The War in the Ukraine

O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
memfisa said:
Not so fast. Abrams aren't exactly on their way to Ukraine just yet. It appears the announcement was more to trick the Germans than to get M1s on the battlefield ASAP. It's now being reported new build M1s will go to the Ukraine, in "months or years" whatever that translates to.

Disappointing, however does lend even more credence to my thought that the US is trying to oust German MIC from the tank market

Gonna be tough to sell a Leo after the Ukraine. It's a clever plat and if it's what happens it will surely keep the M1 away from the front long enough to clear out whatever stocks are available and pave the way for emergency orders of Abrams heh.

I guess we might as well ditch our 40 or so serviceable Leo's while we're at it

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Even if the Abrams are sent in time, the US can make a backdoor deal with Ukraine to keep them in the Ukraine-Poland border, never seeing actual combat lol

The US has thousands of ways to ensure that their tank will never see combat in Ukraine. As you said, the real loser here is German MIC
 
LawLeadsToPeace

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
Delusional. The atgm penetrated inside which causes the crew compartment to super heat into the temperatures required to cook off everything inside the tank.

The crew could only survive if it is a handheld older rpg type weapon which isn't supposed to deal with modern tanks.

If the turret flies off or not mostly comes down to how heavy the projectile used to hit the tank was. View attachment 105830
A weak point hit by the likes of Kornet or Hellfire will generally cause that more often than not.

Whereas a hit on weak points with lighter weapons will disable the tank with less major damage, so the crew can survive.
View attachment 105832

Abrams from the video had 0 survivors. Abrams from the above quoted still images probably had surviving crew. The major difference is what they were hit by.
Click to expand...
To counter your points on the temperature roasting the crew alive and the missile type claim:

As you can tell, the tank in the link I posted above was hit in a similar fashion by a Metis-M, which is newer than the Tosan 1 (a copy of the 1970's designed Konkurs), and the ammo also cooked off. However the commander at least survived despite the cook off, and the driver still drove the vehicle. That footage that you addressed was too short and grainy to determine whether or not the crew survived.
 
A

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
LawLeadsToPeace said:
To counter your points on the temperature roasting the crew alive and the missile type claim:


As you can tell, the tank in the link I posted above was hit in a similar fashion by a Metis-M, which is newer than the Tosan 1 (a copy of the 1970's designed Konkurs), and the ammo also cooked off. However the commander at least survived despite the cook off, and the driver still drove the vehicle. That footage that you addressed was too short and grainy to determine whether or not the crew survived.
Click to expand...
Few observations :
1. the attacker specifically targeted the ammo storage.
2. in similat situation the T-72 either missed, or even with hit it had minor damage only.

So, what is the point with this video ?

Yes, the Abrams is a big and bulky target, and yes, it i guranteed to make it non operable with a single hit on the side of the turet, even if the tank is digged into to ground.

So, how this video proove any superior characteristics?
 
LawLeadsToPeace

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
Anlsvrthng said:
Few observations :
1. the attacker specifically targeted the ammo storage.
2. in similat situation the T-72 either missed, or even with hit it had minor damage only.

So, what is the point with this video ?

Yes, the Abrams is a big and bulky target, and yes, it i guranteed to make it non operable with a single hit on the side of the turet, even if the tank is digged into to ground.

So, how this video proove any superior characteristics?
Click to expand...
I was addressing the user's claims that missile types are a determinant factor in whether or not ammo cook off will the M1A2 crew and that the temperature most likely killed the crew, not whether or not the M1 series is superior to the T-72 series. I made that clear literally in the first sentence of my post. Arguments around which weapon is superior is generally dumb since weapons are all designed around a specific doctrine during a certain time period.
 
Last edited:
B

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
LawLeadsToPeace said:
To counter your points on the temperature roasting the crew alive and the missile type claim:

As you can tell, the tank in the link I posted above was hit in a similar fashion by a Metis-M, which is newer than the Tosan 1 (a copy of the 1970's designed Konkurs), and the ammo also cooked off. However the commander at least survived despite the cook off, and the driver still drove the vehicle. That footage that you addressed was too short and grainy to determine whether or not the crew survived.
Click to expand...
The difference is in if it hits penetrates the hull or just the turret. I'm pretty sure in the first example, the missile hits the side of the tank dead on whereas here it's a glancing upper turret hit, where there sits no crew members.

But Ill concede in that the first footage is rather grainy and stop further tank debate at that.
 
H

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
plawolf said:
Thats because the strategy has changed from taking ground to attrition the AFU.

The previous strategy resulted in quicker map progress where they managed to capture territory fairly quickly, but also allowed the AFU to retain the lion share of their troops and equipment from abandoned positions.

As the Russians learnt to their cost, that just meant they faced more defenders at the next objective and also allowed the AFU to accumulate sufficient reserves of man and material to launch their own offensives. And the Russians belatedly realised that with their own manpower deficiencies but (inaccurate) firepower dominance, attacking fixed positions works out far better for them than defending, especially against mass tactical spam Zerg rushes across open territory where the AFU can just rush through their fire zones without taking crippling losses due to how inaccurate most Russian firepower is.

So now the objective is not to take territory as fast as possible but rather to find choice locations to bait the AFU into pouring as much men and materials into defending as possible while the Russians grind them to meat paste with area bombardment.

The attacks are spearheaded by Wagner penal legions for the Russians, so it’s a very good trade for them as they are trading their own disposable forces with dubious combat effectiveness for some of the best of the AFU.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware that this is the reasoning they chose to explain why it took them weeks to take Soledar and Bakhmut suburbs. I personally don't believe it or put much stock into it.

Temstar said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1618285026508144640
155th brigade of the Pacific Fleet and 7th operational-combat tactical formation are now fighting inside Ugledar. Ukranian positions in the town is taking tremendous amount of fire apparently.
Click to expand...
About time.
 
H

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
kokole said:
So, NATO countries have decided to send tanks to Ukraine. But what happened to the thousands of tanks that Ukraine had before the conflict started?! Just asking for a friend. Also, what about the hundreds of tanks they "captured from Russia"?!

The Trouble with Western Tanks in Ukraine
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Some of those tanks were used by Ukraine, especially in the beginning of the war, though I've seen them pop up every now and then even now.

A lot of "captured" vehicles tend to be damaged or in areas that are too dangerous to meaningfully bring them back to base, so they tend to be scavenged quickly for parts like the machine gun or ammunition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top