- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 1/19/23 at 10:40 am to Chromdome35
Posted on 1/19/23 at 10:40 am to Chromdome35
quote:
Without increased manufacturing capacity, I'm hesitant to give them any M1's. We have those in storage in case we need them. I am not for sacrificing our readiness.
Agree 100%. We have to maintain one of our aces in the hole.
In probably 1998, when I was in 1st CAV, we transitioned from the M1A1 Heavy Common to the M1A2. We were the first units in the Army to get the A2.
It took about 8 months of maintenance and busting arse on those things to get the bug wigs and General Dynamics to take those things for war stock.
It was such a big deal that we were nin deployable and didn't go to the field the whole time. Also so serious that we didn't do PT for 8 months. Sun up to sun down in the motor pool doing depot level maintenance. It was so crazy we had to paint the BII (tankers bar, shovel, etc.)
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 10:50 am
Posted on 1/19/23 at 10:45 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
The Abrams engine is unlike anything else on the battlefield, and I think that the US DoD doesn't think that it's feasible right now to maintain.
And I agree with that too. With experienced tankers like myself, it was nothing to pull the pack (turbine engine, transmission, main hydraulic pump). I did have a Private loader decide to put 30w in the turbine engine one time in Germany when I was away from the tank. Ouch. 30w is for the transmission. Turboshaft was for the engine.
Anyway, sand and dust is the biggest enemy of the turbine engine. We would have to pull the 3 V Packs twice a day to blow the dirt out in the desert. Any bit if dust and you'll blow the forward mod.
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 10:46 am
Posted on 1/19/23 at 11:39 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Holy cow is this Ramstein shaping up to be huge.
Germany looks incredibly weak here. Those packages are big in terms of relative value to the country they’re coming from and because of who they’re coming from.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 11:44 am to Napoleon
quote:
Sad fricking thing is, if Trump supported this war Biden and Dems would be against it and the Poliboard here would be the war hawks. Social media politics broke this nation.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 11:57 am to GOP_Tiger
The Baltic States, Poland and the UK have been the only countries that have impressed me with the aid they have given Ukraine. There have been no holdups or limits to what they are able and willing to donate, they along with the US acutely recognize what is at stake in this conflict. The Western Europeans have shown why they are shells of the former nations they once were on the other hand, particularly Germany, France and Italy. You can tell that they all have been more worried about making sure homosexuals have 6 months paid maternity leave than paying any sort of attention to national and European defense. I hope Poland comes out as the next true EU/NATO leader from this because they along with the Baltic states have shown they have the balls to tell the Germans to pound sand on things like arms transfers.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 11:58 am to WeeWee
I think everyone is about ready to tell Germany to frick off but we still need their Leopards. I’d love nothing more than to see Abrams blowing the shite out of T-90s and T-72s but Ukraine’s logistics are already stretched thin with all the different systems it has on the battlefield. The Abrams would be a beast on its own logistically. It would take even longer to train on Abrams than Leopards also, especially for the maintenance crews. Between the Bradleys, Strykers, Marders and the CV 90s you could field 2 new western armored brigades but you need around 150-160 MBTs. Poland and Finland alone could make that happen if they wanted to from their stocks but we would need to send Poland some Abrams to replace them. I think that is the better plan. It’s good to see everyone pitching in what they can for Ukraine, even the small Eastern European countries. If everyone pulls their weight in assistance Ukraine can do the world a huge favor by destroying the Russian military therefore Russia since their top way to get what they want is by threat of force.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:18 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Isn’t the fuel burn on an Abrams like 20 gallons to the mile? Maybe that’s a reason we think it’s not best for Ukraine
Consumer Reports might knock a few points off for that.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:33 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Isn’t the fuel burn on an Abrams like 20 gallons to the mile? Maybe that’s a reason we think it’s not best for Ukraine
LOL. No. The Abrams is a thirsty girl. But no close to that thirsty.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:35 pm to El Segundo Guy
quote:
We would roll all day and take on averages of about 120 gallons of JP-8. Not bad.
I remember when we transitioned from burning diesel in our Abrams to JP8. Went through about a year’s worth of fuel filters in a matter of weeks because they kept clogging from all the gunk that the JP8 broke from from our tanks and fuel lines.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:53 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Isn’t the fuel burn on an Abrams like 20 gallons to the mile? Maybe that’s a reason we think it’s not best for Ukraine
A fuel guzzling Abrams in Ukraine is better than a fuel efficient Leopard not in Ukraine.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:54 pm to Darth_Vader
Darth and El Segundo,
What did you name your tanks?
What did you name your tanks?
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:03 pm to Darth_Vader
Was it yourself or someone else who said this earlier in the thread? I swear it's virtually verbatim without even checking.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:05 pm to OutsideObserver
Darth said it a week or two ago.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:12 pm to El Segundo Guy
quote:
Without increased manufacturing capacity, I'm hesitant to give them any M1's. We have those in storage in case we need them. I am not for sacrificing our readiness. Agree 100%. We have to maintain one of our aces in the hole.
We have approximately 2000 M1s in active service and approximately 3500 M1s in storage? Who in the flying and crying f**k are we going to go to war with that we are going to need 2000 active MBTs and 3500 MBTs in storage to fight effectively that we couldn’t fight just as effective with 2000 active MBTs and 3000 MBTs in storage? It’s better to restore and send those tanks to Ukraine then sinking them for artificial reefs.
To address concerns that others have mentioned, yes the Abrams uses a lot of fuel, but so do Leopards and their current MBTs. The Leopards are going to require more maintenance than Ukraine’s current MBTs and will use the same type of ammo as the Abrams. Yes, Ukrainian logistics are stretched right now. That would be a problem if Abrams or Leopards started showing up in large numbers in Ukraine tomorrow, but they are not going to on the battlefield until summer. There is plenty of time to train the support ppl( who would to have to be trained on Leopards btw) on the Abrams and to get enough trucks from Europe to Ukraine to allow for them to have the logistics to keep the Abrams supplied.
ETA: I also just noticed something. As recently as yesterday wikipedia showed 3700 M1s in storage but today it says that we have 3450 M1s in storage. I wonder if that is a coincidence or if we are getting ready to send 250 M1s to Ukraine.
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:13 pm to Chromdome35
Many thanks, thought I had slipped into the Twilight Zone.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:20 pm to LSUPilot07
quote:
I think everyone is about ready to tell Germany to frick off but we still need their Leopards. I’d love nothing more than to see Abrams blowing the shite out of T-90s and T-72s but Ukraine’s logistics are already stretched thin with all the different systems it has on the battlefield. The Abrams would be a beast on its own logistically. It would take even longer to train on Abrams than Leopards also, especially for the maintenance crews. Between the Bradleys, Strykers, Marders and the CV 90s you could field 2 new western armored brigades but you need around 150-160 MBTs. Poland and Finland alone could make that happen if they wanted to from their stocks but we would need to send Poland some Abrams to replace them. I think that is the better plan. It’s good to see everyone pitching in what they can for Ukraine, even the small Eastern European countries. If everyone pulls their weight in assistance Ukraine can do the world a huge favor by destroying the Russian military therefore Russia since their top way to get what they want is by threat of force.
If everyone pulls their own weight it would be great. However, one of the largest members of the EU and NATO is not pulling their weight and is preventing others from pulling their own weight as well. That’s the problem. Even if Germany allows the Leopards to go to Ukraine, they will still do everything in their power to slow walk the process. Germany’s bureaucrats are compromised by Russia. I will not be surprised to see Leopards Ukraine unable to fight because they need a replacement track or some other part which is still sitting in a warehouse in Germany because some bureaucrat in Germany hasn’t approved the shipment of spare parts.
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:29 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Germany’s bureaucrats are compromised by Russia
exactly, same with hungry.....sorry but they should be kicked out of nato or we should leave along with the uk and sign individual agreements....well atleast threaten to until germany and others get in line.
if we are going to continue to carry the lions share of the cost, R&D, manpower etc than everyone else should bow down in situations like this. sorry is what it is.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:33 pm to lsu777
quote:
exactly, same with hungry.....sorry but they should be kicked out of nato or we should leave along with the uk and sign individual agreements....well atleast threaten to until germany and others get in line.
The USA and the UK are never leaving NATO. Germany needs to be threatened with being kicked out and be subjected to economic consequences. However, I don’t think there is a mechanism to kick out a member of NATO and Germany doesn’t have to worry economic consequences because it is in the EU. It’s a shame but that is the world we live in.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:47 pm to WeeWee
oh i know but we should threaten atleast try
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:48 pm to WeeWee
quote:
We have approximately 2000 M1s in active service and approximately 3500 M1s in storage? Who in the flying and crying f**k are we going to go to war with that we are going to need 2000 active MBTs and 3500 MBTs in storage to fight effectively that we couldn’t fight just as effective with 2000 active MBTs and 3000 MBTs in storage? It’s better to restore and send those tanks to Ukraine then sinking them for artificial reefs.
Facts like these don't mean anything to the guys on this board who desperately want to deep throat Putin and guzzle down every drop he can give them.
Popular
Back to top


1






