Canada's tanks

[KevinB]

I never said we would send our tanks south of the border. Just mentioning there is the capability to weld tank hulls up.

My comment was in response to this.

It works if you have a dedicated Tank Building or 4th Line Refurb depot supported by the OEM.
But you need to have the capability to basically build a new hull.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Trust me. If Canada could've cheaped out on the cracked hulls by refurbing them, they would have. You just can't weld up a stress fracture and forget about it. The weld becomes the strongest part but the stress just moves to a weaker portion outside that weld. And continues to crack. Once the metal becomes fatigued, it becomes fatigued throughout the module, not just where it cracked first. It behooves the military to provide the newest and best equipment for the operators. Sending out crews in inferior equipment that is constantly being jury-rigged and repaired, where the reason is expediency and saving money, doesn't work. If the crews aren't confident in their equipment, they won't exploit it to it's full potential, for fear of putting themselves in jeopardy with equipment that no longer meets it's designed capability.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The way to do it is the same as the other upgrades of the last decade. LAV, CH-148 etc. Its call Ship of Theseus process.

First pick the option package you want for the tanks. Leo 2A7 CAN etc.

Award "upgrade" contract to OEM with the IP license so limiting bidders. Issue ACAN

That OEM builds approx 80 tanks kits. A "kit" being the whole tank.

Bring Canadian tanks to OEM's Canadian facility to start "upgrade" process....Remove Number Plate. Put Number plate aside. Disassemble unit to some level put all parts aside.
Unpackage OEM upgrade part kit. Assemble all of those parts into "upgraded" tank. Take the set aside number plate and one part from the disassembled pile and then bolt on the upgraded tank. Done.

Only problem here is that the LEO 2 has two fathers. Rheinmetall and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann GmbH. Rheinmetall is the natural OEM for this as they have a footprint in Canada. Let two of them fight it out before hand with a wink wink.

Is the situation that dire to require full rebuilds vice incremental upgrade and refurbishment?

My understanding was the that A4M CAN's are essentially A7+'s/ Revolutions- full digital upgrade, mine protection, applique armour but haven't had the gunner's sight raised out of the turret wedge and don't have the L55.

If so, Is there enough life in the tanks/ is the A4M CAN standard good enough that Rheinmetall Montreal running the fleet through a depot level refurb + upgrading the A6's and A4's to match would get us another decade and jump to a next generation replacement?

Would the A6 be different enough that it would make sense to trade them for someone else's (Finland?) A4's and run a pure fleet of A4M CAN's?

 

[Spencer100]

Is the situation that dire to require full rebuilds vice incremental upgrade and refurbishment?

My understanding was the that A4M CAN's are essentially A7+'s/ Revolutions- full digital upgrade, mine protection, applique armour but haven't had the gunner's sight raised out of the turret wedge and don't have the L55.

If so, Is there enough life in the tanks/ is the A4M CAN standard good enough that Rheinmetall Montreal running the fleet through a depot level refurb + upgrading the A6's and A4's to match would get us another decade and jump to a next generation replacement?

Would the A6 be different enough that it would make sense to trade them for someone else's (Finland?) A4's and run a pure fleet of A4M CAN's?

My point is more basic than that. Defence procurement is broken in this country. As the government even knows its a mess as demonstrated with the announcement of the UOR for Air defence and antitank missiles. Looking back over the last 15 years what major procurement has been close to a success? Chinook, C-17, C-130 etc were all UOR or made to look that way. Then you say LAV6 was Ok. But why? It was sold as a reset and upgrade. In all reality it was a new build will some pieces (gun, and other bits) reused. Same with the future the CH-149 upgrade. In the end most of the unit will be replaced. I know there are some example of stuff that got done but not many. The ACSV easier too because "jobs" and we already have the LAV6.

Because new capital programs can not be done or very very long and difficult I put it out as a "upgrade" but like the LAV in reality a new unit.

In both my cases because the "upgrade" can only be done by the OEM that has the IP. So an ACAN be issued. And then less problems with other wanting a piece of the action. GD will not be as put out if a LEO2 upgrade is issued. (I know I know GDLS Santa Barbara made them too)

So I going back to my original point. Figure out what you want and can pay for from the LEO2 OEM options list (and no you are not getting the Alcantara dash) And have Rheinmetall "upgrade" them in Quebec with a kit from Germany. I would bet you would find that most the parts will be new build. Maybe the hull maybe not.

Just save the all important number plate.

 

[brihard]

Is the situation that dire to require full rebuilds vice incremental upgrade and refurbishment?

My understanding was the that A4M CAN's are essentially A7+'s/ Revolutions- full digital upgrade, mine protection, applique armour but haven't had the gunner's sight raised out of the turret wedge and don't have the L55.

If so, Is there enough life in the tanks/ is the A4M CAN standard good enough that Rheinmetall Montreal running the fleet through a depot level refurb + upgrading the A6's and A4's to match would get us another decade and jump to a next generation replacement?

Would the A6 be different enough that it would make sense to trade them for someone else's (Finland?) A4's and run a pure fleet of A4M CAN's?

Just one minor point- Leopard 2A4 (including M) have the shorter 120mm L44 gun; A6 and A7 have the L55. For tank vs tank that’s a significant difference.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Just one minor point- Leopard 2A4 (including M) have the shorter 120mm L44 gun; A6 and A7 have the L55. For tank vs tank that’s a significant difference.

Yeah, I listed L55 and the gunners sight location as the main differences from A4M CAN to A7.

But I guess what I getting at is that is whether an A7 presents enough of an upgrade vs an A4M CAN/Revolution in the short-term to make it the long term play. It just seems like we're setting ourselves up to behind the 8 ball again all to soon if the 2024-25 play is to commit and rebuild to a standard only incrementally better than what we pioneered and fielded in 2009.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Trust me. If Canada could've cheaped out on the cracked hulls by refurbing them, they would have. You just can't weld up a stress fracture and forget about it. The weld becomes the strongest part but the stress just moves to a weaker portion outside that weld. And continues to crack. Once the metal becomes fatigued, it becomes fatigued throughout the module, not just where it cracked first. It behooves the military to provide the newest and best equipment for the operators. Sending out crews in inferior equipment that is constantly being jury-rigged and repaired, where the reason is expediency and saving money, doesn't work. If the crews aren't confident in their equipment, they won't exploit it to it's full potential, for fear of putting themselves in jeopardy with equipment that no longer meets it's designed capability.

But look at it from their point of view: there would be serious career implications for any Senior Officer gutsy enough to complain about the issue

 

[suffolkowner]

Can A5's and A6's not be upgraded to the A7 for some reason to do with the hull?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

But look at it from their point of view: there would be serious career implications for any Senior Officer gutsy enough to complain about the issue

That's why you have Warrant Officers.

When you put something into service, you commission it.
If you want it to work properly, you warrant it.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

You could have the Germans make you a new hull, ship it with all the new parts that will only fit it. Then graft the older parts after they been refurbished onto the new hull and that can be done in Canada. Expensive, but you build up some expertise and you can do 5-10 a year and slowly upgrade the fleet. Throw in 1-2 new tanks a year for 10 years and you get to expand it as well.

 

[Spencer100]

You could have the Germans make you a new hull, ship it with all the new parts that will only fit it. Then graft the older parts after they been refurbished onto the new hull and that can be done in Canada. Expensive, but you build up some expertise and you can do 5-10 a year and slowly upgrade the fleet. Throw in 1-2 new tanks a year for 10 years and you get to expand it as well.

Don't forget the number plate....the most important part.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Don't forget the number plate....the most important part.

Like most of the Beavers flying in this country.

 

[childs56]

Trust me. If Canada could've cheaped out on the cracked hulls by refurbing them, they would have. You just can't weld up a stress fracture and forget about it. The weld becomes the strongest part but the stress just moves to a weaker portion outside that weld. And continues to crack. Once the metal becomes fatigued, it becomes fatigued throughout the module, not just where it cracked first. It behooves the military to provide the newest and best equipment for the operators. Sending out crews in inferior equipment that is constantly being jury-rigged and repaired, where the reason is expediency and saving money, doesn't work. If the crews aren't confident in their equipment, they won't exploit it to it's full potential, for fear of putting themselves in jeopardy with equipment that no longer meets it's designed capability.

I had a discussion with a couple of my NDT/ Welding friends about fixing armored vehicles with different composites and their take on fixing cracked, stress cracked, corrosion cracked, other types of stresses along with battle damage and worn plates is more then feasible by local shops in Alberta and even across the country. Their take and experience is simple, yes they can fix cracks in welds. they can fix double hulled vehicles, they can inspect, replace, repair pretty much anything out there.
They use all forms of heat treating, stress relieving (not the massage parlor off base) techniques to fix welds, replace plates etc to repair fix and replace components.

It is funny when the Canadian Forces needed to fix tanks to go to Afghanistan they went into a rush to fix, repair and get serviceable a fleet with tanks that had been worn out, not properly maintained and severely neglected. They expected things to happen over night to fill its operational gap to get things going.
I would suggest if our tanks cant be overhauled at the Rheinmetall plant in Canada then we look at other industry who perform massive welding and fabricating projects on a daily basis in local areas for example Edmonton.

One thing I have noticed is many in the Military circle are in a revolving door of if we don't do it, it cant be done.
Hopefully we buy some new equipment and set up local shops who have the specs and equipment and parts required to perform the work.

 

[KevinB]

I had a discussion with a couple of my NDT/ Welding friends about fixing armored vehicles with different composites and their take on fixing cracked, stress cracked, corrosion cracked, other types of stresses along with battle damage and worn plates is more then feasible by local shops in Alberta and even across the country. Their take and experience is simple, yes they can fix cracks in welds. they can fix double hulled vehicles, they can inspect, replace, repair pretty much anything out there.
They use all forms of heat treating, stress relieving (not the massage parlor off base) techniques to fix welds, replace plates etc to repair fix and replace components.

You can’t simply reweld Chobham armor.
No one in Alberta has experience working with it.
There are areas of a current tank that could be fixed by some domestic shops in Canada, but at lot of areas aren’t able to be fixed that way.

It is funny when the Canadian Forces needed to fix tanks to go to Afghanistan they went into a rush to fix, repair and get serviceable a fleet with tanks that had been worn out, not properly maintained and severely neglected. They expected things to happen over night to fill its operational gap to get things going.

What you don’t think the good idea fairy can just wave a wand and make it better
The Leo1’s where actually significantly easier to fix than current Gen tanks too.

I would suggest if our tanks cant be overhauled at the Rheinmetall plant in Canada then we look at other industry who perform massive welding and fabricating projects on a daily basis in local areas for example Edmonton.

No civilian shop deals with Chobham armor. Composite overlays that are integrated with the steel is not something done outside of dedicated Tank manufacturing or 4th line refurbishment facilities.

One thing I have noticed is many in the Military circle are in a revolving door of if we don't do it, it cant be done.

Sometimes that is true.

Hopefully we buy some new equipment and set up local shops who have the specs and equipment and parts required to perform the work.

You and your logic.
Imagine having the ability to maintain one’s gear

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Most of the exotic armour is on the upper hull and turret and you see a lot less stress cracks there. Most of the stress cracks I have seen on armoured vehicles have been on the lower hull which is generally RHA and at corners, holes and fastening points for suspension, etc.

 

[Kirkhill]

I wonder how many vehicles a year the average upfitter upfits.

 

[AmmoTech90]

It's too bad the Army doesn't have sort of engineering establishment for land equipment.
At least we have an air engineering establishment that can figure out how to make mounts for mine plows and rollers.

 

[FJAG]

It's too bad the Army doesn't have sort of engineering establishment for land equipment.
At least we have an air engineering establishment that can figure out how to make mounts for mine plows and rollers.

Kind of like they should have beefed up LETE rather than shutting it down after its negative report on the LSVW? That Chretien. Always so helpful he was.

 

[KevinB]

It's too bad the Army doesn't have sort of engineering establishment for land equipment.

Anymore.

At least we have an air engineering establishment that can figure out how to make mounts for mine plows and rollers.

Lol.

 

[KevinB]

Most of the exotic armour is on the upper hull and turret and you see a lot less stress cracks there. Most of the stress cracks I have seen on armoured vehicles have been on the lower hull which is generally RHA and at corners, holes and fastening points for suspension, etc.

But the ‘regular’ steel there isn’t exactly the same grade as one finds on a Caterpillar Dozer or Giant Dumptruck either.