Vanir Ausf B

That makes a little more sense, but it's still pretty crazy. Where are they going to get the ammunition for all those launchers? They appear to have ordered enough for one salvo . Domestic production under license?

Hmm. Reuters says the number of HIMARS launchers in the Poland deal is actually 18, a far more believable number. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-approves-sale-up-10-bln-sale-himars-rocket-launchers-ammunition-poland-2023-02-07/

The mind boggles. That's more HIMARS than in the entire US Army + Marine Corp.

Export models have different armor. AFAIK there are none of those in storage.

"QUICK THREAD on the Russian take of where UAVs and drones are today for both Russian and Ukrainian militaries - from a pro-Kremlin Telegram channel - main points below: A year in, both us (Russians) and the adversary (Ukrainians) "moved to the next class." Commercial "flying binoculars" have become the de facto standard across the front lines, and the means of combating them/protection against them are already rapidly developing. The number of competent drone pilots is already in the thousands, and this is now the order of things. However, now both sides are on the threshold of the next "phase transition", and there is a kind of speed race going on now. For reconnaissance, VTOL drones have become the most promising factor, combining the advantages of a copter and an airplane: vertical takeoff and landing anywhere, with the ability to hover over an object, and can spend much more time in the air than quadcopters. The VTOL flight range is at the level of long-range artillery, and if we add the ability to select frequency ranges that adversary EW systems are not trained to work with... Now Ukrainians are buying hundreds of VTOLs...and we too are doing something (about it) Standard quadcopters, meanwhile, are being used more and more for dropping munitions. Accordingly, this ability is being improved, experiments with carrying capacity are underway, and the pilot skills are growing. But still: drone quantity plays a big role. The munitions drop is effective when there are lots of drones. Some may grumble that this is irrational - the drone is not cheap, the chances of losing it are high, and the payload is small - nevertheless, the massed accuracy it provides trumps all these disadvantages. Nevertheless, the strike drone of the very near future is still a disposable kamikaze drone (loitering munition), controlled by a sufficiently trained pilot in FPV mode (that is, through goggles). If we had such drones in service today we would not have to attack entire buildings with artillery in order to suppress one firing point. It would be enough to find this target with a scout drone and send (a kamikaze UAV) there that is capable of flying through the window. In the near future, this (kamikaze drone) will become the standard means of operation for assault units. And if an ordinary recon drone gives only the advantage of awareness, then such a kamikaze drone is already a revolution in tactics, comparable to the Maxim machine gun. In fact, this is a flying munition capable of flying in any arbitrarily way, flying even into the windows. In principle, this is a way out of the current "positional impasse"; the only question, as always, is the speed of development and mass application. https://twitter.com/SamBendett/status/1622270288003055616

What? A new Perun PowerPoint video drops and no one mentions it? I'll fix that.

Found one.

Terminators doing forestry work.

'Fake' armor __________ But federal policy forbids the export of Abrams with classified armor packages used by the U.S. military, which includes depleted uranium, according to a fourth person with knowledge of the policy. The U.S. strips the vehicles of this secret armor “recipe” before selling them to other countries. There are other armor packages the U.S. can provide for foreign military sales customers. The Pentagon is planning to provide Ukraine the A2 version in this “exportable” form, according to one defense official and two other people with knowledge of the deliberations. __________ https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/26/us-sends-ukraine-advanced-abrams-tanks-00079648

I'd love to see how much of a difference Trophy could make in a conflict like this, but even if the US or Germany were willing it's unlikely Israel would approve the transfer.

Russian defense analyst Ruslan Pukhov on western tanks. Delivery of Abrams tanks could seriously aggravate the situation at the front for Russian forces because even export variants of the M1A2 SEP V2 is significantly better than existing Russian tanks in serial production. This doesn't include T-90M, which aren't in serial production. He says Russian tanks are using old Soviet-era ammunition, which is sufficient against T-64, T-72, and T-80 tanks at short ranges, but NATO tanks could engage them at longer distances, putting them at a disadvantage. He also says that Russia lacks a 3rd generation ATGM like the Javelin, and that Russian forces don't have enough Kornets. Instead, older Konkurs and Fagot ATGMs are the bulk of Russia's ATGMs. He says that 30-50 tanks is unlikely to affect the situation, but 200-300 could be a significant operational factor. He says much will depend on Russian producers of anti-tank systems. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1618380131214688261

My guess is they will be taken from the Abrams tanks slotted for Poland. The question is will they be new-built M1A2s or refurbished M1A1s? Poland has both on order.

Much left unspoken there. If Ukraine regains it's pre-2014 borders on the battlefield there is very little left to negotiate.

I suppose there is a concern that in the future countries may be reluctant to sell weapons to other countries that have demonstrated a willingness to ignore re-export agreements. But the more immediate problem may be with sustainment. So Poland sends Leopard 2s to Ukraine. Okay. Can Poland produce all the ammunition and spare parts for those Leopards?

Combat Mission LAN party this weekend. "This week, top U.S. and Ukrainian commanders will hold a high-level planning meeting in Germany to game out the offensive planning, another senior U.S. official said. The drill, the official said, is meant to align Ukraine’s battle plans with the kinds of weapons and supplies NATO allies are contributing." https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/18/us/politics/ukraine-crimea-military.html

Since this particular statement attributed to Michael Kofman has for some reason become controversial it should be pointed out that he never actually said it. That was @The_MonkeyKing paraphrasing the host of the podcast, Ryan Evans, who in turn was paraphrasing comments Kofman wrote in an article two weeks ago. _____ The Russian strike campaign, targeting Ukrainian critical infrastructure, is part and parcel of this strategy. Timed to coincide with onset of cold weather, Russian strikes are steadily degrading Ukraine’s electricity, and water management infrastructure. This campaign could grow in significance, and is one of the better organized Russian efforts since the strikes conducted in the first days of the war. An additional effect is draining Ukrainian air defense of ammunition, which could result in Ukraine having to choose between covering the front line, and defending its cities. Acquiring Western air defense, and a stable supply of air defense missiles, is therefore a near term priority for Ukraine. Fortunately, the Russian military exhausted a large percentage of its long-range precision guided weapons over the course of the spring and summer. There is growing evidence that Russia is using recently made missiles, and much older missile types with dummy warheads to stimulate air defenses, which could suggest dwindling stocks. What this means in practice is that eventually waves of Russian missile strikes may diminish to the amount that its industry can produce monthly. Consequently, Russia is also growing in dependence on imports of Iranian strike drones to supplement its missile inventory. ________ https://ridl.io/the-russo-ukrainian-war-ten-months-in-taking-stock/

Slightly less useful comments on the T-90M.

Comments on the Marder IFV. https://twitter.com/KampfmitKette/status/1611094917983490074

Again, the no-fly zone argument. If the premise is that there is no downside to direct conflict all sorts of possibilities open up. Indeed one would then have to ask why not begin airstrikes on Russian forces immediately. That's where you'll end up eventually. Might as well cut to the chase. But we had this discussion six months ago. No matter what you or I think of it's merits there is a zero point zero percent chance of it happening.

You can cut and paste the no-fly zone debate. Bottom line is that NATO is a collective action organization, i.e. a blockade would have to be agreed to by all member nations. There is no chance of that.

Some type of T-80, I believe. Much faster reverse gear than the T-72.

Keeping the nukes was not a realistic option for Ukraine. __________ Ukraine never had the ability to launch those missiles or to use those warheads. The security measures against unauthorized use were under Moscow’s control. The Ukrainians might have found ways around those security measures, or they might not have. Removing the warheads and physically taking them apart to repurpose them would be dangerous, and Ukraine did not have the facilities for doing that. Nor did Ukraine have the facilities to maintain those warheads. For only one example, the tritium in those warheads has a 12-year half-life and needs to be replaced regularly. Ukraine did not have the technical infrastructure to maintain a nuclear arsenal. It would have had to spend billions to build that infrastructure. __________ https://nucleardiner.wordpress.com/2022/02/06/could-ukraine-have-retained-soviet-nuclear-weapons/