Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

Page 921 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
30,238
7,638
136
Biden makes it official, 31 M1s for Ukraine.
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
42,349
24,261
136
A regular US army brigade has about 80-90 main battle tanks. If Ukraine had a mix of around 80-100 modern Main Battle Tanks along with the Infantry fighting vehicles that would allow them to well equip one brigade with this equipment which isn't bad. In suitable ground the Abrams and Leopards should make short work for any Russian T-series tanks. Maybe have supporting Ukraine T-series tanks to go in close and flush out the Russia tanks while the western tanks hand back and support and use their long range capabilities to pick off the Russian tanks.
Yeah though the Bradleys might end up getting most them first with their TOWs.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
42,349
24,261
136
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
From what I understand training will commence on them in Poland soonish. If General Dynamics can deliver units by say the middle of the year should see them in combat soon after.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fenixgoon

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
21,101
8,036
136
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
They keep talking about maintenance of the turbine and that is only takes jet fuel. If my memory serves, it's like the opposite of the selling point for the turbine. Low maintenance, multi fuel capable. Probably spending all the time changing/ cleaning air filters.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,942
5,794
136
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
It'll be interesting to see where and when the training takes place. It wouldn't be good to have the tanks sitting in Ukraine before the crews are ready to go. Sitting, they'd be prime targets for the Rooskies to score a propaganda coup or two. Even if they never engage, they will have done their job, which was to get the Germans onboard.

Biden's decision, reportedly against the wishes of the Pentagon, gave Germany the cover they felt they needed, and now the damn has broken.

But Putin still hopes to win a war of attrition. It's best Ukraine takes back what they can, while they can. I feel the longer the war goes on, the more it could eventually favor Russia. Russia may look like a joke now, and they sure have earned that, but . . . they're bigger and their closer.

And . . .

Unlike some others, I don't see Putin being overthrown anytime soon. He's the Czar. I don't think we in the West fully appreciate how fully craven subordination, fatalism and a seemingly bottomless tolerance of deep suffering is etched right into the warp and woof in the psyche of Russians. Russia is . . . different. Remember, for one, unlike the rest of Europe, Russia did not experience the Renaissance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zor Prime

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,942
5,794
136
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
They keep talking about maintenance of the turbine and that is only takes jet fuel. If my memory serves, it's like the opposite of the selling point for the turbine. Low maintenance, multi fuel capable. Probably spending all the time changing/ cleaning air filters.
Yeah, the "jet fuel only" argument was a canard. From up here in the peanut gallery, I'm guessing one of the Pentagon's main concerns was the electronics and accompanying hardware in the tanks falling into Russian hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fenixgoon

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,840
5,862
126
I'm not sure how grateful Xi is going to be for Putin for waking the west up about it's limited munitions production capacity.
A ground war in Europe will be NOTHING like an air and naval battle in the Pacific.
Not sure it would even have the same nations, aside from the US.
Artillery shells won't be bothering Xi.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
3,997
2,387
146
A ground war in Europe will be NOTHING like an air and naval battle in the Pacific.
Not sure it would even have the same nations, aside from the US.
Artillery shells won't be bothering Xi.
True, but the lessons about munition usage apply to naval and air engagements too. That recent paper on defeating an invasion of Taiwan said the same thing. Many, many more missiles would be more gooder.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
42,349
24,261
136
A ground war in Europe will be NOTHING like an air and naval battle in the Pacific.
Not sure it would even have the same nations, aside from the US.
Artillery shells won't be bothering Xi.
If Xi wants to come ashore in Taiwan 155mm shells and GMLRS are going to have something to say about that. But bigger picture the Pentagon has now recognized that stocks of all sorts of munitions are probably too low and that production takes too long. They are moving to increase capacity and issue multiyear contracts for all sorts of stuff.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,840
5,862
126
Unlike some others, I don't see Putin being overthrown anytime soon. He's the Czar. I don't think we in the West fully appreciate how fully craven subordination, fatalism and a seemingly bottomless tolerance of deep suffering is etched right into the warp and woof in the psyche of Russians. Russia is . . . different. Remember, for one, unlike the rest of Europe, Russia did not experience the Renaissance.
Russia is a larger North Korea.
It is extremely disappointing how this has turned out.
We offered them a western life style, we showered them in access and western money. Kid gloves into what should have been a budding partnership.

It wasn't enough. Putin just had to try and rebuild the USSR on the bones of his former allies. He saw a future full of death and chose that over coexistence. His nation is a bunch of slaves, and if they replace him... it would be due to a failure to achieve their goal, not because of how horrible genocidal ambition is. Their future leaders will almost certainly carry on the mission, we must maintain a united front to block them from killing any more people. If not, we must act to make them pay for the death and suffering they cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
7,652
3,658
136
Wouldn't it be interesting if when WW3 breaks out that Germany would be part of "The Allies"?
I think Russia would love there to be a WW3 but I don't see any countries jumping up and down, itching to be part of the Russian side in this..

At the moment it's pretty much:

1. Russians on 1 side

2. The Allies on the other side

And The Neutrals who care about only themselves and want to play both sides and make money/ steal wealth and treasures like Switzerland, Germany, China and India.

If I'm wrong on this assessment, let me know..

Maybe Trumpistan/ Tucker Carlson Fuckheadistan but that isn't a real country with military might that can effect the battlefield in Ukraine at the moment is it?
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
12,020
5,688
136
Geez, getting tanks was like pulling a molar using tweezers! It's a start.

So, at this rate, the prevailing prediction of 2-3 more years of war is looking accurate. UA needs needs more additional armored battalions than, uh, one. I hope up arming the UAF goes a bit better than this. If I were Zelensky - I'd be disheartened (though he won't show it). Many more Ukrainians are going to die.

I know we need a strong and secure NATO to fold the Ukraine into, instead of the tattered one we had, but this is tough to watch.
 

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
7,652
3,658
136
I know we need a strong and secure NATO to fold the Ukraine into, instead of the tattered one we had, but this is tough to watch.
Had?

We are in tatters with Hungary and Turkey stopping us from actually doing what we want.

I honestly think NATO's politics are slowly showing it's problems and it's going to be replaced by a NATO 2.0 without Hungary and Turkey and instead adding Finland and Sweden and allowing Ukraine to join.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
11,592
9,040
146
not that the abrams isn't an awesome tank, but the US position was that it's so much more complicated than other tanks - operations, logistics, and maintenance - that it's difficult to deploy. and training and deployment certainly won't happen immediately.

but even if it's just to get germany off its ass with Leopard exports, that's 31 M1s well spent for democracy in Ukraine.

assuming the M1s do get deployed next year (what i read as far as how long training and logistics setup would take), i have no doubt they will be highly effective
They could have the m1s idling in the back charging cellphones and I'd be happy because one way or another, Ukraine's got some armor to deploy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fenixgoon

Leeea

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2020
2,738
4,124
106
They could have the m1s idling in the back charging cellphones and I'd be happy because one way or another, Ukraine's got some armor to deploy.
The more recent versions of the m1 with the APU are actually quite fuel efficient when idling. Probably as efficient as the average generator for the same task.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
20,654
10,306
136
It unfortunately sounds like it's going to take months for those to arrive, but that may give Russia pause if it thinks it can launch a renewed assault in the spring. Russian tanks already have trouble cracking Ukranian defenses; they might not stand a chance against M1 Abrams tanks.
Thats not the point, the point is the go-ahead for every other nation to flood Ukraine with Leopards…
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drach

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
20,654
10,306
136
Had?

We are in tatters with Hungary and Turkey stopping us from actually doing what we want.

I honestly think NATO's politics are slowly showing it's problems and it's going to be replaced by a NATO 2.0 without Hungary and Turkey and instead adding Finland and Sweden and allowing Ukraine to join.
This 100%. Fuck Erdogan and Orban right in the ass with huge non lubricated objects specifically cause they’re both homophobic assholes. Take pictures.
Fuck Hungary right out of the EU as well, let em have a taste of the other side.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11 and Drach

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
12,020
5,688
136
Yeah, the "jet fuel only" argument was a canard. From up here in the peanut gallery, I'm guessing one of the Pentagon's main concerns was the electronics and accompanying hardware in the tanks falling into Russian hands.
Yeah, that a great one. US Army to congress - and it can run on any grade of petrol, diesel, aviation fuel or kerosene.

US Army to Ukraine - it needs special jet fuel.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
42,349
24,261
136
Now that Germany has relented Ukraine can likely lay its hands on hundreds of other tanks like Leopard 1A5 and Challenger 1s with minimal fuss.
 
  • Love
Reactions: cytg111

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
12,738
7,872
136
They keep talking about maintenance of the turbine and that is only takes jet fuel. If my memory serves, it's like the opposite of the selling point for the turbine. Low maintenance, multi fuel capable. Probably spending all the time changing/ cleaning air filters.
Turbines can burn different fuels, but not on the fly, they have to have fuel nozzles changed and returned. It also has to be relatively highly refined fuel, your can't just dump bunker oil in them.

Both Royal Caribbean and Union Pacific went to turbines at one point and then very quickly went back to diesels. The huge benefit of turbines is the power density. I worked on an engine that was about the size of a standard V8, only a few hundred pounds, and could output 3,000 shaft HP. They are expensive to maintain though and require continuous inspections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo and Ajay

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
12,020
5,688
136
Had?

We are in tatters with Hungary and Turkey stopping us from actually doing what we want.

I honestly think NATO's politics are slowly showing it's problems and it's going to be replaced by a NATO 2.0 without Hungary and Turkey and instead adding Finland and Sweden and allowing Ukraine to join.
No, we really need Turkey in NATO. Just look at a map. We'll have to put up with some BS posturing and BS demands for a bit. I think he’ll cave after some apologies are said b/4 the cameras and a few deals slide under the table.

There's a chance that with a weakened Russia, Syria and Iraq - he fancies himself occupying a larger stage of his own. That would be a loss for us in the southern flank. If I don’t think it will play out that way.

Hungary - I don’t like puzzles with a missing piece ;). They can step out - they’ll be surrounded by NATO countries anyway, so they get the benefits of the alliance without being in it. Orbán is an autocrat, but he’s a bigger problem for the EU than NATO I think.

Germany's is the biggest problem for NATO. They are in a pretty confused state right now. They were in their happy place before Russia wrecked it. Good economy, cheap gas and oil from Russia. Great banking relationships. A small military budget, mainly there so they could sell their gear to others. And those savings were available to spend on public infrastructure and benefits. What’s not to like (me - blows raspberries).
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
12,020
5,688
136
Now that Germany has relented Ukraine can likely lay its hands on hundreds of other tanks like Leopard 1A5 and Challenger 1s with minimal fuss.
I hope that’s the case and that deals are being negotiated as we speak. That would cheer me up (lol, not that it’s about me).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY