MBT's

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Might need to check the German OOB to ensure they have the latest versions.
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don and I had a "discussion" before the last patch concerning where we thought some of these tanks we've been expecting for a VERY LONGTIME would've already have reached FOC but haven't for any combination of reasons WELL DOCUMENTED in this thread. One of these was the ALTAY. The rest included the ARMATA, CHALLENGER 3 (FOC already declared by MOD as 2030.), M1A2A (Australia MOD declared IOC in 2025.), ARIETE (Also referred to as the ARIETE C1.) (Italy never went ahead with the current C2 tanks in the game. More on this in my files as I'm currently tracking the NEW modified version. STATUS: Best I can give you at this time is it's LIKELY to get in.) and the LeClerc LX "will come down to the wire".

There are a couple of "outliners" but the above would in most people's minds be the more important ones.

Our solution to FOC dates for most above was to set the START for them to DEC 2025.

The reason(s) should be obvious for many of you who've followed this Thread over the years (And THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!) for others basically my job is easy, I track these projects until the scent is dead, report the results and make my recommendations and discuss alternative solutions to fix the problem. Though very time consuming my end is a little easier.

Don: checks my work as I would expect him to do, we come to a consensus and if the fix is needed, he fixes it in the OOB and most times multiple OOB's depending on the issue(s) and then he has to "comb" through all the Campaigns and Scenarios and fix them there. That stuff is beyond my capabilities, and I have NO DESIRE to learn. It's NOT what I do. I'm a "deep miner" and Electronics and associated systems guy (Plus a darn good navigator. ) not a programmer or some such. That's why I have Andy and Don and all the rest of you guys that do that Sxxt out here!!!

There has been nothing more frustrating to us then having too CONSTANTLY having to push START dates to the right. This why we chose DEC 2025 and OMG how could I have forgotten INDIA and the ARJUN Mk 2?????

So back to the ALTAY, I had already reported that Turkey signed a contract with South Korea (S.K.) to buy engines from them for the ALTAY (As reminder, the ALTAY is based on the K2.) . I'm not going to rehash everything that delayed the ALTAY except for the most recent from 4 years ago when Turkey was forced to attempt to produce their own 1500hp engine from scratch. Well, here we are.

The PROTOTYPE with the S.K. engine is ready to start evaluations this or next month.

They are progressing in the development of their own engine as well but that will also require a PROTOTYPE.

Production could start within 2yrs. which would put our START date about on target. Maybe.

Note the conclusion reached also in the last para of the article.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...altay_mbt.html

ARIETE C1 (As referred to in the next.) will start with three PROTOTYPES the following: "AMV PT1, which will feature improvements to the hull, the PT2 which will feature improvements to the turret, and finally the PT3 which will incorporate improvements to both the turret and hull."

My personal feeling is since the war started after this plan they will end up with the PT3 with further improvements to include APS. Hopefully "I won't have to eat too much crow" concerning that prediction.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/weap...ttle_tank.html

Crap after 3 time for a shower!!

As a postscript to my last in Post 1350 I've concluded Russia doesn't have a "road following" tank shell. I'm back to my opening remark in my opinion.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

An "Oldie but Goodie" is being bought back into service apparently as seen in Ukraine this past March.

The T-62M/M1 are replacing Russian tank losses. It's actually a better tank then the T-64 which had a reputation for looking like a "Bonfire" when hit. It was a much worse in that regard then what we're seeing now with some of the T-72/80/90M tanks we've seen.

If the Ukraine gets the LEOPARD 1A5 that tank would still represent and overmatch.

There is something going on in the tactical and strategic thinking on the use of their heavy armor. Where it was reported they had at least a 100 T-90M tanks we found out they had only 20 now 18.

Where are the T-72B3/B4 tanks? That tank was modified to correct the ammunition storage issues (Don, I see NO REASON to change that tank with possible exception of the RELIKT ERA values. ) that makes such a difference as compared against the other T-72 variants to include the T-73B3 which has also suffered losses in the Ukrainian War.

This also brings into question how many T-14/ARMATA tanks do they really have? I'm thinking now it's what you seen the Victory Day Parade and those are PROTOTYPES.

With the technical problems they've had for years now, the war and the sanctions having for some time taking hold now, this might be a true assessment of where they're at with the ARMATA.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...t-tanks-170901
(From last OCT.)
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...t-62_mbts.html
https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and...rves-3033.html

Some things to think about.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

An "Oldie but Goodie" is being bought back into service apparently as seen in Ukraine this past March.

The T-62M/M1 are replacing Russian tank losses. It's actually a better tank then the T-64 which had a reputation for looking like a "Bonfire" when hit. It was a much worse in that regard then what we're seeing now with some of the T-72/80/90M tanks we've seen.

If the Ukraine gets the LEOPARD 1A5 that tank would still represent and overmatch.

There is something going on in the tactical and strategic thinking on the use of their heavy armor. Where it was reported they had at least a 100 T-90M tanks we found out they had only 20 now 18.

Where is the T-72B3/B4 tanks? That tank was modified to correct the ammunition storage issues (Don, I see NO REASON to change that tank with possible exception of the RELIKT ERA values. ) that is such a determent compared against the other T-72 variants to include the T-73B3 which has also suffered losses in the Ukrainian War.

This also brings into question how many T-14/ARMATA tanks do they really have? I'm thinking now it's what you seen the Victory Day Parade and those are PROTOTYPES.

With the technical problems they've had for years now, the war and the sanctions having for some time taking hold now, this might be a true assessment of where they're at with the ARMATA.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...t-tanks-170901
(From last OCT.)
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...t-62_mbts.html
https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and...rves-3033.html

Some things to think about.

Regards,
Pat

This is akin to the US refurbishing M60A1 RISE(ERA) and sending them someplace

Right now ANYTHING is possible.

This would be the Russian OOB unit 793

Fortunately, I don't have to add a unit, just extend the in-service date then add a formation that starts June 2022. We have lots of formation slots to burn. It won't show up between the end of 2011 and now so easy-peasey

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

If only they all could be that easy. Nice touch adding the "Z"!

Also, it looks potentially like the K2PL (Poland passed on this to get the M1A2P.) and I would think LEOPARD 2A7 tanks could be in play. Poland has aggressively been pursuing heavy armor options for the last few years. I further feel if they can make these deals, I further wouldn't be surprised if the Ukraine receives the Polish PT-91 TWARDY (UNIT 021.) tanks.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...o_ukraine.html

The following is an abstract item but one for the real world of the Ukraine. This is "right up my alley" Demark is to send the Ukraine the HARPOON BLK II though the articles point out other target types, this is primarily designed to be a ship killer. For the Ukraine this would come in handy in destroying those ships that are "stealing" the grains that were stored in the ports lost to include the granaries as seen in the satellite pictures shown well, everywhere.

They are very capable of taking out moving sea vessels as well especially in the Sea of Azov and Black Sea which even compared to the Mediterranean Sea are just "oversized bathtubs". It'll take out any current (Or recently past.) surface combatant operating in those areas.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...e_systems.html
https://www.naval-technology.com/pro...-ship-missile/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYj913i_VdA
(HARPOON)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijq6LiNlqJQ&t=86s
(HARPOON II)


(And ONLY 1 Mk-48 torpedo. I was there.)

The videos and pictures would've of course been more spectacular with fuel and ammo were aboard. We don't do that of course because of the environmental hazards. However, another country dumped their decommissioned submarine nuke reactors and other radioactive waste into the Kara Sea region.
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/24/s...disclosed.html
https://polarjournal.ch/en/2021/09/0...-the-kara-sea/

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

If only they all could be that easy. Nice touch adding the "Z"!

Regards,
Pat

I may add it to the SHP files and Icon list for scenario designers who want to be creative but adding that as new means using up another unit slot and I try to avoid that for trivial items when the OOB is nearly full and a T-62 in 2022 used on a modern battlefield that is highly infused with up to date anti tanks weapons pretty much defines "trivial"

Seriously..... if the Russians are digging out T-62s and sending them to the front they are getting desperate and I don't care how much reactive armour they slap on it's not going to slow much of anything used now down.

Who knows this may prompt a change in thinking and design. If you know no matter how much armour ( steel, ceramic, reactive) you throw on and something that costs 100 times less is going to turn it into junk then building lighter, faster, armoured vehicles is a way to have more of them.

The Armata reminds me in some ways of the bastard son of a T-35 and a Maus. They are just bigger targets and building them means less of what you really need

[Aeraaa]

I think it is a symptom of prolonged warfare. The more the conflict drags on, the more probable it is for requirements to change from "A highly sophisticated state of the art tank" to "a tank". Same with infantry, both sides will have a much lower percentage of trained infantry the more this thing continues. And this btw is usually the reason why countries that fight for a long time dont necessarily have the best quality troops (as another example, see Iran-Iraq war).

T62 will still be useful as a modern day Stug IMHO. And for the type of warfare we witness, you dont really need an Armata, you need any moving cannon.

[Karagin]

When high tech counters high tech which counters high tech ad-nauseam, then you are down to simple things that work. Everyone is so impressed and captivated over the wonder toys and forget that they are only as good as the training and all of them have a counter somewhere or in the works.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Unlike the "RHINO" that was mounted on the Sherman and developed by a SGT. that was decisive in the armor breakout from Normandy, the Russian "BRAZIER" hasn't worked so well even when modified to provide better protection as the article discusses.

I believe some officer came up this, thanks a lot sir!?!

I clearly stated when this first came up in this thread, they would not defeat a modern tandem ATGW warhead. We've all seen the pictures and videos.

I'm posting this because for one they're the first I've seen write about it and to discuss and show the measures they thought might improve the protection but also that they failed to stop the destruction.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...s_useless.html

Also, finally I leave with this video it exemplifies why here have Memorial Day to honor "those that gave the last full measure".
https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...-video-1711423

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Just further confirmation of what I already reported on Russia bringing in the T-62M/MV tanks in the battle for Ukraine. In para 2 they provide a more conservative list of Russian tanks lost thus far to the date of the articles release.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...dern_mbts.html

I'm kind've surprised that this wasn't already posted by a handful of our regulars out here, so I've held off (Though it's in my tracking file.) long enough. I believe two things are driving this tank acquisition and modernization program for Greece. One is obvious the Ukrainian War and the next maybe not so much but, in my opinion almost as important, Turkeys ALTAY program getting back on track that'll swing the MBT advantage more to their side.

What I found interesting is their desire to bring the LEOPARD 1A5 up to the LEOPARD 1A5+/A6 standard. As you might recall I threw the possibility of this for the Ukraine if they ever get those tanks from Germany (LEOPARD 2A5.) Again, the LEOPARD 1A5+/A6 is armed with the 120mm/L44 and would also be equipped with modern add-on armor applications.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...lynx_ifvs.html

Someone is saying my time is up/lunch/shower/work and TGIF!

Regards,
Pat