How can a NZLAV cast as much as an Abrams tank?
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
PlasmaKrab
New Member
Where do these figures come from? I just found costs between 1.4 and 2 MUSD for the US Stryker, which should be exactly the same as the APC version of the NZLAV-III.
I see here that the whole program is supposed to cost 672M$ for 105 vehicles.
That's more than 6M$ apiece, but which dollars are we talking about? US or NZ?
Besides, that 672M$ deal includes "infrastructure in Linton and Burnham Military Camps, overseas training, simulators, publications, specialist tools and test equipment, spare parts, add-on armour, field service representatives and ammunition", which is certainly no small amount, particularly if it includes building two vehicle service centers from the ground up.
Now I see that this article is 3 years old. Have the figures risen significalntly since then?
Edit: where is the point in comparing a Stryker armed with a 25mm (30mm?) Bushmaster autocannon and carrying an infantry section with an Abrams anyway? Abramses won't move your grunts around (except maybe with asbestos-lined pants...). You can argue about the usefulness of the LAV's "pop-gun", as some call it, but compare comparable options, not an APC with a tank.
I see here that the whole program is supposed to cost 672M$ for 105 vehicles.
That's more than 6M$ apiece, but which dollars are we talking about? US or NZ?
Besides, that 672M$ deal includes "infrastructure in Linton and Burnham Military Camps, overseas training, simulators, publications, specialist tools and test equipment, spare parts, add-on armour, field service representatives and ammunition", which is certainly no small amount, particularly if it includes building two vehicle service centers from the ground up.
Now I see that this article is 3 years old. Have the figures risen significalntly since then?
Edit: where is the point in comparing a Stryker armed with a 25mm (30mm?) Bushmaster autocannon and carrying an infantry section with an Abrams anyway? Abramses won't move your grunts around (except maybe with asbestos-lined pants...). You can argue about the usefulness of the LAV's "pop-gun", as some call it, but compare comparable options, not an APC with a tank.
Last edited:
Since it's a NZ source, it must be NZ dollars. As you point out, it's whole programme cost, not the vehicles. Australia is paying AUD550 mn (according to the 2004 original press release) for 59 refurbished secondhand M1, or AUD9.3 mn each. And an Oz dollar is a bit more than an NZ dollar.PlasmaKrab said:
PlasmaKrab
New Member
That's nearly 7MUSD per Abrams... pretty expensive IMHO.
Do you have more info about how far "refurbished" they were? I mean, are they US Army stored M1A2s with the AIM upgrade or old-stuff M1A0 or IPM1 pulled out of the mothballs and brought to M1A2 standard first?
Looks like the AIM upgrade is worth some bucks in terms of battlefield management, anyhow.
Do you have more info about how far "refurbished" they were? I mean, are they US Army stored M1A2s with the AIM upgrade or old-stuff M1A0 or IPM1 pulled out of the mothballs and brought to M1A2 standard first?
Looks like the AIM upgrade is worth some bucks in terms of battlefield management, anyhow.
Last edited:
Since the NZ dollar is worth about 60 percent of the US dollar, the whole program cost ZLAV is less than $4 million US each. It wouldn't surprise me if that's worth twice the drive away cost of $2 million US each. And since the AU dollar is worth about 70 percent of the US dollar, the M1A1 cost will be near 6 million US each using the figures above.
So using simple elementary mathematics, its obvious they don't cost the same.
So using simple elementary mathematics, its obvious they don't cost the same.
NZLAV said:
If you want to make a specialized LAV vehicle from the GM factory in Canada, it costs 14 million USD. Thats from a direct 2002 request for quote.
Which is ludicrous, so while I am not sure on the numbers posted here, it would not surprise me in the least (In fact I think it is a certainty) if NZ has been "ripped off" as the original post implied.
cheers
W
PlasmaKrab
New Member
Thinking about it, where and when is an Abrams worth 4M$?
Isn't that the figure of the original US Army procurment in the early 80s? Sounds like that kind of figure.
If so, a top-notch M1A2SEP or M1A2AIM is certainly worth lots more in today's dollars.
Anyone got any figure on recent Abrams biddings? (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Quwait, Australia, Turkey...)
Isn't that the figure of the original US Army procurment in the early 80s? Sounds like that kind of figure.
If so, a top-notch M1A2SEP or M1A2AIM is certainly worth lots more in today's dollars.
Anyone got any figure on recent Abrams biddings? (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Quwait, Australia, Turkey...)
The Abrhams we got had to have certain requirments, as such, it was not required to use DU shells, as they are banned in Aus. Forces. and most or all M1A2s have this requirement.
The Abrahms we got also recieved custom mods including reducing heat emissions. The ASLAV was also given Aus mods to make it more adaptable in the Australian Environment, an obvious requirment for all Army vehicles if they are to survive training in the Northern Territory
The Abrahms we got also recieved custom mods including reducing heat emissions. The ASLAV was also given Aus mods to make it more adaptable in the Australian Environment, an obvious requirment for all Army vehicles if they are to survive training in the Northern Territory
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The Abrams contract for Australia, it was announced last week, came in at AU$520m, a saving of $30m over original estimates.
For that we got 59x M1A1 AIM (M1A1D) tanks, completely refurbished and upgraded with latest gen thermal imagers, fire control, command support system, Blue Force tracker, and some TUSK mods including infantry phone and (I believe) the bar armour to protect the rear of the vehicle from RPG attacks. (The armour has not yet been fitted however).
We also received 7 M88A2 Hercules, a fleet of 14 MAN trucks and "Swing-Arm" trailers (low loaders) for road transport, a fleet of 8 new refuelling trucks, a large quantity of 120mm ammo (including DM53 Tungsten penetrator, MPAT, Canister and training ammo) and support capabilities.
Given the large support package I'd imagine the actual tank price amounted to no more than 70% of the total contract price ($385m or so) which works out at roughly $5.8m per tank, which seems about right for a second hand tank...
For that we got 59x M1A1 AIM (M1A1D) tanks, completely refurbished and upgraded with latest gen thermal imagers, fire control, command support system, Blue Force tracker, and some TUSK mods including infantry phone and (I believe) the bar armour to protect the rear of the vehicle from RPG attacks. (The armour has not yet been fitted however).
We also received 7 M88A2 Hercules, a fleet of 14 MAN trucks and "Swing-Arm" trailers (low loaders) for road transport, a fleet of 8 new refuelling trucks, a large quantity of 120mm ammo (including DM53 Tungsten penetrator, MPAT, Canister and training ammo) and support capabilities.
Given the large support package I'd imagine the actual tank price amounted to no more than 70% of the total contract price ($385m or so) which works out at roughly $5.8m per tank, which seems about right for a second hand tank...
Okay, NZ paid NZ$574m (excl GST) for 105 LAVs, they are all equipped with a 25mm turret. So NZ$5.5m per copy, roughly AUD$4.75m a copy. Source from the NZ ministry of Defence.Aussie Digger said:
PlasmaKrab
New Member
OK, so that's more like 3.6 MUSD per LAV, which already sounds more reasonable. Thinking about it, I don't think the Delco turret would add more cost to, say a LAV-III APC aka Stryker, given that the turret is broadly the same since some 20 years.
Whiskyjack, have you factored out the services, parts, ammo, training, etc? If so, that kind of price still smells ripoff.
Whiskyjack, have you factored out the services, parts, ammo, training, etc? If so, that kind of price still smells ripoff.
Michael RVR
New Member
Theres massive amounts of support costs built into these contracts, i'm not sure that you could reliably work out the 'unit cost' per se.. as it would end up being dependant on the amount of support purchased.
LavIII's with all the electronics gear are not cheap.. $574 doesn't sound too bad to my mind given what comes with them.
LavIII's with all the electronics gear are not cheap.. $574 doesn't sound too bad to my mind given what comes with them.
No that is total package, although there has been further buys of equipment as well. Can't list it off the top of my head though.PlasmaKrab said:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #15
Here are my figures:
M1A1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrams_tank
Ever if the source I used was wrong and they cost 7million NZD each, how does this work? An M1A1 is bigger in all aspects.
M1A1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrams_tank
Ever if the source I used was wrong and they cost 7million NZD each, how does this work? An M1A1 is bigger in all aspects.
If you are buying 7000 odd the price would be kept down as well! Plus a lot were produced in the early 80's, so you need to think inflation.NZLAV said:
One further point would be logistics and maintenance costs would be VERY high IMO.
Yeah certainly not comparing apples with apples! I guess given that the Aussie's M1's are rebuilds must be a significant factor in the lower (apparent) cost.
There could also be another factor - NZ bought it's LAV's at market prices from the manufacturer, no govt-govt deal. What's the bet the US govt are doing a 'sweetheart' deal to get the Aussie's their M1's at a cheap price.
Remember the US offered NZ the F-16's at a token price in the late 90's - same sort of thing I bet! The only difference is that the Aussie govt doesn't have it's head in the clouds!
There could also be another factor - NZ bought it's LAV's at market prices from the manufacturer, no govt-govt deal. What's the bet the US govt are doing a 'sweetheart' deal to get the Aussie's their M1's at a cheap price.
Remember the US offered NZ the F-16's at a token price in the late 90's - same sort of thing I bet! The only difference is that the Aussie govt doesn't have it's head in the clouds!
I also think that the fact that the Abrams are "just" overhauled surplus M1A1s with some new equipment is a big factor. Just look at the tank market. With all the Leopard 2 from Germany, Netherlands and Switzerland, the Ts from eastern europe and the will of the US to spread some of their Abrams the tank market is much more a buyers market than the one for modern APCs, IFVs and mine protected vehicles.
These vehicles are a big market these days with all these peacekeeping missions going on for which they are the vehicles number one.
@Aussie Digger
You bought DM53 rounds? I thought you buy some US tungsten penetrators. Especially while DM53 is more vulnerable to extreme temperatures than DM63, so DM63 should be much more usefull for a country like big, hot Aussieland.
These vehicles are a big market these days with all these peacekeeping missions going on for which they are the vehicles number one.
@Aussie Digger
You bought DM53 rounds? I thought you buy some US tungsten penetrators. Especially while DM53 is more vulnerable to extreme temperatures than DM63, so DM63 should be much more usefull for a country like big, hot Aussieland.
PlasmaKrab
New Member
Waylander, speaking about US and German sabt rounds, I recently heard (from US sources of course) that the German DM43 was a licensed copy or derivate from the US-made tungsten-based KEW-1. Have you heard about that, or is it just some misunderstanding based on the LKE-designation?
If there is some grain of truth in that, it could be a reason why the US didn't push too much on the Aussies for a local APFSDS round.
Besides, are the original M1A2s equipped with DM53-compatible firing tables? The LKE2 DM53 must be physically close to the best US DU rounds like the M829E3, but I don't know if the US tanks could fire DM53 rounds off the cuff.
If there is some grain of truth in that, it could be a reason why the US didn't push too much on the Aussies for a local APFSDS round.
Besides, are the original M1A2s equipped with DM53-compatible firing tables? The LKE2 DM53 must be physically close to the best US DU rounds like the M829E3, but I don't know if the US tanks could fire DM53 rounds off the cuff.