• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canada's tanks

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
885
Points
1,060
You aren’t going to get anything for the Leo for quite sometime. Germany has half its tank fleet as unusable and is needing to upgrade/return those to duty and get more.

The only place with real production ability for ‘excess’ MBT is here with the Abrams M1A2 SEP V3 and beyond.
are you saying that there is no room in the pipline for those companies to upgrade our Leopards?
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
885
Points
1,060
Well thats both surprising and disappointing and takes one future path off the table I guess not that it really matters as this current government has shown any real intent on upping our national security abilities and much prefers to talk loudly and carry a foam stick while posing for photo ops while Ukrainians pay the price
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,462
Points
1,040
A passing thought.
The USMC are restructuring their forces to focus on the Pacific (China). The focus will be on missiles and unmanned equipment. China's navy and missiles may chew through the landing ships. (you all can go find the articles as it would take pages to explain. The Marine Corps Is About to Reinvent Itself—Drastically

As a result they are reducing much of the traditional asset complement including Tanks, IFVs, artillery, amphibious vehicles, etc. This could be a great opportunity to re-equip the CAF quickly and at "possibly" affordable prices. Current inventory (retain majority of LAVs and Logistics vehicles) could be sold/donated to Ukraine or other Eastern Flank NATO members.
M1A2s, M109s, EFVs, AAVs, AH1s, UH1s, and specialty and logistics vehicles.
The US has more Abrams than it needs by a long shot. They are literally refurbishing tanks they don't need to keep the pork rolling in specific voting districts. I don't think the US Army has even gotten an actual "new" Abrams in 15 years, they just keep upgrading/refurbing the older ones (ship of Theseus).
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
5,945
Points
1,110
I am going to burst some bubbles here. I do not think there is any chance of Canada obtaining Abrams tanks.

The industrial people in our dearly beloved special child province would kick and scream if they were cut out of the middle.
The second point - do the adults in the US government and industry trust a fancy sox wearer with their technology?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
6,065
Points
1,040
I think our tanks should be upgraded to a single standard one way or another. If we cant do it now in these circumstances when can we?

Does it matter if the upgrade is done by Rheinmetall or KMW or RUAG? Do they all have access to the same upgrade paths?

Alternatively maybe its the right time to move to the Abrams
I agree that they should be brought to the same standard but they aren't useless the way that they are. A4s are in use all over the world and certainly make an excellent training vehicle if nothing else. Looking at what the Ukrainians are doing with Soviet era kit makes you realize that while tanks do not make you invulnerable, its as much the people as the gear itself that delivers success.

We have facilities in Canada that can upgrade tanks even with the rush on right now. The key is having the need seen and the money allocated. I fear neither is a high enough priority even now. My concern for a long time now is that there hasn't been a rational vision for a force rebuild since we embarked on the Advancing with Purpose agenda which IMHO was weak and flawed from the start. I had hopes for Force 2025, but its degenerating as well. If the Army has no vision, how can it convince its political masters to put money behind it?

I like the Leos. Particularly their engines and mileage, but my guess is that we could get a whole lot of older M1s at bargain prices for training purposes in Canada and have the US furnish flyover stocks prepositioned in Europe. Canada needs a vision and a plan. Everything else follows from that.

Fancy socks or not, we'd have no problems getting US buy-in. I would think that Canada actually stepping up and saying that we will provide the manpower for a fly-over brigade using prepositioned US stocks would thrill them. Above all else, the US values commitment. What they hate is hedge betting, mealy-mouthed platitudes and vacillation all of which Socks, and much of our military leadership, excels at.

🍻
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
642
Points
960
I agree that they should be brought to the same standard but they aren't useless the way that they are. A4s are in use all over the world and certainly make an excellent training vehicle if nothing else. Looking at what the Ukrainians are doing with Soviet era kit makes you realize that while tanks do not make you invulnerable, its as much the people as the gear itself that delivers success.

We have facilities in Canada that can upgrade tanks even with the rush on right now. The key is having the need seen and the money allocated. I fear neither is a high enough priority even now. My concern for a long time now is that there hasn't been a rational vision for a force rebuild since we embarked on the Advancing with Purpose agenda which IMHO was weak and flawed from the start. I had hopes for Force 2025, but its degenerating as well. If the Army has no vision, how can it convince its political masters to put money behind it?

I like the Leos. Particularly their engines and mileage, but my guess is that we could get a whole lot of older M1s at bargain prices for training purposes in Canada and have the US furnish flyover stocks prepositioned in Europe. Canada needs a vision and a plan. Everything else follows from that.

Fancy socks or not, we'd have no problems getting US buy-in. I would think that Canada actually stepping up and saying that we will provide the manpower for a fly-over brigade using prepositioned US stocks would thrill them. Above all else, the US values commitment. What they hate is hedge betting, mealy-mouthed platitudes and vacillation all of which Socks, and much of our military leadership, excels at.

🍻
amen
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,462
Points
1,040
I'm a Leo fan as well, but that's likely because I prefer intellectually their focus on the mobility, firepower, armour triangle. It seems that the Leo has put mobility higher priority than the M1 and the Challenger 2. It also seems that they have put system availability higher as well.

Fun fact: Leo 2A4/6 cheek applique armour is basically impenetrable to 120-125mm APFSDS for at least one shot. Its hollow centre is wider than the sabot is long. This means upon penetration of the cheek the sabot decelerates at different rates along the shaft. This causes the sabot to yaw, thus it can't penetrate the composite behind the cheek applique as it shatters when it hits. Instead of going into the armour like this - it hits like this \
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,456
Points
1,160
The sabot falls away from the penetrator well before it gets anywhere near the target.
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,088
Points
1,040
I am going to burst some bubbles here. I do not think there is any chance of Canada obtaining Abrams tanks.

The industrial people in our dearly beloved special child province would kick and scream if they were cut out of the middle.
The second point - do the adults in the US government and industry trust a fancy sox wearer with their technology?

While I don't think we will go that route either it likely isn't for those reasons. We have lots of American tech already in our hands much of it much more sensitive than what would be found in the Abrams. As for Quebec screaming while I am not in the loop on every contract for tank support there are very few options in Canada anyway so it would likely be Rheinmetall Canada in Quebec or FFG Canada in NB. Either one represents a "great win" to politicians given the history of the Maritimes & Quebec.

We have facilities in Canada that can upgrade tanks even with the rush on right now. The key is having the need seen and the money allocated. I fear neither is a high enough priority even now. My concern for a long time now is that there hasn't been a rational vision for a force rebuild since we embarked on the Advancing with Purpose agenda which IMHO was weak and flawed from the start.

While I said above that there are options there are no fast options, our industry is woefully lacking in capacity. On the bright side Leo conversion to common standard and a a long term support contract (R&O) are as I understand well underway already but unknown how close they are to execution/contract award.
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
642
Points
960
Sure, and Lima, Ohio is only a 100 or so miles south from Detroit so you could do a parts run or get a TAV on the same day.

🍻
Except that with the exception of training and routine maintenance, they won't be used here. It is far more likely that any Canadian tanks will be employed in Europe or as part of an international effort. In all cases it makes more sense strategically to position them in Europe and only keep sufficient here for training purposes. And if they are in Europe, the Leo or whatever equipment London decides upon would be much closer to the parts supplies.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,450
Points
1,160
Except that with the exception of training and routine maintenance, they won't be used here. It is far more likely that any Canadian tanks will be employed in Europe or as part of an international effort. In all cases it makes more sense strategically to position them in Europe and only keep sufficient here for training purposes. And if they are in Europe, the Leo or whatever equipment London decides upon would be much closer to the parts supplies.
You are assuming that KMW will have a greater supply of Leopard 2 parts in Europe than the US Army will have of Abrams parts in Europe.

I honestly don't know the answer to that, but it wouldn't surprise me if the answer to that question is not as obvious as one might think.
 

ArmyRick

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
524
Points
910
I am going to burst some bubbles here. I do not think there is any chance of Canada obtaining Abrams tanks.

The industrial people in our dearly beloved special child province would kick and scream if they were cut out of the middle.
The second point - do the adults in the US government and industry trust a fancy sox wearer with their technology?
I will take it one step further, Jim. Sorry RSM, doing 25 now for that insubordination.

We will not get new anything except what was on/sort of on the books. NO Bradleys, NO Apaches, NO Switchblades 600, NO Javelin Missiles, NO, no, no.

Canada stands strong in words only against Russia and other global threats. We are literally the opposite of the JTF2 motto, so for Trudeau's Canada "Words not deeds"
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,210
Points
1,090
I will take it one step further, Jim. Sorry RSM, doing 25 now for that insubordination.

We will not get new anything except what was on/sort of on the books. NO Bradleys, NO Apaches, NO Switchblades 600, NO Javelin Missiles, NO, no, no.

Canada stands strong in words only against Russia and other global threats. We are literally the opposite of the JTF2 motto, so for Trudeau's Canada "Words not deeds"
They will give us a slightly bigger budget, won't let us spend it, and return it all at the end of the year
 
Top