• 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

I'd be really out in front of my skis if I tried to answer that!

I will say, though, that in 2008 to get the armour package as-configured (particularly the belly armour) the work had to be done in Germany. The interior turret stuff, though, could be done in New Brunswick. I am sure that some bright engineers/plant design folks could figure out a way to put on some form of armour upgrade in New Brunswick.
the billion in service support contract with KNDS doesnt cover refurbishment of the 2A4's?
 
Though- that 15 number was set while that 20 A6M's were off the board for overhaul and upgrades, the completion of which leads to some interesting possibilities.

  1. 34 A4's+5A4M's was enough to sustainably meet domestic training/generation needs- it stands to reason that 34+5+5A6M's would do so as well, leaving the option of adding 15 A6M's to Latvia (flyover contingent?)
  2. 1, but instead of Latvia the 15 available combat tanks are tasked to part of a 2nd combined arms battlegroup to be shipped over
  3. 34 A4's + 5A4M's was an unsustainable stop gap, the availability of the A6's lets us shift to a more sustainable 34+9+9, leaving 11+11 for full doctrinal squadron+ spares in Latvia
  4. Somewhere between 1 & 2, full squadron+ 1-2 additional troops and/or spares (25-28 total tanks in Latvia)
Still no to deploying full tank regiment or heavy combined arms Bde, but better than a combat team - especially if the infantry can match the expansion
So what you're saying ( In my best Cathy BBC 4 voice) is Canada needs more Tanks. How about we get on board and buy 100 Leo 2A7M's plus 7 or so Bridge layers? Keep the 20 A6M's and give the A4's to Ukraine. Hopefully the R&O contract will maintain the ARV's AND AEV's
 
I'd be really out in front of my skis if I tried to answer that!

I will say, though, that in 2008 to get the armour package as-configured (particularly the belly armour) the work had to be done in Germany. The interior turret stuff, though, could be done in New Brunswick. I am sure that some bright engineers/plant design folks could figure out a way to put on some form of armour upgrade in New Brunswick.
Even without armour upgrade, Assuming "interior turret stuff" is inclusive of replacing the obsolete hydraulic turret drive with electric and bringing the FCS etc into more or less commonality with the rest of the fleet...

Seems like the benefits of doing so would be massive. Easier to maintain, can be fully functional trainers without need for conversion, actually deployable in a ballon up scenario
 
So what you're saying ( In my best Cathy BBC 4 voice) is Canada needs more Tanks. How about we get on board and buy 100 Leo 2A7M's plus 7 or so Bridge layers? Keep the 20 A6M's and give the A4's to Ukraine. Hopefully the R&O contract will maintain the ARV's AND AEV's
whats the difference between a 2a7 or 2a8 and our MC2?
 
Germany has begun equipping its Leopard 2's with Trophy APS. Hopefully when we eventually get around to replacing our tanks we do the same. My understanding is that the system is pretty heavy (around 1,800lbs) so not sure if it's something that could be retrofitted to our existing tanks or if the turrets would have to be specially designed to take the added weight (I'm guessing the latter).

 
And then backfill with M1A2 Abrams.
And make the logistical nightmare even worse, how do you think maintaining a different platform is possible. So sending the A4s to Ukraine , then move 15 A6MC2 to Latvia, upgrade and R&O the 19 A4Ms. This would leave only 4 A6MC2 to train a Sqn of personal every 6 months.
 
And make the logistical nightmare even worse, how do you think maintaining a different platform is possible. So sending the A4s to Ukraine , then move 15 A6MC2 to Latvia, upgrade and R&O the 19 A4Ms. This would leave only 4 A6MC2 to train a Sqn of personal every 6 months.
agreed go all in one way or another
 
And make the logistical nightmare even worse, how do you think maintaining a different platform is possible. So sending the A4s to Ukraine , then move 15 A6MC2 to Latvia, upgrade and R&O the 19 A4Ms. This would leave only 4 A6MC2 to train a Sqn of personal every 6 months.
Agreed. It's gotta be a complete replacement. Hopefully at a 2-2.5x ratio. I bet if the will was there to come to terms with infrastructure and servicing agreements the Americans would cut us a deal on M1A2s if we gave all our Leos to the Ukrainians. We desperately need more tanks either way as well as more PYs dedicated to tanks.
 
Agreed. It's gotta be a complete replacement. Hopefully at a 2-2.5x ratio. I bet if the will was there to come to terms with infrastructure and servicing agreements the Americans would cut us a deal on M1A2s if we gave all our Leos to the Ukrainians. We desperately need more tanks either way as well as more PYs dedicated to tanks.
just cut a deal with KNDS on maintenance though?

Might as well wait on the Abrams until we can make the deal with Trump and get as much benefit out of it as possible
 
just cut a deal with KNDS on maintenance though?

Might as well wait on the Abrams until we can make the deal with Trump and get as much benefit out of it as possible
Man, I love me the Leo but our big problem is our hull are TIRED. We're at some serious diminishing returns territory with a lot of the tanks we have left in the fleet. If we could try to leverage donating all of our Leo platforms (MBT, ARV, AEV) into 200-275 Abrams platforms, that might earn us some goodwill with the Donald as we can say "look, we're taking actual steps". That said, infrastructure and armoured personnel issues will still remain a critical concern to fielding a new tank force.
 
Man, I love me the Leo but our big problem is our hull are TIRED. We're at some serious diminishing returns territory with a lot of the tanks we have left in the fleet. If we could try to leverage donating all of our Leo platforms (MBT, ARV, AEV) into 200-275 Abrams platforms, that might earn us some goodwill with the Donald as we can say "look, we're taking actual steps". That said, infrastructure and armoured personnel issues will still remain a critical concern to fielding a new tank force.
As of yet there is not a lot to suggest that we-Canada/Liberals/Trudeau are treating any of this seriously. On the other hand we do have orders and plans for P8's/AEW/new subs
 
just cut a deal with KNDS on maintenance though?

Might as well wait on the Abrams until we can make the deal with Trump and get as much benefit out of it as possible
KNDS is having a hard time finding personal for the maintenance of our Leopards. The military doesn’t have enough personal to maintain them and deploy at the same time either a maintenance course is 12 weeks for 8 students. Not sure what the correct answer is but introducing a complete new platform isn’t the solution.
 
Back
Top