lol, you’re going on about the Abrams being trash while you’re sad about the piece of rubbish Taipan being put out of service.
1 Like
Can’t have the helicopters flying
NH90 is an exceptional platform, we didn’t maintain them. You can blame yank interference for yet again our home being defended sub optimally.
So I guess Norway also doesn’t maintain theirs? Okay, I see your biases. Carry on.
You realise we have plenty of supporting evidence for the Taipans having substandard maintenance and software management? I do not know of Norway’s use of it, it is entirely possible Norway had strife aside their own cause, but ours is documented to be our own fault.
Really? I haven’t heard as much about Abrams getting bogged down. They are lighter and have more engine power, so naturally will do better in pretty much every environment
The NH-90 in general has had pretty severe issues
higher horsepower does not matter when you have no traction. all these vehicles are in excess of 50 tons on land that even the CVR(T) platform breaks a sweat on, and that things ground pressure isnt much more than a soldiers
What a topic derailment…
3 Likes
Right, so Australia happily maintains F-35s and a range of other gear, but somehow the Taipan is too much for us. This is some victim-blaming-esque line of thinking. Next you’ll tell me we should have stuck with the French submarine rather than going with AUKUS.
Topic died long ago. If you’re a Canadian, go watch ‘Camping with Steve’ on YouTube if you want some valid use of your time.
2 Likes
The Abrams will still do better, obviously there is a point where pretty much anything will get stuck, but even then a lighter more powerful vehicle is probably going to be easier to recover
is that why anything that get stuck is scuttled?
When there is a constant threat of drones it’s understandable
Getting it’s retirement date moved 13 years earlier doesn’t happen just because of substandard maintenance (not that I think Australia maintained their helicopters badly)
1 Like
Canada is the only one who doesn’t. Australia and New Zealand are in the FDPA which is a military alliance with the UK, Malaysia, and Singapore
I am aware of that, tis why I mentioned Germany as well as stated that I don’t think Canada should go to the US. My point is that Canada has a great deal of connections with other nations and doesn’t fully fit with any single one of them. Like, sure the ground side of things may have a lot to do with Britain, but what about air and helis?
Except they have?.. Gaijin just calls them the Republic of China. Why else do you think China has an F5, 104, and M60?
I mean there is a reason wht even Britain is also switching to the L55.
Who would have thought that maintaining a whole ammo production by yourself for ammo only you use would get expensive?
The Leopard (or CR3, I’ll give you that) will always be a better choice because availability and price of ammo it can fire.
EDIT: And I mean there is a reason why the CR2 has continuously failed in trials over the years.
Ironic because we have also seen plenty pictures of the Challenger 2 with it’s turret popped, or other destroyed vehicles.
1 Like
- 2 Challengers were lost. Granted there were more Abrams sent but plenty is very much stretching.
Anyhow please go can y’all go on topic before mods
I mean when a tank is barely used on the front lines of course there won’t be many losses.
Agreed. Canada being a sub tree for the US would be beyond stupid. The US really doesn’t have much need for any of the vehicles Canada would bring.
I mean Canadian vehicles won’t make a massive difference for the British tree, but at least the irl connections make the British tree a better place for the Canadian vehicles.
2 Likes
No.
No.
As a joke, making the US a sub-branch of the UK will be more historical than this.
Disclaimer: I don’t want US to be our subtree.
Nah.