Jump to content
tanknet.org

"surprising" Omissions In National Armo(U)Ries


Recommended Posts

I'm probably not the only one here who has been left scratching his head at the fact that certain armed forces lack some forms of equipment that would seem to fit in well or fill an obvious gap. Here are a few examples just off the top of my head.

 

UK - 120mm mortars, conventional patrol subs and, until recently, a land based area defence SAM

 

US - a viable hand held anti tank weapon (M136 really isn't one and the M3A1 isn't intended to be one).

France - heavy lift helicopters

 

Canada - attack helicopters

 

Belgium - GBAD (it has none whatsoever - even Eire has RBS-70)

 

Feel free to challenge the above examples or add more of your own.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

120mm mortars in UK are due the fact that British army never reinforced Bn level firesupport compared to a WW2 level. 8 x 81mm mortar in 1945, 8 x 81mm mortar in 2019... It is a mind boggling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

120mm mortars in UK are due the fact that British army never reinforced Bn level firesupport compared to a WW2 level. 8 x 81mm mortar in 1945, 8 x 81mm mortar in 2019... It is a mind boggling.

 

You score extra points for knowing the "3 inch" mortar was actually 81mm :) We did have 4.2" mortars that served in limited numbers until (and including) the Borneo confronation, but they were treated as artillery and operated by the Royal Artillery. I'm guessing they were gone by 1967-8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You score extra points for knowing the "3 inch" mortar was actually 81mm

 

Well, local designation "Mortar, 81mm Mk.1/2/3* (e) was kinda giveaway. :)

 

*Apparently there were 3 versions and they survived until 1990s in war storages, being reworked to 82mm in the '60s (as with all other 81mm mortars, whole process only included removing 0.3mm from the inside of the tube on the lathe, since 81mm mortars are 81.4mm anyway).

Edited by bojan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably attack helicopters don't figure in Canada's doctrine?

Considering the distances involved, slightly left leaning politicians and who our southern neighbours. tanks almost never figured in Canada's doctrine. It was only due to the involvement in Afghanistan and the use of the leopard1 in that conflict that they decided to upgrade to leopard 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably attack helicopters don't figure in Canada's doctrine?

More like they don't fit into the budget. We are certainly happy to use them if others ( i.e. US Army or USMC) provide them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

US - Air-droppable light tank (to replace M551, fully phased out since 1996).

Much of world - Cheap top-attack munition for RPG-7 platform. The technology is available. I keep waiting for someone to put the pieces together.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm probably not the only one here who has been left scratching his head at the fact that certain armed forces lack some forms of equipment that would seem to fit in well or fill an obvious gap. Here are a few examples just off the top of my head.

 

UK - 120mm mortars, conventional patrol subs and, until recently, a land based area defence SAM

 

US - a viable hand held anti tank weapon (M136 really isn't one and the M3A1 isn't intended to be one).

 

France - heavy lift helicopters

 

Canada - attack helicopters

 

Belgium - GBAD (it has none whatsoever - even Eire has RBS-70)

 

Feel free to challenge the above examples or add more of your own.

 

Philippines - everything in meaningful numbers :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You score extra points for knowing the "3 inch" mortar was actually 81mm

Well, local designation "Mortar, 81mm Mk.1/2/3* (e) was kinda giveaway. :)

 

*Apparently there were 3 versions and they survived until 1990s in war storages, being reworked to 82mm in the '60s (as with all other 81mm mortars, whole process only included removing 0.3mm from the inside of the tube on the lathe, since 81mm mortars are 81.4mm anyway).

 

So yugo conversion to the soviet 82 mm bombs. makes sense to standardize on one type. That the brits are still without 120 mm moratas may have to do that LK118 105 mm light guins are in service and that there is maybe some interservice envy going on, that would put 120 mm mortars under the Royal Artillery?

 

 

France - heavy lift helicopters

​

 

Actually the Armee de l'air is looking ard at buying one. Maybe standing up a joint unit with Germany like the C-130J unit.

 

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/paris-air-show/2019/06/16/french-air-force-deputy-talks-strategy-brexit-and-future-fighter-jets/

 

Intresting stuff the chief of french air force says there.

 

 

 

For Germany:

 

No Army AAA. the half dozen LeFlaSys Ozelot (Igla or Stinger) are under Luftwaffe control, as are MIM-104 Patriots. Roland and Gepard have been scrapped or sold. the handful of MANTIS systems are also Luftwaffe and not mobile.

 

No self-propelled mortars for the Panzerbrigades. There is only the half dozen Wiesel 2 mortar carriers that are attached to the Artillerielehrbattaillon. they have to make do with nothing or the old worn out Tampella 120mm mortars.

 

No proper modern radio sets, they have to make do with the old SEM-70 -80 -90 series mostly and adhoc bought PRC-117 series to talk to others. Real fun when actually deployed abroad to juggle the different radios signalmen tell me.

 

 

All of these are mostly budgeting and project management shortcomings. And teh myopic expectation that the next conflict looks like the last one. In the German case the expeditionary warfare that has been waged in the last nearly twenty years.

Edited by Panzermann
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada also lacks IFV's, 120mm mortars, Air Defense systems and until recently no ATGM's. They also wanted to replace all the 60mm mortars with automatic grenade launchers....

 

 

Not to mention mundane stuff like winter warfare gear, bridging equipment and tactical trucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but we are getting previously enjoyed, state-of-the-art a generation ago, ex-RAAF Hornets while we wait for a replacement for the CF-18s we ordered in 1979.

 

We're also moving right along with a program to replace our WW2 built Browning HPs. We've only been trying since about 2010 with that, though, so it should only be another decade or so.

Edited by R011
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Australia still has the Browning as standard.

Ours are all Inglis wartime manufacture. I understand the UK replaced those in the late sixties with new builds. I don't know how old Australia's are. If Wikipedia is right, they may be late eighties/ early nineties made - and probably replaced older Brownings.

Edited by R011
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada also lacks IFV's, 120mm mortars, Air Defense systems and until recently no ATGM's. They also wanted to replace all the 60mm mortars with automatic grenade launchers....

 

 

Not to mention mundane stuff like winter warfare gear, bridging equipment and tactical trucks.

When did the ATGW come back?

 

I'd also add SP artillery (almost any artillery at all really, 37x155mm M777 and some retubed 105mm M2A1 FH seem kinda limited) and an integrated artillery fire direction system

 

Jay

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Sweden sold it's entire inventory of BILL 2 ATGMS and launchers and the factory that made them to the Saudis in 2013, leaving their infantry without a truly man portable ATGM. They still have TOW in service. To be fair, they have NLAW, which is probably the best "unguided" shoulder launched AT weapon out there, but no portable ATGWs is a suprising omission, particularly as they had a really good one in service and dumped it without explanation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Sweden sold it's entire inventory of BILL 2 ATGMS and launchers and the factory that made them to the Saudis in 2013, leaving their infantry without a truly man portable ATGM. They still have TOW in service. To be fair, they have NLAW, which is probably the best "unguided" shoulder launched AT weapon out there, but no portable ATGWs is a suprising omission, particularly as they had a really good one in service and dumped it without explanation.

I am sure the reasons were the ususal "to save money" and "world peace has broken out".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...