Which company was a bigger winner in the Canadian Tactical Armored Patrol Vehicle contest than Textron? I would say IBD.
This company has been operating in the background but has amassed some impressive wins and tech. Its armor designs and concepts have challenged PLASAN to the point that they can arguably called the most dynamic and cutting edge armor corporation on the planet.
Proof positive is the package that they assembled for Singapore.
The Leopard 2A4 by itself is a formidable tank. In Asia...doubly so. But add the Evolution Armor Concept to the vehicle and you have a tank that is more heavily armored (in my opinion) than a M1A1 and given the terrain found in that theater, more survivable too. In jungle and urban fighting with armor, close in fights will be the norm...multiple hits from multiple quadrants will be the norm...and the ability to get hit and keep in the fight will be essential.
The Leopard 2A4 Evo has that in spades. Singapore has a winner and so does IBD. Read more about the company and their concepts here.
NOTE:
Can anyone name a more powerful armor force than the one that Singapore is assembling in Asia? China? The Type 99 is a joke in comparison. The S. Korean K2? Nice as a M1A1 light but I don't think so. The Japanese Type 90? Nope, they better hope the MBT-X proves out. Australia's M1's? Again, nice but I don't think so.
well first the Leopdard in almost all of its forms can easily match if not exceed our M1s period, but this beast is several notches above that. i think what many fail to realize is its not only the stuff you have, but are trained to use it and the doctrine and discipline to use it, i dont think china is anywhere near singapore, and in a major way chinas population hinders it. It can mass alot of people, but with the force multipliers today the human wave attacks arent as effective, singapore has my respect and it keeps gaining it.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of a "more powerful armor force" Singapore's has 130 MBT's vs South Korea with 2,000+ with many more armored units. Many Asian nations have a superior armor force.
ReplyDeleteAs for the K2 I'd be careful dismissing it as an "M1A1" light. Korea doesn't exactly provide a lot of public information on it's armed forces and exactly how good the armor and systems on the K2 is speculation. That aside the K2 has a better gun than any M1 and almost every Leopard 2, including the A4's. It's the Rheinmetall 120/55 that I believe is only in service on a few Leopard A6's. The K2 was originally designed for the Rheinmetall 140mm.
So Leo 2A4 vs K2 is an entirely open question and how well trained the crews and units were would be far more important than the actual tanks.
In terms of some other basic kit of an armored force South Korea's has a better IFV in every respect over Singapore (better protection, firepower, mobility, larger squad size, etc.) and South Korea's 155/52 is a far better SPH than Singapore's own 155/39 leaving aside South Korea operating far more mechanized and artillery units. Singapore has some very capable forces but it's not clear their armored units are superior to South Korea's of which the ROK operates many more.
While I'm a fan of the Leopard 2 every model up to the A5 had issues with the flat armor face on the turret as well as the deep armor gouge the placement of the gunners site requires. The A5 and A6 with the 120/55 are significant improvements and fixed both issues noted above. While I believe one could make an argument that the A6 is better than any model M1 (due to the gun if nothing else) it's not clear to me there is enough information in the public domain to make such an assertion for other models. Frex, whether the M1A2 or Leo 2A4 has better armor, and if so in what respects, is not exactly available information.
The US's current L44, with US ammunition, is better than the L55 with German ammunition. That's one reason the US hasn't bothered with the upgrade. AFAIK both the M829E3 and E4 are better than anything in the German inventory, even when fired from an L55.
ReplyDeleteThe US, as far as I know, doesn't export the M829 (with DU) so for everyone else L44 vs L55 matters. As far as exact performance I've seen numbers all over the place posted on public forums. Frex, the M829A3 is often estimated to penetrate 765mm at 2km (also sometimes mentioned Russian estimate of 795mm) while the DM-53 German round is listed at 700mm at 2km for the L44 and 760mm at 2km for the L55.
ReplyDeleteNone of this means very much. DU rounds have other advantages beyond simply comparing penetration guesstimates such as starting fires. All this aside the L55 is clearly the better gun that the US currently has decided it doesn't require given modern ammo vs projected threats. For anyone else a Leo A6 or K2 with the Rheinmetall 120/55 is the worst MBT threat, unless the Israeli's have DU rounds as is often suggested.