Singapore to Acquire Refurbished Leopard Tanks
-
Should get a few LEOPARD 2 PSO as well. It's highly mobile n extremely well protected. It's also suitable for use against single targets n optimally so in both built-up n non built-up terrain.
It includes components that allow it to accomplish assignments in urban areas n asymmetric threats. They include highly effective all-round protection, sec weapon station that's operable under protection(7.62 mm or 12.7 mm MG or 40 mm AGL), option for equipping with non-lethal effective means, high performance camera sys for close ob, enhanced recon ability, search light n dozer-blade for barricade removal.
The asymmetrical threat comes from all sides: AT mines, hand held weapons, grenades, IEDs, etc. KMW has already developed and tested a new mine protection kit for Leopard 2 n Leopard 2 PSO. This provides high level of protection against AT mines n explosively formed penetrator-type ordnance.
New advanced passive armour side-skirts will be fitted above front five road wheels n extra turret side armour added that extends to rear of turret bustle.
Aside from extremely high all-round n mine protection sys, it has additional components making it highly suitable for deployment in urban areas under all climatic cond. It has a high-performance cooling unit, APU, modern guiding sys n equipped for 24 hr battle. For optimum ob day n night, it's also fitted out with a 360 deg camera sys, most up-to-date IR equip n outside comm point for infantry.
Now with all this,weight will be a problem. Increased from normal Leo2 MBT.
-
Gas guzzler and its exhaust too hot for infantry to run behind as well.Originally posted by sand king:
i heard that the M1A1's turbine engine is a killer to maintain! -
Will never happen. Non NATO stdOriginally posted by tankee1981:Possible future upgrade to our Leopards.Check this out!
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Leo2_Files/tanks.140mm-gun.kruse.pdf -
Oh... no wonder they used it for Desert Storm...Originally posted by Shotgun:Gas guzzler and its exhaust too hot for infantry to run behind as well. -
Eh, with all the big APCs and IFVs, do infantrymen still ride on the outside of tanks? Some people already said, its impossible for the M1A2 because of the hot exhaust but can infantry do that for our Leos?
-
Gr8 find , tks.Originally posted by lionnoisy:
BTW , it was USD48m , not 46. -
-
-
An efficient and effective „Euro-LEOPARD“
SPEC of LEOPARD 2
Height above the turret roof/commander periscope
2,64 m / 3,00 m
Combat weight
59,7 t
Long 12 o'clock gun / 6 o'clock gun
9,97 m / 8,49 m
Width while transported by rail/with track skirts
3,55 m / 3,74 m
Maximum speed
(reverse)
72 km/h
(31 km/h)
Road range
470 km
Engine performance
1100 kW (1500 HP) at 2600 rpm
Main weapon
120 mm smoothbore cannon
Secondary weapons
Coax 7.62 mm MG
AA MG 7.62 mm
16-tube launcher system
Crew
4-man
© 2005-2007 Krauss-Maffei Wegmann & Co KG -
I don't get it!Originally posted by sand king:Why not the M1 Abrams? Why they want Leopards?
Why are people out there drooling over German's automobile like Benz , BMW, VW and you guys just simply can't accept the Leopards?
The Germans are great engineers and they developed great stuffs.
Just what so f**king great about the M1 anyway? Why should SAF chose M1 instead? Please enlighten me.
I'm not against the M1 but please tell me why you think it is a MUST have, and not other MBT? -
Because people worship the Americans. What the Americans use MUST be good. Cultural imperialism if you may.Originally posted by Paladin:I don't get it!
Why are people out there drooling over German's automobile like Benz , BMW, VW and you guys just simply can't accept the Leopards?
The Germans are great engineers and they developed great stuffs.
Just what so f**king great about the M1 anyway? Why should SAF chose M1 instead? Please enlighten me.
I'm not against the M1 but please tell me why you think it is a MUST have, and not other MBT? -
I tend to think that this is a very good deal. astute move by SAF.
Any thought?
____________________________________________________________
quote:Originally posted by lionnoisy:
This reports stated that Sg paid US$46 million for 66 refubrished tanks,30 spare tanks.
some may be in Aussie for training
_______________________________________________________________
Gr8 find , tks.
BTW , it was USD48m , not 46.
[This message was edited by gary1910 on 200 -
compared to what our neighbours paid for their MBTs, I'd say it's a steal ... especially when the polish army themselves BOUGHT leopard 2 tanks ....
-
For a "mere" 50 mil, it solved a big part of the tank replacement problem SAF have been facing for a long time.
but i still think we cant get away from the need of a light tank. -
the sm1s won't be decomissioned
-
Yes, it won't be decommissioned any time soon...Originally posted by beavan:the sm1s won't be decomissioned
-
Huh?Originally posted by Fatum:compared to what our neighbours paid for their MBTs, I'd say it's a steal ... especially when the polish army themselves BOUGHT leopard 2 tanks ....
I thought MAF paid pineapplesl and coconuts for their tanks or sumpin'... -
They paid partially with cash and in kind (palm oil) which I heard abt USD4.5mil per unit, more expensive than USD3m T-90 that Indian bought and 9x more expensive than our Leo 2!!!!Originally posted by moca:Huh?
I thought MAF paid pineapplesl and coconuts for their tanks or sumpin'... -
If i'm not wrong, the M1 Abrams & the Leopard tank were sort of in the same development project between Uncle Sam & Germany but along the way, germany left to build her own tank...which was the Leopard.
-
It was MBT-70.Originally posted by wonderamazement:If i'm not wrong, the M1 Abrams & the Leopard tank were sort of in the same development project between Uncle Sam & Germany but along the way, germany left to build her own tank...which was the Leopard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT-70 -
You can see that the turret looks a lot like the current M1 Abram's one.Originally posted by gary1910: -
I think M1A1 is more advanced overall than the Leopard 2 A4. But the Leopard 2 A5/6 is at least on par with M1A1. However, the gas turbine in teh M1A1 is a pain as it needs lots of expensive clean jet fuel. Leopards use MTU diesel engines and the Germans build great diesels.
Anyway , it is a steal at the prices we bought them at. I believe that SAF will not accept an A4 standard Leopard 2 - they will definitely upgrade close to at least A5 standard ( however, without the longer 120 mm gun ). -
So, in other words, the cunning Poles unloaded their overpriced PT-91 on our neighbour so they can buy some REAL tanks?!!Originally posted by Fatum:compared to what our neighbours paid for their MBTs, I'd say it's a steal ... especially when the polish army themselves BOUGHT leopard 2 tanks ....
But ill humour aside, this begs the question: Why this move by the Poles? Surely this is not the right business move for a country trying to sell its own domestically-produced tank?
Is it because a second-hand Leo 2 is really so much better than a brand new PT-91?
Or is it because a seond hand Leo 2 is WAYYY cheaper than a locally-made PT-91? -
The Poles need a "NATO" "Standard" tank....Originally posted by moca:So, in other words, the cunning Poles unloaded their overpriced PT-91 on our neighbour so they can buy some REAL tanks?!!
But ill humour aside, this begs the question: Why this move by the Poles? Surely this is not the right business move for a country trying to sell its own domestically-produced tank?
Is it because a second-hand Leo 2 is really so much better than a brand new PT-91?
Or is it because a seond hand Leo 2 is WAYYY cheaper than a locally-made PT-91?
