Admiral Beez
Major
Has this canister round been used in combat? It seems the ideal ammunition for Ukraine's Leopard 2s when clearing the field of mass infantry.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Don't get me started on the StuG...I've always liked the looks of the Sheridan.
Too tall, not enough performance to make up for the lack of armor.What's the consensus on the US Army's new MPF light tank?
View attachment 721298
This seems like a good, more deployable replacement for Canada's Leopard 2 MBTs.
Has this canister round been used in combat?
I bet Ukraine would do well with a force of Stridsvagn 103 and Kanonenjagdpanzer. Too bad they were all scrapped, minus a few museum pieces. NATO should have done what Russia does, store every tank ever made for a rainy day, like Belgium's warehouse of Leopard 1s.
I agree. But we still have a sixty-four Leopard 2s plus twenty-odd Leo2-based ARVs. And then there's Rheinmetall Canada and their investment in the domestic economy, shown below rebuilding a Canadian Leopard 2 in the 2010s.As long as we're cranking up production of M-1s anyway and it's just a train ride away, how 'bout the Abrams?
The best road is the railroad.
The UK has had a strong AFV production capability post WWII. But aircraft production had issues thanks to political decisions.I agree. But we still have a sixty-four Leopard 2s plus twenty-odd Leo2-based ARVs. And then there's Rheinmetall Canada and their investment in the domestic economy, shown below rebuilding a Canadian Leopard 2 in the 2010s.
View attachment 721833
Interestingly, with the exception of surplus Shermans in Korea, Canada has not used US tanks post WW2. Post-war we had Centurions, Leopard 1s and now Leopard 2s. Given our post-war purchases or license production of US combat aircraft (Sabre, Banshee, Tracker, Voodoo, Starfighter, Freedom Fighter, Aurora/Orion, etc.), one would have thought we'd operate Patton tanks.
Apparently PM Pierre Trudeau was strongarmed into buying the Leopard 1s by the other NATO members. I wonder if the Centurions could have been upgraded to a capability equal to the Leopard 1s we bought. The Israelis and South Africans did wonders with their Centurion upgrades.
Britain's Hawker-Siddeley Group wholly owned Avro Canada. It's too bad the UK and Canada couldn't work together on a common aircraft requirement instead of the former developing the P.1121 and the latter the CF-105 Arrow. What both nations needed was an equal to the US F4 Phantom II, which coincidently first flew in 1958, the same year both the Avro Arrow first flew and the Hawker P.1121 was canceled.But aircraft production had issues thanks to political decisions.
There was a tremendous amount of American aid to AVRO during their work on the Arrow. You could almost say it was a minor partnership.Britain's Hawker-Siddeley Group wholly owned Avro Canada. It's too bad the UK and Canada couldn't work together on a common aircraft requirement instead of the former developing the P.1121 and the latter the CF-105 Arrow. What both nations needed was an equal to the US F4 Phantom II, which coincidently first flew in 1958, the same year both the Avro Arrow first flew and the Hawker P.1121 was canceled.
As for using British tanks to follow Canada's soon to be retired 105mm-armed Centurions, Britain's decision to use ammunition incompatible with US/NATO standards in their post-Centurion Chieftain and Challenger tanks likely pushed Canada toward the Leo1 and Leo2 that fired the same 105mm and later on 120mm ammo as the Abrams. The stockpiles of 105mm ammo from the Centurions could also go into the Leo1.
To be fair, the British 120mm gun was a generation before the Rheinmetall 120 smooth bore. When it entered service the British 120mm gun was the best tank gun in the world, and in an era of thinly armed Pattons, Leopards and T-55s, with the Chieftain the British had the best protected/armed (and slowest, lol) MBT available.I agree with you that they didn't like the Brit 120. Non fixed ammunition, and still rifled. So nowhere near the performance of the Rheinmetall 1200 smooth bore.
I agree, as long as you're not beholden to your supplier partner's national governments for permission to deploy or transfer the tanks. One of the reasons Britain was the first to donate western MBTs to Ukraine was that the Challenger 2 was not restricted by either Berlin or Washington. No one who wanted to donate their Leopard 2s or Abrams could do so without this. But Britain was free to do as it wished.Makes sense. Less requirements overseas for Britain so less requirements for the land based military.