Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic
This same situation would have occurred if we had bought the Leopard 2 or the Challenger 2. We don't have the facilities to even make ceramic armours let alone repair something like Chobham armour let alone any armour more advanced than Chobham. Any repairs would require the vehicle be sent back to the country of origin. Even with the Leopard AS1 tank, we would have had to send them back to Germany for any significant repair or refurbishment.
DU armour was unacceptable to the Australian public and was, as mentioned before, a vote killer for any political party that went against that aspect of public opinion.
For any political party to covertly acquire tanks with DU armour at that period in time would require a conspiracy of silence from 2004 until the present day that would involve politicians on all sides of Australian politics, public servants, civilian contractors and military personnel to the tune of thousands of individuals. The Australian Greens party in particular would have rained merry hell down on government if they found out any such duplicity involving uranium had occurred.
The implication of all this is that either: -
1. the rest of the Australian population are a bunch of dupes who believe whatever the government tells them
2. the entire population of Australia is "in on it" and is lying to the rest of the world to protect the conspiracy despite many Australians being firmly opposed to DU
or
3. the government is telling the truth, we have no DU armour
In the nearly two decades of Abrams in Australian service, there has not been a single piece of evidence to support the notion that the Australian Abrams have DU armour. The American tanker that claimed we do have DU armour was arguing from a point of supposition. He displayed no consideration for the Australian social-political situation, of Australian health & safety regulations, of Australian military practice or, to be blunt, he exhibited no proof that he had any idea whatsoever about any aspect of Australia, the Australian government and the Australian military.
The Australian tanker could at least claim direct knowledge of all three of those subjects even if he had not had direct experience of the Australian Abrams.
|
I think I did say that the Leopard 2 or Challenger 2 would have been a better option for Australia at the time. The Leopard 2 is a fine tank but it has no real combat experience, and expect for maybe the very latest models available today in 2020 the armour on older models is not up to that of the DU-armoured Abram's or the Challenger 2. The armour on the Challenger 2 is equally as tough as the DU armour on the Abram's. I don't know what it is made of as the Brits wont tell anyone about it no matter how hard you look. Maybe some DU armour too huh!!
I think cost came into the equation when Australia was choosing which tank to buy, and America offered a relatively cheap package with mostly refurbished models. But all the work on them was done in America and there is ambiguity about which M1A1 SA AIP variant was supplied.
There is some secrecy about all of this and it is near impossible to find out which tank Australia really got. Australia says it got the M1A1 SA AIP v1 with no DU armour, but the data relating to the very heavy weight of the Australian tank points to M1A1 SA AIP v2 which has DU armour. All the major repair work is also done in America, and that is another part of the problem as you would have to closely inspect the armour to figure out what it actually is and that is only going to happen in America at a tank factory. Official secrets acts etc would mean you would end up in prison if you went near one.
But that is what you get when you don't have a major arms industry and have to buy from another country.
The Australian government has gone out of its way to state that there is no DU armour in it tanks and I have never denied any of this. However despite vocal support for condemning depleted uranium as a toxic weapon, the Australian government has abstained from voting in UN resolution to restrict or ban the use of depleted uranium weapons. Why was this?
The issue I have is the weight of the Australian tank. It is just far to heavy to be fitted with the export grade armour that was supplied to the Arabs.