Cadet Seaman said:
AlexKall said:
Cadet Seaman said:
AlexKall said:
Cadet Seaman said:
AlexKall said:
If i'm not misstaking the M1A2 was first in production in 1990, the Leopard 2 was in production in 1979
Source of the info of when the M1A2 was first put into production was
http://www.military.com/Resources/EQG/EQGmain?file=M1A2_TANK&cat=g&lev=2
The A2 was first produced in 90', but the M1 was first produced in 79'. The A1 and A2 don't differ much externally.
Yes the Leo 2 was built in 79'.
I don't get what your point is? The M1 Family is built around the MBT-70 as is the Leo 2.
Well you did mention M1A2 and not M1 from 1979. And the year on the Leo wasnt a question
And if it differ much externaly is only something you have to consider if its a buty contest, its the inside that counts and there quite a difference between the M1A2 and Leo 2 when it comes to internal parts, such as electronics etc, so i'm not sure why you compare a tank from 79 with an updated tank from 90. Thats my point
Think of how much a computer changed in 10 years.
Well considring that the armor platform ramains the same, yet the designation hasn't. The current tank, the Leopard 2A6 is totally differ form the baseline Leo 2.
As you said, it's the inside that counts. The M1 and M1A2 are the same externally, execpt the CITV, UAAPU, and main gun.
M1= M1A2
Leo 2= Leo 2A6
Both armor platforms where built in 1979, but have been updated through the years.
M1
M1A2 SEP
Leo 2
Leo 2A6
The reason for why I said that its the inside that counts is because when comparing a tank from 1979 and 1990 its the Electronics that changes the most, there for I don't see a reason to look at the outside either. It is however a big part of a modern tank.
Also Leopard 2 = Leopard 2
Leopard 2 A6 = Leopard 2 A6
STRV 122 = STRV 122 and so on
By the way, you posted a picture of an early Leopard 2 A4 model and not a Leopard 2 (Its still a Leopard 2 but Leopard 2 referes to the first Leopard 2 and not any of the upgrades, the correct way is to add the upgrade designition at the end for clearification.
I know I posted a picture of an early 2A4, the site doesn't have any Leo 2 photos.
I do get your point. The Leo 2A6 is the same platform as the Leo. The Leo 2A6 is the most recent variant of the Leo 2 family, as is the M1A2 for the M1 family. I was comparing the M1A2 SEP with the Leopard 2A6.
Are you stating the M1A2 SEP is superior to the Leopard 2A6?
Oh sorry a mixup then, thought you ware refering to the Leopard 2 and not Leopard 2 A6, now i know!
I state that STRV 122 and Leopard 2E is better then M1A2 SEP
One more thing is that, its not cost effective for any countries, It may however be and it can be used by USA, its however not cost effective. The price running it doesnt justify the few things that it can do that a Diesel can not do.
Not sure why Aussie díd not get a newer Leopard 2 such as A4 or A5. Not that M1A2 isn't good, don't get me wrong, but they already have older Leopards so for me it would be natrual to go for the Leopard 2 A5.
I guess political reasons got cought in there once again.
I do guess that the M1A2 can cope with the climat better then the Leopard 2 A5 can though, the Leo isn't made for desert so that might be another reason. By the way did they get M1A1 or A2?