Author Topic: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?  (Read 331 times)

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« on: January 22, 2023, 09:29:47 AM »
I'm putting this out as a 'scenario' since its all what-if policy (rather than mods or engineering).

Politics: Like a lot of folks, I've gone around in circles on the 'Leopard 2 log-jam'. BK Olaf Scholz has reserved for himself any final go-ahead decisions on re-exporting Leopard 2s. Most frustrating is that Scholz keeps 'moving the goalposts'. Whether this is intentional or dithering, the effect is the same.

While I was glad to see Christine Lambrecht gone, a BMVg headed by Boris Pistorius is worse in some ways. He flips back and forth about working in concert with allies, then German industry can't deliver rebuilt Leo 2A4s until 2024. When the lack of connection between approving allied re-exports and German rebuilds is pointed out, Pistorius switches over to vague SPD policy statements.

So, rather than waiting for Ukraine to lose momentum completely, what if the rest of NATO just exhales on any hope of prompt German action on approving Polish or Finnish Leopard re-exports?

Alternative: UK PM Rishi Sunak has already diverted Challenger 2s to Ukraine. So far, it is only 14 x CR2s and Ukraine is asking for hundreds. My suggestion is that Britain abandon the proposed Rheinmetall/BAE Systems Challenger 3 modernization programme. Instead, drop the 30-year-old CR2s in favour of taking on 250 x US-supplied M1A1s or M1A2s. [1]

In the short-term, this would free-up at least 184 x CR2s from active British Army service. [2] There are sound arguments against the Challenger 2 as an ideal tank for Ukraine - CR2 being a unique tank type with a distinct main armament. So, not exactly NATO-Standard. But the British Army holds sufficient spares to keep 200-odd vehicles viable long enough for a Spring offensive.

With the intensity of combat in Ukraine, the CR2s should probably be regarded as 'attritive'. The point is not to provide the ZSU with an 'ideal' NATO-Standard tank for the long-term. Rather, the objective is a decisive Ukrainian breakthrough. If the CR2 fleet is worn out when Putin throws in the towel, then the tanks will have served their purpose.

Okay, feuer frei! folks  ;D

BTW: I've assumed that the ultimate replacement for Challengers (and the overly-heavy Abrams) would be a separate topic ... but I'm happy to engage here too.
____________________________________


[1] That vague "US-supplied" is intentional. Since speed would be of the essence, the Abrams could be leased (and left stock) or purchased (and modified to British Army standards). The Abrams variant taken on would depend upon source.

Some 400 ex-USMC M1A1 Abrams are out of service and currently in storage at the Sierra and Anniston Army Depots. Meanwhile, on the reserve storage side, the US Army has over 2,300 idle M1A2s (but, with ANGs, etc., outside access might be tricker - read: time-consuming).

[2] I am assuming 56 x CR 2s for both QRH and KRH, plus another 72 from the 4 x squadrons of the RTR. Other CR2 could be retained in the UK for now for training UA crews. Ditto for simulators and other training aids.

____________________________________
« Last Edit: January 22, 2023, 09:32:25 AM by apophenia »
"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline kim margosein

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2023, 12:21:52 PM »
I don't know if the Abrams is really to complex or if that is just an excuse.  First, where are the Challengers that the UK gave to Ukraine now, and who is driving them?  Now, say Ukraine gets all these western tanks.  You will have Challengers, and Leopards in a couple of flavors.  These tanks need to be fueled maintained supplied and repaired.  These folks will need to be equipped and trained, along with the tank crew.  This is not something that can be done overnight.  Assuming a three month training period, these tanks have to be in Ukranian hands NOW.   I don't know about switching from WARPAC to NATO tanks, but I read an article (in  Husbhkit?) that switching from MiGs to F-16s required a whole different mindset.  I think the tank crews will need to learn a different way of fighting, a different way of thinking. 
Also= This is the first real first-world peer to peer combat since the Korean War.  What stands out to me greater importance of artillery than expected, drones make hiding more difficult, and the massive attrition of sophisticated weaponry.  This is the big takeaway of the war to me.

Offline Kerick

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2023, 03:18:40 PM »
The Leopards and Challengers are already in Europe. So send them in. Ukraine will be using ex Soviet tanks for quite some time yet as that’s what they have the most of and the ammo for and experience with. Germany just can’t make up its mind so if someone else wants to send tanks let them and Germany can fight with them about it later. This is an emergency situation and should be treated as such.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2023, 03:43:50 PM »
The Germans will want to wait until the Eleventh Hour to make a decision, by then it'll be too late. Training crews takes time, which means the vehicles should be available now, not as the Russians are pushing into Poland!

This war should also be teaching Western politicians a vital lesson; You can't wait until a war starts to begin acquiring your military resources, you needed them yesterday!

It's time to bite the bullet, governments of the West; put pressure on the armaments manufacturers to streamline their production & R&D; punish those who are pork-barrelling; buy in bulk, not piecemeal dribs & drabs; increase your defence spending to a significant percentage of GDP (5% minimum); increase recruiting &, if that doesn't boost defence personnel numbers enough, re-introduce National Service.

Bah! Who am I kidding, we'll wait until it's too late & ensure more young people die than was ever necessary in an attempt at appeasement ... Again!
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2023, 02:15:32 AM »
Quite a bit to address here.  To begin with the following might be useful viewing/reading:

https://mickryan.substack.com/p/the-great-tank-debate
https://youtu.be/n2fvltvllko

Politics: Like a lot of folks, I've gone around in circles on the 'Leopard 2 log-jam'. BK Olaf Scholz has reserved for himself any final go-ahead decisions on re-exporting Leopard 2s. Most frustrating is that Scholz keeps 'moving the goalposts'. Whether this is intentional or dithering, the effect is the same.

I think there is a lot to do with the poor readiness of the Bundeswehr as a whole - see here for some discussion on this.  Note that both sides of politics in Germany are responsible for this and the issues probably go back for 20 - 30yrs.

Basically, the German Military is essentially a mirage and thus any attempts to call upon it to support the likes of Ukraine are very difficult.  That said, as can be see here they have actually managed to supply quite a bit...but at what cost?


Alternative: UK PM Rishi Sunak has already diverted Challenger 2s to Ukraine. So far, it is only 14 x CR2s and Ukraine is asking for hundreds. My suggestion is that Britain abandon the proposed Rheinmetall/BAE Systems Challenger 3 modernization programme. Instead, drop the 30-year-old CR2s in favour of taking on 250 x US-supplied M1A1s or M1A2s. [1]

Getting the Abrams is not so easy.  For one, you would want them in service before giving up the Challengers.  This means at least a 6 - 12mth wait IMHO, if not more.  Also, generating Abrams in the presumed latest M1A2 sEP v3 configuration will take time.  the US is flat out converting tanks to this configuration now.  In fact, a big part of the reason why Poland has gone for Abrams and K2s is that they can't get the desired number of Abrams in service fast enough.  if the US could have supplied 750 - 1000 Abrams quicker the K2 deal wouldn't have happened.


In the short-term, this would free-up at least 184 x CR2s from active British Army service. [2] There are sound arguments against the Challenger 2 as an ideal tank for Ukraine - CR2 being a unique tank type with a distinct main armament. So, not exactly NATO-Standard. But the British Army holds sufficient spares to keep 200-odd vehicles viable long enough for a Spring offensive.

Possibly, but again are you going to have an alternative in place before hand?

Some 400 ex-USMC M1A1 Abrams are out of service and currently in storage at the Sierra and Anniston Army Depots. Meanwhile, on the reserve storage side, the US Army has over 2,300 idle M1A2s (but, with ANGs, etc., outside access might be tricker - read: time-consuming).

I understand that the ex-USMC Abrams are already earmarked for/physically being updated to M1A2 SEP v3s and are part of those going to both the US Army, Australia and Poland.  Remember that other than Egypt, no-one is really making new Abrams any more.  They are all refurbished from older stock.

BTW ANAD is not so much a storage depot as much a full overhaul depot - in fact, that's where the majority of the world's Abrams get overhauled.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2023, 02:25:46 AM »
put pressure on the armaments manufacturers to streamline their production & R&D;

The pressure is there already I can assure you.  It doesn't happen by magic though.  Business is in it for business and without orders or funding nothing happens - harsh reality but still the reality.

punish those who are pork-barrelling

Nice sentiment but remember that those responsible for punishing will also be the same ones guilty of the pork-barrelling.

; buy in bulk, not piecemeal dribs & drabs; increase your defence spending to a significant percentage of GDP (5% minimum);

There are not bottomless pits of funding available.  Also 2 - 2.5% of GDP is seen as a 'health investment.  The only major Western investments doing more than that that I am aware of are:

USA:  ~3.5% GDP
Poland:  ~2.5% a draining for 5% but this is generally not seen as realistic
South Korea:  ~2.8%

increase recruiting &, if that doesn't boost defence personnel numbers enough, re-introduce National Service.

Easy to say...difficult in reality.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Frank3k

  • Excession
  • Global Moderator
  • Formerly Frank2056. New upgrade!
    • My new webpage
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2023, 02:35:35 AM »
Beyond fuel types and logistic issues, the NATO alliance  has to get down to the basic requirement: overkill Russian "military" as quickly and efficiently 9or not) as possible. End of story. Russia is well on it's way to a population collapse and irrelevance and the quicker we can accelerate the pace, the better for the rest of the world. They will eventually become China's problem.

Offline Kerick

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2023, 06:59:16 AM »
Also, firm action from NATO allies here will go a long way towards deterring China from aggression in the Pacific. Waffling around will just encourage them.

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2023, 07:05:27 AM »
Wow! Thanks for all the responses folks  :smiley:

I don't know if the Abrams is really to complex or if that is just an excuse.  First, where are the Challengers that the UK gave to Ukraine now, and who is driving them?...

1) Doubtless the M1 is complex but really this is code for 'most armies aren't used to maintaining turbine engines'. Turbines are, of course, simpler in concept and parts-count than ICE but still maintenance-intensive.

Being ignored in the West is that UA designs and builds its own turbine engines for aircraft. If the ZSU had trouble maintaining AGT1500s, it would be in the field. Motor Sich alone could provide a host of highly experienced technicians for any 'heavy' engine maintenance.

... You will have Challengers, and Leopards in a couple of flavors.  ...

My assumption here was the Challengers being sent essentially as-is. So, to a typical CR2 TES standard - as currently serving RTR, QOH, and KOH - with as few 'sensitive' bits of kit removed as possible. I've shown the CR2 TES with a pruned 'antennae farm' and sans-Barracuda nets. The emphasis is on speed of delivery.

... Assuming a three month training period ...

The ZSU has shown repeatedly that it can field modern equipment far quicker than peacetime western armies can. Unfortunately, Ukrainian tankers are now highly experienced. ZSU crews are already at Bovington and I would not be surprised if the switch-over to CR2s could be done in 3 weeks (partly due to intense motivation, partly to increased risk tolerance).

In the end, western armies are going to be learning at least as much from the Ukrainians as the professionals have to teach the ZSU.

... these tanks have to be in Ukranian hands NOW...

That is certainly the messaging. But Kyiv's urgency is partly based on the often glacial pace of western decision-making. But any major, pre-'rasputitsa' UA combined arms offensive may be off the table anyway - with prep time running out and the Winter having been very mild by regional standards. Still, there is time for CR2s to be deployed for a later Spring offensive. The question is: In what numbers?

Going back to training, the UK has another CR2 option. BATUS has 22 x CR2s which are not used for British Army training between November and April. So, another what-if: Co-ordinate with Canada to use CFB Suffield to train ZSU crews in combined arms on British equipment. Along with CR2s, BATUS has CVR(T)s and Bulldogs - both latter types promised or supplied to UA. Add to that a similarity in terrain. Another advantage of using BATUS is a comparatively large Ukrainian-Canadian population in Alberta [1] - a useful source of support, translators, and freshly-made pyrohy and borshch  ;)

___________________________________

[1] There are ~1.36M Ukrainian-Canadians (with about 370k in AB) of which around 144,000 know the language. Translators may also be found amongst the 20,000 Ukrainian refugees in Canada (most living around Calgary - only 260 km from CFB Suffield).


"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2023, 07:19:01 AM »
... I think there is a lot to do with the poor readiness of the Bundeswehr as a whole ...

Absolutely. And it is hard to separate this from a perceived need to use the 'Peace Dividend' to help balance the high costs of unification. We can't completely discount Scholtz' Zeitenwende but I think it is fair to say that, on average, SPD members are conflicted-through-to-hostile on/to defence spending. CDU members generally make more supportive noises but, in the past, that hasn't often translated into higher spending ... let alone more sensible procurement policies.

At least some of this stems from legal issues with stockpiling BW equipment. That, in turn, is a result of the Grundgesetz ('Basic Law') which can be seen (like the Japanese constitution) as an artifact of Allied victory in 1945. It's not an excuse but the Grundg does complicate matters for German policy-makers.

... Note that both sides of politics in Germany are responsible for this and the issues probably go back for 20 - 30yrs...

Agreed that both sides (and their coalition governments) are responsible. And there's been a lot of 20/20 finger-pointing over Ostpolitk. Assumptions were made about an emerging Russian leadership that would make choices which would seem rational to westerners. That didn't pan out and now UA pays the price in blood while Germany pays in Euros and reputation.


... Getting the Abrams is not so easy.  For one, you would want them in service before giving up the Challengers...

I was thinking more of phased BA withdrawl, training (BA & US), and service entry.

Sunak started this by taken one squadron's worth of CR2s out of BA service for UA. I was imagining an extension of that concept, going something like this:

C Sqn QRH deploys to Poland as an extension of OP Harfa. At the end of the exercise, C Sqn turns its CR2s over to ZSU crews (who have completed their CR2 training at Bovington or Suffield). C Sqn then returns to Tidworth to begin conversion training for Abrams. Once training Abrams arrive in the UK, C Sqn QRH goes to Bovington to complete on-vehicle conversion.

Meanwhile, RTR 'Dreadnaught' has deployed to Poland as part of OP Harfa. Upon completion of Ex, D Sqn returns 'tankless' to Hampshire to repeat that Abrams conversion as the next tranche in the training process. So, the US would need to provide a dozen or so 'M1Ax' for Bovington followed by 14 x operational Abrams by the time each British squadron completes its conversion to the type. Not a small undertaking but, then again, not unfamiliar practices for USA depots/conversion centres or for Military Sealift Command.

Also, to state the obvious, it would also speed up matters if the USA (or USMC?) was willing to second Abrams training staff to Bovington.

... I understand that the ex-USMC Abrams are already earmarked for/physically being updated to M1A2 SEP v3s and are part of those going to both the US Army, Australia and Poland...

Now that is a fly in the ointment (and point taken about Poland's K2 purchase as well). As mentioned in the original post, one option would be a UK lease of Abrams. In that case, the question becomes: Would the USA, ADF, or SZ RP be willing to defer M1A2 SEP v3 deliveries while the British Army fielded the erstwhile Marine M1A1 HAs?

BTW ANAD is not so much a storage depot as much a full overhaul depot - in fact, that's where the majority of the world's Abrams get overhauled.

Thanks for that - an important distinction!
"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2023, 07:25:09 AM »
Beyond fuel types and logistic issues ...

Thanks Frank. That 'jet fuel issue' is a bit of nonsense from officialdom. The Abrams' AGT1500 engine was intended from the outset to be multi-fuelled (JP-8/F-34/Jet A-1, petrol, DF-6, bio-diesel, DFM, and the like). [1]

___________________________________

[1] DFM (Diesel Fuel Marine) is DoD-ese for what most of us would call MDO (Marine Diesel Oil).
"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #11 on: January 23, 2023, 11:47:23 AM »
This scenario may be moot ...

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is making statements that sound like approval for re-exporting Polish Leopard 2s. If so, this is great news and the current problem is solved.

I suppose it makes sense that such an announcement comes from the Auswärtiges Amt rather than BMVg. And Baerbock (along with Robert Habeck) has supporterd sending Leopard 2s to Ukraine all along. Still, ... can't help wondering if Scholtz and Pistorius aren't offering up a Green minister to avoid blow-back from SPD rank-and-filers  :icon_nif:
"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2023, 04:22:23 AM »
Quick viz of modern Western tanks to be supplied to #Ukraine. Challenger 2, M1 Abrams and Leopard 2s...



Source: https://twitter.com/CovertShores/status/1618335759651737600?s=20&t=pebj-TVAT31RH8L6GtHSWA
« Last Edit: January 26, 2023, 05:43:34 AM by The Big Gimper »
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline Sport25ing

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2023, 07:55:53 PM »
Link: https://yt3.ggpht.com/s7PbXPAvX682YA0HbE8arBLy8x8qKFfRxQlCp7bqxj0rEVxj4sKLSkZaz-KKtCR7s86QWA1irHVfYw=s640-nd-v1

Plus, this mighty be pure fantasy, but imagine that not only the NATO members send tanks (among others), but also:
- Israel: newest Merkavas III or oldest IV's
- South Korea: K1A2
- Japan: Type 90

Off course, it would be pure fantasy :P

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2023, 09:36:15 PM »
The one issue with a multiplicity of tank types is that each type requires its own, individual, supply chain at a considerable cost both financially & in manpower.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2023, 01:55:21 AM »
- Israel: newest Merkavas III or oldest IV's


I would love to see both Merkavas and Namers ...but with Netanyahu back in power there is no chance of that happening.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #16 on: January 27, 2023, 02:03:07 AM »
The one issue with a multiplicity of tank types is that each type requires its own, individual, supply chain at a considerable cost both financially & in manpower.

There are some but I think people are over stating some.  First up, will they be a logistics burden?  Yes, but no more so than everything else that is causing a burden to Ukraine given the hotch-potch they have now.  That said, they are in this for the here and now not the multi-year scenario.  Once Ukraine wins the war then they will decide what to keep and what to dispose of (or put on mounts).

Some aspects such as fuel (about which quite a bit has been mentioned in regards to the Abrams) is not an issue as all can run on diesel.  Moreover, in the case of the Abrams, the AGT1500 can run on anything that burns and can flow through the engine spray nozzles.  For instance, the Australian Army runs theirs on diesel so there is no issue there despite how some, seem to think it is an issue.

Ammunition is partially an issue but only really for the Challengers though provided the UK sends plenty it can be dealt with.  The Leopards and Abrams both can interchange ammunition.

« Last Edit: January 27, 2023, 02:17:00 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #17 on: January 27, 2023, 03:59:57 AM »
I would love to see both Merkavas and Namers ...but with Netanyahu back in power there is no chance of that happening.

None at all.  Mind you, Bibi's predecessors didn't seem all that keen on miffing Moscow either  :P

... the AGT1500 can run on anything that burns and can flow through the engine spray nozzles.  For instance, the Australian Army runs theirs on diesel so there is no issue there despite how some, seem to think it is an issue.

That whole 'fuel issue' seems to have originated with earlier Pentagon statements but journos have seized upon it. Weight and bridge-crossing has also confused the press. I'm sure that somebody at Ukravtodor is clever enough to provide the ZSU with a list of Ukrainian bridges with capacities less than 62 tonnes.
"The doorbell's ringing, could be the elves
But it's probably the werewolf ..."

Offline Sport25ing

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #18 on: January 27, 2023, 07:22:50 AM »
While not operated by the Ukrainian:

"A unknow tank operated by the Wagney Group was knock out near the 2nd Battle of Mariupol. After examination, they found East Asian markings. Initially, the though was that China began selling military equipment. But further examination found out that the tank was in fact North Korean, been either a Chonma-ho or a Pokpung-ho. It is thought that the Russian were helping the NK to built their "M2020" in return of their own tanks.

Offline Sport25ing

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2023, 06:06:07 PM »
"BREAKING NEWS"
Israel consider sending "weapons" to Ukraine

Link:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/02/01/ukraine-russia-war-latest-news-putin-france-caeser-howitzer/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_youtube_youtube-community

So... the chanches of a Merkava in Ukrainian colors is increasing :D

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2023, 02:40:54 AM »
"BREAKING NEWS"
Israel consider sending "weapons" to Ukraine

Link:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/02/01/ukraine-russia-war-latest-news-putin-france-caeser-howitzer/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_youtube_youtube-community

So... the chanches of a Merkava in Ukrainian colors is increasing :D

I will believe it when I see it
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Frank3k

  • Excession
  • Global Moderator
  • Formerly Frank2056. New upgrade!
    • My new webpage
Re: More Challenger 2s for Ukraine?
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2023, 04:49:09 AM »
Don't forget Russia providing a few T-90s and a few hundred fairly modern T-72s. Send them to Poland or the Czech Republic to be modernized/have real ERA bricks installed.