Ukrainian troops ‘quick to master’ Challenger tanks

All specialist logistic (ammunition) and engineering items (spares) need to come in from outside Ukraine, so not sure there is much difference.

The CR2s could be supported from the British BG in Estonia or from the UK or both. Even better would be to move a British support unit to Poland near the UA border.

Similar issues to be faced in supporting the donated Leo 1s, Leo2s, and M1 Abrams – and of course all the other equipment donated by the west including HIMARS, MLRS etc etc..they must have solved ammunition supply for those items long ago.

Thanks for support. I can remember I definitely drove a Ferret and would have gone on to drive a Saladin. I can’t understand why we stopped building such excellent AFV’s. I think Alvis being sold was the end of AC’s in the UK. Why we cant be more like the French in this regard.Still a place IMHO for a radically updated Saladin with a 105mm using Boxer parts as much as possible and 6 wheels. Are we not needing this to support Airborne forces?

I use to be one 😀

Primarily many of the skills and attributes that make someone a good officer make then terrible at project management.

I can’t account for any army procurement projects going well as I don’t know of any I would describe as going well. Almost every one is a complete cluster ****. What ones do you think went well?

The other services have to deal with the same civil service and have to procure unique domestic solutions like SSN’s and aircraft carriers or even multi national aircraft programs which are some of the most complicated endeavours the human race undertakes and they manage to deliver. The army just needs to pick some off the shelf vehicles and it ****s it up.

I can’t blame NCO’s or civil servants for that.

Thanks Jim, for the reply. I would have thought that officer-like skills of strategising, planning, managing resources, setting deadlines and ensuring adherence to them, keeping on top of many moving parts, liasion and communication skills etc would have made officers very good at project management.

I like to think that just about all the UOR projects during the time the army was in Iraq and Afghanistan went well – nothing to do with me being the PM for the Operational Vehicles Office in ABW of course! The Casualty Locator Beacon project went well – delivered on time, to budget and to perrfomance/quality and safety considerations – and the troops liked it – but I must stop talking about my projects!

There must be some core projects that have gone well over the last 10/20/30 years, albeit none of the tracked ones, be they for major upgrades or replacement. I have not heard of major procurement problems with: Panther FCLV, Sky Sabre/Land Ceptor, L85 A2 and A3, NLAW, L129A1, L123 UGL, Javelin, L2A1 ASM, PRR, Foxhound, Jackal, Coyote, GMLRS, StarStreak, MAMBA, Exactor, Centurion C-RAM, HET, M3 rig, JCB HMEE, Terrier, Buffalo, MTVR Tanker, MAN SV trucks including rec veh, LR Pulse BFA. Some of course are MOTS rather than new developments but it is possible to screw up a MOTS, of course, if you change the spec etc.

The tracked vehs projects – all of them – have been total garbage. Many heads should have rolled.

I do think the army is cursed by its AFV contractors, particularly if you cut BAE out of the loop for political reasons, as seemed to happen with the CVR(T) replacment ‘competition’. But also many senior officers just did not get stuck in and sort out SNAFUs as they occurred. With WCSP, too much prevarication led to cost over-run and politicians getting worried – led to WCSP getting cut – result is we will now spend far more on Boxer which may not even have a cannon – total joke, but not if you are in the Armoured Infantry and were expecting a 40mm stabilised cannon to see you into the assault.

I agree, but having been in DE&S for a time. I would concur that there were some chinless, red trouser wearing numpties, who were either crap in a regiment and sent there to be out of the way. Or just doing the job to get the staff tour tick. I’m sure they were good at something? Running projects and talking contracts they were not.

However, there were quite a lot who were the complete opposite. Bringing experience from 1st line to the project, but also being savy as a project manager. Where they believed it was their duty to make sure the kit was not only fit for purpose, but would survive being used and abused on the 1st line.

In my totally unbiased opinion, I believe I was the later.

Thanks Davey…and there’s me thinking that red trousers went out 20 or more years ago! What I would say is that most decisions were made by committee (or rather at a committee meeting) rather than by a single staff officer.

Some say that MoD should have professional procurement officers – I am sure the civil servants at DE&S would say that they were professional procurement officers.

What is frustrating is that MoD procurement processes have not greatly improved since the 1970s despite reviews by respected people such as Peter Levene and Bernard Gray.

Also frustrating that CGS and the Army Board seemed not ever to be that inerested or influential in procurement of kit for the army.

The key is a small team that really knows what it is doing and they make decisions that stick.

N-a-B described on NL why T26 design became so tortured with too much CAD taking the place of decisions and common sense.

A big part of the issue, as I and many others have pointed out, is the two year rotation of desk officers ‘owning’ these army projects at a not senior enough rank. The desk officers have no idea how to do something this complex and slow moving. The two year timeframe was fine when project took two years from inception to prototype but now everything is stretched out for ‘complex’ or ‘world beating’ or ‘budget line’ issues then the inevitable happens!

I agree, the “military” did recognize this. As DE&S tours were extended from 18 months to 3 years, However, a lot depended on the Officer. If they showed that they had good networking skills, could deliver and started making a name for themselves. They would become “wanted” people, especially if they were a junior officer. So could be taken off the desk early. There was talk, of Officers with the right aptitude being put on projects for longer, to make the project run smoother. But I left before any decision was reached.

That’s really interesting, you need to a really senior subject matter expert on a procurement team…we always look for a very senior person. As for rotating out before the procurement is done thats just bonkers inefficiency. It looks like they are mixing up their learn ( having a fixed term placement for a junior body) with their management of the procurement ( senior who stays to the end).

kind regards

jonathan

It was very confused: believe me.

Problem is nobody wants to stall their career path. The simple solution is promotion on results in post.

But that isn’t the modern zig zag method of climbing the greasy pole…..

Interestingly they asked a general of marines to look at nhs management and he found some of the same issues.

1) managers moving quickly from post to post to gain promotion before projects had finished.
2) short term focus no long term views, changing direction every couple of months due to political drivers etc.
3) massive increase in central government bureaucracy with the national NHSE and DOH workforce increasing from 7 thousand to 14 thousand…now these are not you jobing health care managers or even system strategist ( county level) these are your based in London making national policy,wonks.

I can very much see this….the garbage produced from London and central control went through the roof starting with the TM and BJ governments. We now spend most of our time having to read central government rubbish ideas…change direction to implement them with 2 weeks notice..and report every week on how we are implementing them, until they change their mind in two months…it’s a crime, removed the DOH, and central NHSE and the NHS would sort itself out in a few years.

As well seeing very senior leaders moving around like chess pieces..with the same thing happening in lower bands of management even when they don’t want to move..I’ve not applied for a new job in a decade but been moved 7 times worked for 5 different directors and 10 different line managers.

Oh the joys of micro management….

Very often both safety and productivity suffer as a result of rigidly following pointless procedures.

Yes indeed, I’m especially fond of reporting stuff that nobody will ever bother with just because the DOH decided it should be reported.

Yeah but the difference is they are professional managers. No one expects medical doctors or nurses to have much input in to building a new hospital or buying a new MRI scanner.

Just because your using it does not mean you capable or qualified to determine how it’s bought or built.

It can take 10 years or more to procure complex military equipment. Would you really want an officer to be at DE&S for 10 years continuous?

Some things are worth having people stick around for. But I see your point. I’ve stayed with projects for 8 years even when I was moved around to do other things, I was networked into the project to keep my knowledge in play..there are ways and means if you think laterally.

Jonathan, sounds like you are talking about PM’ing in civvy street? You could never keep an officer engaged on a project for 8 years.
Recalling 8 consecutive years of my career – 2 years on R&D at Chertsey, Surrey then 18 months commanding a workshop in Hameln, Germany, then 1 year as a training officer in Arborfield, nr Reading then 2 years as 2IC of a REME Bn in Bordon Hampshire, then another 2 years technical staff job in Andover. No way could I have spent significant time over that period ‘moonlighting’ on a totally different PM job in procurement.

I graham, to be honest I’m one of the team experts and sometimes leader and coach, so I sort of give my wisdom and leave the project management to someone else, which is why I can wiz off doing different stuff but stay with a project for so long and be the memory of the team. I had assumed that the MOD would use officers like that…with the civil service providing the project management expertise and office team ( which is needed ) but that’s not either leading the team or being a team expert which you would think would be something an officer would be good at (leaders are different fish from managers). I surprised the army tries to make officers into project managers it seems a bit incompatible as project managers are not generally good leaders ( to focused on process and not on culture and reacting to need or understanding the subject matter).

Maybe the MOD and Army have not thought through what the professional leader and subject expert brings vs what a project manager brings ?

in the NHS very few clinicians become project managers ( I don’t actually know any) we are service leaders, strategic leads, clinical lead, professional subject leads, co-ordinations and leaders of multiagency teams, overseers of quality, learning, research, improvement and compliance…but one an all we make rubbish project managers….as senior clinicians we are trained to lead and be accountable…the spread sheets and compiling action plan returns…that’s not a clinician….( to put it childishly……boring boring boring….or if I was reflecting…that’s not how a clinicians mind works..we are problem solvers, innovators and leaders)

Very interesting to see how the NHS does things. In my career as an army officer (34 years) in REME, I had many, many appointments across a broad range of areas. Up to and including Captain, most of your soldiering is at Regimental Duty (ie serving a Field Force (deployable) unit and they aren’t all by any means being in command of soldiers – there are many admin and staff jobs in a unit (or brigade HQ) that you could be doing. Often you manage projects within a job, rather than being a full-time project manager – I first managed a project at the age of 20, cosmetically renovating a 1953 Centurion tank as an ‘interest project’ with my platoon of apprentices – clearly it wasn’t my main job – we did this for a few hours a week as an extra-curricular ativity.
Other tasks could loosely be called project management – at the same or similar age I organised a major Regimental boxing tournament, a rugby team tour to Berlin, and formal dinner nights.
Fast forward a few years and your projects get more complicated. Again these ‘projects’ are done as a small part of your day job.
When I was at RARDE as a young Major, I was in a job that was 50% staff work (for the research division as a whole) and 50% project manager (I managed the unmanned MBT project).
My point is that you learned how to be a PM or more often, to manage projects as an adjunct to another job, by dint of experience rather than formal training as a PM.
When I was at DE&S Abbey Wood I was there as a civilian and was deputy programme manager of all UOR vehicle projects and then moved on to a job being PM of the Casualty Locator Beacon project. As I recall only a few regular officers (Majors) were doing 100% PM roles (others were employed as Requirements Managers or ILSMs) but quite a few senior officers were doing Programme Director and Project Sponsor roles. Civil servants provided the continuity as most of the junior grades did not seek postings and the senior ‘mobile’ grades seemed to move jobs very infrequently. There has been a trend to lengthen the postings of senior officers to 3 or so years as I understand, the norm being 2 years.

The Navy and RAF will I am sure operate roughly similarly.

There are many examples of successful army projects but they don’t get the publicity. Also, very few civilians have much idea of the complexity of much military kit – its not all going to go swimmingly.

I agree, and everything you say is pretty much the opposite of how you run an infantry platoon and there in lies the problem. 1 year at sandhurst and probably not even with a university degree. That’s no basis for someone running complex acquisition programs or even being involved beyond setting basic requirements which in my experience are normally better determined by NCO’s that will have a lot more experience by virtue of age and not rotating so much.

The other thing that differentiates the Army from the Navy and Airforce is that both services have gone out of their way to achieve continuous build programs with a domestic manufacturer or two. That means the contractor themselves will iron out many of the problems over time and achieve exports which will help with the acquisition costs and further ironing out problems.

Instead of cutting numbers like the other services the army went out if it’s way to retain soldier numbers and allowed all UK manufacturing to cease. This could have worked fine if the army was then willing to accept 80% solutions from existing platforms but instead it tried to then get Gucci bespoke solutions from foreign manufactures with zero connection to the UK and worse still ask multiple competing manufacturers to integrate separate systems in to the same vehicle and they all have to work on small batches and establish UK manufacturing plants from scratch.

Sure we could say the army was fighting a horrendous protracted war with a limited budget however all of this rot started in the 90’s well before we set foot in Afghanistan.

Like the navy does on the Clyde or the Airforce does at Wharton the army could have facilitated a single UK manufacture like BAE or Alvis with a single production line that could have run from C2 and AS90 to FRES SV then FRES UV. Indeed if it had not wasted so much money on FRES (£4 billion) I believe it could probably have kept two manufacturers going with near continuous build for heavy and light armoured vehicles or wheels verses tracks.

Instead it focused on keeping cap badges and it spent two decades trying to get an armoured vehicle that was strong enough to resist a heavy IED and light enough to fly in a C130 while sending out soldiers in the same land rovers they knew were death traps from norther Ireland.

You are talking about Ukraine getting Abrams!

Similar with the UK which is not only replacing the CH2 with the CH3 but also significantly reducing the numbers of MTB’s they have on the books down the 76 at last count so a significant number of CH2’s are being drawn down and could be sent to Ukraine. Politics aside.

We are always significantly reducing tank fleet size. 900 Chieftains to 420 CR1 to 386 CR2 to 227 CR2 to 148 CR3.

Perhaps we will get 40 or 50 ‘CR4s’ in about 2030 or so!

Yes, there are more CR2s that could go to Ukraine – or they could be fed into the CR3 line if the politicos find more cash and can be convinced that BA needs more than 148 tanks.

Seems like a very golden opportunity for the UK to get some best of the best Jordanian CR1s that could be engineered back up to CR3 standard and boost the tank pool! some “old tanks” anyone?

Quentin, are you joking? I was considering CR1s being given a quick check over and fix, and pressed into service with UA straightaway.
The CR3 programme has been designed to convert CR2s. The CR1 is very different and only has 35% commonality with CR2. A new programme would have to be designed from scratch and that would take time – it may not even be possible to convert a CR1 to a CR3. More parts, up to and including new turrets and cannon would hav eto be ordered up which would take many, many months to make and deliver.
The British Army’s own CR3 programme would be put back massively.

Hi Graham, pardon my naivety in these matters, but no I’m not joking. Seems like a decent size enough pool to get at least another 100+ tanks in a shortish time. Obviously a lot of re-work involved going by what you’re saying but didn’t RM even propose a possible turret upgrade for these too? Doesn’t Russia hold onto tank stocks going way back? And the US reworking its Abrams? They’re thinking outside the “turret box”, pardon the pun. I don’t see why you couldn’t have a CR 1 to CR3 and a CR 2 to CR 3 program running in parallel. The end results would be the same. It’s not the same thing but the Typhoon T1 to T3 upgrade is being proposed while there’s the current T3/4 upgrades going on. That’s got to be challenging but being looked at as doable.
This whole tank saga and the supply of tanks to Ukraine has unfortunately IMHO been publicised in the media too much and really should have been well in process by now. Probably a lot has been done that we don’t know. But we’re telling Russia how many we’re sending, who from, when they’ll arrive. We’ll be selling tickets to the show next! I mean, bloody hell, how absolutely dumb is that? Good to demonstrate unity of purpose in supporting Ukraine but why not do more sooner, more on the quiet, less talk and rah, rah?! And of course Russia will react to this. Isn’t it a battle of will, weapons on hand, logistics, brains and brawn and even a bit of mischievous misinformation thrown in? For example , “UK, sending 600 Brimstone“. Send 1000 and don’t mention if it’s version 1, 2 or 3! They could be doing this already but I/we don’t really need to know…lol. And we hope the UK restocks itself asap and with enough of the best and latest!
Sorry if my comments are a bit silly at times. I am a long way from it all down here. I’m enjoying reading everyone’s comments, there’s some good stuff and experiences which all helps to increase one’s awareness, including mine!
🇦🇺 🇬🇧 🇺🇦

I wasn’t (and am still not) sure if you were proposing re-lifing CR1s for the Ukraine Army or the British Army.
If for Ukraine – then they need western tanks now, or at worse case within the next 2 months. If Jordan gifted their (up to 400) CR1s, then UK could pay for a quick check over and fix by KADDB in Jordan, and arrange shipping of tanks and whatever spares are left. They would be far better than the Leo1s and almost as good as the Leo2s that others are gifting.
If for the UK – we certainly need more than 148 tanks, which is just enough to equip two armoured regiments (tank battalions in US-speak). Why not convert all 227 CR2s to the CR3 build standard? or a figure between 148 and 227?

RM did propose a turret upgrade for CR1 – it would take too long.
Russia and other countries eg USA do hold vast quantities of old, obsolete tanks going way back. We don’t – we can’t afford to and don’t have the storage, or the men to crew them.

I fully agree that we should not publicise how much kit we are giving and when. There is no OPSEC happening at all.

I like comments that are novel – keep them coming!

Just remind me, how much territory did Ukraine lose when Trump was president?

That literally has nothing to do with what I was talking about…I was discussing the wider world and you know global geopolitics and the influence of the west…not what sparked the invasion of Ukraine…which in reality started in 2014. If you think that Donald trump did not impact in the wider world view of the US as stable ally I’m happy to debate with clear examples.

Ooh look a squirrel…

Like it Jonathan. Succinct. The world’s quick response, including the UKs, to the earthquakes in Turkey is showing there’s still very much humanity, decency, compassion and vulnerability around especially in overwhelming happenings like this. If we are going to leading force in the world then we need to keep our head, heart and actions in a moral, strong and humane place. As you say, lots of competing forces going on all the time and we want to stay on or near the top don’t we?!

Good question, Poland has supplied Ukraine with a number of T72 upgraded tanks and last I heard the US was to agree they would supply them with Abrams as replacements so they could be coupled with that.

Babcock left CR2 hull with an armour stripped turret outside at Bovington for about a year not covered . Think it was destined to be used for recovery training by REME somewhere !

My point was about tanks deploying to war and it being a good idea to maintain some secrecy.

Quite a shock to hear that tanks that have not been declared Obsolete are wending their way to be used as a recovery hulk – we used to use vehicles that were about 2 generations old for that.

I think I’ve found him. Waiting for UKDJ to approve the links taken directly from google

RUSSIA DEFENCE FORUM

16 Jan 2023 — person JohninMK. Mon Jan 16, 2023 6:55 pm. by JohninMK. Soviet carton 1958, on the money. Russian special military operation in Ukraine #36 …

LINK TO GOOGLE PAGE Quoted Twice

Great work Nigel. Seems our Putin bot has been discovered and exposed. Hilarious. 👊💪👍

Presumably a medal made out of the remains of a T72 that the Ukrainians ‘recycled’ 😏

When Russia has made an enemy of The Twät’s Echo (a.k.a. The Guardian) you realise how serious this special military operation has gone wrong for the Kremlin. The woke rag had a long piece last Friday on how Russia has been the largest single donor of tanks to Kviv; workshops are stripping, repairing and returning captured T series tanks to the front – several hundred have been acquired so far.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/03/the-ukraine-repair-shop-where-russian-tanks-go-to-change-sides

Oh the extremes of the far-left (eg Piers Corbyn) and far-right (eg David Kurten) still say it’s all nasty NATO’s fault and that Putin is peace-loving. But these fruitcakes are also anti-vax, believe in chemtrails, etc, etc 🤦🏻‍♂️

I believe even before the commitment of western MBTs, Ukraine now has more tanks than when the war started. Hopefully with the quantity of Soviet-era tanks and quality of Western tanks they can liberate their country.

its funny how both the far right and far left end up functionally looking and sounding the same…. There was after all no functional difference between hitlers third reich and Stalin’s Soviet Union. Infact the birth of fascism can be tracked back to communism. That excludes the ultra libertarians who are just a bit odd and are not really functionally far right wing in the same way as the right wing movement itself (they are more sod off and leave me alone).

Libertarianism is a rather specific form of liberalism and liberalism doesn’t sit on a left-right axis, which is why even the more extreme libertarians don’t end up in the political horseshoe gap with the fascists and communists.

Fascism is the right-wing’s ultra-authoritarianism, communism is the left-wing’s authoritarianism.

Ultra-Libertarians are the right-wing’s equivalent to the left-wing’s anarchists.

Is short, extremism always bad.

https://politicalcompass.org/

“Ha ha ha ha ha ha
There are many ways to get what you want
I use the best, well I use the rest
Well I use the enemy
I use anarchy
‘Cause I, I want to be, anarchy…”

sorry showing my age there…loved that single.

To be honest for most of there existence anarchist and libertarian were essentially the same thing as the libertarian movement was part of the same anti authoritarian socialist ideology that essentially got sidelined by the soviets (socialism could not have picked a worst county to set rout in, as Russians make really bad communists).it’s only with more modern nuance and mainly American thinking that they separated ( Americans created a new version of libertarian thinking based in the right). But as you say in reality they are all the same…..not what you want.

But it’s always been my opinion that the British would have made exceedingly good socialists, better than all the rest…our fair play and do your best genes as well as let’s stop, make tea and que up genes would have interacted very will with socialists ideology…mix in a bit of “ in the nicest possible way we have rebelled a lot you know” genes…super communists.

I think the British fair-play and muddle-through pragmatism means that we are adverse to ideologies and their fanatics.
Neither fascism nor communism took hold here. Instead we have a Woolworths pick-and-mix attitude, so social healthcare “yes”, private home ownership “yes”.
In short, we’re quite a mellow, laidback, bunch.

That’s why we would be brilliant at it, none of that fanatical international socialist movement nonsense….just a bit of fair play and everyone’s alright attitude…defo none of that shooting the bourgeoisie none sense the Russians got up to.

I wouldn’t call that socialism though.
I’d just call it being a decent human being, with aspirations for betterment, but a sense of social responsibility too.

Indeed, personally I call myself a socialist, but what I mean by that is being a social democrat and essentially believing in what you just said. But in essence when your talking left and right in our country your really just talking main stream middle of the road not far from each other reasonableness…you do get the odd aberration like the Corbin Labour Party ( I’m a Labour supporter, but I would never have voted Labour with that team in charge).

You forgot to talk about the extremists from the center. You know those revolutionaires that want to destroy the economi system, the food production system, what can be said and what cannot be said. That have protected classes negating equality before the law…

You can’t have extremists from the centre by its very definition 🤦🏻‍♂️

As for the people you describe, I’m not aware of anyone who wants to destroy the food-production and economic system. The climate-change deniers will destroy these, but I doubt it’s their intention, just their stupidity.

Maybe you should look at extremist definition first…

Extremism is not only defined by the “center”.
When the center want to upheaval the whole economy system the center are extremist, when the center have the biggest debt in peace, the center are extremist, when your centrist universities have racial quotas the center is extremist, when centrist BBC cries for a terrorist the BBC is extremist. When the center makes British people not equal under the law the center is extremist.
Extremism is not only what the center conveniently picks as extremism.

You’ve been watching too much InfoWars and QAnon I think…

Being pro-Brexit I’m no fan of the Remainer groupthink at the BBC, but it’s certainly not extremist. That’s both factually incorrect and downright silly.

Nobody in the centre ground of politics wants to destroy the economic system. The only people who appear to want to do that are:
• those on the far-left who advocate the overthrow of free-market capitalism in favour of communism
• those on the far-right who advocate doing nothing about climate-change, which will utterly wreck the economy of every nation on the planet (as well as killing millions)

All people are equal under the law – well except for Charlie, but while I’m no monarchist there’s issues with all systems for choosing a head of state 🤷🏻‍♂️

I think your paranoid post has told everyone who the extremist actually is…

Nah, JohnInMK is the real comedian…
Or did I mean “clown”? 🤔

Court Jester!

Yes the Ukrainians organise their tanks in groups of 31, which is why the USA pledged 31 Abrams. Will be interesting to see if we up the number of Challengers donated, they are operated on their own, or operate in a combined unit with Leopards or Soviet-era tanks.

Just send the us army standard ones. There are lots of older models sitting around in the USA. They are acting like the armour is some alien technology.

Shhhh if you keep say that the CIA will be asking MI5 to kidnap you.

I think I’ve found him. Waiting for UKDJ to approve the links taken directly from google

RUSSIA DEFENCE FORUM

16 Jan 2023 — person JohninMK. Mon Jan 16, 2023 6:55 pm. by JohninMK. Soviet carton 1958, on the money. Russian special military operation in Ukraine #36 …
LINK TO GOOGLE PAGE Quoted Twice

Taken from the website

https://www.russiadefence.net/t8891p825-russian-special-military-operation-in-ukraine-37#416876

https://www.russiadefence.net/images

I think the challenger 1s will probably be £1 million each then the upgrade and to get them running. The spares is also another big question mark. Will the uk fund all of that? Would be great if the tanks were in good condition and could get some newer sensors put on and problematic parts replaced within a reasonable budget.
Need to look into what Jordan is offering in the sale and how much they are

Found this on Bulgarianmiltary.com
The German military concern Rheinmetall has made an offer to Amman to modernize the British Challenger 1 tank. BulgarianMilitary.com recalls that London has agreed to send 14 units of its Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Kyiv.

German newspaper Handelsblatt says Rheinmetall is ready to buy a “double-digit amount” of Jordanian Challenger 1 tanks, bring them to Germany, refurbish and repair them, and send them to help Ukrainian ground forces.

According to experts from the company, this process can proceed relatively quickly, so that by the end of 2023 the “double-digit amount” of British tanks will be deployed at the front in Ukraine. At the moment, there is no more information on the subject, nor official statements from Amman.
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/amp/2023/02/01/british-gulf-war-tanks-may-be-modernized-and-sent-to-ukraine/

Is the issue more around spare parts?

We sold CR1s to Jordan for a lot less than £1m each.

I don’t know how much the original lot supplied were but the 2nd batch were described in the guardian as:
what is described as an “unusual gift” of tanks with a book value of £385,000 each.
Whether that was actually free I can’t tell.
My thoughts are why did Jordan retire it’s challenger 1 and upgrade its M60A3 instead. Is there something wrong with the challenger 1. It seems a strange preference to choose the older less well armed tank for modest upgrade.
Someone will need to inspect the vehicles and see what issues they have.
Good to know the German press are running the story about the tanks.
I does seem like a good idea. 400 well armoured tanks that can be upgraded with new sensors.

I think one of the possible reasons is that the M60 is an earlier generation tank with “solid” armour, rather than composite as per the Challenger 1. This makes it easier and cheaper to work on. Especially if you want to add an external part that needs welding on.

From what I understand the Raytheon upgrade to the M60 is centered around a new fire control computer. It doesn’t for instance add an independent thermal sight for the commander. So package wise it brings it up to the same-ish level as their Challengers. It still has the 105mm L7 (licensed copy) gun fitted, unlike the Challenger’s 120mm. Whilst they’ve also added an appliqué armour package.

For a more up to date tank, Jordan has taken deliver of 150+ Leclerc tanks from the UAE.

Jordan is not a wealthy country so the CR1 tanks were sold at a price Jordan was comfortable with.
Jordan has for 20 years operated a mixed fleet of CR1 (Al-Hussein), M60A3 (now upgraded with a new Raytheon FCS).
They are replacing the CR1s ( a mix of in-service and stored tanks) with Leclerc (gifted by UAE), but it seems they are keeping the M60A3s. Why? I agree that it makes no sense. Of course there is nothing wrong with CR1, unless they are finding it hard to get the unique ammo – CR1 is far superior to the M60.

Most Middle Eastern military procurement is more about influencing whatever western nation they need to at the time.

Hi Mr Bell, received your comment re “Great work Nigel. Seems our Putin bot has been discovered and exposed.”

The posts have been removed already, but yes, confirmed!

RUSSIA DEFENCE FORUM

16 Jan 2023 — person JohninMK. Mon Jan 16, 2023 6:55 pm. by JohninMK. Soviet carton 1958, on the money. Russian special military operation in Ukraine #36 …

“UK-funded expert research has exposed how the Kremlin is using a troll factory to spread lies on social media and in comment sections of popular websites.

The cyber soldiers are ruthlessly targeting politicians and audiences across a number of countries including the UK, South Africa and India.”

LINK

Yes, tanks are kind of needed right now by Ukraine, as they’ve been asking for ages, amongst other equipment. Hope they have enough in place to withstand the next supposed Russian offensive or, better, take the offensive themselves!! It’s their country, they don’t have to wait for Russia to act big!

The US might be best buying 1A5’s too. It would give mass without the logistical tail and long lag time that the M1’s need.

Well said, we do have some plunkers on this site who think brainless criticism of the MOD is clever.

😆

that would be a useful us of all those tanks.

We did buy Leopard 1s once. A little known fact is that our Beach Recovery Vehicles that replaced the Cent BARVs are Leo 1-based.

Now that is really interesting. I will look it up, cheers.

I was the Equipment Support Manager for the 5 Cent BARVs – they were converted from gun tanks in 1961 by a REME static workshop. The Leo 1 replacement was long overdue but we only bought 4 of them.

Talking about Belgium. We sold them our old Saracens and Humber Pigs in the 60s, but had to buy them back for the NI troubles. Did they put the price up!

Agreed, the decision back when Leo 1 was being designed, is that the HEAT warhead from an ATGM couldn’t be stopped by armour. Well light enough armour, that still allowed the tank to be mobile. So it was decided to go with firepower and mobility over armour. The French did the same with AMX30.

The L7 proved it could take out T62s when used by the Israeli army. It was also used against early T72s, when Israel replaced their Centurions with M60s, then Merkava 1s. It wasn’t until the Merkava 3 came along, that the L7 was replaced with a Rh120L44 copy.

Therefore, the L7 “should” still be useful against T62s and early T72s that Russia is using in Ukraine. The issue comes with the up-armouring of these tanks. If they’re fitted with the later Kontakt-5 ERA, which is supposed to slow down Fin rounds. The L7 will struggle to take out these tanks frontally. From the sides and rear both tanks have weak primary armour. So even with ERA on the sides the L7 should do ok. Up against a modernized T72, T80 or T90, the L7 will struggle frontally.

The Leo 1 will give the Ukrainians a vehicle that is excellent for thunder runs. Where it can be used to exploit flanks and gaps in defenses. Something they used the Scimitars for last year. I also think that with how things could be shaping up for Russias next grand offensive. Ukraine couldnt give a monkey’s about the logistical issues of mixing Western and ex-Soviet/ Russian tanks together. So long as they have armour that works.

Indeed they are in an attritional conflict, numbers will matter a lot. I would imagine the Ukrainian army will take any western tank that works…especially as western tanks have always had better focus on keeping crews alive if they get knocked out. They and the Russians are happily using T62s and T72s which are death traps for crews.We should as much as practicable be emptying every warehouse the west can get hold of…be it Leopardi 1 challenger 1 etc, if we give Ukraine tanks that help keep crews alive in an attritional conflict that will make a big difference….

See Nigel Collins 2 posts above Johninmk has been thoroughly exposed as a Kremlin mole, officially.

That’s news to me. Care to explain?

If they have its not impacting on my life. It is possible that the seven seventh have a file on me, but probably re my views on Covid vaccines.

Ah another thread where you probably had another avatar and spewing shite in the COVID vaccine! But as your Nazi Russia vaccine was a bluff, maybe you could have tried ours!

I expect that your knowledge of virology, epidemiology, immunology and pathology are as accurate and rooted in scientific fact as your endless misinformation on military and geopolitical matters. . Or in simple terms, full of shit.

There are plentiful supplies of 105mm tank ammo lying around, it was the standard calibre for NATO until upgrade too 120mm

Just testing Graham…..just testing.

Thanks!
Conqueror ISD 1955, also had a 120mm gun.

there is a list on Wiki, but it wont let me post it

What are you talking about “my mates in the Kremlin”…

Not certain how materially these tactics differ from Soviet tactics during WW II. The very abbreviated version of history was that the Nazis initially overwhelmed the Soviets, who eventually reorganized and then proceeded to pay them back w/ compounded interest. Never considered the Russians as exhibiting much finesse as opposed to being capable of bludgeoning their opponents into submission. A number of posters on this site apparently believe this conflict has virtually been won already, and discount the resiliency of the Russians; I am not as confident or optimistic. Could easily envision WW I style meat grinder trench warfare, hand-to-hand combat in the Donbas region. And especially if Mad Vlad does appear to be losing, very uncertain re potential escalations as he doubles down again on his probable existential bet. Hope that I have misjudged intentions of Russians, but would feel more comfortable if allies would provide both CBRN training and equipment as a hedge against future developments. 🤔😳☹️

This war is very far from a Ukrainian victory. The Ukrainians are losing bits of territory, the hope is they are inflicting mass casualties in the process. Whether that’s true or not I don’t know.
The best thing for Ukraine is probably to go down to crimea. The front lines are just too large. Ukraine has to defend all of it while Russia can pick where to attack. Obviously this applies to Russian lines aswell but ukraine doesn’t seem to be pushing so much just now.
The big surprise has been the huge losses Russia is prepared to accept for small gains.

Thanks Graham for expanding on the origins of Challenger. the MVEE must have been good. Didn’t Vickers then also try and come up with a tank (MVII ?) that us Chally turret & gun, but with Leopard hull/running gear.

I am a suggesting an agency that nurtures and develops key strategic capabilities and assets. It holds the IP, but works also with private industry on a secondment/sub-contract basis. A bit like the Ministry of Aircraft Production back in WWII but much wider ranging and without a politician in charge.

MVEE (various other names) designed just about all our tanks up to and including CR1, invented Chobham armour, pioneered unmanned vehicles (from EOD Wheelbarrow and other much more advanced stuff). Much more besides..
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/from-scimitar-to-fres-to-ajax/from-scimitar-to-fres-to-ajax-the-sixties-and-seventies/

Vickers produced a number of PV tanks, selling the early ones to India as Vijayanta. Vickers Mk 1, 3, 5, 7 MBT etc

Good idea for the agency.

What do you make of this?

RUSSIA DEFENCE FORUM

Russian special military operation in Ukraine #36 – Page 18
https://www.russiadefence.net › … › CIS Military Issues

16 Jan 2023 — person JohninMK. Mon Jan 16, 2023 6:55 pm. by JohninMK. Soviet carton 1958, on the money. Russian special military operation in Ukraine #36 …

LINK

UK Government funded expert research unveils new tactics of the Kremlin’s large-scale disinformation campaign
troll factory is targeting politicians and baiting audiences across a number of countries including the UK, South Africa and India.

the operation has suspected links to Yevgeniy Prigozhin, founder of infamous bot-farm the Internet Research Agency
UK-funded expert research has exposed how the Kremlin is using a troll factory to spread lies on social media and in comment sections of popular websites.

LINK

👍

At the moment Russian air defenses cannot intercept the M30/31 rockets fired by M270 and HIMARS. Which a range of around 90km. The GLSDB after the SDB has separated from its booster, will be an even harder target to intercept. With a range of about 150km whist carrying 250lbs precision guided warhead. The airfields on Crimea will be an obvious target. Followed by any bridges supporting the resupply of Russian forces on the Eastern bank of the Dneiper river. Such as along the E97 from Crimea to Kherson. This would also place the main supply hub of Belgorad in strike range from Ukraine.

Sorry but you are delusional in you believe that Russian AD can’t shoot down those rockets, along with other MLRS missiles. Given its slower speed the GLSBD munition is even more vulnerable.

Will the be the AD bring craned into high rise Nazi Government buildings in Moscow? The incompetent actions of desperation and a failed Nazi leader! Your Russian GBAD would have trouble shooting down a heckler at a comedy show!

But is it? I have yet to hear or watch any videos, propaganda saying that M270/HIMARS rockets have been intercepted. Of all the air defence systems Russia uses, the SA19 Tunguska and SA22 Pantsir are perhaps the best suited to counter these types of rocket strikes.

There is very little point in using a Buk or Tor system nor using S300/400 to try and intercept the rockets, even if they could. On cost grounds alone there is a massive cost advantage in M270/HIMARS favour against these systems.

In January this year TASS reported that Pantsir in particular was getting software upgrades. The upgrades were specifically designed so it can detect and counter HIMARS rocket strikes. Which is basically stating before January they couldn’t detect or intercept these rockets!

Ukraine are still posting successful HIMARS strikes against fuel and ammo dumps in the occupied southern Ukraine. So perhaps Russia haven’t rolled out the software updates to all its units yet!

Remains to be seen, if GLSDB will be intercepted or not. I’d bet that it has a better than even chance of reaching its target, judging by Russia’s past experience.

I’ve seen a video, I’ll try and find it.

Oooooooh seen a video, quick such OSINT is a great reference 😂😂😂👜

Nope. Daveyb has probably forgotten more than you could ever hope to know about missiles and guidance. The only person labouring under eternal delusion here is you, you bullshit as ever uncauterised by any contact with reality.

Let’s be completely honest here. After this Ukraine debacle, I don’t think anyone sees Russia as a peer. The Russian military has been exposed as a Potemkin village of the highest order.

You are watching what is happening in eastern Ukraine at the moment?

That’s exactly why I have come to this conclusion. What’s happening now in eastern Ukraine has been happening for close to a year now. Russia trying and failing to conquer a country right on it’s own border. Not miles away, not halfway around the world, but a country right on the Russian border. Russia has been forced to conscript three hundred thousand new soldiers with another round of mobilization likely coming soon. Russia has been thoroughly humiliated and this monumentally stupid decision to try to invade Ukraine will be remembered as one of the worst strategic blunders in modern history.

Spot on 👍

I would respectfully suggest that you have misread Russian strategy since the early summer. They are not trying to take territory, they are trying to destroy the UA and doing so not far from their railheads is very efficient. There is a difference between mobilisation and conscription. There has been no change to Russian conscription which continues as normal. It is reserves that have been called up for service, much as the US does.

Have you seen the latest estimateded casualty figures out of Turkey claimed to be Mossad’s? Horrific.

Sadly you have it the wrong way round. The actions of the World’s superpower, the US, in effectively forcing its two main competitors, Russia and China, together since 2014 and backing Russia into an existential corner in Ukraine, followed by dramatically misreading its economic strength, is what will be regarded as perhaps the most important strategic blunder in history.

Russia humiliated? Lavrov is currently being welcomed with open arms all over Africa and the ME. The ex French colonies are ejecting French ‘help’ as fast as they can.

“They are not trying to take territory, they are trying to destroy the UA and doing so not far from their railheads is very efficient.”

Is that the latest excuse for this failure. They are definitely trying to take territory but they have scaled back their ambitions significantly as they realize the west won’t allow them to take over Ukraine. Russia wasn’t backed into a corner, it put itself there by trying to rebuild it’s “past glory”. and now it’s left with a shattered military that the world now knows is a paper tiger and if not for it’s nuclear arsenal no one would take Russia seriously.

What Russia has achieved are previously neutral countries joining NATO. Hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens fleeing the country, Europe weaning itself of Russia oil, CSTO is in the garbage bin and the US getting huge amounts of new arms deals all over the world. Talk about a historic mistake!!!

Spot on yet again but johnskie will never be allowed to agree as he is a monitored troll account. Ask him to type “Putin is a wanker”, and condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia…..he won’t as he can’t! 😂

“Ask him to type “Putin is a wanker”, and condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia…..he won’t as he can’t! 😂””

hahahahahaha

That made me laugh out loud.

Oh my your monitored account is having to work overtime my little troll! Getting worried as your stint in the low flying tank turret display team may be coming a little closer! You are sooooo amusing with your nonsense.

Wow !!! Ha ha !! So the lumbering oaf Lavrov has met with a few tin pot dictators from semi failed impoverished and corrupt states. No doubt to help recruitment for the Wagner organised crime group. What a stunning diplomatic coup !! Said no one ever.

Eastern Ukraine mmmmmm a bunch of private contractors containing convicted criminals, rapists, murders, nonces are being used as cannon fodder to extend a small Russian gain, in order to ensure the Wagner wanker head shed has a shot at Putins title of head Nazi, while the regular (use that term loosely) Russian army is filling itself up with incompetent drafts of older men, while nearly half a million younger men do a runner to other countries! Yes, have I missed anything troll boy?

Yes you have, reality.

So what did I say was incorrect my little troll? Please refer to an incorrect statement in that paragraph…..that’s a no then troll farm boy! God you are making it far to easy.

JohninMK is a troll which I have confirmed in my post above.

We all suspected it but you pretty much proved it. Great catch.

Peer enemy? Russia? Oh dear, oh dear oh dear…..again any reason why you removed your posts from the RDF?

Removed what posts? After a post ceases to be the last in a thread only a mod can remove it over there.

Love the desperation of your replies. As when you deem it necessary to defend your position against threats, you respond, when challenged about a military subject, which you have claimed, and proven to be incorrect once again, you don’t.

Similarily your replies, very predictable and devoid of factual argument.

Factual argument, from you, from a propaganda troll…..oh my, how amusing. Every “fact” you have spewed has been quickly dispelled by the numerous military SMEs on here, over the last 12 months. Come on, make more of an effort at defending your position, and, if your not a troll I dare you to type “Putin is a nonce loser and is acting like a Nazi”……..no, thought not my little monitored troll.

Not used the link my little troll went on that Nazi Russian forum myself to recce your nonsense, and to confirm what we all know and get bored with, your a propaganda pushing troll. Same as your posts starting 2014, promoting the Nazi invasion of Crimea onwards. Remember Farouk clocked you that time. Silly troll, bad drills.

So why did you accuse me of something I didn’t do when you hadn’t even checked it? This is the cartoon that all the fuss is about

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FmiUnkxX0AI0jf7?format=jpg&name=small

Er, the considerable pro Russian Nazi posts supporting the illegal invasion of Crimea since 2014, on your fav russkie websites! I don’t give a flying fuck about a sad cartoon, as delete/ insert Wermacht/Russian/Soviet uniform, all scum of the same pond, fully supported by you. No excuses this time, as you cannot support or excuse this Russian invasion if you were anything but a sad Russian troll.

I think there’s a difference in what UK want to do. BAE recently reported the T1 was upgradeable but…

‘structural and avionic modifications’ are needed.

The T2 and 3 airframes are different so it’s more than computer hardware or software to do a full upgrade. And with lines running dry just bud more. Tempest may be IoC by 2035 but as we known to be fully capable fast jets normally have blocks or tranches to add full capability so could be 2040+ for Tempest to meet its full capability.

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/upgrade-and-retention-of-tranche-1-eurofighters-technically-feasible-bae-systems-tells-uk-parliament

Rebuilding old airframes can also keep a production line going. We did this with harriers for quite some time.

And Nimrod and look how well that went for BAe….

No official statement as such ,as yet other than there is no additional funding and that the MoD has already had an additional 16 billion ( I think)
So they are playing politics when they should be talk capabilities,

My comments were on tech training for the mechanics, and you have usefully added in the language training that they might need beforehand. I hope there is time to do this before the Russian Spring offensive and the tanks getting out to UKR.

You mention Log support – and I have mentioned engineering support. It would be interesting to hear what the arangements amount to in both cases.