Re: MBT's
 

No Time!

Take the following as it stands. Expect to hear something from the Army concerning what will be our game-built ABRAMS SEP 3 export tanks COMING ONLINE.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...0e3ea80&ei=15#

TGIF!! :D

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

https://x.com/Trotes936897/status/1835698422248272257

Leopard 1A5DK and Leopard 1A5DK1 in Ukraine with Kontact ERA armor and rolled up cope cage netting.

Re: MBT's
 

A little something about our favorite Russian tank and they have only 20 of them of which the threshold was much higher for the OPLOT-M to "join the club"...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...s-into-service
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ont-end-210628

And there are so many more and how many years ago did I bring up the engine issue? You don't build tanks around the engine! :doh: :doh:!!

This next will show this similar situation existed with a couple of German WWII tanks.
https://tankandafvnews.com/2015/11/1...r-reliability/

But Russia did build an improved T-90M and fielded it a year ago or so as posted.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

The Dutch have signed a contract to field a Battalion of LEOPARD 2A8 (46 Units) with an option for another 6 units.
" Allies are expected take delivery of the first new Leopard 2A8 battle tanks rolling off reactivated KNDS production lines end-2025, the state secretary said. " probably closer to early 2026 as Germany will also be getting these tanks.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...dedb84db5&ei=6

I would hope in the meantime the Netherlands will have in the OOB the LEOPARD 2A6M2 as posted this past February in Page 176/Post 1751 with the following NEW End 2030 or until fully equipped with the LEOPARD 2A8.

Germany is treaty bound (And other documents.) to release those tanks to the Netherlands for defense of their country. Those tanks are assigned to the joint German and Dutch armored unit 414 Tank Battalion (German: Panzerbataillon 414; Dutch: 414 Tankbataljon. currently.

Been suggesting it from the start when they were getting rid of their tanks, I'm glad the Netherlands didn't let me down. Well Don to with the new games END Date!! ;)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

For game purposes, there is NO difference between the 2A6M and 2A6M2

Re: MBT's
 

I would agree with you on that, and it would seem your response further answers my question as well as an "AFRIM" to the Dutch question.

Thanks!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Pat. I have no idea what this is about but that vehicle has been in the Dutch OOB for a couple of years.

Re: MBT's
 

Don,
Sorry for the distraction, I obviously missed it somehow.

EDIT: 0248 Found it as Netherlands UNIT 038 LEOPARD 2A6M should not the END date be pushed right to DEC 2030?

None of the references concerning the LEOPARD 2A8 for the Netherlands are even suggesting that there will be any changes to the treaty or other signed agreements so, it would seem the LEOPARD 2A6M would still be made available to the Dutch as required for National Defense.

Just a thought is all.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Pat..... this was already done on our master OOB's for months. Any unit / formation that ended 2025 was changed to 2030 then any units that were slated for retirement between 2025 and 2030 were adjusted........... so naturally it won't show up as 2030 on anyone else's OOB's

Re: MBT's
 

The Russians are confirming the T-14 was Not in the Ukraine.

We ourselves debunked several videos and posts showing them driving around Ukraine.

Further and as recently posted the Ukraine has NEVER seen anywhere near a battlefield or roaming around the countryside. I seriously think they would've sent in a handful of drones to spot for a precision strike or take it out.

Let us not forget the several articles where the Russian Commanders and tank crews wanted nothing to do with them in the field going back to last year late.

For now, and in my opinion for what it's worth out here feel that T-14 at this point in time is in the same situation as when the T-95 and a couple of others within about an 8-year time span were paraded on May Day (Which is all we're really seeing for T-14 overall.)
and they never got fielded which by the way Russia has never formally announced themselves concerning the T-14.

"...the T-14 has faced production delays and manufacturing issues, making it too expensive for active combat roles."

"-Russian Defense Minister Sergey Chemezov confirmed reliance on the more cost-effective T-90 tanks instead. Initial claims by state media about T-14 deployments were debunked, suggesting the Kremlin lacks confidence in its performance against Ukraine’s Western-supplied anti-tank systems."

"-Consequently, the T-14 Armata is viewed as a failed project, unable to meet operational demands amidst heavy losses and logistical challenges."

"In March, Sergey Chemezov, who leads the Russian defense giant Rostec, confirmed prior Western intelligence assessments and our coverage here at The National Interest that the Russian military hasn’t deployed the T-14 Armata tank in Ukraine. "

This article is 2 hours old.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...bda6ef04&ei=10

This situation would obviously affect the T-15 as well since they share a common chassis and the same engine and components.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I tend to agree and THIS supports the idea but I'm not ready to pull it or the T-15 from the OOB yet

And note this article states "The tank's deployment in Ukraine revealed performance problems, leading to its withdrawal from frontline service."

Personally, I belive the tank never was on Ukraine soil but it was probably tested in western Russia nearby and if it was it was actually over the border it was far away from the actual front as possible

Eventually the truth will be known but what is "the first casualty of war" Pat?

Re: MBT's
 

The "TRUTH" YOU COULDN'T ASK SOMETHING HARDER!?! :D

I get it.

But remember I was on this tank from the start, that being said we've lost some and we got some in sometimes with a lot of patience on both our parts (ARJUN etc.) over the years.

You know how I feel about "keeping it real" that's my standard and the one you've always held me to since I joined the club.

And a couple of the things I've seen over the years from the game review "experts" is on the realism and continuous updating of the game.

I know we have the means to make these things available to the player without having it in the OOB. Which was why I brought up again the "improved" T-90M within the last handful of posts in here. It's marginally better but more importantly it's fielded and has been in combat though in limited numbers.

Also, ORNX is showing that there is a T-72B3 Obr. 2022 of which ORNX is showing that 65 have seen combat (51 destroyed/3 damaged/8 damaged and abandoned and 3 captured.)

This also includes 163 unknown types of T-72 tanks of which
127 destroyed (So for the Obr. 2022 the numbers might be slightly higher.).

As a note if ORNX can't identify the specific model of equipment this is the category they go into.

When I submitted the tank as you might remember I did so as "hybrid" of what was to be the T-72B3/Obr. 2014 & Obr. 2016 the changes were incremental between models, but it didn't make sense to submit 3 tanks separately especially as the OOB is so tight. Again, the tank in the game NOW was submitted with ALL the improvements added. Another reason for doing this was the very short timeline between the three types noted above.

I have to look into this further (T-72B3 Obr. 2022) to see if we need to add this tank or not. I believe what I submitted was around 2019 give or take a year or two.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Alright so here's where we're at, our "hybrid" tank is in the Russian OOB as UNIT 697 T-72B3M (I had originally submitted it as the T-72B3/B4 similar to the ref. below showing it as the T-72B3M/T-72B4.

To be clear ours was built to the specs of the first ref. and others when submitted.

Our tank checks out fine and as some might remember we play tested it against the OPLOT-M 3-4 years back which led to the OPLOT-M being modified based on the testing and the numerous references that accompanied the posts throughout supporting the need to make those changes that were not available when first submitted.

The only thing is if we have the correct main gun which is...
"The main armament of the T72B3M / T-72B4 consists of one 2A46M5 125-mm smoothbore gun which is a modernized variant of the standard 2A46M cannon, also known as the D-81TM. This gun system features reduced recoil and a stabilized gun mount. The 2A46M-5 variant was introduced in March 2012 as part of the upgraded T-90MS tank. The 2A46M5 gun design made it possible to reduce the technical dispersion of shells of all types by 15% in average and to increase the effective range of fire. "
https://www.armyrecognition.com/mili...video-12003163
(This ref. is dated from 7 AUG. 2024.)

"T-72B3M Model 2022: This version appears in December 2022. It is fitted with a new dynamic protection system around the hull. The turret is fitted with a new ERA armor and the lower part is equipped with an RPG metal net." THIS IS ALSO FROM THE ABOVE REF.

So, this all means it is equipped with the same linked hanging chain covering the back and backsides of the turret same as on the T-90M against RPGs.

You'll also note the top of the turret has added a little more Kontakt-1 (See photo on lower left of the ref. below.).

I personally see no added value in this tank game wise (Or RL.) based on what are only minor at best improvements.

None of these T-72 variants have addressed the main issue of this model which is a poorly designed ammo storage area causing what's being called the "Jack in the Box" effect.

I hope the reader will continue reading about T-72B1 Obr. 2022 (or 2023) tanks and from MANY other sources that are saying the same about this tank to include the more recent delivered (Within the last year or two.) T-80BVM and others. Those are shown (T-72B1 Obr. 2022 (or 2023) in the main picture of the article and upper right picture further down.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...r-their-crews/
(Updated on 29 JAN. 2023.)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Yep and things like that are why the OOB's in Russia and USA are at near capacity and we ARE working ( slowly ) on a solution to that but still........there are a lot of things added over the years that in game play make zero difference

Now in the reference you cited mentioned better stabilization but the T-72B3M is already a 5 and I don't see that it justifies being a 6

Re: MBT's
 

I referenced that para for further info but, my concern about that particular main gun (2A46M5) cited is that it can shoot any of the current ammunition in the Russian stock meant for the likes of the T-14/T-90M. But that's more your side of the house.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

T-14 uses the 2A82-1M 125 mm gun the ammo is different than previous 125mm rounds and higher pressure

T-90M uses the 2A46M 125mm cannon

The T72B3M is armed with a 2A46M5 125mm

They are not the same gun......... I believe the ammo for the 2A46M and 2A46M5 is interchangeable but not the ammo for the 2A82-1M and in the game the "gun" is the ammo

EDIT
So the T-72B3M should be using W128 ( now changed) and as well the T-80BVM gets W128 ( now changed)

From Wiki for this last bit

• 2A46M-5: Used on T-90M, T-80BVM, and T72B3 Obr2017.
• 2A82-1M: Used on T-14 Armata

Re: MBT's
 

https://x.com/RyszardJonski/status/1848749456788730110

Lithuania purchases a battalion of Leopard 2A8 tanks and 2 battalions of CV90MkIV IFV vehicles.

The decisions were made today by the Lithuanian State Defense Council VGT /Valstybės Gynimo Taryboje/.

https://kam.lt/valstybes-gynimo-tary...tuvos-paramos/

Re: MBT's
 

More Leopard 2A8 Sales:

https://x.com/Jeff21461/status/1850923912097382857

Re: MBT's
 

More on Marks...
CROATIA/CHANGE/M-84/UNIT 024/START/JAN 2025/VICE/AUG 2022. // The deal for the LEOPARD 2A8 will happen. Too many articles are popping up and too many officials are talking about this. The MOU will get the ball rolling. Germany will finance this deal and credit Croatia for the tanks and APC's being given to the Ukraine. Checked with ORNX NO M-84 tanks have shown up on their list this is important since we "think" they got them in '22. In contrast the M-55S is on the list as 1 Destroyed/1 Damaged with the timeline about the same as the M-84 roughly. I believe Croatia was trying to get a different LEOPARD at the time but they were "feed" to the Ukraine. My bottom-line is simply if they had them then odds are they'd be on that list given the numbers they would've gotten which by the way happens to be the same number this deal would get them. CROATIA simply doesn't have that many of those tanks to give away as that means they would've received (& about to.) 60 of the 70 of those tanks THEY HAVE IN TOTAL.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...s/ar-AA1t5J52?
ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=467899891a194f4c96931f6 3b41e4b3e&ei=16
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...pard-2a8-tanks
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/0...ukrainian.html

And to save time...
UKRAINE/ADD/M-80A/COPY/CROATIA/M-80A/UNIT 539/START/JAN 2025. //Both these units are designated for delivery by the end of this year. January just feels safer. They will keep the weapons and receive ammo, spares and Maintenace support as part of the package.

Something extra...
https://defence-blog.com/russia-file...unition-maker/

Also, Australia will transfer their ABRAMS to the Ukraine however, they will not get the Helos they wanted as well. They already have started to strip them to support the world supply chain for the NH-90 copters. There is NO TIMELINE for the transfer yet, SAME for ABRAMS V3 FOC.

And Don knows my source for this info on Australia, enough said.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

EDIT: Corrected on my next post.

Re: MBT's
 

Pat......... go back and check what you meant to have written..... There is NO unit 24 in the Croatian OOB and NONE start Aug 2022

Maybe you meant ...
UKRAINE/CHANGE/M-84/UNIT 024/START/JAN 2025/VICE/AUG 2022. //

??

Re: MBT's
 

Sorry...
UKRAINE/CHANGE/M-84A/UNIT 024/START/JAN 2025/VICE/AUG 2022. //Is what I meant as you noted.

This is what I get for checking things when I thought I was going to bed... :doh: Anyway...
UKRAINE/ADD/LAV 6 ISC/COPY/CANADA/LAV 6 ISC/UNIT 612/START/OCT 2024. // The article refers to the unit as the LAV 6.0 armoured combat support vehicles (ACSV) which the above should cover.

Also, I noted that Canadian UNITS 600/612 have FC 30 but UNIT 603 LARV Coyote has FC 35 with END/JUN 2019.

I would think that the LAV 6.0 being the latest model in service that UNITS 600/612 should at least match the FC of UNIT 603 at 35 as well.
https://www.army-technology.com/news...-lav-6-0-acsv/

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Pat

What is in Ukraine is CND unit 611 not 612 and the first ten of the 50 ACVS Canada is donating will be of the ambulance variant and even 30 FC is not justified for that. ( and it's already in the UKN OOB --U312 I just need to tweak the date )

If it can be proven they have the turreted combat variant I will activate it

The coyote was a specialized scout vehicle used for battlefield reconnaissance and surveillance missions at the battle group and brigade levels.. They came in two varieties----command vehicles and surveillance vehicles

From wiki------"As of 2015–2022, the Coyote was in the midst of a planned retirement and being replaced by a mix of TAPV and LAV VI armoured vehicles . The LAV III – has replaced the Bison in many roles."

That's why it has a 2019 retirement date. If it needs adjusting I will adjust

Re: MBT's
 

It looks like COYOTE and BISON are still in service at least the latest models anyway.

I did not realize the ACSVs (Armoured Combat Support Vehicles) were the replacement to the above and the Canadian Govt. decided to send them to the Ukraine which my most recent ref. in my last post was also showing. This article below dated Jan 04, 2023 it also is saying that some got there as early as Oct. 2022.
. Also appearing the ACSV Program had both setbacks and delays.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...hicles-ukraine

These next supports COYOTE further.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/natio...e-deficiencies
(Dated Last updated Sep 01, 2023)

Next from Canadian Govt.
https://www.canada.ca/en/army/servic...es/coyote.html
(Date modified: 2021-02-10)

The following seems to support immediate above but found something interesting...
"In addition, the turret front faces receive 2x4 76mm Smoke and fragmentation grenade launchers (8 reloads)." This below picture on left as "DESIGN" section continues.
https://tank-afv.com/modern/Canada/Coyote-ARV.php

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

OK, I'll extend the dates a bit but when or if this happens is just a WAG because.......

The clowns we have in Ottawa now...... well.... if I said what I wanted to say it I'll have to ban myself

I think this will pass and you can fill in the blanks

"couldn't organize a ------- in a -----house"

Re: MBT's
 

I understand and I'd bet you knew my "curiosity" would "kick in" at the same time. ;)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Official Leopard 2A7A1 rollout event:

https://i.imgur.com/yeTOZwD.jpeg

https://i.imgur.com/A36T7Z0.jpeg

Re: MBT's
 

https://x.com/battle_order/status/18...758100/photo/1

https://i.imgur.com/LTnuN3b.jpeg

Re: MBT's
 

I have some "adjusting" to do with the German OOB.......


I also need to review the speeds used for all the Leo 2's in all the OOB;s ( fun)

The Bundeswehr website for the Leopard 2 A7V ( which is now a higher weight class than previous=63.9-ton) says

63 kph converted to game speed = 21 NOT the 26 we have used for every 2a model except the first one.:doh:

So I will be searching for an all-in-one webpage with that info on each model so I can correct the OOB's ............if someone finds one please post the link


https://armyrecognition.com/military...technical-data

claims the top speed of the 2a8 is 70 kp/h that = 23 game speed so I have adjusted that and the 2a7v

EDIT

All sorted now for the German Leo 2's..... moving to everyone else who has them now

Re: MBT's
 

This site still considered the best source of information on LEOPARD and a couple of the others. Some of my other sources use this site as well. I believe you might know the moderator.

Look towards the bottom of each section.
https://id3486.securedata.net/fprado...site/main.html

These are very good as well to corroborate or help set an average speed overall.
http://tank-masters.de/?cat=4
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/#google_vignette

I have to go-sorry-best I can suggest for now.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

If you notice the values we use for the 2a4 and 2a6 match the range given in the Prado link

Re: MBT's
 

For the record, Prado's "Armor Site" was one of the first sites I found in the beginning for me out here.

I appreciated the depth of research it took to get his information and to my mind validated my thoughts as to how I would have to present my submissions once I decided to try going beyond just playing the game.

It laid the foundation for me to start from with a fair amount of "trial and error" you would unfortunately had/have to deal with along the way and over the years.

Simply saying we all had to have a "start point" in what we imagine are the things important to us as individuals.

More on the LEOPARD 2A7A1 first though the following...
"Therefore, the A7A1 is expected to be slightly heavier than the A8, because the Trophy system needed to be integrated into the existing turret rather than a newly designed one with additional equipment."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...80683fec&ei=39

I've in the last couple of years or so have come to appreciate this website so I post the below as there are 3 to 4 very good articles in this particular issue from the site.
https://www.edrmagazine.eu/pdfviewer...&pagemode=none

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

LEOPARD A7A1 first to get TROPHY.

From ref.
"The German military first conducted live fire tests with Trophy in 2021, and it is now being employed on the Leopard 2A7A1 variant – which is set to enter active service next year with the Bundeswehr's 203rd Armored Battalion, the unit that is on track to be deployed to Lithuania."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...9cec2843&ei=20

Will likely end up on CHALLENGER 3 as well.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

https://x.com/Trotes936897/status/1853677672112501091

Excellent overhead shot of a T-90M lost in Ukraine with tons of Kontakt-1 on the roof.

Re: MBT's
 

Excellent overhead shots of "modern" T-62, T-72, T-80, T-90, T-14 taken at Kazan Higher Tank Command School.

https://x.com/MrFrantarelli/status/1853121943551062138

Re: MBT's
 

https://x.com/2805662/status/1854338548406878385

New official shots of Australia's M1A2 SEPv3 in Aussie camo

Re: MBT's
 

Re: MBT's
 

Just a couple of articles that are subjective in nature. For the first I can see the case for the Renault FT and I have to agree with the second where it has the K2 and not so much with the ARMATA due to its continued mechanical and technical issues that have been ongoing for years.

When we're getting verification of these issues from Russian industry, government and military in quotes from several sources (Russian news and defense websites even within Russia etc.) you need to simply remember "Where there is smoke there is fire."
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...nk-ever-208734
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...f5393155&ei=15

As to Australia, the below supplements Marks post. As I have indicated my source for the official source will come from the Army itself. On tracking this from a couple of things I've read to this point I believe our export version of SEP V3 MIGHT reach FOC sometime between OCT- DEC 2025.

Also, the "gap" in numbers from that same source is saying the Army is going to hold back 10 of the M1 ABRAMS first to have tanks and to also use them for training platforms. The rest are still as of this time, are still to go to the Ukraine.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...oogle_vignette
(THE BOTTOM PARA IS MY REASON FOR MY DATES ABOVE. YOU GOT TO BUILD THEM TO HAVE THEM.)

The ICON looks GREAT! Are you going to do a dessert version?

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

As far as I can tell , AUSCAM as shown in my example is standard for every environment.

If you have photos of known Australian active service desert schemes pass them on and I will build it but I am not aware there is one

Re: MBT's
 

Take it off your plate as I saw your Shp. file post issue. Give me at least a couple of days to look into this thoroughly though I believe you may be right after a cursory check.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

There are photos associated with the Australian Abrams in tan that are photos of US ones but there is this one photo but one photo means nothing and it does look experimental and I have not found another but I have found references to "fishscale" and that " The Australian Army has used / uses a range of interesting camouflage patterns for its M1A1 MBTs."

https://www.ozarmour.com.au/store/im...le-example.png

There is also this
https://armyrecognition.com/template...-f9568e14.webp

But that looks like the standard camo with added tan painted on .... I could try something like that but it may just be a different view of the one above........ and there is a limit to my OCD for icon camo:D

But.......... not today it seems........

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1731490288

But what the hell, it's not like I'm going to be doing this forever..... here's the full series but I doubt the Aussies will be playing much in the snow<g>

The SHP file rebuild is done...... two hours of work entering then checking every icon in MOBHack and the game....... FUN (not!)

Re: MBT's
 

I clicked on the two forum.shrapnelgames links and got this message:

Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

Re: MBT's
 

Now corrected

Re: MBT's
 

Well, I have a few.

The first was taken at their tank training center I would that is about 100 miles NE of Melbourne.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/541346817693425871/

That picture shown looks very familiar to me as one I posted originally when they got those tanks back in 2007.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...t=0&ajaxserp=0

You might find the next interesting as well...
https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...t=0&ajaxserp=0
https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...D0&vt=0&sim=11

More arrive in 2008 ...
https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...t=0&ajaxserp=0

As I'm sure you noticed opening the above, you're seeing most of what I did.

So, here's my thought on the matter, I believe for a period of a year or two as the shipments arrived it is possible some retained our desert colors until painted to the AUSCAMO scheme. So is it worth it to have them in the U.S. desert camo, I don't feel it necessary to do so.

That being said, the many pictures of the current AUSCAMO scheme would definitely support a little more of the desert color. Maybe just slightly widening out what you already have.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Two of the links I added to my previous post failed ....I have just corrected the problem but here is what you missed seeing before you posted

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1731490288

The ones just shipped from the States and driven off the boat don't count

The Icons above are what you will see for the Australian M1A2 SEP the final release

Re: MBT's
 

All three are perfect, because if you look at the actual pictures closely you can see clearly see the variance in the AUSCAMO you've duplicated with your ICONs.

Like I said, the U.S. camo was a non-starter for me personally. I just followed the information where it took me.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

And there will be revisions for the Australian winter and desert m1a1's as well

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1731518567


Alternate winter....... I favour a more " well used" look of late especially for winter icons.....no more pristine starched linen table cloth white battle tanks

https://forum.shrapnelgames.com/atta...1&d=1731536330

Re: MBT's
 

Simply the following from the source that matters:
AUSTRAILIA/ADD/ABRAMS M1A2C EXPORT/START/APR 2025. // As already built from last year. That date based on my best guess from the following quote...
"About 130 soldiers and officers learned the ins and outs of the new battle tank before the first of 75 M1A2s begin to enter service in early next year (2025-mine) with 2 Cav Regt."

Unfortunately, the page would not allow me to "cut and paste" so a little back and forth was required.

It was also reporting on the live firing testing and quals currently ongoing. Picture showed three tanks.

Paint schemes same AUSCAMO as revised so the newer Icons are good.

One of the Senior tanker's WO 1 Bernie Maus reports "...enhancements are like going from Windows 98 to the latest operating system." Also,

"After a short burst, crews can hit targets at 2500 metres every time."

I will attempt to post the page from the paper. Again, THIS IS NOT LIKE our Army Times or any of our other branch services "Times". This is directly from their Army with the other services having their own as well.
https://www.armynewspaper.defence.go...4/flipbook/10/
(IT WORKS!! THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IT HAS.)

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Now that's a proper name for a tanker :up::D

Re: MBT's
 

Only might've been better if it was Bernie "Von" Maus!?!

Had to go back to make sure I had that right, just not what I expected but I agree, it certainly is a "proper" tankers name. :cool:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

All I will say about the next video is it reminded me of the SHERMAN vs. PANTHER or TIGER. By that I simply mean they were much more reliable, faster, maneuverable and generally outnumbered them on the battlefield. The last though probably does count for less overall concerning the video.

Enjoy!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news...2b4aa6c1&ei=13

Regards,
Pat
:capt: