"Tank-Fest"

[Harlan (Deceased)]

An old friend of mine in England sent me these photos that he took from a 'Tank-Fest' show that he attended there recently. Pretty cool and I thought I should share here.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[CINDERS]

No real comparison between pic 1 and the last one good old 131 Mk VI Panzer, pic 3 has me intrigued as it looks like it has a bifocal aiming system similar to the gun turrets on cruisers and battleships when they were in local control the whole turret looks huge Maker! TIA

[browningautorifle]

Love the Canadian Leopard...hard to believe that it and I are now museum grade...except it might be a bit less worn than I am. I remember when we got those as new. They came with an MG3 on top as part of the scale of issue. Those disappeared very quickly...

[rickv100]

No real comparison between pic 1 and the last one good old 131 Mk VI Panzer, pic 3 has me intrigued as it looks like it has a bifocal aiming system similar to the gun turrets on cruisers and battleships when they were in local control the whole turret looks huge Maker! TIA

Stereoscopic rangefinder? That tank is an M103 heavy tank.

Rick

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Very nice looking 38T in there as well.

In Oz, in true form, when our Leopards were taken out of their quite short service, most were "donated" to service clubs and sundry towns as welded-up, static displays.

I drove past one in a small country town not far out of Brisbane the other day. Next time, I'll remember to chuck the camera in the car.

The politics of procurement are odd, to say the least.

When the Leopards were acquired, there was NO "doctrine" that mentioned air-defence versions etc. There was one or maybe two of the "driver-training" variant, but no apparent consideration of "peripherals. The MG-3s were replaced by MaG-58's as soon as the "warranty" ran out. Apparently they were, depending on the source, "too expensive to run" or "not standard". Oddly enough, only a few years before, we had gone to an inordinate amount of trouble to remove the MaGs from the Scorpion turrets and jury-rig .30 cal Brownings in their place, because "Armoured Corps used .30 cal (and .50cal) Brownings.As a "last-gasp" of the Brownings, they were modified to fire from an open bolt; great idea, but a couple of decades late. Apparently there was a token effort to convert them to 7.62 NATO, but it seemed that "new toys" were part of the deal, and the Brownings went to the smelter.

No, we didn't have ACTUAL Scorpions, just the turrets, "fitted" to long-suffering M-113s, to replace the "re-purposed" Saladin turrets that had been previously grafted onto 113 hulls. These "Saladinized" jobs were locally called "The Beast", and were ludicrously top-heavy and definitely "non-swimmable.". I think I have a couple of pics in an old album somewhere.

It became "rapidly" apparent that the Leopard was a LOT quicker in ALL terrain than the vintage M-113s then on issue. It seemed to an ex-infantry type (since gone to the "light" side) that Tanks without Infantry support that could keep up, and appropriate air-defence, mine clearers, etc. were just big targets.

Then we got the "export" M1 variants, and, instead of keeping the Leopard hulls and using them, with new power-packs and M-1-compatible tracks, they were "de-militarized" and put out to pasture, to "rust in peace".

It always struck me as interesting that a country like Israel, which is smaller in area than some cattle-grazing farms in Australia, could squeeze an incredible amount of life out of "obsolete" vehicles, whilst at the same time fielding some of the world's best AFVs, small arms and advanced military electronics.

[browningautorifle]

I recall the variations of M113 when I was there in '77 as we only had the pintle mount on top of ours. They were odd. I also encountered the 7.62 Brens with those M113 crews when they dismounted for local defense...I wanted one. Just one...

[Bob Womack]

I had no idea that the Leopard has been retired, stuffed, and mounted. All the Brit-originated armament comparison shows* on cable TV here in the U.S. (many with, um... the former Aryeh Nussbaum) are still touting it as vastly superior to the Abrams by virtue of its speed. The fact that all the speed simply made it possible to outrun its infantry is fascinating to hear on this side of the pond.

Bob

* Top Ten Tanks, etc.

[CINDERS]

We have one in Bunbury and another in Collie about 45 K's apart the Collie one is at the RSL hall the other is at a tourist park.
I have always wondered why we took on the M-1 which I have been told or heard love to shred tracks, are to heavy for some of the bridges in our North when you consider we have had Leopards for years why not just up grade to the Leopard II as all the crews would be familiar with it and need minimal training.
Australia has no aircraft carrier yet we utilize an aircraft designed for one as a land based fighter!

[Paul S.]

...
I have always wondered why we took on the M-1 which I have been told or heard love to shred tracks, are to heavy for some of the bridges in our North when you consider we have had Leopards for years why not just up grade to the Leopard II as all the crews would be familiar with it and need minimal training.
Australia has no aircraft carrier yet we utilize an aircraft designed for one as a land based fighter!

My honest opinion? Yank marketing.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

I think that issue of speed was part of the rationale for the "Bradley" IFV. This was / is a problem shared by the Australian Army; when we got the Leopards, all of a sudden, NOTHING could keep up with them "cross-country".

Without an equally mobile "screen", tanks either have to slow down to the pace of foot-sloggers, (or their supposed "support"), or go it alone. Neither prospect is in accordance with the doctrine of Heinz Guderian OR the battlefield lessons of latter 20th Century military history.

One criticism of the Bradley is that it tries to be all things to all soldiers. Thus, like Topsy, it just "growed" into something akin to a baby "Merkava", but without the "wallop".

The humble, but trusty, old M-113 is not doing too badly to still be in active service after more than fifty years, as well. NEVER intended to be anything more than a glorified taxi, with upgrades to the drive and power-pack, they will be rattling around the world for quite a while yet. And, if not too "enhanced", they retain their ability to swim, albeit slowly.