Cold War, The Reimagined Series

[bd1]

we all here could do a lot better, spend some money etc. all in all i think that we´ve made relatively good choice with latest acquisitions - cv-9035 can kill anything except MBT´s, including little green men, provides relatively good protection for troops etc., but at really high expense. javelin buy is not as large as could be, but still it´s relatively quick way to have some serious punch. too bad we can´t afford the arty upgrade as quick , since the money is too short. croatia bought 18 pzh-2000 + stuff for 40mil. eur iirc.

 

there is some merit buying these western systems- if one looks at current events at ukraine. at least it´s probably harder to acquire cv-9035 company from vladmart than find a abandoned weapons cache full day after latest russian humanitarian convoy´s visit.

 

and about the russian superiority numbers wise - i´m not competent to judge this, but how many brigades can they press through , if the main directions are

a) st.petersburg - tallinn - just one road between lake peipsi and gulf of finland, all the rest swamps and forests

pskov-tartu-tallinn - again one road plus network of often gravel roads, through forests. i don´t think one can foresee even whole tank batallions operating here.

 

afaik currently russians are basicly trying to get the brigade battlegroups to work, that as i understand are basicly old motor rifle regiments with addit. arty etc.. couple years ago there was lots of articles how they can´t get that to work properly and have been switching to motor rifle batallion battlegroups (bmp/btr btl + mbt coy) . incidentally that is what we´ve been seen reported in ukraine - all those reports of units of afv-s crossing border are quoting relatively similar numbers

 

 

edit. of course, even if we get our land borders secure (if..), there is always latvia, our soft underbelly

Edited December 27, 2014 by bd1

[Gregory]

I can [inaudible] provide that we are fully committed to improve and strengthen our security and safety as well as defensibility by continuing commitment at development of our armed forces and the parliament of Latvia has unanimously decided on increasing their defence spending up to 2% of the gross domestic product of Latvia in the nearest years. This decision of the parliament of Latvia will be implemented for sure.

Latvian President Andris Berzins

 

I guess there has been some sort of movement - Latvian defense budget for 2015 has been increased by ~40 mln euros, which in percent terms is about 20% rise from 2014. The purchase of 123 ex-UK Scimitars (and variants) should start arriving in early 2016. From Norway, Latvia is buying 800 Carl Gustaf as well as 50 Scania trucks and 50 lightly armed Mercedes Benz vehicles (might be UNIMOGs or Mambas, but probably just G-class ). Those will go to Latvian Home Guard.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Gregory

[Gregory]

 

 

I can [inaudible] provide that we are fully committed to improve and strengthen our security and safety as well as defensibility by continuing commitment at development of our armed forces and the parliament of Latvia has unanimously decided on increasing their defence spending up to 2% of the gross domestic product of Latvia in the nearest years. This decision of the parliament of Latvia will be implemented for sure.

Latvian President Andris Berzins

 

I guess there has been some sort of movement - Latvian defense budget for 2015 has been increased by ~40 mln euros, which in percent terms is about 20% rise from 2014. The purchase of 123 ex-UK Scimitars (and variants) should start arriving in early 2016. From Norway, Latvia is buying 800 Carl Gustaf as well as 50 Scania trucks and 50 lightly armed Mercedes Benz vehicles (might be UNIMOGs or Mambas, but probably just G-class ). Those will go to Latvian Home Guard.

The Scimitars are worn out. The gun should do quite well against BMDs and BMP2s Ill grant you, but it was showing its age as long ago as the 1980s. Despite upgrades, I wouldnt consider them a particularly great buy. Particularly after being thrashed in Afghanistan.

 

Carl Gustav was good in its day. I dont really see it primarily useful as an antitank weapon these days though, it seems from all ive read to be most useful for HE support for infantry now.

They are supposed to get refurbished and overhauled, and the price is reasonable - about 500000$ each. I don't know where they could get a better deal on a used Western AFV.

[Gregory]

They might well be overhauled, but they are still 40 years old and short of getting new hulls starting to suffer from fatigue cracks. Cheap isnt always a virtue.

Clearly not the best, but if you were Satrap of Latvia with a 40,000,000$ budget for IFVs, what would you choose?

[Adam Peter]

And you are effectively limiting any movement of such trains to areas where there is no overhead electric cables anyway.

Why do you think that is a problem?

[bd1]

 

They might well be overhauled, but they are still 40 years old and short of getting new hulls starting to suffer from fatigue cracks. Cheap isnt always a virtue.

Clearly not the best, but if you were Satrap of Latvia with a 40,000,000$ budget for IFVs, what would you choose?

 

do the dutch have ypr-765-s still around or are they all already in jordan and egypt? that would still be a machine, built during 80´s-mid 90´s and were sold a decade ago around 350000usd a piece iirc. always thought that would be relatively similar to bmp-2, but probably bit more habitable - people wearing winter clothing and body armor i think might be squeezed into bmp only by using some hydraulic devices.

[bd1]

 

 

But you are forgetting VDV, which unlike many western nations Parachute troops, not only seems to be preserved in near cold war numbers, but if anything seems to be (or at the very least is claimed to be) having resources thrown at it like there is no tomorrow. Now Ill grant you, you have the baltic air patrol, but I think less than 20 combat aircraft is going to have its work cut out stopping an extensive parachute drop, particularly as one has to question how quickly it would get authorization to actually engage anyone flying over Estonian, Latvian or Lithuanian territory. (they havent down with recent incursions after all) Then there are the surviving airmobile VDV brigades. I know a lot of them were for the chop in the 1990s, but I seem to recall from recent orbats some have survived.

 

So not only would Estonia and the others be fighting a vaguely conventional fight against invading forces, they would also have to fight against forces dropped in their rear with mechanised forces scarcely less well armed. A BMD is pretty ancient, but the main armament works, and I daresay an AT5 would be fully capable of dispatching even a CV90 from the rear quarter.

 

Ultimately it boils down to the point that, poor though Russias forces are now compared to the late cold war, they still have the ability to project significant fire-power quickly on their borders, far faster than Nato can manage. As seen in Georgia and Crimea, that alone is a significant point in their favour.

 

Thats why I keep coming back to an air mobile force. Its about the only thing that has a chance of not being pinned down and destroyed. Ill grant you I cant see the funding for that being present any time soon, but I cant help but think old MI8s ought to be fairly cheap on the international market. Ditto UH1s for that matter, the US Army has a massive bonepile of H Model UH1s going cheap.

 

Replicating Russian force structures seems like a good idea, but I still cant see it achieving much against anything but limited border incursions. The lessons of Ukraine are there for all to see, when an army that was much better equipped were unable to defeat insurgent forces. Even if they make up for numbers in elan, I cant see it doing much against cross border artillery attacks, which seemed not uncommon in Ukraine.

 

Anyway, just an idea. Chalk me up as the new Sparky if you will.

 

i can´t imagine a scenario where vdv might do an airdrop, short of capturing islands of saaremaa and hiiumaa. 76th vdv is situated in the city of pskov, they are some 40 km. from estonian south border, they are more likely to repeat their glorious roadmarch to tallinn during 1991 putch. (that one btw saw them losing about 1/3 of their bmd-s to breakdowns even before they got to their objective). i think airmobile force (brigade)on our budgets would have even worse maintenance record. and there is such thing as kaitseliit in estonia, zemessardze in latvia and k.a.s.p in lithuania, that are territorial defence organizations. if these were equipped with, say javelin/spike and n-law, the loss rates of these vdv bmd´s would be pretty bad.

[Gregory]

I don't think airborne/airmobile (as method of insertion) would play a major role in any conflict over the Baltics. Could it be used in concert with other high-tempo operations? Yes. Would it be used as a sole method of invasion? No. In any situation where BMDs are being air-dropped deep into Estonia, they would be accompanied by armored/mechanized task forces advancing over the border, accompanied by artillery and air strikes. Therefore, structuring your defense to deal with one element of that threat strikes me as suboptimal.

[Gregory]

 

 

They might well be overhauled, but they are still 40 years old and short of getting new hulls starting to suffer from fatigue cracks. Cheap isnt always a virtue.

Clearly not the best, but if you were Satrap of Latvia with a 40,000,000$ budget for IFVs, what would you choose?

 

 

 

This is why I think concentrating on AFVs is a mistake. You can put far more into a capablity than you will ever get out of it, particularly if you have a really small force. Its getting to the point when the logistics of keeping Britain in tanks is being offset by the cost of buying spares and maintaining logistics equipment. You can justify it easily for a force of 4 or 5 hundred tanks, but when you start heading to a force below 100 you kind of wonder what the point is.

 

 

That's a fair point. It would make a lot of sense for Baltics to standardize their equipment purchases. The geographical proximity would make it easy to position common logistics and service assets sufficiently close to all countries. Unfortunately, due to vagaries of budgeting and such I don't see that happening.

[Adam Peter]

Countryball

 

 

 

[urbanoid]

One of the best Polandball comics I've recently seen! Eesti, yuo of genious!

[Nikolas93TS]

I opened this thread with intention to post that one!

 

Tank-net is such a lovely place with so much Polanball fans!

[sunday]

I wonder who the author is. That M113 G@v1n bit...

[bd1]

ROFL

 

so, that should end all the rumors that estonians are not believers...

[Adam Peter]

I wonder who the author is. That M113 G@v1n bit...

 

My thoughts, exactly.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Adam Peter

[urbanoid]

ROFL

 

so, that should end all the rumors that estonians are not believers...

I'm not sure what to think about it. Estonians saying there is no god is one thing, Estonians saying Gav!n, or even worse - Sparky himself, is God, is another...

[BansheeOne]

RAF Mildenhall to close amid other Europe consolidations

 

By John Vandiver

Stars and Stripes

Published: January 8, 2015

STUTTGART, Germany — A major U.S. Air Force base in the United Kingdom and 14 other installations scattered across Europe will close as part of a sweeping reorganization of forces on the Continent, the Pentagon announced.

Operations at RAF Mildenhall — home to Air Force special operations forces, air refueling tankers and 3,200 military personnel — will end, and missions carried out there will be moved to other locations such as Germany. RAF Alconbury and Molesworth, two other facilities in the U.K., also will close as part of a consolidation effort. Most of the missions there will be moved to RAF Croughton.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon plans to station two squadrons of F-35s at RAF Lakenheath by 2020, which ensures the continuous presence of U.S. air power in the country.

As a result of the moves, there will be a slight reduction in overall force levels. However, Germany and Italy are expected to gain troops through the Pentagon’s moves.

It is expected to take several years for all of the Pentagon’s basing decisions to be implemented.

In all, the Pentagon expects to save about $500 million annually from the consolidations, which have been under review for more than a year.

The European Infrastructure Consolidation review and F-35 basing decisions will result in a decrease of about 2,000 U.S. military and civilian personnel in the U.K. over the next several years, according to the Pentagon. The removal of 3,200 people from Mildenhall will be offset by the addition of 1,200 personnel at Lakenheath, who will be added to support new missions like the arrival of the F-35 fighters, according to the Pentagon.

In the case of the Army, most of the announced consolidations target small outposts and support infrastructure rather than key operational hubs.

[...]

In Germany, various troops movements will result in an increase of several hundred U.S. military personnel, the Pentagon stated. Germany will receive Mildenhall’s KC-135s and the 352nd Special Operations Group, which includes a fleet of CV-22 Ospreys. The move will put the tilt-rotor aircraft, favored by special operations troops, closer to troops assigned to Stuttgart-based Special Operations Command Europe and Africa.

Mildenhall’s RC-135s will remain in the U.K, however.

In Italy, the Pentagon said it would add about 200 military positions once the 606th Air Control Squadron relocates from Spangdahlem, Germany.

In Portugal, efforts to reduce the mission at Lajes Field will continue with the reduction of 500 military and civilian personnel assigned there and the returning of some infrastructure to Portuguese authorities, according to the Pentagon.

The consolidations come as the U.S. and its allies in Europe attempt to bolster their presence in eastern Europe as part of an effort to reassure allies and deter Russian aggression in the region.

Plans to increase troop rotations throughout the region will continue, according to the Pentagon. The already approved $1 billion European Reassurance Initiative aims to boost the U.S.’ rotational presence in Europe for a range of training and exercises with NATO partners, as well as support infrastructure improvement projects that will help efforts in eastern Europe.

[...]

List of planned changes in Europe:

United Kingdom

Divest RAF Mildenhall:

• Returns the installation and four supported sites to the United Kingdom.

• DOD intends to relocate the operational units at RAF Mildenhall within Europe — the assigned KC-135s and the 352nd Special Operations Group to Germany and the assigned RC-135s within the U.K. This paves the way for the stationing of two squadrons of F-35s at RAF Lakenheath, starting in 2020.

• Divest RAF Alconbury/RAF Molesworth: Consolidation of missions allows the permanent return of RAF Alconbury, RAF Molesworth and supporting sites to the United Kingdom. The majority of U.S. personnel, and many of the U.S.-funded host nation positions assigned to these bases will be transferred to RAF Croughton.

Germany

• Close Mainz-Kastel Station — fully returns the site to Germany.

• Close Barton Barracks — fully returns the site to Germany and relocates the Department of Defense Dependents Schools district office to Sembach.

• Partially close Pulaski Barracks in the Kaiserslautem area — returns part of the site to Germany.

• Close Weilimdorf warehouse site — returns the site to German control.

• Close two Baumholder waterworks — returns control to Germany.

• Relocate HQs DISA-Europe from Stuttgart to Kaiserslautem.

• Close Amelia Earhart Hotel in Wiesbaden.

• Partially close Artillery Kaserne in Garmisch — returns two-thirds of the site to Germany.

• Restructure the Army Air Force Exchange Services bakery and water distribution operations at Grünstadt.

• Close Husterhöh Kaserne in Pirmasens — returns the site to Germany.

• Relocate mail sorting/distribution from German Aerial Mail Terminal in Frankfurt to Germersheim Army Depot — efficiencies and personnel moves only.

• Create a distribution center of excellence at Germersheim Army Depot.

• Consolidate various communication data centers across EUCOM.

• Close commissaries at Illesheim and Sembach, as well as the four commissaries in Stuttgart at Kelley Barracks, Patch Barracks, Panzer Barracks and Robinson Barracks, once a new replacement store on Panzer is constructed.

• Consolidate Defense Media Activity operations across Europe.

• Consolidate communications, postal services and personnel management that support the U.S. mission to NATO and the U.S. military delegation to the NATO military committee.

Belgium

• Divest leased site in Brussels — Consolidation of U.S. facilities in Brussels to Sterrebeek.

The Netherlands

• Divest Schinnen Emma Mine leased site, Netherlands and consolidate U.S. facilities at Brunssum.

Italy

• Place a portion of the Pisa Ammo Storage Area, near Livorno, into caretaker status.

Partially close Camp Darby near Livorno. Returns about half of the installation to Italy.

Convert the Vicenza Health Center to outpatient and specialty care only.

Portugal

• Streamline operations and property at Lajes Field — Reduces active duty, civilian personnel and contract providers by two-thirds. A number of the buildings at Lajes will also be returned to Portugal.

—Source: Department of Defense

 

http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/raf-mildenhall-to-close-amid-other-europe-consolidations-1.322825

[BansheeOne]

NATO Sets Sizes for Spearhead, Response Forces

 

By Jim Garamone

DoD News, Defense Media Activity

 

WASHINGTON, Feb. 5, 2015 – The NATO Response Force’s new Spearhead Force will be a multinational, brigade-sized unit of around 5,000 troops, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in Brussels today.

 

Stoltenberg spoke at a news conference wrapping up a meeting of the alliance’s defense ministers at NATO headquarters in which Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel participated.

 

The force will help the alliance meet the threats in the east and south, the secretary general said.

 

A Highly Trained Land Force

 

The Spearhead Force will be a highly trained land force of around 5,000 troops. “These will be supported by air, sea and special forces,” Stoltenberg said. “The lead element of this land brigade will be ready to move within as little as 48 hours, with the rest moving within a week.”

 

Two brigades will back up the Spearhead Force as a rapid reinforcement capability in case of a major crisis, he noted. All told, the enhanced NATO Response Force will number up to about 30,000 troops.

 

France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom will be framework nations for the Spearhead Force. They will command in rotation in the coming years to ensure that the Spearhead Force can be sustained for the long term, the secretary general said.

 

“These countries will provide the main elements of the force, and help bring together other allies, so this will be truly a multinational force,” he added. “This is a strong signal of NATO solidarity, and it shows that European allies are fully playing their part, taking the lead in protecting Europe.”

 

Interim Spearhead Force

 

Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and others already have begun training and exercising an interim Spearhead Force, Stoltenberg said.

 

The defense ministers also decided to immediately establish six multinational command and control units in Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania, the secretary general told reporters. “If a crisis arises,” he added, “they will ensure that national and NATO forces from across the alliance are able to act as one from the start. They will make rapid deployment easier, support planning for collective defense, and help coordinate training and exercises.”

 

Stoltenberg stressed the importance of these units, noting that they will be the link between national defense and multinational NATO forces. “They will be key for connecting national forces with NATO reinforcements,” he added.

 

All NATO nations will contribute staff to these units, and they will be in the countries “on a persistent basis,” Stoltenberg said.

 

The secretary general also welcomed the work of Germany, Denmark and Poland to develop the Headquarters Multinational Corps Northeast in Szcecin, Poland.

 

“This will enhance our high readiness capability to command forces deployed to Poland and the Baltic states,” he said. “I also welcome Romania’s intention to make available a new deployable Multinational Division Headquarters for the southeast.”

 

Hagel Outlines U.S. Involvement

 

The United States is involved in the process, Hagel said earlier in the day, noting that, the U.S. Congress has approved the $1 billion that President Barack Obama requested for the European Reassurance Initiative, which he called a major contribution to NATO’s Readiness Action Plan.

 

“This initiative will enable us to continue providing a persistent presence of U.S. air, land and maritime forces along the alliance’s eastern flank as we also upgrade infrastructure and preposition equipment and supplies,” Hagel said. “We intend to contribute staff officers to each of NATO’s new command and control centers in Eastern Europe.”

 

These “defensive, proportionate” moves are in line with NATO’s international commitments, Stoltenberg said. “Our core responsibility is to keep our nations safe,” he added, “and this is exactly what we are doing.”

 

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=128120

 

Read elsewhere that deployment of the interim spearhead force is to be tested within the first half of this year. Not sure if this involves all of the current IRF land component which is NL 11 Airmobile Brigade reinforced by GER Panzergrenadier Battalion 371 under HQ I GER/NL Corps, plus some other bits (no idea what the Norwegian contribution is; also heard of Denmark being involved).

 

What I have seen of the forward bases is rather austere, basically feeding and refueling the incoming troops, administrated by a couple dozen personnel each, half of which local nationals. All equipment will have to be moved with the force, which I saw pointed out in a blog might be a challenge with today's commercially streamlined European rail transport and strained airlift capabilities; I guess the latter is where the US comes into play if necessary.

[BansheeOne]

You probably mean the transfer of the twinning agreement between 1st Panzer and 1st Armoured to 3rd (UK) Division to address restructuring on the British side and continue to allow joint GER/UK training and exercises at division level. I guess this is because 1st (UK) will be mostly an HQ under the "Adaptable Force" under Army 2020 while 3rd remains a traditional three-brigade formation.

[BansheeOne]

I wouldn't rule that out. With the British Army moving out of Germany, having joint exercises on the left side of the Channel makes as much sense as on the right. Of course there seems to be a certain reluctance anywhere these days to move heavy equipment about, not least for financial reasons; but as we have seen lately, things might change again.

[wendist]

Yet another one of those "not our proudest moment"I´m afraid. If true, I should ad.

 

"Sweden has agreed to Russian demands not to land fighter jets in Estonia during a coming military exercise in the Baltic region, according to a Swedish newspaper."

 

It should be noted that in oktober last year Swedish fighter jets did use Estonian airfields so this move could be seen as either a belated Russian reaction to that or an attempt to put pressure on both Sweden and Finland not to get to involved in the Baltic countries.

 

http://www.thelocal.se/20150216/cweden-agreed-to-russiand-emands

 

Maybe we can blame the Finns!

[wendist]

So what happens if they have to make an emergency landing, they have to punch out instead to appease Russian opinion?

 

When you consider that in the 1950s the Swedes put aside airfields for Emergency landings for SAC and Bomber Command aircraft in the event of WW3, you kind of think that the West collectively just doesnt have any balls any more.

Sometimes I think the word neutral is just the word neutered spelled wrong.

[wendist]

Dont feel bad. We arent any better ourselves, and we supposedly are part of an alliance to secure Europe.

No worries Stuart, I´m not about to cry myself to sleep.

 

But neutrality can come in more than one form. You have the "I do things my way and fuck you" version and then there is the limp wrist version.

 

I guess we picked the wrong one!

[Adam Peter]

There is a ceasefire in Ukraine and the government is retreating from Debalcevo.

[BansheeOne]

Update: Lithuania seeks new armoured vehicles

Nicholas de Larrinaga, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

24 July 2014

 

Lithuania is looking to buy wheeled infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), the Ministry of Defence (MoD) revealed on 21 July.

 

The new vehicles are intended to replace the country's existing fleet of 300 M113 tracked armoured personnel carriers (APCs), according to the MoD.

 

However, the new vehicles are intended to not just fulfil an APC role, but to be capable of engaging both armour and personnel. For this the IFVs are to feature a stabilised automatic cannon no smaller than 25 mm as its primary armament, a coaxial armament no smaller than 7.62 mm, while the turret should be capable of integrating anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), the request for information (RfI) from the Lithuanian MoD states.

 

Explaining the decision to opt for a wheeled IFV, Brigadier General Gintautas Zenkevicius, Director General of Capability and Armament at the Lithuanian MoD told IHS Jane's on 25 July that: "Deployability, speed manoeuvrability, affordability and sustainability were major factors that were considered. To be ready for today's and tomorrow's mission spectrum in country and outside its borders these qualities are essential. Wheeled vehicle provides us with this flexibility."

 

The MoD has issued the RfI to nine different prospective IFV suppliers to seek information on the family of 8x8 vehicles that they might be able to offer. The company's contracted are: France's Nexter Systems, Finland's Patria, Germany's Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), Israel's Elbit Systems, Italy's Iveco, Poland's Wojskowe Zaklady Mechaniczne (WZM), Switzerland's General Dynamics European Land Systems - MOWAG, and Turkish firms FNSS Savunma Sistemleri and Otokar.

 

The Lithuanian programme isn't limited to these suppliers however, with Gen Zenkevicius stating that: "With this RfI Lithuania is conducting market research to access availability of desired IFV. At this stage the Lithuanian MoD is ready to consider all offers that meet criteria specified in the RfI."

 

Interested suppliers are required to reply by mid-October the MoD stated, adding that it hoped to sign a contract for the vehicles in 2015.

 

The new vehicles are intended to initially equip two mechanised infantry battalions. The purchase of new armoured fighting vehicles forms part of Lithuania's new defence development programme covering 2014 to 2023.

 

The IFVs are requested to feature a three man crew, and to be able of accommodating eight fully equipped dismounts. No maximum or minimum weight for the vehicle has been specified in the RfI, while an amphibious capability is understood to not be a priority requirement for Lithuania.

 

http://www.janes.com/article/41216/update-lithuania-seeks-new-armoured-vehicles

 

There are media reports that Lithuania requested delivery of Boxers from Bundeswehr stocks, rather than new-built, to speed up the process. Unsurprisingly that was turned down because the Bundeswehr is only equipping itself and acquisitions are far from finished at this point, and in fact we're talking about increasing the meagre original order. If true I have to say asking like that takes some nerve.