NATO return to Cold War force structure

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Martineleca said:

Have you heard the rumours about Italy seeking to buy 250 Leopard 2 tanks, 

Buy it from whom?

If there were 250 surplus Leopard 2 tanks in Europe, chances are they'd go to Ukraine.

The only possible supplier would be Switzerland, but they already refused a buyback offer from Germany two or three weeks ago.

[Martineleca]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Buy it from whom?

If there were 250 surplus Leopard 2 tanks in Europe, chances are they'd go to Ukraine.

It is made clear they want brand new ones, like Norway or Hungary and perhaps others in the near future, hence the inquiry if Krauss-Maffei will be expanding manufacturing output so they can be delivered in a timely manner...

Edited March 20, 2023 by Martineleca

[Ssnake]

To answer your question - no, I'm not privy to KMW's business plans.

[bojan]

7 hours ago, Josh said:

...The opportunities in Europe for ATGM fire that exceeded the capability of even T-64's fire control seems rather limited to me, and it seems like a surprisingly complex solution to the problem from the traditionally more conservative Russian designers.

Prime targets for tank fired ATGMs were long-range ATGM platforms which were smaller, hence harder to hit than a tank at ranges those would be employed, so there was some logic to it. I just don't think it was (or is now...) worth an increased cost and complexity to integrate ATGM to a tank vs using combined arms approach.

Edited March 21, 2023 by bojan

[Martineleca]

18 hours ago, Ssnake said:

To answer your question - no, I'm not privy to KMW's business plans.

For a time the Italians were very intent on developing a successor to the Ariete, after that became unfeasible they looked into getting either the K2 or Abrams and rejected them as well. MGCS is still too far off, so it appears the've settled on an existing German design...

[Martineleca]

On 3/20/2023 at 10:26 AM, Stuart Galbraith said:

Even now its contentious that it wont even replace the tanks that are already in service.

While the MBT shortage is a pressing issue that must be dealt with as soon as possible, the SPG situation is arguably even more desperate. After 30 AS-90 units were sent to aid Ukraine the Royal Artillery has fewer than a hundred left, reportedly not all of them operational and a decision on procuring new mobile howitzers will be needed soon. The Archer is a fine system, though a tracked vehicle is probably more appropriate in this case, buying the new M109 variant would be far too ironic considering that model was hurriedly retired in favour of the AS-90. So unless some new Ajax-based SPG is offered as a domestic alternative, the only other options are either the Panzerhaubitze or K9, how do you see this turning out?

[Stuart Galbraith]

We were looking at a Boxer based 155mm solution, as well as K9. I think there is a view a shortfall in the amount of tubes must be made up, but as we will have just 2 battalions sp artillery, nobody is convincing me that the buy from Sweden is more than a plaster on a gaping credablity gap.

I dont care what design we get. IMHO sp artillery has historically been brought in from abroad, and we have seldom ever shown a flair for developing our own. But two battalions we can deploy is completely taking the piss, whichever way you look at it. It badly compromises any mechanised operations we wish to undertake.

AS90 was never much good. There were lots braking down as long ago as the Iraq war, because the engine kept overheating. The turret was ok. The polish Krab seems to have been a fairly good solution to what we could do. But of course, we wont.

[DB]

Bear in mind that a new build M109A7 uses a completely different chassis than your grandfather's one. It is now Bradley component based.

I'm less concerned about any immediate gap in artillery tubes in the BA than I am about our ability to feed 155mm ammunition into the current war, and also to replenish stocks. Given the current size of the BA and their being no obvious pressure to increase its manning at the moment, an urgent procurement of some tubes that would be useful in Poland or the Baltic states suits us just fine. Also, there's nothing in the press release to suggest that we intend to stop buying, just that these are already authorised.

The sky is not falling in, nor has it already fallen in. Chicken Little needs to stop panicking.

[Stuart Galbraith]

History has proven its only by a little panicking the British system ever moves halfway effectively. Witness the panic over France, that gave us HMS Warrior and the Palmerston forts. The latter was the cornerstone of British defence for the next 100 years. Or the panic over a nuclear armed USSR, that gave us airbases that were still in use over 40 years later.

So yes, we should be a little panicked over Russia. And as best I can tell, its pretty much business as usual.

 

[Martineleca]

1 hour ago, DB said:

Bear in mind that a new build M109A7 uses a completely different chassis than your grandfather's one. It is now Bradley component based.

Since the new M109 being based on the Bradley IFV proves the concept, wouldn't the sturdier Ajax platform be even better suited to accommodating the AS-90 turret?

[DB]

See the arguments elsewhere about change for change's sake (Spike in Germany service).

if there's one thing that is absolutely guaranteed to mess up a procurement, it's national requirement-specific changes.

Now, I'm not saying "buy M109A7", I'm just saying that there would be minimal irony in replacing AS-90, which replaced the old M109 with new ones, because they're not by any stretch the same beast.

I don't have a particular preference, but I'd rather build a relationship with Poland or Korea than the US, for reasons that are too nebulous to be worth discussing.

[Martineleca]

50 minutes ago, DB said:

I don't have a particular preference, but I'd rather build a relationship with Poland or Korea than the US, for reasons that are too nebulous to be worth discussing.

AHS Krab is an excellent SPG combining the AS-90 turret with a K9 chassis, the only reason for discontinuing it is Poland wants to achieve economies of scale for the 700 Thunders ordered. It could be a good fit for the British Army, but only if BAE and Hanwha can come to some agreement.

[DB]

36 minutes ago, Martineleca said:

AHS Krab is an excellent SPG combining the AS-90 turret with a K9 chassis, the only reason for discontinuing it is Poland wants to achieve economies of scale for the 700 Thunders ordered. It could be a good fit for the British Army, but only if BAE and Hanwha can come to some agreement.

BAE doesn't need to be involved, unless the K9 has some of their IP.

[Martineleca]

40 minutes ago, DB said:

BAE doesn't need to be involved, unless the K9 has some of their IP.

Doesn't BAE own the IP to everything developed by Vickers, the Challenger and Braveheart components included?

[DB]

You've lost me completely now. Which bit of the K9 has anything to do with AS-90?

[Martineleca]

24 minutes ago, DB said:

You've lost me completely now. Which bit of the K9 has anything to do with AS-90?

The AS-90 turret if you were to make a Krab-type hybrid with a Thunder chassis, otherwise just the K9 SPG can be readily bought.

[DB]

Oh, yeah, of course. I bet BAE doesn't have the tooling to build more AS-90 turrets anyway - they may even have sold it to Poland, IDK.

[Martineleca]

10 minutes ago, DB said:

Oh, yeah, of course. I bet BAE doesn't have the tooling to build more AS-90 turrets anyway - they may even have sold it to Poland, IDK.

Now that would be terribly ironic, buying back industrial tooling from a country you originally introduced modern arms manufacturing to...

[Stuart Galbraith]

3 hours ago, DB said:

See the arguments elsewhere about change for change's sake (Spike in Germany service).

if there's one thing that is absolutely guaranteed to mess up a procurement, it's national requirement-specific changes.

Now, I'm not saying "buy M109A7", I'm just saying that there would be minimal irony in replacing AS-90, which replaced the old M109 with new ones, because they're not by any stretch the same beast.

I don't have a particular preference, but I'd rather build a relationship with Poland or Korea than the US, for reasons that are too nebulous to be worth discussing.

FWIW, I entirely agree with you. Maybe even for the same reasons, I dont know. Looking at how we got screwed on F35 weapons integration, I think we give them too much trade.

As far as Krab, the Poles are apparently going with K9 because they perceive the turret as better than the British design they bought. They are probably right, its certainly newer. OTOH, the Poles dont seem as cash strapped as we are. I believe we could probably just get away with swapping turrets and carrying the gun for now.

[Stuart Galbraith]

13 minutes ago, Martineleca said:

Now that would be terribly ironic, buying back industrial tooling from a country you originally introduced modern arms manufacturing to...

Perhaps not so ironic, when you see how many Royal Enfields we import. We even used to source 25pdr blank rounds from Pakistan IIRC.

[Martineleca]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

So yes, we should be a little panicked over Russia. And as best I can tell, its pretty much business as usual.

Just yesterday I read a stupid article about how the West needs to do everything it can to end this war soon, not to alleviate the suffering of the Ukrainian people, but so we can finally return to blissful complacency. There was much criticism within France against raising the defence budget, same in Germany, I guess there still are a lot of people that believe this finally will be the war to end all war and reject the notion that our continued conventional weakness will invite further aggression from the east...

Edited March 22, 2023 by Martineleca

[Strannik]

NATO Needs More Guns and Less Butter - time to shift priorities! 😂

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-needs-more-guns-and-less-butter-russia-ukriane-defense-spending-security-investments-11646688247

[Martineleca]

55 minutes ago, Strannik said:

NATO Needs More Guns and Less Butter - time to shift priorities! 😂

I don't understand this reaction, when the UK or Japan increase military spending in reaction to Russia and China doing so for decades and starting to throw their weight around, it should not be taken seriously?

[Stuart Galbraith]

4 hours ago, Martineleca said:

Just yesterday I read a stupid article about how the West needs to do everything it can to end this war soon, not to alleviate the suffering of the Ukrainian people, but so we can finally return to blissful complacency. There was much criticism within France against raising the defence budget, same in Germany, I guess there still are a lot of people that believe this finally will be the war to end all war and reject the notion that our continued conventional weakness will invite further aggression from the east...

We need to end it now to reduce the chance of it escalating. The drone incident illustrates how easily it can happen. We don't need any other reasons.

[Martineleca]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

We need to end it now to reduce the chance of it escalating. The drone incident illustrates how easily it can happen. We don't need any other reasons.

Right, but what about groups and politicians actively sabotaging even the currently limited rearmament effort, genuinely or not they are convinced we only need to support Ukraine enough not to fall and that will somehow alter the new geopolitical reality we find ourselves in.