Question about Ukraine OOB...

[Mustang]

Ukraine has too many options, most of the equipment they have is just starting to get operational.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Ukraine has too many options, most of the equipment they have is just starting to get operational.

Well then you should have no trouble providing hard data with sources we can cross-check to support your idea

If we don't include something we get complaints..... we get them when we do put in rare types too. Everything in there was put in because info existed that supported adding it even if there were only a handful in a shop somewhere that does not mean they were not used

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by DRG

Well then you should have no trouble providing hard data with sources we can cross-check to support your idea

If we don't include something we get complaints..... we get them when we do put in rare types too. Everything in there was put in because info existed that supported adding it even if there were only a handful in a shop somewhere that does not mean they were not used

Sources are unclear what is happening. So far they used a handful of Bradley, leopard etc in combat all of which were lost to mines and its not clear what operational capacity they have.

https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukraine-wi...tance-package/

Servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be trained to operate with Bradley in Germany.

That was in January, if training takes a reasonable amount of time then maybe they will be ready in 2024?

The timelines given for training on everything are very brief. I heard that they are supposed to be operating f 16s right now and other reports say 2025.

For "long campaign" purposes having large Bradley and Abrams forces in Ukraine seems like a 2024-25 thing, all they have seen so far is some minefield losses.

Just as a comparison, in North Africa rommel had 5 Stugs out of thousands of tanks. Nobody includes the Stug in Africa campaign scenarios because they were less than 1% of the force.

We can have a policy where a unit has to be at least 1% of the active forces of an army for it to be in the game, or have seen meaningful combat experience, so we're not including all the minor equipment and prototypes as is the normal practice with any OOB.

https://www.army-technology.com/news...rmany/?cf-view

Using the marder as an example, they received 20 in March and the article implies 10 per month starting in July. Considering Ukraine has thousands of infantry vehicles the marders may not make up 1% the force even now. Buying two "mechanized rifle co" of marders is more than their entire army has.

Then the British and other IFVs might be even less.

[MarkSheppard]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Sources are unclear what is happening. So far they used a handful of Bradley, leopard etc in combat all of which were lost to mines and its not clear what operational capacity they have.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/0...ukrainian.html

52 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA: (1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (3 and 4, destroyed) (5, destroyed) (6, destroyed) (7, 8, 9 and 10, destroyed) (11, destroyed) (12, destroyed) (13, destroyed) (14, destroyed) (15, destroyed) (16, destroyed) (17, destroyed) (18, destroyed) (19, destroyed) (20, destroyed) (21, destroyed) (22, destroyed) (23, destroyed) (24, destroyed) (25, destroyed) (26, destroyed) (1, damaged) (2, damaged) (3, 4, and 5, damaged) (6, damaged) (7, damaged) (8 and 9, damaged) (10, damaged) (11, damaged) (12, damaged) (13 and 14, damaged) (15 and 16, damaged) (17, damaged) (18, damaged) (19, damaged) (20, damaged) (21, damaged) (1, 2 and 3, damaged and abandoned) (4, damaged and abandoned) (5, damaged and abandoned)

[MarkSheppard]

From Oryx:

Delivered/Pledged
40 AMX-10 RC(R)s [Delivered from March 2023 onwards]

Losses
4 AMX-10 RC(R): (1, destroyed) (1 and 2, abandoned) (1, captured)

10% of the AMX-10 fleet has been heavily damaged so far, with one of them ending up in Patriot Park in Moscow.

==================

Delivered/Pledged
14 Leopard 2A4s [February 2023 and March 2023]
10 Leopard 2A4s [April and June 2023]
8 Leopard 2A4s [March 2023]
8 Leopard 2A4s [March 2023]
40 x Leo 2A4 Total

18 Leopard 2A6s [March 2023]
3 Leopard 2A6s [March 2023]
21 x Leo 2A6 Total

Losses
6 Leopard 2A4: (1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (1, damaged) (2, damaged) (3, damaged) (4, damaged)

9 Leopard 2A6: (1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (3, destroyed) (1, damaged) (2, damaged) (3, damaged) (1, damaged and abandoned) (2, damaged and abandoned) (3, damaged and abandoned)

So let's recap....15% of the Leopard 2A4s in AFU have been damaged in some way, as well as 42% of Leopard 2A6s.

"Limited use"

[MarkSheppard]

As for Marders; they literally only just started seeing action since 8/20 or so; so the bean counters have yet to catch up with them.

https://twitter.com/Ukraina8648545/s...19667547590687

German-made Marder 1A3 tank, in service with the 82nd Assault Brigade of Ukraine. The brigade recently entered the Ukrainian counter-offensive in the Zaporizhzhia region.

https://twitter.com/Military_oO/stat...84373192139088

German Marder 1A3 infantry fighting vehicle stuck in trench and abandoned

BTW, apparently the 82nd BDE has Challenger 2s, so we should see Challenger II in action "soon".

https://twitter.com/ChallengerInUA/s...53594440216768

The 82nd Air Assault Brigade of Ukraine, according to reports, has overcome the first anti-tank obstacles of the most heavily fortified Russian defense line. The 82nd operates all of Ukraine's Challenger 2 main battle tanks. No vids as yet!

But it's "coming", because Ukrainian propaganda is starting to HYPE the chally 2.

https://twitter.com/front_ukrainian/...23706356408351

The 🇬🇧British Challenger 2 tank in service with the Airborne Assault Forces of the Armed Forces of 🇺🇦Ukraine in combat conditions and its advantages

💭 The accuracy of a British tank shot is comparable to a sniper rifle. If there were more such armored vehicles, we would be able to achieve a greater effect in the battle with the enemy, - notes the Ukrainian tanker.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by MarkSheppard

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/0...ukrainian.html

52 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA: (1, destroyed) (2, destroyed) (3 and 4, destroyed) (5, destroyed) (6, destroyed) (7, 8, 9 and 10, destroyed) (11, destroyed) (12, destroyed) (13, destroyed) (14, destroyed) (15, destroyed) (16, destroyed) (17, destroyed) (18, destroyed) (19, destroyed) (20, destroyed) (21, destroyed) (22, destroyed) (23, destroyed) (24, destroyed) (25, destroyed) (26, destroyed) (1, damaged) (2, damaged) (3, 4, and 5, damaged) (6, damaged) (7, damaged) (8 and 9, damaged) (10, damaged) (11, damaged) (12, damaged) (13 and 14, damaged) (15 and 16, damaged) (17, damaged) (18, damaged) (19, damaged) (20, damaged) (21, damaged) (1, 2 and 3, damaged and abandoned) (4, damaged and abandoned) (5, damaged and abandoned)

Being abandoned does not prove it was originally operational, almost the opposite.

Anyway as I already said people are free to construct their own scenarios as they wish, I just wouldn't consider it realistic to have major Ukrainian tank and apc forces.

And my other point is that it's a tank game. Infantry shouldn't even be in the game. Although I understand it has to be, the focus of the game is on tanks.

Ukraine right now is a red green "buy everything" oob. The only oobs that exist in real life are red and green. Western forces vs eastern forces. These are Afghanistan, Kurds, Syria, all the obscure factions that have imported equipment. This is the only way things can work.

Not to be political but Ukraine isn't a real country. It was not included in the original country because it's just a pass through for other countries to dump equipment on. Having Ukraine as an OOB just ends up being a "buy everything" OOB, just like the Taliban or vietnam is a "buy everything" OOB, because of captured equipment. Wherever the war is happening becomes the "buy everything" OOB which is why I suggested, if you want Ukraine to mean anything, you stick to equipment it actually has.

And yes, the Bradley has seen limited use, according to your own sources most of them were abandoned.

There are two possible directions to go with the Ukraine OOB. Either limit it to equipment it has in large numbers or that it made itself (to my awareness it hasn't made any significant weapons), or just get rid of the Ukraine OOB and make it the "buy everything" OOB. The direction the game is heading now is to just make Ukraine the red-green "buy everything" flag because if a country has a major war and lots of equipment is captured AND you count every minor thing used 10 times as a unit, you just end up with everything.

[MarkSheppard]

Originally Posted by Mustang

Being abandoned does not prove it was originally operational, almost the opposite.

52 M2A2 ODS Bradleys lost/damaged/abandoned is a lot more than a "handful" in contact. The original tranche of Bradleys which was announced in January 2023 was for 109 M2A2-ODS-SA and 4 Bradley-FIST variants.

I just wouldn't consider it realistic to have major Ukrainian tank and apc forces.

Very confused right now.

https://twitter.com/AlexRaptor94/sta...27249921741202

that's a lot of Leopard 2's in AFU service.

Ukraine right now is a red green "buy everything" oob.

Of course they are. They're buying anything that can be reasonably delivered with full technical support packages.

Not to be political but Ukraine isn't a real country. It was not included in the original country because it's just a pass through for other countries to dump equipment on.

1.) In 2005-2006 Ukraine had 3,784 MBTs, 3,043 AIFVs, 8,492 APCs, 1,143 Towed Guns, 1,298 SP Guns, and 200+ Mi-24 HINDs, along with 40 x Mi-6 HOOK and 300+ Mi-8 HIP transport helicopters, as well as 400~ mobile tactical SAM systems and 400+ combat aircraft of all types, plus 800+ strategic heavy SAM systems.

2.) In the original SP2 and SP3 days in the late 1990s; a good number of scenarios made involved Ukraine; as it was a potential fUSSR flashpoint.

Ergo, it made sense for Ukraine to be included in SP:MBT when it was being developed into WinSPMBT.

And yes, the Bradley has seen limited use, according to your own sources most of them were abandoned.

The US has officially pledged up to 186 M2 Bradleys; unofficially, now that the AFU has established units of the type as well as a spare parts line; they have an unlimited credit line on US Bradleys.

It makes no difference if AFU loses 50, 100 or all 186 M2s pledged, as the US will simply pull more M2s and refurbish them as needed to keep AFU "topped up". This isn't possible with the European NATO stockpiles; as due to the CFE treaty, everything in Europe over a certain limit had to be destroyed, so there's no huge stockpile of Leopard 1s or 2s left over from 1992 the way there is with US Abrams and Bradleys.

Only the US and Russia were able to "cheat" by moving their stockpiles out of the "European" zone.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by MarkSheppard

52 M2A2 ODS Bradleys lost/damaged/abandoned is a lot more than a "handful" in contact. The original tranche of Bradleys which was announced in January 2023 was for 109 M2A2-ODS-SA and 4 Bradley-FIST variants.

Your source does not say they were damaged in combat. Many, maybe 90% of vehicles historically are lost in accidents or other problems outside of combat.

I just wouldn't consider it realistic to have major Ukrainian tank and apc forces.

Very confused right now.

https://twitter.com/AlexRaptor94/sta...27249921741202

that's a lot of Leopard 2's in AFU service.

I am fine with including the leopard 2a4 because Ukraine has no other tanks. It's soviet tanks are mostly obsolete. The 2a4 is the only tank it really has.

The 2a6 and other tanks are not available in number.

Of course they are. They're buying anything that can be reasonably delivered with full technical support packages.

It undermines the concept of what an OOB is, you might as well include everything because Ukraine can refurbish a IS2 and call it operational.

Not to be political but Ukraine isn't a real country. It was not included in the original country because it's just a pass through for other countries to dump equipment on.


1.) In 2005-2006 Ukraine had 3,784 MBTs, 3,043 AIFVs, 8,492 APCs, 1,143 Towed Guns, 1,298 SP Guns, and 200+ Mi-24 HINDs, along with 40 x Mi-6 HOOK and 300+ Mi-8 HIP transport helicopters, as well as 400~ mobile tactical SAM systems and 400+ combat aircraft of all types, plus 800+ strategic heavy SAM systems.

2.) In the original SP2 and SP3 days in the late 1990s; a good number of scenarios made involved Ukraine; as it was a potential fUSSR flashpoint.

Ergo, it made sense for Ukraine to be included in SP:MBT when it was being developed into WinSPMBT.

That is fine if you include the huge t55 and bmp 1 fleet of obsolete vehicles but I am just talking about their modern equipment.

And yes, the Bradley has seen limited use, according to your own sources most of them were abandoned.

The US has officially pledged up to 186 M2 Bradleys; unofficially, now that the AFU has established units of the type as well as a spare parts line; they have an unlimited credit line on US Bradleys.

It makes no difference if AFU loses 50, 100 or all 186 M2s pledged, as the US will simply pull more M2s and refurbish them as needed to keep AFU "topped up". This isn't possible with the European NATO stockpiles; as due to the CFE treaty, everything in Europe over a certain limit had to be destroyed, so there's no huge stockpile of Leopard 1s or 2s left over from 1992 the way there is with US Abrams and Bradleys.

Only the US and Russia were able to "cheat" by moving their stockpiles out of the "European" zone.

I do not think Ukraine has anywhere near an unlimited credit line, and that is the real issue here. If 2024 comes around and they aren't receiving more equipment then the underwhelming US support for Ukraine will be more obvious. We will wait and see.

[MarkSheppard]

Originally Posted by Mustang

For "long campaign" purposes having large Bradley and Abrams forces in Ukraine seems like a 2024-25 thing, all they have seen so far is some minefield losses.

Speaking of Abrams -- I think we're getting VERY close to them in Ukraine -- Late September, early October from the two datapoints:

Datapoint #1

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-sen...es-2023-09-01/

WASHINGTON, Sept 1 (Reuters) - The Biden administration will for the first time send controversial armor-piercing munitions containing depleted uranium to Ukraine, according to a document seen by Reuters and separately confirmed by two U.S. officials.

The rounds, which could help destroy Russian tanks, are part of a new military aid package for Ukraine set to be unveiled in the next week. The munitions can be fired from U.S. Abrams tanks that, according to a person familiar with the matter, are expected be delivered to Ukraine in the coming weeks.

Datapoint #2:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...plete-training

According to a report from Politico yesterday, citing information from spokesperson Col. Martin O’Donnell, around 200 Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel have undergone training at different U.S. Army facilities in Germany. The report added that these soldiers “recently completed one of the last phases of the program, a combined arms, battalion force-on-force exercise at Hohenfels Training Area.”

...

Quoting an unnamed Pentagon official and “another person familiar with the discussions,” Politico now reports that the first 10 of these tanks will arrive in Ukraine in mid-September.

The same Pentagon official said that this batch of tanks was now “undergoing final refurbishments,” after which they can be dispatched to Ukraine, with the remaining 21 examples of the Abrams also due to arrive in-country during the fall.