Australian Abrams Tank Arrival
-
You don't seriously think they will stop there will they?Originally posted by fallin:A pretty small amount to defend a continent don't you think? In comparison to our size and the number of Leopards we bought. -
Any idea if the Abrams they recieved are the 68ton DU-ed Heavy Armor? Or M1A1 with Export Armor Package?
-
Leo2 A4 $1.5 million in SGD or USD ?
-
Nope to both ... M1A1 AIM (D)Originally posted by Shotgun:Any idea if the Abrams they recieved are the 68ton DU-ed Heavy Armor? Or M1A1 with Export Armor Package?
"We're not buying Depleted Uranium (DU) armour or munitions, we are buying an advanced composite armour which is comparable and in some areas better, than DU."
http://www.defence.gov.au/news/armynews/editions/1093/topstories/story01.htm
D model, digitised with AIM common log package and zero hour-ed engine, tranny and harness.
"The second piece of our O&S cost reduction strategy is the Abrams Integrated Management (AIM) program. The AIM process overhauls an old M1A1 tank to original factory standards, applying all applicable MWOÂ’s.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm
That's AFAIK ...
-
USD of course! And that is not confirmed to be absolutely true, only an indication but nevetheless cheap. A brand new Leo2A6 is estimated somewhere close to 5 million USD or more if I remember correctly.Originally posted by glock:Leo2 A4 $1.5 million in SGD or USD ?
Of course SAF would have to pay for the additional training, spare parts, armoured recovery vehicles???, etc.
The ADF $500mil USD includes everything in the package. The American call this the "mate-price". You can't get cheaper than that! That was why M1A1 AIM won the contract and not the Leo2 ADF personnels perferred after the evaluation. -
Not too sure the M1A1 was chosen over the Leo2 on the basis of price alone, what I understand from an Oz Defense contractor, on another forum, with regards to this is ...Originally posted by Joe Black:USD of course! And that is not confirmed to be absolutely true, only an indication but nevetheless cheap. A brand new Leo2A6 is estimated somewhere close to 5 million USD or more if I remember correctly.
Of course SAF would have to pay for the additional training, spare parts, armoured recovery vehicles???, etc.
The ADF $500mil USD includes everything in the package. The American call this the "mate-price". You can't get cheaper than that! That was why M1A1 AIM won the contract and not the Leo2 ADF personnels perferred after the evaluation.
The above is combination of a few of his post from http://defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4639
* The germans offered us A4's at very competitive prices.
* Superior gun (IMV)
* VFM - value for money. we could have bought 2-3 ,times more MBT's for the same price and the germans were willing to throw in support vehicles etc...
* they were ex warstock - so almost brand new and comparable to a zero timed rebuilt abrams as such.
The Germans have been giving the stuff away - and their ex NATO warstock stuff is impeccable.
we could have had SPH, arty, APC, etc... all at bargain prices and all in mint condition.
Well, I'm no armour guy, so I'm sure that army have more than sufficient reasons for going with Abrams - its just that I can't see them -
I read that the ADF testing personnel actually preferred Leo2 compared to the Abrams. It was just a little more superior in most aspect. I believe the Abram won because of the AIM package. Noticed how Australian seem to get involved in most of the theatre the American have started. I believe that they said something about being compatible in the hardware is important due to the availability of spare and resources.
BTW, the ADF was testing Leo2A6 vs Abram M1A2 but ended up getting M1A1 AIM(D). -
Thats like the M'sian testing the F/A-18C/Ds vs MiG-29SMTs and end up getting the MiG-29As.Originally posted by Joe Black:I read that the ADF testing personnel actually preferred Leo2 compared to the Abrams. It was just a little more superior in most aspect. I believe the Abram won because of the AIM package. Noticed how Australian seem to get involved in most of the theatre the American have started. I believe that they said something about being compatible in the hardware is important due to the availability of spare and resources.
BTW, the ADF was testing Leo2A6 vs Abram M1A2 but ended up getting M1A1 AIM(D).
Though they did eventually purchase the bugs as well.
LoL, If the abrams they got aren't the DU- armored ones... I'm not too sure of its survivability anymore. I remember some american armor nut saying, "if it ain't DUed, it aint shiitt." -
Aussie also got refurbished tanks like SG!!
Transcript
10 Mar 2004 ,MIN100304/04,PRESS CONFERENCE.Parliament House, Canberra
10:30am, Wednesday, 10 March 2004.....Journalist:
(Inaudible) How old are the hulls?
Senator Robert Hill,
Minister for Defence:
I don’t know how old the hulls are. They – the US has over 3,000 M1A1 tanks and it has a program to refurbish some of them up to this standard. And basically we’ll become part of that refurbishment program. So we get, in effect an as new vehicle, but with significant upgrades, some of which were mentioned by General Leahy, when it comes off the refurbishment line.....
-
What are you talking about? Of course the M1A1s are refurbished! The US has plenty of extra stock and it makes no sense to manufacture an older model just to sell to the Aussies.
You mean you didn't know that?
LoL, If the abrams they got aren't the DU- armored ones... I'm not too sure of its survivability anymore. I remember some american armor nut saying, "if it ain't DUed, it aint shiitt."
That's the yanks for you... but if you come to think of it, most other MBTs do not use (officially anyway) DU in their armour, and some of them are rated quite high for protection.
And there are other metals that are nearly as dense as well, though DU is good for armour, no doubt there. -
Given that John Howard made it an art form to suck up to American Presidents, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a political decision.
The M1 tanks are otherwise nice tanks for any army, though whether it was bang for buck is a different story.