Soldato
When KRH, QRH and RTR rapid deployed earlier this year, they took 150 out of the 227 with them.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
When KRH, QRH and RTR rapid deployed earlier this year, they took 150 out of the 227 with them.
Soldato
Soldato
This will be the interesting one if Ukraine breakthrough, it will force Russia to thin there lines to cover Luhansk.
Last edited:
Soldato
Retreading old ground but this video gives a good analysis as to what happened on the Crimea Bridge last year:
This, the Ukrainians have said that their T-64s need a 3:1 advantage to kill T-90s, and the C2 is better than the T-90, if it were all about numbers then Russia would just be spamming T-34s again
TBH, the "joke" was in bad taste fifty years ago, it stopped being funny decades ago, today it's more akin to subtle racism/xenophobia than actual humour.
The interesting thing with the AT mines is, the Russian forces operating in Ukraine hardly strike as the most competent invasion force, so what are the odds they actually made any record of where they put the AT mines. Could cause them trouble as they try and mount a new offensive.
Sadly I believe we can't, the British companies that created/produced it were bought out by BAE and the ability to manufacturer them doesn't exist. This is why the upgrade to Challenger 3 is being done by BAE in partnership with Rheinmetall (Who make Leopards).
The big problem is, there is still an escalation point because Putin knows that the chances of the west getting directly military involved in the war if he were to use a few tactical nukes are very low. Yes Russia would be hit with a wall of sanctions the like of which has never been seen, yes the west would step up supplies to Ukraine and yes he would face international condemnation for it and prob lose the support of China/etc (at least publicly). But he knows the west would be extremely hesitant to get directly involved because then things may escalate further and he may start using proper nukes.
Soldato
Kwarteng didn't even attempt to lead. Leadership is bringing people with you.
Soldato
Use of any type of nuke is a big risk, that's why they haven't done it yet.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
A friend of mine who was a former tank commander during the Iraq invasion post 9/11 said the tanks we are sending are likely to be stripped to their bare bones so lacking most of the modern high tech gear we have currently, how true that is I don't know but I guess he's still in contact with people who are on the ground.
Last edited:
Associate
There is no more escalation, it's about as bad as it gets, Putin maybe dead, but if not if they were going to let him use nukes it would have been done by now.Nice bit of gas-lighting from Ukraine because apparently we aren't helping them enough.
Ukraine war: Zelensky adviser says West’s 'indecision' is killing Ukrainians
Zelensky adviser tells West to "think faster" as pressure grows on countries to send tanks to Ukraine.www.bbc.co.uk
Yet if we help them too much, Putin will see it as escalation.
Catch-22 situation.
A week or two ago it was rumoured he tried but was stopped from doing so.
Bottom line is NATO is not getting attacked no matter what they do. It would be the end of Russia, and they know it.
Soldato
The main `issue` with the T64 is modern optics. The T80 and T90 have thermal sights whereas the T64 doesnt. Both have similar gun and armour (T64B pre dates the T72B, both use the same gun) ; but as Chieftain has frequently said - its who gets the first shot off. T90 has a thermal sight and relikt ERA but the same gun . There is a video of a T64 that literally cannot see the T80 that kills it, right in front.
I think even Putin's few allies would immediately back away from him..even the nasty ones.
They don't want to dies themselves or to live in the apocalypse.
Soldato
Last edited:
Associate
I'm curious is there no such thing as tank destroyers anymore
I suppose MBT (tanks) take on that role now but just curious if they still exist
I suppose MBT (tanks) take on that role now but just curious if they still exist
Soldato
Britain considering expanding tank fleet
A review will assess whether the experiences of Ukraine necessitate an expansion of the tank fleet.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Soldato
The AMX-10RC could be argued as a wheeled tank destroyer. With the advent of Swingfire and TOW - the big main gun on a small truck, is replaced by a missile on a jeep for the same role
Permabanned
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Posts
- 9,078
i`ll ask a mate who is a current 2 stripe TC, and running around Estonia
He has told me we have a fair few tanks and plenty of infantry out there currently, probably itching to get across the border and dish out some good old fashion british justice.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2020
- Posts
- 41
To be honest, MY ideal solution would be to simply gift a brigades-worth, 150 or so, challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine. We dont need them as we have such low numbers planned for challenger 3 that in any real full-scale war they would simply cause integration and supply issues when mixed in with all the hundreds and thousands of Leopards and Abrahams. In any all-out war, our role is no longer to hold the fulda gap against the warsaw pact forces (many of whom are now in NATO now anyway) until the American cavalry can arrive but to support Norway and The Baltics with lighter forces. Germany should be able to defend itself. Aborting the upgrade to C3 would save... a few hundred millions at least which could be used to beef up other aspects of our defence portfolio, such as submarine and anti-submarine warfare, our air forces, and nuclear deterrant.
A few dozen tanks were all that were sent to Afghanistan I believe - not in an armoured warfare role but simply to patrol while being almost immune to IEDs. We could still do that with our remnant few dozen which could also be a cadre for any future expansion. It would lead us unable to join in any land expeditionary force, like gulf wars I and II, but at least in the latter case I see that as a plus. The only thing I forsee in the medium term is a defence of Taiwan, and we dont want to be going anywhere near there with land forces (or the white elephant carriers which wont last more than a week).
Historically, the only reason for us making our own tanks was for expertise and sales purposes, but since we have closed and sold off our capability for that, and BAE is basically a US company now (bigger US ownership than British anyway) why bother? The only other nation we have a land border with is Ireland... and they dont have any tanks either.
Just my two penn'orth.
PS. Slightly off-topic... but the most un-PC real unit badge ever?: Air force medic patch
A few dozen tanks were all that were sent to Afghanistan I believe - not in an armoured warfare role but simply to patrol while being almost immune to IEDs. We could still do that with our remnant few dozen which could also be a cadre for any future expansion. It would lead us unable to join in any land expeditionary force, like gulf wars I and II, but at least in the latter case I see that as a plus. The only thing I forsee in the medium term is a defence of Taiwan, and we dont want to be going anywhere near there with land forces (or the white elephant carriers which wont last more than a week).
Historically, the only reason for us making our own tanks was for expertise and sales purposes, but since we have closed and sold off our capability for that, and BAE is basically a US company now (bigger US ownership than British anyway) why bother? The only other nation we have a land border with is Ireland... and they dont have any tanks either.
Just my two penn'orth.
PS. Slightly off-topic... but the most un-PC real unit badge ever?: Air force medic patch
Last edited:
Soldato
Chatting now - he loves the British Army Standard Hotel Accommodation - yep, in the snow and cold .
Last edited:
- Status