Insight, analysis & opinion from Joe Paduda

< Back to Home

Jan
25

Wildly off-topic #13 – Tanks.

Last time we talked about weapons…how many each side had, what’s been lost, and the challenges in replacing those weapons.

Today’s newsfeed arrived with the VERY welcome news that Germany has OK’ed supplying Leopard 2 tanks, and we will be sending Abrams tanks to Ukraine. The UK had committed to send 14 of its Challenger II tanks to Ukraine… Note that countries that use Leopard 2s have to get permission from Germany before sending them to Ukraine; with this latest announcement sources indicate Ukraine will get at least 100 Leopard 2s.

This will supply roughly one brigade – and is about 1/3 of what Ukraines’ leaders say they need.

These are “main battle tanks” [MBTs], a term describing very heavy, very well armored vehicles with very powerful cannons. Unlike the other armored vehicles already sent to or on the way to Ukraine, MBTs are much more likely to survive an IED, land mine, rocket or artillery attack.

Highlights…

  • Leopard 2 tanks are very capable; well armored and with a very powerful cannon, highly mobile, durable and simpler to maintain than the US Abrams tank
  • there are thousands of them in more than 19 armies

  • The US Abrams is equally if not more capable, BUT…
    • guzzles fuel (although it can use jet fuel, gasoline, or diesel)
    • requires a lot more maintenance
    • is really heavy and thus harder to transport

Timing

These will not be there tomorrow…however I’d bet NATO countries will be sending tanks from their current units rather than pulling mothballed older versions and going through what could be a long and difficult process of upgrading them and preparing them for battle.

Then there’s spare parts, fuel, ammunition, training, repair and maintenance  personnel and facilities and transport. These are massive, very complex vehicles that require a lot of care and feeding.

Experts contend that Ukraine’s Army has shown itself quite able to learn complicated weapons systems quickly; it’s use of the HIMARS rocket system, artillery, and anti-ship missiles has been pretty impressive.

What does this mean?

This is a major move, one that will definitely improve Ukraine’s chances of retaking territory. 

That said, like any tool, it comes down to how well it is used. 


3 thoughts on “Wildly off-topic #13 – Tanks.”

  1. Love it Joe! How long do you think it will be before NATO sends planes if at all? That would definitely be a game changer, but something I suspect causes a lot of heartburn for both the US and NATO.

    1. Hi Brad – thanks for the note.

      I have no idea if or when NATO will send planes…my layperson’s view is planes are a lot harder to learn, maintain, and repair than land vehicles and armaments. If anything nations that use former Soviet planes – former eastern bloc nations – may be able to supply more aircraft to Ukraine.

      be well – Joe

  2. As an ex US Army Combat Engineer – All of this equipment should have been shipped the moment Putin was lined up to invade. I happy to see this development and we should all prepared for anything and everything from Putin.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Prove you're human -> five + five =

Joe Paduda is the principal of Health Strategy Associates

SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL

SEARCH THIS SITE

A national consulting firm specializing in managed care for workers’ compensation, group health and auto, and health care cost containment. We serve insurers, employers and health care providers.

 

DISCLAIMER

© Joe Paduda 2023. We encourage links to any material on this page. Fair use excerpts of material written by Joe Paduda may be used with attribution to Joe Paduda, Managed Care Matters.

Note: Some material on this page may be excerpted from other sources. In such cases, copyright is retained by the respective authors of those sources.

ARCHIVES

Archives