AgLA06 said:

---

74OA said:

---

The good news is that both DOD and Congress are finally focused on fixing the problem. MUNITIONS

---

I think this was the wakeup call we needed. DOD got too comfortable slow rolling contracts to the same groups to provide just in time munitions for steady conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. There's no such thing in a real war (and I'm not downplaying the blood that was shed in those conflicts, but it wasn't a world war or korea).

My concern is I'm hearing more and more people against the war as they see it nothing more than a money grab by politicians and the defence industry.

I don't see it that way. I see it as the best opportunity since WW2 to cripple our main nuclear threat with a large standing army without shedding US soldier blood. However, they conservative economic policy in me can see the conundrum.

---

Very much a timely wakeup call. BIG BUMP

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Yes, if NATO decisively gives Ukraine enough combat power to make Russia's war untenable, they will be forced to negotiate and from a weaker position, instead of the idea they can drag the war on until Ukraine acquiesces.

---

The war is already untenable, Russia is a dead man walking, Putin probably knows this , Putin Generals almost certainly knows this. Negotiations are not happening until Putin is removed , and the Ukes might have to come up with a middle ground on the disputed area. I know Russia took this land illegally still it could be sticking point to a negotiated peace

Update on eastern front fighting. LUHANSK

Not really. We're doing everything we can to stop them from trading with other countries with better value. They just happen to be our enemies.

interesting time lapse map


https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-timelapse-map-video-shows-how-much-russians-have-retreated-1743125

Growing rumblings about US sending tanks. ABRAMS?

I still think that with Leo on the way, makes little sense to add Abrams to the mix. Instead, send surplus Abrams to the countries donating their Leo's. This will encourage larger Leo donations, strengthen NATO and allow Ukraine to concentrate on operating Leo's with the huge advantage of close support from the massive Leo logistics infrastructure in next-door Europe.

74OA said:

---

Growing rumblings about US sending tanks. ABRAMS?

I still think that with Leo on the way, makes little sense to add Abrams to the mix. Instead, send surplus Abrams to the countries donating their Leo's. This will encourage larger Leo donations, strengthen NATO and allow Ukraine to concentrate on operating Leo's with the huge advantage of close support from the massive Leo logistics infrastructure in next-door Europe.

---

I concur. Instead of Abrams send the damn ATACAMS or better get the GLSDBs in production which are a fraction of the cost and likely more effective just lack some of the range of the ATACAMS. Send some more HARMS as well. They also need more airburst triggers, would save a bunch or rounds on orc troops in the trenches.


https://www.saab.com/products/ground-launched-small-diameter-bomb-glsdb

74OA said:

---

We should send surplus Abrams to the countries donating Leo's to Ukraine. This will encourage larger Leo donations and allow Ukraine to concentrate on operating and supporting just Leo's using next-door access to the continent-wide Leo logistics network.

TANKS

---

We also could benefit because those Abrams require spare parts, training, and may lead to further US arms acquisitions in the future.

Not too shabby considering a lot of them are in warehouses and may be eating up maintenance costs.

Obviously, ending the war in Ukraine with a Russian defeat is by far the highest priority.

JFABNRGR said:

---

I concur. Instead of Abrams send the damn ATACAMS or better get the GLSDBs in production which are a fraction of the cost and likely more effective just lack some of the range of the ATACAMS. Send some more HARMS as well. They also need more airburst triggers, would save a bunch or rounds on orc troops in the trenches.

---

This^. Game changers ... it could even be argued that Ukraine can't prevail without these weapons.

ATCAMS and GMLRS do not take and hold ground.

Imagine mauling Russia for months around Bakhmut, then slowly drawing them out in the open country beyond, then knifing an armored brigade through them in the open where range and accuracy are a premium and where there are no urban strongholds to fortify…and rolling up 100km of front in a few days.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

ATCAMS and GMLRS do not take and hold ground.

Imagine mauling Russia for months around Bakhmut, then slowly drawing them out in the open country beyond, then knifing an armored brigade through them in the open where range and accuracy are a premium and where there are no urban strongholds to fortify…and rolling up 100km of front in a few days.

---

A lesson the Russians should be very familiar with from the battle of Kursk. A tempting salient, defense in depth as the enemy tries to exploit it, a punishing counterattack after the enemy suffers devastating losses in their fruitless assault.

Yep, back when they had the surplus manpower and production and Allied suppportvto Marshall the forces to do so. Now, I don't think they could manage the same feat. Fwiw though, it would be hard for either side to hide any buildup of forces.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

ATCAMS and GMLRS do not take and hold ground.

Imagine mauling Russia for months around Bakhmut, then slowly drawing them out in the open country beyond, then knifing an armored brigade through them in the open where range and accuracy are a premium and where there are no urban strongholds to fortify…and rolling up 100km of front in a few days.

---

I agree completely and after re-reading my comment prior to yours, thought I should have included comments regarding the HUNDREDS of Heavy IFVs and thousands of light IFVs, they are getting on top of what they already have. keep jumping forward in regular artillery range jumps, which in reality is rarely a straight jump without a flank maneuver and of course influenced by geography and all the other normal combat variables....the acronym escapes me at the moment.

I have observed countless videos of orcs getting chased in/out/up/down trenches by drones, mortars, and artillery and regularly leaving their rifle. There will be no serious threat to UKE IFVs/MBTs rolling up on on an occupied trench at 30-50MPH blazing a coax or grenade launcher moments after drone & IDF fire missions have occurred. If ivan can't hold the line or even retreat with his rifle no way in hell he is going to stand up and steady aim a MANPAD.

The bigger threat will be the precoordinated russian artillery fires on their own people in the trenches and thats what the HARMS & HIMARS are for. With the range capability of the HIMARS/M270 they should be able to support 3X+ the area that russian artillery can support with one. Even said the russians have no accurate artillery on moving targets, they can only hope they get lucky with MRLS/TOS. Their most accurate weapon has been the
Lancet loitering drone and even that not always effective upon direct hits. Meanwhile Ukes have several smart munitions.

I suspect the current russian lines look like this based on the last 2 months of videos:

1. FLOT mostly conscrips/prisoners/mixed inf outfitted with RPGs/mines/maybe some heavier ATGMS
2. ARMOR line 2000-5000M behind. IFV/APC/MBTs Mortars, supplies
3. ARTILLERY line 10-18K behind. C&C/Logistics

With the long range munitions and the armor they are getting even if its low in MBT numbers they will have what they need to take and hold ground all the way to #3 and beyond as shown above. Question is will they have enough training to pull that off in coordinated combined arms effort and I think the answer is yes.

Note 1. the HARMS are for helping get recon/ attack drones deep behind the FLOT. Hell for that matter hopefully even manned aircraft eventually along the FLOT in direct attack modes.

CondensedFogAggie said:

---

74OA said:

---

We should send surplus Abrams to the countries donating Leo's to Ukraine. This will encourage larger Leo donations and allow Ukraine to concentrate on operating and supporting just Leo's using next-door access to the continent-wide Leo logistics network.

TANKS

---

We also could benefit because those Abrams require spare parts, training, and may lead to further US arms acquisitions in the future.

Not too shabby considering a lot of them are in warehouses and may be eating up maintenance costs.

Obviously, ending the war in Ukraine with a Russian defeat is by far the highest priority.

---

Well one of the reasons that the Germans didn't want to let countries send their tanks was a fear we would sell everyone ours as replacements….

amercer said:

---

CondensedFogAggie said:

---

74OA said:

---

We should send surplus Abrams to the countries donating Leo's to Ukraine. This will encourage larger Leo donations and allow Ukraine to concentrate on operating and supporting just Leo's using next-door access to the continent-wide Leo logistics network.

TANKS

---

We also could benefit because those Abrams require spare parts, training, and may lead to further US arms acquisitions in the future.

Not too shabby considering a lot of them are in warehouses and may be eating up maintenance costs.

Obviously, ending the war in Ukraine with a Russian defeat is by far the highest priority.

---

Well one of the reasons that the Germans didn't want to let countries send their tanks was a fear we would sell everyone ours as replacements….

---

Link?

Leopards and Abrams are about to get a nice taste of Russian artillery. Something they havent seen in battle yet.

TBoneAg said:

---

Leopards and Abrams are about to get a nice taste of Russian artillery. Something they havent seen in battle yet.

---

I'm sure they will chow down and ask for more

Bring on the F16s!

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-kyiv-claims-new-combat-aircraft-has-been-determined

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

TBoneAg said:

---

Leopards and Abrams are about to get a nice taste of Russian artillery. Something they havent seen in battle yet.

---

I'm sure they will chow down and ask for more

---

Well if the Leopards perform anything like the ones in Syria did against ISIS, they may have bitten off more than they can chew…

ETA reference: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/germany's-leopard-2-tank-syria-was-beaten-badly-battle-why-78441?amp

Not sure you read the article you posted, or at least took what I did from it, IED's and suicide trucks/bombs and missiles took them out, but thanks for the info. And imo, the Leopard would be an upgrade in Ukraine provided they can keep them fueled and maintained.

edit to add. Hope we find out if they are a benefit or not.

smstork1007 said:

---

Not sure you read the article you posted, or at least took what I did from it, IED's and suicide trucks/bombs and missiles took them out, but thanks for the info. And imo, the Leopard would be an upgrade in Ukraine provided they can keep them fueled and maintained.

---

Yes, now imagine what modern weapons would do.

That's a big "If"

No matter, at the end of the day it is better to have more tanks than less tanks.

It also stated that they were older model leopards and the tactics were poor with inadequate or nonexistent infantry support.
It goes on to say more modern variants have done very well in other theaters by the Dutch and others.

80sGeorge said:

---

Bring on the F16s!

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-kyiv-claims-new-combat-aircraft-has-been-determined

---

The air war is fairly static at this point, no? Just not much benefit risking air crews and frames to just lob some rockets in a general direction. At least I have not heard any real developments on this subject past HARMS missions and at least some success from that.

Eliminatus said:

---

80sGeorge said:

---

Bring on the F16s!

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-kyiv-claims-new-combat-aircraft-has-been-determined

---

The air war is fairly static at this point, no? Just not much benefit risking air crews and frames to just lob some rockets in a general direction. At least I have not heard any real developments on this subject past HARMS missions and at least some success from that.

---

I think our ISR birds would be Better and provide immediate actionable results.

I've read that Abrams are too heavy for the terrain and Ukrainian bridges. What would the US have deployed if we ever got into a kinetic fight over there? Do we have lighter tanks?

On the decision to provide Abrams, it's like Michael Morrell (former acting director of the CIA) said a couple of weeks ago if you're going to give them a weapon technology later, why not give it to them now? What's the strategic advantage of just dripping in the help?

SamHou said:

---

I've read that Abrams are too heavy for the terrain and Ukrainian bridges. What would the US have deployed if we ever got into a kinetic fight over there? Do we have lighter tanks?

---

We have bridging that can handle it but we also weren't really planning on invading the Warsaw Pact despite Russia's paranoia. The weight is a real issue but the Leopard isn't much lighter. It's 62-67 tons vs 63-72 for Abrams depending on variant

Whatever tanks they are provided, I hope we act quickly and in a quantity sufficient to equip large units and integrate with the Bradleys and Strykers the way they were intended to be used instead of being used piecemeal

Quote:

---

Belarusian army conducting training with BTR-82A APCs at the firing range near Brest

---

https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/25-january-belarusian-army-conducting-training-with-btr82a

BREAK: as well as the tanks. Germany will start training Ukrainians to use them soon. They will also include logistics, ammunition and system maintenance support

— Siobhán Robbins Sky (@SiobhanRobbins) January 25, 2023

Portugal🇵🇹 to send 4 Leopard 2A6 to Ukraine🇺🇦 according to Lisbon daily @cmjornal. https://t.co/uDhnIbCvN8

— Bernardo Pereira (@BCamposPereira) January 25, 2023

On the night of January 23-24, a special purpose group of 🇺🇦 conducted a reconnaissance raid against the rear of Russian occupiers in Nova Kakhovka area. As claimed, during the raid, 12 occupants and BTR 82A were destroyed, also a prisoner was captured.
(46.7619876, 33.2399045) https://t.co/J4nxSJCGXF

— Special Kherson Cat 🐈🇺🇦 (@bayraktar_1love) January 24, 2023

Best quality of a Leopard tank?