Re: MBT's
 

And I totally agree with yours above. Time will be the "arbitrator" for the now speculated.

Also,
“In the first Gulf War, in 1991 for example, the American and British tanks were knocking out Iraqi T-55s from 23 kilometers,” Delaney said.

“We’ve got multiple pieces of evidence that Russian industry, which had been given access to Western technology in the 90s, is really suffering from the restrictions,” Taylor said. “We’re hearing about them taking chips out of washing machines. And when you’re doing that, then you’re really obviously in quite a bit of difficulty. ”

“I think faced with Western weapons, the Russians must expect very heavy casualties if they expect to move forward using the T-55 system,” Taylor said. “It’s a move of desperation to be using weapons of that vintage. ”


Admiral Samuel Paparo: We call it the Decade of Concern. We've seen a tenfold increase in the size of the PRC Navy.

Norah O'Donnell: Technically speaking, the Chinese now have the largest navy in the world, in terms of number of ships, correct?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. Yes.

Norah O'Donnell: Do the numbers matter?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. As the saying goes, "Quantity has a quality all its own."


"Norah O'Donnell: How much more advanced is U.S. submarine technology than Chinese capability?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: A generation.

Norah O'Donnell: A generation.

Admiral Samuel Paparo: And-- by generation, think 10 or 20 years. But broadly, I don't really talk in depth about submarine capabilities. It's the silent service."

Re: MBT's
 

And I totally agree with yours above. Time will be the "arbitrator" for the now speculated and the truth.

Also,
“In the first Gulf War, in 1991 for example, the American and British tanks were knocking out Iraqi T-55s from 23 kilometers,” Delaney said.

“We’ve got multiple pieces of evidence that Russian industry, which had been given access to Western technology in the 90s, is really suffering from the restrictions,” Taylor said. “We’re hearing about them taking chips out of washing machines. And when you’re doing that, then you’re really obviously in quite a bit of difficulty. ”

“I think faced with Western weapons, the Russians must expect very heavy casualties if they expect to move forward using the T-55 system,” Taylor said. “It’s a move of desperation to be using weapons of that vintage. ”

From a recent 60 Minutes interview:
Admiral Samuel Paparo (COMPACFLT): We call it the Decade of Concern. We've seen a tenfold increase in the size of the PRC Navy.

Norah O'Donnell: Technically speaking, the Chinese now have the largest navy in the world, in terms of number of ships, correct?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. Yes.

Norah O'Donnell: Do the numbers matter?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. As the saying goes, "Quantity has a quality all its own. (Russia throughout its modern military history has ALWAYS operated on this simple principle.) "
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...84a2ad7a&ei=36

And from earlier in the interview:

"Norah O'Donnell: How much more advanced is U.S. submarine technology than Chinese capability?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: A generation.

Norah O'Donnell: A generation.

Admiral Samuel Paparo: And-- by generation, think 10 or 20 years. But broadly, I don't really talk in depth about submarine capabilities. It's the silent service. "

Because I can!?! :D

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

23 .... what planet was this on?
As a sailor (well ... bubblehead ... not your typical bluejacket) you know as well as I do an object would need to be apx. 33m high to even be seen at 23km due to the earth curvature. I guess Iraqi T-55s are REALLY big tanks!
Tho I suppose the American/Brit tanks could have been siting atop a sand dune ;)

Yes, yes it does.
BUT there are limits.
I seriously doubt a Roman Legion could defeat a modern USMC infantry platoon (apx 44-50 people) IF it had enough ammo and a decent position to defend.

Re: MBT's
 

Here's your ROTFLMAO for the day......

https://www.jpost.com/international/...0alongside,%22

so far it's not working out quite that way..........

https://s4.reutersmedia.net/resource...UKRAINE-CRISIS

https://i0.wp.com/asiatimes.com/wp-c...00%2C710&ssl=1

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-co...fit=1481%2C864

Re: MBT's
 

I have first hand experience with T-72s (don't know the models we encountered) and the T-55's (same on the models) versus our M1A1 tanks in Iraq and Kuwait.

To put it nicely, the T-55's are piles of junk and coffin for four brother and no match to any modern western tank built since 1980.

The T-72s are piles of useless metal scraps when faced by M1A1s.

If the Ukraine's get M1A2's then the Soviets, sorry I mean the Russian's stand no chance.

I am biased but I don't think the T-80s, T-90s or even the T-14s stand any chance against either US crewed M1A1s or any well trained M1A2 crew.

So far the only two things the Russians have excelled at are human waves causing mass casualties like WW2 1941 and 1942. Lots of noise and shaking with WW2 style artillery. Oh three things, turning their entire tank force into burnt out rusted landmarks on the Ukrainian soil.

Re: MBT's
 

I have to wonder if the Russians get the joke :cool:

Re: MBT's
 

Only if they saw the movie.........:D

I thought it was a nice touch. Obviously, someone in Ukraine has watched it. Betting quite a few have

Re: MBT's
 

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-co...fit=1481%2C864[


What I got from that was I should make the turret rings bigger........

...and the new green and grey blended make a close approximation of the green that is not burnt off


I tried a little experiment..... then got more creative:)

Rev
https://i.imgur.com/frqdz2L.png

All colours are game palette

Re: MBT's
 

We laugh many times from T-54/55 taken to battlefield but looks like tactics of their usage by Russians is different than MBT. They using them as mobile SP guns and use to shelling Ukrainians position indirectly and as is said here this tactics is probably best usage for this obsolete tanks.

https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and...tive-6797.html

Re: MBT's
 

If that turns out to be the main use for these then we could put them in an indirect fire Unitclass......unfortunately there are no spare ones in the Russian OOB so they would have to be put in with real SP guns


.......and yes, keeping them away from direct engagement with modern tanks is a smart thing to do

Re: MBT's
 

Here article about this towers of T-72 even with movie from Chinese TV from Mariupol.

https://en.defence-ua.com/media/illu...8fa40e0a5d.jpg

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/warsp...ance-6887.html

Re: MBT's
 

FORBES
As Tank Losses Top 2,000, Russia Is Deploying Museum-Grade T-72s From 1974


The latest Russian museum tank to roll into combat is the T-72 Ural


https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=681761506efc

Re: MBT's
 

Well the first 'Western" equipment loses are in. If you don't want to read the whole article which has good info, just proceed to the last para. It seems the AMX question is now resolved.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...adley_ifvs.htm

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Re: MBT's
 

Seems the US Army is getting this:

https://www.defensenews.com/land/202...-in-iraq-wwii/

Re: MBT's
 

And then this came out after the little debacle from the other day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la2q...p=wgIGCgQQAhgB

Take from it what you want or will...

Re: MBT's
 

Nothing is invincible and an arty strike as described is re-creatable in the game
https://i.imgur.com/n2leJYC.png

EDIT

An observation I read which makes a good point.
Note there are no arty impact craters near those vehicles

https://www.armyrecognition.com/imag...Vs_925_001.jpg




EDIT

However, that does not explain the BMR-2 wreck........ so this may be the result of a combination of factors

Re: MBT's
 

I agree nothing is invincible, but too many believe that Western military equipment is or is to the point that it would take similar equipment to take it out. That is because the MIC PR machines have done a fantastic job of selling things. Add in other video games that show tanks like the M1 as these unstoppable machines, and you get the point I am driving at. At least here on this forum, we deal with reason. In other places, yeah anything pointed out that explains why the stuff was destroyed/damaged, etc...and it's like WWF/WWE match.

Re: MBT's
 

YOU WILL FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THE BELOW LINK I POSTED IN MY LAST HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE WEBSITE. OBVOISLY, THEY FOUND SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT.

FALSE FLAG? THEY GIVE NO REASON UNLESS YOU CAN READ FRENCH WHEN YOU CLICK ON IT BELOW.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...adley_ifvs.htm

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

If you google

first_48_hours_of_ukrainian_counter-offensive_see_unprecedented_loss_of_leopard_2a6_ta nks_bradley_ifvs

you will find the article

Re: MBT's
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7h6JrNdfgY

1~ minute of Leopard 2s engaging like it's 1943.

Re: MBT's
 

There was one comment...........

Yep...it is. Going to say FAKE about this. That was something like WoT. The trees and earth just don't look real enough

Forbes used the same shot

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=751bb0365931

I am just not convinced that is real

Re: MBT's
 

Further

https://i.imgur.com/1woQO5i.png

aside from the colours just not looking real the turret detail see does not quite match up with reality

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...C3%9C_2012.jpg


It's close but it just does not ring true for me. Looks more like WoT or War Thunder

Re: MBT's
 

Hi, guy that has a modern computer that can run really, REALLY high-end video games here. There's quite a few ways to determine whether this is fake or not, but I'm going to run through just a few of them.

1) Shadows: It's the Year of Our Lord 2023 and computers still have a time and a half trying to render shadows. Sure they're good at rendering big shadows like, say, the silhouette of a tank, but the closer you zoom in the more lines you'll start to see. DRG, that image you posted shows some insanely good shadows. If this was a game like Warthunder at that close a zoom you'd start to see little jagged lines where the shadows are rendering at a lower quality

2) Smoke: Smoke simulation is fun, so much fun in fact that people will spend time and money to not have to deal with it! When smoke is rendered it tends to appears as a sort of texture that expands to fill out a screen. It'll clip through ground and phase out of reality and all sorts of excitingly boring stuff. In the footage shown it.. Doesn't do that. At 0:13 that smoke reacts extremely rapidly, something modern computers aren't really good at

3) Trees: Trees? Trees. Most modern video game trees look horrible up close. They tend to be little tree-like greebles stuck onto a solid object to make it look authentic from far away. The trees at the start of the video? Nope, those are real.

Here's a link showing off some of WarThunder's newest graphics back in 2002.

Additionally Here is a picture of War Thunder's Leopard 2A6 model.
The detail is excellent, but it's missing all of the 'clutter' on the tank in the video. Namely the twigs stuck in the small spaces and a few of the bolts on top of the turret -- things a game would have a real tough time replicating.

Sorry for the derailment here, just figured that with all this talk of modern graphics and AI it's important to recognize what's in a game and what isn't. As it stands? This looks nearly 100% authentic to me, unless someone took time and energy to create an incredibly detailed render of the Leopard 2A6 and design a pixar-quality video around it.

Re: MBT's
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbBX...&feature=share

FYI

Re: MBT's
 

Well, it's been a while since I posted anything out here. So, I'll start with May for at least today. It'll serve as a reminder that there are other countries looking into or improving their own tanks.

ARGENTINA: They have by this time completed testing of the new improved TAM 2CA2 medium tank. I believe I submitted an improved version several years ago. This will be a major improvement with new digital systems to include a much enhanced FCS. A new power plant that gives it a faster game speed both on and off road.
ON MY LIST.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...dium_tank.html

BRAZIL: It is of course noteworthy that they are looking at the Chinese VT-4 120mm. However, my attention is focused more on the upgrade package put into the LEOPARD 1A5BR which is possibly why they refused to send their tanks to the Ukraine that Germany tried to get based on my earlier reporting.
ON MY LIST
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...ttle_tank.html

CZECH REPUBLIC: The first sentence says it all for the time being. This will be a long process I feel outside of our timeline with more on that following for Germany next. But since this would represent a foreign sales tank, I feel at this moment that the standard German LEOPARD 2A7 might be an appropriate tank possibly with some minor tweaks be representative of a foreign sale LEOPARD 2A8.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...h_germany.html

GERMANY: As I posted many months back, Germany ranks in the lower middling of European countries in tanks but also in LEOPARD tanks. Production is still ongoing with the LEOPARD 2A7V but the LEOPARD 2A8 will be a further improvement.

Germany has ordered 18 of these tanks with a further possible follow on order for 105 more. I have already outlined the LEOPARD 2A8. I expect these tanks to reach FOC by mid-summer/fall 2024 certainly not a "bulls' eye" on the dart board by any means (Probably early 2025 is BETTER but being a little optimistic is all.) .

If the additional order is picked up, KMW will start production of them in JUNE 2026 at a rate of 2 UNITS per month. So, my best guess from above is just that based on that additional order start date.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe..._105_more.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...nk_design.html
ON MY LIST

I see my time is up will try to get the others in later.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

May Part 2...

GREECE: They appear to be starting an upgrade program for their LEOPARD 2A4 tanks. The article shows the first example of this tank. This will warrant further investigation.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...ar_ng-mbt.html

NETHERLANDS: It didn't take them long to realize that they made a mistake by getting rid of their tanks. They have been renting the most modern version of the LEOPARD 2A6 since about 2018. I stumbled upon a series of articles that pointed out that the agreement allows the Dutch to use those tanks as needed for national defense. And the unit they are assigned to also regularly holds exercises in the Netherlands.

I intend to submit them whenever the next patch occurs once I identify the right version of the 2A6. I expect when the government makes its decision, they'll pick the LEOPARD 2A7V Export version. They are talking in the sense of forming Battalions of them. Amazing how a war in the "neighborhood" motivates Governments.
ON MY LIST.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe..._its_army.html

ROMANIA: Could be the second operator of the M1A2 Export in Europe. NOTHING has been approved by their government and there doesn't even exist an MOU to start the contract process. We've built the tank already and though I'll be tracking this, I see this as "doubtful" before games end. More likely 2026/2027.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...ion_euros.html

UKRAINE: Well when you have a huge war chest to buy military equipment it allows you to build your own weapons in this case as pictured that would mean the OPLOT-M. There is another follow-on article in late June or early this month concerning the same.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...lot_tanks.html

M1A1 Export: I built this version in the Thread and was not submitted in my last patch. However, it was discussed between Don and me during "our" process, so we have it for both Poland and the Ukraine when they get them or anyone else for that matter.

Before people get all "jacked up" about the next issue, I want to be perfectly clear that they will not get those tanks probably until the late fall as DOD has not changed the timeline for delivery.

As it stands, we've started training about the 2nd week of July as we observe our holidays wherever our troops are serving (And because of the above delivery dates, there's no rush.) We are using our own M1A1 SA (Only one in service with the USA.) AND Crews as part our mission to support our allies.

Training is set to last 10 weeks with completion by mid-September. I'm sure we'll keep them in them until they get theirs unless our unit is scheduled to be elsewhere when the training ends. I'm sure we'll know when the training is finished.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...many_soon.html


I believe along with others that it was already posted that the Ukrainians started training in Denmark on the LEOPARD 1A5 DK in the beginning of May.

THIS ALL ON MY LIST

So that's it for May.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Re: MBT's
 

And to the last, let's not forget about the T-80BVM which is also seeing increased production as posted.

The next I feel couldn't wait because quite frankly we've been waiting on what improvements the Ukrainians would make to the Western tanks they've received.

Well, where it concerns the 47 or so LEOPARD 2A4 tanks the Ukraine operates the answer is they have ERA Kontakt-1. You should based on the picture see quite clearly where it is mounted on the hull.

What you might not notice is that it's also mounted fully on the turret side as well. I bring your attention to the forward 2 block sets of ERA Kontakt-1 and look straight up onto the turret side and you will notice to blocks there in the gap on the camo netting. Also, you can see the same on the aft end of the turret as well.
The way the camo netting is draped over the turret, convinces me it's completely covering the turret side fully.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...nian_army.html

Tomorrow is Mi-7 in 4-DX! I'm not standing by to just watch the movie as much as waiting to be launched instead. The 4-DX is something to be experienced with the right movie. :cool:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Which is what I anticipated would happen and why it was applied in the Ukrainian OOB

Re: MBT's
 

this is another interesting article.

I have several modern campaign games where I honestly think that the Soviet and WP equipment is overrated compared to Western equipment.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukra...ire-2023-7?amp

Re: MBT's
 

Sorry postscript, this is being played out in Ukraine now as we speak (i.e., better Western equipment then Soviet era).

Re: MBT's
 

I recall once being told "The Soviets can make one highly capable thing, but can't mass produce anything". I've long agreed with this.

Soviet equipment is generally "adequate" but very rarely "good". And given Soviet doctrine this makes sense. Waves of units to overwhelm their opposition. You don't need "the best" merely "good enough" because there's so much of it the opponent can't destroy enough of it fast enough to win.

This is NOT to imply the stereotypical "human wave" approach, of uncaring use of poorly equipped (trained?) units thrown into the meat-grinder. Again, their equipment was "adequate".

It was never on par with that of the "West". In spite of claims/delusions to the contrary.

Are there exceptions? Certainly. Was Soviet equipment occasionally "ground-breaking"? Definitely! (Mass use of the AK47 before the West started using "assault rifles" comes to mind.)

Re: MBT's
 

Okay, hold on. Having seen Western stuff in action and having seen the one part we don't see in Ukraine when the US sends us out to fight, the MIC sends their techs with us. In other words, the folks who know how the crap works are there to make sure it works. That is not to say the mechanics or techs the US military has can't keep it running, that they can do.

What this means, is that these techs are there to make sure the wonder weapons keep work as they were sold as or claimed to work as. Go take a hard look at ever single ABCT and you will see BAE and GDLS techs there working right along side the Army-trained mechanics to keep things running and ready to go. Same in the Air Force and the rest.

Remove those civilian contractors and I am willing to bet our stuff won't be that wonder or superior for long. While it's great to believe in our stuff, let's be realistic about things. We are not ten feet tall nor is our stuff perfect. Remember everything we have is made by the lowest bidder who is looking to make a quick buck or ten. And I can back up my comments with 31 years of dealing with armor and infantry and support units.

Re: MBT's
 

Well, kind've deals with the previous comments as I turn to the "vaunted" T-14 ARMATA.

Has anyone besides me noticed we haven't heard a darn thing about the ARMATA since early May when apparently the 14 sent into "combat" were used in an artillery role which was unverified except by Moscow?

Or prior to that which has been verified even by Moscow that the frontline units that were assigned to use them basically found the tanks flawed in many aspects of operations and sent them back?

You should've as I know I posted articles related to both issues along with a handful of others.

I haven't checked but I suspect we have them operational which would make that a travesty.

Well, we have the first news of them since about May. Moscow has withdrawn them for "unspecified" reasons only saying that "testing is still ongoing" so they are gone and never were spotted on the battlefield.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...9e273c6c&ei=19

It has also been several months since the T-90M (As was reported here.) has seen combat in the Ukraine frontlines as well. We know they've gotten a handful of new ones, but all are believed to be in Crimea as coming from various sources.

Just checked ORNX with no news on ARMATA and No Change for the T-90M the last (Of 2/1st in Sep 2022. ) captured on 03 Dec. 2022.

I will gladly take the bet that the second is "stateside" or at the very least under our control and the other in the hands of our European allies to include the Ukraine. Those two captures represent an Intelligence coup for the West and will provide valuable insights to the ARMATA as well.

After the ARMATA showing somewhere near the Ukraine (Actually they were near the border in Crimea.) I don't believe we'll see them operational before mid-2024 if then or at all.

To the contractors they rule the military case in point, we had a situation with the navigation system which "was dying" but our techs broke it down and kept that system running a little beyond it's normal "spin down" process.

Today they're not authorized nor are they for the most part trained to do so beyond making Adjustments, PMS, Maintenace and swapping out circuit cards. Anything like what we dealt with has to be done by the contractors responsible for the equipment.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Just before 2023 release I moved the Armata from 2025 to 2023 because of the rumors about it being sent to Ukraine. Just because you haven't heard about it or seen photos of one doesn't mean it's not there but my bet is there might be one or two well back from the front doing field trials........ as for having them in the OOB operational being a "travesty"..... GIMME A *EXPLETIVE DELETED* BREAK PAT !.
:mad:
Dial the outraged rhetoric back a notch or two....OK? and maybe spending a few minutes checking would be a "good idea".

Everyone has a choice of what to use. You don't think it's available ? DON'T USE IT

Re: MBT's
 

So, to avoid any confusion, I,m going to break this next down by the "numbers" to make things easy.

Para 1:
"...United States is anticipated to begin delivering Abrams tanks to Ukraine in September."

Para 2:
"As part of the plan, a few Abrams tanks will be sent to Germany in August for final refurbishment before being shipped to Ukraine the following month. "

Para 3:
"The tanks are said to be older M1A1 models, as they can be made available much sooner than the more modern A2 version, which would have taken an additional year to reach Ukraine. "

Para 5:
"The initial shipment will include 6 to 8 tanks. A total of 31 tanks, equivalent to a Ukrainian battalion's strength, are planned to be sent to Ukraine. Pentagon spokesperson Col. Martin O'Donnell declined to provide specific details on the timeline but emphasized the U.S.'s commitment to expedite the process. Before Ukrainian forces can use the tanks, they are required to complete a roughly 10-week training course on 31 trainer tanks at Germany's Grafenwoehr base. According to a separate Defense Department official, the Ukrainian troops are expected to complete their training in August. "

I have discussed the training issue back in May/June, at this time I have nothing to indicate any delays in that process.

Dealing with the tanks, we've CLEARLY seen those tanks going into combat once the Battalions are fully formed. Case in point as was well covered dealt with the M-55S which went through 3 months of training before they were operational.

If we send them 8 tanks a month, we're looking at Feb. 2024 before they become operational. I expect no further delays once all the tanks have arrived to fit out that Battalion, since the training is ongoing and operation unit training will start when the first tanks arrive. I'm starting to think the American training tanks will be used until that Battalion is fully fitted out, thus again making them ready for combat once fully fitted out with their own tanks.

The only mismatched tank Battalion I'm aware of using Western tanks is the one that has the LEOPARD 2A6 and the STRV-122 (Arrived this month.) tanks.

Para 6:
"While there is hope that the tanks could potentially arrive in Ukraine as early as August, uncertainties remain due to the refurbishment process, which involves stripping the older vehicles of sensitive technology, including secret depleted uranium armor. "

Almost my favorite para ^. :p

https://www.armyrecognition.com/ukra...september.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

By the time we release another update a lot of these dates will be firmed up

Re: MBT's
 

Re: MBT's
 

Well probably won't make many friends with this next but that's OK. What I have is the last USMC Tank Employment/MCWP 3-12 Manual before Plan 2030 and when the CORPS divested all their tanks back to the owner of them the USA. This was officially adopted in March 2014.

You will find no mention of Active Protection System/or APS.
HOWEVER, you will find how to properly disperse your smoke grenades. See F7 & F8 at the end of the document.

Also, we've made the assumption (I believe) that the AMBRAMS can't or doesn't carry troops. In the case of the USMC, it would appear this isn't the case at all, though the word "rare" is used in this context. When to do so is covered. The number carried is 9 Marines.
See 3-6 Figure 3-1 for troop disposition and weapons.

I would further delve into how the USMC has a USA tank formation in the OOB when the use of the games Allie function would seem more appropriate.

It would seem a difficult "reach" as the USA is falling behind in filling out their own units which has further delayed the USA to officially declare the M1A2C/SEP 3 at Full Operation Capability (FOC) unlike they did with the AMPV as reported earlier this Summer.

Funny how when there's a war the resources go to other places, so you don't have to go to war.

There is a lot of REALLY useful information in this document from the player perspective especially for the less experienced players but I saw a couple of things in it I might want to use as well. Of course, TO&E is also covered, ammo etc. etc.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...9bf699cd&ei=13
https://www.marines.mil/Portals/1/Pu...-16-085052-437

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

The AI chooses units from a picklist and it only picks from ONE picklist.

The " Allied" / "Captured" feature is for human use only so is of no use to the AI when it chooses units

So.....the USMC has US Army assets available to USMC starting 7/2021 primarily for the AI to use. The > 7/2021 formations COULD HAVE been " renationalized" so the human player would not see them in the game but the AI would see them but then we would have to explain over and over why there are no tanks to select in USMC > 7/21.

Players preferring to see the US ID tag for armour units >7 /21 are encouraged to use the ALLIES function and then their Marines will have properly ID's US Army tanks but that is not an option for the AI

Doing it the way it was done simplified matters ( K.I.S.S.). In RL the USMC can request US Army armour support if the mission requires armour and that's what we have but they will be tagged USMC UNLESS the human player buys for the USMC and uses the Allied button to buy armour > 7/21

Re: MBT's
 

To be truthful forgot about AI, however, would think the ABRAMS SEP 2 the much more realistic tank option here.

I rechecked the ARMY.MIL website and still no press releases in a longtime about M1A2C with NONE announcing FOC unlike when they did so for the M1A2 SEP 2 which drove my submission for that tank.

Plenty about ABRAMS for foreign sales/donations though.

Will need to push it (M1A2C) to the right again.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

The MBT game uses a data driven pick list, unlike the WW2 one which does it all in large lumps of pick code. That was done for flexibility, but in retrospect not an approach i would do again.

The code driven approach in WW2 allows me to use a "PickAliedNation (formationID)" function wot I rote, say for UK planes if it was an ANZAC pick V Italy in the desert. So the air support (and maybe armour too) - might have UK ID tags, UK leader names and values etc. should you have ID tags on and look at them.

But the data driven model (the dat files are put together in spreadsheets then the numbers extracted by column to dat files) - was not really conducive to a "PickAllied()" function. Every formationID column in the spreadsheet would have needed an extra column for foreign OOB ID, at the very least. And then you would have had to select 2 columns to extract and port to the DAT file, and the wrangling of that picklist data and the umpty-five pick files per OOB is already bad enough! - Yep, the "flexibility" that the approach seemed to offer - really wasn't in retrospect. If I did it again, loads of embedded C code wins out!

I think only 2 OOB designers of ours ever really tried editing picklists, and Suhir has been the main such for the USMC - and it was a real task for them to get thier heads around. Yep, once again, dedicated code for the win, not databases!

Re: MBT's
 

Just a "quick" post here as I have an early morning appt.

The following covers losses on both sides in the Ukrainian War, they were compiled from several "open source" sites and agencies in brief ORNX and British Intelligence plus others tracking (As noted at the very bottom of the article.) these issues.

Data was compiled from Feb. 2022 through Sep. 2023.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...uary_2022.html

Have a great day!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

As I had pointed out many times in well over the last year plus, the Ukrainian War will be won or lost by original or updated variants of Soviet era tanks and some newer ones since.

The plain truth is the NATO countries don't have the tanks to spare as most, as with our ABRAMS are being modernized for their own defense.

This article does discuss this issue along with a cheaper and easier possible solution which the Ukraine already has some of as pictured in the article as well.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news...6112ed49d&ei=6
(From FORBES)

Current Ukrainian armor losses from ORNX. Foreign units are shown by their Country flags as are Russian captured ones by both Soviet and current flag.

A couple that caught my eye are the M-55S which was pretty much the first foreign tank to serve and the longest; listed at the top of the list on the GOOD.

And the Bradley ODAS well, it ain't pretty as it's from us and that means everyone incapacitated is a propaganda victory for the Russians and the numbers show that. They might have ~20 left at this point after the last shipment.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/0...ukrainian.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

So it would appear that the UKR unit 18 "T-72 Avenger" is the T-72EA .... ?

That IS the upgraded 72M1

Re: MBT's
 

I believe them to be separate tanks I don't believe the T-72 AVENGER had the engine upgrade and seems the T-72EA might have a slightly better vision system as well. ERA was factory installed by "EA" as well

The T-72 AVENGER (Crowd Funded.) available in 2022 with the T-72EA (Govt.Internationally Funded) earlier this this year.

Both are manufactured by EXCALIBUR ARMOR (EA ^^^^)
[b]https://www.excaliburarmy.cz/
https://www.excaliburarmy.cz/main-battle-tanks-p12
https://www.excaliburarmy.cz/services

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

[quote=FASTBOAT TOUGH;855139] Well probably won't make many friends with this next but that's OK. What I have is the last USMC Tank Employment/MCWP 3-12 Manual before Plan 2030 and when the CORPS divested all their tanks back to the owner of them the USA. This was officially adopted in March 2014.

You will find no mention of Active Protection System/or APS.
HOWEVER, you will find how to properly disperse your smoke grenades. See F7 & F8 at the end of the document.

Also, we've made the assumption (I believe) that the AMBRAMS can't or doesn't carry troops. In the case of the USMC, it would appear this isn't the case at all, though the word "rare" is used in this context. When to do so is covered. The number carried is 9 Marines.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:[/QUOTE

In the case of the USMC "last deployment" is far less important then "last active unit employing". I saw USMC infantry trained on 3.5in bazookas and M79 GLs (fired one myself) in 1974, M1919 MGs were used on the Ontos till 1969. During Dessert Storm (1991) I carried an M870 12ga and my Co XO had an M79, many of the SNCOs had M1911s (tho they were officially phased out in 1986, and more would have had more been available).

As to the APS, as I said previously the USMC never had enough to equip all of it's tanks, but did have enough to equip all tanks deployed in MEUs and most, if not all, tanks at 29 Palms. We can assume when the USMC divested itself of tanks the APS systems were given to the US Army, but to my knowledge the US Army as never employed the system outside testing so they may well be sitting in a USMC warehouse alongside M1903s, putees, and actual swords (as opposed to the dress ones used for ceremonies). As far as I know it's more-or-less a "bolt on" system so could be fairly easily equipped.

Tank Riders: While OFFICIALLY the Abrams certainly does not carry troops the lack of vehicles in the USMC (as compared to the US Army) means people can, will, and do ride anything when needed. NO it's not doctrine, but it happens, regularly. As to 9 riders, rather then create new units it's easier to just fudge a bit.

Re: MBT's
 

Don't bring up U.S. ABRAMS W/APS without expecting a response.

There is no mention of the USMC in the first ref. from 2017.

A BCT was equipped with APS TROPHY under an emergency funding measure and deployed to Europe for an exercise and to be forward deployed in Europe.

I reported on this all along in this thread at the time. The problem for the USMC is that these articles blow the notion that the CORPS had them "out of the water" as there's no mention of them (USMC) and it doesn't fit the timeline (When the USA got them as compared to the game and also as related to when the USMC "Sunset" their tanks.) the at all based on these articles and MANY others.

Introduction: Meet Col. Glenn Dean from ref. 1 2017.
The U.S. Army has decided to equip a brigade’s worth of Abrams M1A2 SEP 2 tanks with the Trophy Active Protection System and urgently field them to the European theater, Col. Glenn Dean, the program manager for Stryker, who also manages the service’s (USA) effort to install APS on combat vehicles, told Defense News.

As reported on 09 Oct. 2017
https://www.defensenews.com/digital-...ection-system/

As reported on 20 Jul. 2020
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army...system-europe/
https://militaryleak.com/2020/07/20/...ps-to-germany/

I have never said the USMC wasn't involved in the testing and the following bears that out so...

The next is from the USA as released on 30 Jan. 2020 it is an Executive Summary of the Army's APS/IRON FIST Programs.

I start with the 2ND PAGE/LEFT SIDE under TROPHY APS ...

"In September 2017, the Army completed Phase I testing.
Phase I testing also included 10 Marine Corps Abrams tests
with moving vehicle and inert threats."

Next below ...

"In September 2019, the Army completed Phase II testing,
which included:
- Operational testing at Fort Bliss, Texas, from November
28 through December 14, 2018. An armored platoon
outfitted with Trophy APS-equipped M1A2 SEPv2 tanks
successfully conducted maneuver and gunnery test events.
The test unit completed Trophy APS familiarization training,"

After the Phase I testing the USMC and the M1A1 ABRAMS are no longer mentioned except in the "washout" further below. As you can plainly see this document covers FY 2019 which as a reminder means it covers the period from Oct. 2018 - Sep. 2019.

For the USMC in the "washout" portion...

"The Army and Marine Corps completed 62 live fire tests..."

"Live fire testing included inert unguided threats fired against either a fully functional Abrams SEPv2 or Marine M1A1 tanks (Phase I testing in 2017.) equipped with Trophy..."

Lower Right Corner in preparation for continued Phase III testing ...

"Recommendations
The Army should:
1. Ensure Trophy Phase III testing is designed to examine
areas identified as a concern in Phase II.
2. Continue to develop and advance the appropriate modeling
and simulation tools needed to support the test planning and
evaluation of systems equipped with APS.
3. Include test events designed to assess logistical
considerations for maintenance and counter munition
resupply.
4. Conduct additional testing to further assess installation and
transportability considerations"
https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/...0of%20vehicles.

Who generated the above?
https://www.dote.osd.mil/

USMC TANKS
The first tanks were already heading to Army depots in the Summer of 2020.

The final tank unit (U.S. Marines' 1st Tank Battalion Camp Pendelton, Ca.) was officially deactivated on 21 May 2021.
https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/202...1381622057088/

The 50 remaining M1A1 tanks were located in different locations globally (Somewhere near Europe and Asia.) on forward based Pre-Positioning ships (We called them "Fasts" or "Faster Targets" in my world.) curtesy of the USN.

They were turned over stateside to the Army between Oct. - Dec. 2022

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

https://www.mca-marines.org/wp-conte...ive-System.pdf

Looks like the date of getting the system should have been 2018 not 2017.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aladW_D4nKU
At 2:14 minutes.