Leopard 2 Germany - Indonesia controversy.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by revmodes, May 9, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

    • Like Like x 1
    • Like Like x 1
    • Like Like x 1
  1. You mean the Newcastle plant that's closing at the end of the year as there's no work ? The one that hasn't designed a MBT since CR2 in the 80s ? The one where the skills necessary have all slipped away to other jobs, retired or drive cabs ? That one ? Don't kid yourself, there's zero chance anyone is going to pay for some unique low volume prototype when you can get Leo 2, Abrams, T-90 and some cheap yet cheerful Chinese knock-offs for a lot less.

    Trust me, I've been in the defence industry from graduating until last year and if you haven't built a product for a couple of decades you're not going to succeed without paying a huge premium to build up the industrial base. As evidence I offer Nimrod, which was never going to offer more than flawed 1950s aerodynamics and got canned. Also Astute, although here as it is vital to the deterrent truly eye watering sums of money were paid to bring in foreign talent to make it work. If it wasn't deterrent related we'd be out of that business as well.
    • Like Like x 9
  2. And it is exactly this kind of insight that should be read by the other thread -

    • Like Like x 4
  3. I think it would be very sensible of MOD to purchase Leopard, retain skills, send more money to Germany, greater interoperability. Great blue sky thinking Jarrod...!

    I am impressed.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Having played with a Leo 2 a number of years back, I was reminded yet again why members of my family, me included, have been Mercedes-Benz fans since 1951. Every single part you touched just dripped, nay ooooooooooooozed, sheer quality. I was very impressed to see a demo of two Leo 2s and their ARRV - Bueffel - drive over a 20m gap [laid in less than three minutes by a Biber] and exchange engines with each other, and then all drive back across the Biber bridge in just a tad over 28 minutes...

    Only using a Leatherman.


    PS - I lied about the Leatherman for narrative impact. Sorry.
    • Like Like x 3
  5. I would think that Rolls Royce aero engines, most of the Formula 1 engineering works, Triumph motorcycles and a whole host of specialist engineering companies may disagree.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Undoubtedly but still pretty much niche markets compared to what we used to do on a much larger industrial scale. We were an industrial power house providing heavy goods in all manner of markets and usefully I thought, providing jobs for the masses.

    Now we would struggle enormously to do anything more than what you mentioned above and those masses just keep on drawing dole or working in supermarkets.
    • Like Like x 4
  7. I think that is cause we cannot get hold of the resources cheap enough (due to loss of empire) and we cannot pay skilled turners and fabricators a small pay packet nowadays so the end product would be very expensive.
    Niche engineering can be expensive though, especially when it involves sexy carbon fibre and titanium :)
  8. In 1945 87% of the world's shipping was constructed in British yards.

    In 1951 90% of the world's motor cars were built in and exported from UK.

    Post-war european military was modelled on and equipped from UK.

    Whilst I concur that RR (Aero) and F1 are still cutting edge, you would be "exceedingly brave" to deny that there is not an order of magnitude of difference there.

    Thanks to the UK pre-occupation with a Welfare state and apologist politicians (standfast one certain lady PM), we're in a state from which recovery (fiscal, morality, business) will be extraordinarily challenging. Put another way: if we're not actually, already f#cked - we shall be shortly.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. and we could have had the TSR.2...
    • Like Like x 3