MBT bang for you buck, Ozzie or South African

[7.62]

OK this is my position.
I did plan to sell my small mixed up collection of micro armour. That did not happen, too many great pictures here have got me thinking again. So I'm looking at building a small force for fun and games.
It's come down to Australian or South African. I have a bit of each at the moment but no MBT of either.

GHQ covers the Ozzie line up well, in time I'm sure there will be a Bushmaster and Tiger Helo and I get to go out and buy the M1 (59).

Then there is the oddball factor of the SA equipment which seems to have me hooked.
The only draw back is the question of the Olifant vs other modern MBTs.
Given that I could use Oilfant 2 (not in service IIRC) andRooikat 105 (0nly 76mm in service).
How well would they stand up vs other modern types, LeoII, T90s etc in a war gaming set up?
I'm not asking to compare armies here just the MBT side of of things.
I did not wish to high jack the South Africa defends itself thread but would welcome all feed back.
Thanks, Mick.
_________________
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance!

[thomas.tmcc]

mick the same could be said for the points you say for the aussies who would they come up against ,as for the centurion in SADF service they would upgrade them even more maybe with ERA etc experience in those old tanks can count against other types ..


i remember the SADF were offered afaik the challenger 1 tanks that went to jordan ..


thomas

for me more scope with SADF but an aussie force could be fun ..
_________________
owner of yahoo group for WW1 ,WW2 and Modern TO&Es,
tables of organisation & equipment or the unit of action

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/TOandEs/

[chrisswim]

Thomas, thank you for the note that Challenger could been given/sold to SADF. Guess it will happen. Back in 1993 or so, some Canadians solders were training down in FL at a base here. They had said Canada was buying M2 Bradleys, they had seen them on base up there. Well, apparently it was a trial or a joint training, since I have not read anything on it. But it was fun to give them M2 Bradleys and Leopard C1. Now Leopard 2A6 and Bradleys...... ahhhhhhhh, the fun.

Jordan also has the M1S, dont they? M1A1 turrets on M60 hulls? So Jordan can fight the Israelis, Egyptians, Saudis, Turkey, etc.

As for your question Mick, SADF is not really set up for a fight in the context of Europe was for the cold war. Many European countries are utilizing wheeled APCs, such as LAV III, AMV, Boxer, etc. Trying to have heavier armored 'armored cars' (i did it twice intentionally); LAV III vs LAV, etc. SA has exported some technology, we use it in Iraq.

[7.62]

Thanks guys. I understand the way the SADF equipment came about (thats what makes it so interesting and different). Cold war planing in Europe and S.Africa is like comparing apples to oranges.
What I'm looking for is a small war gaming force that could hold is own when faced with another modern force.
It would be freelance but 90-95% true to their TOE.

Plan A.
The Ozzie force would have most of the tools for the job. M1, ASLAV and updated M113s is a great mix, plus new helos (almost all by GHQ which is a nice bonus).
I would add a little to amphib/airborne kit (thats my 5-10%).

Plan B.
The SA force is fast moving and simple to use. Most is now out of date but would still seems to get the job done. If you get into the hit and run mindset even old Eland 90s could be a pain to others. Saab Gripen, attack helos, G5 G6 all help the sharp end.
I would add a tracked APC as my 5-10% (prob the M113s that I have).

The only area I'm unsure about would be a head to head with MBTs.
The M1s are a given but the Olifant (1Bs or 2s what ever I could get/build) I don't know.

There is no need to start a "what is the best MBT" thread, heaven knows there are too many pages on the web covering that!
I would like to know from a gaming side how well people think the Olifants would stand up?
Mick.
_________________
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance!

[piersyf]

My 2 cents worth (or 5 cents, as 2c pieces don't exist in aus any more);
SA has a better range of unique kit, but as a military is very local. If you were basing this on the premise of SA selling their kit to someone, maybe, otherwise you end up with a local (African) scenario. Nothing wrong with that, except facing a modern force is rare (or hard to explain).
As to Aus forces, the modern mix is not for operation overseas. If we deploy OS it's with special forces and infantry. LWB landrovers, unimogs etc with SAS. The chances of us deploying M1's is virtually nil. We don't have the lift capacity, and we aint likely to send all of our armour OS in one go (we don't have many).
What we DO still have is a light infantry force that is still among the best in the world at counter insurgency and 'peace keeping' (read about our ops in Somalia and you'll get the idea). We tie in with the 'big players' very well, but are 'niche ** CENSORED **'. Our armour can fight, no question, (our armoured corps has a very good history) but they would fight defensively. With a total armour force of 60 MBT's, we can't afford losses.
So, depends on what's important, toys or who they represent. If toys, I'd pick SA. If you want something that has actually got its hands dirty, pick Aus, but in an infantry role.

BTW, one battalion of infantry are usually trained as paratroops, although govt cost cutting has messed with that recently. All infantry can deploy from helicopters of course... We have (had) an airborne capacity.

P

[thomas.tmcc]

piers the SA Have had their hands dirty also .. remember they fought a conflict in angola with armour and infantry ...
_________________
owner of yahoo group for WW1 ,WW2 and Modern TO&Es,
tables of organisation & equipment or the unit of action

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/TOandEs/

[chrisswim]

Interesting comments, I appreciate it.

Still can run The Aussies overseas, with a company or two. with APCs (M113 or LAC25) ASLAV. If you need any excuse to run a game, let me know.

The SADF has some unique stuff, neat to look at. The Eland 90/ Ratel 90 had a difficult time taking out the tanks from Angola, but they did. Hence why the French went with the F-4 turret vs F-1 turret, longer barrel for better accuracy. Higher presure, but that only comes into play with AP rounds, speed does not effect HEAT pentetration.

Mick, you can do both, then you can have the Aussie and SADF fight each other, for surpremacy of the Southern Indian Ocean; Madagascar is out of the running on this one.

[Mk 1]

If the question is whether an Olifant can stand up in a MBT-vs-MBT fight, the question can only be answered with reference to what MBT it faces.

If your Olifants find themselves facing US M1A2SEPs, or Leo 5/6s, LeClercs, or fully kitted-out T-90As, well you had better be a pretty clever tactician, facing a reasonably inept foe, or they will be served up as an appetizer on a tray.

Think about how far your PC has advanced in the last 20 years. MBTs have not quite advanced that far, but close to it. With TI, integrated targetting computers and packet-data wireless networking for battlefield communications, composit array armor, and a selection of long-rod penetrators and proximity-fuzed and/or guided main gun munitions, a tank that relies on steel and a rifled gun shooting a 6- or 8-to-1 (L-to-D ratio) round is going to provide target practice. Doesn't matter if the targets are Centurions, M60s, T-55s, or T-72s (well at least T-72s have modern guns, and may have modern armor depending on the version). In any case, if you aren't in the current league, it winds up being a fight like Panthers against Mathildas or Char-Bs. If you're really good I suppose it is possible that you'll pop one or two of the opponent's tanks before your entire battalion is wasted, but that's about the best you can hope for.

All just IMHO.
_________________
-Mark 1
Difficile est, saturam non scribere.
"It is hard NOT to write satire." - Jean Paul Sartre

[7.62]

Thanks for all the feed back, it's always welcome.
From a gaming point of view MK1 has hit the nail on the head. Since I kind of want a modern force, I kind of need modern kit!

It would be great if you go up against.
"Hi, I'm Bill, I only collect/game with East German 1966-70".
However I think it would tend to be more like.
"Hi, I'm Bill check out my peace loving Swedish Strv122's".
Them IKEA 2A5 would have a range day with Olifant 1a's
The day of the data bus and c3 is here to stay.

The only "what if" with a chance would be going for a Olifant 2 with a 125mm.
AFAIK South Africa's MBT is still the 1a. The 1b's (44 at most) are all different standards and not issued to unit.

To want the best you can get is only human. Then sometimes you have to use what you have.
I'm still on the fence on this one.

Mick.
_________________
Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance!

[bishnak]

As an Aussie, I'd like to see you do the Oz force, but hey, I'm biased!

I do disagree with one of the previous posters that the chances of Aussie armour going anywhere are 'nil'. We sent tanks to Vietnam as part of our Bde Task Force, and just last weekend, at least one paper was running stories about the Oz government considering increasing the commitment in Afghanistan. One of the elements under consideration was (according to their sources) some of the new M1A1s. If I were to guess, I'd say this would only be a Troop or maximum a Squadron, but at least there'd be some Tank support for the diggers if Infantry are deployed. So "watch this space"...

Also, one of the main reasons cited for selection of M1 for Australia to replace our Leopard 1s (and not Leo2 for example) was for the sake of 'commonality' with coalition forces. It is not unrealistic (IMHO) to suppose that an Aussie Tank Squadron, or even the whole Regiment, could be deployed as part of an Aussie commitment to a coalition force and fit in as part of a larger formation (eg. Fighting as a manoeuuver element in a US HBCT)?

Since most 'moderns' gaing is hypothetical supposition and fantasy anyway, I can't see any reason not to premise a force in some fictional conflict as being an Aussie force? Sure we only have 60 tanks now, but who's to say we couldn't "ramp up" if something big occurred? (in WW2, we had multiple Tank Regiments...) Why not consider that Oz has seen the error of our frugal ways and bought another Regiment (or two!!) of M1A1s?

For that matter, you could easily do the same and do a 'what if?' for the South Africans you're considering - upgrade them with a Modern MBT and give them M1 or Leopard 2 or Merkava or whatever...

Whilst on this related topic , the Aussie background on the GHQ site for 'Modern Microarmour the Game' is a bit out of date. (eg. we now have M1, ASLAV, Bushmaster PMV, Javelin ATGM, Eurocopter Tiger etc...) It also has some factual errors (eg. the majority of the Task Force that went into East Timor was from 3 Bde, not 1 Bde etc). Has anyone considered updating it?

Oh, and I'd also love to see GHQ produce a model of the Bushmaster PMV as mentioned in the intial post. Oz orders for this vehicle are now up around the 800 mark, and it is also in service with the UK and Netherlands in smaller numbers. So it might be something a few people would be interested in?

cheers,

bish

[Mk 1]

[sultanbev]

[size=12][size=18]Interesting this should come up, as one of my friends has just got a South African army, and I looked up what I could on the Olifants for our wargames rules.

The Olifant 1A is basically a standard Centurion, with laser rangefinder, IINF and smoke dischargers. Weight 53t, speed 45kmh on road, 24kmh cross-country, armour c25cm hull front basic steel. In service e 1985, had FSAPDS PS1 ammunition available, a copy of IDF M111 round.

As such it was capable against the T-55 and T-62s common on its borders, but against your Chobham armoured stuff, it wouldn't last long. With the FSAPDS it could take on export model T-72s, but would as vulnerable back.

The Olifant 1B is a much different beast. It is basically a new tank, and on a par with the Israeli Magach 6/7 versions of the M60, and probably used Israeli technology, given the known links between the two nations.

Speed 58kmh road, c30kmh cross-country, weight 58t, full Improved Fire Control System with laser ranger, exhaust smoke generator, smoke dischargers, IINF, Spextronic fire suppression. It has a large increase in armour, spaced ceramic layer in the region of 36cm, and uparmoured turret side as well, c20cm equivalent armour. Available from 1991. The armour basis is on a par with early Abrams and Leopard 2 and T-64, and overall it is a tough tank. Not quite Chobham armour, but nearly as good as. For the local opposition it defeat all comers. It was developed because they thought the Angolans were to get T-80 tanks at one point.

This never happened, but it would have been able to take on T-80s on equal terms. The 1B had FSAPDS PS2 which would penetrate a T-80 basic at 1km, but was found to have severe dispersal problems over 2km.

So in your hypothetical scenarios, it would have a reasonable head-to-head chance against your late 1980s supertanks, but would be surpassed by the 200# generation such as Leo 2A5, Challenger 2, M1A2HA, Merkava III.

Hope this answers your question

Mark

[thomas.tmcc]

thanks mark .. that would be a good tank to get for 20mm ..

thomas
_________________
owner of yahoo group for WW1 ,WW2 and Modern TO&Es,
tables of organisation & equipment or the unit of action

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/TOandEs/

[sultanbev]

Thomas, we'll have to get advance orders in at S&S Models.....

[chrisswim]

Mick, thank you for the turrets, they arrived today. I like your idea on the LAV 25 turrets on the Stryker MGS for the Canadian version. I use the Stryker CAV. I am sending you some AML 90 turrets for your Ratel 90s and a few other turrets. I did send you a 'PM'. I want to verify your address.

Chris

Does any one have any extra turrets from the Stryker MGS, this is the base that the gun rests on. Thank you,