ADF goes with Challenger 2 or Leopard 2

[Legosim]

I have a very simple way to produce a winner here. Which one looks best?

Simple, the Leopard 2. She is a sexy beast.

Indeed.

Your are correct sir. Best looking tank ever. The M1 is just ugly I'm afraid.

As far as best tank for the money, I believe I proved with a (very well put together) slide show on my "Best post-World War II Tank"-thread in Chat that it was the Centurion.

That tank has a cheap running price, and a reliable history. It's able to be endlessly upgraded and is outfitted with the 105mm L7-series gun, which is probably the best tank gun ever fitted in the history of armoured warfare.

There are South African versions of the Centurion that are still in operation. The chassis are between 40 and 60 years old. That's unheard of in the world of armour. No other tank has that kind of longevity, especially when it's been through constant combat like the Centurion has.

The Centurion is most definitely an amazing piece of engineering.

About four months ago in the Armchair General forums a thread came up on how best to outfit a smallish first-world country's military. We came to conclude through some digging, that the Leo II seemed to be the best choice out of "The Four", being the Abrams, Chally II, Leo II, and the LeClerc.

But someone raised the question, about what about massively modernizing a slightly older design was more cost effective being the possible threats. Australia's only real threat atm is Indonesia, I believe correct? Their military's armour is limited to APC's and IFV's, mostly 80's hardware. They also field the AMX-13 and PT-76 light tanks which were both outclassed, outgunned, and obsolete in 1970. And also any enemy Australia might fight in the future, such as say, a NATO invasion of Iran, or anything you can really think, will not be armed with anything more than T-80's in capability.

According to ArmyGuide.com which specialises in military contracts, in Dec of 2004, Australia bought 51 M1A1 Abrams mbt's for a total of $401 million, to be delivered by September 2013. This comes to a unit cost at $7,862,745 a piece. (Now I am confused, because we sold tanks to Australia, our friend and ally, for 5 million dollars MORE than we sold them to Egypt...wtf...? They're sold to the US for just over $800,000...)

So, round that with some extra fees up to 8 million a tank. The M60 tank's average foreign contract price has been $900,000 to $1 million each. BAE offers the upgrade to M60-2000 at $800,000, plus tech support, and spare parts. Round up another 200 grand for any other things you may need, and you can still afford 200 main battle tanks equal in capability to an Israeli Merkava Mk. IV, for the price you pay for 50 M1A1 Abrams.

 

[DuQuense]

?Any way the Aussies could go with the Italian Arieste tank?

 

[MacCaulay]

Now who can't find these South African Centurions (they call them Oliphants) a nice sight? I think part of the advantage the South Africans had was that they had these nice open spaces to run across. Made for good photo ops.

 

[Nietzsche]

The add-on armour helped, though I did like the original boxy turret.

It does look better than the M1A1.

I actually loathe the 'box turret'. It looks so plain and 'Old German'. Which is good if Germany suddenly became a super-revanchist state. But this is Modern Germany, sleek, stylish and otherwise non-neighbor-hating at all(or so we think).

There's also the effective, but also nice looking camouflage and of course, what can't look pretty with an Iron Cross?

 

[Legosim]

Now who can't find these South African Centurions (they call them Oliphants) a nice sight? I think part of the advantage the South Africans had was that they had these nice open spaces to run across. Made for good photo ops.

SA sure knows how to fight on a savannah.

Ever seen a Rooikat? Damn those things look nice.

Seriously, forget tanks, Australia should get these. Developed for South African savannahs, not much different than defending the Outback Indonesia right? And they even have a modified version of the 105mm gun off the Centurion you love so much MacCauley .

I'm gonna beg, you made a good argument for the Centurion, can you check my M60 argument? Even if you disprove everything in it, I'd like to hear your take on it.

Btw, love the sig Nietzche. Lol.

 

[MacCaulay]

SA sure knows how to fight on a savannah.

Ever seen a Rooikat? Damn those things look nice.

Rooikats rule.

Seriously, forget tanks, Australia should get these. Developed for South African savannahs, not much different than defending the Outback Indonesia right? And they even have a modified version of the 105mm gun off the Centurion you love so much MacCauley .

The South African Defense Force was the ace of wheeled fighting vehicles.

The Ratels and the others are great! The stories of their operation in the Bush War are really amazing. Also, Larry Bond does a good job of providing a realistic portrayal of their operation and employment in his novel Vortex.

I'm gonna beg, you made a good argument for the Centurion, can you check my M60 argument? Even if you disprove everything in it, I'd like to hear your take on it.

Where is it?

 

[Melvin Loh]

Rooikats rule.

The South African Defense Force was the ace of wheeled fighting vehicles.

The Ratels and the others are great! The stories of their operation in the Bush War are really amazing. Also, Larry Bond does a good job of providing a realistic portrayal of their operation and employment in his novel Vortex.

I know a Sth Afr pastor in Plymouth who served on Ratels when he was in the SADF during the 80s, fightin the bush wars against the Communists...

 

[Legosim]

Rooikats rule.

The South African Defense Force was the ace of wheeled fighting vehicles.

The Ratels and the others are great! The stories of their operation in the Bush War are really amazing. Also, Larry Bond does a good job of providing a realistic portrayal of their operation and employment in his novel Vortex.

Where is it?

Not the post above your pic of the Centurions, the one above that.

I'll have to check out that book.

 

[MacCaulay]

Not the post above your pic of the Centurions, the one above that.

Actually, I always thought the M60 was a better value for the money than the M1. The Israelis, the USMC, they both proved that with reactive armour the thing is an amazing piece of machinery and has the capability to take on modern tanks.
In Desert Storm near the Burqan oil fields, the Marine Corps M-60s took on Iraqi T-55s upgraded with reactive armour on their frontal arc. The Iraqis attacked in brigade strength, but the M-60s still managed to take them out. (Into the Storm, Gen. (ret'd) Fred Franks & Tom Clancy)

It's a tough machine. And honestly, for the cash that the Australians and some other nations have to put out, they might as well do something like that.
The South Koreans have done that with the M48s. They got those at least 25 years ago, and they've still got whole battalions outfitted with them. Obviously they think they're reliable. And there's no way someone can say the South Korean military is in a low-threat environment.
If the South Koreans can afford to buy gear like that, any country can do it.


Now, obviously sometimes you want a newer tank because it'll last longer. But the SADF has stretched the Centurion upwards of 40 years, the Israelis have stretched the M-60 at least 30.
It's possible to buy a used tank off a country 10 years into it's life and still get a good run out of it provided you spend the rest of your cash on upkeep. But you'd be spending it on that anyway if you bought a new one.

I'll have to check out that book.

It's probably the best techno-thriller I've ever read. And I've read...god. Hundreds. But Vortex is the best.

 

[Legosim]

Actually, I always thought the M60 was a better value for the money than the M1. The Israelis, the USMC, they both proved that with reactive armour the thing is an amazing piece of machinery and has the capability to take on modern tanks.
In Desert Storm near the Burqan oil fields, the Marine Corps M-60s took on Iraqi T-55s upgraded with reactive armour on their frontal arc. The Iraqis attacked in brigade strength, but the M-60s still managed to take them out. (Into the Storm, Gen. (ret'd) Fred Franks & Tom Clancy)

It's a tough machine. And honestly, for the cash that the Australians and some other nations have to put out, they might as well do something like that.
The South Koreans have done that with the M48s. They got those at least 25 years ago, and they've still got whole battalions outfitted with them. Obviously they think they're reliable. And there's no way someone can say the South Korean military is in a low-threat environment.
If the South Koreans can afford to buy gear like that, any country can do it.


Now, obviously sometimes you want a newer tank because it'll last longer. But the SADF has stretched the Centurion upwards of 40 years, the Israelis have stretched the M-60 at least 30.
It's possible to buy a used tank off a country 10 years into it's life and still get a good run out of it provided you spend the rest of your cash on upkeep. But you'd be spending it on that anyway if you bought a new one.



It's probably the best techno-thriller I've ever read. And I've read...god. Hundreds. But Vortex is the best.

I have enjoyed Dale Brown's work as of late he tells a great story.

Turkey has also used the M60T Sabra III an Israeli twist on the basic BAE -2000 kit, so it must be good. I have to say, I did not know there were many military enthusiasts on AH.com.

 

[MacCaulay]

Turkey has also used the M60T Sabra III an Israeli twist on the basic BAE -2000 kit, so it must be good. I have to say, I did not know there were many military enthusiasts on AH.com.

There's...me, Calbear, I bet the tank thread brought out some of the others. There was this thread on the Future History forum about future USN operations that brought a bunch of us out of the woodwork.

Then there was that thread I started on the non-political Chat that was just about the Iranian military. I'll have to bump that sometime. It was actually pretty interesting.

There's a fair amount of folks. There is more knowledge on past military weapons systems, but the current stuff is still pretty well represented here as well.

You just get some crazy viewpoints every once in awhile.

 

[Riain]

I can assure people that Australia did NOT pay almost US$8 million each for our Abrams.

Major defence purchases also carry an important political message, but nobody has mentioned that yet.

 

[Legosim]

I can assure people that Australia did NOT pay almost US$8 million each for our Abrams.

Major defence purchases also carry an important political message, but nobody has mentioned that yet.

Yeah no one has mentioned politics. This is AH.com, lets butterfly away politics, who needs them.

Now that's interesting. Normally I trust http://www.army-guide.com/ so I tend to believe them. They get a lot of their stuff from Jane's Defense, which I know is a very credible source. I'll do some digging though, I'd be interested to find out about this stuff.

If you'd like to take a look; http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1779.html is the link for the M1A1. Scroll down, and eventually you'll see the "Last Contracts" area. Hmm...

I'll have to snoop around better for those threads, I've enjoyed this one!

EDIT: A quick search brought up that Australia bought 59 tanks, not 51. Can any Aussie member give a certain hard amount of how many M1's were bought?

EDIT2: You may be right Riain. Three sources on a quick google search have all said the same thing. $70 million overall contract, 59 tanks. Which is different than A-G.com. This would put the contract at about normal M1 export cost. I am sorry, thaanks for making me double check my work.


So that basically just destroyed all of my arguments for the M60-2000... Might as well grab an Abrams for 500 grand more.

 

[Theodoric]

I have a very simple way to produce a winner here. Which one looks best?

Simple, the Leopard 2. She is a sexy beast.

And the 2A6 has got quite a good gun. Remember the one that the Americans installed on their tanks after Desert Storm? The 2A6 exchanged that for an even bigger version.

 

[Riain]

It was 59 tanks, and 6 M88s Hercules recovery vehicles. I have commented on the fact that with 110 Leopards we only needed 5 recovery vehicles, but the Army tells me that we kept our Leopards on low rotation and usually only had about 60 or 70 running around so only needed 5 recovery vehicles. BTW there are still stacks of Leopards at Puckapunyal, if they are still around should the big one happen they might get another run with the Reserves.

 

[Legosim]

Leopard II's are still fine vehicles, why they would totally scrap them is beyond me. They can still fight anything Australia will really need to ever fight.

 

[Alexius]

The fact that people are actually debating this is kind of silly, but as an American, I also prefer the Leo II. You also have to take into account that the Brits have never exported the Chally II, so there's also another factor.

Challenger 2's have been exported, to Oman. BAE did market a special export version, but stopped after Greece selected the Leopard instead.

 

[MacCaulay]

Challenger 2's have been exported, to Oman. BAE did market a special export version, but stopped after Greece selected the Leopard instead.

And that gets us into all the different versions of British MBTs floating around the Middle East: you've got Centurions in the IDF (in reserve status), Al Khalids in Jordan which are actually upgraded Chieftains with Challenger 1 guts in them (that were designed for Iran in the '70s), and they Challenger 2s in Oman. Not to mention the regular Chieftains the Jordanians have.

The Middle East has pretty much every single generation of British, American, and Soviet tank in it's arsenal. Oddly enough, the only major arms supplier that's not there in huge numbers anymore is the French.

Though the Iraqi Army sure loved their AMX-30s until the Iranians and the Coalition got through with them.

 

[Legosim]

AMX-30 is a good tank. Most people don't usually include the French in most military export discussions unfortunately.

Really, Oman has them? I didn't know that there were any exported Chally 2's.

 

[HJ Tulp]

It's a tough machine. And honestly, for the cash that the Australians and some other nations have to put out, they might as well do something like that.
The South Koreans have done that with the M48s. They got those at least 25 years ago, and they've still got whole battalions outfitted with them. Obviously they think they're reliable. And there's no way someone can say the South Korean military is in a low-threat environment.
If the South Koreans can afford to buy gear like that, any country can do it.


Now, obviously sometimes you want a newer tank because it'll last longer. But the SADF has stretched the Centurion upwards of 40 years, the Israelis have stretched the M-60 at least 30.
It's possible to buy a used tank off a country 10 years into it's life and still get a good run out of it provided you spend the rest of your cash on upkeep. But you'd be spending it on that anyway if you bought a new one.
.

I have a little theory about that.

Countries like South Korea, Israel and until recently South Africa are front-line states with militaries that punch somewhat above their GDP weight, atleast compared to most other nations (especially those in Europe). They spend large sums on their larger armies. The ones running their MoD and military know that they'll get a significant portion of the budget-pie because the enemy is right next door. Therefor they are more likely to go after the best bang for their buck because of the strain on their nations budget. They know they can't get more so they make the best of it and they get good at it.

There are other countries, mostly in Western Europe, where the militaries don't have the advantages of pointing at the big bad neighbour and are thus constantly hawking over their budget. I don't know how other countries do it but in the Netherlands the really large expeditures related to buying new equipement are handled outside the regulary budget. Procurements like a new MBT or fighter are just to big and incidental for that. Therefor, when the time comes for such a procurement the big shots in the military want the best of the best instead of the best bang for a buck. Why? Because the saved money will not be pumped back into the military anyway. Take the Netherlands and it's new fighterjet for example. The last two contenders are the JSF and the Saab Grippen. Given the fact that the Netherlands is in NATO, on good terms with the US and the only possesions in harms way (the Antilles) are in the lasts backyard the Dutch Airforce doesn't really need to get a fighter that has top-notch dogfight capabilities because it won't be fighting any last-generation fighter any time soon and even if that happens it's allies can fly CAP. The Grippen is atleast a billion euros cheaper. A billion euros would be fantastic news for the navy that could use new submarines and frigates instead of the corvettes it is going to get. It would also be fantastic news for our soldiers in Afghanistan who could use new spare-parts, more bushmasters, a reliable UAV and much much more. However, if the Grippen was selected that billion dollars wouldn't be pumped back into the military but used to buy votes next election. Therefor it's much better for the military if it get's the JSF even though it's not the best bang for a buck.