Dejin
22112
According to the US, it’s all about the money and power for the head of Wagner:
Grifman
22113
Heh, my bad, should be Soledar, I think :)
Grifman
22114
Next US aid package, heavy on mobility and artillery. Along with Bradley’s, Ukraine is getting more SP and towed artillery:
This really isn’t true. Hoplites - the main contigent of the Greek armies - were land owners. No one else could afford the panoply of war. The amount of property that soldiers owned fell as states mobilized more and more troops (and I guess mercenaries - of which there were a lot - could be considered the “poor”), but even during the Hellenistic age the main requirement for becoming a soldier was still that you were a citizen of good standing (Seleucid and Egyptian monarchs largely drew the core of their armies from colonies of Greek settlers). Outfitting people who did not identify with your cause (such as the poorest and slaves) in any great numbers was always fraught with danger - as the Ptolemies discovered when they tried to use the Egyptians in a phalanx.
The same was at its core true of the Roman army, and it didn’t really change much until Marius who abolished the property requirements. But - especially after Augustus - it can probably be discussed how much of a “poor mans” army this really was. Service in the legions was reserved for citizens (which remained a select group for >200 years), and both service in the Legions and in the Auxilia were pretty good careers (with people who were literate preferred, having to undergo intellectual, physical and legal exams to even get in). It seems quite unlikely that the very poor - although eligible - would have much chance of getting such opportunities. Especially not among the Auxilia (with the price of citizenship at the end)- those cushy opportunities would (and were) reserved for the upper and middle class of non-citizens.
The picture gets muddied a lot during the later Empire when conscription is increasingly used to fill the ranks, but even if the proportion of poor(er) soldiers may have increased, there was never a universal shift to “poor” soldiers. Many recruits were “military career” families (not unlike Hellenistic armies) - something that eventually got enforced through conscription.
Generalization on this scale never makes sense, but broadly speaking this isn’t true either. The Greeks and Romans did not invent “citizen armies” drawn from the farm-owning class; this was the basic rule for almost all civilizations throughhout history. Yes - poor people have fought throughout. But until recently, armies always contained large numbers of what (by the standards of their day) would be termed “middle class” people, for the simple reason that most cultures considered that “better status” = “better quality” (the idea that someone who is rich is a better class of person didn’t originate in Modern Capitalism). And for most of history that was actually also true - someone who was richer, would generally have better equipment and better training than someone who was poor (and also had much more to lose if they lost). So not only did they believe this (elite soldiers = richer soldiers) - it was also at least somewhat true. And that basic calculus doesn’t really change until the era of gunpowder.
Oh, shame. I was busy concocting a fable about the lonely Spanish enclave there, something Garcia-Marquesian enough to be crazy and believable at the same time.
schurem
22118
oh boy oh boy vatniks gonna get it now!
abrandt
22119
Hopefully in an effort to avoid being outdone by those stinky Europeans the US will soon announce we’re sending 50 of our super secret hover tanks.
Are they talking about sending the A7s?
Janster
22121
Well, the pro-russia crowd are all giddy with new breakthrough info, I don’t know how bad it is, doubt its a lot, but I think we’re going to see a lot of aggressive pushes from Russia now, Ukraine says they lack about 700 IFV but I think they have enough tanks…
However I still think this is an artillery showdown and I’m hoping Russia is running out of ammo now as their offensives from now on will depend on that stuff.
jpinard
22122
It’s got to be really hard to properly integrate so many different systems into a cohesive force.
Janster
22123
Yeah I wonder if they are able to use the Bradleys laser targeting stuff to direct their artillery…
Otherwise, integration isn’t hard, you just use their basic functions…
Houngan
22124
Seems like two things, one is AFV tactics which should transfer between the platforms, but the other is keeping them running and training the teams and keeping the ammo straight.
Keeping Bradleys and Marders and 10RCs or whatever going is probably not that bad. Something like a Leo 2 might be a bit dicier, but it’s a big ass diesel I think, so not terribly unfamiliar. Abrams with its turbine would be a bitch though.
ShivaX
22126
Turbines are such a bitch that Russia developed them and then pretty much immediately stopped using anything that had them and made the same tank with a diesel.
Janster
22127
I think the T-80 U uses turbine engine…they built a lot of them, but they are hard to keep fueled, just like the M1…
I don’t think the M1 or the T-80 are good for Ukraine…as fuel shortage would be a constant problem.
My concern too. I understand not only EU countries were happy to get rid of Warsaw Pact equipment, but also Ukrainians know how to use it. I don’t know, maybe all tank controls are the same so training is not an issie, but supply will probably be hard.
Dejin
22129
Maintenance and parts supply seem like they’d be a real mess too without standardized equipment. Does anyone know if any parts other than ammunition are NATO standardized on vehicles and artillery?
Jaws_au
22130
There are hundreds of NATO Standards for various things (called STANAGs), like map markings, how to do aerial refuelling, crypto, aircraft power receptacles, etc. Not a lot are for regular parts of a vehicle unless they have to interface with something else.
That said, Ukraine are part of the NATO (plus guests - we use it here in Australia too) Stock Number (NSN) system, which means that all the parts you need to repair and maintain your Leopard 2 or HIMARS or whatever will be identified with a unique NSN, which you can then order through your military supply system. So while a Bradley and a Leo 2 might not have any parts in common, the way to identify and order those parts is the same.
Now that whole system doesn’t mean there are spare parts available on the shelf, but I’d imagine all these aid packages are including big bundles of spares to fill the Ukraine warehouses. Someone from an actual NATO country might also know whether the system allows for fulfilling demands from other countries stock holdings… not something I’ve ever seen happen in Australia but it’d make sense in Europe…
It is doable. For a long time Israel had trouble procuring arms, which meant they had to sort of mix and match everything where they could get it, and Ukraine is basically Israel at this point, right down to the whole facing down greater militaries, and making daring operations and what not.
