Singapore to Acquire Refurbished Leopard Tanks

• ah_kwang

  11 Dec 06, 19:11

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  maybe..
  
  Our good friends down below also bought refurbished M1s rite?
  
  or brand new? i think it was refurbished...

  yup. refurbished. think maybe its because of their defense relation with US
• gary1910

  11 Dec 06, 19:12

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  ANd wad happened to the people who say our fighting area unsuitable for a MBT?
  
  and hor, why not the M1 abrams?
  
  is it because of price issue?

  Leo 2 is not the rerplacement for SM1. Our LT should be still under development.
  
  

  The Leopard 2A4 surpasses the SM1 in protection and firepower. It is comparable to SM1 in mobility. As a replacement for some of the Army's SM1s, the introduction of the Leopard 2A4 represents a significant enhancement in the army's capability.
  

  M1???
  Expensive and fuel guzzing MBT, Leo 2 is way better in term of price and logistics support.
  
  With proper upgrade with the latest FCS with thermal sight etc, plus bolted on armour, A4 could be easily upgraded to close to A6 standard and will as good as any tank in the world!!!!
• ah_kwang

  11 Dec 06, 19:12

  Originally posted by sane_guy2:

  I think this is just a replacement for our centurions. They are getting 66 tanks, which is roughly the number of centurions we have (according to Jane's).
  A light tank is still needed I guess, because of terrain, environment etc.

  hopefully. now let's await the announcement of new light tanks.
• Shotgun

  11 Dec 06, 19:14

  The Leo2's spaced armor does offer significantly more armor protection than the M1's thought. What kinda of refurbishment does our Leo2 come with? Air con?
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:14

  The Leopards have an option for PSO kit-outs. A complete modular system that can transform it for peacekeeping operations without much fuss.
  
  Perhaps this is the reason. Another reason for this, is the commonality it shares with the Leguan in terms of chassis.
  
  66 + 30 spares sounds alright. I believe that they can provide adequate deterrent for our SAF.
• ah_kwang

  11 Dec 06, 19:17

  
  
  Leo 2 is not the rerplacement for SM1. Our LT should be still under development.

  so we are developing our own LT? why not buy off the shelf instead since they are so many light tanks available and maybe upgrade the systems inside ourself. isnt it cheaper this way.
• ah_kwang

  11 Dec 06, 19:19

  Originally posted by LazerLordz:

  The Leopards have an option for PSO kit-outs. A complete modular system that can transform it for peacekeeping operations without much fuss.
  
  Perhaps this is the reason. Another reason for this, is the commonality it shares with the Leguan in terms of chassis.
  
  66 + 30 spares sounds alright. I believe that they can provide adequate deterrent for our SAF.

  i think the swedes have very good upgraded leopards and one of the most advanced variant. (correct me if i'm wrong) perhaps we could collaborate with them in this area since we already have a good working relation with their navy and kockums
• Dr Who

  11 Dec 06, 19:21

  very soon, there will be Leopard clone........pasar malam version.....improved with chinese and indian foreign talent teknologi (sic)......
• Pitot

  11 Dec 06, 19:24

  So it means our leopards are refurbished or upgraded?
  
  its a huge jump from SM1 leh.. digital.. a step towards 3G SAF.
• zenden9

  11 Dec 06, 19:24

  Leopard A4? I wondering will we end up like the Aussie of having difficulties handling the monster on our road!
  
  I still think we will become the second Arjun of India......
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:30

  Some history..from Wikipedia..
  
  On 11 December 1974 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with the USA for the possible joint production of a new MBT, after the Americans had bought and investigated prototype hull number seven in 1973. In view of the experiences in the Yom Kippur War a much higher level of protection was demanded than was implemented in the prototypes, that used heavily sloped spaced armour. The weight class was increased to sixty tons. Prototype turret number fourteen was changed to test a new armour configuration, and was turned into a blockier looking turret as a result of using vertical steel perforated armour; it already had been much more voluminous than the turret of a Leopard 1 because of a large internal ammunition storage locker in the rear.
  
  The Leopard 2 thus initially used perforated armour but not Chobham armour as often claimed. PT-14 used the 120 mm Rheinmetall gun (as eventually did the U.S. Abrams). After this two new prototype hulls and three turrets were ordered, one (PT-20) mounting the original L7A3 105 mm gun and a Hughes fire control system, a second (PT-19) with the same fire control system but able to "swap out" the gun for the 120 mm Rheinmetall design (it was indeed so changed by the Americans), and one more (PT-21) mounting the Hughes-Krupp Atlas Elektronik EMES 13 fire control system, with the 120 mm gun.
  
  In the summer of 1976 prototype 19 was assembled and shipped to the USA, together with hull number twenty and a special target vehicle to test the armour. The prototype was called Leopard 2AV (Austere Version) because it had a simplified fire control system. It arrived in the US by the end of August 1976, and comparative tests between the Leopard 2 and the XM1 (the prototype name for the M1 Abrams) prototypes were held from 1 September at Aberdeen Proving Ground, lasting until December 1976.
  
  The US Army reported that the Leopard 2 and the XM1 were comparable in firepower and mobility, but the XM1 was superior in armor protection. Today we know this was only true as regards a hit by a hollow charge; against KE-attack the Leopard 2 was almost twice as well protected as the original M1 (650 mm to 350 mm). The difference with a shaped charge is also negligible. Its more traditional multifuel diesel engine was also much more reliable, and provided the same performance. Hull twenty was fitted with simulation weights, which transpired to equal only the weight of a turret without armour modules fitted, devalidating all performance data.
  
  After the comparative test the Leopard 2 hulls were returned to Germany for further evaluation, but turret 19 remained and was fitted to the hull of prototype seven, while its gun was changed for the 120 mm Rheinmetall. In tests until March 1977 it was found to be far superior to the 105 mm M7 mounted on the Abrams, which was confirmed by subsequent NATO tank gunnery contests
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:32

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  So it means our leopards are refurbished or upgraded?
  
  its a huge jump from SM1 leh.. digital.. a step towards 3G SAF.

  the term refurbished, can mean anything. Given that the Swedes operate the most advanced and customised Leopards, it could mean more collaboration, like what someone here has said.
  
  SM1 is a light tank. That one will have a replacement too, probably an hybrid between our Bionix and other parts.
  
  This one is for replacing those old Tempests.
• Pitot

  11 Dec 06, 19:34

  Originally posted by LazerLordz:

  the term refurbished, can mean anything. Given that the Swedes operate the most advanced and customised Leopards, it could mean more collaboration, like what someone here has said.
  
  SM1 is a light tank. That one will have a replacement too, probably an hybrid between our Bionix and other parts.
  
  This one is for replacing those old Tempests.

  I see.
  
  so refurbished it shall be.
  
  Navy, Air Force, Army... it seems to be a cycle..
  
  so we shall be expecting something for RSN next?
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:36

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  I see.
  
  so refurbished it shall be.
  
  Navy, Air Force, Army... it seems to be a cycle..
  
  so we shall be expecting something for RSN next?

  New MCV replacements and the Vastergotlands.
  
  What do you want? A new, larger LPD? Not a bad idea..
  
  But I think the next one will be the RSAF, a Hawkeye replacement.
• Pitot

  11 Dec 06, 19:38

  Originally posted by LazerLordz:

  New MCV replacements and the Vastergotlands.
  
  What do you want? A new, larger LPD? Not a bad idea..
  
  But I think the next one will be the RSAF, a Hawkeye replacement.

  LCAC?
  
  
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:40

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  LCAC?
  
  

  LCAC + LPDs + Seahawks = naval rapid deployable battalion.
• gary1910

  11 Dec 06, 19:43

  Originally posted by Pitot:

  So it means our leopards are refurbished or upgraded?
  
  its a huge jump from SM1 leh.. digital.. a step towards 3G SAF.

  I dunno, but what officially stated does not mean the whole truth, and to upgrade to the latest vehtronics is not impossible.
  
  Secondly, our BX II seem to be more advanced in term of vehtronics than Leo2A4( A4 has no thermal sight and BMS)!!!!
  
  Is that possible????
  
  There is a rumour that we are already sending armour personnel to train in MBT, perhaps also looking at upgrades for our Leo2?!?
• tankee1981

  11 Dec 06, 19:47

  Now i know what the MBT talk which CJ is talking about liao! And why he close the registration either yesterday or this morning nia!
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 19:47

  Originally posted by gary1910:

  I dunno, but what officially stated does not mean the whole truth, and to upgrade to the latest vehtronics is not impossible.
  
  Secondly, our BX II seem to be more advanced in term of vehtronics than Leo2A4( A4 has no thermal sight and BMS)!!!!
  
  Is that possible????
  
  There is a rumour that we are already sending armour personnel to train in MBT, perhaps also looking at upgrades for our Leo2?!?

  Precisely.They can just merely say we bought 2A4 bodies. It doesn't say what they will become.
  
  Read in between the lines, and the part about collaboration is such a bright beacon for "R&D and upgrading"
  
  http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm
  
  Another website with more information on the Leo.
• Pitot

  11 Dec 06, 19:49

  Originally posted by gary1910:

  I dunno, but what officially stated does not mean the whole truth, and to upgrade to the latest vehtronics is not impossible.
  
  Secondly, our BX II seem to be more advanced in term of vehtronics than Leo2A4( A4 has no thermal sight and BMS)!!!!
  
  Is that possible????
  
  There is a rumour that we are already sending armour personnel to train in MBT, perhaps also looking at upgrades for our Leo2?!?

  
  
  I think they are bought to fight a 2 wars.
  
  1) Pyscological.
  
  2) Conventional.
• tankee1981

  11 Dec 06, 20:00

  The Centurions will most probably be sent into storage. But what about the other MBT which we have? Whats going to happen to them?
• saline

  11 Dec 06, 20:01

  http://www.edu.lahti.fi/~aroinila/leo/loader.wmv
  A Finnish Leopard 2A4 firing, videoed from inside the turret...
  nice...
• LazerLordz

  11 Dec 06, 20:02

  Originally posted by tankee1981:

  The Centurions will most probably be sent into storage. But what about the other MBT which we have? Whats going to happen to them?

  U mean the SM1.. I think they should donate them for educational purposes. It will help to create a Department of Military Systems somewhere.
• saline

  11 Dec 06, 20:07

  Originally posted by tankee1981:

  The Centurions will most probably be sent into storage. But what about the other MBT which we have? Whats going to happen to them?

  we don't have other MBTs
  shh....
  
  
  anyway, check this out... http://www.43tankbataljon.nl/43-Tank-Binnenzijde/43-tank-binnenzijde.html
  it shows the insides of the leo2 A4s
• tripwire

  11 Dec 06, 20:09

  i think he means... THE OTHER MBT... not AMX-13.