Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Parliament 14598]

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

hard for stuff to work when all the parts are sold for vodka.

 

And cabbage

[MillerEP 30907]

 

[SL Xpress 7609]

 

Article about the general difficulties operating the Abrams in theater, with lots of quotes from our favorite pro Ukraine retired US general, Mark Hertling:

https://kyivindependent.com/what-will-it-take-for-ukraine-to-maintain-and-operate-the-m1-abrams/

Spoiler

What will it take for Ukraine to maintain and operate the M1 Abrams?

Share

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share via Email

by Illia PonomarenkoMay 30, 2023 10:42 PM7 min read

/content/images/2023/05/GettyImages-51166390.jpg

An U.S. military's M1 Abrams tank of the 1st Cavalry Division takes up a position on a deserted street in Najaf, Iraq, on August 13, 2004. (Joe Raedle)

Listen to this article

 

 

0:00 / 10:33

1X

BeyondWords

This audio is created with AI assistance

The Ukrainian military has passed another milestone by starting to master the M1 Abrams, the top-notch main battle tank to be provided by the U.S.

According to the Pentagon, some 400 Ukrainians are training for the job at U.S. Army bases in Germany. After many months of deliberations about Ukraine's ability to operate the American tanks, Ukraine will get its first-ever Abrams crews and maintenance specialists within the next 10 to 12 weeks.

The M1 Abrams is expected to hit the Ukrainian battlefields later this year, where it will join other Western tanks.

Operating them will be a tough challenge for Ukraine, especially in the middle of a big war on its territory.

Though the Abrams is a mighty symbol of American military power, it’s also a very demanding tank that requires expensive supply chains and complicated maintenance infrastructure.

A new level

Ukraine expects 31 Abrams tanks, the size of a Ukrainian tank battalion, to arrive by fall.

For faster delivery, Ukraine agreed to get the M1A1 version instead of one of the more recent M1A2 variants, the preparation and shipment of which could be complete no sooner than 2024.

According to the Kyiv Independent's sources, the Ukrainian military expects to get the M1A1SA variant, which confirms earlier reports by U.S. media.

The SA ("Situational Awareness") variant notably features FBCB2 communications platform for tracking hostile and friendly units nearby and a thermal scope for a .50 caliber machine gun, which improves the tank's effectiveness against hostile infantry in urban warfare.

According to Kyiv-based think tank Defense Express, the fact that, against expectations, Ukraine gets the older M1A1 version of the tank is not bad news. The M1A1 SA version Ukraine will get is generally as good as the M1A2 SEPv2 modernization introduced in the 2010s, as Defense Express believes.

Under the upgrade program, the Abrams manufacturer refurbishes units to so-called zero-hour conditions, meaning all SA tanks are supposed to be as good as newly-manufactured machines.

And it's a variant widely fielded by the U.S. itself. According to the Military Balance 2023 database, out of 2,645 Abrams tanks on active duty with the U.S. Army, nearly 540 (some 20%) are the M1A1SA.

M1A1 Abrams main battle tank fires during Exercise Chong Ju at the Puckapunyal Military Area in Seymour, Australia, on May 09, 2019. (Scott Barbour)

Australia and Morocco also operate very similar variants.

However, Ukraine’s tanks will not come equipped with third-generation depleted uranium armor because of the U.S. export ban on such.

Apart from that, the United States is also providing Ukraine with maintenance equipment, particularly eight M88A2 Hercules recovery vehicles.

According to Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Garron Garn, some 200 Ukrainians are currently deployed to U.S. military installations in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels in Germany, which suggests that at least 50 Abrams crews are being trained there.

Importantly, according to the statement, the instruction course includes combined arms exercises at platoon, company, and battalion levels, which is essential for unit cohesion.

More than 200 Ukrainian specialists are also getting trained to maintain and resupply the Abrams.

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s, especially given the fact that tank-on-tank combat is sporadic in Russia's war in Ukraine.

But for Ukraine, the acquisition of Western tanks like Abrams, Leopards, and Challenger 2s, is a huge technological leap forward from its old Soviet T-64s and T-72s.

And just like other Western tank types, in combination with advanced infantry fighting vehicles like M2 Bradley or CV-90, the Abrams is expected to greatly enhance Ukrainian infantry support and breakthrough operations.

Maintenance lifelines

Even though Washington said it will provide 31 tanks, it’s preparing more crews than that, opening the possibility that it’ll send more M1s in the future, possibly even an M1A2 variant.

The Ukrainian defense community is discussing the future of Ukraine's tank fleet.

That includes the nation's long-term and post-war military development when Ukraine might need to choose between Abrams and Leopard as its new Western-made main battle tank (or keep both types).

The first, relatively small batch of M1s and its battlefield performance will show if it makes sense for Ukraine to seek and operate more of the Abrams, like its neighbor Poland, the key U.S. ally in continental Europe.

So, as though Ukrainian logistics and maintenance specialists haven't had enough headaches, they will now have to worry about keeping the 62-ton armored behemoths running indefinitely.

"When you compare the Abrams to other western tanks, it's just a very difficult task — not for the crew but for those who support it," says Mark Hertling, the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and the former commander of the 1st Armored Division.

The January decision to provide Ukraine with the Abrams came amid hot debates over Ukraine's ability to operate the tanks.

TIME magazine described the U.S. administration as saying, "the Abrams tank was too complicated, too expensive, and too difficult to train Ukrainian forces to use."

In his debates with European allies, the Pentagon, particularly Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, insisted that the Abrams turbine engine consumes a lot of jet fuel as opposed to the more savvy German-made Leopard 2 consuming more customary diesel fuel.

The Pentagon was saying Leopard 2 is much more recommended for Ukraine since it's much easier to maintain and is widely available across Europe. After all, the decision to drop the U.S. opposition and send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine was made to finally get Germany's green light on massive Leopard 1 and 2 transfers from European nations.

Yet, apart from the natural need to prepare highly-trained and cohesive crews and units, support and maintenance are the most significant concern behind the Ukrainian use of the Abrams.

"Would it surprise you if I told you that, as an armored division commander, the most important unit I had in my command was not one of combat arms units — but it was the support brigade?" says Hertling, a Desert Storm and Iraq War veteran.

"If you don't have the support infrastructure, with the mechanics, with the repairers, with the parts supply system, with the ammo and fuel redistribution, with a long line of communication, all those great 5-million-dollar-a-piece tanks aren't capable of fighting at all."

And in this regard, from Hertling's perspective, the Ukrainian military currently has shortcomings with supply chain management. This remains the biggest concern for the retired general, who is deeply supportive of Ukraine's war effort.

For instance, when it comes to engine repairs, M1s variants are powered by a singular integrated propulsion unit titled Full-Up Power Pack (FUPP), a combination of a Honeywell AGT1500 turbine engine and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

And since it's a jet engine, air filters must be cleaned every 12 hours via startup and cool-down procedures.

"All those things can be taught to the crew, but if ever they make a mistake — and they will — it blows a million-dollar engine that can't be repaired in the field," Hertling says.

"It has to be taken out of the vehicle, shipped back over the supply line, and replaced with a new engine. You can ask why can't it be repaired in the field. I guess if you have a bunch of jet mechanics in your field location where the tanks are, you could. But that's not what the U.S. military does. We pull the engine and ship it back to depot-level maintenance, and they repair both the engine and the transmission."

The same goes for multiple pieces of electronic equipment, from the commander's independent thermal viewers to ballistic computers and many other sophisticated components.

An Australian M1 Abrams tank moves along a dirt road during the Brolga Strike exercise in Townsville, Australia, on June 16, 2017. (Ian Hitchcock)

"Now you can say crews can learn all that," Hertling says.

"Yes, they can. But having been a tanker myself, what I tell you is when one of those black boxes breaks… you have to take the whole thing out, transport it back to be repaired, and replace it with another one."

In this regard, it might be good that Ukraine will get an M1A1 version that is simpler but has everything Ukraine needs.

Hertling added that the Abrams given to Ukraine are invariably aged machines, the maintenance of which becomes even more complicated as time goes by.

Years ago, as a young tank battalion commander in charge of 54 vehicles, Hertling was glad  if 90% of his tanks were fully operational. His son, who was recently also a tank battalion commander, considered himself lucky to have 80% of his M1s ready to go at any given moment.

"And he was in a location in the United States where the depot-level maintenance and supplies were located," Hertling says.

"When he broke something, the place that would fix it was right around the corner. When we're talking about supply lines in combat, it's a whole different story, especially with the length of the supply lines going into Poland."

All these challenges, along with the acquisition and support of a myriad of other Western-provided types of weapons, equipment, and vehicles, are now up to the Ukrainian command to resolve.

"From the perspective of a guy who commanded forces in combat, I know every time I was given something new, it was a pain in the ass to try and get everything trained in order to incorporate it," Hertling says.

"And Ukraine's forces have seen all sorts of new things coming their way. I know (Ukraine's armed forces general-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny) is probably pulling his hair out, of what little hair he has, to try and get everything massed together — so that he can begin a counteroffensive."

 

[Rimbo 27019]

11 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

You really give yourself away with your bullshit whinging about “mainstream media.” Only idiots and clowns and the people trying to fool them use that term. My deep suspicion is that you’ve let yourself fall so deeply in love with the smell of your own smart farts that you crawled all the way up in your own butthole. Your nostrils are so full of shit that you can’t smell that these alternative outlets you follow hoping to gain insight are just serving you straight dogshit. You’re whining about getting a hair in your soup from the mainstream while you’re licking a shit-filled ice cream cone down at the disinformation parlor and you’re proud of yourself for seeking out balance. 

[Parliament 14598]

24 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

 

Article about the general difficulties operating the Abrams in theater, with lots of quotes from our favorite pro Ukraine retired US general, Mark Hertling:

https://kyivindependent.com/what-will-it-take-for-ukraine-to-maintain-and-operate-the-m1-abrams/

  Reveal hidden contents

What will it take for Ukraine to maintain and operate the M1 Abrams?

Share

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share via Email

by Illia PonomarenkoMay 30, 2023 10:42 PM7 min read

/content/images/2023/05/GettyImages-51166390.jpg

An U.S. military's M1 Abrams tank of the 1st Cavalry Division takes up a position on a deserted street in Najaf, Iraq, on August 13, 2004. (Joe Raedle)

 

Listen to this article

 

 

0:00 / 10:33

1X

BeyondWords

This audio is created with AI assistance

The Ukrainian military has passed another milestone by starting to master the M1 Abrams, the top-notch main battle tank to be provided by the U.S.

According to the Pentagon, some 400 Ukrainians are training for the job at U.S. Army bases in Germany. After many months of deliberations about Ukraine's ability to operate the American tanks, Ukraine will get its first-ever Abrams crews and maintenance specialists within the next 10 to 12 weeks.

The M1 Abrams is expected to hit the Ukrainian battlefields later this year, where it will join other Western tanks.

Operating them will be a tough challenge for Ukraine, especially in the middle of a big war on its territory.

Though the Abrams is a mighty symbol of American military power, it’s also a very demanding tank that requires expensive supply chains and complicated maintenance infrastructure.

A new level

Ukraine expects 31 Abrams tanks, the size of a Ukrainian tank battalion, to arrive by fall.

For faster delivery, Ukraine agreed to get the M1A1 version instead of one of the more recent M1A2 variants, the preparation and shipment of which could be complete no sooner than 2024.

According to the Kyiv Independent's sources, the Ukrainian military expects to get the M1A1SA variant, which confirms earlier reports by U.S. media.

The SA ("Situational Awareness") variant notably features FBCB2 communications platform for tracking hostile and friendly units nearby and a thermal scope for a .50 caliber machine gun, which improves the tank's effectiveness against hostile infantry in urban warfare.

According to Kyiv-based think tank Defense Express, the fact that, against expectations, Ukraine gets the older M1A1 version of the tank is not bad news. The M1A1 SA version Ukraine will get is generally as good as the M1A2 SEPv2 modernization introduced in the 2010s, as Defense Express believes.

Under the upgrade program, the Abrams manufacturer refurbishes units to so-called zero-hour conditions, meaning all SA tanks are supposed to be as good as newly-manufactured machines.

And it's a variant widely fielded by the U.S. itself. According to the Military Balance 2023 database, out of 2,645 Abrams tanks on active duty with the U.S. Army, nearly 540 (some 20%) are the M1A1SA.

M1A1 Abrams main battle tank fires during Exercise Chong Ju at the Puckapunyal Military Area in Seymour, Australia, on May 09, 2019. (Scott Barbour)

Australia and Morocco also operate very similar variants.

However, Ukraine’s tanks will not come equipped with third-generation depleted uranium armor because of the U.S. export ban on such.

Apart from that, the United States is also providing Ukraine with maintenance equipment, particularly eight M88A2 Hercules recovery vehicles.

According to Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Garron Garn, some 200 Ukrainians are currently deployed to U.S. military installations in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels in Germany, which suggests that at least 50 Abrams crews are being trained there.

Importantly, according to the statement, the instruction course includes combined arms exercises at platoon, company, and battalion levels, which is essential for unit cohesion.

More than 200 Ukrainian specialists are also getting trained to maintain and resupply the Abrams.

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s, especially given the fact that tank-on-tank combat is sporadic in Russia's war in Ukraine.

But for Ukraine, the acquisition of Western tanks like Abrams, Leopards, and Challenger 2s, is a huge technological leap forward from its old Soviet T-64s and T-72s.

And just like other Western tank types, in combination with advanced infantry fighting vehicles like M2 Bradley or CV-90, the Abrams is expected to greatly enhance Ukrainian infantry support and breakthrough operations.

Maintenance lifelines

Even though Washington said it will provide 31 tanks, it’s preparing more crews than that, opening the possibility that it’ll send more M1s in the future, possibly even an M1A2 variant.

The Ukrainian defense community is discussing the future of Ukraine's tank fleet.

That includes the nation's long-term and post-war military development when Ukraine might need to choose between Abrams and Leopard as its new Western-made main battle tank (or keep both types).

The first, relatively small batch of M1s and its battlefield performance will show if it makes sense for Ukraine to seek and operate more of the Abrams, like its neighbor Poland, the key U.S. ally in continental Europe.

So, as though Ukrainian logistics and maintenance specialists haven't had enough headaches, they will now have to worry about keeping the 62-ton armored behemoths running indefinitely.

"When you compare the Abrams to other western tanks, it's just a very difficult task — not for the crew but for those who support it," says Mark Hertling, the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and the former commander of the 1st Armored Division.

The January decision to provide Ukraine with the Abrams came amid hot debates over Ukraine's ability to operate the tanks.

TIME magazine described the U.S. administration as saying, "the Abrams tank was too complicated, too expensive, and too difficult to train Ukrainian forces to use."

In his debates with European allies, the Pentagon, particularly Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, insisted that the Abrams turbine engine consumes a lot of jet fuel as opposed to the more savvy German-made Leopard 2 consuming more customary diesel fuel.

The Pentagon was saying Leopard 2 is much more recommended for Ukraine since it's much easier to maintain and is widely available across Europe. After all, the decision to drop the U.S. opposition and send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine was made to finally get Germany's green light on massive Leopard 1 and 2 transfers from European nations.

Yet, apart from the natural need to prepare highly-trained and cohesive crews and units, support and maintenance are the most significant concern behind the Ukrainian use of the Abrams.

"Would it surprise you if I told you that, as an armored division commander, the most important unit I had in my command was not one of combat arms units — but it was the support brigade?" says Hertling, a Desert Storm and Iraq War veteran.

"If you don't have the support infrastructure, with the mechanics, with the repairers, with the parts supply system, with the ammo and fuel redistribution, with a long line of communication, all those great 5-million-dollar-a-piece tanks aren't capable of fighting at all."

And in this regard, from Hertling's perspective, the Ukrainian military currently has shortcomings with supply chain management. This remains the biggest concern for the retired general, who is deeply supportive of Ukraine's war effort.

For instance, when it comes to engine repairs, M1s variants are powered by a singular integrated propulsion unit titled Full-Up Power Pack (FUPP), a combination of a Honeywell AGT1500 turbine engine and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

And since it's a jet engine, air filters must be cleaned every 12 hours via startup and cool-down procedures.

"All those things can be taught to the crew, but if ever they make a mistake — and they will — it blows a million-dollar engine that can't be repaired in the field," Hertling says.

"It has to be taken out of the vehicle, shipped back over the supply line, and replaced with a new engine. You can ask why can't it be repaired in the field. I guess if you have a bunch of jet mechanics in your field location where the tanks are, you could. But that's not what the U.S. military does. We pull the engine and ship it back to depot-level maintenance, and they repair both the engine and the transmission."

The same goes for multiple pieces of electronic equipment, from the commander's independent thermal viewers to ballistic computers and many other sophisticated components.

An Australian M1 Abrams tank moves along a dirt road during the Brolga Strike exercise in Townsville, Australia, on June 16, 2017. (Ian Hitchcock)

"Now you can say crews can learn all that," Hertling says.

"Yes, they can. But having been a tanker myself, what I tell you is when one of those black boxes breaks… you have to take the whole thing out, transport it back to be repaired, and replace it with another one."

In this regard, it might be good that Ukraine will get an M1A1 version that is simpler but has everything Ukraine needs.

Hertling added that the Abrams given to Ukraine are invariably aged machines, the maintenance of which becomes even more complicated as time goes by.

Years ago, as a young tank battalion commander in charge of 54 vehicles, Hertling was glad  if 90% of his tanks were fully operational. His son, who was recently also a tank battalion commander, considered himself lucky to have 80% of his M1s ready to go at any given moment.

"And he was in a location in the United States where the depot-level maintenance and supplies were located," Hertling says.

"When he broke something, the place that would fix it was right around the corner. When we're talking about supply lines in combat, it's a whole different story, especially with the length of the supply lines going into Poland."

All these challenges, along with the acquisition and support of a myriad of other Western-provided types of weapons, equipment, and vehicles, are now up to the Ukrainian command to resolve.

"From the perspective of a guy who commanded forces in combat, I know every time I was given something new, it was a pain in the ass to try and get everything trained in order to incorporate it," Hertling says.

"And Ukraine's forces have seen all sorts of new things coming their way. I know (Ukraine's armed forces general-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny) is probably pulling his hair out, of what little hair he has, to try and get everything massed together — so that he can begin a counteroffensive."

 

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s...

Who is the moron asking THAT question?

The article reminds me how well the US Military is at combined arms tactics and such.  Just incredible.

Is the UKA getting our DU rounds?

[Rimbo 27019]

7 hours ago, blacklab said:

Mullet won't be posting for a while so lets move on and quit engaging him

[kevwun 16438]

It be a lot easier for people to stop engaging him if he didn't get to keep posting for months after he's been outed as another GRU sock.

[Rimbo 27019]

 

 

 

 

[Rimbo 27019]

 

[atomheartbevo 90649]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 

Jimbo Fisher: “Alabama should give us a copy of their playbook.”

[SL Xpress 7609]

13 minutes ago, Parliament said:

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s...

Who is the moron asking THAT question?

The article reminds me how well the US Military is at combined arms tactics and such.  Just incredible.

Is the UKA getting our DU rounds?

It hasn’t been ruled out. The Russians made a big deal out of the apparent nuclear escalation if the US sent them to Ukraine, but all I saw from official US sources was the equivalent of, “stop. You’re embarrassing yourself.”

But I did see that narrative parroted by imbeciles to one degree or another. Not even just Russian socks. A lot of folks who want to wring their hands about things they’re completely ignorant of, one of them being the dangers of exposure to radiation from depleted uranium shells on the battlefield. 

[MillerEP 30907]

 

[JesusSweatDuck 18113]

58 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

 

Article about the general difficulties operating the Abrams in theater, with lots of quotes from our favorite pro Ukraine retired US general, Mark Hertling:

https://kyivindependent.com/what-will-it-take-for-ukraine-to-maintain-and-operate-the-m1-abrams/

  Hide contents

What will it take for Ukraine to maintain and operate the M1 Abrams?

Share

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share via Email

by Illia PonomarenkoMay 30, 2023 10:42 PM7 min read

/content/images/2023/05/GettyImages-51166390.jpg

An U.S. military's M1 Abrams tank of the 1st Cavalry Division takes up a position on a deserted street in Najaf, Iraq, on August 13, 2004. (Joe Raedle)

 

Listen to this article

 

 

0:00 / 10:33

1X

BeyondWords

This audio is created with AI assistance

The Ukrainian military has passed another milestone by starting to master the M1 Abrams, the top-notch main battle tank to be provided by the U.S.

According to the Pentagon, some 400 Ukrainians are training for the job at U.S. Army bases in Germany. After many months of deliberations about Ukraine's ability to operate the American tanks, Ukraine will get its first-ever Abrams crews and maintenance specialists within the next 10 to 12 weeks.

The M1 Abrams is expected to hit the Ukrainian battlefields later this year, where it will join other Western tanks.

Operating them will be a tough challenge for Ukraine, especially in the middle of a big war on its territory.

Though the Abrams is a mighty symbol of American military power, it’s also a very demanding tank that requires expensive supply chains and complicated maintenance infrastructure.

A new level

Ukraine expects 31 Abrams tanks, the size of a Ukrainian tank battalion, to arrive by fall.

For faster delivery, Ukraine agreed to get the M1A1 version instead of one of the more recent M1A2 variants, the preparation and shipment of which could be complete no sooner than 2024.

According to the Kyiv Independent's sources, the Ukrainian military expects to get the M1A1SA variant, which confirms earlier reports by U.S. media.

The SA ("Situational Awareness") variant notably features FBCB2 communications platform for tracking hostile and friendly units nearby and a thermal scope for a .50 caliber machine gun, which improves the tank's effectiveness against hostile infantry in urban warfare.

According to Kyiv-based think tank Defense Express, the fact that, against expectations, Ukraine gets the older M1A1 version of the tank is not bad news. The M1A1 SA version Ukraine will get is generally as good as the M1A2 SEPv2 modernization introduced in the 2010s, as Defense Express believes.

Under the upgrade program, the Abrams manufacturer refurbishes units to so-called zero-hour conditions, meaning all SA tanks are supposed to be as good as newly-manufactured machines.

And it's a variant widely fielded by the U.S. itself. According to the Military Balance 2023 database, out of 2,645 Abrams tanks on active duty with the U.S. Army, nearly 540 (some 20%) are the M1A1SA.

M1A1 Abrams main battle tank fires during Exercise Chong Ju at the Puckapunyal Military Area in Seymour, Australia, on May 09, 2019. (Scott Barbour)

Australia and Morocco also operate very similar variants.

However, Ukraine’s tanks will not come equipped with third-generation depleted uranium armor because of the U.S. export ban on such.

Apart from that, the United States is also providing Ukraine with maintenance equipment, particularly eight M88A2 Hercules recovery vehicles.

According to Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Garron Garn, some 200 Ukrainians are currently deployed to U.S. military installations in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels in Germany, which suggests that at least 50 Abrams crews are being trained there.

Importantly, according to the statement, the instruction course includes combined arms exercises at platoon, company, and battalion levels, which is essential for unit cohesion.

More than 200 Ukrainian specialists are also getting trained to maintain and resupply the Abrams.

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s, especially given the fact that tank-on-tank combat is sporadic in Russia's war in Ukraine.

But for Ukraine, the acquisition of Western tanks like Abrams, Leopards, and Challenger 2s, is a huge technological leap forward from its old Soviet T-64s and T-72s.

And just like other Western tank types, in combination with advanced infantry fighting vehicles like M2 Bradley or CV-90, the Abrams is expected to greatly enhance Ukrainian infantry support and breakthrough operations.

Maintenance lifelines

Even though Washington said it will provide 31 tanks, it’s preparing more crews than that, opening the possibility that it’ll send more M1s in the future, possibly even an M1A2 variant.

The Ukrainian defense community is discussing the future of Ukraine's tank fleet.

That includes the nation's long-term and post-war military development when Ukraine might need to choose between Abrams and Leopard as its new Western-made main battle tank (or keep both types).

The first, relatively small batch of M1s and its battlefield performance will show if it makes sense for Ukraine to seek and operate more of the Abrams, like its neighbor Poland, the key U.S. ally in continental Europe.

So, as though Ukrainian logistics and maintenance specialists haven't had enough headaches, they will now have to worry about keeping the 62-ton armored behemoths running indefinitely.

"When you compare the Abrams to other western tanks, it's just a very difficult task — not for the crew but for those who support it," says Mark Hertling, the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and the former commander of the 1st Armored Division.

The January decision to provide Ukraine with the Abrams came amid hot debates over Ukraine's ability to operate the tanks.

TIME magazine described the U.S. administration as saying, "the Abrams tank was too complicated, too expensive, and too difficult to train Ukrainian forces to use."

In his debates with European allies, the Pentagon, particularly Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, insisted that the Abrams turbine engine consumes a lot of jet fuel as opposed to the more savvy German-made Leopard 2 consuming more customary diesel fuel.

The Pentagon was saying Leopard 2 is much more recommended for Ukraine since it's much easier to maintain and is widely available across Europe. After all, the decision to drop the U.S. opposition and send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine was made to finally get Germany's green light on massive Leopard 1 and 2 transfers from European nations.

Yet, apart from the natural need to prepare highly-trained and cohesive crews and units, support and maintenance are the most significant concern behind the Ukrainian use of the Abrams.

"Would it surprise you if I told you that, as an armored division commander, the most important unit I had in my command was not one of combat arms units — but it was the support brigade?" says Hertling, a Desert Storm and Iraq War veteran.

"If you don't have the support infrastructure, with the mechanics, with the repairers, with the parts supply system, with the ammo and fuel redistribution, with a long line of communication, all those great 5-million-dollar-a-piece tanks aren't capable of fighting at all."

And in this regard, from Hertling's perspective, the Ukrainian military currently has shortcomings with supply chain management. This remains the biggest concern for the retired general, who is deeply supportive of Ukraine's war effort.

For instance, when it comes to engine repairs, M1s variants are powered by a singular integrated propulsion unit titled Full-Up Power Pack (FUPP), a combination of a Honeywell AGT1500 turbine engine and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

And since it's a jet engine, air filters must be cleaned every 12 hours via startup and cool-down procedures.

"All those things can be taught to the crew, but if ever they make a mistake — and they will — it blows a million-dollar engine that can't be repaired in the field," Hertling says.

"It has to be taken out of the vehicle, shipped back over the supply line, and replaced with a new engine. You can ask why can't it be repaired in the field. I guess if you have a bunch of jet mechanics in your field location where the tanks are, you could. But that's not what the U.S. military does. We pull the engine and ship it back to depot-level maintenance, and they repair both the engine and the transmission."

The same goes for multiple pieces of electronic equipment, from the commander's independent thermal viewers to ballistic computers and many other sophisticated components.

An Australian M1 Abrams tank moves along a dirt road during the Brolga Strike exercise in Townsville, Australia, on June 16, 2017. (Ian Hitchcock)

"Now you can say crews can learn all that," Hertling says.

"Yes, they can. But having been a tanker myself, what I tell you is when one of those black boxes breaks… you have to take the whole thing out, transport it back to be repaired, and replace it with another one."

In this regard, it might be good that Ukraine will get an M1A1 version that is simpler but has everything Ukraine needs.

Hertling added that the Abrams given to Ukraine are invariably aged machines, the maintenance of which becomes even more complicated as time goes by.

Years ago, as a young tank battalion commander in charge of 54 vehicles, Hertling was glad  if 90% of his tanks were fully operational. His son, who was recently also a tank battalion commander, considered himself lucky to have 80% of his M1s ready to go at any given moment.

"And he was in a location in the United States where the depot-level maintenance and supplies were located," Hertling says.

"When he broke something, the place that would fix it was right around the corner. When we're talking about supply lines in combat, it's a whole different story, especially with the length of the supply lines going into Poland."

All these challenges, along with the acquisition and support of a myriad of other Western-provided types of weapons, equipment, and vehicles, are now up to the Ukrainian command to resolve.

"From the perspective of a guy who commanded forces in combat, I know every time I was given something new, it was a pain in the ass to try and get everything trained in order to incorporate it," Hertling says.

"And Ukraine's forces have seen all sorts of new things coming their way. I know (Ukraine's armed forces general-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny) is probably pulling his hair out, of what little hair he has, to try and get everything massed together — so that he can begin a counteroffensive."

 

Darkmode

Quote

The Ukrainian military has passed another milestone by starting to master the M1 Abrams, the top-notch main battle tank to be provided by the U.S.

According to the Pentagon, some 400 Ukrainians are training for the job at U.S. Army bases in Germany. After many months of deliberations about Ukraine's ability to operate the American tanks, Ukraine will get its first-ever Abrams crews and maintenance specialists within the next 10 to 12 weeks.

The M1 Abrams is expected to hit the Ukrainian battlefields later this year, where it will join other Western tanks.

Operating them will be a tough challenge for Ukraine, especially in the middle of a big war on its territory.

Though the Abrams is a mighty symbol of American military power, it’s also a very demanding tank that requires expensive supply chains and complicated maintenance infrastructure.

A new level

Ukraine expects 31 Abrams tanks, the size of a Ukrainian tank battalion, to arrive by fall.

For faster delivery, Ukraine agreed to get the M1A1 version instead of one of the more recent M1A2 variants, the preparation and shipment of which could be complete no sooner than 2024.

According to the Kyiv Independent's sources, the Ukrainian military expects to get the M1A1SA variant, which confirms earlier reports by U.S. media.

The SA ("Situational Awareness") variant notably features FBCB2 communications platform for tracking hostile and friendly units nearby and a thermal scope for a .50 caliber machine gun, which improves the tank's effectiveness against hostile infantry in urban warfare.

According to Kyiv-based think tank Defense Express, the fact that, against expectations, Ukraine gets the older M1A1 version of the tank is not bad news. The M1A1 SA version Ukraine will get is generally as good as the M1A2 SEPv2 modernization introduced in the 2010s, as Defense Express believes.

Under the upgrade program, the Abrams manufacturer refurbishes units to so-called zero-hour conditions, meaning all SA tanks are supposed to be as good as newly-manufactured machines.

And it's a variant widely fielded by the U.S. itself. According to the Military Balance 2023 database, out of 2,645 Abrams tanks on active duty with the U.S. Army, nearly 540 (some 20%) are the M1A1SA.

M1A1 Abrams main battle tank fires during Exercise Chong Ju at the Puckapunyal Military Area in Seymour, Australia, on May 09, 2019. (Scott Barbour)

Australia and Morocco also operate very similar variants.

However, Ukraine’s tanks will not come equipped with third-generation depleted uranium armor because of the U.S. export ban on such.

Apart from that, the United States is also providing Ukraine with maintenance equipment, particularly eight M88A2 Hercules recovery vehicles.

According to Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Garron Garn, some 200 Ukrainians are currently deployed to U.S. military installations in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels in Germany, which suggests that at least 50 Abrams crews are being trained there.

Importantly, according to the statement, the instruction course includes combined arms exercises at platoon, company, and battalion levels, which is essential for unit cohesion.

More than 200 Ukrainian specialists are also getting trained to maintain and resupply the Abrams.

It remains a question if the Abrams is superior to Russia's top tanks, such as T-90M or T-80BVM, or their workhorse T-72B3s, especially given the fact that tank-on-tank combat is sporadic in Russia's war in Ukraine.

But for Ukraine, the acquisition of Western tanks like Abrams, Leopards, and Challenger 2s, is a huge technological leap forward from its old Soviet T-64s and T-72s.

And just like other Western tank types, in combination with advanced infantry fighting vehicles like M2 Bradley or CV-90, the Abrams is expected to greatly enhance Ukrainian infantry support and breakthrough operations.

Maintenance lifelines

Even though Washington said it will provide 31 tanks, it’s preparing more crews than that, opening the possibility that it’ll send more M1s in the future, possibly even an M1A2 variant.

The Ukrainian defense community is discussing the future of Ukraine's tank fleet.

That includes the nation's long-term and post-war military development when Ukraine might need to choose between Abrams and Leopard as its new Western-made main battle tank (or keep both types).

The first, relatively small batch of M1s and its battlefield performance will show if it makes sense for Ukraine to seek and operate more of the Abrams, like its neighbor Poland, the key U.S. ally in continental Europe.

So, as though Ukrainian logistics and maintenance specialists haven't had enough headaches, they will now have to worry about keeping the 62-ton armored behemoths running indefinitely.

"When you compare the Abrams to other western tanks, it's just a very difficult task — not for the crew but for those who support it," says Mark Hertling, the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and the former commander of the 1st Armored Division.

The January decision to provide Ukraine with the Abrams came amid hot debates over Ukraine's ability to operate the tanks.

TIME magazine described the U.S. administration as saying, "the Abrams tank was too complicated, too expensive, and too difficult to train Ukrainian forces to use."

In his debates with European allies, the Pentagon, particularly Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, insisted that the Abrams turbine engine consumes a lot of jet fuel as opposed to the more savvy German-made Leopard 2 consuming more customary diesel fuel.

The Pentagon was saying Leopard 2 is much more recommended for Ukraine since it's much easier to maintain and is widely available across Europe. After all, the decision to drop the U.S. opposition and send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine was made to finally get Germany's green light on massive Leopard 1 and 2 transfers from European nations.

Yet, apart from the natural need to prepare highly-trained and cohesive crews and units, support and maintenance are the most significant concern behind the Ukrainian use of the Abrams.

"Would it surprise you if I told you that, as an armored division commander, the most important unit I had in my command was not one of combat arms units — but it was the support brigade?" says Hertling, a Desert Storm and Iraq War veteran.

"If you don't have the support infrastructure, with the mechanics, with the repairers, with the parts supply system, with the ammo and fuel redistribution, with a long line of communication, all those great 5-million-dollar-a-piece tanks aren't capable of fighting at all."

And in this regard, from Hertling's perspective, the Ukrainian military currently has shortcomings with supply chain management. This remains the biggest concern for the retired general, who is deeply supportive of Ukraine's war effort.

For instance, when it comes to engine repairs, M1s variants are powered by a singular integrated propulsion unit titled Full-Up Power Pack (FUPP), a combination of a Honeywell AGT1500 turbine engine and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.

And since it's a jet engine, air filters must be cleaned every 12 hours via startup and cool-down procedures.

"All those things can be taught to the crew, but if ever they make a mistake — and they will — it blows a million-dollar engine that can't be repaired in the field," Hertling says.

"It has to be taken out of the vehicle, shipped back over the supply line, and replaced with a new engine. You can ask why can't it be repaired in the field. I guess if you have a bunch of jet mechanics in your field location where the tanks are, you could. But that's not what the U.S. military does. We pull the engine and ship it back to depot-level maintenance, and they repair both the engine and the transmission."

The same goes for multiple pieces of electronic equipment, from the commander's independent thermal viewers to ballistic computers and many other sophisticated components.

An Australian M1 Abrams tank moves along a dirt road during the Brolga Strike exercise in Townsville, Australia, on June 16, 2017. (Ian Hitchcock)

"Now you can say crews can learn all that," Hertling says.

"Yes, they can. But having been a tanker myself, what I tell you is when one of those black boxes breaks… you have to take the whole thing out, transport it back to be repaired, and replace it with another one."

In this regard, it might be good that Ukraine will get an M1A1 version that is simpler but has everything Ukraine needs.

Hertling added that the Abrams given to Ukraine are invariably aged machines, the maintenance of which becomes even more complicated as time goes by.

Years ago, as a young tank battalion commander in charge of 54 vehicles, Hertling was glad  if 90% of his tanks were fully operational. His son, who was recently also a tank battalion commander, considered himself lucky to have 80% of his M1s ready to go at any given moment.

"And he was in a location in the United States where the depot-level maintenance and supplies were located," Hertling says.

"When he broke something, the place that would fix it was right around the corner. When we're talking about supply lines in combat, it's a whole different story, especially with the length of the supply lines going into Poland."

All these challenges, along with the acquisition and support of a myriad of other Western-provided types of weapons, equipment, and vehicles, are now up to the Ukrainian command to resolve.

"From the perspective of a guy who commanded forces in combat, I know every time I was given something new, it was a pain in the ass to try and get everything trained in order to incorporate it," Hertling says.

"And Ukraine's forces have seen all sorts of new things coming their way. I know (Ukraine's armed forces general-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny) is probably pulling his hair out, of what little hair he has, to try and get everything massed together — so that he can begin a counteroffensive."

 

[JesusSweatDuck 18113]

26 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Jimbo Fisher: “Alabama should give us a copy of their playbook.”

Mike Leach strategy.  Gotta leave some fake playbooks behind

[MillerEP 30907]

 

[MillerEP 30907]

 

[Post Oak 20568]

1 hour ago, MillerEP said:

 

Get it in while you can comrades.

[butthurt 1568]

 

 

[MissingInAction 25556]

10 hours ago, blacklab said:

Mullet won't be posting for a while so lets move on and quit engaging him

no

[Texzilla58 4792]

Leaving Putin in power is how we got to this situation in the first place. Trying to leave him in power for the sake of nuclear security is like trying to fuck a girl's pregnancy away. It just don't work like that.

Wait what are you sure?

[Parliament 14598]

Well I guess I wasted last weekend.

[YGIFS 19458]

Yeah, I gotta plead ignorance on this one.  If I had any idea that wasn't a feasible plan, I mean...nobody told me...

[Gil Bang 26240]

4 hours ago, MillerEP said:

https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1663497142051258369?s=20

 

Apaches are bad motherfuckers

[Rimbo 27019]

10 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Yeah, I gotta plead ignorance on this one.  If I had any idea that wasn't a feasible plan, I mean...nobody told me...

[The Dog 44861]

 

[Parliament 14598]

MOAR

[Viper 12220]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

 

[atomheartbevo 90649]

From that ABBA video thing...perfect, 100% accurate comment

 

[Rimbo 27019]

2 hours ago, Viper said:

[Rimbo 27019]

gimme fue

[Rimbo 27019]

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1663576873668952067?t=04FZ6HQIc1h32BcxbNLkZg&s=19

elon's folly, no embedypoop. here quoth:

Quote

These russian copelerone pyramids... it will take Ukrainians under 2 minutes to move them out of the way, as these are:  • not embedded in concrete • spaced too far apart • too small • too light

A proper dragon teeth obstacle is embedded in a giant block of concrete, with taller teeth full of steel, all of them packed tightly, and covered by a bunch of bunkers with machine guns and anti-tank weapons, plus barbed wire all over, and a minefield out front.

gimme fai

Edited May 31, 2023 by Rimbo

[Rimbo 27019]

gimme dabajabazaaaa

[956 Worldwide 35594]

I am not a drone spotter/expert—but I don’t have a hard time believing that this Moscow attack is a AFU operation.  I really doubt that they were targeting civilian targets explicitly, it’s more likely they were interferes with and shot down by RU air defenses. But I don’t see hitting military targets as their primary benefit, nor do I see the psychological impact as most important. What’s most important is that Russia is going to have to reassess and redeploy EW and AD around Moscow and other internal sites, and they’re going to have to dedicate the people trained to operate it as well. Anything that degrades or impacts their ability to use these systems in Ukraine is a W. 
 

For what it’s worth, I think the main reason Russia keeps using these Iranian drone swarm attacks is to use up as much AFU AD capacity, too. With the added benefit (to Orcs) of psychological terror.

 

[statsman 5693]

Question- suppose you are in the decision making cohort for Ukraine. You have a stable front. You have AD, but keeping missiles stocked is a constant fight. You have IFVs that you did not have before. You have the HIMARs that made such a difference last fall. You now have modern tanks. 
 
In two months you will have F-16s ready to go. 
 
Why would you launch a counteroffensive now, instead of waiting two months? This may be the deciding battle for the war. Why wouldn’t you wait until you can launch a true combined arms attack, such as your opponent has not seen before? With a little luck, you might even get air superiority, of a fashion. 
 
 

[Parliament 14598]

I've wondered that myself.  In my mind it comes down to how long we think western support will hold.  If we think the US, NATO, etc. are with us for the long haul, why not wait.  All the reasons you mentioned, and also the results of sanctions, preach patience.

[The Dog 44861]

 

[Bateshorn 9991]

I mean, borscht is delicious…..

[BamaATL 16593]

44 minutes ago, statsman said:

Question- suppose you are in the decision making cohort for Ukraine. You have a stable front. You have AD, but keeping missiles stocked is a constant fight. You have IFVs that you did not have before. You have the HIMARs that made such a difference last fall. You now have modern tanks. 
 
In two months you will have F-16s ready to go. 
 
Why would you launch a counteroffensive now, instead of waiting two months? This may be the deciding battle for the war. Why wouldn’t you wait until you can launch a true combined arms attack, such as your opponent has not seen before? With a little luck, you might even get air superiority, of a fashion. 
 
 

The window is limited because of raspustista, the mud.  My understanding is that in late Septemberish/early October it returns.  That would mean that if you were to wait 4 months for the planes that no one has agreed to yet (just training thus far, though I am sure that will come later) you'd have only a few weeks before you'd have to wait for a freeze.  Even if you got accelerated training of 2 months, and planes, and weapons platforms to go with the planes, you'd have only a brief period to accomplish anything.  There is a political element to this (which I wish didn't exist, but hey, welcome to the real world), and the Western allies will need to begin to see a return of sorts.  Because of all this, I don't think the Ukrainians can afford to wait.  

Personally, I think the F16s are looked at as end game sort of stuff by the West, additionally security assistance while going thru the full NATO acceptance.  I could be wrong on this.  Also, if they were going to wait, I don't believe they'd be tipping their hand to a degree by using things like the Storm Shadow for shaping operations.  I've long thought they will really start very late night on a Friday or Saturday, when the Russian officers are most likely to be on an overnight drunk; not to mention the night vision advantage they have.  

[Scheiss Meister 8470]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

Question- suppose you are in the decision making cohort for Ukraine. You have a stable front. You have AD, but keeping missiles stocked is a constant fight. You have IFVs that you did not have before. You have the HIMARs that made such a difference last fall. You now have modern tanks. 
 
In two months you will have F-16s ready to go. 
 
Why would you launch a counteroffensive now, instead of waiting two months? This may be the deciding battle for the war. Why wouldn’t you wait until you can launch a true combined arms attack, such as your opponent has not seen before? With a little luck, you might even get air superiority, of a fashion. 
 
 

The longer you wait, the higher the risk of having your plans get into Russian hands.  The Germans delayed the attack at Kursk to get Panther tanks into service.  The Russians got ahold of the German plans, down to the minute that the attack was to jump off, and used the delay to shape the battlefield and prepare very deep defensive positions and position reserves in the best places for the counter attack after the Germans were stopped.  From what I've seen, the Russian defensive positions in Ukraine are modeled on their positions around Kursk.

As has been mentioned, too much delay risks a loss of political will to support Ukraine in Western countries.  Lack of action waiting for F-16s and other modern jets may result in those jets never coming. 

Finally, too much delay will undercut the morale in the Ukrainian Army.  Once they get everything fine tuned and ready for the fight, it is impossible to hold that edge indefinitely.  Too much delay also sends a signal of weakness to both the Ukrainian Army and the Russian Army.

As the wise Tuco Ramirez said, "When it's time to shoot, shoot.  Don't talk."

[MissingInAction 25556]

The attack will 💯 come at night. Are there any Russian holidays coming up where they could pull their own Tet offensive?

[Scheiss Meister 8470]

I half expected it to kick off May 8, during the One Tank Parade.

[atomheartbevo 90649]

45 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Also, if they were going to wait, I don't believe they'd be tipping their hand to a degree by using things like the Storm Shadow for shaping operations.  I've long thought they will really start very late night on a Friday or Saturday, when the Russian officers are most likely to be on an overnight drunk; not to mention the night vision advantage they have.  

Also, the longer they wait, the more Russians can be mobilized, and the more chances Russia can get more supplies.

In terms of the air stuff with Moscow, I think forcing them to pull some AD out of Ukraine is huge.  And it may force them to save some S-300 missiles for air defense, rather than using them to attack civilian targets in Ukraine.

The refineries and hitting troop concentrations are huge.

[Bevo 13895]

53 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

The window is limited because of raspustista, the mud.  My understanding is that in late Septemberish/early October it returns.  That would mean that if you were to wait 4 months for the planes that no one has agreed to yet (just training thus far, though I am sure that will come later) you'd have only a few weeks before you'd have to wait for a freeze.  Even if you got accelerated training of 2 months, and planes, and weapons platforms to go with the planes, you'd have only a brief period to accomplish anything.  There is a political element to this (which I wish didn't exist, but hey, welcome to the real world), and the Western allies will need to begin to see a return of sorts.  Because of all this, I don't think the Ukrainians can afford to wait.  

Personally, I think the F16s are looked at as end game sort of stuff by the West, additionally security assistance while going thru the full NATO acceptance.  I could be wrong on this.  Also, if they were going to wait, I don't believe they'd be tipping their hand to a degree by using things like the Storm Shadow for shaping operations.  I've long thought they will really start very late night on a Friday or Saturday, when the Russian officers are most likely to be on an overnight drunk; not to mention the night vision advantage they have.  

I think you are correct.

[Bevo 13895]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Also, the longer they wait, the more Russians can be mobilized, and the more chances Russia can get more supplies.

In terms of the air stuff with Moscow, I think forcing them to pull some AD out of Ukraine is huge.  And it may force them to save some S-300 missiles for air defense, rather than using them to attack civilian targets in Ukraine.

The refineries and hitting troop concentrations are huge.

Do they have to get a lot of troops across the river before the start of the offensive? I know one of the delays is to weaken Russian defenses and test potential breakthrough points. Maybe another may be to get all the weapons, materials, and support in place but that should be done already.

[Jameslaw121 4494]

19 minutes ago, Scheiss Meister said:

The longer you wait, the higher the risk of having your plans get into Russian hands.  The Germans delayed the attack at Kursk to get Panther tanks into service.  The Russians got ahold of the German plans, down to the minute that the attack was to jump off, and used the delay to shape the battlefield and prepare very deep defensive positions and position reserves in the best places for the counter attack after the Germans were stopped.  From what I've seen, the Russian defensive positions in Ukraine are modeled on their positions around Kursk.

As has been mentioned, too much delay risks a loss of political will to support Ukraine in Western countries.  Lack of action waiting for F-16s and other modern jets may result in those jets never coming. 

Finally, too much delay will undercut the morale in the Ukrainian Army.  Once they get everything fine tuned and ready for the fight, it is impossible to hold that edge indefinitely.  Too much delay also sends a signal of weakness to both the Ukrainian Army and the Russian Army.

As the wise Tuco Ramirez said, "When it's time to shoot, shoot.  Don't talk."

Lets not forget the general moral of the Ukrainian people.  I would imagine they are very similar to the British during WW2. While moral is very high now, High Unemployment, debt, bomb raids take their toll on the people. 

[Handcruser 2815]

I think they’ll go in the next 7 days or so.

So many shaping ops in the last few weeks or so and the announcement that they are basically ready to start.

[956 Worldwide 35594]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

Question- suppose you are in the decision making cohort for Ukraine. You have a stable front. You have AD, but keeping missiles stocked is a constant fight. You have IFVs that you did not have before. You have the HIMARs that made such a difference last fall. You now have modern tanks. 
 
In two months you will have F-16s ready to go. 
 
Why would you launch a counteroffensive now, instead of waiting two months? This may be the deciding battle for the war. Why wouldn’t you wait until you can launch a true combined arms attack, such as your opponent has not seen before? With a little luck, you might even get air superiority, of a fashion. 
 
 

The F-16s are going to be good mostly because they are airplanes that fly. They’ll be better than the MiGs but they aren’t fifth gen, they aren’t stealth, and they are not likely to get shiny low-mileage versions with the latest radar. They would be unlikely to change the game incredibly— and if you think Russia is on the back foot, you strike when you can. They don’t get weaker as you wait, especially now that they’ve ground out Bakhmut and are in hunker down mode. 

[Post Oak 20568]

Great listen if you have the time.

Paraphrasing here

Ukraine is brave and bold and taking risks because they have too.  They know Russia better than any country in NATO . 

NATO would be incredibly lucky to have Ukraine. If NATO was formed to fight Russia, you should ask the people who are currently kicking their ass.

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy8zN2M3Mjg3NC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw/episode/MjAwZmZmOWMtZmVmNS0xMWVkLTgwYjUtZDNiMmMwNjg4MjE2?ep=14

 

[The Dog 44861]

17 minutes ago, Scheiss Meister said:

As has been mentioned, too much delay risks a loss of political will to support Ukraine in Western countries.  Lack of action waiting for F-16s and other modern jets may result in those jets never coming. 

 

People have been saying this and if anything Western will to support Ukraine has only increased. Yet another wrong take by people who should have known better. 

 

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Also, the longer they wait, the more Russians can be mobilized, and the more chances Russia can get more supplies.

 

This is another prediction that has so far been proven wrong. Russia's resources aren't what everyone thought (because the Russians lied about it in all of their official reports that was the primary source of intelligence). The ONLY way Russia can compete with Ukraine now is with military support from China and that isn't happening. Xi has read the writing on the wall and is acting accordingly. And they don't have the bodies to do any more "human wave" attacks because that will only increase their body count. 

Keep in mind that the recent Ukrainian drone attacks do more than just score propaganda points. It shows that Ukraine has the capability to hit targets deep in Russia and do significant damage to their infrastructure. Something that isn't being discussed enough is Ukraine's own capacity to manufacture weapons. They've already started producing their own version of HIMARS that can fire the same GMLRS rockets. Expect them also to develop drones with greater warhead capacity and range to hit targets further in Russia as well. Remember the "don't target Russia" rule was only for western supplies. They can do whatever they want with their own. 

The longer this goes the worse it is for Russia - not Ukraine. 

[morehornsepower 888]

Slight tangent - Jose Andres (WCK) speaking at work today...looking forward to this...