Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Start with any Ukrainian tankers who are loaders on the ex-Slovak M-55 and captured T-62 tanks, plus temporarily take some of the loaders from self propelled artillery. Challenger's are single piece projectiles, so there's still a learning curve. Below we see a Challenger loader at work. It's quick work but I looks like something soldiers could be trained to do well enough in short order. The idea of the Challenger is first shot, first kill, so we're not needing incredible ROF.True, but adding a fourth guy, who also has to load separate powder charges as well as ammo, into a tank force that's used to one less crewman, none of whom are loaders at all, on equipment they're unfamiliar with ...
Its i think not what flag the ships sail unders but who owns them. Dont think any sane ceo would gamble his assets. Not only the ship but capital and his ass personaly. Boycot goes way beyond.I don't think Russia ever depended on a domestically-flagged oil tanker fleet. There's no naval blockade of Russia - even if NATO and Ukraine/NATO-sympathetic nations ban their ships, merchant shipping can come and go. I assume foreign tankers will take the oil via the four main Western Russian ports (Primorsk, Ust-Luga, Murmansk and Novorossiysk).
"Panama was the world's largest flag state for oil tankers, with 528 of the vessels in its registry. Six other flag states had more than 200 registered oil tankers: Liberia (464), Singapore (355), China (252), Russia (250), the Marshall Islands (234) and the Bahamas (209)."
AIUI, Panama, Liberia and China haven't banned Russian oil shipments. Not sure about the others.
War hammers aside, I meant Wagner started doing it in Syria.Actually the practice started in Uganda in the mid or late 60's with President for Life Idi Amin who would line up all the "criminals" and give the second in line a sledge hammer. His job was to smash in the head of the person in front of him and then hand the hammer back to the person behind him and on it went. Refusing meant a far far worse death.
Good point. But we'll need to see what the impact will be.With ships there's also the problem with insurance, if they have to pass national waters the'll have to provide insurance documents for their ship and cargo. I believe european insurers are forbidden to ensure them if the oil is traded above the price cap.
As much as I would too be excited about the prospect huge tank battles, I'm afraid that we will not see anything of the sort. Small local skirmishes at most.I'm excited to see Leopard 2 tanks in mass formations rolling towards Crimea.
View attachment 702723
It has the potential to be the largest tank battle since Kursk. Command and communication will be essential, as you don't want everyone shooting at the same target.
When this war is over how is Russia ever going to be able to replace 3,000 plus MBTs? I've read that their max rate of production is about 200 tanks a year, and that was before sanctions on essential components sourced from the West.(*) Ukraine claims 3118 tanks, and some data obtained from Russian units suggests that visual confirmation accounted for about 70% of the lost units, so probably the truth is somewhere in the 2000-2500 range.
Looks like the separatist-mind ethnic Russians in Georgia may be rethinking their plans. With little hope now of Russian military intervention, the "South Ossetians" likely understand that any provocation whatsoever will spark a decisive military action by Georgia, who's just waiting for any excuse, to clear them out.Georgia's breakaway Republic of South Ossetia might synchronize its own referendum on joining Russia for September, as well. Also, South Ossetian officials have announced a vote on July 17, but two sources close to the Kremlin told Meduza that the plebiscite's date might be moved.
Good points. As an aside, do the Russians have TOWs and MANPATS in sufficient numbers that can reliably kill western MBTs? To kill a Leopard 2 I assume you'd want a top attack missile. How does the 9M133 Kornet compare?Since the advent of guided missiles and precision ammo, tank mission is toscarebreak-through enemy infantry, most tanks are killed by artillery, TOWs, manpats, ..., tank vs tank is a last resort.
Hitting the weaker side. The classic whey of killing a German cat.The Kurds destroyed some Leo 2s with Missiles slamming into their weaker side.
Iraq has alrady enough radioactive contamination from panzer wrecks destroyed in the gulf wars, don't need more in their own tanks when hit.
Side armor has always been and will always be a weak spot on tanks hence the Schürzen in WW2 or the cages seen today
The key word is "depleted."When we got to our Airfield near Tikrit in January 2004, there were destroyed tanks and aircraft and APCs littering the airfield that were destroyed during OIF. Command had to remind everyone to not climb around in them because of the depleted uranium.
View attachment 702852View attachment 702851View attachment 702853View attachment 702854