Canada's tanks

[suffolkowner]

Is the Gepard not already on a Leo1 hull?

 

[PrairieFella]

I’m not suggesting a Gepard - but a more armored version

Diminishing returns in terms of armour. You can make it infinitely more expensive in terms of armour, make it as solid as a Chally if you want, but a well placed ATGM will still kill. Further more, tough to armour a radar, as long as you can sensor kill it, it may as well be dead. I think the A ech is the perfect hedge for the squadron AD.

 

[PrairieFella]

Also demostrator tanks often have a lot of stuff bolted to them that never makes it to production. Who is going load that 30mm? clear jams, etc. Not to mention overwhelm the crew with tasks. Getting rid of it will likley drop the weight below 60 tons

Certainly would require something since there's no coax haha. Silly design if you ask me. The Gnr/comd should have a coax 7.62 and there should be a fourth crewman who is the air sentry and manning a distinct AD RWS. Give the comd a screen to give fire control orders.

 

[suffolkowner]

Certainly would require something since there's no coax haha. Silly design if you ask me. The Gnr/comd should have a coax 7.62 and there should be a fourth crewman who is the air sentry and manning a distinct AD RWS. Give the comd a screen to give fire control orders.

I think all EMBT/KF51/ARC 3.0 are all planned on having a 30mm RWS/Trophy and a coax

 

[PrairieFella]

I think all EMBT/KF51/ARC 3.0 are all planned on having a 30mm RWS/Trophy and a coax

Hope so! The Leo RC 3.0 prototype does have a coax cutout.

 

[suffolkowner]

Hope so! The Leo RC 3.0 prototype does have a coax cutout.

i read somewhere that it will, been looking for it. maybe more info on KNDS

 

[FJAG]

Is the Gepard not already on a Leo1 hull?

Yup

 

[KevinB]

Diminishing returns in terms of armour. You can make it infinitely more expensive in terms of armour, make it as solid as a Chally if you want, but a well placed ATGM will still kill. Further more, tough to armour a radar, as long as you can sensor kill it, it may as well be dead. I think the A ech is the perfect hedge for the squadron AD.

The Gepard turret is where I was thinking for more armor - the radar can be extremely more low pro - as well as taking linked feeds.

I don’t see the Gepard type setup as an Air Defense system at least in the Anti Aircraft sense beyond point defense. But the guns give exceptional capabilities for C-RAM and C-UAS.

I’m fairly confident that the current crop of APS are not going to do much.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Putting your Gepard in a tank fight is a good way to get your Gepard killed. The furthest forward I want that is ideally the A1 or A2 Ech. Put them in the F Ech and the first thing I shoot is the box with the big spinny thing...then unleash the drones. One bound to the rear would provide ample radar coverage for the FEBA.

That said, armoured regiments most certainly need internal EW and AD. A Gepard is good example of what should be attached to the SHQ.

Edit: Speak of the devil, Son of Gepard, equipped with the Skyranger 35 with AHEAD.

Rheinmetall unveils hybrid tank and air defense system

Rheinmetall, the German defense giant, has introduced a groundbreaking hybrid of the Pz.87 tank (a Swiss variant of the Leopard 2) and the Skyranger 35 air defense turret at Eurosatory 2024. This innovative system represents the next step in mobile air defense, following the success of the...

defence-blog.com

The folks over at the War Zone also have an article that looks at experiments by Rheinmetall in mounting the Skyranger 35 on older Leopard 1 hulls:

Old Leopard Tanks Can Be Reborn As Air Defense Systems With Skyranger 35 Turret

Integrating the Skyranger automatic cannon system on old Leopard 1 tanks could speed critical drone-busting air defenses to Ukraine.

www.twz.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting Support Squadron - 8x AMOS/MJollnir and 12-16 Skyrangers - mount on Leo1s or CV90s.

 

[GR66]

Interesting Support Squadron - 8x AMOS/MJollnir and 12-16 Skyrangers - mount on Leo1s or CV90s.

Sounds similar the Staff & Support Company of a Swedish Mechanized Battalion which contains:

• 2 x Mortar Platoons each with 4 x Mjollnir (CV-90 with 2 x 120mm mortars)
• AA Platoon with 4 x Lvkv 9040 SP AD vehicles (CV-90 with 40mm autocannon and PS-95 radar)

 

[Kirkhill]

Here are the reasons I am dubious about the viability of the current "tool kit".

“The experiences from recent crises and wars, in addition to the obvious postponement of the main Ground Combat System Program [MGCS], creates the necessity to set up an additional medium-term solution,” Bjoern Bernhard, Managing Director of Rheinmetall Landsysteme, said today at the unveiling here at Eurosatory in Paris.

“We see that the MGCS is not getting ahead like it was thought to be,” he later told reporters. “So, I can tell you right in the beginning, the MGCS was thought to be introduced in 2035 and with a small look on the calendar, I can tell you that is only 10 years to go for an extremely complex system.”

Today, Bernhard said the CUT is still in the “early” side of development, but if a customer is interested and ready to invest, the company could have it ready for the field in the early 2030s.

Rheinmetall’s announcement comes as questions linger about the health of the MGCS program. The Franco-German project was first launched in 2017 to develop a commonly designed next-generation European main battle tank to succeed French Army Leclerc and German Leopard 2 vehicles, with entry of service originally planned for 2035. Sébastien Lecornu, France’s defense minister, has since suggested between 2040-2045 stands as a more realistic timetable.

If MGCS drags out, Rheinmetall pitches Concept Unmanned Turret as near-term alternative - Breaking Defense

“The experiences from recent crises and wars, in addition to the obvious postponement of the main Ground Combat System Program, creates the necessity to set up an additional medium-term solution,” said Rheinmetall’s Bjoern Bernhard.

breakingdefense.com

This is 2024. Ukrainians and Russians are dying today. Tanks, guns, ships and aircraft are dying as fast. And they are not being replaced. Even the ones that are planned are being planned for in very low numbers at very high costs with deliveries for the next generation of soldiers and sailors.

To my mind that suggests a gap during which wars will be fought with "other things".

 

[FJAG]

The folks over at the War Zone also have an article that looks at experiments by Rheinmetall in mounting the Skyranger 35 on older Leopard 1 hulls:

Old Leopard Tanks Can Be Reborn As Air Defense Systems With Skyranger 35 Turret

Integrating the Skyranger automatic cannon system on old Leopard 1 tanks could speed critical drone-busting air defenses to Ukraine.

www.twz.com

Too bad we keep cutting our old kit up or turning it into monuments or range targets.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Too bad we keep cutting our old kit up or turning it into monuments or range targets.

Too bad we don’t buy enough kit and then run it past the point where it is worn out…

Those Leopard hulls were finished. I saw some of them.

 

[GK .Dundas]

There's used to be a A couple of fields in Belgium and Germany where you could find literally hundreds of Leo1s . They'd been sitting there for decades.
Most of which were in better material shape the C1 and C2 Leo's.
The surviving 66 or so tanks were in really rough shape or so I'm told .
I suspect most of those European field dwellers are either off to Ukraine or a scrap heap depending on condition.

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1803062536746479788

the ARC 3.0 driving and firing

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1803062536746479788

the ARC 3.0 driving and firing

some more info on the ARC 3.0
it will have hydro pneumatic in arm suspension and the coax

https://twitter.com/x/status/1804217590534820133

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Weight is the big issue according to this interview

 

[KevinB]

Weight is the big issue according to this interview

He is missing the one point that the major weight increases occurred during the times of Gulf War 1 and GWOT. The NATO current gen tanks all had their genesis from the Cold War and those earlier versions where all sub 60t
M1 Abrams
Leopard 2
Challenger I
The armor etc upgrades came after concerns about West Germany were gone - and fighting in the desert was the big issue - where the weight wasn't as big an issue --

But other than that it is a very good article.

 

[FJAG]

Even Germany had problems with bogging down. The problem with farmlands that are loamy is that the low spots retain water more than the high spots - especially in the spring. For very practical reasons, tracked vehicles want to manoeuvre through the low grown so as to stay hull or turret down. Sometimes that bites you in the ass.

You can compensate to a point with track width - in fact the track ground pressure of the lighter Leo 1 (0.86 kg/cm2) isn't much different from that of the Leo 2 (0.89 kg/cm2) or the Challenger 2 (0.9 kg/cm2) but the M1A2 goes up to 1.09 kg/cm2. Its forerunner, the M60, was at 0.77 kg/cm2. Interestingly , T72, T80 and T90s come in at around 0.89, 0.92 and 0.94 kg/cm2 respectively. Not much difference there.

Training plays a big role here. The bridge issue, on the other hand, is a real limitation as it deals with raw weight rather than ground pressure.