Australia gets Abrams

[Kilgor]

Australia will spend $550 million to buy 59 M1A1 Abrams tanks from the US military, in a "mates' rates" deal that includes free training, support vehicles, spare parts and maintenance.

The deal highlights the new era of closer ties with the US, with Australia receiving a discount that will amount to hundreds of millions of dollars over the lifetime of the tanks.

"It's mates' rates, a sweetheart deal," one defence commentator said last night.

The decision to buy the tanks is likely to spur controversy.

Some analysts consider the heavy-duty tank to be suited to desert warfare, open plains and high-intensity conflict rather than the poor quality roads and the jungles of Australia's immediate region.

The Abrams achieved considerable success in the invasion of Iraq last year, rekindling the Government's interest in it.

The army wanted new tanks to replace its 100-strong fleet of 30-year old Leopard tanks, which are vulnerable to mines, rocket-propelled grenades and shoulder-held missiles.

This technology is widespread - part of virtually every nation's armed forces - and is in the hands of terrorists and militias.

The Government considered three types of tanks - the Abrams, the lighter German-built Leopard 2 tanks, and the British-made Challenger 2.

The US Government lobbied for the Abrams, despite concerns it was high-maintenance and guzzled fuel.

The Minister for Defence, Robert Hill, who will announce the purchase today after cabinet's national security committee endorsed the expenditure late yesterday, pushed the US to address these concerns.

Defence sources said Australia had bought a "complete capability" rather than just a tank.

The US has agreed to provide continuing maintenance for the tanks, training and simulators, spare parts, support vehicles such as transport trucks and accessories such as radios.

Unlike the US version, the Australian tanks will not use depleted uranium in its armour.

The tanks' gas turbine engines will also be compatible with diesel and helicopter fuel used by the Australian Defence Force, rather than the aviation fuel used by the US version.

The US is keen to ensure Australian and American equipment are compatible for any future coalition combat.

It is a doctrine supported by Canberra, with both governments discussing joint training facilities and a military pre-positioning post.

As revealed in the Herald last year, the tanks are expected to form the basis of a new joint training facility in northern Australia, where exercises will be conducted and US equipment stored in the event of conflict in the region.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/09/1078594364315.html



So without the nationalistic flame war, which is the better tank / or more suitable for our requirements ?

[Merik]

Would this be the first nation outside the US to operate the M1? Or does Taiwan have them too?

[RomanS]

Saudis have em too


Kick ass news, good for Australians!

[Operation Ivy]

So without the nationalistic flame war, which is the better tank / or more suitable for our requirements ?

Well if you guys got some oil the Abrams is perfect! I actually thought you guys would pick the Leo2,but i guess the guys who decided to get the Abrams have good taste woot

Congrats on your new tank :D

O and will you guys also be buying the M88 with the Abrams?

[Kilgor]

What are the advantages/ disadvantages on both tanks ?

I know the leo2 is a smaller and cheaper tank
Does the Abrams have better electronic gear like most US stuff ?

[flickme]

Cool. The Australian military is so cool.

[Flagg]

$550 mil for 59 tanks...sheesh

I love tanks...and I certainly like the Abrams......but wouldn't that $550 Mil be better spent on a more significant defense need?

Australia lacks the strategic airlift capability to deploy them either internally or externally.

Australia has an excellent natural defense being a bloody big island too far for any potential threat's logistics chain to stretch without getting smoked by Collins subs and F111 Aardvark interdiction strikes...I don't get it

[Operation Ivy]

What are the advantages/ disadvantages on both tanks ?

I know the leo2 is a smaller and cheaper tank
Does the Abrams have better electronic gear like most US stuff ?

Heres the Abrams specs
Crew 4 - driver, commander, gunner, loader
Weight 69.54 tons
Dimensions
Length with gun forward 387 inches
Turret height 93.5 inches
Width 144 inches
Ground clearance 19 inches
Ground pressure 15.4 p.s.i.
Propulsion Gas turbine engine, 1500 horsepower
Transmission Hydrokinetic transmission, 4 forward gears, 2 reverse gears
Power-to-weight ratio 21.6 hp/ton
Performance
Maximum governed speed 42 m.p.h.
Speed cross country 30 m.p.h.
Speed, 10% slope 17 m.p.h.
Speed 60% slope 4.1 m.p.h.
Acceleration 0 to 20 m.p.h. in 7.2 seconds
Range 265 miles cruising
Obstacle crossing
Vertical 42 inches
Trench 9 feet
Main armament 120 mm smooth bore cannon, M256
Coaxial Weapon 7.62 mm machine gun, M240
Loader's Weapon 7.62 mm machine gun, M240, on Skate mount
Commander's weapon 0.50 calibre machine gun, M2, on powered rotary platform
NBC protection: 200 SCFM, clean cooled air



cheaper tank
I thought that the Abrams and Leo2 both ran at 4.5mill

Leo2
Crew 4
Weight 62 metric tonnes
Length 7.7 m
Width 3.7 m
Height 3.0 m
Armament 1 x Rheinmetall 120 mm L55 smoothbore gun
1 x coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun
1 x 7.62 mm anti-aircraft machine gun
Maximum speed 72 km/hr
Maximum range 500 km
Powerplant MTU MB 873 multi-fuel, 1500 hp
Transmission Renk HSWL 354
Gunner's sight STN Atlas Elektronik EMES 15 with thermal channel and laser rangefinder
Commander's sight STN Atlas Elektronik PERI-R17A2 with thermal channel

:D

[AFACadet]

Yeah, they could buy 3 Raptors and a couple AMRAAM Cs :P

[Flagg]

Or a big(ger) fleet of armed/unarmed UAVs.....

lots of unpopulated land/coastline/EEC to protect against poachers/illegal immigration/smugglers/infiltrators etc.......

while the M1s are "securing Australia" in their service laegers....

accomplishing nothing

[Kilgor]

Unlike the US version, the Australian tanks will not use depleted uranium in its armour.

WTF???

WHY ???

[wyrm_142]

Egypt has the M1A1 as well.

[Sixgun Symphony]

Australia lacks the strategic airlift capability to deploy them either internally or externally.


What about sealift capability?


I agree that the money could have been better spent.

[front]

In a question to:

"Unlike the US version, the Australian tanks will not use depleted uranium in its armour."

Kilgor wrote:

"WHY ???"

Australia gave up using DU for "health and safety reasons" in 1990 apparently.

7/2003 - AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE POLICY ON DEPLETED URANIUM
http://www.defence.gov.au/dpe/dhs/infocentre/publications/bulletins/HB07_03.pdf

They think that while the "risks are low" it is can have very nasty effects... could dangerous to everybody who goes near the stuff... munitions or armour.

cheers

front

[Backis]

The US may also have "issues" with exporting that tech. The M1A1 Abrams offered to Sweden would have been without the DU (they were simply never offered).

The Egyptian and SA M1's also lack the DU armor, and I don't think they turned them down for crew-related health reasons... I think the export Abrams never had the DU armor to begin with.

Then again, the diggers are in favour right now, and it was a couple of years ago we were offered those Abrams...

[Gimana]

Would this be the first nation outside the US to operate the M1? Or does Taiwan have them too?

I really hope they (the Taiwanese) do have them. To counter the mainland's continuous threatening.

[Backis]

No Abrams for Taiwan (yet anyway). They still use M48's and M60's, and indigenous modifications of these tanks (CM11 & CM12 Brave Tiger).

[Uncle Sam]

In return for the Tanks, and as a gesture of friendship, you Aussies can send me a couple of HOT Aussie women... :D

[Merik]

Nice sig USP woot

[Sixgun Symphony]

Would this be the first nation outside the US to operate the M1? Or does Taiwan have them too?

I really hope they (the Taiwanese) do have them. To counter the mainland's continuous threatening.


The Taiwanese would be better served by something like the PHM 1 Pegasus Class Hydrofoil Missile Patrol Ships. Better to stop a ChiCom invasion before it reaches the shores of Taiwan.

[Backis]

The Taiwanese would be better served by something like the PHM 1 Pegasus Class Hydrofoil Missile Patrol Ships. Better to stop a ChiCom invasion before it reaches the shores of Taiwan.

Pegasus PHM is old tech... and that rooster tail would be spotted even on Chicom radars. :oops:

In these puppies they might even survive to go home! ;)

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/visby4.jpg
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_8.jpg
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_1.jpg
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_2.jpg
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_4.jpg
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_6.jpg

And OFF I went into OT land! :lol:

[Kilgor]

I dont have a good knowledge of post ww2 tanks ... but isnt the DU armour sealed or encased in another metal ?
Is it exposed to the crew ?

[Sixgun Symphony]

Huh, things have changed since I got out. Than ship looks rather strange to my eyes. Is that supposed to be a gun turrent in the front? I suppose the missiles come out of the back like on a submarine?









The Taiwanese would be better served by something like the PHM 1 Pegasus Class Hydrofoil Missile Patrol Ships. Better to stop a ChiCom invasion before it reaches the shores of Taiwan.

Pegasus PHM is old tech... and that rooster tail would be spotted even on Chicom radars. :oops:

In these puppies they might even survive to go home! ;)

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby/images/Visby_6.jpg

[Backis]

I dont have a good knowledge of post ww2 tanks ... but isnt the DU armour sealed or encased in another metal ?
Is it exposed to the crew ?

As I wrote, i don't think its a crew health issue (although it may be political issua and the Aussies prefer not to alarm the average suburbanite with "nuclear" tanks)...

[Backis]

Huh, things have changed since I got out. Than ship looks rather strange to my eyes. Is that supposed to be a gun turrent in the front? I suppose the missiles come out of the back like on a submarine?


This is the Visby-class FFL.

That "thing" to the fore is a gun yes. The barrel is only exposed while firing to minimize the ships signature. Its a Bofors 57mmL70 SAK3 dual purpose gun, tossing 220 rounds per minute, its "supposed" to be CIWS capable, and with the programmable 3P fuze ammunition... maybe it is.

The aft of the ship is modular under the covering. Ours will contain either a small helicopter hangar or a variable depth towed sonar, alongside a standard complement of SSM's (4x2 RBS-15 mk.3, firing to the sides), and four full-size 533mm multipurpose torpedoes. There are plans (and space) to fit the ship with a SR-VLSAM of some sort as well, but this is only in the planning stages as of now. They will also be fully capable mine sweepers. Sensors include a hull-mounted and side aperture sonar, 3D/HF and LPI nav radar plus an IR sensor.

Me, I have no idea how they managed to fit all that capability inside a 700std FFL! http://forum.daves-universe.com/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif

[USMarine3521]

I'm a little suprised they chose the Abrams, I thought they would opt for the challenger 2 or leo2 a lot more than the abrams.....o well the abrams is a great tank woot :D

[Sixgun Symphony]

That is alot of capabilities for such a small ship. I can see it being very cost effective for a small country like Taiwan.

[Backis]

That is alot of capabilities for such a small ship. I can see it being very cost effective for a small country like Taiwan.

Yeah, I sure hope our current wannabe-peacenik's-in-power doesn't axe the project for some unintelligible reason... There are 4 delivered (6? 6 ordered anyway), but they're not finished with trials yet (service comission is expected in 2005-2007 I think). :(

The issues that could be a problem for Taiwan are sea keeping and endurance. It is stabilized for the Baltic and North Sea... so if it works as claimed, the China Sea shouldn't be that much of a problem. I just have not come over any figures on how long her legs are though... she is supposed to be capable of foreign deployment, so it can't be that bad.

Then again, Pegasus sea-keeping might not be that good either. ;)

[Sixgun Symphony]

Yeah, I sure hope our current wannabe-peacenik's-in-power doesn't axe the project for some unintelligible reason... There are 4 delivered (6? 6 ordered anyway), but they're not finished with trials yet (service comission is expected in 2005-2007 I think). :(


I advise writing letters to your representatives in government. Advise others to do so as well.

When the next election comes up, vote right. :)

[Durandal]

M1s!? You have to be kidding me....

Edit: Leo 2s would be just as dumb. unless of course Austrailia is planning on doing some force projection down the line...either way.

AFVs...like a modular combat vehicle would be a better penny spent...

[Backis]

I advise writing letters to your representatives in government. Advise others to do so as well.

When the next election comes up, vote right. :)

I've been writing so many emails I think I activated their spam-filters by now. :lol:

Voting right won't help... there are four parties who can't agree on a common policy... two of them ranging from anti-military(c) to rabid moron anti-military liberals (fp)

They'll also f*ck up the economy even worse...

Last time they were in power the central bank had to raise the interest to 500% because speculation against our currency was so bad... :bash:

SH*T, WERE SCREWED!!! :lol:

[Midav]

I take it the Australian M1 will have cobham armor, right?

Just add some more of that on or ceramics in the place of DU.

[stuntman]

M1s!? You have to be kidding me....

Edit: Leo 2s would be just as dumb. unless of course Austrailia is planning on doing some force projection down the line...either way.

AFVs...like a modular combat vehicle would be a better penny spent...
Do you mean more like South Africa does with it's AFV, APC?

[angry cow]

IT seems to me like the only reason they would be getting Abrams is if they are going to be "helping out" the US in foreign policy matters.

[Gimana]

The Taiwanese would be better served by something like the PHM 1 Pegasus Class Hydrofoil Missile Patrol Ships. Better to stop a ChiCom invasion before it reaches the shores of Taiwan.

Yup, i second u with that. Since i'm in Macau and i must say that thought i don really suggest a independece of Taiwan, but a communist rule of Taiwan is never in my mind neither. Its disastrous :|

[Ballistic]

$550 mil for 59 tanks...sheesh

I love tanks...and I certainly like the Abrams......but wouldn't that $550 Mil be better spent on a more significant defense need?

Australia lacks the strategic airlift capability to deploy them either internally or externally.

Australia has an excellent natural defense being a bloody big island too far for any potential threat's logistics chain to stretch without getting smoked by Collins subs and F111 Aardvark interdiction strikes...I don't get it

I'm all for the purchase, good buy, but only 59 ?? I dont know yet, but will we be keeping existing Leopards ?? Hmmm. Either way I'm happy with my tax going to such good equipment. The ADF is currently getting an modernisation upgrade at the cost of $50 Billion. As far as IFV's go, the ADF has well over 110 ASLAVs already and another (round about) 150 are being purchased in the Land 112 Project. The Phase3 LAVs (being delivered this year) will have lots of different upgrades including new thermal imaging sights.

We arent getting Raptors :) But the RAAF is getting a substantial overhaul to the current F/A-18 fleet, with new avionics etc., airframe strengthening to last up until the JSF comes into service and new ammunitions including JDAM's, AIM 120C AMRAAM's and ASRAAM's.

Mentioned also was a UAV, well the Aus Government is looking at purchasing a "squadron" of Global Hawk UAVs, plus some new Air Warfare Destroyers and other upgrades for the Navy.

[ShotOver]

Sweet, i'm going to the ADF as a tanker. So maybe if im lucky i will get to play with one of these babies... woot

[Ballistic]

Cool, good luck !! woot

I'm wanting to join the Army aswell but not sure yet, I'm getting older and time aint getting any slower so I best make my mind up before too long. :) Either way, I want to be a Para. :)

[Sixgun Symphony]

Cool, good luck !! woot

I'm wanting to join the Army aswell but not sure yet, I'm getting older and time aint getting any slower so I best make my mind up before too long. :) Either way, I want to be a Para. :)

Does your country have anything like our "weekend warriors"?

If so then you can go part-time, if you really like it then you only have to sign some papers for full-time active duty. If you don't like it then you are only doing it part-time.

[Ballistic]

Yep, Australia has an Army Reserve, and yeah, thats actually not a bad idea. My only concern really is the fact I have a mild case of asthma, nothing bad, and I can run for quite a distance without having troubles, hell I dont even use ventolin. I guess the Army doctors will assess whether Im fit enough when the time comes :|, the only thing I can do is continue to get fitter.

[Kingpin]

"It's mates' rates, a sweetheart deal," one defence commentator said last night.

Yeah, 10 millions per tank was very sweetheart deal :) Or this is Aussie dollar?

[Ballistic]

Aussie dollars mate. Good time to buy aswell, our dollar is quite good right now, although it has gone down a few cents in the last few days. :D

[marktigger]

so abrahams wins by washington pressure again!!!!!!!

arms companies, election year, campaign funds are the words that spring to mind

[Backis]

so abrahams wins by washington pressure again!!!!!!!

arms companies, election year, campaign funds are the words that spring to mind

Aussie generals seem to have already forgot the M60 GPMG disaster, they're just replacing them with MAG58's... the design that won the trials in the sixties! :lol:

:P ;)

Seriously, wich times has the Abrams won before? Arabs seem to buy whatever takes their fancy... just how many diferent types of MBT does the Saudis use? AMX-30, M84 (Yugo T-72), Leclerc, Patton and Abrams? The term "logistical nightmare" comes to mind...)

The Chally never was on the short list for Australia. The rifled gun messes up logistics to much, and ammunition stowage will be a problem for crew safety if its converted to a smoothbore... lots of expenses in money and time required to redesign the interior.

Even you Brits are planning to replace the L30, but it ain't done yet.

The only thing "wrong" with the Abrams is that gas turbine... expensive guzzler using seventies tech. But I guess the Yanks will keep up the logistical tail in injun country.