Best Tank

[innonimatu]

Yeah, KM or GD briverying Saudi Crown prince who probably has more money than they can even dream of.

They don't offer money to the clown prince, they offer protection. Then they bribe Trump or Merkel or Macron or whomever, by supporting their political campaigns, in order to deliver that protection.

Kind of inevitable that the US supplier will win despite any shows put up for public consumption. The country is the one delivering military protection to the clown prince. He kind of needs that while in the process of losing a war against yemeni rebels. Political protection (welcome to our exclusive club...) would be nice, Macron slithered his way into MBS' side recently offering that, but it's not such a priority. The germans... meh, they're not good players in that league: they're good at bribing lower ranking officials and political parties, works in poorer countries but not on a tyranny ruled by a dirty rich clown.

 

[Zardnaar]

Problem with Saudi army it's more trained to look pretty on parades and jobs for Saudi elite vs actually fighting anyone.

The security services are also aimed at internal dissent vs unarmed civilians. Yemeni rebels shoot back.

The whole combined arms aspect probably eludes them.

 

[red_elk]

I think I know why they can't fight Yemeni rebels or detect Iranian missiles... it's just general level of professionalism in everything.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think I know why they can't fight Yemeni rebels or detect Iranian missiles... it's just general level of professionalism in everything.

That's basically it. That lack of professionalism is systematic to the Saudi regime though. Authoritarian regimes in general. Political reliability is chosen over competency. Saudi army officers are top heavy with Saudi royal family and allies.

USSR had same problem in 41, Stalin loosened the reins a bit and Chuikov and Zhukov plus others did their thing. Hitler went the other way and well yeah.

 

[cardgame]

I heard it the other way around, that the German General Staff was the best on the continent bar none, and were hamstrung more by politics. Unless that is what you're saying and I'm misinterpreting it. Anyway, Lexicus will probably be along soon to tell me this is just a wehraboo myth.

 

[Zardnaar]

I heard it the other way around, that the German General Staff was the best on the continent bar none, and were hamstrung more by politics. Unless that is what you're saying and I'm misinterpreting it. Anyway, Lexicus will probably be along soon to tell me this is just a wehraboo myth.

German junior officers were trained to seize the initiative.

Nazi regime fired a lot of Generals, rehired then fired and towards the end loyalists were handed promotions etc.

You could yell at Hitler, Stalin not so much.

Alot of authoritarian regimes draw support from tribes, families, certain ethnic groups so officers are drawn heavily from those groups.

Rank and file tend to get it rough. In Western type armies only the very senior officers get more than double or triple a privates salary. I suspect a lot of Saudi Colonels and generals will be members of the royal family or related to allies of the royal family.

It's like in Russia where they have had generals use their men to build a private dacha. It's not very conductive to discipline building. Armies where junior officers don't want to lead from the front and the senior officers are hacks don't tend to perform that well.

I guess the Saudi tankers think they're safe, the infantry don't want to support them because they don't have a tank and the Saudi officers don't want to get shot at themselves.

Then said tank gets an RPG in the side. And their air support will just drop bombs they won't care to much where they land.

 

[Zardnaar]

Limitations of upgrading old Soviet tanks.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-has-new-weapon-kill-americas-abrams-tanks-96921

 

[Phrossack]

Limitations of upgrading old Soviet tanks.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-has-new-weapon-kill-americas-abrams-tanks-96921

I hope to post a proper post tomorrow, assuming I'm not busy baking.

I have mixed feelings on "The National Interest." On one hand, Sebastien Rolin writes decent articles. On the other hand, "The National Interest" articles are all basically, "American Generals Hate Him! This Russian Dad Figured Out How to DESTROY the US Army with This One WEIRD Trick!"

But yeah, the T-72 and T-80 are typical Russian min-max designs - great armor, firepower, and incredibly light weight at the expense of all sorts of things from crew survivability to gun depression and room for upgrades. The two-part ammunition and carousel autoloader don't allow for long penetrators, but the new T-14 does.

However, it doesn't matter. Russia's massive stock of upgraded T-72s, T-90s, and T-80s could easily overrun all of the rest of Europe, which, perhaps outside of France, doesn't really bother to have a credible military. There is thus little reason to replace the current Russian tank fleet.

 

[Lexicus]

I heard it the other way around, that the German General Staff was the best on the continent bar none, and were hamstrung more by politics. Unless that is what you're saying and I'm misinterpreting it. Anyway, Lexicus will probably be along soon to tell me this is just a wehraboo myth.

Zardnaar is correct as to the dynamic that happened as the war went on. The German General Staff started out fairly independent but gradually came more and more under Hitler's control (and Hitler's mind became more and more warped), while the USSR's high command started the war under the shadow of the purges and political commissars, but Stalin gradually learned to delegate. I forget the details but the power of the political commissars was also reduced somewhat as the war went on.

The problem on the German side was that OKW, the high command of the armed forces, was personally subordinated to Hitler and staffed by yes-men like Keitel and Jodl, while OKH, the Army High Command, had a lot of professional talent but amounted to a specialty board controlling the Eastern Front only. There was no equivalent to the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hitler himself was the only one with access to all the information required to form Germany's strategy. As long as the Germans were winning this wasn't such a handicap but as soon as they ran into difficulties it became fatal.

Hitler never achieved the kind of control over the officers that Stalin had. There is little question that every Russian edit: Soviet (sorry) general was terrified of Stalin and all were doing their jobs with the constant knowledge that Stalin could order their execution at any moment. That was not really true of the German generals at any point, but it did become closer to true after the July 20 plot failed and Hitler began to descend into total madness.

 

[red_elk]

Russia has tank hordes, America has planes and carriers.
Generals always prepare for the previous war.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I have mixed feelings on "The National Interest." On one hand, Sebastien Rolin writes decent articles. On the other hand, "The National Interest" articles are all basically, "American Generals Hate Him! This Russian Dad Figured Out How to DESTROY the US Army with This One WEIRD Trick!"

I feel the same. Their articles can be pretty decent but always carry clickbait titles and are pretty nationalisitic in tone.

 

[Zardnaar]

Russia has tank hordes, America has planes and carriers.
Generals always prepare for the previous war.

I think America has more Abrams than Russia.

And most Russian tanks are T-72s alot of them unupgraded

 

[Broken_Erika]

I think America has more Abrams than Russia.

I would think so too.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would think so too.

Oops I meant the American tank army is probably bigger than the Russian.

Could be wrong as they've sold a few.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I think America has more Abrams than Russia.

And most Russian tanks are T-72s alot of them unupgraded

Yes, Russia has zero Abrams.
Russia has loads of T-72, even more than US has Abrams, but i doubt they can field an important fraction of them at anytime.

Anyway in a modern war you can have as many tanks as you want but without air superiority a single attack helicopter can wipe out entire armored companies in minutes.

 

[cardgame]

Well, however many it has missiles for. Most helos won't carry anything more than 8 Hellfires or equivalent.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Well, however many it has missiles for. Most helos won't carry anything more than 8 Hellfires or equivalent.

That is about the size of a tank company.

An Apache can carry up to 16 hellfires though, plus 30mm cannon to dispatch lighter vehicles as BMPs and BTRs. Hokums and Havocs can also carry more than 8 AT missiles IIRC.

 

[r16]

the German problem is them generals were thinking themselves to be smart to bring in some corporal to let them border adjustments , simply ignoring the depths of American vallet , which meant the Corporal let them to doom .

or subscription post , like how many threads ı follow and they keep throwing me out .

upps , sorry xenforo was still following and let the alert appear now .

 

[red_elk]

I think America has more Abrams than Russia.

I was talking about army building strategy, not how many abrams anyone has.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/armor-tanks-total.asp

 

[GamezRule]

That is about the size of a tank company.

An Apache can carry up to 16 hellfires though, plus 30mm cannon to dispatch lighter vehicles as BMPs and BTRs. Hokums and Havocs can also carry more than 8 AT missiles IIRC.

Semi trollish but I was just about to post that the best tank isn’t a tank at all, but the AH-64. Ultimately the “best” depends on the situation. Perhaps a better question would be which tank is the most versatile?

serious post to come later

PS: Lethality aside, Apache crewmembers are all a bunch of tossers