- Reaction score
- 7,216
- Points
- 1,160
Sorry, bit of a brain fart. Not flails but ploughs.
Canada's tanks
- Thread starter jfposada
- Start date
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,451
- Points
- 990
Two questions-
Is that 30 million the general new "new Leopard price" or the specific "new 2A8" price. That is to say, could a 2A6M or 2A7 be built and acquired at a materially lower price point, if not, what where is the line?
and, if a 21st century MBT can be built materially cheaper- just not to the spec of the latest and greatest- do we (the west, not just Canada) need to be thinking about "good enough"
Is that 30 million the general new "new Leopard price" or the specific "new 2A8" price. That is to say, could a 2A6M or 2A7 be built and acquired at a materially lower price point, if not, what where is the line?
and, if a 21st century MBT can be built materially cheaper- just not to the spec of the latest and greatest- do we (the west, not just Canada) need to be thinking about "good enough"
Last edited:
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 17,384
- Points
- 1,260
Perfection is the enemy of good enough. I quite agree with you.
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,937
- Points
- 1,160
We need to build our own and keep the money in country. Do we still have the plans for M4A3E8s?
That's if we built Shermans in Canada.
Tank Production in Canada (AHQ report from 1950)
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 14,986
- Points
- 1,160
I do believe that the Grizzley was in fact an M4A1 Sherman. While the RAM was not an M4, it was based on the M3 Lee chassis removing the sponson gun and given a better turret. The M3 chassis evolved into the M4 chassis. By the time that Canadian troops went into combat the Ram's 6 pdr was considered inadequate so it stayed a training tanks while Canadian's deployed in American M4s (having also first spent some time in Brit tanks)
Another point. A large number of Sextons were built in Canada. First several hundred on the Ram M3 chassis and subsequently, many more on the Grizzley M4 chassis. The Sexton was a highly successful design and stayed in service for at least a decade after the war with the Brits. I'm not sure how long they remained in service in Canada. We did have 3 Militia artillery regiments (26, 29 and 39 Fd) designated as (SP) until around 1964/5 but they would undoubtably have given up their SP guns when the new towed 105mm entered service in the 1950s for both RegF and Militia regiments.
29 Fd gave up the 25-Pdr in 1957. The Sgts mess in the Sarnia Armouries has a display of some notable casings from the unit's history, which includes the last 25-Pdr round that they fired.
- Reaction score
- 23,674
- Points
- 1,260
The issue is no one is building A6 or A7's anymore.
KNDS doesn't have the ability to run more than one line, and quite frankly for them the opportunity cost of building A6 or A7's isn't worth it as that would result in less A8's which already have a decently long wait list.
If you want a cheaper tank, you need to look outside the KNDS portfolio
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,451
- Points
- 990
That's the situation as it is, but what I'm asking is - is it the best the situation could/should be if NATO countries acted together in concert on a war type footing? How does that opportunity cost look if the dog decides to stop letting itself be wagged by the tail?
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,412
- Points
- 1,210
you are correct, only reason we stopped making the Grizzly is US tank production easily was feeding the alllies, so it wasn't needed.I do believe that the Grizzley was in fact an M4A1 Sherman. While the RAM was not an M4, it was based on the M3 Lee chassis removing the sponson gun and given a better turret. The M3 chassis evolved into the M4 chassis. By the time that Canadian troops went into combat the Ram's 6 pdr was considered inadequate so it stayed a training tanks while Canadian's deployed in American M4s (having also first spent some time in Brit tanks)
Another point. A large number of Sextons were built in Canada. First several hundred on the Ram M3 chassis and subsequently, many more on the Grizzley M4 chassis. The Sexton was a highly successful design and stayed in service for at least a decade after the war with the Brits. I'm not sure how long they remained in service in Canada. We did have 3 Militia artillery regiments (26, 29 and 39 Fd) designated as (SP) until around 1964/5 but they would undoubtably have given up their SP guns when the new towed 105mm entered service in the 1950s for both RegF and Militia regiments.
- Reaction score
- 23,674
- Points
- 1,260
No one in their right mind is going to buy a tank without and APS and the integrated hull and turret sensors on them now.
So, no, no one is going to be clamoring for A6/A7's.
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,451
- Points
- 990
Even at 2:1?
- Reaction score
- 2,248
- Points
- 1,060
seems like APS should be coming to more AFV
outside of KNDS and the 2A8 what can we do since were not sure about the Abrams or the US right now? Jump onto the KF51 project? K2 out of SK/Poland?
Those systems can be added later on as proven by all the updates from the A4-A7 models.
Base tank would be a good start for many countries. All the addons can be somewhat limiting especially if the tanks are going to be used for training only and or in storage.
As the Ukrainians can attest to. Adding armor to the Leopard 1 and 2 has been pretty successful in terms of protection. No fancy systems.
One needs to look at the person and equipment they will be potentially fighting. Looking at specs of the New A8 tank weighing in at 70-80 tons is a lot of weight for a vehicle crossing rough terrain, bridges. No matter how big of tracks you have modern 70-80 ton tanks are going to be limited in their fighting areas they can reasonably access. Central/Northern Europe is one of those areas where access will be limited for vehciles of that weight class.
Poland has already done lots of thought in regards to heavier tanks and equipment in regards to road structures including road base, bridges, culverts etc.
KMD might be enticed for a production facility here in Canada if we were to order 2-300 tanks.
- Reaction score
- 2,248
- Points
- 1,060
a production facility or an assembly one? I doubt we see 300 tanks. I doubt we see 300 hulls including ARV/AEV/ABLV
Production and Assembly.
We have the skill sets here in the Country already. Provide expertise around the world with our current partners. It would not take much if any thing at all for us to ramp up the process and put it all together.
quadrapiper
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 617
- Points
- 1,040
Any area of the country seem like a particularly good option for that sort of facility?
Depends on how one looks at the success of industries. Lots of places out west that could fit the bill. Central Canada has lots of support to offer, in terms of manufacturing and labor force. It would be a roll the dice and throw the contract out to see who wants the work.
Alberta is busy with Oilfield and heavy industrial manufacturing Not sure if they have the will or the want to get involved in Government carrot contracts.
KNDS has a maintenance center established or being established in Edmonton. That would not be a bad idea to expand on that.
I personally would stay out of Central Canada due to land costs and they already control the market on Defense Contracts. Try and spread the industry out a bit.
But maybe GDLS Canada could pair up and make the transition easier. start to work on a tracked LAV program also or CV90 procurement
Similar threads
