Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

I3BrigPvSk said:
And having a logistical nightmare.
Click to expand...

We had something bordering on a logistical nightmare during the Falklands war, Britain ordered a certain ammunition from the manufacturer in Belgium, who refused to supply Britain because they didn't agree with Britain taking the Falklands back. I forget what type it was, but it goes to show how dangerous it can be having one foreign supplier as the sole source of certain supplies.

If I remember correctly this isn't the first time Belgium has refused to supply ammunition.
 
Last edited:
I3BrigPvSk said:
I don't see that as a major problem. The Ukrainians got upgraded T-55s which have a fourth crew member without any major issues. Swedish recruits learn to load the main gun pretty fast and I don't think Ukrainian recruits are worse than Swedish recruits. Usually all members of the crew must be able to take aný of the other crew members position. The gunner and the driver require more training than to be a loader. It also depends on how many MBTs Ukraine gets. Ukraine needs also most likely repair/recover vehicles for the Western MBTs. The American Abrams require a huge logistical chain and that will be an issue for Ukraine.


But if the Ukrainians prefer to get MBTs without a crew of four. The Leclerc and the South Korean K2 Black Panther are better alternatives.
Click to expand...
To be honest I never knew the T-55 had a four man crew, I assumed it followed standard Russian practice of three man crews.

But I think you are right in that all these weapons systems must inevitably create a logistics issue.


BritinBritain said:
We had something bordering on a logistical nightmare during the Falklands war, Britain ordered a certain ammunition from the manufacturer in Belgium, who refused to supply Britain because they didn't agree with Britain taking the Falklands back. I forget what type it was, but it goes to show how dangerous it can be having one foreign supplier as the sole source of certain supplies.

If I remember correctly this isn't the first time Belgium has refused to supply ammunition.
Click to expand...

Belgium has sent about 60 million Euro in weaponry to Ukraine along with a lot of non-lethal equipment.

Austria appears to be the foot dragger in Europe with regards to supporting Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
MontyB said:
Belgium has sent about 60 million Euro in weaponry to Ukraine along with a lot of non-lethal equipment.

Austria appears to be the foot dragger in Europe with regards to supporting Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Pity they didn't do that for us during the Falklands war.
 
MontyB said:
To be honest I never knew the T-55 had a four man crew, I assumed it followed standard Russian practice of three man crews.

But I think you are right in that all these weapons systems must inevitably create a logistics issue.




Belgium has sent about 60 million Euro in weaponry to Ukraine along with a lot of non-lethal equipment.

Austria appears to be the foot dragger in Europe with regards to supporting Ukraine.
Click to expand...

The T-62 has also a crew of four and both sides have it, but the T-62's main gun has an odd caliber. It has a 115mm main gun. The 125mm main gun appeared first in the T-64, but the Russians and the Chinese have stayed with the 125mm since then.

The Ukrainians will get Western MBTs and when there are Leo2s in storage across Europe and outside Europe too. When UE gets the Bradley, Marder, different self propelled howitzers, more and missiles with a longer range to the M270 MLRS, HIMARS, they will need MBTs to either to be used during counter offensives or to counter any Russian offensive. MBTs can also provide with direct fire support for the motorized/mechanized infantry.

Btw, Canada is adding to the Ukrainian logistical nightmare with providing the Ukrainian army with APCs based upon the LAV- vehicles
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
The T-62 has also a crew of four and both sides have it, but the T-62's main gun has an odd caliber. It has a 115mm main gun. The 125mm main gun appeared first in the T-64, but the Russians and the Chinese have stayed with the 125mm since then.

The Ukrainians will get Western MBTs and when there are Leo2s in storage across Europe and outside Europe too. When UE gets the Bradley, Marder, different self propelled howitzers, more and missiles with a longer range to the M270 MLRS, HIMARS, they will need MBTs to either to be used during counter offensives or to counter any Russian offensive. MBTs can also provide with direct fire support for the motorized/mechanized infantry.

Btw, Canada is adding to the Ukrainian logistical nightmare with providing the Ukrainian army with APCs based upon the LAV- vehicles
Click to expand...

I think in the rush to get anything that fires to Ukraine we have overlooked the logistical nightmare that may ensue, I guess the problem is only going to be parts and maintenance as at least most of the weapons run a NATO standard weapon.
 
BritinBritain said:
Pity they didn't do that for us during the Falklands war.
Click to expand...

I kind of understand their quandary as being a small country with limited resources we tend to want to sit on the edges and provide humanitarian assistance, however, I doubt the Falklands war was ever going to blow up out of proportion like the Ukrainian one could and I am not sure this is one we really can ignore.
 
MontyB said:
I think in the rush to get anything that fires to Ukraine we have overlooked the logistical nightmare that may ensue, I guess the problem is only going to be parts and maintenance as at least most of the weapons run a NATO standard weapon.
Click to expand...

That's why I think giving them JAS Gripen is a bad idea. It is better to give them F-16. The F-16s will be replaced by the F-35 and a lot of countries have the F-16s.

Ukraine has now the HIMARS, the M270 MLRS, The German MLRS, the German self propelled howitzer PzH 2000, The M109 self propelled howitzer, the M177 howitzer, the French CEASAR howitzer, the small German howitzer is on its way, The Swedish Archer howitzer is on its way, and all the Russian made artillery. Fortunately, all the artillery systems from the West can use the same ammunition. All these systems have helped Ukraine, but what helped them most is the training they received between 2014 up to the beginning of the war.
 
MontyB said:
To be honest I never knew the T-55 had a four man crew, I assumed it followed standard Russian practice of three man crews.

But I think you are right in that all these weapons systems must inevitably create a logistics issue.




Belgium has sent about 60 million Euro in weaponry to Ukraine along with a lot of non-lethal equipment.

Austria appears to be the foot dragger in Europe with regards to supporting Ukraine.
Click to expand...

About Belgium
1 60 million Euro in weaponry is meaningless as it does not say which and how much weaponry has been delivered
2 It is also unlikely (most declarations of the Belgian authorities are good for under the bus ) as Belgium has a very small army with a very small weapon reserve and as the ,de facto, only Belgian weapon producer (FN ) can not produce sufficient weapons in a short time . In September they said they would give 12 million Euro of military aid (machine guns and ammunition )to Ukraine (when ? no one knows ) and non -lethal equipment in 2023 .
3 The same for non-lethal equipment .
About Austria : Austria is neutral ( not member of NATO ) with a very small army and has no obligation to support Ukraine . Besides :Austria is almost totally depending on Russian gas .
But : does Ireland deliver more than Austria ?
 
lljadw said:
About Belgium
1 60 million Euro in weaponry is meaningless as it does not say which and how much weaponry has been delivered
2 It is also unlikely (most declarations of the Belgian authorities are good for under the bus ) as Belgium has a very small army with a very small weapon reserve and as the ,de facto, only Belgian weapon producer (FN ) can not produce sufficient weapons in a short time . In September they said they would give 12 million Euro of military aid (machine guns and ammunition )to Ukraine (when ? no one knows ) and non -lethal equipment in 2023 .
3 The same for non-lethal equipment .
About Austria : Austria is neutral ( not member of NATO ) with a very small army and has no obligation to support Ukraine . Besides :Austria is almost totally depending on Russian gas .
But : does Ireland deliver more than Austria ?
Click to expand...

As I mentioned earlier we are in the same boat, New Zealand is a small country with a small defence budget and a military more focused on Pacific support than a European war.
Basically we just don't have a lot to give.
 
MontyB said:
As I mentioned earlier we are in the same boat, New Zealand is a small country with a small defence budget and a military more focused on Pacific support than a European war.
Basically we just don't have a lot to give.
Click to expand...

A lot of countries have the same problem. After the Cold War the majority of NATO and non member countries reduced their armed forces. It is easy to deactivate and reduce, but it takes much longer to increase and activate the armed forces. To find the COs and the NCOs from platoon level up to the brigade level isn't easy. Provide them with vehicles, weapon systems, facilities, and getting the funding for exercises.

Germany is under pressure to allow other NATO and not member countries to provide Ukraine with Leo2s. They will give in for the pressure. Germany has been ridiculed for its stance on providing Ukraine with German made defense systems.

Ukraine wants the Leo2. Russian made MBTs don't have a great reverse speed. The Ukrainian T-84 has improved the reverse speed. A MBT without it can face a danger after an engagement when it disengage to regroup.

The systems Ukraine gets don't create a logistical problem immediately, the logistical problems emerge with a few months when the systems need maintenance. Unless they get hit by the Russians and need to be repaired.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
Yes, the chief of staff take over the command and that's odd. Russia is planning to mobilize even more soldiers. That might hurt their economy even more than the sanctions.
Click to expand...

I am dubious about the idea of them mobilising another half a million troops, they have struggled to equip the 300k they called up earlier with the basic gear and most had to provide for themselves and I agree that the economy may not be able to take that hit.
 
MontyB said:
I am dubious about the idea of them mobilising another half a million troops, they have struggled to equip the 300k they called up earlier with the basic gear and most had to provide for themselves and I agree that the economy may not be able to take that hit.
Click to expand...

If Russia mobilize about 500 000 it might end the war faster when these Russians begin to return in body bags.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
The T-62 has also a crew of four and both sides have it, but the T-62's main gun has an odd caliber. It has a 115mm main gun. The 125mm main gun appeared first in the T-64, but the Russians and the Chinese have stayed with the 125mm since then.

The Ukrainians will get Western MBTs and when there are Leo2s in storage across Europe and outside Europe too. When UE gets the Bradley, Marder, different self propelled howitzers, more and missiles with a longer range to the M270 MLRS, HIMARS, they will need MBTs to either to be used during counter offensives or to counter any Russian offensive. MBTs can also provide with direct fire support for the motorized/mechanized infantry.

Btw, Canada is adding to the Ukrainian logistical nightmare with providing the Ukrainian army with APCs based upon the LAV- vehicles
Click to expand...

Yesterday,the French president Macron declared that within 2 months (half March ) France would send AMX tanks to Ukraine, but he was unable or unwilling to specify the number of these tanks .
Thus, I do not sea any reason to give any importance to what he said .
The Germans promise Leos,also without specifying the numbers, but no German Leo has already arrived In Ukraine .
Thus also empty promises .
Czechia said that it would deliver old Soviet tanks to Ukraine,at the condition that in exchange Germany would give the Czechs Leos.
But here also, we have only hollow declarations .
Belgium (PM De Croo ) promised a lot of military and other support, but it has nothing in cash .
Ukraine refused tanks from Portugal ,because they were totally obsolete .
All depends on the willingness of US Congress to continue to give an (unspecified ) amount of aid to Ukraine , And,it is doubtfull that this aid will continue .
 
I don't think it is accurate to disregard things that haven't happened yet, the growth in Western support for Ukraine has been incremental throughout the war, let's face it 12 months ago all Germany was offering helmets and a change of underwear now they have handed over missile systems and IFVs are on the way.

I don't think it is unrealistic that if this war goes another year Ukraine will be fielding western MBTs and flying western jets simply because the supply of Soviet stuff will have run out.
 
France has supported Ukraine with self propelled howitzer CEASAR, the air defense system Crotale, ATGM MILAN, TRF1 howitzers, Mistral missiles, vehicles, fuel, individual equipment, ammunition, and training. The French will give the Ukrainians the light tank

Germany can prevent others to send German made weapons and from at the beginning of the war only to send helmets and underwear. They were ridiculed for it and now they are providing with self propelled howitzers, AT weapons. They if they haven't already allowed Poland to give Ukraine Leo2s. Finland has also promised to give Leo2s to Ukraine.

Btw, It was Spain, not Portugal that have Leo2s in a bad shape. What EU/NATO is working on is if all countries with Leo2s give Ukraine between 10-14 Leo2s, Ukraine will get Leo2s for at least a brigade battlegroup with MBTs, IFVs, artillery and additional support units.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
France has supported Ukraine with self propelled howitzer CEASAR, the air defense system Crotale, ATGM MILAN, TRF1 howitzers, Mistral missiles, vehicles, fuel, individual equipment, ammunition, and training. The French will give the Ukrainians the light tank

Germany can prevent others to send German made weapons and from at the beginning of the war only to send helmets and underwear. They were ridiculed for it and now they are providing with self propelled howitzers, AT weapons. They if they haven't already allowed Poland to give Ukraine Leo2s. Finland has also promised to give Leo2s to Ukraine.

Btw, It was Spain, not Portugal that have Leo2s in a bad shape. What EU/NATO is working on is if all countries with Leo2s give Ukraine between 10-14 Leo2s, Ukraine will get Leo2s for at least a brigade battlegroup with MBTs, IFVs, artillery and additional support units.
Click to expand...

A bit of an update, Germany has claimed that as yet no state has applied for an export licence to ship Leopard tanks and until they do and it is approved the Polish offer is not happening any time soon.
However, Britain is now offering 10-12 Challenger 2s.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/...raine-heavy-tanks-as-german-leos-are-on-hold/
 
MontyB said:
A bit of an update, Germany has claimed that as yet no state has applied for an export licence to ship Leopard tanks and until they do and it is approved the Polish offer is not happening any time soon.
However, Britain is now offering 10-12 Challenger 2s.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/...raine-heavy-tanks-as-german-leos-are-on-hold/
Click to expand...

Is an offer of 10/12 tanks,which will not change the situation, not ridiculous ?
For a serious offer, a minimum of 50 tanks would be needed .
If defense news was honest, they would say :''Britain to give Ukraine 10/12 heavy tanks ''.
The fact that they are hiding the number of tanks is significant .
 
lljadw said:
Is an offer of 10/12 tanks,which will not change the situation, not ridiculous ?
For a serious offer, a minimum of 50 tanks would be needed .
If defense news was honest, they would say :''Britain to give Ukraine 10/12 heavy tanks ''.
The fact that they are hiding the number of tanks is significant .
Click to expand...

It would depend on the result of giving the tanks.
If it is just 10 tanks then it is meaningless but if that 10 tanks provides the impetus for more then it is meaningful.
My guess is that it is a symbolic gesture designed to pave the way for more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top