuum.
Wanderlust said:The sad thing is that without export sales, it's likely BAE will close the tank plants - meaning no more British tank development.
Not that BAE (which also makes the M1 series) will mind that too much
Well, Chrysler used to make ours.
Sior
Banned
But Abrams have been taken out by RPG's where as a Challenger was hit by 14 RPG's and the only damage needing repair was the commanders sight!
Must be because they're British. Apparently everything British is superior, even the tanks, never mind that they have the same armor.
Until there is actually a war between us first world nations, nobody will ever know which tank is best. Get over it.