dan/california

The British tank program is in a weird place. They never really got any export sales except for Jordan. So their are a very small number of of them in use world wide. The British have about ~250 of them in service now. The current plan is to upgrade ~150 of them with a new turret that uses the same gun and ammo as the newest Abrams/Leopard models, or near enough, 120mm smoothbore with digital everything. The basic idea is that instead of going thru all these hoops to sort of, but not really standardize with the Abrams/Leopard industrial ecosystem. Maybe they should just buy either Abrams or Leopards. Now all of these issues apply to Ukraine in the long term. But Ukraine has a largish short term problem with the Russian Army. I think the basic idea is that the Challenger II fleet would be shipped to Ukraine with the expectation that it would be mostly expended in the process of winning this war, and in the long term their would just be one less tank model in NATO. Is this even vaguely acceptable politically? I have no idea. It seems to make a lot of sense from From a NATO industrial base and logistics compatibility perspective in the long term. Edit: And for whatever combination of reasons the British seem more willing to do SOMETHING in the short term, as in right now. The right now part matters at the moment. That is an avoidable tragedy Ukraine didn't need. Sincerest sympathies to all the families. It does seem like most of the people who made the bad decisions involved were in the helicopter. That the entire upper level of the ministry was in one helicopter being one of the bad decisions in question. Can I recommend that Zelensky not get in any helicopter, EVER?

The race between the next generation of smart missiles and artillery rounds , and systems to intercept, jam, confuse, or otherwise confound those systems will define the next generation of land warfare. It has basically been the whole ball game for air and seapower for decades now. It really all comes down to what gets better faster. Missiles seem to have a cost edge, especially when you figure in the logistics tail for heavy AFVs. But it is possible some sort of beam weapon reverses this dynamic, and everything visible above the horizon dies. The Army has some programs that imply they might be on the edge of a break through. So far I have seen a lot of positive buzz, but not a single specification on what these new beam systems can do.

Interview with the former head of RAF intelligence, one of the most informative things I have listened to since 2/24. He also states Britain should seriously consider giving the entire Challenger 2 fleet to Ukraine and starting over with a tank that has a broader logistics base. ~200 units in service just can't maintain the parts infrastructure.

AFVs are not obsolete in THIS war, the war five or ten years from now could be very different. Let me just throw out one improvement in ATGMS that is so obvious I am shocked it hasn't been deployed already . The Stugna P has already demonstrated the vast utility of ~50 meters of cable in making ATGMs a lot safer for the operators. The next iteration will separate the optics from the missile. And the missiles become fire and forget aka Javelins. So every missile is launching from a unique location and the expensive optic is somewhere else, and the operator is separated from it. Again I am expecting this any day, in a very few years every piece of the system drives itself around. So instead of getting tracking the missile back to it origin, and hopefully hitting something or someone there, you have to suppress at least a couple of hundred meters of tree line, and get the operators behind cover.

Russia has huge holes in its tech stack/ISR/targeting management. Ukraine has limitations on its truly deep targeting imposed by NATO. This is a weird asymmetry that is unlikely to reoccur in exactly this way. Also the next war is probably going to include VASTLY more drones built specifically for military use. The next war, whenever, and wherever that is is, going to have different set of asymmetries .

How is this not the only thing on CNN? It should certainly be on every screen at the Ramstein conference this Friday, continuous loop.

We may simply be entering an era that favors defense over offense if the opposing side are anything like equal. All of the new toys can be used on offense but it is slower than simply grinding the other side under your tank treads. It is probably MUCH slower if you don't have a large tech overmatch.

I am morally offended that their are still Russian tourists in Europe to be mad about anything. At the same time s this idiot less of a problem being an annoying draft dodger on an Austrian ski slope than he is as a bullet sponge in the Donbas? There might be some level of propaganda value in making sure the mobiks who ARE being used as bullet sponges in the Donbas know that guys like this one are talking tough at apres ski while they are busy dying.

The way China's influence over Russia develops as Russia loses almost all leverage in the relationship is one of the great unknowns of how the long term effects of Putin's disaster play out. I am particularly interested in if China has the sense and patience to play a long game, or Xi and his proxies get so greedy they create a real backlash in Russia.

Now that is a meeting I would have liked to be a fly on wall for.

Head of the IAEA is the the only person in the United Nations penumbra that has done his job. Indeed he has done it heroically, and gotten everybody he works for to do the same. He should 100% be the next Secretary General. Tell the Russians it is one the conditions for any sanctions relief.

I didn't think posting 9 pages was appropriate After 2000 pages it occurs to you to worry about this? Also do we get a bone about the new game at the official 2000 pages mark. That should be sometime next weekend at the latest.

It is worth reiterating that it is the lightest handed and fairest empire/world order ever. And there is even a relatively fair, by world empire measures of fair, meritocracy to the the way the whole thing is run, usually, mostly. Japan went all in on adopting the "Western" or if you prefer "Anglo-Saxon" Model and we were remarkably OK with it until they got greedy and tried to conquer most of Asia. And after some unpleasantness they are right back in the club. Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and other places to varying degrees adopted the system, and are now pretty much card carrying members of "The Club". Furthermore the people who enforce what passes for the rules in this system are really lazy. You have to TRY to get them come knock you back into line. Direct threats to the worlds energy supply, TRULY large scale terrorism, or genocidal wars directly adjacent to club members seem to be the three things that do trick. Almost anything short of that gets a less than robust response. These are not difficult rules to keep in mind, unless you have a multi decade case of dictators disease progress to outright megalomania, or religious fanaticism has eaten your frontal lobes.

Just two or three points of emphasis. 1) If we can't supply the shells and barrels and GMLRS rockets that Ukraine needs without affecting our minimum war stocks we need to build factories until we can. 2) Drones are munitions not capital equipment, war stocks and manufacturing capacity must reflect this. 3) It may be hopeless, but our cluster munitions hang up is inexplicable given the circumstances of this war. Every M26 rocket and 155 DPICM shell that is still usable should be on the way to Ukraine. Show them the tape of the Ukrainian POW being tortured that was just discussed if you need to get the point across. Edit 4) Seize enough Russian money to cover Ukraines monthly budget deficit for a year, and write Kyiv a check. It will relieve a huge pressure point on Ukraine, and upset the Russians horribly. that makes it a perfect twofer.

Another data point for the theory that the Russians own the Swiss outright.

Getting the remnants of Russia's semi competent pre war infantry to grind themselves to powder for territory that will have no meaningful effect on the outcome of this war is either military genius, or a sign of divine favor. I lean harder every day into the theory that the AFU are following Napoleon's maxim about not interrupting your enemy while he is making a mistake. A competent Russian command would go entirely to defensive and use every single one of those experienced paratroopers as trainers and cadre for the mobiks

Proving my point that their business model needs a little trimming.

The entire Swiss business model works because the European Union lets it. The entire country is an exercise regulatory arbitrage. Given that they are COMPLETELY surrounded by the EU it would not be very hard to make that a great deal less profitable. Indeed it would probably make a great deal of the planet work better. They might need a quiet reminder about this fact.

All you need to know about Zoka is that he is an Assad fan.

I won't believe the Apache article until this is formally read out on floor of Parliament. But there is a very strong military incentive to test MODERN attack helicopters in this war. Because if Apaches can't do something useful against the current state of Russian air defenses then every dollar currently earmarked for attack helicopter programs needs to be diverted to drones and the Precision Strike Missile, or similar systems.

A whole bunch of Swiss business interests and practices need to be subjected to vastly increased scrutiny.

Somewhere between a platoon and a company of IFVs headed somewhere. The ground looks rock hard.

Sometimes you truly can't figure out if the flaw is in the targeting or the guidance system. Was there some random bit of wrong or utterly out date intelligence about an AFU something? From ten days ago? Or was the intended target 37 kilometers south by south west, and the guidance system is just that bad?

Nuremberg wasn't exactly suspenseful, but there seems to be strong opinion it was important.

Urals oil is currently being priced about thirty dollars per barrel below Brent Crude. That is actually a devastatingly effective sanctions program in the medium to long term. Brent at ~$85 per barrel is well within historical norms. And Russian oil is expensive to extract. At $55 per barrel Russia is not making a lot of money. Certainly not relative to the vast expenses of the war.