[cardcrimson]

This was interesting to me:  https://app.23degrees.io/view/DUeaa54W7K...h-eu-share

This indicates that the US has given more aid to Ukraine than the next 8 biggest contributors combined. And there’s a significant dropoff after the that next group of 8. Really it’s the US and then everyone else. That is not to say the US is wrong. I’m suggesting that others, especially those geographically closer to Ukraine, need to pony up more.

It would be nice, but they just don't have "more" militarily. Much of what the UK is giving is stuff that is available surplus because they are downsizing again. Germany is a mess we have already discussed. France maintains a parity with Germany, so they are largely in the same boat. What can happen, and is to some extent, is that the EU can pony up the money to keep Ukraine going economically. The Dutch can help there as well, even though militarily they are not in a position to help.

Man, I'd love to go down this rabbit hole, but I don't want to experience the same fate as Phogge.

[cardcrimson]

This was interesting to me:  https://app.23degrees.io/view/DUeaa54W7K...h-eu-share

This indicates that the US has given more aid to Ukraine than the next 8 biggest contributors combined. And there’s a significant dropoff after the that next group of 8. Really it’s the US and then everyone else. That is not to say the US is wrong. I’m suggesting that others, especially those geographically closer to Ukraine, need to pony up more.

It would be nice, but they just don't have "more" militarily. Much of what the UK is giving is stuff that is available surplus because they are downsizing again. Germany is a mess we have already discussed. France maintains a parity with Germany, so they are largely in the same boat. What can happen, and is to some extent, is that the EU can pony up the money to keep Ukraine going economically. The Dutch can help there as well, even though militarily they are not in a position to help.

Man, I'd love to go down this rabbit hole, but I don't want to experience the same fate as Phogge.

[TrumpCard]

Lots of news on military aid today, but that’s sort of technical stuff that shouldn’t drown out the information about the human toll of this criminal invasion. Significantly more than 100k Russian casualties per USDOD. My assumption is far more Ukrainian casualties (when including civilians), along with millions of refugees and kidnapping victims. 

https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/16...X67u4sAAAA

[TrumpCard]

Lots of news on military aid today, but that’s sort of technical stuff that shouldn’t drown out the information about the human toll of this criminal invasion. Significantly more than 100k Russian casualties per USDOD. My assumption is far more Ukrainian casualties (when including civilians), along with millions of refugees and kidnapping victims. 

https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/16...X67u4sAAAA

[Goose]

I think that when we attempt to compare the "dollar value" of military hardware contributions to Ukraine by many nations we are attempting the impossible. Most if not all the numbers we see in the press are the notional acquisition costs of the item. However, many of the items being supplied are "surplus" to current needs and have a net present value that is much lower than what they cost new. In some cases the NPV is negative because these items have to be either stored or scrapped, both of which cost money. In all these cases the items are not going to be replaced or were already going to be replaced. The Strykers recently pledged fall in to the "obsolete and being replaced" category.

There are defense items that do require replacement and therefore have an actual "cost" when supplied to Ukraine. 155 mm ammunition is in that category. However, even that has a shelf life, and ammunition that is approaching EOL that is sent to Ukraine would need replacing "soon" anyway. This is also true of HIMARS rockets. Most if not all of the Javelin missiles we provided were almost new, and have to be replaced at full value as an unanticipated expense.

Since every country providing defense items to Ukraine is in a different position regarding the real "costs" of those items, saying that the US has provided "X times" as much as another nation is probably incorrect. We don't know the actual costs on either end. For sure, the US has provided a much larger quantity of defense items at what is undoubtedly a greater "cost". How much greater is not known IMO.

[Goose]

I think that when we attempt to compare the "dollar value" of military hardware contributions to Ukraine by many nations we are attempting the impossible. Most if not all the numbers we see in the press are the notional acquisition costs of the item. However, many of the items being supplied are "surplus" to current needs and have a net present value that is much lower than what they cost new. In some cases the NPV is negative because these items have to be either stored or scrapped, both of which cost money. In all these cases the items are not going to be replaced or were already going to be replaced. The Strykers recently pledged fall in to the "obsolete and being replaced" category.

There are defense items that do require replacement and therefore have an actual "cost" when supplied to Ukraine. 155 mm ammunition is in that category. However, even that has a shelf life, and ammunition that is approaching EOL that is sent to Ukraine would need replacing "soon" anyway. This is also true of HIMARS rockets. Most if not all of the Javelin missiles we provided were almost new, and have to be replaced at full value as an unanticipated expense.

Since every country providing defense items to Ukraine is in a different position regarding the real "costs" of those items, saying that the US has provided "X times" as much as another nation is probably incorrect. We don't know the actual costs on either end. For sure, the US has provided a much larger quantity of defense items at what is undoubtedly a greater "cost". How much greater is not known IMO.

[gocard14]

Big new defense package today. 59 more Bradley's in addition to the earlier 50, and 90 Stryker APCs (the specific variant, whether TOW equipped, 50 cal, 25mm, or 105mm not specified). US has surplus of lots of them reportedly as they are being phased out.

Not included yet apparently- the GLSDBs we were excited about.

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1616207810093584405?s=20&t=WDcQ26lRZHSy2lNVPKRtmg[/tweet]

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1616209218041692167?s=20&t=WDcQ26lRZHSy2lNVPKRtmg[/tweet]

Interesting

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-...ne-russia/

CIA Director William J. Burns traveled in secret to Ukraine’s capital at the end of last week to brief President Volodymyr Zelensky on his expectations for what Russia is planning militarily in the coming weeks and months, said a U.S. official and other people familiar with the visit.

Regarding Leopards-

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1616219101541588992?s=20&t=ukcfrsiaLV2aronDXwxoqg[/tweet]

Real shame about the GLSDB. That capability in volume seems like it could make a big difference. Though to be fair, it is essentially creating an entirely new munition from scratch, even though we have the component parts, so I was actually surprised it could be available so soon (and turns out it likely can't).

That being said, the fact that it may not be available for several months doesn't mean we shouldn't get the ball rolling. Yes we have no idea what the situation will be in late 23, but it is hard to imagine a situation in which the ability to cheaply and precisely place a 250 pound bomb almost 100 miles away isn't a useful one. Even if a ceasefire occurs by then, Ukraine is going to need to backfill/stockpile munitions and capability.

Somehow ifUkraine doesn't need them, its a nice capability for our military to have to to be able to use a GLSDB this in lieu of a 1 million dollar ATACMS (or new PSM) or an even more expensive air sortie + precision munition.

[gocard14]

Big new defense package today. 59 more Bradley's in addition to the earlier 50, and 90 Stryker APCs (the specific variant, whether TOW equipped, 50 cal, 25mm, or 105mm not specified). US has surplus of lots of them reportedly as they are being phased out.

Not included yet apparently- the GLSDBs we were excited about.

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1616207810093584405?s=20&t=WDcQ26lRZHSy2lNVPKRtmg[/tweet]

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1616209218041692167?s=20&t=WDcQ26lRZHSy2lNVPKRtmg[/tweet]

Interesting

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-...ne-russia/

CIA Director William J. Burns traveled in secret to Ukraine’s capital at the end of last week to brief President Volodymyr Zelensky on his expectations for what Russia is planning militarily in the coming weeks and months, said a U.S. official and other people familiar with the visit.

Regarding Leopards-

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1616219101541588992?s=20&t=ukcfrsiaLV2aronDXwxoqg[/tweet]

Real shame about the GLSDB. That capability in volume seems like it could make a big difference. Though to be fair, it is essentially creating an entirely new munition from scratch, even though we have the component parts, so I was actually surprised it could be available so soon (and turns out it likely can't).

That being said, the fact that it may not be available for several months doesn't mean we shouldn't get the ball rolling. Yes we have no idea what the situation will be in late 23, but it is hard to imagine a situation in which the ability to cheaply and precisely place a 250 pound bomb almost 100 miles away isn't a useful one. Even if a ceasefire occurs by then, Ukraine is going to need to backfill/stockpile munitions and capability.

Somehow ifUkraine doesn't need them, its a nice capability for our military to have to to be able to use a GLSDB this in lieu of a 1 million dollar ATACMS (or new PSM) or an even more expensive air sortie + precision munition.

[dabigv13]

Nervous

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/pa...w-rooftops

The Russian military appears to have emplaced Pantsir air defense systems on top of at least two different government buildings in Moscow, including the Ministry of Defense's headquarters. The official reason for the apparent deployments is unclear, but Ukrainian forces have demonstrated their ability to conduct strikes at extended ranges using various types of drones. There could be other explanations, including this just being part of an ostensible exercise of some kind.


Multiple pictures and videos reportedly showing the rooftop Pantsirs began to emerge on social media earlier today, but it is not immediately clear when exactly they were taken. In addition to the one on top of the headquarters of Russia's Defense Ministry, another looks to have been craned onto a building that is slightly closer to the city center and that Google Maps says belongs to the country's Ministry of Education.

[dabigv13]

Nervous

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/pa...w-rooftops

The Russian military appears to have emplaced Pantsir air defense systems on top of at least two different government buildings in Moscow, including the Ministry of Defense's headquarters. The official reason for the apparent deployments is unclear, but Ukrainian forces have demonstrated their ability to conduct strikes at extended ranges using various types of drones. There could be other explanations, including this just being part of an ostensible exercise of some kind.


Multiple pictures and videos reportedly showing the rooftop Pantsirs began to emerge on social media earlier today, but it is not immediately clear when exactly they were taken. In addition to the one on top of the headquarters of Russia's Defense Ministry, another looks to have been craned onto a building that is slightly closer to the city center and that Google Maps says belongs to the country's Ministry of Education.

[Goose]

That being said, the fact that it may not be available for several months doesn't mean we shouldn't get the ball rolling. Yes we have no idea what the situation will be in late 23, but it is hard to imagine a situation in which the ability to cheaply and precisely place a 250 pound bomb almost 100 miles away isn't a useful one. Even if a ceasefire occurs by then, Ukraine is going to need to backfill/stockpile munitions and capability.

This capability would be great for Ukraine because they don't have an air force that can deliver the SDB. The US does, and that is why we are at best lukewarm about this weapon's system. Would it be good to have? Yes. Is it "essential" in that it fills an unmet need in the US inventory? I can assure you the USAF doesn't think so :-). For Ukraine, given the somewhat artificial constraints under which they function, it would be great. For the US, not so much.

It is unclear to me where in the development process this weapon is. I get the impression it isn't actually "real" yet. I also wonder where we are in the effort to supply JDAMs to Ukraine. Since that is a "weapons system of record", it probably is more likely to be deliverable. Yet I haven't seen much about that.

Somehow if Ukraine doesn't need them, its a nice capability for our military to have to to be able to use a GLSDB this in lieu of a 1 million dollar ATACMS (or new PSM) or an even more expensive air sortie + precision munition.

Obviously the GLSDB require the "precision munition", the SDB part. As far as the air sortie cost goes, it may not be more expensive because 1) it may be flown anyway and 2) the "range" of the aircraft adds to the coverage of the munition. You can cover a lot of ground with one aircraft, while you would need several HIMARS units to do the same thing. Even then, the HIMARS can't reach as far into hostile territory.

The "real" reason the USAF isn't all that excited about the SDB is that when it comes to blowing things up they can do almost the same thing with JDAMs, which they have lots of and are cheap. The SDB is mostly reserved for cases where "collateral damage" would be to big with even the smallest JDAM. The ability to carry more SDBs than JDAMS doesn't really move the needle that much. For real "precision" the Maverick works just fine. If you don't want to fly that far, use the SLAM-ER.

[Goose]

That being said, the fact that it may not be available for several months doesn't mean we shouldn't get the ball rolling. Yes we have no idea what the situation will be in late 23, but it is hard to imagine a situation in which the ability to cheaply and precisely place a 250 pound bomb almost 100 miles away isn't a useful one. Even if a ceasefire occurs by then, Ukraine is going to need to backfill/stockpile munitions and capability.

This capability would be great for Ukraine because they don't have an air force that can deliver the SDB. The US does, and that is why we are at best lukewarm about this weapon's system. Would it be good to have? Yes. Is it "essential" in that it fills an unmet need in the US inventory? I can assure you the USAF doesn't think so :-). For Ukraine, given the somewhat artificial constraints under which they function, it would be great. For the US, not so much.

It is unclear to me where in the development process this weapon is. I get the impression it isn't actually "real" yet. I also wonder where we are in the effort to supply JDAMs to Ukraine. Since that is a "weapons system of record", it probably is more likely to be deliverable. Yet I haven't seen much about that.

Somehow if Ukraine doesn't need them, its a nice capability for our military to have to to be able to use a GLSDB this in lieu of a 1 million dollar ATACMS (or new PSM) or an even more expensive air sortie + precision munition.

Obviously the GLSDB require the "precision munition", the SDB part. As far as the air sortie cost goes, it may not be more expensive because 1) it may be flown anyway and 2) the "range" of the aircraft adds to the coverage of the munition. You can cover a lot of ground with one aircraft, while you would need several HIMARS units to do the same thing. Even then, the HIMARS can't reach as far into hostile territory.

The "real" reason the USAF isn't all that excited about the SDB is that when it comes to blowing things up they can do almost the same thing with JDAMs, which they have lots of and are cheap. The SDB is mostly reserved for cases where "collateral damage" would be to big with even the smallest JDAM. The ability to carry more SDBs than JDAMS doesn't really move the needle that much. For real "precision" the Maverick works just fine. If you don't want to fly that far, use the SLAM-ER.

[TrumpCard]

The "incremental" gains in the Bakhmut area seem to be less incremental this week.  I hope Ukraine can establish a new defensible front line that will slow Russia's progress soon.

https://twitter.com/georgewbarros/status...1252932608

[TrumpCard]

The "incremental" gains in the Bakhmut area seem to be less incremental this week.  I hope Ukraine can establish a new defensible front line that will slow Russia's progress soon.

https://twitter.com/georgewbarros/status...1252932608

[Treefence]

I think Bakhmut is realistically in danger now, as Russia seems to be putting almost all their eggs in this basket. Russia is losing some ground up north, and for the most part the rest of the lines aren't moving besides the greater Bakhmut area. For the past few months, those who know best have been saying Bakhmut won't fall anytime soon.  That language has recently changed, and now they talk about how there are layers of defensive lines behind Bakhmut.  It's hard to predict what will happen next, but I think it's possible Ukraine will withdraw soon, if the northern and southern flanks are compromised.

[Treefence]

I think Bakhmut is realistically in danger now, as Russia seems to be putting almost all their eggs in this basket. Russia is losing some ground up north, and for the most part the rest of the lines aren't moving besides the greater Bakhmut area. For the past few months, those who know best have been saying Bakhmut won't fall anytime soon.  That language has recently changed, and now they talk about how there are layers of defensive lines behind Bakhmut.  It's hard to predict what will happen next, but I think it's possible Ukraine will withdraw soon, if the northern and southern flanks are compromised.

[Goose]

I think Bakhmut is realistically in danger now, as Russia seems to be putting almost all their eggs in this basket. Russia is losing some ground up north, and for the most part the rest of the lines aren't moving besides the greater Bakhmut area. For the past few months, those who know best have been saying Bakhmut won't fall anytime soon.  That language has recently changed, and now they talk about how there are layers of defensive lines behind Bakhmut.  It's hard to predict what will happen next, but I think it's possible Ukraine will withdraw soon, if the northern and southern flanks are compromised.

I too expect they will pull out in a timely fashion. IMO Ukraine is still holding back significant forces in order to repel a Russian assault from the North toward Kiev. The US is saying they don't see signs Russia is preparing for such an action, but the impact of being wrong about that is so large Ukraine is unwilling to risk it. It may be a strategic success for Russia. IMO Ukraine could commit more forces to the Donbas if they weren't so encumbered. Maybe better that they don't reinforce there anyway. Kherson Oblast is better tank country.

I hope the 500-600 troops being trained at Grafenwoehr will be followed by repeated classes. Having trained troops will be a force multiplier for Ukraine.

[Goose]

I think Bakhmut is realistically in danger now, as Russia seems to be putting almost all their eggs in this basket. Russia is losing some ground up north, and for the most part the rest of the lines aren't moving besides the greater Bakhmut area. For the past few months, those who know best have been saying Bakhmut won't fall anytime soon.  That language has recently changed, and now they talk about how there are layers of defensive lines behind Bakhmut.  It's hard to predict what will happen next, but I think it's possible Ukraine will withdraw soon, if the northern and southern flanks are compromised.

I too expect they will pull out in a timely fashion. IMO Ukraine is still holding back significant forces in order to repel a Russian assault from the North toward Kiev. The US is saying they don't see signs Russia is preparing for such an action, but the impact of being wrong about that is so large Ukraine is unwilling to risk it. It may be a strategic success for Russia. IMO Ukraine could commit more forces to the Donbas if they weren't so encumbered. Maybe better that they don't reinforce there anyway. Kherson Oblast is better tank country.

I hope the 500-600 troops being trained at Grafenwoehr will be followed by repeated classes. Having trained troops will be a force multiplier for Ukraine.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sweden-should...13624.html

The problem with Erdoğan has now reached a point it could easily kill the admission of Sweden and Finland. While to some degree I think it was a political calculation by Erdoğan to extract benefits in exchange for his support, he has an unfortunate history of 1) taking things personally, and 2) going so far out on a limb he can't walk it back. The S-400 purchase was in that category. He could have parlayed that into getting what he wanted for local Turkish production of Patriot parts. Instead, he overplayed his hand and got no Patriot parts assembly and was removed from the F-35 co-production effort. He also ended up with a system the Turkish military doesn't have much confidence in.

I greatly fear the recent incident and Erdoğan's response to it puts him in a similar position regarding Sweden's membership request. He isn't going to get the extraditions he wanted, and he isn't going to get an apology from Sweden. He will get an explanation, namely that Sweden has laws and they must follow them, even if at times it is inconvenient. That probably isn't going to work for Erdoğan. Will he just back down after the election? I kind of doubt it given the recent turn of events.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sweden-should...13624.html

The problem with Erdoğan has now reached a point it could easily kill the admission of Sweden and Finland. While to some degree I think it was a political calculation by Erdoğan to extract benefits in exchange for his support, he has an unfortunate history of 1) taking things personally, and 2) going so far out on a limb he can't walk it back. The S-400 purchase was in that category. He could have parlayed that into getting what he wanted for local Turkish production of Patriot parts. Instead, he overplayed his hand and got no Patriot parts assembly and was removed from the F-35 co-production effort. He also ended up with a system the Turkish military doesn't have much confidence in.

I greatly fear the recent incident and Erdoğan's response to it puts him in a similar position regarding Sweden's membership request. He isn't going to get the extraditions he wanted, and he isn't going to get an apology from Sweden. He will get an explanation, namely that Sweden has laws and they must follow them, even if at times it is inconvenient. That probably isn't going to work for Erdoğan. Will he just back down after the election? I kind of doubt it given the recent turn of events.

[TrumpCard]

Sweden can accommodate this demand better than it can the extradition demand. Erdogan is just upset about some looney bin Islamophobic politician in Sweden. The Swedish government can condemn it and take steps, with funding, to advance tolerance. That’s totally consistent with this Swedish administration.

[TrumpCard]

Sweden can accommodate this demand better than it can the extradition demand. Erdogan is just upset about some looney bin Islamophobic politician in Sweden. The Swedish government can condemn it and take steps, with funding, to advance tolerance. That’s totally consistent with this Swedish administration.

[Goose]

Sweden can accommodate this demand better than it can the extradition demand. Erdogan is just upset about some looney bin Islamophobic politician in Sweden. The Swedish government can condemn it and take steps, with funding, to advance tolerance. That’s totally consistent with this Swedish administration.

Yes, they can do that. But they can't ban burning the Koran and they can't arrest the people who did it. Anything less will be seen as paying lip service to the issue by Erdoğan and most of his supporters in Türkiye. Unfortunately, this is an emotional issue and rational responses to emotional issues generally don't satisfy the people involved. Erdoğan knows full well this is the last thing the Swedish government wanted to happen. In his world, if somebody does something the government doesn't like, they get squashed. He expects everybody else to do the same. He remains unsatisfied by less. Sometimes he has to grin and bear it, but in this case he believes he doesn't, it seems.

[Goose]

Sweden can accommodate this demand better than it can the extradition demand. Erdogan is just upset about some looney bin Islamophobic politician in Sweden. The Swedish government can condemn it and take steps, with funding, to advance tolerance. That’s totally consistent with this Swedish administration.

Yes, they can do that. But they can't ban burning the Koran and they can't arrest the people who did it. Anything less will be seen as paying lip service to the issue by Erdoğan and most of his supporters in Türkiye. Unfortunately, this is an emotional issue and rational responses to emotional issues generally don't satisfy the people involved. Erdoğan knows full well this is the last thing the Swedish government wanted to happen. In his world, if somebody does something the government doesn't like, they get squashed. He expects everybody else to do the same. He remains unsatisfied by less. Sometimes he has to grin and bear it, but in this case he believes he doesn't, it seems.

[gocard14]

Interesting thread re Abrams (with a little twitter smack talk to boot)

[tweet]https://twitter.com/markhertling/status/1616792744135098370?s=46&t=lWStYBZxG9wxuzVWKSH65A[/tweet]

[gocard14]

Interesting thread re Abrams (with a little twitter smack talk to boot)

[tweet]https://twitter.com/markhertling/status/1616792744135098370?s=46&t=lWStYBZxG9wxuzVWKSH65A[/tweet]

[TrumpCard]

I think Goose mentioned that there aren't many Leopard tanks just lying around in Europe and the surplus ones that are available resemble the junk you might pull from the couch cushions.  I saw mention today, however, that Poland bought 116 Abrams tanks from the U.S. last month.  Here's that story:  https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articl...%20Tuesday..  I presume that sale is meant to backfill tanks that Poland is planning to send to Ukraine.  So it's possible that the plan is not to send tanks from under the couch cushions, but rather, to send tanks that Poland's army currently uses (which are being replaced by the Abrams).  I imagine something similar could be arranged in other countries whose armies currently use a substantial numbers of Leopard tanks.  Fingers crossed that I am correctly interpreting the December sale.  Also, Poland is saying that it will train Ukrainian soldiers on Leopards in Poland for the time being.  https://www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-defens...27976.html.  Although it's impossible to spin Germany's position as being anything but harmful, it seems like others do have some work around strategies.

[TrumpCard]

I think Goose mentioned that there aren't many Leopard tanks just lying around in Europe and the surplus ones that are available resemble the junk you might pull from the couch cushions.  I saw mention today, however, that Poland bought 116 Abrams tanks from the U.S. last month.  Here's that story:  https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articl...%20Tuesday..  I presume that sale is meant to backfill tanks that Poland is planning to send to Ukraine.  So it's possible that the plan is not to send tanks from under the couch cushions, but rather, to send tanks that Poland's army currently uses (which are being replaced by the Abrams).  I imagine something similar could be arranged in other countries whose armies currently use a substantial numbers of Leopard tanks.  Fingers crossed that I am correctly interpreting the December sale.  Also, Poland is saying that it will train Ukrainian soldiers on Leopards in Poland for the time being.  https://www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-defens...27976.html.  Although it's impossible to spin Germany's position as being anything but harmful, it seems like others do have some work around strategies.

[dabigv13]

Poland has been on a very big tank buying spree recently. They should have many good condition Leopard 2s that could be donated.

With more than a thousand of the latest American and South Korean tanks scheduled to arrive in Poland over the next decade, the roughly 250 Leopard 2s in the Polish army’s inventory soon should be excess to need. Poland could start giving them away right now and suffer, at worst, a fleeting capability gap.

...

Two years ago the Polish armor corps, which provides tanks and crews to four tank brigades and six mechanized brigades, possessed around 250 Leopard 2s in several variants as well as 230 or so locally-made PT-91 tanks and some 320 ex-Soviet T-72s. The PT-91 itself is an upgraded T-72.

That’s 800 tanks. As Russia grew more aggressive in the years leading up to its wider invasion of Ukraine starting last February, Poland launched one of the most intensive tank-acquisition efforts in modern history.

First, it began updating its Leopard 2s. Then it dropped a staggering $4.7 billion on 250 of the latest American M-1A2 SEPv3 tanks, with large-scale deliveries commencing in early 2025.

Finally, late last year, Polish officials went on a shopping spree in South Korea, where local industry produces a tank called the K-2 that’s widely considered the equal of the Leopard 2 and M-1.
....


“We just took our suitcases with money and [are] going like Hell around the world and trying to buy,” Gen. Rajmund Andrzejczak, chief of staff of the Polish armed forces, told Breaking Defense. “We know the strategic objective is [to] support Ukraine.”

The brobdingnagian tank buys have freed up the Polish army to begin donating its older tanks. T-72s went to Ukraine first, back in the spring. PT-91s followed over the summer. The Leopard 2 pledge boosted to around 275 the number of Polish tanks destined for Ukrainian service.

But with 1,250 of the world’s newest tanks on their way to Poland from the United States and South Korea—that’s 450 more tanks than Poland had just two years ago—all of Poland’s remaining older tanks arguably are on the verge of being redundant. That’s 240 or so Leopard 2s and around 280 PT-91s and T-72s.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/20...ld-follow/

[dabigv13]

Poland has been on a very big tank buying spree recently. They should have many good condition Leopard 2s that could be donated.

With more than a thousand of the latest American and South Korean tanks scheduled to arrive in Poland over the next decade, the roughly 250 Leopard 2s in the Polish army’s inventory soon should be excess to need. Poland could start giving them away right now and suffer, at worst, a fleeting capability gap.

...

Two years ago the Polish armor corps, which provides tanks and crews to four tank brigades and six mechanized brigades, possessed around 250 Leopard 2s in several variants as well as 230 or so locally-made PT-91 tanks and some 320 ex-Soviet T-72s. The PT-91 itself is an upgraded T-72.

That’s 800 tanks. As Russia grew more aggressive in the years leading up to its wider invasion of Ukraine starting last February, Poland launched one of the most intensive tank-acquisition efforts in modern history.

First, it began updating its Leopard 2s. Then it dropped a staggering $4.7 billion on 250 of the latest American M-1A2 SEPv3 tanks, with large-scale deliveries commencing in early 2025.

Finally, late last year, Polish officials went on a shopping spree in South Korea, where local industry produces a tank called the K-2 that’s widely considered the equal of the Leopard 2 and M-1.
....


“We just took our suitcases with money and [are] going like Hell around the world and trying to buy,” Gen. Rajmund Andrzejczak, chief of staff of the Polish armed forces, told Breaking Defense. “We know the strategic objective is [to] support Ukraine.”

The brobdingnagian tank buys have freed up the Polish army to begin donating its older tanks. T-72s went to Ukraine first, back in the spring. PT-91s followed over the summer. The Leopard 2 pledge boosted to around 275 the number of Polish tanks destined for Ukrainian service.

But with 1,250 of the world’s newest tanks on their way to Poland from the United States and South Korea—that’s 450 more tanks than Poland had just two years ago—all of Poland’s remaining older tanks arguably are on the verge of being redundant. That’s 240 or so Leopard 2s and around 280 PT-91s and T-72s.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/20...ld-follow/

[Goose]

Poland has indeed gone on a buying spree and notionally has over 1K tanks on the way. The purchase from the Koreans is arriving/has arrived and will be operational sometime in the near future. The first order was for Abrams M1A2s will not arrive until 2025. The second order is for M1A1s that will arrive "this year". These are presumably refurbished ex US tanks that were not upgraded. All such orders obviously will not achieve IOC immediately.

So, while Poland has lots of tanks on the way, they will certainly have a window where they arguably need their "old" tanks to function as a deterrent to Russia. That said, it seems the latest order for M1A1s is probably intended to backfill for tanks sent to Ukraine. Poland has already sent T-72s. How many Leopards they will be willing to part with is obviously up to them. They have their own political calculus to deal with. IMO they will send a substantial number, perhaps 50 all told. I would be surprised if it were more, and it could be less. These numbers, plus the ones promised by other nations, will be substantial. All Germany has to do is not object. Let's hope they can at least do that.

[Goose]

Poland has indeed gone on a buying spree and notionally has over 1K tanks on the way. The purchase from the Koreans is arriving/has arrived and will be operational sometime in the near future. The first order was for Abrams M1A2s will not arrive until 2025. The second order is for M1A1s that will arrive "this year". These are presumably refurbished ex US tanks that were not upgraded. All such orders obviously will not achieve IOC immediately.

So, while Poland has lots of tanks on the way, they will certainly have a window where they arguably need their "old" tanks to function as a deterrent to Russia. That said, it seems the latest order for M1A1s is probably intended to backfill for tanks sent to Ukraine. Poland has already sent T-72s. How many Leopards they will be willing to part with is obviously up to them. They have their own political calculus to deal with. IMO they will send a substantial number, perhaps 50 all told. I would be surprised if it were more, and it could be less. These numbers, plus the ones promised by other nations, will be substantial. All Germany has to do is not object. Let's hope they can at least do that.

[Leftcoast]

Past-Peak powers fighting to retain their prestige and privileges can be uniquely dangerous.  I wonder if we're seeing the vicious death throes of a fading empire? Eastern Europe strongly supports Ukraine wherever they feel capable of doing so and it must be galling to Russia to see how quickly the old Warsaw Pact "allies" (sarcasm) line up against them. 

None of the mistreated oxen wish to rewear the yoke they shed in in 1989.

[Leftcoast]

Past-Peak powers fighting to retain their prestige and privileges can be uniquely dangerous.  I wonder if we're seeing the vicious death throes of a fading empire? Eastern Europe strongly supports Ukraine wherever they feel capable of doing so and it must be galling to Russia to see how quickly the old Warsaw Pact "allies" (sarcasm) line up against them. 

None of the mistreated oxen wish to rewear the yoke they shed in in 1989.

[BostonCard]

Poland has indeed gone on a buying spree and notionally has over 1K tanks on the way. The purchase from the Koreans is arriving/has arrived and will be operational sometime in the near future. The first order was for Abrams M1A2s will not arrive until 2025. The second order is for M1A1s that will arrive "this year". These are presumably refurbished ex US tanks that were not upgraded. All such orders obviously will not achieve IOC immediately.

So, while Poland has lots of tanks on the way, they will certainly have a window where they arguably need their "old" tanks to function as a deterrent to Russia. That said, it seems the latest order for M1A1s is probably intended to backfill for tanks sent to Ukraine. Poland has already sent T-72s. How many Leopards they will be willing to part with is obviously up to them. They have their own political calculus to deal with. IMO they will send a substantial number, perhaps 50 all told. I would be surprised if it were more, and it could be less. These numbers, plus the ones promised by other nations, will be substantial. All Germany has to do is not object. Let's hope they can at least do that.

Germany is hinting that it won't oppose Poland sending tanks:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-tan...e-meeting/
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ger...023-01-23/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/202...s-ukraine/

Specifically, it quotes German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock as saying, "if we were asked, we would not stand in the way."

But also, Poland is willing to send the tanks even if Germany says no.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-new...tle-tanks/

BC

[BostonCard]

Poland has indeed gone on a buying spree and notionally has over 1K tanks on the way. The purchase from the Koreans is arriving/has arrived and will be operational sometime in the near future. The first order was for Abrams M1A2s will not arrive until 2025. The second order is for M1A1s that will arrive "this year". These are presumably refurbished ex US tanks that were not upgraded. All such orders obviously will not achieve IOC immediately.

So, while Poland has lots of tanks on the way, they will certainly have a window where they arguably need their "old" tanks to function as a deterrent to Russia. That said, it seems the latest order for M1A1s is probably intended to backfill for tanks sent to Ukraine. Poland has already sent T-72s. How many Leopards they will be willing to part with is obviously up to them. They have their own political calculus to deal with. IMO they will send a substantial number, perhaps 50 all told. I would be surprised if it were more, and it could be less. These numbers, plus the ones promised by other nations, will be substantial. All Germany has to do is not object. Let's hope they can at least do that.

Germany is hinting that it won't oppose Poland sending tanks:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-tan...e-meeting/
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ger...023-01-23/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/202...s-ukraine/

Specifically, it quotes German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock as saying, "if we were asked, we would not stand in the way."

But also, Poland is willing to send the tanks even if Germany says no.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-new...tle-tanks/

BC

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/ukraine-expect...00990.html

100 all together sounds feasible to me. It probably won't be 100 all at the same time though. Some of them probably have to be re-furbished a bit first, and it will be necessary to make sure they can communicate with each other. The radios are all probably NATO Standard but from what years may be quite different. Also necessary to make sure they can talk to their surrounding infantry support. If they are in Bradleys/Stryker/M113s it probably is straightforward. If they are Ukrainian BMPs, maybe not so much. If they are leg infantry, something is wrong. The next problem will be if any of the Leopards are Leopard 1s. There are lots of those out there but they don't fire 120 mm ammunition.

There was an article in the news that said the Bundeswehr had 19 Leopard 2A7s in their training command that they could send. While it is undoubtedly true these tanks exist they are presently being used to train the German troops that will be upgrading to the A7 model. Seems to me very unlikely these tanks could actually be "spared", even if they have no immediate combat assignment. This upgrade also probably means there are some older model tanks that are in a "deferred maintenance" status in anticipation of their being declared surplus. These tanks would be better candidates for donation IF they aren't in too bad shape. It is important people realize exactly how gutted the German military is. They have outsourced all their tank maintenance to industry. They can't fix anything themselves. There is a big backlog in scheduled maintenance and upgrade installation. How combat losses are supposed to be dealt with is totally unclear. Germany itself is undoubtedly in no shape to release tanks to anybody.

Rheinmetall OTOH does have quite a few tanks that it has retained with hopes of upgrading and selling. However, these tanks are not ready to go and will take a year (supposedly) to be made ready for combat. It may be the best we can hope for that Germany just quietly acquiesces to other nation's donating tanks.

[Goose]

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/ukraine-expect...00990.html

100 all together sounds feasible to me. It probably won't be 100 all at the same time though. Some of them probably have to be re-furbished a bit first, and it will be necessary to make sure they can communicate with each other. The radios are all probably NATO Standard but from what years may be quite different. Also necessary to make sure they can talk to their surrounding infantry support. If they are in Bradleys/Stryker/M113s it probably is straightforward. If they are Ukrainian BMPs, maybe not so much. If they are leg infantry, something is wrong. The next problem will be if any of the Leopards are Leopard 1s. There are lots of those out there but they don't fire 120 mm ammunition.

There was an article in the news that said the Bundeswehr had 19 Leopard 2A7s in their training command that they could send. While it is undoubtedly true these tanks exist they are presently being used to train the German troops that will be upgrading to the A7 model. Seems to me very unlikely these tanks could actually be "spared", even if they have no immediate combat assignment. This upgrade also probably means there are some older model tanks that are in a "deferred maintenance" status in anticipation of their being declared surplus. These tanks would be better candidates for donation IF they aren't in too bad shape. It is important people realize exactly how gutted the German military is. They have outsourced all their tank maintenance to industry. They can't fix anything themselves. There is a big backlog in scheduled maintenance and upgrade installation. How combat losses are supposed to be dealt with is totally unclear. Germany itself is undoubtedly in no shape to release tanks to anybody.

Rheinmetall OTOH does have quite a few tanks that it has retained with hopes of upgrading and selling. However, these tanks are not ready to go and will take a year (supposedly) to be made ready for combat. It may be the best we can hope for that Germany just quietly acquiesces to other nation's donating tanks.

[81alum]

Goose mentioned how hollowed-out the German military currently is.  This NYT piece reflects that very well.  There is a major cultural shift beginning to happen there, but it will take a long time to rebuild.  Following is a gift link--hopefully it works.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magaz...=share-url

[81alum]

Goose mentioned how hollowed-out the German military currently is.  This NYT piece reflects that very well.  There is a major cultural shift beginning to happen there, but it will take a long time to rebuild.  Following is a gift link--hopefully it works.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/magaz...=share-url