Army's plans for more and better tanks
A major upgrade is being considered for Australia's main battle tank, the M1 Abrams.
[email protected]
by Mark Abernethy
As the Defence Department gears into "new and enhanced capability", spending around $195 billion over the next 10 years, most people are aware of the large-scale builds: the Air Warfare Destroyers, the 12 future submarines, the future frigates and Australia's step into the aviation future with 72 F-35 stealth fighters.
Less well known is the resurgence of a defence technology which has not made many headlines for the past 45 years: the main battle tank.
The Australian Army's main battle tank (MBT) is the M1 Abrams, an American 62-tonne behemoth that carries four people and a 120mm main gun. It has not seen combat since 59 of them were bought in 2007, and Australia has not used an MBT since it deployed its Leopards in the Vietnam War.
The MBT is the core of an Army's ability to engage in sustained close combat: when you can actually see the enemy, an MBT is an indispensable and devastating weapon, says Colonel Anthony Duus, the Australian Army's Director of Armoured Fighting Vehicles Systems.
Duus says we may have one of the best tanks in the world, but we have too few, we have the 'analogue' models and we do not have the domestic sustainment capacity for the M1 Abrams in the way that the RAAF and RAN sustains its fleets.
The Army's Plan Beersheba from 2011 – ratified in the 2013 Defence White Paper – stipulates three armoured cavalry regiments, which each contains a tank squadron.
Duus says the current Land 8160 phase 1 project will resolve the challenges, although the exact details are still being finalised.
"We see the optimum fleet size for the M1 Abrams fleet as 90," says Duus. "That's a return to the fleet size we had with the Leopard but it's still short of the 110 we had with the Centurion. Ninety is a realistic fleet size to cover three tank squadrons."
Active squadrons
He says when there are three active squadrons, there have to be tanks in maintenance and being repaired, tanks kept as spares, tanks used for training and tanks being used.
"When you have a fleet of twelve submarines, there are only two at sea. It's the same with these big tanks – you need the right fleet size to generate three squadrons."
The first task of the current Land project is to "right-size" the fleet to 90, which Duus says is uncontroversial and was acknowledged by the then-Australian government and the US government when the M1 was originally acquired as a foreign military sale.
Duus says the challenge of converting the Australian M1 Abrams from an analogue model to a fully digital tank – along with other enhancements, including creating a 'breaching and bridging' capability – will cost between $770 million and $1 billion.
"We're in a technology cul de sac with our Abrams tanks," says Duus.
The main upgrade items for the tanks will enhance 'lethality' and introduce new-generation communications and sights. In the latest-generation thermal gun sights, the target can be seen from further out, it can be identified, locked onto and synchronised with firing the gun.
Other digital upgrades are not disclosed by the Army although the Americans are rolling out the latest high-tech 'active protection systems' for its heavy armour.
Armour upgrades
Also due for an upgrade is the tank's armour. When the original Australian order was filled, the tank came with non-DU (depleted uranium) armour, and the upgrades will bring the tank up to the latest standards in protection.
Duus says the Australian Army is also looking at a breach-and-bridge capability, which is built on the M1 chassis. These are tank-like vehicles that have combat engineering capability: the bridging vehicle has a fold-out bridge that it can deploy, and the breaching vehicles can attach dozer blades, ploughs and other tools of demolition and construction.
In the current round of right-sizing the M1 fleet, the Army has already bought six extra M88 Hercules armoured recovery vehicles from the US, to add to the seven bought in 2007.
The question of a sustainment capability for the enlarged M1 fleet will have a lot to do with how the upgrade project is conducted.
Duus says the upgrade options in consideration come down to shipping the M1 tanks to one of the two General Dynamics tank production lines in either Ohio or Michigan, or building a production line in Australia and using the facility as a sustainment hub for the subsequent 20-year life of the Australian Army M1 fleet.
"With vehicles like the M1, which you operate for decades, the sustainment cost far outweighs the procurement cost. We favour the option of having the production line in Australia."
He says the current sustainment operation for the M1 includes 'deep maintenance' on many aspects of the tank, including the diesel-turbine engine, which is sustained by Queensland engineering company, TAE.
What is not supported in Australia is the 'white box' technology in the tank, which has to be sent to the US.
"We'd like to have all the sustainment for the M1 in Australia," says Duus. "In terms of levels of readiness, that is the best option."
Duus says General Dynamics and the US government are both open to the idea of an Australian production line but no decisions have been made.
Technology-security concerns
The technology-security concerns of the American Defense Department have been resolved in partnerships such as the F-35 stealth fighter and the Aegis combat system in the Air Warfare Destroyers, and Duus says the US is comfortable with Australia as a partner.
"General Dynamics has an M1 production line in Egypt and the tanks from that line are being sold to Morocco and Iraq. An Australian line shouldn't be a problem."
He says the Australian Army's MBT will continue to be the M1 for another 25 years, but the Army is replacing the venerable M113 armoured personnel carrier, a tracked vehicle which always fights alongside the MBT.
"The M113 is the M1's little brother," says Duus. "They always fight together because together they minimise one's weaknesses by maximising the other's strengths."
The search for a new infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) to replace the M113 is a $10 billion project called Land 400 Phase 3 that calls for a 'tracked and turreted' vehicle with similar protection levels to the M1 Abrams but capable of carrying eight people – an infantry section.
Duus says the IFV – to be operating in 2025 – will be tracked.
"Tanks can go anywhere and they exert less ground pressure than the Hawkei (armoured vehicle)," says Duus. "The best technology for that last 300 metres is still the tank."
Read more:
