[RN7]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

The weight of the Australian M1 comes from an acquaintance who is currently serving in the Australian Army.

Well these figures are actually heavier than the official Australian figures for the weight of Australian Abram's, which further supports my argument that they are fitted with DU armour.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

The commentary about Australian politics comes from me from being a voter in Australia for several decades and from having family members involved in both sides of Australian politics.

Well your government is playing to both sides in its stand on DU armour fitted to Australian tanks. On one hand it is publically condemning depleted uranium as a toxic weapon and claims it wants to eliminate the use of DU, but on the other hand through abstaining to vote in UN resolutions it won't commit to that policy. All five permanent UN security council members including Australia's major arms suppliers the United States, Britain and France also voted against or abstained from the UN resolutions as did Russia and China.

If Australia was so committed to not using DU armour it would not have bought the Abram's tank in the first place. The German Leopard 2 was the obvious choice back in the early 2000's as the Australian Army already used the Leopard 1. In fact they could have also bought the British Challenger 2, a remarkably powerful and well protected tank which has proven very adaptable for use in the deserts of the Middle East. It would also have been a logical choice given Australia's close links to Britain and history of using British tanks in the past. The Canadians also used the Leopard 1 and bought the Leopard 2 to replace them, and Canada also has a major uranium mining infrastructure and even closer links to America.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Anybody who bothers to actually look at the situation knows that the Arabs used their tanks without support from any other service. They were vulnerable to simple infantry attacks because they had not taken them into consideration when they deployed their tanks - tanks are not invulnerable even with DU armour. The Russian found the same result with their foray into Chechnya.

So the Arabs have incompetent tactics and leadership? Funny because some Arab countries have being closely training and fighting with American and other Western forces in the Middle East since 1991 and have been very well armed by them, and I'm sure they picked up a few things. However none of the Arab M1 Abram's are fitted with DU armour, unlike all of the American Abram's. The Iranians and other foreign players have made an industry out of developing ever more powerful IED's for use against Western armies in the warzones of the Middle East. Some US Abram's have been disabled or rendered scrap through ambush from IED and missiles from multiple directions including against their rears, but no US Army or Marine Abram's has ever been destroyed in a frontal assault on them by any weapons including IED, anti-tank missiles or any ordnance round from another tank. The British Challenger 2 has an equal if not even better reputation in warzones. As for the Russian tanks in Chechnya, they are no where near as well armoured as a modern US Abram's.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

But you seem to have more investment in this than it would deserve, resurrecting a thread that's been left standing for nearly a year.

So the initial discussion I had with you and some of the others about this subject dates back to January 2019. I put up some data to support my argument and after I did nobody really seemed to want to debate those figures or go any further with it and it was sidestepped. Then Paul Mulcahy puts up with some relevant data about the composition of DU armour in June 2019, and after I reply and ask did he find out anything about the Australian Abram's you post up an Australian Army briefing about this some six months after saying nothing on the subject. That briefing you put up says a lot about what people wanted to hear but gives absolutely no technical information about the Australian Abram's or the contradictions of its very heavy weight. But I'm not allowed respond in my own good time?

Its 8 and half months not a year since I last put up something up on this subject. BTW other threads are also regularly resurrected after being left standing for a year or more, and in fact I've seen some threads resurrected after five years or more. Do you have a problem those threads to and do you also get on to the others about doing that?.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Invested to the point where it seems that nothing anyone says is going to convince you that the Aussie tanks do not have DU. This discussion has been rendered pointless, you're going to do T2k whatever way you see it and nothing I or any other Australian says is going to make any difference to your opinion.

You know its very hard to get motivated into discussing things when I get this criticism. I actually left the thread alone in the first place precisely because of this attitude. This website is about Twilight 2000 and military subjects in general. I am interested in that and so are others. I believe that the Australian Abram's are fitted with DU armour. I've presented a very plausible argument for that opinion and posted a lot of technical data to back that opinion up. Feel free to question that data in any way you want in your own good time.