SamjamAg said:

---

deddog said:

---

Seriously though, obviously the Leopard is superior to anything currently in that theater. Is there any significant advantage? Its not like there have been many tank-to-tank battles.
Better survivability for offense operations against areas still in Russian control?

It will be an amazing morale booster for sure.

---

Anyone know the answer to this question along with the number of tanks committed?

---

at the levels they were discussing during the Ramstein conference last week the numbers of tanks to be provided will not be decisive on the battlefield.

two or three companies of Leopards are not going to change the strategic situation

what the Ukes are attempting to do is get their foot in the door of more and more advanced equipment, and hope that by next year there is a regular flow of MBTs to Ukraine to offset their Russian equipment.

even the optimists are predicting this war will continue another year.

Better protection, more accurate targeting, better optics and sighting, especially at night, independent commander viewers allows for hunter killer operation and better situational awareness. Operating with supporting armored infantry and adequate engineering vehicle support, these vehicles will allow a powerful combined arms force that will allow rapid assaults that the Russian forces should not be able to adequately resist, with proper cooperative and integrated operation.

Alternatively on defense, any Russian attack that comes out in the open on the attack should be easily repelled by quick detection and accurate targeting.

These vehicles, used in concentration with a more western doctrine, should allow for Ukraine to launch attacks against Russian positions, even if there are levels of prepared defenses.

GAC06 said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

Pretty sure that's a different company.

---

Where does it mention the company? Maybe I'm missing it

---

The very first word.

FMV

Is the company. They make a dozen or so products as the national defense contractor of Sweden.

https://www.fmv.se/english/procurement/

Sweden's defense procurement agency doesn't "make" anything. The leopards I mentioned were mostly constructed by Bofors which would also fall under FMV.

Don't know what to tell you. The stuff you mentioned aren't listed as products on their website. The ones I listed were there and seemed relative.

It's a government procurement agency, not a defense contractor. Those are Saab and Bofors products. The tanks were a Bofors product.

Are they limited to stuff currently in production? Perhaps.

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

GAC06 said:

---

It's a government procurement agency, not a defense contractor. Those are Saab and Bofors products. The tanks were a Bofors product.

Are they limited to stuff currently in production? Perhaps.

---

Who knows. We could both be right and wrong. The article I read seemed to indicate Sweden would allow Ukraine to purchase existing Swedish products through FMV. FMV essential acts as the GC and project manages orders from creation of specs to delivery. That's why I assumed it kept it to the products list they published. I'm definitely not opposed to them getting tanks.

Just seems Sweden would just donate existing equipment in stock and the only reason to go through FMV is for equipment currently in production.

Bradley's are infantry fighting vehicles. Not tanks.

Heavily armed and tracked, but still not tanks. Different type of use (haul troops into battle and support with heavier weapons than they can carry). Except for some rare tank killer variations that I believe someone said aren't fielded anymore.

La Bamba said:

---

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

---

Sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine would be about as useful as giving them an aircraft carrier. They wouldn't know what to do with them.

AgLA06 said:

---

Bradley's are infantry fighting vehicles. Not tanks.

Heavily armed and tracked, but still not tanks. Different type of use (haul troops into battle and support with heavier weapons than they can carry). Except for some rare tank killer variations that I believe someone said aren't fielded anymore.

---

Thanks, pretty green to the diff types of military vehicles. Fascinating stuff. The Media is making it sound like Schulz is waiting on the Abrams tanks to be deployed before committing the Leopards. But if the Ukrainians wouldn't be able to use them, sounds like political paralysis.

You would think that we have been training some of their soldiers stateside on systems like the Bradley's. Now that they are in country those soldiers can train their people

Common convention is they wouldn't be a great option. Twice as big and heavy as current Soviet era tanks that aren't optimal for heavy forested / swamp northern Ukraine and Deep mud eastern Ukraine. Turbine engines completely different than current soviet diesels and guzzle fuel.

Then there's the article I posted a page or 2 back that says Ukraine Airborne troops prefer a T-80M variant that is a similar turbine engine tank that guzzle fuel due to it's size and speed. So who knows.

We've already been more than willing to backfill other countries donating their tanks with Abrams, so I doubt it's us not being willing to send them. Just more that we don't think it makes sense.

La Bamba said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

Bradley's are infantry fighting vehicles. Not tanks.

Heavily armed and tracked, but still not tanks. Different type of use (haul troops into battle and support with heavier weapons than they can carry). Except for some rare tank killer variations that I believe someone said aren't fielded anymore.

---

Thanks, pretty green to the diff types of military vehicles. Fascinating stuff. The Media is making it sound like Schulz is waiting on the Abrams tanks to be deployed before committing the Leopards. But if the Ukrainians wouldn't be able to use them, sounds like political paralysis.

---

PRIMER

GAC06 said:

---

twk said:

---

La Bamba said:

---

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

---

Sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine would be about as useful as giving them an aircraft carrier. They wouldn't know what to do with them.

---

It's not like we'd just drop off a hundred tanks and say "figure it out". They're not morons, and it's not some revolutionary technology. We'd train them and they'd use them just fine.

---

I agree. I don't know why we just don't send about 20 of them over there. I think if there was a line to cross we have crossed that months ago.

GAC06 said:

---

twk said:

---

La Bamba said:

---

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

---

Sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine would be about as useful as giving them an aircraft carrier. They wouldn't know what to do with them.

---

It's not like we'd just drop off a hundred tanks and say "figure it out". They're not morons, and it's not some revolutionary technology. We'd train them and they'd use them just fine.

---

I am more enthused about all the IFVs going in. Almost like a MIC competition on the battlefield. If my numbers are right:

• 90 100 Strykers (likely the being dropped 105 version)(amounts of 105 ammo supports this)
• 50 CV9040s variants not specified but I believe all Sweden owned had upgrades complete 2 years ago.
• 109 50 Bradleys
• TBD AMX-10RC also with 105 main gun
• 580 MRAPs
• 250 M1117s
• 1000+ Hummers

These being used to bust russian trenches both directly and indirectly by delivering INF, while able to fight off any supporting countering tanks will be quite strategic IMO. Almost in all videos in which IDF worked over trenches before UKE INF overtook, the UKES state they run out of AMMO and have to retreat to old lines. A few of these should change this. Their vulnerability of course will be to orc artillery and ATGMs with the latter being less of an issue with the suppressive capabilities of these IFVs auto cannons/MK19s/.50 cal/etc. Would love to see some 40-60MPH blitzes to the russian artillery batteries.

I believe BAE systems bought Bofors the maker of the CV90.

GAC06 said:

---

twk said:

---

La Bamba said:

---

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

---

Sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine would be about as useful as giving them an aircraft carrier. They wouldn't know what to do with them.

---

It's not like we'd just drop off a hundred tanks and say "figure it out". They're not morons, and it's not some revolutionary technology. We'd train them and they'd use them just fine.

---

I think the biggest issue with the Abrams is the dedicated support and logistics you need to field them. I know from my time at Hood that you don't realize how much support is needed for these things until you see them on the ground. A lot of that support is built into the culture of the tank branches and fostered over many years of NCO and professional development. Not sure it's something that could be whip trained into the Ukes quickly enough.

I worked with tanks a bit with LAR and saw their maintenance spaces next to ours. I thought LAV's were impressive off road until I saw an M1 just cruising across the desert and 2-3 times our speed. It's a big deal no doubt and the power train would be new to them. Also they'd need the trucks and fuel logistics to move them around. But it's not a completely foreign concept to them. Plus they have NATO neighbors like Poland that operate them and could help.

Leopards might fit a little better or maybe just Bradley's will be fine with TOWs. I just disagree that the Ukrainians wouldn't know what to do with them.

Leopards in meaningful numbers would take a multinational effort which is taking forever. We could equip them with a ton of Abrams easily and train them in Germany and Poland, or even here in the US.

Teslag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

twk said:

---

La Bamba said:

---

Are Abrams tanks' the absolute cream of the crop globally? Would Ukraine even know how to use them to the full capacity?

I saw this morning that Bradley tanks were rolling in...

AMERICAN BRADLEY TANKS IN POLANDpic.twitter.com/1xldJmOkIB

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) January 22, 2023

---

Sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine would be about as useful as giving them an aircraft carrier. They wouldn't know what to do with them.

---

It's not like we'd just drop off a hundred tanks and say "figure it out". They're not morons, and it's not some revolutionary technology. We'd train them and they'd use them just fine.

---

I think the biggest issue with the Abrams is the dedicated support and logistics you need to field them. I know from my time at Hood that you don't realize how much support is needed for these things until you see them on the ground. A lot of that support is built into the culture of the tank branches and fostered over many years of NCO and professional development. Not sure it's something that could be whip trained into the Ukes quickly enough.

---

Plus, Abrams is too heavy to cross most Ukrainian bridges. Not only major riverine bridges but the hundreds of highway overpasses and many of the thousands of ordinary road culverts, too. It's an unneeded planning hassle for Ukraine. NATO, for example, has spent decades upgrading European crossings to accommodate the weight of modern armor.

109 Bradley's total

https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/#:~:text=United%20States%20security%20assistance%20committed%20to%20Ukraine%20includes%3A,100%2C000%20rounds%20of%20125mm%20tank%20ammunition%3B%20More%20items

I've mentioned the article a couple of times. It read as if the T-80M variants with turbine engines were pretty similar. Is that the case?

GAC06 said:

---

I worked with tanks a bit with LAR and saw their maintenance spaces next to ours. I thought LAV's were impressive off road until I saw an M1 just cruising across the desert and 2-3 times our speed. It's a big deal no doubt and the power train would be new to them. Also they'd need the trucks and fuel logistics to move them around. But it's not a completely foreign concept to them. Plus they have NATO neighbors like Poland that operate them and could help.

Leopards might fit a little better or maybe just Bradley's will be fine with TOWs. I just disagree that the Ukrainians wouldn't know what to do with them.

Leopards in meaningful numbers would take a multinational effort which is taking forever. We could equip them with a ton of Abrams easily and train them in Germany and Poland, or even here in the US.

---

They wouldn't know what to do with them, in the sense that putting them to practical use in the field, under current circumstances, would be more difficult, and likely less effective, than other options. The Ukrainians don't want them for that very reason. The only reason it has even been discussed is because the Germans were using the lack of US tank deliveries being a justification for their holding back on Leopards.

AgLA06 said:

---

I've mentioned the article a couple of times. It read as if the T-80M variants with turbine engines were pretty similar. Is that the case?

---

No clue. I think the weight and fuel consumption would be the biggest hurdles. They already have a ton of various vehicles that must be a maintenance nightmare

I was wondering the same thing. If anything just to get Germany off their position.

GAC06 said:

---

109 Bradley's total

https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/#:~:text=United%20States%20security%20assistance%20committed%20to%20Ukraine%20includes%3A,100%2C000%20rounds%20of%20125mm%20tank%20ammunition%3B%20More%20items

---

That's almost an ABCT's worth of Brads.

Waffledynamics said:

---

Wouldn't this risk Poland's ability to get more stuff?

Quote:

---

We will apply to Germany for permission to send Leopards to Ukraine, but even if there is no such consent, we will hand over the tanks as part of the "small coalition" - said Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki

---

https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/23-january-we-will-apply-to-germany-for-permission-to-send

---

Germany gets plausible deniability. They can protest openly (to appease Putin) and quietly wink at Poland for the go ahead.

We haven't checked in with the Belarusians in a while

A bit of random Belarusian chaos, enjoy pic.twitter.com/oLo0h5PDqY

— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) January 22, 2023

I'd love to see the reaction if some mid level officer tried to tell our SF to do something like that.

Doc Holiday with the patronizing gun twirl routine comes to mind.

GAC06 said:

---

109 Bradley's total

https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/#:~:text=United%20States%20security%20assistance%20committed%20to%20Ukraine%20includes%3A,100%2C000%20rounds%20of%20125mm%20tank%20ammunition%3B%20More%20items

---

Thanks even better. Looks like I confused the first 50 promised on 1-6-23 with the latest.

I also missed the 580 MRAPs & 250 M1117s along with 1000+ Hummers. Hopefully a significant number of them are equipped with decent armament. No sane person will be trying to aim an ant-tank weapon when 40MM grenades are popping off all around and or everything from .50 cal to 40MM whizzing by. The CV90 40MM has antipersonnel rounds as well.

Given russian reluctance to utilize aircraft this amount of light armor is significant.

JFABNRGR said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

109 Bradley's total

https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/#:~:text=United%20States%20security%20assistance%20committed%20to%20Ukraine%20includes%3A,100%2C000%20rounds%20of%20125mm%20tank%20ammunition%3B%20More%20items

---

Thanks even better. Looks like I confused the first 50 promised on 1-6-23 with the latest.

I also missed the 580 MRAPs & 250 M1117s along with 1000+ Hummers. Hopefully a significant number of them are equipped with decent armament. No sane person will be trying to aim an ant-tank weapon when 40MM grenades are popping off all around and or everything from .50 cal to 40MM whizzing by. The CV90 40MM has antipersonnel rounds as well.

Given russian reluctance to utilize aircraft this amount of light armor is significant.

---

I guess my question is how much of that is new?

Seems like quite a bit of the lesser (non Bradley or Striker) armored vehicles were used in the last offensives. I imagine they aren't exactly cherry at this point (if still running).

Cool video showing the anti-personnel rounds from the CV-90 and some other stuff

sclaff said:

---

We haven't checked in with the Belarusians in a while

A bit of random Belarusian chaos, enjoy pic.twitter.com/oLo0h5PDqY

— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) January 22, 2023

---

About the stupidest thing . . .

Errybody was Kung Fu fightin'- Ha! ....those fists were fast as lightning...Was a little bit frightening....

Italy donates SAM system. SAMP-T