2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: QUIETShooter on February 26, 2023, 04:16:57 PM
-
WTF. Just send these multi-million dollar tanks to Ukraine with no trained tank crews.
A state of the art cutting edge tank is worthless if the crew doesn't know a f**kn thing as to how to use it.
We have an idiot for a POTUS. Likes to waste other people's money. A$$hole....
https://www.newsweek.com/abrams-tanks-ukraine-russia-war-us-veteran-1779164#:~:text=No%20matter%20how%20well%20the%20Ukrainian%20tankers%20have,the%20work%20of%20years%2C%20not%20weeks%20or%20months.
-
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ExcellentVainBetafish-size_restricted.gif)
-
I'm sure the Russians and Chinese will have fun taking them apart and finding critical vulnerabilities.
-
They will be trained. Are you pro Putin and anti-Ukraine ? Anti democracy too?
No other choices? We call this a 1 sided option.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
They will be trained. Are you pro Putin and anti-Ukraine ? Anti democracy too?
How about training them first. Just because I question what our leaders are doing does not make me pro Putin, anti-Ukraine, nor against democracy.
You really are a f**kn troll.
-
Training involves much more than operation. Our resident know-it-all hasn't got a clue.
Maintenance, repair, spare part acquisition, and diagnosing the mechanical and electronic systems takes years.
You can't just drop it off at the dealership when the targeting system won't power up or figure everything out from the owner's manual. Today's weapons systems are extremely complex, require technical skills to operate and keep working, and need a supply chain in order to get spare parts. No matter how resilient a part is, that doesn't protect against battle damage and unusually harsh operating conditions.
:crazy:
-
It will take some time before the tanks arrive and I am sure they are training as you are complaining.
Training to sell them on the black market?
-
It will take some time before the tanks arrive and I am sure they are training as you are complaining.
Have you ever tried training forreign nationals on US weapons systems? I have.
It took 3-4 years for Boeing to deliver 4 E-3 AWACS aircraft to Riyadh. In that time, the US flew our own AWACS doing 24/7/365 sorties with Saudi national officers, and US ground support worked with their techs to get them ready.
You can't expect the new operators and support personnel to become proficient over "some time." And they are not training now, They can't until the tanks are there. What are they going to train on? Simulators they don't have?
-
Have you ever tried training forreign nationals on US weapons systems? I have.
It took 3-4 years for Boeing to deliver 4 E-3 AWACS aircraft to Riyadh. In that time, the US flew our own AWACS doing 24/7/365 sorties with Saudi national officers, and US ground support worked with their techs to get them ready.
You can't expect the new operators and support personnel to become proficient over "some time." And they are not training now, They can't until the tanks are there. What are they going to train on? Simulators they don't have?
Our rhesident military expert reminds me of someone....same mistakes and still didnt read past threads.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Our rhesident military expert reminds me of someone....same mistakes and still didnt read past threads.
I was a Software Engineer for AWACS, and much of the process in delivering them to the Saudis was spent developing a releasable version that would not impact US operations and capabilities.
Just one of many aspects where foreign military sales is concerned.
-
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfsrsRd8rfFueY3UWJH1iZoth9A8xLhppxGZopdEP1QrKWTAOEF_Krfa8PqUui-2lNzwsD_jlWF_5KXR95LLQYN_S_rPSCS9yjku_mLFHVt4O7toPQP1hjlZlx_8OT6wSnw3nO3ObdFDTdd1VfzX4XhEblH95FvFlqCJ2jDjm-O7unua39GDI/w399-h472/ukrnz00001.jpg)
-
read the fine print.
They can't get their tanks for about two years.
:wtf:
-
Have you ever tried training forreign nationals on US weapons systems? I have.
It took 3-4 years for Boeing to deliver 4 E-3 AWACS aircraft to Riyadh. In that time, the US flew our own AWACS doing 24/7/365 sorties with Saudi national officers, and US ground support worked with their techs to get them ready.
You can't expect the new operators and support personnel to become proficient over "some time." And they are not training now, They can't until the tanks are there. What are they going to train on? Simulators they don't have?
Obviously this person has not served in the military. A Tanker recruit goes through 13 weeks of training at the Armor School at Fort Knox.
That's just the beginning. Then there is more training and certifications along the way at his assigned duty station.
You don't just "drive" the damn thing and look down the barrel sights like a rifle to fight the enemy. :rofl:
What I was getting at is the high risk of a multi-million dollar vehicle getting destroyed in battle by a bunch of Ukranians with more balls than training.
And I also was criticizing our leadership. You know, the same retard that handled the Afghanistan withdrawal....... ::) ::) ::) :rofl:
-
read the fine print.
They can't get their tanks for about two years.
:wtf:
Some sources say a matter of months. Some say sometime in 2024. I couldn't find more credible sources.
-
Some sources say a matter of months. Some say sometime in 2024. I couldn't find more credible sources.
When a politician or PR person says 'months', that could end up being 2 months, or it could stretch out to 12, 18, 24 ....
-
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ebc98797d05b8244292f5975a40787b0ebfd8fb4b30de373ddc36aa0cbf9d5c1.jpg?w=480&h=545)
-
Forest for the trees. . . more nitwit distractions. . .
-
Obviously this person has not served in the military. A Tanker recruit goes through 13 weeks of training at the Armor School at Fort Knox.
That's just the beginning. Then there is more training and certifications along the way at his assigned duty station.
You don't just "drive" the damn thing and look down the barrel sights like a rifle to fight the enemy. :rofl:
What I was getting at is the high risk of a multi-million dollar vehicle getting destroyed in battle by a bunch of Ukranians with more balls than training.
And I also was criticizing our leadership. You know, the same retard that handled the Afghanistan withdrawal....... ::) ::) ::) :rofl:
I mean, 1 could just drive it. But it wont get very far. The driver has to understand the limitations, like dont drive over barbed wire. Same for the other crew jobs. I mean I guess it could run on a skeleton crew. Just need a gunner. He can move to load the gun himself, then take the time to go back to the gunner seat. No need a TC as the gunner could find his own targets, but all this would take much longer between shots. Which is 1 reason why the US never adopted auto loaders like how the Russian Tanks have. A human loader can load much quicker.
Then add in all the support crews for PMCS. Maybe our Rhesident mechanic can be the E2 hard spot finder and exhaust sample taker.
I remember watching pre WW2 US military training on equipment. The budget was so low that they had to use cans of soup to mimic loading an artillery shell. For grenades, they used bags of flower to throw at a replica tank (wood used as an armor shape). Maybe this is the training our military expert is suggesting be done since there are no simulators or equipment to live train on like how Flapp mentioned in Ukraine.
-
Side note to the "could drive the tank". I had a conversation with a friend and I said I could fly a helicopter and all I would need is a few mins to "get the feel for her". Compared to a plane, taking off is easy, but landing takes skill. So I would not be able to land a plane by "getting the feel for her".
I talked to my friends dad who was a Huey pilot in NAM. He said they didn't have simulators back then. For their first flight they took them to an open field with a small chopper in the middle of it. That's how they learned to fly after all the book work was completed. So he agreed, that I would be able to pilot a chopper by "getting the feel".
-
training for the challenger 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cu3N0y7Sf8
-
Side note to the "could drive the tank". I had a conversation with a friend and I said I could fly a helicopter and all I would need is a few mins to "get the feel for her". Compared to a plane, taking off is easy, but landing takes skill. So I would not be able to land a plane by "getting the feel for her".
I talked to my friends dad who was a Huey pilot in NAM. He said they didn't have simulators back then. For their first flight they took them to an open field with a small chopper in the middle of it. That's how they learned to fly after all the book work was completed. So he agreed, that I would be able to pilot a chopper by "getting the feel".
not "undo" burden? ;D
-
Side note to the "could drive the tank". I had a conversation with a friend and I said I could fly a helicopter and all I would need is a few mins to "get the feel for her". Compared to a plane, taking off is easy, but landing takes skill. So I would not be able to land a plane by "getting the feel for her".
I talked to my friends dad who was a Huey pilot in NAM. He said they didn't have simulators back then. For their first flight they took them to an open field with a small chopper in the middle of it. That's how they learned to fly after all the book work was completed. So he agreed, that I would be able to pilot a chopper by "getting the feel".
Big difference between being able to make a vehicle go and being able to maneuver in combat.
Not the place for OJT.
-
Not the place for OJT.
Not against the Russians, who invented modern armored warfare tactics.
-
A weapon is only as effective as the person(s) using it.
It's the crew that defines if the tank is a bad-ass killing machine or a rolling coffin.
You can have balls of steel but many battles were lost by soldiers with big balls.
Training is what wins battles. (Along with big balls....)
-
What's new about this war between 2 modern nations is there aren't many tank vs tank engagements. Maybe more BMP vs tank. But the main vulnerability for the M1 would be infantry anti tank weapons. Sending in M1's would be a waste due to the cost and PMCS they require, plus fuel consumption. More better to send Stryker type vehicles. Quantity vs. quality or even NAM era APC's. Basically keeps troops safe from small arms while going from place to place.
After thinking about it, armored HMMMV's would be better. Much cheaper, way easier to maintain, less resources, easier to produce and transport. No training required. I mean, only training would be to how to start the engine and use the battery warmer.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZqxBFfS5J0
This video states the crews have about a month of intensive training. This tank is more heavier and more sophisticated than the T-80 they are used to.
Most likely the Ukranian crews will have similar half-assed training when the M1 gets delivered.
With so much corruption in that country I wonder if these tanks see service at the front lines at all, but that's fodder for another thread.
edited to add: Lots of the comments after the video mentioned the training should have started sooner for the crews instead of last minute. Lots of people know that training in these things don't happen overnight.
-
What's new about this war between 2 modern nations is there aren't many tank vs tank engagements. Maybe more BMP vs tank. But the main vulnerability for the M1 would be infantry anti tank weapons. Sending in M1's would be a waste due to the cost and PMCS they require, plus fuel consumption. More better to send Stryker type vehicles. Quantity vs. quality or even NAM era APC's. Basically keeps troops safe from small arms while going from place to place.
After thinking about it, armored HMMMV's would be better. Much cheaper, way easier to maintain, less resources, easier to produce and transport. No training required. I mean, only training would be to how to start the engine and use the battery warmer.
Actually, using A-7 or A-10 jets to take out the enemy tanks would be more effective and risk fewer lives. The cost to acquire and operate would be higher compared to a few tanks, but they are more survivable on the battlefield and can overwhelm enemies employing tanks as long as they don't also have accurate anti-aircraft weapons. Whichever side owns the skies has the advantage.
To build a Hummer that can withstand a direct hit from a tank would mean basically creating a tank without the canon. At some point, you might as well make it a tank.
https://youtu.be/gXgtyyXjDm4
-
Actually, using A-7 or A-10 jets to take out the enemy tanks would be more effective and risk fewer lives. The cost to acquire and operate would be higher compared to a few tanks, but they are more survivable on the battlefield and can overwhelm enemies employing tanks as long as they don't also have accurate anti-aircraft weapons. Whichever side owns the skies has the advantage.
To build a Hummer that can withstand a direct hit from a tank would mean basically creating a tank without the canon. At some point, you might as well make it a tank.
https://youtu.be/gXgtyyXjDm4
These things are the ground troops best friend. And a nightmare for the enemy.
-
These things are the ground troops best friend. And a nightmare for the enemy.
i graduated college in 1984. My first AFROTC Military Banquet would have been Fall 1980. During that event, we watched a film on the A-10 Thunderbolt (nickname: Warthog). They were first operational in 1976, so not that many in inventory in '80.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II
-
These things are the ground troops best friend. And a nightmare for the enemy.
Since I was stationed at the A-10 Depot I was schooled on A-10's at Myrtle beach AFB before they were in wide usage.
Awesome machine. The designers didn't think out some maintenance issues very well, but
survivability was excellent.
Even me, a Nav systems specialist could swap engines and repair flight control surfaces.
But then again I was a depot repair guy. Back in my day that (billet, PCS, Posting) took special recommendations to get.
:worship:
-
Since I was stationed at the A-10 Depot I was schooled on A-10's at Myrtle beach AFB before they were in wide usage.
Awesome machine. The designers didn't think out some maintenance issues very well, but
survivability was excellent.
Even me, a Nav systems specialist could swap engines and repair flight control surfaces.
But then again I was a depot repair guy. Back in my day that (billet, PCS, Posting) took special recommendations to get.
:worship:
From what I read, they have about 1,200 lbs of titanium armor protecting the cockpit and avionics.
:thumbsup:
-
From what I read, they have about 1,200 lbs of titanium armor protecting the cockpit and avionics.
:thumbsup:
Shaped like a bathtub
guillotine to sever all
connections on ejection.
Build to get shot up
and survive.
:shaka:
-
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230306/1d48666065d2bd2360448acbb0fe152a.jpg)
Sent from my moto g power (2021) using Tapatalk