Modern Graphics Showcase

[Case]

Originally posted by Palaiologos
So theoritically we can kick your ass any time!

Yeah, if you could land that stuff in Australia. Which you can't.

Australia's defencive strategy is based around using the Air Force and Navy to smash up any major invasions. As such, all the Army has historically needed to be able to do is to counter small raiding parties and mop up any isolated remnants of invasion forces which made it through the air-sea guantlet.

However, this strategy is being abandoned with our conservative government returning to the suitably retro 'forward defence' policy of the 1960s. As a result, the Army is after new tanks so that it can operate in South Korea, and that means Leopard 2s, which, as you point out, are extreamly good tanks.

Leos1 a deathtrap? Never heard that before.

These days they're considered to be too lightly armed and armoured. Aparently the Australian PM promised the US the services of the 1st Armoured Brigade ahead of the recent Gulf War only for the Army to refuse to deploy it on the grounds that the Leo 1s were inferior to Iraq's T-72 tanks. Having wargamed it out in Steel Panthers 3, I tend to agree.

But we use a special made version of Leos 1A5 customized for the Greek army. Although i think the customization only applies to their tracks....i am sure Tanerlorn can shed more light here.

The Australian version is the Leo 1AS, which is essentially a tropicalised version of the Canadian Leo C1, which in turn is considered the tank's peak of development. However, the tank dates back to the mid 50s, and is simply outdated.

[rmsharpe]

Not to start a policy debate, but what baffles me is how we (the U.S.) sell our M1A1 tanks to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, two countries who's history toward the United States is...interesting, to say the least. Yet, we don't offer these utilities to our REAL allies like Australia. If I'm ever President, feel free to give me a ring and ask for a couple, I'll get you a good price.

[Case]

...going completely off topic

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Not to start a policy debate, but what baffles me is how we (the U.S.) sell our M1A1 tanks to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, two countries who's history toward the United States is...interesting, to say the least. Yet, we don't offer these utilities to our REAL allies like Australia.

AFAIK, the tanks are freely available to Australia if we were to want them. The RAAF recently bought AMRAAMs without any drama and the USN keeps trying to get us to buy their old AEGIS cruisers, so the M1 technology certainly wouldn't be restricted to Australia.

However, the Army wants the Leo 2's becuase a) they're second hand, so they're much cheaper to buy b) the Army has 25 years experiance operating Leo 1s so introducing the Leo 2 would be easier then the M1 c) the Leo 2 is better suited to Australian conditions - Australia needs a reliable tank with decent range. The M1 is a real fuel hog and is a bit mechanically cranky. Bear in mind that the Army has had a good look at the M1 over the years - the USMC regularly deploys them to Australia on training exercises.

As an example of how this works, I understand that in the recent attack helicopter competition, the Army favoured the AH-64D Apache Longbow over the Tiger. The Government then told the Army how much money was available, and told it that it should pick the helicopters which delivered the most bang per buck. As a result, the Army went for 22 Tigers over 12 Apaches. IMO this decision was completly correct - while the Apache is a great chopper, it's capabilities are in excess of what Australia actually needs, and 22 adequte choppers are a better idea then a mere 12 execelent ones. The same principle holds for the M1 - the Leo 2 is more then adequte, and buying them would deliver a lot more bangs per buck then spending the same amount of money on M1s.

[Nilat]

here are some units I made (not ready)

[Nilat]

And I just cant kind a MiG-15 anywhere!! Anybody have one? (or two )

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Not to start a policy debate, but what baffles me is how we (the U.S.) sell our M1A1 tanks to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, two countries who's history toward the United States is...interesting, to say the least. Yet, we don't offer these utilities to our REAL allies like Australia. If I'm ever President, feel free to give me a ring and ask for a couple, I'll get you a good price.

Like Blade's sword, perhaps these IFVs are rigged to explode when used in aggression against Amercians!

[typhoon]

Er, they're MBTs, not IFVs.

Not to start a policy debate, but what baffles me is how we (the U.S.) sell our M1A1 tanks to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, two countries who's history toward the United States is...interesting, to say the least. Yet, we don't offer these utilities to our REAL allies like Australia. If I'm ever President, feel free to give me a ring and ask for a couple, I'll get you a good price.

Regarding the S. Arabia and Egypt issue, its actually not such a bad thing.

1) Back in the Clinton days the Saudis were used to contain Saddam. (Same reasons why the Kuwaitis have M1s too.)

2) Interoperability with US forces.

3) Kept the oil flowing.

Don't worry, rmsharpe- the Saudi M1s are considerably downgraded (as with their F-15s.) It seems that the US is wary of another Iran taking place.

And if its any assurance, Saudi Arabia's army is widely acknowledged as the worst trained in the Middle East. I'll take a Jew in a Merkava anytime.

As for Egypt... that goes way back to Camp David.

However, the Army wants the Leo 2's becuase a) they're second hand, so they're much cheaper to buy b) the Army has 25 years experiance operating Leo 1s so introducing the Leo 2 would be easier then the M1 c) the Leo 2 is better suited to Australian conditions - Australia needs a reliable tank with decent range. The M1 is a real fuel hog and is a bit mechanically cranky. Bear in mind that the Army has had a good look at the M1 over the years - the USMC regularly deploys them to Australia on training exercises.

I completely concur. The M1 (70 tons!) is way to heavy for the type of terrain that the ADF is going to encounter. The Leo II at 55 tons is a better choice. Case is right too that the M1 is a gas guzzler- back in Operation DS they had to stop and refuel every three hours.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention that the a secondhand Leopard 2A4 costs just $4.5 million while an M1A2 costs somewhere around $6-7 million.

[Case]

Originally posted by Stalin II
And I just cant kind a MiG-15 anywhere!! Anybody have one? (or two )

Yes

The one on the left is by BeBro and the one on the right is by Andrew Livings (aka Panda I *think*)

[FiGu]

I edited Pablos C-130 into a A-130 Gunship..

[curtsibling]

Hot damn!

Nice work, Figu!!!

[Pablostuka]

Great work, FiGu

[Nilat]

Thanks for the MiG-15 I have been looking for it pretty long

[Nilat]

And im looking for Russian bombers from the late 50s (1950-1957)


And if possible Swedish planes and tanks from the late 50s (and again 1950-1957 )

[FiGu]

A130 Camo Set!

[Nilat]

Really nice! Im crap in unit customising (you may notice it yourself)