22472

Particularly the illegal ones…

2A4 is long in the tooth, but I think they have thermals, so, thats kinda cool, not all Russian tanks do, and most of their modern ones are dead, so …eh …well, thats something.

22473

Yeah, it’s one step from “No war machine of yours can survive a direct hit by a nuclear missile, which we by the way have a lot of and all are in working conditions”.

22474

The Leopard 2A4 is way beyond anything the russians can field. Besides. The machines particulars pale in significance to the morale of those who crew it, the minds who direct it and the logistics that feed it. I bet the gogols would kick major ass even with base model Leo 2’s.

22475

Just read that Germany can apparently only deliver those Leopards in 2024?? Since they are in pretty bad shape and need to be completely taken apart and reassembled…

22476
22477

I read somewhere that our MBTs are significantly heavier than the Russian MBTs, and I know you guys are all over it, but it got me reading about bogging, and it does make me wonder how much they’re gonna get out of them.

Obviously it brings awesome firepower and superior protection in a fight, but from a gamer’s perspective, you have to wonder if they would be better served with lighter, more mobile units like the French IFVs.

Those are mothballed reserves, which the Germans won’t miss as much, but it would make more sense to send battle ready ones.

Of course, given the state of the German military, maybe they don’t have any.

22478

Mobility armored vehicles depends more on ground pressure, and how it’s distributed, than on sheer weight in most cases (though obviously more weight reduces the range of terrain you can successfully navigate, especially things like bridges). The width and type of the tracks, the suspension, it’s stance (how physically wide the tank itself is), all of that stuff factors in to mobility. But, yeah, in general, a 40t vehicle can go more places than a 70t vehicle, everything else being equal. The “everything else” though is almost never equal.

22479

Definitely. What I got from my quick dive was that ground clearance and power to weight is key, and obviously engineers have thought of that. Western tanks are heavier, but they also have far higher ground clearance than Russian tanks, so it’s not a given that a Leopard will bog down where a T-80 will bog down.

But the terrain is muddy down there when you leave the road, so I think it will matter.

If they bog down, or if the Russians are good enough at digging tank trenches and blowing bridges, suddenly a bridger or a recovery vehicle is worth more than a Challenger.

22480

I’ve had the distinct impression that Western military procurement officers have looked at this war in two ways; a testbed to determine value of systems and a way to unload leftover/soon to be retired gear to make space in budgets for the new stuff.

22481

Looks like the article got pulled after the UK Ministry of Defense said this was incorrect

22482

Mobiks need a bit more training:

22483

That is an excellent point. The difference between being in that vs. a pop-off T-72 has got to be immense for moral because of survivability.

22484

Beautifully edited and perfect music selection.

22485

They are pretty sexy, it is true.

22486

Recovery vehicles, bridging vehicles, engineering vehicles–all in general worth far, far more than people often realize, for sure.

22487

especially if

22488

That guy doesn’t appear to be anyone with any special access to information.

22489

Though the scenario he lays out is at least plausible. As much as we would like to think this sort of horror can’t continue for long, humans have proved themselves capable of doing worse for longer–and even doing it to themselves.

22490

Yea, Russian officials don’t give a crap what their people think. If they think wrong they get thrown in jail.

22491

Yes, unless Ukraine can win this on the battlefield, I don’t see much changing in Russia. Even the current stalemate and failure of the SMO is to Putin’s advantage.