Fast though, be in crimea in no time
Abrams and C2 about 25mph across country, L2 is a bit quicker 🙂
Abrams and L2 45mph on road, C2 a bit slower
C2 has the greatest range on a tank-full, L2 the worst
Abrams and C2 about 25mph across country, L2 is a bit quicker 🙂
Abrams and L2 45mph on road, C2 a bit slower
C2 has the greatest range on a tank-full, L2 the worst
Is this from wikipedia or Top Trumps 🙂
Is this from wikipedia or Top Trumps
It's the best that I can find, but no guarantees... https://xkcd.com/386/ 🙂
Spec-wise the three MBTs are similar and Challenger 2, Abrams and L2 all use a 120mm gun that uses common ammunition. Challenger 2 uses a rifled gun that will also fire HESH rounds, which has been a UK preference. The smoothbore guns on Abrams and L2 will also fire HEAT rounds but not HESH
Not entirely true, yes they all use 120mm ammunition, but the Challenger uses a two part ammo, the projectile and charge are separate, three part if you consider the charge is ignited by what is called a vent tube.
The M1 and L2 use conventional one piece ammunition, hence the large buttress on the rear of the turret. There will be logistical issues to supplying two differing types of ammunition.
There will be logistical issues to supplying two differing types of ammunition.
Three, considering their existing tanks
Is this from wikipedia or Top Trumps
From world of tanks of course.
Which if you havent heard of it is an online tank battle again with some very dedicated fans including members of various tank units.
There have been several occasions where people have complained about the stats of a particular tank and provided restricted documents to back up their claims.
Challenger 2 has the ability to make cups of tea.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_vessel
Clearly it is superior.
Abrahams have an Ooni 3 Pizza Oven welded on the back
Not entirely true, yes they all use 120mm ammunition...snip
I've flicked back through the Top Trumps and you're right, which isn't what they say... http://military-today.com/tanks/challenger_2.htm 🙂
Thanks for pointing that out. Challenger 3 will be NATO-standard
Challenger 3 will be NATO-standard
Milk and two sugars?
Spain is sending up to 53 Leopards 👏
be in Crimea in no time
and be welcomed with flowers. Or maybe not.
This article is more than 7 years old.
The U.S and European Union may want to save Crimeans from themselves. But the Crimeans are happy right where they are.
and be welcomed with flowers. Or maybe not.
That's one of the most extreme cases of selection bias imaginable. Any openly pro-Ukrainian Crimeans would have either fled or have been imprisoned or deported. Russians moved into Crimea after the invasion so the current occupants of Crimea are overwhelmingly pro-Russian. If Ukraine retakes Crimea and conducts a survey of Crimean residents, you'll find the exact opposite has happened - the pro-Russian people will have fled to Russia and the pro-Ukrainian Crimeans will have returned.
How long does it take to train crews up to be effective in these vehicles?
What level of adaption will they need?
That’s one of the most extreme cases of selection bias imaginable. Any openly pro-Ukrainian Crimeans would have either fled or have been imprisoned or deported. Russians moved into Crimea after the invasion so the current occupants of Crimea are overwhelmingly pro-Russian.
That may or may not be the case - I am guessing that you have no data to back up your claim. But I think it's useful to bear in mind that the story that's being fed us day after day may not be the whole truth.
How long does it take to train crews up to be effective in these vehicles?
What level of adaption will they need?
According to a bloke on The Newsagents Podcast just now it's pretty straightforward and any teenager can learn to fire the gun in a few minutes.
Setting up the logistics chain might take a while - if that isnt done properly you end up with the Russian convoys north of Kyiv with no fuel!
I jumped into a Challenger and it took Less than an hour to be able to get it moving in the intended direction at a steady smooth speed. Admittedly this was a flat feild, with no one trying to insert an rpg into turret.
It will be the more techy stuff that takes time to learn. Crossing ditches or raised barracdes. Going fast backwards, getting out of mud when ypur bottomed out and the tracks are useless stuff.
Then there is the gunnery, targeting, smoke, machine guns, fuelling, re loading, in feild maintenance to learn.
It will be the more techy stuff that takes time to learn. Crossing ditches or raised barracdes. Going fast backwards, getting out of mud when ypur bottomed out and the tracks are useless stuff.
Does that stuff differ significantly from tank to tank, or will Ukrainians experienced with their current kit already know pretty much what to do?
That’s one of the most extreme cases of selection bias imaginable.
Not just that though. If you're in an area that's being occupied militarily, and someone asks you if you like being occupied, what are you going to say?
I jumped into a Challenger and it took Less than an hour to be able to get it moving in the intended direction at a steady smooth speed. Admittedly this was a flat feild, with no one trying to insert an rpg into turret.
It will be the more techy stuff that takes time to learn.
Yep.
https://twitter.com/bigSAC10/status/1618609882504257537
Im just going to recommend nobody go and look at any other of bigSAC10's Tweets!
There's stuff in there youll not be able to forget.
The basic principles of tank warfare will already be known. What they have to learn are the differant fire control systems and the differant gun loading systems.
Whilst a teenager can learn to press the firing switch in two minutes, target aquisition and basic gunnery principles particular to the tank in question will take a bit longer...plus the drills to follow should the gun not fire.
The Challenger has a fabulous ride, compared to older tanks, it will feel like an armchair compared to a T72.
It'll certainly help Ukraine having armoured squadrons, it's just another string to their defence, they'll have air defence to support their deployment as well, but it's only going to escalate further, talk from Ukraine is they'll now push the west to supply long range missiles and aircraft, which i can see being a real issue, on one side it's what they need to defend their country, but the flip side is that it could drag the west into a bigger war, we have had arguments, no matter how loose of the supply of defensive weaponry, but you start giving them long range missiles and combat aircraft and it's a whole other thing.
Is it? Russia are using them. It’s hardly giving then ICBMs. In fact when Ukraine gave up it’s nukes we promised to protect them…..
Theyve already received fighter aircraft, quite early on as well.
Do you mean aircraft that are not Soviet designs?
100-200 modern tanks of any flavour , plus 100 Bradleys, 50 Marder, 50 AMX10, 50 CV90, 100 new western SPG and hundreds of new APCs. Yes, that lot is pretty game changing.
Up against an estimated 15,000 Russian tanks. If it comes down to numbers, then Russia is not going to run out any time soon.
Up against an estimated 15,000 Russian tanks.
Russia does not have 15,000 operational tanks. They may have that many rusty old hulks sitting in storage depots, but they lost most of their modern tanks in the first few months. Now they seem to have stopped using tanks at all in their offenses - they're just sending in waves of conscripts without any armoured support. We aren't going to see massed tank battles, just tanks being used to support infantry.
Nobody knows for sure, but its likely going to be in the thousands anyway. And they can and will build more. So while the latest battle didnt use massed tanks, thats not to say subsequent battles will be fought the same way.
I think all we can hope for is to push Russia back across the border and leave it at that. But to do that means retaking the Donbas region, and thats only going to happen years hence, with considerable cost to both sides.
Nobody knows for sure, but its likely going to be in the thousands anyway. And they can and will build more.
If Russia was able to build more modern tanks, they would have done so already. Same with pulling tanks out of reserve. They've already sent pretty much everything they can muster to the front. They do have thousands of old Cold War tanks in storage, but they will need extensive overhauls. The engines and transmissions will need to be stripped and rebuilt pretty much from scratch just to make them mobile. The armour will need to be upgraded with reactive armour, plus the electronic systems will need to be replaced with modern gear. Without modern armour and electronics, they will be sitting ducks for Ukrainian missiles and tanks. The electronics systems will use a lot of imported components that Russia cannot produce locally.
Milk and two sugars?
🙂 👍
It’ll certainly help Ukraine having armoured squadrons, it’s just another string to their defence...snip
It's more important at this stage to turn this slogfest of attrition around, tanks will help in that. Longer range missiles, aircraft, etc would also be a big advantage and Russia has spaffed that advantage in its attacks on civilian targets
It won't have been missed in Moscow that western resolve has hardened when Germany decided to supply MBTs and they will be a lot more convinced that the west is in this for the long run
I'm not convinced that western aircraft are a short-term solution for Ukraine, but missiles would be. More tough decisions to come
It won’t have been missed in Moscow that western resolve has hardened when Germany decided to supply MBTs and they will be a lot more convinced that the west is in this for the long run
This is there whole gambit isnt it? To simply endure longer than the west by buying time on the battlefield with Russian lives. But theres only so long they can do that before the political situation in Moscow changes against Putins control.
Which is fine if you can inflict long term harm on the west, but thats looking increasingly less likely following the energy markets adjustments. (Funny how the freezing Europe narrative has largely died away and were back to Bio Nazi Satanists)
There will be price rises rises again Im sure, but nothing like we had last year now that much of the uncertainty has been removed from the pricing. And its not even just the west moving against Russia, both India and China are forcing heavy discounts on Putin (when not killing each other over a border dispute and investing heavily in infrastructure to improve military logistics to that border). And China isnt (unless Ive missed something) offering much more than words in terms of connecting to Russias main (the main fields that supply Europe arent connected) gas pipeline network either and has instead been busy signing LPG contracts with other suppliers.
Supposedly even some of the other raw materials Russia was heavily involved in have found new sources triggered by customers looking for reliable supplies, especially in the Americas.
Itll still drag on in to next year in my uneducated view.
I dont think the Challenger 2's will be roaming anywhere. The UK is very very keen that the Russians don't get a hold of a destroyed one.
I dont think the Challenger 2’s will be roaming anywhere.
Are you saying they will be sent to Ukraine with some kind of caveat that they aren't used?? What would be the point of that? I predict they will be used aggressively and effectively by Ukrainian tank crews once they get to grips with them and integrate them properly into a combined arms formation. The MoD will have carried out a risk assessment which will have acknowledged the risk of loss or capture. Whilst I'm sure they wouldn't be chuffed about it, they accept it might happen. I suspect some of the more sensitive equipment will be withheld because of this. The Challenger 2 was used operationally in Bosnia, Kosovo and the Iraq war and has also been sold to Oman so there has always been a risk of loss or compromise. Although upgraded several times it is a relatively old (though still very capable) tank soon due to be replaced by Challenger 3.
I would imagine there will be a procedure for destroying a disabled tank in the event it could be captured.
Hit it with himars or air to ground munitions. Trouble is with 35mm armour you risk reducing it to man portable lumps by blowing it up more.
Probably some men with pixelated faces from the uk will be around in the worst case of an intact tank being overun or more likely breakdown in a fwd area.
I read whatt to the layman suggested a reasonable reason for Challengers not going to the main front lines.
Theyd be park on the Belarus border along with the Abrams, and the Leopards would go ti the active rront line.
Shortens and secures the logistics for the small number of Challengers, the hard to maintain Abrams whilst securing that border freeing up Soviet built units to go east.
Leaving the Leapords as the only supply and maintenance chain that needs to be built ti the front line.
Just some dude on the internet admittedly but it sounded plausible.
Original purpose of these exact tanks was to take on the Russians on some Central or Eastern European plain. The risk of losing a tank to the Russians was always there.
Theyd be park on the Belarus border along with the Abrams
The UK has said it wants the Challengers in theatre by March. The Abrams haven't even been built yet and won't be there for at least a year. The Ukrainians are already operating a very mixed fleet of armoured vehicles very effectively. Yes, it complicates the logistics but there is no way they are going to let capable gen 3 MBTs they have been begging for, languish unused at the rear somewhere.
The risk of losing a tank to the Russians was always there.
Yes but in the full conflict scenario the chances are the Russians wouldnt have been able to make use of any captured equipment in time.
As it would take time to analysis the armour, for example, and then either build weapons which are specifically designed against it or to start including knockoff armour on your own tanks.
Sounds like the Poles are sending another batch of the more recently upgraded PT-91s as well as Leopards. Think the UAF have been using older versions for a while now.
I could be way off the mark but I have a feeling that when they're in Ukrainian hands Zelensky and his commanders will employ them how they see fit and to hell with the repercussions (if any).
And if anybody has put such conditions of use on their donation, they'd be a bloody fool to expect them to be honoured.
IMO of course.
Are you saying they will be sent to Ukraine with some kind of caveat that they aren’t used??
Not sure, article said something about them only being used to secure certain areas, where they can be easily recovered.
They even spoke about a forming a unit solely for recovery, especially in front line conditions.
But I dont know, understandable given how secret the new armour is.
I don't think Russia will gain much by capturing a tank intact. They haven't the luxury of time our expertise to develop new weapons to exploit weaknesses doing. It might just allow them to exploit them tactically at best.
The real beneficiary of any Intel gained will be Russia's best buddy, China.
Even then, Russia getting a bloody nose in Ukraine will further deter them from a potential invasion of Taiwan in the near term anyway.
Edit: CNN reporting that the relevant armoured retrieval units are being sent too, though not many. Sorry, can't remember their proper name. They can tow the tanks away for repair hopefully.
