_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Modern Armor
Modern armor in general.
Hosted by Darren Baker
"New" Leopard 2 for the Bundeswehr
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 12:18 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Well, the UK is sending 75 "advisors" to Ukraine, and if those Russkies cut up rough, we'll send the OTHER half of the army too!



Carefull Alan; the way we are going you could end up being right.
USMCMGUNZ
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: January 14, 2015
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 12:28 AM UTC
Doing some research; it appears that Egypt has more Abrams tanks than the U.S. Marine Corps owns. American tax dollars at work!
smydi01
Visit this Community
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: October 14, 2009
KitMaker: 219 posts
Armorama: 197 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 01:15 AM UTC

Earlier on tv today it was stated after the current cuts our Army will be the smallest it has been since the napoleonic wars Also our budget for the forces may drop below 2% of GDP. A shocking state of affairs.
Lisec
Visit this Community
Croatia Hrvatska
Joined: September 13, 2006
KitMaker: 306 posts
Armorama: 282 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 01:44 AM UTC
Nations disarming.

Shocking!
johhar
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: September 22, 2008
KitMaker: 476 posts
Armorama: 447 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 02:11 AM UTC
Taking a long view of military history, the impact of the tank was brief. It appeared in WWI against enemies who had very few and the war was over before effectiveness was maximized. It's "marquee" starring role was in WWII, and even then it was extremely vulnerable to anti-tank aircraft, and it seems like a lot of what they did was to fight each other. Fast forward to today, where, in the US, I read that the military doesn't really want any more but is ordering some just to keep the one and only Abrams factory open so at least we have some manufacturing capability should we need more. And I have to think that UAVs would be a potentially devastating weapon against them.
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 02:11 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Nations disarming.

Shocking!


Except Russia!
LeoCmdr
Visit this Community
Alberta, Canada
Joined: January 19, 2005
KitMaker: 4,085 posts
Armorama: 3,917 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 05:10 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Taking a long view of military history, the impact of the tank was brief. It appeared in WWI against enemies who had very few and the war was over before effectiveness was maximized. It's "marquee" starring role was in WWII, and even then it was extremely vulnerable to anti-tank aircraft, and it seems like a lot of what they did was to fight each other. Fast forward to today, where, in the US, I read that the military doesn't really want any more but is ordering some just to keep the one and only Abrams factory open so at least we have some manufacturing capability should we need more. And I have to think that UAVs would be a potentially devastating weapon against them.


I have to disagree with you on multiple levels. All pieces of military technology have to be battle tested. WWI proved the worthiness of a mobile armoured fighting vehicle and very quickly changed static trench warfare into offensive tactics where ground could be taken by armour and then held by infantry...the birth of combined arms operations.

Of course tanks fought each other during WWII. That is what they evolved to do. Limiting a tank to simply an Infantry support role takes away from two key elements...mobility and shock action. WWII was a showcase for both technological advances in tank technology, tank tactics, and it solidified the need for tanks in both offensive and defensive operations onwards.

The U.S. has purchased thousands and thousands of Abrams versions over the years...over 8000 purchased with almost 6000 still in service? I don't think there is a need to build anymore when the U.S. is considering selling off surplus Abrams...Morocco, Greece, Taiwan, Peru.

The tank has proved its worth on the modern battlefield time and time again. Canada had canned all Leopards when tragic losses of soldiers in Afghanistan solidified the need for tanks in combined arms operations.

As far as UAVs being a threat to tanks. There are tons of threats to tanks in the past and in the future. The UAV is not infallible and is limited in the amount of munitions each can carry and the ability to control air superiority. Any nations deploying drones against armour will have a heck of time winning a battle. Proper professional tank tactics don't allow a tank to sit in a field and wait to be hit.

If you look at sustained tank missions over the past years with NATO nations tank aren't deployed in the thousands during a mission. Logistics alone limit the amount of tanks and supporting vehicles that are deployed to complete a mission.

Despite all the tin foil hat wearing folks out there thinking that the Russians are planning some type of transcontinental invasion to take over the "western world" and destroy all that is known to be gluttonous and glamorous we should look at how information technology has advanced beyond WWII carrier pigeons and the fact that the majority of tank deployments since Korea have been for asymmetric type battlefields. No army moves on the planet without leaving an electronic or visual foot print...or tank tread mark in this case.

TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 10:05 AM UTC

Hummm... I think that Putin can do what he wants as long as he goes slow. Remember OJ Simpsons slow speed chase? He got away with it to. Russia has not invaded the Ukraine (at least that is what Putin says). It was some unknown force from the east. It was the fault of adventure travel agents who scheduled combat tours for "vacationing" Russian troupes. As long as it is slow, the Ukraine will be lost and become the buffer he wants. No country has said they are coming to the Ukrainians defense. There is no line in the sand. The Ukraine keeps asking for help. Is there anyone among us that doesn't see the Ukraine eventually falling? There is no country in Europe that is capable of helping. Putin is aware and taking advantage. Europe is where the US was in the thirties trying to struggle out of an economic nightmare. One of the first things the US did during the great depression was to drastically reduce the military. Our saving grace was distance. No one could invade us and that allowed us the time to rebuild the military as WWII continued on. If we were boardering France we would have been bowled over. Europe is in the same place without an ocean to protect them. Politicians are just hoping they don't have to do anything and the gas lines from the east don't stop flowing.

I will get off the soap box now and no, I haven't made up my mind to run for president yet. I am still testing the waters for grass roots support.
chnoone
Visit this Community
Armed Forces Europe, United States
Joined: January 01, 2009
KitMaker: 1,036 posts
Armorama: 1,033 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 02:29 PM UTC
That the overall decrease in military capacities in Europe is due to the fact have that everyone is just looking at "Terrorist style" warfare ... as if conventional war has just disappeared !
This has lead the many "Europeans" to rely too heavily on the US in abroad conflicts ... but this conflict is right on their doorstep now and the lack of strength to even make an impression (towards Russia).
The Baltic States, Poland, Hungary etc. all have their own "history" with an autocratic ruled Russia in the past and might view thing a little different from the German lets say.
Overall the USMC, for example, is a fare more effective force then the whole Bundeswehr .... with a more balanced organization of resources ... the Marines can field even more MBT's than the Germans right now ... Look and learn ?
I am not really worried about what's going on in the Ukraine at the moment ... leaving the annexation of the Crimea so unchallenged does make me think though !
What should be of some concern is what's going to happen to Russia once Putin is gone ? One can only learn from history ... remember that Henry II guy and this Thomas Becket fellow ... that's the state of mind Russia is right in now I believe.
Back to the topic ... yes the Bundeswehr does need to get their "S@@t " together and German politicians have to faced the fact that being one of the world most largest and strongest economies does bare some responsibilities too.

Cheers
Christopher
CMOT
Staff MemberEditor-in-Chief
ARMORAMA
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: May 14, 2006
KitMaker: 10,954 posts
Armorama: 8,571 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 04:03 PM UTC
There was news only this morning saying that the British Armed Forces will have to work within the US Armed Forces as we don't have the forces to work alongside them. What should worry other nations is that the UK and France both have Nuclear weapons and in the event of a conflict will resort to using them far quicker than previously. That speed of events should worry everyone as it will take away the ability for talks to settle a disagreement.

On a more positive message: it was always my understanding that members of NATO must spend 2% of GDP on the military, is everyone meeting that requirement?
mmeier
Visit this Community
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
Joined: October 22, 2008
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,015 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 05:35 PM UTC
Latest news is the new Leopard 2 will be delayed until they figure out how to load and secure the baby buggy and the beauty mirror After all Secretary of Defence vd Leier wants a more "family and female friendly Bundeswehr".
Dangeroo
#023
Visit this Community
Zurich, Switzerland
Joined: March 13, 2009
KitMaker: 2,058 posts
Armorama: 1,656 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 05:39 PM UTC
Wow! Seems like we have 225 Leo 2 active in Switzerland. And another 150 probably in storage... At least if Wikipedia is correct.

But what good is a tank force if you have no air cover (some 32 leftover F18 hornets and obsolete F5 Tigers...)?
SteveAndrews
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: August 16, 2010
KitMaker: 693 posts
Armorama: 16 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 07:34 PM UTC
Hi Guys

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

The last time democracies were in economic trouble and stopped investing in defence was right before the second world war. That was also the time when a major European power was flexing its muscles, and annexing land.

There are differences today of course - the USA is no longer isolationist and has a very big defense budget including all those nukes. But, it also has a big new competitor in the shape of China which is shifting its defence emphasis.

It seems to me that us folks in Europe have lost our focus on defending our territory and replaced it with a reliance on the US and more emphasis on fighting terrorism in the middle east. It shocked me to learn that the once mighty Bundeswehr has only about 200 hundred tanks. I'm sure a Leopard 2A6/7 is a formidable AFV, but as Stalin said "Quantity has a quality all of its own." I wonder how many of those new Armata MBTs Russia will produce?

It feels like the cold war was on pause for a while, but it is far from over.

Oh cripes now I've depressed myself. Time for a beer.

At least we're likely to see a range of interesting new AFVs to model.

orpant
Visit this Community
Attica, Greece / Ελλάδα
Joined: January 16, 2010
KitMaker: 139 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 07:45 PM UTC
Okay, all these seems a bit strange...
I'm from Greece. You know, the country that's bankrupted, owes money to the half of the world,and yet spends the biggest percentage of its budget to the Defence.
We have (according to Wikipedia), 1,913 MBTs, 4,209 IFVs & APCs, and 4,840 artillery pieces. In the air, we have 523+ aircraft and 8 types of air defence systems. On the Sea we have 39 Warships
10 Submarines, 6 Patrol Boats, 57 Fleet Support & other Ships and 21 Navy Aircrafts.
We are second amongst NATO countries, regarding the military spendings (The first being the US).
All of that, happens for a reason: our Eastern neighbor (and NATO Ally). Turkey, regards half of the Aegean Sea (including the islands) as hers. As a matter of fact Today Turkey with a NOTAM, stated that almost half of the Aegean (including Islands and territorial waters) will be used as a firing filed by the NAVY and airforce, until thw end of the Year!!!
Thus said, I ask: OK for Greece, Cyprus, and even Baltic states, to have big armies. But Switzerland? Belgium? Netherlands? Spain? Even Britain, and Germany? Why? Whats the danger? From who are you threatened?
Whats the purpose of Switzerland (the iconic neutral country, the country that has been in a war, 300 years ago?), to have 225 Leos?
And please don't say Russia, Al Kaida, ISIS... C'mon... I mean yes, they are threats, but are capable of being dealt, with a “logical” sized army... And regarding that both NATO and the EU, have a Joint military programmes for their member countries, There simply no need for the vast numbers in material, rather a good educated and well trained small capable force...
P.S. No mean to argue with the Turkish fellow modellers...
jrutman
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 07:54 PM UTC
It seems from my perspective that the European countries have fallen into the trap of electing people that are willing to buy their votes with the promise of govt social programs. Cashing in on the long (unusual) period of peace after the "big one" was over.
This is just human nature at work and I caste no aspersions on the good people of Europe. But now the waves of history are rolling in to the usual time where everyone goes a little nuts and wants to kill each other over bits and pieces of property,etc.
So,yes,it's time for the European govts to start to ante up as we are really broke over here. 18TRILLION dollars broke!! So we could use some good comrades. The kind we relied on in the past
So i agree it would be nice to see some models of the yet to be designed super tanks and FVs in general. Just seems a shame that at the point in my life where I am loosing patience more and more,the new vehicles seem waaay more complicated with all those new doo-dads all over them.
J
chnoone
Visit this Community
Armed Forces Europe, United States
Joined: January 01, 2009
KitMaker: 1,036 posts
Armorama: 1,033 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 08:16 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Okay, all these seems a bit strange...
I'm from Greece. You know, the country that's bankrupted, owes money to the half of the world,and yet spends the biggest percentage of its budget to the Defence.
We have (according to Wikipedia), 1,913 MBTs, 4,209 IFVs & APCs, and 4,840 artillery pieces. In the air, we have 523+ aircraft and 8 types of air defence systems. On the Sea we have 39 Warships
10 Submarines, 6 Patrol Boats, 57 Fleet Support & other Ships and 21 Navy Aircrafts.
We are second amongst NATO countries, regarding the military spendings (The first being the US).
All of that, happens for a reason: our Eastern neighbor (and NATO Ally). Turkey, regards half of the Aegean Sea (including the islands) as hers. As a matter of fact Today Turkey with a NOTAM, stated that almost half of the Aegean (including Islands and territorial waters) will be used as a firing filed by the NAVY and airforce, until thw end of the Year!!!
Thus said, I ask: OK for Greece, Cyprus, and even Baltic states, to have big armies. But Switzerland? Belgium? Netherlands? Spain? Even Britain, and Germany? Why? Whats the danger? From who are you threatened?
Whats the purpose of Switzerland (the iconic neutral country, the country that has been in a war, 300 years ago?), to have 225 Leos?
And please don't say Russia, Al Kaida, ISIS... C'mon... I mean yes, they are threats, but are capable of being dealt, with a “logical” sized army... And regarding that both NATO and the EU, have a Joint military programmes for their member countries, There simply no need for the vast numbers in material, rather a good educated and well trained small capable force...
P.S. No mean to argue with the Turkish fellow modellers...


You might be right if you are talking about "Intervention-capacities" on smaller scale conflicts ... but you would be surprised about the rate of abrasion of material on larger/longer lasting operations ... you would run out of heavy equipment really fast in a conflict like the one going on in the Ukraine. Think about trained personell in quantities to replace your losses .... it's still practice that makes perfect.
What happens if you would have to defend a longer stretch of frontline all along the Baltic States ? How would you want to hold this area with "Light"-troops ?
The Canadian, Danes the USMC were smart enough to use their MBTs in A-Stan (very successfully) the Germans decided not too residing on a "quiet" front ... what if that turns "hot"?
The problem is that the Bundeswehr didn't even have their own MEDIVAC airlift capacities in A-Stan till last year relay on the US to bring their boys out. Hey .. what are friends for ... but what a concept for a professional Army ?
The problem with the Greek Army is that things are turning into a very expensive logistical nightmare with all the mixed equipment you possess ... but your country is surrounded by some potentially dangerous areas with probably a realistic approach on having to deal with things more immediate instead of waiting on all the support by your allies !

Cheers
Christopher
orpant
Visit this Community
Attica, Greece / Ελλάδα
Joined: January 16, 2010
KitMaker: 139 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 08:46 PM UTC
You're right Christopher!
And by your saying, you confirm my point of view: Instead of spending thousands of Euros, in forming another Tank Brigade, Bundeswehr, should develop other key aspects (for example MEDEVAC or C4I).
Let's face it. Nor the Baltic countries, or Poland will be alone, in case of a Russian attack NATO will be there, EU will be there. Instead of putting in fron 10.000 tanks, 5.000 jets and couple of million soldiers that have no C4I infrastructure, no medical and technical support, just because governments stayed in the quantity and not the quality, this will be very difficult.
Taken in consideration your signature " He who seeks to defend everything, defends nothing " by Frederick the Great, I think that there's something more than the numbers of the tanks e.t.c.
chnoone
Visit this Community
Armed Forces Europe, United States
Joined: January 01, 2009
KitMaker: 1,036 posts
Armorama: 1,033 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 09:21 PM UTC
But first you have to be in the position to defend yourself at all ... in accordance with Frederick.
I just believe the reduction of heavy equipment through out NATO with no coordination amongst each other may leave you short on things you might need when push comes to shove.
Better safe than sorry !

Cheers
Christopher
LonCray
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: August 24, 2005
KitMaker: 348 posts
Armorama: 256 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 09:36 PM UTC
With nearly all interventionist military activity lately being run by coalitions rather than individual nations, I can see a future where nations farm out specific military capabilities to other nations in their coalitions - like Germany with medevac capability. Why should Switzonia maintain long-range air-drop supply capability when they can contract it out to the US? I could see the same thing happening with tanks - if Canada and Germany maintain armored forces, other nations in their coalition would pay them for their use whenever they intervened someplace.
mmeier
Visit this Community
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
Joined: October 22, 2008
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,015 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 09:58 PM UTC
One should remember that the Cold War german Bundeswehr (That I'd LOVE to have back) had two elements no longer present:

A selective and unfair draft(1)
A VERY restricted field of operations (2)

That made for some strange equipment and some strange gaps in equipment. I.e no long range airtransport or long mission capabel naval task forces since those would not be needed. And weapon systems that where designed first to be rugged, relatively limited in variants and easily repaired (Lessons from the Panther have been learned) and high tech second.

It also helped that our school system produced slightly higher qualities in output (I.e Hauptschüler(3) that could count to 13 while fully clothed)

(1) It is said the best chance not to be drafted was an IQ below 100 and no / no finished apprenticeship. The best chance was an IQ in the 110s-120s and a finished apprenticeship in metal working / car repair or other skills useful in a mechanised army

(2) Basically "Germany" (That included the GDR since the state was never "accepted") with a possible of "rest of european NATO countries)

(3) Back then German pupils split up at age 10 into Hauptschule (9 or 19 years, aimed at future blue collar workers), Realschule (10 years, future white collar workers) and Gymnasium (13 years, trains future university students). That is a generalisation and the system was somewhat flexible but still.
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2015 - 11:44 PM UTC
All members of Europe have a stake in their mutual protection from Terrorists and The Bear. If you are in western Europe and say you are safe from the Bear because you are far away, you are mistaken. It is criminal to think it is the job of eastern Europe to defend aggression from the east. Every one must contribute their share for an effective European defense force.Yes Germany has many LEO's in storage. Do they have the trained crews available to fill them? If you do not have the trained people to match the equipment, your toast. Remember in WWII the axis side did not have the large scale training going on to support the losses and eventually people were sent to the front with weeks of training only to be quickly killed by experienced combat troops/pilots. Attrition is a key component. How long does it take to start production to replace lost equipment or once fighting begins the suddenly obsolete equipment? What about movement of equipment? How long did it that for the US to be ready for Desert Storm? Remember the Iraqis didn't have submarines to sink predeployed ships. Gone are the days where the US had armored divisions and strike aircraft stationed in Europe. Something to ponder.
mmeier
Visit this Community
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
Joined: October 22, 2008
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,015 posts
Posted: Monday, March 02, 2015 - 04:48 PM UTC
For the next say 10 years germany can in a pinch still re-draft the "cold war" conscripts with their 15 month service time and a quite decend training. Granted, they are in their late fourties now and some may no longer fit the hatches but they can be brought "up to speed" a bit faster than a green recruit. But with the Marder and Leo1 going out/being out of service that pool shrinks and age is taking it's toll as well.

So expect the Red Army under Zar Wladimir I to parade down Champs Elysee around 2026
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 - 02:41 AM UTC
I wonder if today`s youth can deal with something not on PC, smartphone and IPad. First step would be converting TDv and HDv into APP format. Oh- almost forgot that the Bundeswehr uses computer simulations for drivers training.
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 - 01:31 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Okay, all these seems a bit strange...
I'm from Greece. You know, the country that's bankrupted, owes money to the half of the world,and yet spends the biggest percentage of its budget to the Defence.
We have (according to Wikipedia), 1,913 MBTs, 4,209 IFVs & APCs, and 4,840 artillery pieces. In the air, we have 523+ aircraft and 8 types of air defence systems. On the Sea we have 39 Warships
10 Submarines, 6 Patrol Boats, 57 Fleet Support & other Ships and 21 Navy Aircrafts.
We are second amongst NATO countries, regarding the military spendings (The first being the US).
All of that, happens for a reason: our Eastern neighbor (and NATO Ally). Turkey, regards half of the Aegean Sea (including the islands) as hers. As a matter of fact Today Turkey with a NOTAM, stated that almost half of the Aegean (including Islands and territorial waters) will be used as a firing filed by the NAVY and airforce, until thw end of the Year!!!
Thus said, I ask: OK for Greece, Cyprus, and even Baltic states, to have big armies. But Switzerland? Belgium? Netherlands? Spain? Even Britain, and Germany? Why? Whats the danger? From who are you threatened?
Whats the purpose of Switzerland (the iconic neutral country, the country that has been in a war, 300 years ago?), to have 225 Leos?
And please don't say Russia, Al Kaida, ISIS... C'mon... I mean yes, they are threats, but are capable of being dealt, with a “logical” sized army... And regarding that both NATO and the EU, have a Joint military programmes for their member countries, There simply no need for the vast numbers in material, rather a good educated and well trained small capable force...
P.S. No mean to argue with the Turkish fellow modellers...


Modern day 300 Spartans?
mmeier
Visit this Community
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
Joined: October 22, 2008
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,015 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 - 03:04 PM UTC
Historical or movie version?
 _GOTOTOP