French tanks give teeth to U.N. force

[tocqueville]

By JAMEY KEATEN, Associated Press Writer
Tue Sep 12, 2:19 PM ET


BEIRUT, Lebanon - Thirteen French tanks, the most powerful armor ever deployed by a U.N. peacekeeping force, rolled ashore Tuesday, beefing up a mission aimed at helping cement an uneasy cease-fire in Lebanon.

.............

Scores of blue-helmeted French troops transferred the Leclerc tanks, AUF-1 artillery cannons, two high-tech Cobra radar trucks, and dozens of armored vehicles and transport trucks from a cargo ship in Beirut's port. The port reopened Friday after a nearly two-month Israeli blockade.

The French deployment is part of efforts to give teeth to the U.N. peacekeeping force known as UNIFIL, which has been largely ineffective since it was created for south Lebanon in 1978

......................................

The tanks, which weigh nearly 60 tons each, feature 120 mm smoothbore cannon, anti-tank and armor-piercing rounds, and anti-aircraft machine guns. Each is operated by a crew of three, has thermal sighting, night vision and an automatic loading system for on-the-move firing. Compared to the U.S. M1 Abrams, the Leclerc is smaller and more compact.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060912/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast

[partylessinOhio]

1. Viva Le France and Italia!

Thanks for posting this!

From your link:

Europe is providing the backbone of the force, and has promised 6,900 soldiers. France heads the ground component, while Italy is in charge of maritime patrols off the coast until Germany's navy arrives in about two weeks. ...

French Gen. Alain Pellegrini, who commands UNIFIL, said he had met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and told him the force would reach 5,000 soldiers "very soon."

Italy's 1,000-strong contingent formally began operations Tuesday, with patrols along the coast from the Israeli border to the Litani River 18 miles to the north.

Hopefully this will keep the invaders in check although I heard they shot a young Palestinian boy today. So sad.

[Aristus]

2. The LeClerc has never been tested in combat, but on the books, it

is a sweet piece of machinery.

It shares many features with the M1 Abrams, but also boasts an automatic loader (this can be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on how you look at it.) and a remarkable suspension system. According to reports published before the tank was first fielded, it also has a modular armor system. this allows the tank to be repaired quickly in the event of damage by enemy fire. Also, when new armor types come on-line, the entire armored suite can be replaced very rapidly. Although it lack the Abrams turbine engine, and therefor its speed, it boasts much better fuel economy.

I think the French will do well with this tank. As an ex-tanker myself, I'd love the opportunity to crew it for a bit.

[Selatius]

3. The French produce solid tanks. They have a long tradition of it.

They had more and better tanks than the Germans at the start of WW2, but they spread them too thinly across the front and used them to support infantry. The Germans did the opposite: Tank units served as the spear of attack, not infantry, and they concentrated tanks into mass formations to "roll over" defenses.

[happyslug]

4. History buff in me is coming out.

The French Tanks of WWII were NOT better than the German Tanks of the same period. While the French Tanks had bigger guns (Up to 75mm) these tended to be in the body of the tank not the turret. The Turret tended to be one man turret where the tank commander had to operate by himself either a machine gun or a 47mm gun. Compared to the German tanks of the time period (The Panzer IIIs) which had a 37mm gun in THREE MAN TURRET that permitted 360 degree rotation (Which had a Gunner handle the gun assisted by the Loader leaving the Tank Commander to guide the tank into combat, this grouping has been adopted by all later WWII and post WWII tanks except when automatic loaders replace the loader). The Panzer IIIs also had radios which the French Tanks did not. The Panzer IIIs also had torsion bar suspensions (Adopted by all post WWII tanks except those with pneumatic type suspension) which was better then the Christie type suspension used on most tanks of the pre-WWII era which itself was MUCH better than the suspension used on the French Tanks of WWII).

Thus while the French Tanks were bigger, had heavier Armor went faster and had a bigger main gun, the "Human-Machine" interaction was poor compared to the thiner armored and smaller armed Panzer IIIs of the French Campaign of 1940. The suspension was bad compared to the German Tanks and how the tanks could be used as a team was inferior given the lack of radios in most of the French Tanks.

Now one of the reason for the poor design was the French had adopted a more infantry support attitude to the Tanks as compared to the concentration of Tanks of the Germans. The French Design was a better infantry support weapon. Thus the French Tank Doctrine set up the design flaws of the French Tanks of 1940. Thus the French tanks of 1940 were NOT better than the German Tanks of 1940 given the inherent flaws of those French Tanks compared to the German Tanks.

Now to the Modern French tanks. After WWII the French armed their first Tank Division with ex-German Panthers (Even shipping one to Vietnam to engage any Red Chinese Tanks that might cross from China, no Red Chinese tanks came and the Panther on arriving in Vietnam promptly broke down). France than tried to develop their own tank in the early 1950s but the US was switching from the M47 developed as an emergency tank during the Korean War with the later M48, the US was giving M47s away and the French adopted the M47. This was a lighter tank than the M48 and the light weight factored into French Tank design thinking to this day. Compared to British, American and German Tanks the French Tanks tend to be a little smaller and lighter (Through heavier than the Soviet Tanks of the same time period). The AMX-30 was the 1960 era French design, it has been replaced by the Leclerc starting in 1992 and the AMX was completely replaced by the Leclerc by 2000.

The Leclerc is very similar to the German Leopard II and American M1 tanks, having a similar level of electronic controls and the same basic Gun (120mm, through the Leclerc is LONGER than the German and American version of the 120mm, all three can fire the same rounds). The main difference between the three weapons is the US wanted a tank the floated in the water (Thus had to have sealed exterior sides to provide buoyancy) the Germans wanted a tank with the largest gun and heaviest Armor but did not need the buoyancy of the M1 (Thus the German Leopard and US M1 weigh about the same, but the America tank is "larger" do to the need to provide buoyancy). The French wanted a lighter tank than the Germans or Americans so built the Leclerc with an autoloader so they go put a smaller turret on the Leclerc and thus make the tank overall lighter than the M1 or the Leopard.

The Leclerc other difference is it use of an auxiliary motor to provide power when it motor was turned off. The Auxiliary Power Unit (AUC) used a lot less fuel than the main engine on idle thus saving fuel (The Sherman of WW11 fame had a similar AUC and recent upgrade of the M1 has also installed a AUC do to the high fuel usage of the turbine engine of the M1.

[malaise]

5. Great news

Did you hear 'BLIAR' claiming that he was the first PM to visit Lebanon? That was funny.