Diemert's Defender

[tround]

NATO did not need the Defender.
It had enough anti-tank weapons and the best among them was the anti-tank helicopter .

 

[Bill Walker]

Many modern armies consider the best anti-helicopter weapon to be a MBT and its main gun, with its ability to calculate the lead needed for a slowly moving target. The helicopter's best defence against this is terrain masking, pop ups, night and bad weather ops, and hovering. The Defender has all the helicopter disadvantages (low speed and relatively fragile construction) and none of the advantages.

 

[tround]

Exactly
The Defender cannot use the tactics of the helicopter and it has a low speed .
Send the Defender against Soviet divisions is a crime .
I think that it is very difficult for a MBT to detect a helicopter .
The best Soviet answer is the 2s6 .

 

[tround]

excuse me, I was still in the cold war and spoke of soviet tanks .
the thermal viewer of the commander changed many things .

 

[Grey Havoc]

No, the Diemert was primarily intended to take on Soviet armor in Central Europe, although in the event some squadrons might have possibly ended up being detached to Norway to support what ever would have succeeded the Canadian Air-Sea Transportable Brigade Group in the '90s had the Warsaw Pact not collapsed.

From 1976 to 1987, Canada was commited to reinforce North Norway with the
Canadian Air-Sea Transportable (CAST) Brigade. However, the Canadian Defense
White Paper, published in June 1987, announced that Canada was abandoning that commitment.
As of late 1988, it appeared that Canada would retain a limited commitment to
reinforce Norway: one battalion assigned to the AMF which could be sent to Norway.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a231546.pdf