Defence Spending Increase

[Manix77]

Originally Posted by Rob

I agree with this post - it's not waves of Russian/Chinese infantry/AFVs that MBT's will encounter, it's a 2-3 man group with an RPG-7/LAW type weapons, who are indistinguishable from civilians.

Also, the current conflicts are centered around built up urban areas, where, as WW2 experience shows us, tanks are very vulnerable.

The Israelis have some interesting & useful ideas regarding AFV design whcih have not been adopted by the rest of the world; the Merkava has it's engine and gearbox mounted forward, idea being to protect the crew above all else. They're also fitted with internally loaded 60mm mortars for anti-personnel use, to save firing the 120mm unnecessarily. That is the sort of thing needed in Afghanistan/Iraq, not APFSDS DU penetrators with prodigious range.

Although the modern MBT was designed to fight other tanks it's actually pretty useful in all levels of conflict.

I'd be the first person to admit that an MBT is NOT invulnerable but it will survive a great deal more punishment than any other land based weapon system. If the 2-3 man RPG/LAW team fire at a modern MBT it will likely be the last thing they ever do. Very few man portable anti armour weapons are capable of scoring even a mobility kill on an Abrahms/Leopard 2 standard MBT. Those that can are generally very expensive and come with their own limitations.

The tactics employed by a tank troop need to also be considered, they don't just bumble along waiting for someone to shoot at them. They cover each other's movement and, in more complex terrain, will move with infantry support.

I'm a big fan of the Merkava and it's basic design philosophy. Incidentally the mortar is rarely used and, although it has its place, it is removed from most operational tanks.

In counter insurgency ops the tank's best weapon is its sensors (Thermal sight and high powered optics) followed by the fact that it attracts all the attention allowing dismounted troops to move under its cover. The main gun is also very useful, the primary anti armour round for most tanks (APFSDS) has no explosive content. This allows them to engage very specific targets with minimal collateral damage. An Abrahms can destroy a Landcruiser size vehicle with one shot at 2.5 - 3km without even breaking the windows of a close following vehicle.

As you can see, I'm a big fan of heavy armour. The capabilities of tanks and heavy fighting vehicles are not well understood even by many military professionals so please forgive my little rants when I think the capability is being misrepresented.

regards

Manix

[Fordman1]

Nice post Manix !

It's good to see another Heavy armor fan here.

The Merkava however has it's limitations, that rear end and it's doors are really vulnerable to RPG attack.

The "IV" I think addresses that, but the early versions had quite a few losses from what I gather were attacks from hand held RPGs.

The worst think about the Aussie Abrams is the color

Now if they painted those babies in the 3 color AusCam they would look awesome :

[Road_Warrior]

Arghhhh how do I attach a PowerPoint file - I have a Power Point presentation here that was produced by the US Army Armoured Corps following the Iraq war as a 'lessons learned' document. Got some good detail and pics in there about the performance of the tank and battle damage assessments.

Anyone?

[rocketscientist]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

Nice post Manix !
The worst think about the Aussie Abrams is the color

Now if they painted those babies in the 3 color AusCam they would look awesome :

I understand that the change to AusCam will be made during the Abrams cycle of deep maintenance, in the coming years.

In the meantime there is always the Saab barracuda system to consider.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by rocketscientist

I understand that the change to AusCam will be made during the Abrams cycle of deep maintenance, in the coming years.

In the meantime there is always the Saab barracuda system to consider.

Hey there rocket !

I'm hearing the 'cudda' camo has been canned, and we're left with the tan / sand colored machines.

That is a great photo BTW. What a machine !!

[Daymoe]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Arghhhh how do I attach a PowerPoint file - I have a Power Point presentation here that was produced by the US Army Armoured Corps following the Iraq war as a 'lessons learned' document. Got some good detail and pics in there about the performance of the tank and battle damage assessments.

Anyone?

www.rapidshare.com

then give us the link once it is uploaded

[Road_Warrior]

I'll wait until I've got confirmation that the .ppt file I have is actually the one I am thinking of (PPT wont work on my computer any more) before uploading it.

[Daymoe]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I'll wait until I've got confirmation that the .ppt file I have is actually the one I am thinking of (PPT wont work on my computer any more) before uploading it.

Don't have the office suite anymore? If you want something free get open office, not as good but it does the job and is free.

[Road_Warrior]

Yeah I started downloading open office before but I stopped it when I saw the download was 142mb and I didn't want to fag up my download limit for the month :-I

[muppet]

Tanks lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VdRnY-TUb4
This is a setup but it is fun to watch.

[Road_Warrior]

Manix did it work??

[DoreSlamR]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Yeah I started downloading open office before but I stopped it when I saw the download was 142mb and I didn't want to fag up my download limit for the month :-I

powerpoint viewer 2003:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

1.9mb

Or newer version here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

25.8mb

Should do the job I hope

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

powerpoint viewer 2003:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

1.9mb

Excellent stuff, thanks for that.

OK.

Manix - you may need to delete or ignore that ppt that I sent you because I think it is the wrong one. The file name is different.

Here is the ppt that I was thinking of - an assessment of the US Army's Armored Corps of the Abrams' performance in Operation Iraqi Freedom. It's a must-view document if your a heavy armour fan!

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...earned2003.ppt

[nb_351]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Apart from being old, what's wrong with them? Incidentally, having just flicked through the White Paper I can tell you that there is a program in play to replace the Army's wheeled vehicle fleet (everything) with around 7000 new ones. I think Pinzgauer might get the nod for the Unimog replacement? Not sure. Expect the Landrovers to go eventually as well.

yeah i heard the rovers are the first ones to go in the new plan...
theres nothing wrong with them at all, like you said theyre just old... the problem with old, and the conditions these things go through is that things deteriorate really quickly... and fasteners become rusty and snap...
but we get paid to fix it either way so its all good... theyre pretty basic...