NATO members, led by Poland, have been pressuring Germany to allow the transfer of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine over the past few weeks.
It now appears that the United States, the United Kingdom and some European allies will send armour to the front lines against Russia, a move that was previously unthinkable.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
This choice is significant for a number of reasons.
The deployment of advanced Western battle tanks, including the M1 Abrams of the United States, the Leopard 2 of Germany, and the Challenger 2 of the United Kingdom, to Ukraine, has the potential to enhance the capabilities of Ukrainian military forces significantly. These tanks have superior mobility, firepower, and armour compared to the Soviet-era T-72 tanks used by Russian and Ukrainian forces.
While these modern tanks are heavier, which could provide an advantage to the lighter Russian tanks on difficult terrain, the advanced control and navigation systems of the western tanks give them a distinct advantage in combined manoeuvres involving artillery and infantry, including night operations.
Giving Ukraine leverage
By deploying these tanks, Ukrainian forces may be able to breach Russian defences and influence the outcome of the conflict in a significant amount of occupied territory. Additionally, they can be crucial in protecting Ukrainian positions from counterattacks. For Ukraine and its allies, the most important potential of these weapons is that, if they are as effective as anticipated, they might give Ukraine leverage in dictating ceasefire and peace terms to Moscow.
Two things should be noted.
First off, unlike air defence systems or anti-tank missiles, tanks are not purely defensive weapons. They are offensive platforms, and their sending is about Ukraine retaking territory. They are intended to hit Russia’s troops hard in a ground offensive.
Secondly, this decision to send tanks to Ukraine is not the display of fractious democracies it may appear to be. Throughout the weeks of dispute and pressure around Berlin’s reluctance to assist Kyiv, some in Moscow may have heard something different: a West contemplating sending its most capable armour to a state it considered unfit even to discuss NATO membership seriously with a year ago. This shows NATO as a unified bloc.
Red lines becoming increasingly pale
There has recently been a significant shift in how NATO members perceive the risks involved, as evidenced by their decision to send tanks and other weapons to help Ukraine. This action shows that these countries are unconcerned with crossing Russian “red lines,” and it disproves the long-held notion that some forms of NATO assistance to Ukraine might put a nuclear power in danger of being provoked.
Additionally, this choice implies that these NATO members are less concerned about the possibility of an immediate attack by Russia. A testament to this is their willingness to offer supplies that would be urgently required in the event of a conflict, such as the Caesar artillery from Denmark and a sizable number of Leopards from Norway.
These actions imply that NATO members believe that any decisive conflict with Russia will be in Ukraine and that Moscow will not win.
Caution must be urged
Furthermore, the fact that NATO members are pledging equipment at such a rapid pace, with new announcements being made before the previous ones are implemented, highlights the urgency and seriousness of the situation.
When evaluating the current state of affairs with Russia, caution must be used. It would be dangerous for the West to become complacent if it assumed that Russia had no restrictions on its behaviour. In a similar vein, it is crucial to avoid caving in to Russian threats to use nuclear weapons as leverage. Although Moscow may appear to be in a vulnerable position right now, it’s important to keep in mind that the nature of this conflict is known to change quickly.
It is possible that this discussion is being used to show Moscow that the West is being cautious and respectful of the Kremlin’s actions and is still sensitive to their political concerns as the West continues to discuss the possibility of increasing aid to Ukraine. It is crucial to remember that the situation as it stands now is very different from what was previously conceivable, with Ukraine now in control of advanced NATO technology and Russia appearing to have limited options for retaliation.
It should not be assumed that the conflict is about to end because more Western tanks are heading to Ukraine. The current decisions are a strategic shift rather than a complete reversal of course because the war in Ukraine is likely to last for a considerable amount of time.
I know that it is likely that some here have been in the UK’s Armoured Brigades so are well aware of the amount of training that is needed to reach the level of skill needed to operate complex modern heavy tanks effectively. Would they care to put a timescale on it? Perhaps also giving a time for just driving from A to B, stopping and accurately firing a round?
The simple fact of who is doing the asking would suggest replying to this request would be a bad idea !
Yes, Let us tell the Russians what to expect in advance when they will arrive and what the timescale is between rounds 😉
I’m sure Vlad will greatly appreciate this!
“Momentum is building for a long-awaiting transfer of Western combat aircraft to Kyiv, with at least one NATO country stating publicly it stands ready to respond to Ukrainian requests.”
I’m sure that Russian intel is up to that task and I’m pretty sure that we have proudly stated our prowess at firing rounds. Quite whether semi trained Ukrainians will achieve anything like that I doubt.
Our experience and developed strategies with MBT have grown over decades where we had:-
Control of the airspace
Intact transport facilities including usable bridges
Lots of logistics transport including fuel, especially for the Abrams
Good access to repair and maintenance facilities
Highly trained crews in and out of the tanks.
None will apply to the fighting in Ukraine.
I think you’ll find Ukrainian troops to be very quick learners of new equipment as they have already shown to date. Providing we supply them with adequate numbers it will be a game-changer and send what’s left of the Russian rapists packing. The sooner the better for all western nations and with these next on the shopping list. It only takes one country to get the ball rolling! “The Dutch government has said it is ready to consider the delivery of F-16 fighters to Ukraine with an “open mind.” The position was expressed by Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs… Read more »
This is the escalation I’ve been dreading and warning about, ever since the west started supplying Ukraine with weapons. These initial numbers of MBTs are likely just the tip of the iceberg, once Leopard 2 tanks are prepared for delivery. 200 is not an unreasonable number, considering how many have been produced of different variants. There will also be sufficient equipment and training, to give the tanks the all arms support they require to survive. Of that we can be sure. The Russian propaganda machine is already using the story to prepare their people for an all out war with… Read more »
Meaningful peace talks are a telephone call away. Putin gives up this ‘special operation’ and withdraws.
The west cannot afford to let Putin gain anything. He has to fail and be seen to fail.
That is exactly why they have not taken place. First, all sides need to agree a ceasefire in place. Then start to address each point that ultimately gave us a shooting war. There are just too many to list here. Remember the shooting started back in 2014 or in some places even before that. Polarisation of the ethnic populations started somewhere.
Why on earth would Ukraine agree to a ceasefire in place? That’s as good as letting Pootin keep what he has captured! A ceasefire will happen when he pulls back to Orcland.
Let me play devils advocate here. They would do it to seek peace, recognise the rights of ethnic Russians to self determination and live free from persecution.
Any bilateral peace initiative must start with the stated reasons for the conflict. Otherwise it will never end, until the Ukrainians take Moscow and all of European Russia.
Bugger Putin.
I think Pootin has already stated his reasons for this war the cessation of Ukraine as a sovereign state! Funny though isn’t it theOrcs think nothing of flattening any objective they want to take yet the Ukr is refraining from doing the same in Orc occupied land using precision strikes to not cause unnecessary casualties in the ‘ethnic’ population.
George, The conditions you mention sound very much like the Minsk agreement, the agreement Merkel, Hollande and the chocolate man sign but have said in interviews they never intended to honour. How can Russian take anyone in the west and talks seriously?
You make valid points with reference to the OSCE and the numerous Minsk meetings but things are somewhat different now. Ukraine and Russia (plus Luhansk and Donetsk PRs) have suffered greatly. While most of the contested territories have been devastated and populations displaced from the cities. In addition, western powers of NATO are now preparing to give Ukraine seriously potent capabilities. Giving them the ability to go on the offensive. It is likely Ukraine will capture all of Luhansk, Donetsk and possibly Crimea too. There is also the potential to cross over into the Russian heartland, seize additional territory and/or… Read more »
Thank you George for your reply, to answer your first question, i am Russian. I will not comment on how you think war will go, that become a pointless argument about who has the best propaganda, but we see the cause of war and its out come very different and will never agree, but that is why our sides are at war. I think there will be talks but not for some time, there must be a military solution first, someone must win, someone must loose, one of us will be unhappy. I do not think there can be talks… Read more »
Ulya, as a Russian, do you think what Russia is doing is justified and do you think NATO is the aggressor? Can you provide me with clear reasons from your perspective. This isn’t an intentionally loaded question I’m just interested in how you view what is happening.
Hello Andy, I am not going to try and justify the war. I think this war is very stupid and should not be happening but unfortunately I think a war between our blocks was always going to happen, I just did not think it would happen last year. As to who I think is agressor, maybe the best way to answer is to ask my own questions Why is Ukraine so important to the west? Why did Nuland and friends need to make coup in Kiev in 2014, why not wait a few months for election? Why did Europe not… Read more »
Sorry, AMB? Perhaps groggy, past my usual bedtime…
Possibly ABM treaty?
Hello Ulya, Your comments above do indicate we are coming at these issues from what are almost alternative realities. I am curious as to how common this is in Russia. Please answer two questions to clarify this. In the 30s Stalin murdered between four and eight million Ukrainians. This was one of the ‘excesses’ Khrushchev apologised for when he denounced Stalin in the 50s, although the full numbers were not revealed until the fall of Communism. Is this acknowledged in Russia’s education system or is it covered up the way the Turks cover up the Armenian genocide? WW2 started when… Read more »
Hello Chris, Interesting questions I was born after the CCCP collapse so cannot answer with any knowledge of what was learned at school during communist times, I would have to ask my brothers but I did learn about it at school. It was not just Ukrainian who was killed, Stalin was an equal opportunity mass murderer. I am Tatar, my people got killed or exiled, our language and cultue banned and millions of Slav also murdered so to me trying to make a point with just 1 ethnic group is pointless, no one was left out. You could not hide… Read more »
I personally think we were doing the right thing in all those cases and helping to undo all the evil Russia caused in all three of those countries. It is very similar to the evil Russia did via its neo-colonial regime before the Ukrainians freed themselves in 2014 and Russia invaded.
Trying to compare that to Russia backing Hitler is desperate. If you need to do that it just highlights that Putin is our Hitler today and we need to stop him whatever that takes.
So you managed to justify your own actions in the ME by blaming Russia and take no responsibility at all lol. How very western of you. I guess this is why our counties are at war.
If you want to ‘stop him whatever that takes’ then ask your government to send more than 14 tanks, send all your Army, go volunteer yourself, the options are there for you, commit to the righteous cause Chris
Welcome back, Ulya; understand that you are forced by current circumstances to be very circumspect in your commentary. Take care; stay safe. Remember, all conflicts eventually end.
Hello FormerUSAF,
Sorry, why am i forced to be very circumspect?
I have not been talking here for some time simply because we are at war but i have still been reading as normal. I only comment this time because George comment make me curious
Sorry, an assumption, based on a possible 10-15 yr. prison sentence for those daring to critique government policy.
Fast reply sorry, my horses get angry, talking to a westerner is not a crime 😉
Ulya, Thank you very much for your replies to all of us. I have tried very hard to understand this conflict from the Russian and Ukrainian viewpoints. My conclusion were either there are unreconcilable differences between you both. Or there are some outside influences at work actively polarising the Ukrainian population along ethnic lines. The reality is likely a little of both. Historical hatreds and old scores to be settled, combined with western influences trying to gain a financial hold in Ukraine. In your opinion is my assessment correct. We are told in the media and by politicians. That in… Read more »
Good morning George, “Will it cause you any trouble in Russia with the authorities?”. I do not mean to be rude this has made me laugh very much, at first i think you tried to be funny but now i think you are serious. There is a very different understanding of your view to mine, i will not be sharing state secrets with you simply because i do not know any and you face more risk of being ‘cancelled’ for talking to a orc than i risk for talking to you. It might surpise the world but Stalin is dead,… Read more »
Thank you again Ulya for your very enlightening and honest reply. It is very refreshing to read the opinions of someone on the other side of the divide. I apologise if my assumptions about the degree of authoritarianism in modern Russia was insulting. My honest concern was for your safety, so I’m pleased it is not an issue. During the Cold War and my youth, I served in the military. The CCCP and Warsaw Pact were my enemies. Like many others, when the USSR fell without a major European war, I was ecstatic. Hopeful for the future and peace. Not… Read more »
Forgive me, this must be fast reply but it is important for me to say, no offence was taken by me, I like honest questions and replies otherwise we never learn.
Your Russian is good, better than my English I think.
I look forward to more talks
Your friendly orc 😉
Amen.
George, agree w/ your reasoning, including possibly a small buffer zone on border, carved from existing Russian territory, but a drive on Moscow? Sorry to use old terminology, but, ‘a bridge too far.’ NATO would not supply the requisite logistical support, and Putin wouldn’t hesitate to nuke Ukraine and anyone/everyone otherwise involved.
Until very recently, supplies have been relatively small scale. But that seems to have changed. Once training and logistic support has been delivered. NATO cannot dictate what separatist militia groups will use it for. Unless they are being supervised. Can you guarantee that Right Sector, Azov and the other groups, now officially integrated into the regular army. (Yet very much a separate entity.) Will feel the same way if the opportunity to cross that border presents itself. I’m sure Ulya and other Russians are thinking about this quite seriously. As would we if the roles were reversed. The questions he… Read more »
By the same token why doesn’t Russia recognise the rights of ethnic Chinese living in Outer Manchuria in giving them a vote to return their historical lands back to China? Mmmm let me think.
Bugger me mate, I’ve no idea. One problem at a time.
Just an aside, who the hell would want to return to the hell hole that is communist china. That’s the place where your organs can be harvest if your tissue type is the same as some ill party official.
Putin may be a demon but the CCP are proper devils. Several orders of magnitude worse.
But is China waging aggressive war beyond its borders – Russia keeps on doing this – and threatens European security.
That’s going to be a bit difficult. The only reason(s) for this war is Putins distorted belief that Ukraine should not exist in any form as a sovereign and independent country, his hatred of western democracy and freedoms, his contempt for any culture that isn’t nationalist ethno Russian etc. You can’t negotiate with a crocodile.
Actually, the best counter argument I’ve seen. Putin and his KGB STASI mindset is half the problem. Of course he is propped up by the real powerbroker Oligarchs.
‘You can’t negotiate w/ a crocodile.’ Sorry, going to have to request permission to reuse that line, under license of course. 😁
Permission granted!!😀
👍
Yes, even the start date of 2014, the 100th anniversary of the first fiasco; one can almost hear the words of a ghostly Rod Sterling welcoming all to ‘The Twilight Zone’…
…Serling…🙄
The Twilight Zone did cross the pond. TV, radio and the current updated podcast.
100% agree
I think the escalation started when the Russians invaded……
There is a long, bitter and twisted history to this conflict. It has many similarities to Yugoslavia.
George, I am not sure many would share your view. I am fully behind the West supplying Ukraine with weapons that have offensive capability. We should not cave in to Russian aggression each and every time it appears, whether it is in Georgia, Salisbury, Ukraine. NATO exists to oppose Russia and defend the West. Putin’s war must be stopped – a peace initiative would not achieve all that Ukraine wants. We need to suply Ukraine with far more tanks – the full 300. Then F-16s..and whatever else Zelensky needs. We stood up for Belgium in WW1 and Poland in WW2… Read more »
NATO was indeed started to oppose the USSR. A defunct enterprise, assigned to the history books. Yes we stood up for them both and each time there were world wars. Are you perhaps hoping this time there will be a different outcome. Third time lucky. People on this forum know better than most that WWIII will be somewhat final. A quick recovery being impossible. I’m no pacifist as many of my posts on here will support. Wanting a vast British military infrastructure. The rationale being; peace is best achieved by the deterrent of superior firepower. This Russia v Ukrainian (Rus… Read more »
My perspective is historical and moral. For the first 16 years of my army service the USSR and the Warsaw Pact were my enemy – and I was ready for WWIII, although not hoping for it. Certainly the stakes are high and get higher when the West delivers offensive weaponry but we in the west started doing that some time ago with delivery of HIMARS, MLRS etc. The Rubicon was crossed some time ago. If peace talks occur between Russia and Ukraine, then Zelensky would not get all that he wanted – Russia’s obnoxious invasion would be in part at… Read more »
It seems we share a similar service history, at least in terms of the era covered. I too trained to face off against the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Russia. Learning as much about the enemy as possible to the point of near obsession in a very specialist area. Quite ironic that my war came in the middle east in the deserts of Saudi, Iraq and Kuwait. Typical! I would suggest MBTs are somewhat different to long range rocket artillery. Artillery threatens and can deny ground but tanks have no purpose other than to seize it. I accept in an integrated… Read more »
Thanks for the comments. Neither leader wants a peace summit, let alone a peace agreement. I saw Zelensky being interviewed by Kay Burley on Sky News yesterday – he said he didn’t trust Putin and that he would not keep his part in any agreement. If I was Zelensky I would want: Russian forces out of Ukraine including Crimea; the return of Crimea to Ukraine; cancellation of the documentation relating to annexation of the 4 provinces; reparations in full to repair the whole of Ukraine’s infrastructure; prisoner exchange; surrendering of those suspected of war crimes to face a Court; security… Read more »
Did you see Ulya’s reply to Andy B. Interesting questions that quite clearly outline the Russian point of view. Left with few alternatives but to invade.
Unfortunately, it is true what historians say about truth being the first victim of war. It is not always deliberate but always applies to both sides equally. A lack of communication makes matters worse.
Bringing them both to the UN negotiating table is absolutely vital. As this extends far beyond the Ukraine/Russia borders.
Yes, I found Ulya’s reply very interesting and shows the mindset of the Russian hawk. I can’t see the UN managing to get both sides to the negotiating table.
I also can’t see any leader in the West trying to facilitate this.
Perhaps China might exert pressure on Putin to withdraw or make peace overtures? But again, perhaps they want to see Russia weakened.
Understanding that mindset is crucial if this conflict is to be prevented from turning into something much bigger. The only real beneficiary of this utter shambles, will be the CCP and possibly Iran. I can’t imagine either of them wanting the war to end. Don’t know about you but I’m fully expecting them to strike a deal. Acquiring Russian weapon designs and access to Siberian raw materials. In return for mass producing armaments to be shipped overland to Russia. This conflict will push them closer together than ever before. I just hope we can keep the Ukrainian militia factions, within… Read more »
I agree that the beneficiaries of this conflict are the CCP and Iran – and that means they will not want to see Russia negotiate a peace deal. The deal you suggest may well happen and would prolong the war – depressing. Russia will need help (from China) patching its economy which must have been mauled by western sanctions and greatly increased military expenditure. Ukraine is struggling to reclaim the 20% of territory it has lost – it has no combat power to cross the border into Russia – and it knows that the retribution would be terrible for doing… Read more »
The weak Ukrainian government cannot control the country. It has many factions and little oligarch empires to contend with. Not least of which are the former C14 and Azov leadership, in high ranking military and local government positions. You will recall that in Feb/March last year, Zelenski sacked the pro-Russian military leaders left over from Red Army days. Replacing them with all manner of dubious friends and leaders of his oligarchs private armies. He also was desperate enough to legitimise all the guard militias and bring them into the army. Now well trained by British troops and others. They have… Read more »
Thanks George. Ukrainian society is far from perfect and I was aware of the historic corruption and the fascist labels attached to extreme nationalists. Perhaps the least worse option is the most pragmatic (and better) option ie for Zlensky to have sacked pro-Russian Ukrainian commanders and replacing them with somewhat dubious but patriotic successors. I would be surprised to see as many as 500 Leo2s in Ukraine – and F-16 supply is not ‘a given’. But it is surprising that Moscow’s response to the announcement about western tanks has been somewhat muted – Putin is keeping his powder dry until… Read more »
Graham, forgive me that this is so delayed, but how are my questions a ‘Russian hawk’? I read here time after time of westerners trying to understand Russian actions and then coming to your own conclusions, but your conclusions are based on a western mindset and a western view of the world, yet when a Russian gives you a point of view it is dismissed as being hawk because it does not fit your view. All very interesting to me. One reason I read western media and sites like this is to try and understand your view, even if I… Read more »
Ulya, If you are opposed to Putin’s war, then I should not have called you a hawk. So I apologise for that. I served in the British Army for 34 years and for some of those years I was in West Germany as a member of 1 (BR) Corps, facing 3rd Shock Army GSFG. I was a military opponent of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact. Yet I fully respected the USSR’s phenomenal role in the Second World War – the Great Patriotic War. Facism would not have been defeated without the Red Army. Your people (military and civilian) suffered… Read more »
Thank you for your reply, you make me smile regarding your service in West Germany, I have 5 brothers, all much older than me, all have been in military, the oldest 2 based for some time in East Germany maybe at some time you faced off against each other (I think that is correct term). I have always supported the LPR/DPR but was all so a big supporter of Minsk agreement, to me it kept Ukraine whole but protected ethnic Russian but I have lost any faith of future agreement with the west. I do not think westerners truly understand… Read more »
Hi Ulya, I can see how Russians would wish for the Russian-speakers of the Donbas to live their lives free from interference and violence. It was a tragedy that fighting broke out in 2014 between Russian seperatists and the Ukraine Army and then that it escalated following reinforcement from Mother Russia, and many more lives were lost. A tragedy too that the Minsk agreement did not work out following breakdown by both sides of a ceasefire. Years later, President Putin assessed that the only way to solve this situation was to launch a full-scale invasion, which I do not agree… Read more »
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum (apologies in advance to my Latin instructor). Always subscribed to that philosophy; always will in the future. 👍👍
I see you were looking out of the window too, during the Latin lessons. Oh the benefits of a classical education. Class will conjugate the verb PHUQ.
God in Heaven. NATO was never brought into being to oppose the SOVIET UNION, it was created to defend NATO MS, BEFORE the Warsaw Pact was created.
It might come as a surprise but, the West will not always be remembered as the good guys.
In the meantime, let’s help the AUK kick 7⃣ bells out of the Russians.
Straight from NATO website. Why was NATO founded?The North Atlantic Alliance was founded in the aftermath of the Second World War. Its purpose was to secure peace in Europe, to promote cooperation among its members and to guard their freedom – all of this in the context of countering the threat posed at the time by the Soviet Union. The Alliance’s founding treaty was signed in Washington in 1949 by a dozen European and North American countries. It commits the Allies to democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law, as well as to peaceful resolution of disputes. Importantly, the… Read more »
Yes, to counter the threat, oppose as in opposition suggests something much stronger. Semantics dear, semantics.
The Cold War was something much stronger!
Both you and George make excellent arguments; perceive wisdom in both POV. 🤔 War is both somewhat messy, and disconcerting. when both sides hold the means to end civilization. Hope we don’t have to test the validity of that last statement. 🤞
Amen to that brother I’ll pray we never find out. I’m an atheist but always hedge my bets. Go figure.
Although I never occupied one, my understanding is there are relatively few totally committed atheists in foxholes.
Instead of labeling people as atheists or agnostics, I prefer the term pre-religious. My limited perspective on Christianity is it functions like life insurance; you would wish to delay the event as long as feasible, but someone will eventually cash in the policy. Guaranteed. 🤔
Thanks mate. George and I will surely agree to disagree.
I often think back to the origin of WW2. Appeasement failed to stop Hitler’s war machine and I doubt he would also have been persuaded to negotiate at peace talks at the point his armoured forces had seized 20% of Poland.
Sir. NATO does not exist “to oppose Russia.” NATO exists to defend NATO States. However, in my little shop in Grasmere last night, I asked someone where she was from. I then introduced myself in my best Latvian; she was a tad shocked and asked me if I was Latvian, I replied no, ah, you are English. Nope, I’m British, I was born in Germany, her head is scrambling. Then you are German! Nope, I’m British and explained in English that I was the son of a British soldier (Welsh) and English mother. As we talked, she said something quite… Read more »
You take issue with my sentence “NATO exists to oppose Russia and defend the West”. NATO was founded in 1949 to oppose the Soviet Union (by deterrence, not fighting) and its aggressive expansionist stance westwards, which resulted in them dominating many eastern European countries, cancelling democracy there and imposing communist regimes and stationing troops in their countries for over 45 years. NATO today is a counter to Russia, NATOs forces being deployed in eastern European states (eFP) to provide deterrence and reassurance to those nations who were once dominated by the USSR. I am not sure my sentence was so… Read more »
Peace initiative?
Sure. Putin started the war.
He can finish it quickly and simply.
Just withdraw from Ukraine.
Devils advocate time. Did he, and what is Ukraine?
Who overthrew an elected pro-Russian government?
What about the Luhansk and Donetsk peoples republics, who invaded them?
Is the entire tihs show worthy of WWIII.
I think using the term ‘elected ‘ when describing a pro Russian government is being disingenuous. Russia has had a long and nasty history of interference in Ukrainian affairs . That said however, the ‘yellow revolution ‘ was a popular uprising by the Ukrainian public against a government that was really only a cipher for the Kremlin, it wasn’t any different than the popular uprisings against the governments of Honecker, Jarolelski, Ceaucescu etc in Eastern Europe during the late eighties, early nineties. But, and as you’ve alluded to above, Putins stasi/KGB mindset and memory of East Germany falling to civil… Read more »
Thank you for the detailed reply. It is appreciated. As is the reply from Ulya, have you seen it.
Sorry, tihs is an acronym for? Or simply a variant of the spelling of this? 😉
Trust me, I have indulged in my fair share of spelling variations… 😁
It’s reverse speak. Like bravery tihs is brown and runs down the trouser leg when the going gets tough. Unless parachuting, then it appears to defy gravity and travels upwards.
Does seem perhaps a little eerily reminiscent of WW I, including trench warfare and the British first introduction of (then prototypes, now modern) MBTs, forecasted then and now to be a game changer. Don’t know whether the TV series ‘The Twilight Zone’ ever made it across the Pond in syndication, but it would be a good plotline. Hope this dust-up falls short of the four-year, twenty million-casualties mark; the West has other potential crises to address.
You ask a question and then, in a follow up, answer it. For the past year the Ukrainians have demonstrated rapid development of their forces and command structures and adapted to a wide range of new weapon systems with aplomb. Russia has concentrated from the outset of the ‘special operation’ on killing civilians and committing war crimes.
The overview supplied above is another in long a series of peculiar interpretations, always negative, of the issues facing Ukraine.
Do you condemn the aggression by Russia on Ukraine?
Deluded in soo many ways.
Ha ha haaaa desperate post johnskie!
Er, Russian intel? They did well didn’t they on their initial planning phase for the invasion of Ukraine 😂😂😂
I know you are trying to take the p out of me, fat chance, but do you really think that the Russians are not aware of this kind of information? Do you think its secret or classified or something?
Its me, plus I suspect many readers here, that don’t know and might find it of interest in a good defence forum like this. You know, spread a bit of hard earned knowledge.
Instead, you and others below just ignore the opportunity to educate others and go for the trite option.
Odd that you’d mention spreading hard earned knowledge and educating others when all that you’ve done since before the Russian invasion began is spread baseless myths, lies and propaganda straight from the Kremlin.
Not an iota of what you’ve ever posted is knowledge, it never stands up to any scrutiny.
The thinking on display in your comment to Jim is peak troll. How do you know what you don’t know? What do you need to know? Why? Go and find out, consult the internet. Don’t play innocent.
Hard earned knowledge serving as an officer in the KGB
Oh my, your pulling them right out of your arse at the moment! Your posts are now desperate and flaccid, get a grip or the low flying turret display team is on the cards for you my son!
😂STOP! Creasing me up like this is bad for my blood pressure. But then again, laughing till tears run down the cheeks is good for the soul.
😂👍
🤣🤣🤣 . Comedy gold!!
You forgot to add “asking for a friend …”
Why would we supply answers to a Kremlin mole and Putinbot?
I think the correct responses is get knotted mate. Or stick your question up your a**e.
Worried your boys are about to take a beating are you?
You can’t compare the amount of time Western tank crews spend training anyway. The Ukrainians are likely to send already experienced tankers to cross-train on new tank types, and like all training for Ukraine, it will be accelerated. Who knows, John? It may have already happened.
In fact operating the challenger technically will take about 6 weeks, driving, gunnery using the more modern optics and new loading methods, basic driver/mech stuff! It’s the combat tactics which take time to be proficient at, which isn’t actually a problem for the Ukrainians as they have a years worth of combat experience thanks to Putin and his Jimmy Saville plastic military, therefore you will see a fully crewed Chally/etc on the ground within 6-8 weeks. Anyway, why, do you have a problem with us supplying the Ukrainians my little English patriot?
I was thinking about the furnishing of Ukraine with Leopard 2 Tanks (hopefully A6 and not A4) which got me thinking about the use of Leo2 by Turkey in Syria at the village of Al Bab where they lost 10 of them (Battle of Al Bab). Anyway after such a heavy loss in armour to Jundies in flip flops , Ankara went to the Ukraine and purchased the rights to build their Zaslin active protection system which they then renamed as Akkor-Pulat and claimed to be Turkish. Anyway the Turks have already fitted their Leo 2 tanks in Syria with the… Read more »
A little more on how the Zaslin works: “”Zaslin is one of the more “crude” hard-kill active protection systems on the market, relying on multiple explosive “tubes” that are normally retracted into the side of a vehicle on which it is being installed. When in a high threat area, the tube is extended, and a radar in the tube is activated, searching for a target. When a threat is detected by radar, the tube detonates, creating a wave of debris that destroys or weakens the projectile. Zaslon’s creators say it is effective even against kinetic energy rounds, but this is… Read more »
Fantastic work Farouk. Lets hope the Chally’s get some tbh. Given their small numbers survivability is key to their effectiveness.
They should get reactive armour and possibly an APS although I doubt it in the timeframe. Delivery is reported to be by March by Alex Chalk deputy defence minister. No time for APS but reactive armour and fully serviceable vehicles driven by hopefully elite Ukranian tanker crews.
I’m sure the UA will be delighted to have some tanks that are hard hitting, resilient and not equipped with the Russian turret ejection system.
Should give them time to load their Herforder handbags as well.
(Those that know…).
Yes, very good work and well presented. From what you have written, it seems that Zaslin is even more deadly to accompanying infantry than Trophy. It should give considerable pucker factor to section commanders wishing to use the infantry telephone on the back of MBTs. I assume Leo 2 still has such a thing to cut down on radio chatter.
Given how the Turkis army were using their tanks in Syria (i.e. without any infantry support), then I guess they’re not so worried by that!
But, if the Ukrainians are benefitting from their western combined arms training, then I imagine they’ll certainly be feeling at least some moderate pucker…
OT: Meanwhile US Army will be installing Ironfist APS in Bradleys.
Cool. Well done USA.
From jane’s A set of electro-optical (EO) sensors is under development for the EuroTrophy active protection system (APS) that will enable it to operate without activating its phased-array doppler radars, Dan Kalfus, managing director of EuroTrophy GmbH, announced at Defence IQ’s International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) 2023 conference in London.The development follows work in Israel to equip Merkava Mk 4 main battle tanks and Namer armoured personnel carriers with a variant of the Trophy-HV APS that also utilises EO sensors.Technical details regarding the EO sensors – dubbed ‘Othello’ – were not released, but it was disclosed that they can be used… Read more »
So it does seems that the UK deciding to give 14 Challenger 2’s has resulted in multiple uncorking of some bottles. But mainly all in lots of 14;s which will not really assist the Ukraine to actually roll the Russians back to the pre 2014 Borders in the East. I think it is now our turn to turn over another card in this game of MBT Top Trumps. So it seems we do actaully have another 75 C2 Tanks stashed away somewhere in Non Operational Long Term Storage which we didn’t scrap.I dare say they have been canabalised to blazes… Read more »
In reply to Rodney let’s see how many additional tanks come from Leopard users at 5 have promised then so far, but anyway there are only so many that Ukraine can absorb for a while till training seriously builds up so what will be over 50 at the moment most like is a good start others will follow too. In reply to wolf I think Ukraine announced early this month it has agreement with about 6 foreign Companies to liaise on external military production. Few details were understandably given mind so not sure exactly who and what is envisaged but… Read more »
ha ha yes Mate, arriving sometime soon in 2024! 😋
The offer of four Leopards is, like the U.K.’s offer of fourteen Challenger 2’s, essentially political and helps smaller, but better supplied countries with Leopards to take the step to provide these. It’s symbolic but isn’t unimportant.
I wonder where they will all muster for upgrading and crew familiarity. It would need to be in Germany or somewhere very close. If anyone knows, please don’t post it on here.
They have the cats in Latvia. 12 hours by train.
These are the latest estimates I have been able to find. Germany – 14 2A6 Poland – 14 probably 2A4. Poland has 105 2A5, 102 2A4 with 45 of the latter upgraded to the level of Leopard 2PL. Spain – 12 2A4s seem to have been allocated with general plans to transfer all 53 2A4s in storage. Spain has 219 2E and 108 2A4 (the 53 in storage). Netherlands – they plan to buy out and transfer to Ukraine all 18 of their own former 2A6NL, currently leased from Germany. Portugal – 4 2A6PO tanks, out of 37 available. Norway… Read more »
As for Spain forget it, theirs are so dilapidated they couldn’t even sell them.
The Germans can still supply spares and refurbish them given sufficient incentive, cash and time.
I just hope really good NBC air filtration is given top priority. Few weapons strip a tank squadron of it’s vital infantry support like G, GV and V agents. Even Q, HD and T mustard gases would cause something of a reluctance to debus from the IFV/APC. Certainly a good quality test for the hatch seals.
What the situation calls for more than anything else, is a serious peace imitative. In a location well up wind from any advancing Panzer formations.
Very interesting hypothetical scenario; would certainly accelerate the timeline to at least a tactical nuke exchange. 🤔😳
Could they not get refitted, maybe using others as spare parts to get a few dozen to Ukraine in time for spring fighting season?
Suddenly the man who ‘doesn’t know anything’ has a detailed breakdown of several western countries holdings and models and their current offers of Leopard tanks for Ukraine. I do wish you would slither back under your rock.
Well what do we expect, I am by no means jingoistic but let us be quite honest about this. For over 200 years our poor, dilapidated, self loathing country has actually been the moral and militarily unyielding backbone to all of European freedom.
If we are prepared to lead they will follow, they have too much to lose if they don’t.
As for Canada, I have a large number of family over there and to be honest their contribution compared to their GDP is pitiful.
Those previous Generations would be ashamed and ask why did they bother.
Canada seems to be the 4th or 5th largest contributor to Ukraine aid (vastly higher than France or Italy among G7 nations). Percentage-wise it is among the top contributors who are not direct neighbors of Ukraine (who are obviously contributing more out of immediate necessity). Excluding states such as Poland, Czech Republic, and the Baltics who are directly threatened and would thus rather the Russians be stopped in Ukraine because they might be next, the top contributors by GDP were (1) Norway (2) UK (3) tied US and Canada. Everyone else was less than 2/3 that, usually a lot less.… Read more »
Good on Norway!
I maybe should have clarified that the Canadian contribution in terms of being a member of NATO is pitiful. Nowhere near the 2% required. So they are giving lots of aid to UA but only 4 tanks ! Canada has an amazing military History (I’m related to lots of the participants from Winnipeg, Manitoba and Newfoundland). Canada has a massive coast on 3 Oceans, colossal natural resources and the 10th highest GDP in the world. But only 1.27% of GDP is spent on defence which is less than Bulgaria, Albania and Montenegro which are some of the poorest countries in… Read more »
Well, I agree Canada’s NATO contribution is quite low. We were discussing Ukraine, however. Perhaps if Canada had twice the NATO contribution (2%) it could donate eight tanks instead of four… Given the US has about 20x the GDP of Canada and over twice the contribution, presumably it is giving 40x as many tanks and 160 are going? Hmm, no, it seems to be sending 30. Well, perhaps the contribution is not that far off, given the relative sizes of their economies then? 4 tanks is certainly a much bigger percentage of Canada’s tank force than 30 is of the… Read more »
Honestly I don’t know where to start. There are not 4 types of NATO membership there is only one. Every member is obligated to Article 5 an attack on 1 is an attack on all. Which means if you get attacked every other comes to help you and as Canada has arguably the longest coastline in NATO which borders directly with Russia is a bit silly to slack off. We can only send 4 Tanks but that is quite a lot considering how few we have compared to others. Talk about thin ice, yes you are right it is probably… Read more »
Ahh! All good issues you bring up. You are referring the the Canadian public who don’t care about the armed forces. When the public do talk about it they criticize it without having any knowledges. So funding rises and falls. Canada‘a contribution to the war in Ukraine has been quite robust. 200 Senator APC, 39 brand new APC, 4 leopards for training and combat, anti missile and aircraft defence systems being purchased ukraine for $500 million. The list goes on. We also have 10,000 vacancies in the forces so retention is a big issue. The fed gov has funded many… Read more »
All of which is ………… Very noble, politically very PC but not enough nor appropriate. Canada is part of a very long term bunch of countries which are bound together by common principles. And OMG have our forefathers sacrificed for those. Quite simply you have a Navy which is completely inadequate to defend you, never mind project force or support allies. An Army which is equipped to protect, well nothing really ! And an Airforce which doesn’t see the need for 5th generation Aircraft when everyone else is marching towards 6th generation. The 15 new Frigates are a sticking plaster… Read more »
Fortunately all the things you laid out are being worked on with some alacrity. The chief of defence staff has been doing his job effectively. I agree that most Canadians do not take defence seriously although Ukraine has changed that
The Canadian Armed Forces is still an affective combat force that can deliver in support of its Allies in a combined role or alone. It does need more staff and more equipment.
Canadian planes are in the UK now providing supply runs to the Baltics-Ukraine. Also surveillance flights as part of NATO missions.
And I completely forgot. Canada has a Mechanized batalion as a lead NATO nation in Latvia. Has been since 2018.
No. You are fundamentally wrong. Article 5 is not an all for 1 and 1 for all. Article 5 Edit The key section of the treaty is Article 5. Its commitment clause defines the casus foederis. It commits each member state to CONSIDER An armed attack against one member state, in the areas defined by Article 6, to be an armed attack against them all. Upon such attack, each member state is to assist by taking “such action as [the member state] DEEMS necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic… Read more »
Of course they won’t all turn up. But as always we will which means we need to be well armed and able to work with the others that do
Just remember always go to war over scraps of paper, one of which is why we and the US are supporting UA. We both signed a bit of paper.
Oh and in most cases Article 5 has been assessed by a matter of degrees. Salisbury incident was one, 9 – 11 was another but an attack on a NATO country is way above those.
Er. An NBC attack TWICE on the UK is OK, let it ride? Black Swan, right?
However, a physical attack on America, which, Tom Clancey had predicted 15 years earlier and for which the USMIL was unprepared, was an Article 5?
This Country needs a clean out of Russian linked money and that includes all the lawyers that support them, and more than 1 or 2 Con MPs that party at the Oligarchs Italian retreats.
Let’s just hang Bluffer tomorrow and save TAXPAYERS money on his defence.
Is this a joke!? Who is contributing more than anyone else combined. As usual Canada is a complete joke as are most of the other countries you mentioned 8 million and a half artillery rounds someone has contributed more than everyone else combined so let’s just stop puffing ourselves up about who is doing what. NATO and the EU have completely fallen on their ass as far as contributions. You were warned. There’s a reason Russia is in Ukraine and that’s because the Europeans were weak.
Been reading your books again nobber or just looking at the pictures and coming up with bollocks as usual?
Ahem do you mind ? Not all of NATO has fallen down on their bums. Poland hasn’t, Norway hasn’t and my dear old creaking country hasn’t 🇬🇧 (not in the EU). Training 1000’s of UA soldiers since 2014, 1000’s of NLAW, Starsteak and Javelin missiles. MLRS, APC, M109, SP90 etc, etc. And who embarrassed the US, and Germany to get their fingers out and give the UA modern MBT’s ? It may only be 14 CR2’s but that is 10% of our fleet and I can honestly say it is a force multiplier. Oh and in terms of NATO Defence… Read more »
Good answer but 14 tanks is not 10% of our 227-strong fleet.
Nope but is about 10% of the active fleet and also 10% of the announced CR3 flotilla.
The 227-strong fleet is the active fleet.
The US decision to supply Abrams had absolutely nothing to do with the UK’s offer of Challengers. It was done to force Germany to provide Leopards since Scholz was using lack of Abrams as an excuse not to provide the Leopards.
Bluff and bluster. We don’t spend 2.3% on pure Defence – the Cons rolled the security services into that figure.
Not sure stock given has been replaced.
The Septics are circa 300 000m
We are circa 70 000 – perhaps a quarter, maybe a fifth smaller.
Heavens, with your grasp of Maths, I’d hazard Rupert Guards or something like pretentious public schoolboy. Go to sleep.
Oh dear it would seem Canadian LI pants have been found in your laundry basket oops!
I think you need more SIB training.
The pants found in his dirty laundry basket, given the inverted puckering of his sh!t smothered spincter were of the lesser known type of ‘skiddies’
Here the training ends.
Canada has skin in the game.
Who is the lead NATO EfP in Latvia?
The 4 tanks are ready to go and will be used for training for the Ukrainians. More Leopards will follow. Canada has a strategic airlift but not like the US or UK so that is what can be managed right now.
Canada has donated 200 Senator APCs recently and 39 of the latest off the assembly line APC/IFV that was earmarked for the Canadian army.
Also Canada is buying air intercept platforms for the Ukrainian army. Delivery will be ASAP.
See above, rail in preposition tanks from Latvia.
Thanks for that.
When the Defence Support Group was privatised capability was reduced , they outsourced overhaul of fuel pumps and many electrical items to Carwoods , scrapped the heavy machine shop and rid got of many skilled staff and managers on voluntary exit schemes. Strangely they have only made a profit one year since, this is hid in the land accounts and merely gets performed as expected lol
👍 I recall it was ABRO before that?
Yep – a GOGO agency comprising the non-profit making static REME workshops. The British Army was of course their main customer but they did small amounts of work on Forestry Commission and Fire Brigade equipment as I recall.
A phenomenol resource at the time.
MoD website: “ABRO was an executive agency of the MOD. It provided engineering, repair and re-manufacturing services to the Armed Forces and also to the police and some local councils”.
In ABRO days it was really buzzing ,productivity was much higher. The changes made “modernising ” for sale reduced output. To make it look more attractive for sale the amount the Army was charged was increased and extra work above planned given to boost profits!
Yep I had read this and I stand by what I have said. If you look at what we in the U.K are contributing and if we added the extra C3’s to the mix it is a pretty effective alarms unit. We need to try and separate the various supply chains to ensure some sense of continuity just like NATO does. Lump together the German kit together, the US Kit together and the U.K. supplied kit together. We each supply, train and support our unit. But deploy them alongside each other. So yes I would have a U.K., US, German… Read more »
I thought out of the 386 delivered, that apart from a few (say 5)we still had all of them although they may be in long terms storage (and most likely striped for spare parts)
Apparently 80 were declared as scrapped.
Thanks for the info Graham. wonder why that was? Maybe could have been useful as CRARRV replacements, although supposedly we had 80 of those at one point
Not sure I follow your point Simon about ‘CRARRV replacements’. According to a fellow contributor to these pages, 80 CR2s were scrapped sometime before 2018 (to save money on storing/maintaining them presumably and they will almost certainly have been very heavily stripped for parts ie canibalised) ..I think it was criminal to scrap world-beating tanks that had not even done 20 years service…. ….but we still have 227 on the active list and should have 79 left on the inactive list. It is said that the 14 tanks for UA will come from the active list – makes sense to… Read more »
I was thinking along the lines that CRARRV was based on CH1and may need an update (I did just read the power pack of CH2 was fitted to CRARRV, so maybe not) Also seems positive we still have ~75 CRARRV in service (was expecting it to be far lower) it did seem a very odd decision to scrap those 80 CH2 what ever way you look at it. Mind you how many HET do we have ?
In technology terms CRARRV is a 1.5 – it has some CR2 features – but not the Chobham armour. It replaced CHARRV which first supported CR1 gun tanks. A replacement has been talked about for years but CSS guys are always kept waiting for new equipment. Still does an excellent job. I bet CRARRV gets refurbished to support CR3 rather than replaced. As I said the decision to scrap 80 CR2s was clearly on economic grounds – they were already off the ORBAT (a very important point -HMG decided to cut active fleet from 386 to 227 tanks) and probably… Read more »
Found this. contract may be due for renewal soon
“British Army heavy equipment transporter contractThe British Army heavy transporter contract was awarded as a 20-year private finance initiative (PFI) to the FASTRAX consortium (Kellogg Brown and Root, Deutsche Bank and the Oshkosh Truck).
FASTTRAX was awarded the £290m whole-life-cost contract for 92 tractor trucks, 89 King GTS 110/7 semi-trailers along with three Tru-Hitch recovery systems and also staff to operate them as Sponsored Reserves in January 2001. The vehicles were delivered by Oshkosh between 2003 and 2004.”
Thanks Simon. Rumours abound that they no longer have as many equipments now and have sold some. It was always puzzling to me that an operational resource was contracted-out. Many disadvantages to this, which I can elaborate on if you are interested.
You are right that it looks due for renewal – we can’t really do a U-turn and bring the HWET capability back in-house as the soldiers, both RLC and REME, were laid off 20 years ago!
I would expect it was to save money on buying a new fleet of transporters, much like the air tanker contract. Withham have four HET for sales but they have a service date of 1993 and are left hand drive and claimed direct from Nato. http://www.govsales.co.uk has another 11 for sale, again LHD, ( I am sure they had about twenty for sale last year)a couple of Broshuis Trailers as well, dated 2004. as well as 70 ton trailers. loads of Foden and Bedford TM trucks for sales on there (35 years old!!)
I had not realised that some/all of the original 2003/4 FASTTRAX HETS had been replaced by newer vehicles – but it makes sense.
Which could mean the purchase of 1-3 additional T31s if spreading these around? Or selling these to the Taiwanese?
Interesting read, but could not the Russians then claim it as a legitimate target?
Indeed… Knowing and advising… Then them listening and understanding…
Just hope the Ukrainians can cope with the Logistical burden heading their way…
Slava Ukraini.
Not if it is in Poland 😎
OK, I will rephrase
What will stop them attacking a target in Poland? Covertly or otherwise?
After all, it is not unlike Pootin to attacked when ever and where ever he want…
Agree but we need to ramp up warship construction to be match fit for the 2030s. I’d like to see the type 26 programme accelerated and 2-3 more hulls added, then immediately follow up with batch 2 type 31s. We’ve got to get the RN escort flotilla back upto 30+ warships asap. Especially if an enduring commitment of a QE carrier strike group, RAF formations in Australia and patrol frigates are needed. I’d like to see the last T class boat retained and possibly transferred to Australia and possibly the 6th T class boat now in reserve reactivated and transferred… Read more »
Anyone would think we were still a world power from your comments.
We are not, we are up to our necks in debt with our health and social systems failing.
Yes, those Western sanctions are hitting your mother Russia quite hard now.
We are a world power. Say why you think we are not.
It is a commonplace to describe world power in terms of military strength. However, that has never been a problem for the United Kingdom that has never had much. The astonishing aspect of ‘British power’ is how it depended on such as mutuality, governance and influence much more than brute force; even a critic like George Orwell, himself ‘a child of Empire’, pointed out it was the least militarised of all the great Empires. Most of the world’s people aware there is a choice, wish to live under a system first promoted by people from these islands. Neither Russia nor… Read more »
Oh the desperation is so telling!
Slightly puzzling that we are to supply 14 tanks (one British sqn and no attrition reserve), when UA does not have 14-tank sqns, unless we have supplied 10 for a UA tank company and the other 4 are Attrition Reserve. Anyway – yes we do have more than 227 CR2s – and those ‘extra’ ones they will be in rag order as they are not in the active fleet, so won’t have been maintained and many will have been cannibalised, evern though cannibalisation was always a method of last resort to secure spares. The conversion process has started at RBSL… Read more »
Best use for any spare CR2’s is what they were built for, shooting at Russians. And we get up to date info on the viability of the CR3 upgrades.
I fully agree we must send more than 14 CR2 tanks (at least another 21, so that UA has enough for a Type 31 battalion and 4 for an Attrition Reserve). Those in the active (227) fleet will be in better condition and will need much less prep work than those in the inactive fleet.
How non-operational is ‘non-operational’ purchance? Could envision a large variation in actual conditions.
Prince of Wales with embarked F35s would be really able to loiter in the area!
One thin g that is not being talked about are the recovery vehicles. These are much heavier tanks than those that Ukraine have so i hope West are also supplying recovery tanks.
Yes read today the US would be including the support vehicles required for Abrams, I assume it will be the same with any supplied tanks as a package.
Also read today that none of the Abrams the US will be sending has DU armour. Apparently there is an export ban on such Abrams much like the F-22 Raptor which also can’t be sold abroad. Which brings me to our C2s. I realise there has been virtually no investment made in the vehicle effectively since it entered service but the Dorchester armour is still highly regarded and is apparently still secret. Should we be concerned if one or more fell into Russian hands (re: reverse engineering it) or has modern Western tank armour progressed beyond Dorchester such that it… Read more »
The US shipped 20 or so of their big Oskosh tank transporters towards the end of last year. These 60+ ton tanks won’t be thanked if they collapse bridges.
Mmm bridges falling down due to tanks moving up to fight the Orcs or waiting for said Orcs to knock them down! Take your pick.
On the contrary, Ukraine seems delighted with the addition of these tanks. Perhaps it’s the Kerch bridge that you refer to ?
I hear we are supply 2 x CRARRVs. Also need to think about tank transporters that can handle weighty western tanks.
Indeed Graham.
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/01/uk-reveals-capture-of-russian-equipment-instructs-industry-to-develop-new-countermeasures/. On the face of it we are are due an updated defence review.
Following 9/11 there was a New Chapter written to update the previous Defence Review.
Many, including me, would consider the Russian invasion of Ukraine (ie in Europe) also justifies an update.
Some more positive news and hopefully a chance to consider some additional options too!
2023.01.17
“Business leaders and engineers from five defence companies in the U.K. visited the manufacturing facility of the world’s most proven K9 Self-Propelled Howitzer (SPH) in South Korea to progress plans to compete for the U.K. Mobile Fires Platform (MFP) programme.
The companies include Lockheed Martin U.K.; Leonardo U.K.; Pearson Engineering; Horstman Defence; and Soucy Defense. Hanwha is leading the team to bid for the MFP programme aimed at procuring up to 116 self-propelled guns for the British Army.”
Ben Wallace has announced that we are looking at gaining an interim solution for the MFP programme. Most commentators have taken this to mean we are negotiating to get older K9 models, then will build new updated ones in the UK to replace them. Good if true, particularly on the back of the M270 announcement. It is the one area the British army seems to be getting on top of.
And even better if we signed up for these too! Hanwha Defense to supply 288 K239 Chunmoo MLRS with rockets to Polish army The K239 Chunmoo multiple rocket launcher was developed in 2013 by both Hanwha Corporation and Doosan DST to replace the aging K136 Kooryong: the rocket was developed by Hanwha and the launcher by Doosan. The Chunmoo carries two launch pods able to fire different calibers of rockets: it can fire 130mm non-guided rockets (20 rockets in each pod), 227mm non-guided rockets (6 rockets in each pod), and 239mm guided rockets (6 rockets in each pod). The 130mm… Read more »
AS-21 Redback IFV in Poland – All Fieldtest Recordings – Hanwha Defense
These wouldn’t have gone a miss either.
And they can get orders completed quickly!
“Under the framework agreement, the first batch of 18 Chunmoo artillery systems and ammunition will be delivered to the Polish Armed Forces in 2023, complimenting the large buy of K9 Self Propelled Howitzers announced in July this year.
The first batch of 24 K9 howitzers were rolled out on October 19 at Hanwha Defense’s factory in Changwon, about 300 kilometres southeast of Seoul.”
Excellent. Wallace delivering the goods….again. He probably should be our PM. Much better then Sunak/ Hunt. Although I’d hate to see him leave MOD.
Although positive news, it’s unlikely the proposed number are sufficient to support a sustained Ukrainian counter offensive , scale is required. I trust larger numbers will follow shortly (particularly from the USA).
I’m of the view the West should supply combat jets as well. Just putting this out there ad a thought – imagine a sqn or two of F35As deployed against the Russians.
No way but if Germany would like to put some Tornados in the mix, the Dutch add some F16 and we stick in some Apaches then…….. life gets a bit tasty.
let’s hope so ABC Rodney 👃
let’s hope so Wolf!
That would be a large escalation, wouldn’t it? Even more than tanks. What would you do about the S300 batteries in Belarus? If you attack Belarus first, SEAD/DEAD, might it get involved in the war more actively, or do you wait and hope they won’t want to use the missiles against planes? I think you’d have to attack first to try and create air dominance over at least Western Ukraine, and hope Belarus don’t start sending in troops. You’d also have to attack more into Russia itself, which plays into Putin’s narrative. I think saying, I don’t care about Putin’s… Read more »
Why would Ukraine focus on attacking Belarus? Do they want war with another neighbour?
I doubt Ukraine would attack targets inside Mother Russia -Putin’s response would be disproportionate.
F-16s are more likely – cheaper and more stocks, less complex to maintain.
Are we even able to manufacture more challies? It’s been so long since we made them that I would imagine the machine tools have been scattered to the winds.
The blueprints/CAD files were definitely kept. The next question is what happened to the assembly jigs. If these were scrapped then new ones will need to be manufactured. Even if the jigs are in storage somewhere. Restarting an assembly line will not be quick. As not only do you need to get in place all the supply sub contractors. But perhaps just as importantly, are the people who built the last batch of Challengers still around? Getting a workforce to build from scratch with no experience of the product again is going to take time. A second option is a… Read more »
Have a bit of faith, there are bound to be workers out there who can help or advise. But we still do have some companies who would step up to challenge. And one that springs to mind is 100% U.K owned and still builds big land based heavy machinery. They are also rather patriotic.
JCB !
True, plus they do have a “track” record for heavy machinery. Sorry couldn’t resist! Though they have built a tank in the past. Sadly, it was a WW1 Mkiv/v replica for Guy Martin. Think Defence have an interesting post on UK manufacturers who are still in the game of supplying components for armoured vehicles. The main one missing from the list is a main gun manufacturer. Surprisingly, there is still a department within DSTL that investigates armour. So I do expect them to have researched a MBT suitable armour that is post Dorchester. Plus Tata steel in Wales still produce… Read more »
Great points and I wonder if we should just carry on with present CR3 upgrade programme (add some number). And have a long hard look at what sort of future military we actually want / need. With Poland just deciding to acquire by far the largest conventional armoured force in Europe do we need Heavy Armour of our own ? Or just enough to push through and hold if necessary ? What are we really good at ? What is essential to our needs ? How can we best support alliances with impact ? IMHO the answers would be :-… Read more »
We have used tanks in kinetic operations far more than many other platforms you could care to name. We have used our tanks a lot in the last 20/30/40 years. We would not give them up just because Poland is buying a lot. All significant NATO countries should contribute strong mechanised/armoured forces to the defence of eastern Europe and not just rely on the Poles – that is what collective defence requires. We will have just a single heavy/medium division – with a grand total of just 2 tank regiments (112 tanks in all) in it. We are not over-investing… Read more »
If re read my post I said we should increase the number of CR3’s which will give us 20 years service. But we have to see what lessons we learn from the present conflict and assess for the next generation. The entire History of Warfare one of supremacy followed by rapid obsolescence. I just look at History and every weapon that has been heavy and armoured has eventually been made obsolete by something smaller, cheaper and easier to deploy. Armoured Knight – Long Bow Wooden Walled ships of the line – rifled guns Battleships and Cruisers – Aircraft, Bombs, Destroyers,… Read more »
Interesting. There is a different take on this: Armoured Knight (cavalry) ultimately replaced by the much heavier armoured recce vehicles and tanks. Wooden ships replaced by armoured steel ships. But I take your point – since WW1/WW2 ships have gone from being armoured steel and with armoured decks to paper-thin steel. Is that progress? Granted that sensors, weapons, and tactics have changed over time, which may have made armoured ships less important. But is this example translatable to the land arena? What would make a soldier equipped with an exceptionally well armoured vehicle relish losing that armour protection? For all… Read more »
I am not saying get rid of tanks yet, in fact I said I’d replace what we have with New ones that reflect lessons from the present conflict and some more of them. And then reflect long and hard on what next. I really appreciate your point of view based on being in a Land Rover in BAOR. But there are 2 Historical lessons we always forget. 1 No weapon system or defensive structure has ever been constructed that didn’t end up being defeated by a better offensive weapon. Heavily armoured warships taken out by relatively cheap torpedoes, mines, bombs… Read more »
I agree that tanks are still needed on todays battlefields against armies that have tanks themselves. CR3 should fully be in service in 2030 and may have a 20-30 year service life. So we need at some stage (perhaps in 2040) to see what should be the follow-on. Whatever it is, it should be able to fill the roles of the tank – deliver shock action; support assaulting infantry with large calibre direct fire in order to seize and hold ground; to destroy enemy medium and heavy armour and strong-points. Drones are not a replacement for the tank – they… Read more »
In 1930’s to 40’s , many tanks had 20 – 37 mm guns , the “its not a tank ” brigade would be outraged lol!
Too true. Crazy to think that at the start of the war the 2 pounder was the epitome for anti-tank work. Whereas by the war’s end, a period of nearly 6 years, tanks were mounting 90, 123 and 128mm guns.
KADDB could refurbish the CR1s if given money.
Are they the ones who designed the unmanned turret for the Chally 1?
Yes, the Falcon turret, a low profile turret incorporating an autoloader which reduced the crew to 3, with commander and gunner somehow being accomodated in the hull.
But not implemented due to budget shortfall – Jordan is not a wealthy country.
KADDB is a slick operation – they could easily refurb the CR1s if given some money.
Cheers Graham. The Falcon turret is an interesting concept. I guess the commander and gunner sit on the turret basket floor. Looking at the picture I would imagine that situational awareness is much like the T14. Where it has to rely on cameras for an all round view. Still not convinced this is the next evolutionary step.
Israeli tank commanders years ago often refused to command ‘closed down’ ie with hatch shut and looking out through periscopes… so they could have that head-out situational awareness – they had a very high casualty rate.
Even today, not many tank commanders would like to get SA by looking at multiple TV screens whilst sitting low down in the hull.
The Government would have been offered to pay for the storage of jigs, with warrior they declined and so they were scrapped. I expect it was the same case with CR2 jigs !
What a waste, if true!
Why would we want to manufacture more Challys (I presume you mean CR2s?). To beef up the BA or to supply more to Ukraine?
The CR2 production line closed in 2002, over 20 years ago. Manufacturers do not keep jigs and specialised tools for over 2 decades after last use.
Hope all these tanks have some good air cover provided especially against against kamikaze loitering type drones. Less publicity about numbers and where they come from and when and where they’re going. Next stop, the Asov sea! Strength to Ukraine 🇺🇦, it’s people, it’s forces and President!
*just one…”against”!
I’m not sure publicising where they are going is such a good idea. I’m willing to wait and see.
Virtually no air cover.
Well if you got out more you’d know that is next on Mr Z’s wish list. Don’t worry we have uncorked the bottle so just wait a wee while. The Dutch may take the lead on uncorking that bottle.
I’m talking more about Stormer, Gepard type ground to air cover. Hopefully plenty of this.
Who the Russian Nazis, yes agreed, good comment!
Unless the suicide drone has the equivalent HE content as a 155 shell. It will do little damage to the crew except knock them about a bit. If however, the drones have a HEAT warhead, then the tank and crew will definitely be in trouble. Which why it will be necessary to have either the Gepard SPAAG or Stormer HVM in close support.
Did they ever consider a RWS on top of the CR2/3s? I believe the latest Abrams has a 30mm on the turret which seems a bit clunky but extra fire power none the less.
Yes, trials were done at Bovington on “Megatron” using a RWS mounting a GPMG. It fitted near to the loaders hatch. There’s some images if it on the web. Not seen one fitted as standard TES though!
one of the most interesting questions to me is – how will these tanks be operationally deployed. the Chally’s in particular use distinct ammunition types.
One could therefore postulate that they could be used as a distinct heavy tank company (analogous to ww2 tiger1 tanks in German service) to reinforce standard Ukrainian armoured/mechanized units. Alternatively, they could form the core of a small but powerful battlegroup – say with a permanent complement of supporting arms (say a company of T-series Ukrainian tanks plus supporting arms – mech inf, AA and engineers etc).
\
Very good question. First they have to decide where. For a start it is 5-700 or so miles to a front. They could choose to use them as part of defensive lines in the west, say Kiev. Wherever they put them, given the unique ammo, it makes sense to use them, as you suggest, in a group.
I suspect it will depend on how many Leopards actually get delivered. For Ukraine the Leopard is probably more important. As there are more in Countries closer to them. So there’s more of a possibility of them arriving in numbers sooner. As good as the Abrams is, Ukraine will not be getting the full fat version with the depleted uranium armour. As the US has stated this is secret. Unless the US relent, they will be getting the export model as used by Egypt and Saudi. Which uses the Chobham style composite armour. My thoughts are that both Challenger and… Read more »
Understand your points. Tho the Chally would be particularly useful tactically to provide targetting and long range overwatch to a force of T-series tanks in an independent role. And it has fantastic bunker buster capabilities using HESH of course.
Hi Oldy, totally agree about HESH. My thoughts were that both the Abrams and Chally have their relative disadvantages in regards to fuel consumption and 2 piece (3 really) ammo respectively. Which means their logistical tails need to quite close to make sure they can maintain being in the fight. Both tanks are excellent defensively, being able to outsee and out range Russian tanks. By putting them near Kyiv, they can protect against a possible 2nd invasion by Russian from Belarus. Plus agree they would be ideal providing overwatch for Ukrainian T series tanks. There is a general consensus that… Read more »
Leo 2 and Abrams use distinct ammunition types too – Ukraine currently has no tanks with 120mm smoothbore cannon.
I think the numbers supplied will dictate the structure. The 31 US Abrams are best being in a single tank battalion – for example.
I still think the M60A3 is a better fit for Ukraine. It is closer to the T62/T72, the Ukrainians are used to. Many countries still have large numbers of M60A3 in service/storage. They could be bought or swapped for more modern tanks. Egypt alone is reported to have over 800 M60A3 in storage. We need to get 300+ M60A3 to Ukraine ASAP.
It was first fielded in 1959. Its a bit of an old dog.The M60A3 tank achieves a maximum cross-country speed of 10mph to 12mph and up to 30mph roadspeed – thats really slow. It has only a 105mm gun – we Brits stopped using the 105mm cannon in 1966 – could that penetrate frontal armour of Russian tanks operating in Ukraine? Older models are better than newer models but it would be the older ones that would be offered up, probably. Could possibly be used in a defensive role, hull-down, and might get lucky with shooting into the flanks of… Read more »
The USMC & Saudis used their M60A3 with success against Iraqi T72 in the 1991 Gulf War. Ukraine needs 300+ tanks ASAP to stop Putin’s Spring Offensive. M1 may take a year to sort out training & logistics. Ukraine needs something simpler in the mean time.
Russians are using upgraded, uparmoured T72s from those seen 32 years ago in GW1 – and the 105mm on M60A3 may not punch through the frontal armour.
But I take your point that it helps UA meet the expected Russian spring offensive.
That uparmour has not done the T72 any favors considering the many photos of destroyed T72 in Ukraine.
Good point. Tanks with ERA can be defeated by tandem warheads. Uparmouring is often restricted to the frontal arc and much of the sides – tanks remain vulnerable to Overfly Top Attack (OTA) munitions and muitions dropped from drones.
Yeah they have been sitting in front of every American legion Post for about the last 30 years. . You’re a little late
The M60 would not drive to Moscow. They would only drive a few miles to protect key sites in Ukraine from Putin’s Spring offensive. They would not be in service forever. Just fill a gap for this year.
Don’t bother with him, he just posts derogatory anti UK chuff as his new baby uses British Army acronyms with a Cockley accent…..he is a little confused and angry!
Cockley should read cockney, but he knows what I mean.
AB, I quite like Cockley, can I reuse it?
You may of course! Try to get it into day to day conversation 😂👍
Keep applying for the US green card my little US fetish fan boy.
Hopefully the Ukrainians will secure the numbers to form an heavy armoured brigade and only employ these assets in mass and not penny package across multiple zones. The location of these vehicles will be a key ISR task for Russian intel and my concern re their employment is their unique signature will be a combat indicator of future intent hence unless a very sound deception plan is developed they could be defeated before critical use.
Good Day!
What about 500 Challenger 3 or Leopards for the British Army!
Comments appreciated Ladies and Gentlemen!
Mit freundlichen Grüßen Nick ex Middlesbrough
We didn’t even buy 500 tanks in the 1980s – we bought 420 CR1s (repaced by 386 CR2s from 1998).
We have ordered CR3s – don’t want to pull the plug – stick with that but just increase the order to about 200-225.
Methinks all this open talk about supplying Ukraine with ranks is likely to encourage Russia to launch its up coming offensive sooner than later. They’re not going to wait for the new tanks arrive!
The West should have done it more on the quiet and sooner. Hope this all works out in Ukraine’s favour and they can well and truly push the Russian forces back and out of their territory for good!
*with tanks not ranks… Lol 😁
Putin could launch 2 Spring offensives – the first one in line with the awful anniversary of the invasion (& before western tanks arrive) and the second one when he has got his 300,000 conscripts trained and equipped.
I hope Ukrainecan take more first steps and re-gain grounds before the Russian’s come again. No need to broadcast what we’re supplying and then what they’re doing in advance. There’s a bloody war on, let their bullets, missiles and shells do the talking. Hope one day soon Ukraine can bust through to the Asov sea east of Mariupol, hold that, and then reclaim westwards all the way to the Crimea. Strength to Ukraine 🇺🇦, its people, armed forces and their President! Whatever the true causes of this conflict are and maybe they’re no real saints in either camp, but Russia’s… Read more »
has there been any indication he has the resources to launch any offensive? Surely with all the NATO assets flying about any build up would be spotted well in advance and more than a few of these longer range rockets will really spoil their day.
Any signs of a coordinated all arms attack with multiple breakthroughs has not exactly been the Orcs speciality has it?
Putin would still launch a grand offensive even if such troops were spotted – you don’t stop military operations because the enemy has recce assets. Back in Jan/Feb last year the buildup of Russian forces was spotted but opinion was divided as to whether he was mad enough to launch an attack. We spotted the troops; he still attacked. Things are different now of course. Has he the resources? – he called up 300,000 men a few months ago and they are under training. It is rumoured that he is about to call up very many more, perhaps another 200,000… Read more »
Your right but this time there is no will he won’t he! Unless he has held back his best tanks what will they come with T62s etc.Recce and ISTARS will know exactly when they are coming and where! Have they managed the art of logistics overnight?
I’m sure these babies will be hitting troop concentrations hard as well!
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-kyiv-officially-getting-long-range-rocket-boosted-bomb
Have they also managed the art of deploying in all-arms Battalion Tactical Groups (or BGs as we would say)?