Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

When we can verify that there are none left with more than just hearsay evidence. The Russians never really retire anything even though we had some pulled from reserve units until the info surfaced that some were being re-fitted. Even if there are a handful still running unless they are only in a museum it would be worth keeping in an OOB but maybe put the radio code to 3 to keep the AI from buying them and PERHAPS add a note to the unit that purchasing should be keeping to only a few vehicles due to their rarity but then new info may surface making that wrong.



It's a judgment call that WE ( Andy and I ) make. NOBODY else

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

Request granted

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

The entire "conversation" was getting ridiculous. We've been doing this too long to not know when someone's talking out of their arse and neither of us has any patience for it. The insistence that the Bradley gun was not stabilized was not quite the final straw... more like the bale that broke the camel's back

There are ample sources that support that it is.

This in regards to ERA
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...reactive-armor

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

regarding challenger II loss

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-footage-shows

Western sources indicated on Tuesday night that the tank first struck a Russian mine on Monday, which blew a rear fuel compartment, causing it to be immobilised. The crew then evacuated safely, but as it lay dormant it was then hit by a Lancet drone.

This is something that's going to have to be SOP for future militaries -- either recover tanks ASAP or have SHORAD units covering the battlefield to prevent recoverable vehicles from being converted into losses by enemy UAVs.

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

Certainly a more viable tactic now that it takes a LONG time to get a replacement for it.......IF you get another one at all.
Something that can be repaired is worth making the extra effort to recover it ASAP

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

So the supply train issue comes back to haunt future fighting...who would have thought that...oh wait, everyone who is in combat support who point it out in every AAR and get ignored.

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

They do have CSS - here have two M88s towing a Leopard 2 out of the battlefield.

https://twitter.com/CasualArtyFan/st...05178421092448

It's just...more tanks and other AFV than CSS to recover them. The usual. :rolleyes:

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

You missed the point, but cool video.

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

So...the Russians recently restarted tank gas turbine engine production after...30 years.

That's a big deal, because they don't have a lot of machine tools and they already have the V92 Diesel (T-90) and the weird Diesel for the T-14 in production.

So why restart tank GTEs after 30 years?

Because the T-80 fleet has been mostly extinguished in this war, it can't be about maintaining the T-80 fleet.

I think it's because the weight of all the addons on the T-90 (massive ERA addons, the cope cage anti drone stuff) over the decades, and the need for mobility and reliable cold weather start/performance has forced this upon the Russian Armed Forces.

They need 1500 HP to maintain a mobility advantage over the AFU's increasingly more mobile western tanks; and the V92 Diesel taps out at around 1150 HP; and the T-14 Opposed Piston Diesel simply doesn't work.

Soo....gas turbines by default win.

Re: Question about Ukraine OOB...
 

Abrams is "now in Ukraine" per Zelenskyy, and the US is now talking about an additional 30 to be delivered on top of the initial increment of 30...