Armored Fighting Vehicles version M4 - are we going with that? Sure, man.

[kato]

Leopard 2 PSO was only vaporware.

There were plans to use components from it for "Leopard 2 UrbOps" - which basically would have upgraded 150 Leopard 2A6M with the PSO armor, dozer blade, APU and camera system, and would have kept 50 upgraded Leopard 2A4 turrets with improved armor - for the short gun - available as drop-in modules.

UrbOps was dropped a while ago and replaced with the Leopard 2A7, which was realized as a trial run - using the twenty Leopard 2A6M CAN, i.e. modified Leopard 2A6 NL, that were returned by Canada to Germany when their lease finished.

The Leopard 2A7 is basically an experiment in how much different hardware you can bring together in a Leopard:

• the uparmored 2A6M CAN with MEXAS-H armor
• with an APU specifically newly developed (because apparently they absolutely need one twice as powerful as mounted on some other Leopards...)
• and the air conditioning for the turret from the 2A6 HEL,
• the Saab Barracuda camouflage system from the 2A5 DK,
• the battle management system, PERI RTWL commander's sight and digital intercom transferred over from the Puma (... the latter of which was kinda transferred over from the Leclerc)

The A7V then pretty much takes that set of improvement and transfers them over into other systems where that was considered too big an investment for the small A7 run, thus:

• using 84 older A4-level Leopards, suspected to be Strv 121 returned by Sweden after lease
• implementing all the A7 hardware above, bringing them to the same standard
• since they're taking apart the hull anyway for this some modifications to the drive train to increase acceleration
• add-on armor on frontal arc over Leopard 2A7 level (... yes, on top of what MEXAS-H provides)
• the Attica thermal imager from PERI RTWL also being used for the EMES-15 gunner's sight
• Spectus thermal imager and separate air conditioning for the driver, which mandates moving some equipment around in the vehicle

[I am Belch II]

The put the 120mm/55 on the Leopard.....Im wonder why  the US hasn't done that with the M1A2 and made them more powerful.

[Daryk]

The Russians have something that's not vaporware than can defeat the existing M1A2 gun?  ???

[DoctorMonkey]

The A7V then pretty much takes that set of improvement and transfers them over into other systems where that was considered too big an investment for the small A7 run, thus:

• using 84 older A4-level Leopards, suspected to be Strv 121 returned by Sweden after lease
• implementing all the A7 hardware above, bringing them to the same standard
• since they're taking apart the hull anyway for this some modifications to the drive train to increase acceleration
• add-on armor on frontal arc over Leopard 2A7 level (... yes, on top of what MEXAS-H provides)
• the Attica thermal imager from PERI RTWL also being used for the EMES-15 gunner's sight
• Spectus thermal imager and separate air conditioning for the driver, which mandates moving some equipment around in the vehicle

Fairly sure the A7V is quite a different beast

[Kidd]

@kato - speaking of the sourcing of Leo 2 chasses; why was it necessary to buy back a bunch of Leo 2s which had been sold to other nations? Or is it a misreporting of the leasing arrangements you mention?

[kato]

@kato - speaking of the sourcing of Leo 2 chasses; why was it necessary to buy back a bunch of Leo 2s which had been sold to other nations? Or is it a misreporting of the leasing arrangements you mention?

There were only three cases where significant quantities of Leos were "bought back": That was the 160 Strv 121 from Sweden when their lease expired (they were rented for 15 years), and 40 Leopard 2A4Ö that KMW bought from Austria in 2011 when they offered up one of their three battalions - actually outbidding competing offers. Rheinmetall similarly bought 42 Pz 87 (Leopard 2A4) from Switzerland in 2010 to rebuild them into mineclearing and engineer vehicles.

KMW was maintaining a long-term stock of Leopard 2 (and used to do the same with Leopard 1 until a few years ago) in order to be able to offer them in significant quantities if a buyer popped up. This second-hand stocking and resale was somewhat profitable for them, between e.g. the 2011 Austrian buy and the next sale to Poland in 2013 there was a per-unit margin of several 100,000 Euro (up to half a million minus expenses).

Effectively they stopped doing this when the supply of used Leopard 2 dried up - or at least the supply that they can feasibly buy up. After the above buy-back they sold several hundred units to Poland and Singapore. The relatively recent sale of 100 vehicles to the German Army for conversion to Leopard 2A7V and some mineclearing vehicles likely nearly exhausted their stock. Around the same time KMW refocused activities in this kind of field by buying up Battle Tank Dismantling GmbH instead, the only company in Europe fully certified to dismantle armoured vehicles.

There is only one source remaining for used Leopard 2 that i know of that's available for sale, and that's the Spanish depot stock of 108 Leopard 2A4; Spain had originally only leased these from KMW too, but bought them up in 2005. They've been actively trying to sell them but potential buyers rejected them since they'd require factory-level maintenance - something that KMW obviously could offer inhouse as part of a sale.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

IlIRC, there was some issue with the M1A2's turret that made fitting a larger gun into it problematic.

[kato]

P.S.: What KMW bought in 2016.



It's actually a surprisingly small operation. 35 people taking apart around ten vehicles per week.

[chanman]

UrbOps was dropped a while ago and replaced with the Leopard 2A7, which was realized as a trial run - using the twenty Leopard 2A6M CAN, i.e. modified Leopard 2A6 NL, that were returned by Canada to Germany when their lease finished.

Well, that was a change in plans, since twenty German 2A6 were leased for deployment to Afghanistan while the  2A6NL/2A4NLs were prepped. The leased tanks experienced such hard use though, that the Germans didn't want the leased tanks back, hence the swap with the Dutch models.

I assume the German 2A6s that were kept were/will be refurbished at some point, even if just to rationalize equipment like radios and MGs with the rest of the fleet.

[Kidd]

Interesting, thanks

Huh, 0.5m euro a unit doesn't seem like that much.

What the heck did they expect the Leo 1s to be used for?

[glitterboy2098]

Interesting, thanks

Huh, 0.5m euro a unit doesn't seem like that much.

What the heck did they expect the Leo 1s to be used for?

well the chassis can be rebuilt into Marksman AAG vehicles, bridgelayers, and engineering vehicles. but most likely they planned to sell them to smaller countries that wanted western tanks but couldn't afford the newer Leopards, M1's, etc. some countries still operate them and might need replacements as well.

[PsihoKekec]

@kato - speaking of the sourcing of Leo 2 chasses; why was it necessary to buy back a bunch of Leo 2s which had been sold to other nations? Or is it a misreporting of the leasing arrangements you mention?

There are no capabilities to build new Leo 2 hulls anymore. So if they want to sell tanks new buyers, they need to buy used chassis from someone.

[beachhead1985]

There are no capabilities to build new Leo 2 hulls anymore. So if they want to sell tanks new buyers, they need to buy used chassis from someone.

The factory is shuttered?

[Ursus Maior]

Yes, the assembly line was sacked some time ago and by now most experienced workers will be retired or otherwise gone. Peace dividend does that to countries that are not the US for reasons such as "not buying tank chassis for 20 years" etc. As of now, the only Western nation on the continent with an assembly line from scratch to finished tank would be France. And even the French would need to re-open the line, since it has been shut since 2007.

[glitterboy2098]

and lets face it, the LeClerc isn't exactly in high demand on the market.

[Ursus Maior]

True, of course. Which is why the next German and French tank is probably a shared model.

[dgorsman]

So we should be expecting a Eurofighter, with treads?

[kato]

Yes, the assembly line was sacked some time ago and by now most experienced workers will be retired or otherwise gone

There is still an active assembly line. Hungary just ordered 44 new-built units (Leopard 2A7+) plus 12 used stock units (Leopard 2A4) from KMW in December 2018.

So we should be expecting a Eurofighter, with treads?

We did have a joint tank project before, ya know. It resulted in the Leopard 1 and AMX-30, with nearly 10,000 hulls built across various variants.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Sub 40 tons, what's your guys' best thoughts for something that would follow on the AMX-30 as a replacement model?  Pick your timeframe anywhere in the 80s, to fill the job of the AMX as high-speed cavalry with good gun or missile power, "enough" armor, but keep it light weight.  Say this country has a lot of really old bridges that aren't quite up to the big heavy wonder-armor machines.

Also, what's the consensus (around here) on mobility vs armor protection?  I'd always figured a faster unit, able to move farther over more terrain would be better than something slower and heavier, with more restrictions, because it can seize superior terrain and pre-empt an opponent, but once the shooting starts it does have its vulnerabilities.  Your opinions?

[glitterboy2098]

something akin to the XM-8 "Armored Gun System" (aka Light Tank)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M8_Armored_Gun_System

small, but with the big gun of an MBT. reasonably high speed, and modular armor kit that can be tailored to the level of protection needed for the campaign's battlefield environment.

[marauder648]

So we should be expecting a Eurofighter, with treads?

It can work. But also MBT-70 says hello too.

[kato]

Sub 40 tons, what's your guys' best thoughts for something that would follow on the AMX-30 as a replacement model?  Pick your timeframe anywhere in the 80s, to fill the job of the AMX as high-speed cavalry with good gun or missile power, "enough" armor, but keep it light weight.

For that timeframe? TAM all the way.

Production 1979-1983 for Argentina, then stopped for 10 years for financial problems. Just slot your order in there, much like a number of countries (Malaysia, Peru) tried to but failed for various reasons. In trials for Ecuador in 1989 it performed way ahead of its competitors - the Textron Stingray, Steyr SK-105 and upgraded AMX-13-105.

Modern upgraded version (basically with add-on armor kit and new electronics):

[Daryk]

*snip*
Also, what's the consensus (around here) on mobility vs armor protection?  I'd always figured a faster unit, able to move farther over more terrain would be better than something slower and heavier, with more restrictions, because it can seize superior terrain and pre-empt an opponent, but once the shooting starts it does have its vulnerabilities.  Your opinions?

In today's world?  Mobility rules.  If you're stationary, a heavy enough gun can be brought to bear...

[beachhead1985]

Yes, the assembly line was sacked some time ago and by now most experienced workers will be retired or otherwise gone. Peace dividend does that to countries that are not the US for reasons such as "not buying tank chassis for 20 years" etc. As of now, the only Western nation on the continent with an assembly line from scratch to finished tank would be France. And even the French would need to re-open the line, since it has been shut since 2007.

Um...relevant to my professional interests...can I get a source on that? It would be a real blockbuster of a fact to have in my backpocket, but I need to be able to support it with a reference.

[ANS Kamas P81]

TAM's a fun one though it's even lighter than the AMX-30 is.  I took a look at the AMX-40; it's a nice upgrade though the extra weight doesn't seem to do much for the armor (but that 120mm gun, yummy).  There's Japan's Type 10 but that's about 30 years downrange from what I'm looking at conceptually, and still goes up to 48 tonnes with a full load. 

I almost wonder if it wouldn't be better to abandon true heavy MBTs for this concept since 40 tons just doesn't have the mass budget to run modern armor and guns; everything else seems to be in the 50+ range.  I suppose if I'm going to keep this paradigm, it makes sense to stick with smaller AFVs with moderate armor and heavy missile armament.  Focus on ATGMs instead of a gun based system and give up on really serious passive protection.

Stupid sexy MBTs.

[Force of Nature]

In today's world?  Mobility rules.  If you're stationary, a heavy enough gun can be brought to bear...

Computer assisted gun laying takes into account of the targets movement and your tanks movement. The target will get hit. Its the quality of the armor that matters.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Are infantry-portable anti-tank rockets that fly straight up, then turn around a fly straight down to attack the tank on its roof a thing that militaries have now, or still a thing that they wish they have?

[ANS Kamas P81]

Javelin ATGMs do it, yeah.  You're looking for top-attack munitions.  There's a rather good video on youtube from 2012 of a Javelin hit on a targeted building where you can see the whole missile launch, arc up, then go in on its target very steep.  There's no gore or anything NSFW but I'll refrain from posting the link directly just in case (unruffled moderators are happy moderators).  I mention it specifically because most clips of Javelin launches cut away or the missile simply disappears into the distance; this clip follows it the whole way so you can really see the attack profile.

And yeah, most tanks are running typically 20-30mm of plate on top, just because you can't armor everything and having four inch thick hatches is detrimental to crew happiness.  Top attack is a scary thing.

[kato]

Pretty much limited to Spike and Javelin in practice, the French MMP will does also include a secondary trajectory mode for that. Tradeoff is higher susceptibility to active countermeasures.

[Daryk]

Computer assisted gun laying takes into account of the targets movement and your tanks movement. The target will get hit. Its the quality of the armor that matters.

That depends on terrain, and if you can even bring the heavier tank to the battle in the first place.  Flying an M1 anywhere is generally regarded as a waste of a C-17.