NATO return to Cold War force structure

[Josh]

I wouldn't have thought there would be much of a downside to the T90M outside there not being enough available. Outside the usual carousel liabilities, it seems to be a capable modern design that would easily outclass anything Ukraine can field. I too would like to hear the pro/con arguments; I wonder if the cons were simply fit and finish type items.

[bojan]

Reverse speed is still crap.

[Josh]

11 minutes ago, bojan said:

Reverse speed is still crap.

Ah, forgot about that problem. And I would think that is still a big issue in some of the close quarters tank fights we are seeing in footage, if those are at all typical.

Edited December 30, 2022 by Josh

[Stuart Galbraith]

3 hours ago, bojan said:

Reverse speed is still crap.

They did something to the gearbox to improve it iirc? But it's still bad?

 

[bojan]

I am not sure what were an improvements, but reverse speed has stayed the same.

Edited December 30, 2022 by bojan

[Roman Alymov]

20 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Media too big - could you summarize what the tank commander says he likes and dislikes about the T-90M?

Likes:

1)Improved protection, grids, nets etc.;

2)TC's own stabilized multichannel sight/camera with termal vision, rangefinder, good picture quality - now no need to rely on secondary screen from TG's gunsight;

3)Programmable main gun ammo that could be programmed to explode at known distance. Described as very good against infantry in trenches.

Dislikes: Extra weight is not good for mobility, especially on weak soil

When asked what improvements he would like to have on the tank: 152mm gun, as 125 mm is too weak aganst typical targets, especially buildings.

No complains about reverse speed - but seems like it is not of big use in this area of ioerations, as tanks are used mainly as SPG for infantry (providing high-accuracy fire that regular artillery can't deliver, in one case infantry asked his crew to "fire 3 meters forward" from 10 km distance - and TG somehow managed to do it, but "sweting in process") or firing on move ("flank fire, like on tank biathlon. but not on on low speed - but on 5th gear" and even firing back on full speed, so ejected main gun cartriges are ending on turret top).

[Martineleca]

10 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

In one case infantry asked his crew to "fire 3 meters forward" from 10 km distance - and TG somehow managed to do it, but "sweting in process"

You can’t seriously believe this drivel, it reads like the “reports” of Soviets destroying Jagdtigers before they even entered service, must have had a bit too much bath lotion to drink…

[JWB]

BERLIN, Jan 3 (Reuters) - NATO countries will discuss their defence spending targets in the coming months as some of them call for turning a 2% target into a minimum figure, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told the German news agency DPA.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-countries-discuss-defence-spending-target-stoltenberg-2023-01-03/

[TrustMe]

With almost all of Europe heading into a recession I doubt the 2% target will ever be achieved.

[Mike1158]

We will have to wait and see but the negativity is likely to be unfounded.  Especially when you consider that money in national defence assets goes directly back into the economy.

More likely to be achieve now than any time since WW2.

[Ssnake]

2 hours ago, TrustMe said:

With almost all of Europe heading into a recession I doubt the 2% target will ever be achieved.

It will increase the likelihood. With constant spending and a contracting GDP, the percentage goes up.

[Martineleca]

19 hours ago, Ssnake said:

With constant spending and a contracting GDP, the percentage goes up.

Even when spending does increase in real terms a higher budget is meaningless if it gets lost in the bureaucracy without concrete goals for equipment procurement and force readiness, like the naval laws pre-WW1, if the order is not carried out within the outlined parameters the ministry faces legal liability.

Edited January 4, 2023 by Martineleca

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Martineleca said:

Even when spending does increase in real terms a higher budget is meaningless if it gets lost in the bureaucracy without concrete goals for equipment procurement and force readiness, like the naval laws pre-WW1, if the order is not carried out within the outlined parameters the ministry faces legal liability.

Amen to that.  In Canadian news yesterday there was a piece to the effect that our army has few heavy weapons, inadequate supply, abysmal tactical air defenses.  Our navy and air forces are in equally bad shape.  The NORAD system also is woefully inadequate to modern conditions.   The government is intending to come out with a new policy paper to "address" these issue.  It's the way things are done in Canada now - making reports is seen as action.

[Martineleca]

On 12/23/2022 at 10:56 AM, Huba said:

With their geography? I'd rather trade them for an anti-ship missile battery.

Speaking of trade, if Poland as the rumours suggest sends their remaining PT-91s and even Leopards to Ukraine, is there a plan to quickly backfill them with more Abrams, basically the entire USMC stock?

[DBNd]

2 hours ago, Martineleca said:

Speaking of trade, if Poland as the rumours suggest sends their remaining PT-91s and even Leopards to Ukraine, is there a plan to quickly backfill them with more Abrams, basically the entire USMC stock?

The only thing in place that resembles that is the Lend-Lease Act which includes language for Eastern European countries impacted.

[Huba]

4 hours ago, Martineleca said:

Speaking of trade, if Poland as the rumours suggest sends their remaining PT-91s and even Leopards to Ukraine, is there a plan to quickly backfill them with more Abrams, basically the entire USMC stock?

Some (perhaps a battalion) PT91s were sent already in the summer and are presumably being used for training. No evidence of these being used in combat (or even being present in Ukraine) have surfaced so far. The rest has been undergoing overhauls/ maintenance lately and it seems that their transfer is a question of when, not if. 
Poland bought 250 M1A2 to replace the T-72s, and then got additional 116 M1A1FEP, presumably to replace the PT91s at least partially. IMO as these will start arriving later this year, the PT91s will be handled to the Ukrainians.

Now regarding Leo2, up to now there wasn't nothing indicating that our MoD considers giving them away. These are our "good" tanks, and scheduled to leave the service only in the next decade, when enough K2 will be operational. And even then it would be logical to keep them in reserve.
Today though our MoD announced that Poland will participate in the pan-European Leo2 pool and that they are working to make it happen. He didn't give any details  - IMO realistically we can give away a company or so, but not more. Now if there was a new scheme to replace all of our Leo2 with additional M1s, it might perhaps work, but at the moment nothing indicates that such deal is in the works.

Edited January 7, 2023 by Huba

[Martineleca]

On 1/7/2023 at 9:52 PM, Huba said:

 

Edited January 16, 2023 by Martineleca

[Martineleca]

On 1/7/2023 at 9:52 PM, Huba said:

The rest has been undergoing overhauls/ maintenance lately and it seems that their transfer is a question of when, not if.

Now that Ukraine is slated to receive at least 30 AS-90 SPG units, do you think it's possible they can be repaired in Polish facilities alongside the Krab considering their commonalities?

[Huba]

19 minutes ago, Martineleca said:

Now that Ukraine is slated to receive at least 30 AS-90 SPG units, do you think it's possible they can be repaired in Polish facilities alongside the Krab considering their commonalities?

The commonality between Krab and AS90 is extremely superficial. Krab uses K9 chassis and drivetrain, different 52 caliber gun, proprietary Polish comms, BMS and other electronics. Apart from basic turret shell and drives there are no common parts.

[Martineleca]

On 1/16/2023 at 9:01 PM, Huba said:

Krab uses K9 chassis and drivetrain, different 52 caliber gun, proprietary Polish comms, BMS and other electronics.

Do you expect as the factory switches to producing K9s, most of the original Krab howitzers will end up in Ukrainian service? They are arguably the best SPGs in the field, more rugged than the Panzerhaubitze yet farther shooting than the M109.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Martineleca

[Huba]

On 1/18/2023 at 12:27 PM, Martineleca said:

Do you expect as the factory switches to producing K9s, most of the original Krab howitzers will end up in Ukrainian service? They are arguably the best SPGs in the field, more rugged than the Panzerhaubitze yet farther shooting than the M109.

The situation around Krab is quite unclear. There are rumors that Koreans would like to kill the program and have us switch to K9. On the other hand, reportedly the production queue is full till at least 2027. There is some more news to be announced about it, perhaps even today.
 

In other news, as this topic have more or less become about Poland, here's a breakdown of Polish military help for Ukraine. It is not official and based on the scarce mentions, pictures and rumors from various people in the know, but it's as good a source as one might get. It is stil a bit of work in progress, and was created by this guy:

https://twitter.com/sjanus_pl

[Martineleca]

On 1/20/2023 at 11:07 AM, Huba said:

In other news, as this topic have more or less become about Poland, here's a breakdown of Polish military help for Ukraine.

That's not really a surprise though is it, nuclear weapons aside Poland is strategically the most important player in NATO behind the US. It has sent the most equipment and volunteers to aid Ukraine, is right on the frontline with the new Suwalki gap and Belarus becoming enemy territory, investing heavily in growing its already considerable conventional forces and will be first on call to defend the Baltic states.

[Pavel Novak]

On 1/20/2023 at 10:07 AM, Huba said:

The situation around Krab is quite unclear. There are rumors that Koreans would like to kill the program and have us switch to K9. On the other hand, reportedly the production queue is full till at least 2027. There is some more news to be announced about it, perhaps even today.
 

In other news, as this topic have more or less become about Poland, here's a breakdown of Polish military help for Ukraine. It is not official and based on the scarce mentions, pictures and rumors from various people in the know, but it's as good a source as one might get. It is stil a bit of work in progress, and was created by this guy:

https://twitter.com/sjanus_pl

Regarding SAMs - people really should stop to use launchers in counting. Its like instead number of rifles using number of magazines, it has some information but most of the time useless.

Anyway how could Poland sent to Ukraine 10 SA-5 when there was just one battery with 6 launchers. Or did Poland bought another SA-5 system in 1990s?

EDIT: I need to correct myself Poland had two batteries with total of 12 launchers so sending 10 is possible. Sorry.

Edited January 21, 2023 by Pavel Novak

[Huba]

15 minutes ago, Pavel Novak said:

Regarding SAMs - people really should stop to use launchers in counting. Its like instead number of rifles using number of magazines, it has some information but most of the time useless.

Anyway how could Poland sent to Ukraine 10 SA-5 when there was just one battery with 6 launchers. Or did Poland bought another SA-5 system in 1990s?

EDIT: I need to correct myself Poland had two batteries with total of 12 launchers so sending 10 is possible. Sorry.

IIRC we have (had really) 6 three-battery battalions of S125, of which one had one of the batteries swapped for S200. Last time I checked it was deployed somewhere around Szczecin. I agree that for heavy SAMs that can't operate as individual vehicles, reporting them in this way is not optimal.

Here's an updated version btw, though still not including our newly donated heavy brigade:

[Pavel Novak]

One question - only R-27 (AA-10) missiles were sent? No R-73 (AA-11)?