Yeah, I agree and suspect you are correct re the scrapping.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yeah, I agree and suspect you are correct re the scrapping.It's a shame that we disposed of all our Leo1s as targets, scrap or a few gate guards. They would have made a great gift for Ukraine.
The MEXA kits look good below, but I'm sure it was all scrapped.
View attachment 750420
Here's the gate guard at CFB Petawawa. The appliqué armour panels remain on the side of the turret, but no MEXA.
View attachment 750421
This would imply that it was all scrapped:Yeah, I agree and suspect you are correct re the scrapping.
We should have just changed the oil, drained and anti-corrosion fogged the fuel tanks, greased the nipples and stored them all. This guy in Belgium was smart.This would imply that it was all scrapped:
Canada Has Given Up Trying To Find A Good Home For Its Retired Leopard Tanks
A possible sale to Jordan has apparently fallen through and there are few other buyers who could meet the country's human rights standards.www.thedrive.com
Sigh...for want of a couple of years.
Now that is valet parking at its best.We should have just changed the oil, drained and anti-corrosion fogged the fuel tanks, greased the nipples and stored them all. This guy in Belgium was smart.
View attachment 750438
I still want those four hundred Challenger 1 tanks in Jordan to get to Ukraine somehow.
LOL! At least until the owner insists that he needs the one in the middle...............Now that is valet parking at its best.
LOL! At least until the owner insists that he needs the one in the middle...............
Relevant article:The Canadian Leopard C2s performance in Afghanistan was mixed. Three losses and 15 tanks damaged (and repaired) out of a total of 20 deployed.
The troops operating with them reportedly LOVED the heavy support and their ability to act as both a lead vehicle in breaching operations and as a major psychological inhibitor to attacks when on patrols.
The firepower and range advantage bestowed by the tanks were seen as the biggest plusses. Particularly the HESH rounds, which was very useful in punching large holes (up to 5m x 5m) in whatever structures the Tailban happened to be using as cover/concealment. The Canadian army reports using HESH to engage militants out to 3800 meters (2.35 miles) or as close as 150m.
The lack of climate control was a notable problem. Internal temperatures were measured as high as 65 degrees Celsius! All 20 C2s (and the 8 support vehicles) were subsequently fitted with envrionmental systems, a thermal layer and the crews issued with cooling vests.
The age of the vehicles (30+ years for some of them) meant they were maintenance hogs. Dust/debris injestion was a real issue, leading to engine overheats that would force the tanks to stop regularly to cool off. Local mods were introduced which reduced (but never eliminated) the problem.
With the MEXAS add-on armour, the vehicle was resistant to basic RPG 7 rounds on front hull/turret sections. However, some of the more specalised anti-armour RPG rounds, ATGMs and even some of the Soviet-era recoilless rifles were seen as threats. IEDs and mines were the biggest worry though. The C2s also got add-on anti-mine/IED protection and mine rollers/plows, but I believe all three C2 losses in Afghanistan involved an IED of some kind.
One of those damaged in Afghanistan:The Canadian Leopard C2s performance in Afghanistan was mixed. Three losses and 15 tanks damaged (and repaired) out of a total of 20 deployed.
The troops operating with them reportedly LOVED the heavy support and their ability to act as both a lead vehicle in breaching operations and as a major psychological inhibitor to attacks when on patrols.
The firepower and range advantage bestowed by the tanks were seen as the biggest plusses. Particularly the HESH rounds, which was very useful in punching large holes (up to 5m x 5m) in whatever structures the Tailban happened to be using as cover/concealment. The Canadian army reports using HESH to engage militants out to 3800 meters (2.35 miles) or as close as 150m.
The lack of climate control was a notable problem. Internal temperatures were measured as high as 65 degrees Celsius! All 20 C2s (and the 8 support vehicles) were subsequently fitted with envrionmental systems, a thermal layer and the crews issued with cooling vests.
The age of the vehicles (30+ years for some of them) meant they were maintenance hogs. Dust/debris injestion was a real issue, leading to engine overheats that would force the tanks to stop regularly to cool off. Local mods were introduced which reduced (but never eliminated) the problem.
With the MEXAS add-on armour, the vehicle was resistant to basic RPG 7 rounds on front hull/turret sections. However, some of the more specalised anti-armour RPG rounds, ATGMs and even some of the Soviet-era recoilless rifles were seen as threats. IEDs and mines were the biggest worry though. The C2s also got add-on anti-mine/IED protection and mine rollers/plows, but I believe all three C2 losses in Afghanistan involved an IED of some kind.
Doh!! Forgot. Have now deleted.Duplicate post
I believe the crew survived, possibly due to the CAF's adding additional armour underneath the hull. Which is the best possible outcome from a landmine strike.