1979 ish Canadian Leo c1 ?

[12Alfa]

On 9/24/2017 at 5:18 PM, Will2 said:

Hello people, I am a new member just, so salutations.

 

I came across this fascinating thread when trying to find an answer to a Canadian Leopard  C1 question. Some years back I recall reading (well, I think I do) that the C1 version of the Leopard 1 couldn't effectively fire APFSDS ammunition. I see by this thread that circa 1985 it carried M111 equivalent APFSDS. My vague memory has me further recalling that, though carried, the C1 struggled with accuracy when firing APFSDS, and that a solution was only found by the 1A5 turret substitution and upgrade to the C2 version. I know that this thread is well nigh 4 years old now, but if anyone out there is listening and has any willing insight I would appreciate any commentary, be that it confirm the above or the fact that I have an overactive imagination and none of it is true.

 

Thank's in advance. 

 

The (our) leopards C1/2 did not suffer from that issue from the intel I've gathered on said subject.

Edited September 26, 2017 by 12Alfa

[Will2]

Ok, thanks 12Alfa. Then it must be I have an erroneous memory or one misconstrued over time. On another forum a gent who served in the RCD early 80's commented positively and in line what you have stated in this thread. Though a general comment, he noted seeing 'war stocks only' of some advanced APDS round he guardedly figures could have been APFSDS. He commented that these were never fired in training.

 

A follow on question would be, are any of these type of rounds (APDS or APFSDS) ever fired in training as opposed to, say, TPDS/T?  

[Gibsonm]

Different Army, but same 105mm L7A3 gun.

 

Pretty sure Our Leo AS1s only fired APDS, but I can check the pam when I get home.

 

Unsure if that was due to a technical limitation or if was the only armour defeating ammunition purchased.

[Will2]

A little tid bit of info that came up in recent reading was that the Canadian C1 had the L7A1 and not the A3 version of the 105mm. Even the upgrade to the C2, with its 1A5 turret, had the guns swapped out so the L7A1 was retained. Any info on the AS1s and its particulars vis a vis ammo, or whatever, would be appreciated.

[12Alfa]

12 hours ago, Will2 said:

Ok, thanks 12Alfa. Then it must be I have an erroneous memory or one misconstrued over time. On another forum a gent who served in the RCD early 80's commented positively and in line what you have stated in this thread. Though a general comment, he noted seeing 'war stocks only' of some advanced APDS round he guardedly figures could have been APFSDS. He commented that these were never fired in training.

 

A follow on question would be, are any of these type of rounds (APDS or APFSDS) ever fired in training as opposed to, say, TPDS/T?  

As for the war stocks, They must have been fired as some time as there shelf-life would come into play. When I was in Germany in 1974, I worked hauling 105 ammo from the rail head to the firing point. The rounds were used then were a mixture of both war stock, and new rounds. War stock has to be rotated out for it to stay within the specs of optimal performance, and being war stock one would strive to keep them in the best condition.

 

Also they would have been fired in training, how would the gunners get trained on them? Now the amount could have been low per gunner.

 

We when firing the 76mm would have more Practice round vs combat rounds.

How ever this was due to budget constraints, and why fire less when you could fire a lot more rounds of the practice type and gain the same results, training ones c/c, and gunners.

 

Another fact that may have been in play could have been barrel wear. If the new round had been seen to cause a greater wear, it may have been restricted due to replacing barrels above the historically norms. You would want to maintain this replacement cost for budget forecasting I would think.

 

I can look into my books and manuals further.

[Will2]

That's a very good point when it comes to training practice and ageing war stock use. The gent I referred to earlier, an officer at the time, listed his European service time as 81 to 84, a little before your commentary on Leopard C1 L7 105mm ammunition options (1985). It may have been that the war stock advanced rounds he was referring to were new? Too new to be just expended? I'm even wondering if they may have been other Nato members rounds and not strictly Canadian forces issue. I think you also mentioned this above as being an option? But, I am guessing and theorizing very much here.

 

I have noticed that Canada currently produces both 105 and 120mm tank gun rounds at a General Dynamics Canada Quebec plant. It would seem reasonable the manufacture would include stocks for the Canadian Armed Forces and not just overseas sales. I'm wondering how long that has been the case? In other words, was Canada producing its own tank gun ammunition in the 80's? Or, where they relying on foreign manufacture? If Canada was producing its own tank round supplies we could also ask when they first produced APFSDS?  Or, even, when Leopard C1s were first kitted out with APFSDS? I would appreciate any detail you feel you have the time to root out, on this or any other related topic. However, please proceed at your leisure. And the above may prove a long list, do not feel obliged.

 

There is one other point worth mentioning. I have a tome out from the library entitled The Royal Canadian Armoured Corp - An Illustrated History. In there it mentioned that C1s, early on, did suffer when heat expansion of the turret threw off the linkage between the gun and sight. Apparently the CAT shoot of 1979 saw C1s registering no hits. Perhaps this incident some how got combined with or conflated into my initial question?

[12Alfa]

Well in "79" we were still using rentals, and not the Leopard1A3, they would have been A1's

 

1st

West Germany,     Panzer Battalion 284,     Leopard I A-4     Points 39,749

2nd

Belgium,     2d Regiment of Lancers,     Leopard I A-2     Points 36,778

3rd

Great Britain,     4/7 Royal Dragoon Guards,     Chieftain     Points 34,687

4th

United States,     M Company, 3d Sqdn, 2d ACR,     M60 A-1 Rise      Points 32,489

5th

Canada,     Royal Canadian Dragoons,     Leopard I A-4     Points 30,681

 

I got this information out of the June 1979 issue of the, "The Dragoon.

 

So they must have hit some targets to get that score.

Edited September 27, 2017 by 12Alfa

[Will2]

Aha, I see your point. So much for taking the word of library found commercially published sources.  Have you any info on how those points are scored at the CAT shoot competition?

Edited September 27, 2017 by Will2

[12Alfa]

On one of my drives I have all the scores from research I did years ago. Will look before I expire

Edited September 27, 2017 by 12Alfa

[Eisenschwein]

CAT ? Have a look here:

http://www.mihalko-family.com/Canadian-Army-Trophy-Competition.htm#1979

[Will2]

It sounds like a very sophisticated competition towards its close, in Europe, in 1989. Thanks for this. 

[Will2]

10 hours ago, 12Alfa said:

On one of my drives I have all the scores from research I did years ago. Will look before I expire

 

Please, do not die suddenly! 

[Panzer_Leader]

Australian Leopard AS1 ammunition types were:

- L52A2B1 APDS-T

- L35A3 HESH-T

- M456A1 HEAT-T

- Canister (CNSTR)

 

Source: Leopard AS1: Leopard in Australian Service, Cecil, M, Trackpad Publishing, 2015.

 

Versions of the first three ammunition types are available for the AS1 in Steel Beasts.

 

 

[Will2]

On 29/09/2017 at 7:21 PM, Panzer_Leader said:

Australian Leopard AS1 ammunition types were:

- L52A2B1 APDS-T

- L35A3 HESH-T

- M456A1 HEAT-T

- Canister (CNSTR)

 

Source: Leopard AS1: Leopard in Australian Service, Cecil, M, Trackpad Publishing, 2015.

 

Versions of the first three ammunition types are available for the AS1 in Steel Beasts.

 

 

A very belated thanks for this Panzer Leader. Very interesting that the Australian Armed Forces didn't get to update the Leopard AS1's APDS to APFSDS. Perhaps, projected conflicts didn't include opposing tank types of a superior armoured nature? Could it be it was deemed that the existing APDS round was sufficient for all concerns.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Will2

[Gibsonm]

31 minutes ago, Will2 said:

A very belated thanks for this Panzer Leader. Very interesting that the Australian Armed Forces didn't get to update the Leopard AS1's APDS to APFSDS. Perhaps, projected conflicts didn't include opposing tank types of a superior armoured nature? Could it be it was deemed that the existing APDS round was sufficient for all concerns.

 

Basically the later and of course it cost $.

 

The "mid life" upgrade to give it good night fighting gear was similarly delayed and never arrived during its 30 year service life.

 

At one point our Scorpion turreted recce vehicles had better NFE due to their Image Intensifier sight than the Leo 1s had with the white light / IR searchlight.

[Will2]

On 04/10/2017 at 2:57 AM, Gibsonm said:

 

Basically the later and of course it cost $.

 

The "mid life" upgrade to give it good night fighting gear was similarly delayed and never arrived during its 30 year service life.

 

At one point our Scorpion turreted recce vehicles had better NFE due to their Image Intensifier sight than the Leo 1s had with the white light / IR searchlight.

Thank's for this Gibsonm. I'm wondering now if I, somehow, conflated this chosen ammunition restriction of the Australian Leopard AS1 with the Canadian C1? Isn't memory and assumption a funny thing.