Polish Armoured Vehicles And Their Modernizations.

[Huba]

Or if we even get to the point of building it, first batch of 180 is to be bought off the shelf (with noticeably shorter delivery times compared to Leo2 though...).

As a side note, IMO these types of problems are an even bigger issue for any "European Army" than financing/ commanding it. There's just too many different arms manufacturers in EU, who of course are very politically connected. Making everybody reasonably happy with arms procurement for the new organization would be a daunting task, to say the least...

[Mighty_Zuk]

I've heard Nicholas Drummond's points about the K2 for Poland, particularly vs Leopard. He raised the point that Poland will be missing on a large pool of users with their own available spares, knowledge, and production.

I think at this point, with Poland set to become the largest army in Europe (barring Russia), the thinking should be reversed. Not how Poland better integrates itself with the rest of Europe, but how Europe better integrates itself with Poland.

What good is this "huge pool" of Leopard related stuff, if Poland's army alone is larger than that entire pool? It's a pool of countries whose armed forces can be primarily characterized by sheer neglect and quantities that are symbolic at best.

[Laser Shark]

It will be interesting to see if this also swings Norway in favor of the K2. The competition certainly seems a lot more open now that there is another European user (and a substantial one at that).

[Huba]

56 minutes ago, Laser Shark said:

It will be interesting to see if this also swings Norway in favor of the K2. The competition certainly seems a lot more open now that there is another European user (and a substantial one at that).

That certainly is the plan; assuming PL manages to pull it off, it will be logical that some countries will go for K2 instead of Leo. And regarding Drummond's ill conceived rant, fact that Korea is a huge operator of K2 is another reason to choose it for any European country - if manure flies into the ventilator,  there is a very substantial and very safe support base on the other side of the world,  that cannot be attacked by RU.

Edited July 31, 2022 by Huba

[Dark_Falcon]

Details on the older M1A1s Poland will be receiving.  Don't worry, Seahawk, they're still better than any T-72 or T-80 upgrade Russia can manage.

 

Poland To Field Older M1A1 Abrams Tanks

Quote

The Polish Minister of Defense, Mariusz Blaszczak, has confirmed that Poland will procure more M1 Abrams tanks. The statement comes as Poland embarks on a huge arms deal, which includes tanks, with South Korea. Poland will procure used M1A1 tanks in a contract separate from the one agreed last year for most modern M1A2 SEPv3 variant. The older Abrams variant will replace the T-72M1 and M1R that were delivered to Ukraine by Poland earlier in April this year.

In total 116 tanks will be delivered to Poland. The delivery date has not yet been disclosed, but further details have surfaced. The Polish government will not have to purchase the tanks, but it will cover the costs of maintenance and reintroduction of the vehicles into the service. The Polish Armament Group has recently secured the Abrams maintenance with the American Honeywell which produces the AGT1500 gas turbines.

 

[Domobran7]

20 hours ago, Dark_Falcon said:

Details on the older M1A1s Poland will be receiving.  Don't worry, Seahawk, they're still better than any T-72 or T-80 upgrade Russia can manage.

 

Poland To Field Older M1A1 Abrams Tanks

 

Will these have diesel engines?

[Damian]

2 hours ago, Domobran7 said:

Will these have diesel engines?

No, gas turbines, just like US, Australian, Egyptian, Kuwaiti, Saudi Arabian, Iraqi and Morrocan M1 Abrams tanks.

[Domobran7]

6 hours ago, Damian said:

No, gas turbines, just like US, Australian, Egyptian, Kuwaiti, Saudi Arabian, Iraqi and Morrocan M1 Abrams tanks.

Isn't that a problem? I recall that gas turbine is quite a gas guzzler.

[R011]

1 hour ago, Domobran7 said:

Isn't that a problem? I recall that gas turbine is quite a gas guzzler.

Apparently not enough of a problem to justify changing the engine.  There's not much trouble getting enough fuel and delivering it to tanks in the field.

[Damian]

5 hours ago, Domobran7 said:

Isn't that a problem? I recall that gas turbine is quite a gas guzzler.

Its not a huge problem. And newest AGT1500 TIGER with DECU uses less fuel than original AGT1500.

There is also APU to reduce fuel consumption.

However if US Army decides some day to replace gas turbine with diesel, we will follow most likely.

Simply being within US Army logistics chain is most benefitial.

[Domobran7]

2 hours ago, Damian said:

Its not a huge problem. And newest AGT1500 TIGER with DECU uses less fuel than original AGT1500.

There is also APU to reduce fuel consumption.

However if US Army decides some day to replace gas turbine with diesel, we will follow most likely.

Simply being within US Army logistics chain is most benefitial.

6 hours ago, R011 said:

Apparently not enough of a problem to justify changing the engine.  There's not much trouble getting enough fuel and delivering it to tanks in the field.

Thanks.

[Ssnake]

Turbine and Diesel don't consume substantially differently at full throttle. But most of the time the engine idles, and that's where the big difference comes from. But if you know you're going to idle for an extended period and you have an APU, problem solved.

[Sardaukar]

Gas turbine is also better in cold climates. It starts way faster than diesel etc.

Might not be that big difference in Poland, but one reason Russia had T-80BVMs in Arctic. Though it seems lot of them are now turretless in Ukraine...

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by Sardaukar

[Mighty_Zuk]

We can talk for years about the various differences between gas turbine and diesel, but in the end that's what the US has so that's what Poland gets. Not much choice here, for the better or worse.

Damian, with the huge number of Borsuk and AS21 planned, is there room for Rosomaks? Could they be the vehicle of choice for some elements of the territorials and some reserve production capability?

[Damian]

56 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Turbine and Diesel don't consume substantially differently at full throttle. But most of the time the engine idles, and that's where the big difference comes from. But if you know you're going to idle for an extended period and you have an APU, problem solved.

Correct. Data I found says that at full power AGT1500 TIGER with DECU uses 274g/kWh, while MT883 uses 220g/kWh.

[Damian]

4 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

We can talk for years about the various differences between gas turbine and diesel, but in the end that's what the US has so that's what Poland gets. Not much choice here, for the better or worse.

Damian, with the huge number of Borsuk and AS21 planned, is there room for Rosomaks? Could they be the vehicle of choice for some elements of the territorials and some reserve production capability?

There will be place for Rosomak or future wheeled APC/IFV codenamed Serwal.

Division structure might look like that, either 1x armor brigade, 2x mechanized brigade and 1x Rosomak/Serwal brigade. Or, 2x armored brigade, 1x mechanized brigade and 1x Rosomak/Serwal brigade.

As for TDF, I dont know if in future they will receive such vehicles. Right now they think about procuring some artillery.

Edited August 3, 2022 by Damian

[Mighty_Zuk]

48 minutes ago, Damian said:

There will be place for Rosomak or future wheeled APC/IFV codenamed Serwal.

Division structure might look like that, either 1x armor brigade, 2x mechanized brigade and 1x Rosomak/Serwal brigade. Or, 2x armored brigade, 1x mechanized brigade and 1x Rosomak/Serwal brigade.

As for TDF, I dont know if in future they will receive such vehicles. Right now they think about procuring some artillery.

Makes sense. So for territorials it might be indeed logical to base them entirely on 4x4s that everyone with a drivers' license can quickly get used to, including assets like air defense, anti armor, intelligence etc, but then also artillery. 

So mortars and MLRS can be put on light 4x4s. But are there plans for towed howitzers for them? Or tracked or no howitzers?

Edited August 3, 2022 by Mighty_Zuk

[Damian]

1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Makes sense. So for territorials it might be indeed logical to base them entirely on 4x4s that everyone with a drivers' license can quickly get used to, including assets like air defense, anti armor, intelligence etc, but then also artillery. 

So mortars and MLRS can be put on light 4x4s. But are there plans for towed howitzers for them? Or tracked or no howitzers?

Most likely towed 105mm howitzers and various types of mortars.

[Domobran7]

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Turbine and Diesel don't consume substantially differently at full throttle. But most of the time the engine idles, and that's where the big difference comes from. But if you know you're going to idle for an extended period and you have an APU, problem solved.

Yeah, but how often do tanks move at full throttle? Especially in modern conditions (ATGM says hi), outrunning infantry support is bad, so I think a lot of the time tanks will be moving at basically walking pace.

And does turbine create problems with accompanying infantry?

[Huba]

31 minutes ago, Damian said:

Most likely towed 105mm howitzers and various types of mortars.

Now that is interesting indeed, any chance you could point me to some sources? 120 and 105 sounds a bit redundant. We don’t have any towed pieces for soviet calibers, and anything SP might be a bit too much, and probably too worn off 10 years from now. But if we are to buy new stuff, why no 155?

[Damian]

59 minutes ago, Domobran7 said:

Yeah, but how often do tanks move at full throttle? Especially in modern conditions (ATGM says hi), outrunning infantry support is bad, so I think a lot of the time tanks will be moving at basically walking pace.

And does turbine create problems with accompanying infantry?

No it does not, there are photos showing infantry moving behind Abrams.

[Damian]

30 minutes ago, Huba said:

Now that is interesting indeed, any chance you could point me to some sources? 120 and 105 sounds a bit redundant. We don’t have any towed pieces for soviet calibers, and anything SP might be a bit too much, and probably too worn off 10 years from now. But if we are to buy new stuff, why no 155?

As for now there are just speculations, no hard decisions were made yet.

[Domobran7]

12 minutes ago, Damian said:

No it does not, there are photos showing infantry moving behind Abrams.

OK, thanks.

[Harold Jones]

14 hours ago, Domobran7 said:

And does turbine create problems with accompanying infantry?

Only when they cluster behind it to warm up on a winter morning.

[Markus Becker]

18 hours ago, Harold Jones said:

Only when they cluster behind it to warm up on a winter morning.