Canadians to get Leopard 2s?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher

So why do you support the Liberals and NDP, who are more than happy to send Forces members around in flying deathtraps and scrapped any plans to upgrade them?

If you were honest, about wanting the best for the forces, you'd be praising Harper for finally committing some money to upgrading the military and Canadian Forces members the Liberals left to wither and die.

I have never voted for the Liberals. The Liberals have been screwing the Forces ever since 1968.

And the idea that the NDP are "happy" to see the forces with old equipment is a complete lie.

The problem with the Conservatives is that they think we should thank them for spending money, and they get upset when we ask questions like do we need this? Is this the best we can do.

The Conservatives once bought the Air Force new planes at a real cheap price. We were stuck with the Starfighters, Voodoos and CF-5 for decades. And why did we buy the planes? Because the Conservatives canceled the Arrow.

In the eighties, the Conservatives bought new trucks. Sounds simple, but they had to buy them from a factory in Kelowna, and those trucks still don't work.

The Liberals went out and bought more g-wagons back in 2004. You must be happy with that. Problem is the g-Wagons are not bomb-proof. I guess that doesn't matter to you.

Just because there is a deal, doesn't mean it is the right one.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither
How do you know it's panic buying and that the forces didn't tell Harper that if they got anything they wanted Leos?

Because a decision to buy new equipment like a tank is never done in secret.

(I assume you're referring to the Leopard 2s, not the Leopard C1 which is a completely different tank)

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Lonestar
So, what, exactly, is Harper doing wrong here in the context of keeping the CF well-equipped?

No, what he's doing is making big purchases like the C-17 which the Forces can do without (leasing is a cheaper option and frees up money for equipment needed today).

He talks about expanding the Forces as if it can be done with a snap of a finger. And we've heard these promises before. Hell, even the Liberals promise that.

More importantly, we need smart purchases that make the most of a limited budget, not purchases for the sake of saying we bought new equipment.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
No, what he's doing is making big purchases like the C-17 which the Forces can do without (leasing is a cheaper option and frees up money for equipment needed today).

What???? Do you even follow what the forces want?

One of the things on the top of their list were better/more transport planes.

[Tingkai]

Do you know anything about the Forces and military transport, or do you think the only choice was to buy the C-17?????

Come on, you're not stupid. Do some reading. Talk to people.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Tingkai

The U.S. has a lot more where those came from. I'm sure they can spare another 100.

Not really, those were pre-war stocks(and of the M1-null type) we're having trouble cycling through all our damaged/worn out equipment through the depots as it is to start handing over what we have left(The good stuff)

And if you can't help an ally who is helping you...

The Abrams is overkill for anyone the CF is gonna be fighting, I don't know what your hangup on it is.

You mean the Liberals. We don't have a Labor Party and if we did we would spell it Labour

Whatever...all you foo-foo Commonwealth types sound the same to me

The Army was being organized on an all-wheel force. So the wish-list would be for things needed to support that approach. And the top of that wish list was basic things like communications equipment.

Which is why they've pulled out stuuf like new(er) tanks and large cargo planes that could only be used for airlifting tanks in, huh?

Now there would have been lots of talk over beers about wouldn't it be great to have some new tanks and which tank tank would be best.

But heavy duty studies into which tank we should get if the forces had unlimited funding? Not likely, the Forces are too busy for these pipe dreams.

Why would there be "heavy duty studies"? Unless you're advocating spending the money to repeat the studies of, say, all of Western Europe? The Information is already out there.

Besides, any decision would require serious proposals from the sellers. That's why we need an open bid to find the best deal.

What's wrong with saying "we know what we want, and we know where to get them cheap?" Why drag out the process? It isn't like you're buying them new, you're buying them used and there are only so many places you can go to get them.

And yet, there have been no reports about the tanks breaking down. There have been no reports about tanks not being up to the job. There have been no reports about replacement tanks being sent from Canada.

Tanks breaking down don't make for sexy newsreporting.

"That's right Tom, these three tanks are still not going anyway because the transmission is broken...and no one in the world makes parts for these anymore!"

Just out of the blue, we're suddenly told that we need new tanks stat.

More like "We've been expecting for years that we'll never get the funding we want/need and once it becomes clear that Harper is willing to push for equipment to match our Op-tempo let's take the wishlist out". C'mon, this isn't frickin' hard to imagine.

Just in time for the election.

yeah, those crafty Generals are really sticking it to the voters.

You know the details of the contract, eh.

If it's anything like the deal Sweden got for it's Leopards...then yeah, I'd say so. (or like the C-17 deal, or like the Australian M1 deal...)

Just because you need a new car, doesn't mean you should buy the first one you see. Panic-buying is never a good idea.

But they aren't buying a new car, you twit, they are buying a used care to replace and even older car.

No, what he's doing is making big purchases like the C-17 which the Forces can do without (leasing is a cheaper option and frees up money for equipment needed today).

They could have bought the plans flat out for $1.5bil, the reason why it costs so much is because Canada pushed for a parts/maintenance component of the contract. And leasing doesn't really make a whole Hell of a lot of since, especially since the only other comparable plane out there(The Russian Heavy Lift planes) aren't even certified to fly in Canada.

Do you know anything about the Forces and military transport, or do you think the only choice was to buy the C-17?????

See above, smuckatelli.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Do you know anything about the Forces and military transport, or do you think the only choice was to buy the C-17?????

Come on, you're not stupid. Do some reading. Talk to people.

They didn't just get the C-17...

And from the stories, it seems that was what was requested.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Just because they have the similar names doesn't mean they are similar tanks. In fact, they are very different.

The guns are different 120 vs 105s. . The engines are different. The electronics are going to be different. The control layouts will be different.

So we'll need to train the crews and just as importantly, the mechanics.

Of course; what i meant was a) they're by the same people that made Leo1, so design philosophy should not be too different (the Germans managed to retrain the whole bundeswehr in early 1980s with no major probs). But more emphasis on the budgetary thing - there's STILL piles of barely used Leo2 A1 - A4s in Germany. And A4 is still a damn good tank!

Of course, they coulda done the Commonwealth thing and bought (leased) some chally 2's, now THOSE are a piece of kit!

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Saras

Of course, they coulda done the Commonwealth thing and bought (leased) some chally 2's, now THOSE are a piece of kit!

As I commented already, (1) Britain doesn't have any lying around and (2) they aren't in production, so they'd have to pay through the nose to start the line back up(the only other country with a Chally2 is Oman)

[Saras]

I know, I'm an irrational chally2 loving anglophile

[reds4ever]

The Canucks will buy any old crap. We got rid of a load of leaky old submarines to them a while back....

[Asher]

The Liberals bought us those.

[Tingkai]

Lonestar: You don't know whether or not the U.S. has Abrams to spare. No one knows unless Canada asks, which is what the Conservatives should do before they start spending billions of dollars.

The problem with Harper is that like most Conservatives he spends without thinking just to prove that he's macho.

He did that with the C-17s and he's doing that with the useless Arctic plans.

Originally posted by Lonestar
The Abrams is overkill for anyone the CF is gonna be fighting.

So the Abrams is overkill, but the Leopard 2 is just right. Okay, fine.

You do realize these tanks are designed to do the same job, eh.

Originally posted by Lonestar
Which is why they've pulled out stuuf like new(er) tanks and large cargo planes that could only be used for airlifting tanks in, huh?

So what you're saying is that in order to justify buying the C-17s, they need to buy new tanks. Brilliant. Full marks.

Originally posted by Lonestar
Why would there be "heavy duty studies"? Unless you're advocating spending the money to repeat the studies of, say, all of Western Europe? The Information is already out there.

Dude, Canada is not in Western Europe. The defence requirements for Canada are far different than EU nations, or the U.S. for that matter.

Originally posted by Lonestar
What's wrong with saying "we know what we want, and we know where to get them cheap?"

How do you know they are cheap if you only ask one seller?

Maybe another country, like the Netherlands, would give us a better deal on Leopard 2s. Or maybe we could get a better deal buying the Abrams or another tank.

We won't know what's for sale if we don't ask.

Originally posted by Lonestar
Tanks breaking down don't make for sexy newsreporting.

If five U.S. tanks break down, it means nothing beause you have thousands of them.

If five Leopard C1s break down in Afghanistan, that's big news because that's 30% of our tank force there.

As well, if the tanks are breaking down a lot, the news will be given to the media as a reason why Canada needs new tanks.

But there have been no such reports.

If Canada was shopping for new tanks, then there would be reports as countries try to lobby Canada to buy their tanks.

But there have been no such reports.

This has all the markings of a bad snap decision made purely for political reasons.

Originally posted by Lonestar
And leasing doesn't really make a whole Hell of a lot of since, especially since the only other comparable plane out there(The Russian Heavy Lift planes) aren't even certified to fly in Canada.

Russian airlift planes fly in Canada and have been leased by the Forces to transport equipment in the past. If we did it before, we could have continued doing so at a fraction of the cost of four toys.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Lonestar: You don't know whether or not the U.S. has Abrams to spare.

Horse****, the US Army can't even maintain the equipment on hand and we're going to magically pull Abrams out of our ass for you all? And incidently, these very same Abrams have a per unit cost higher than the Leopard 2s?

No one knows unless Canada asks, which is what the Conservatives should do before they start spending billions of dollars.

So, in your mind, it's completely insane for the government to go "we know what we want, we know where to get it...let's do it!"?

The problem with Harper is that like most Conservatives he spends without thinking just to prove that he's macho.

Harper Harper Harper...so the question is, what does the CF feel about it? the CF website seemed to be happy about the news, not angry at that crazy Harper!

He did that with the C-17s and he's doing that with the useless Arctic plans.



So the Abrams is overkill, but the Leopard 2 is just right. Okay, fine.

A better deal for the kind of wars Canada fights, yeah.

You do realize these tanks are designed to do the same job, eh.

You do realize the the Abrams was designed by the (U.S.)Army, and the DoD has a "performance above all mantra" that causes the per item cost to be way the Hell over the global average, right? And you do realise that the Canadians will probably never be in a Tank battle without either American or British units to the right or left of them, right? And that the United States is far more likely to be in a situation where our tanks need to be WTFPWN because we won't have parity in numbers, right?

So what you're saying is that in order to justify buying the C-17s, they need to buy new tanks. Brilliant. Full marks.

For those of us who pay attention to the news, you'd know that the CF had to finagle a Waiver so they could rent a Russian plane(which are normally NOT certified to fly in Western Countries) to fly the tanks to Afghanistan, right? Because Canada doesn't have the lift, and shocker, the USAF's assets are all tied up doing other ****.

Hmm, I WONDER if that could have been the driving decision behind getting some C-17s?

Dude, Canada is not in Western Europe. The defence requirements for Canada are far different than EU nations, or the U.S. for that matter.

Yeah, Tingkai, that's kinda been my whole point. So what's with the OH GOD WHY DIDN'T HARPER LEAN ON THE AMERICANS TO GET US ABRAMS hangup?

But the performance info is still out there.

How do you know they are cheap if you only ask one seller?

How do you know they didn't ask more than one seller? And why are you assuming that there are any practical alternatives out there?

Maybe another country, like the Netherlands, would give us a better deal on Leopard 2s.

They have several hundred lying around in depots doing nothing, huh?

Or maybe we could get a better deal buying the Abrams or another tank.

Yeah, that's good. Maybe the tank that has a per-unit cost a third more than the Leopard 2 will give you a better deal.

That is, assuming we have any to spare.

We won't know what's for sale if we don't ask.

They probably did ask first.

If five U.S. tanks break down, it means nothing beause you have thousands of them.

But we don't have only "5 tanks" breaking down, because we use them a helluva lot more than you. And the damage in(what with the daisy-chained 155mm shell IEDs), say, Iraq is slightly more severe than in Afghanistan.

If five Leopard C1s break down in Afghanistan, that's big news because that's 30% of our tank force there.

As well, if the tanks are breaking down a lot, the news will be given to the media as a reason why Canada needs new tanks.

Stuff breaking down because it's being used alot isn't news, at least when the odds are that it breaking down won't kill you.

Let's say there's a Convoy in Afghanistan with two C1s. One breaks down. (transmission breaks) Now what? Well, the first crew dismounts, while other vehicles set up a perimeter and a recovery vehicle tows it away.

What if a crappy 40 year old Helicopter breaks down? Sucks to be you!

See the difference yet?

But there have been no such reports.

Why would there be, it isn't news

But don't takemy word for it.

This lease/purchase surprised Canadian media but deployed Leopards are wearing out fast and it may be simpler/cheaper to replace than repair. In light of the German refusal to send troops to Kandahar, it galls to see Canadian defence dollars building up Angela Merkel’s treasury. Still, needs must and the deal means quick delivery, spares, maintenance software etc.

Huh, it almost seems as if the CF chose this because...it made sense!

If Canada was shopping for new tanks, then there would be reports as countries try to lobby Canada to buy their tanks.

But there have been no such reports.

Which countries? No line in the Europe or the United States produces tanks anymore, except the Italian Ariete. And come on man...it's Italian

This has all the markings of a bad snap decision made purely for political reasons.

Still, needs must and the deal means quick delivery, spares, maintenance software etc.

No Sir! It couldn't be because it's a quick, high quality fiscally sound decision!

Russian airlift planes fly in Canada and have been leased by the Forces to transport equipment in the past. If we did it before, we could have continued doing so at a fraction of the cost of four toys.

Yeah, then all it would take is for Russia to go "no", then you'd be without a paddle, wouldn't you? Or maybe they could just hold your gear hostae, like that merchant ship did..

[laurentius]

I thought modern leopard2 2A6m mbt were far superior tanks to abrams or merkava....