Canada's tanks

[KevinB]

Is an 11% probability of a hit with a $1000 munition such a bad ratio?

Hit doesn’t mean kill in this case.

And if it engages the enemy, has them runninng in circles, wasting ammunition, distracting them, aborting their action - harassing, suppressing and neutralizing them isn't that still contributing a useful effect to the battlespace?

It is a question of resources.
We covered this before on other threads.

If a Javelin has a Pk of 95+% and is $175k
Does a system that has a Pk under 5% that costs 15k a better deal?

What are the logistical challenges;
For 100 Javelin missiles or 25,000 FOV drones

Even if all it does is help 3 Ukrainians in a hole to hold a km of line and keep the otherside from advancing - holding them to a stalemate. That would seem to me to be enhancing economy of force efforts.

Opportunity cost is tough to know / maybe a 120mm Mortar would be more effective? Especially in all weather conditions.

...

How many SAA rounds are put down range to achieve one hit?
Mortar rounds?
Grad rounds?
Even dumb artillery rounds and bombs.

The difference is the FPV are guided.

....

To be clear, I will restate that I am not in favour of replacing conventional weapons with "drones". I do believe that "drones" will follow Moore's Law and get smaller, faster, cheaper and more effective and become a greater part of everyone's arsenal.

I also think that the new divisional structure is going to look a lot like the WW2 divisional sructure, particularly the inclusion of Light Anti-Aircraft Regiments (20mm and 40mm) and Anti-Tank Regiments (17 Pdr) with the Divisional Artillery

LAA becomes C-UAS (20 to 40 mm, SAMs, DE and EW)
AT becomes LRPF (Assault Breakers - LAMs, Brimstones and MFOM)

Brimstone is not LRPF.

I think you have gone tangentially sideways on the tank thread.

 

[Kirkhill]

Hit doesn’t mean kill in this case.

It is a question of resources.
We covered this before on other threads.

If a Javelin has a Pk of 95+% and is $175k
Does a system that has a Pk under 5% that costs 15k a better deal?

What are the logistical challenges;
For 100 Javelin missiles or 25,000 FOV drones


Opportunity cost is tough to know / maybe a 120mm Mortar would be more effective? Especially in all weather conditions.

The difference is the FPV are guided.


Brimstone is not LRPF.

I think you have gone tangentially sideways on the tank thread.

Tangentially sideways?

What kills a tank?

And I know the difference between a hit and a kill.

Does the person being hit?

 

[CBH99]

Tangentially sideways?

What kills a tank?

And I know the difference between a hit and a kill.

Does the person being hit?

Yeah, they do. Speaking from experience here...

If you aren't dead, than it wasn't a kill.




Not sure how else to say it lol not trying to sound chirp

 

[Kirkhill]

Yeah, they do. Speaking from experience here...

If you aren't dead, than it wasn't a kill.




Not sure how else to say it lol not trying to sound chirp

In the same spirit, the discovery is after the fact. I would suspect the anticipatory actions would be similar in both cases, regardless of the outcome.

 

[PrairieFella]

Yeah, they do. Speaking from experience here...

If you aren't dead, than it wasn't a kill.




Not sure how else to say it lol not trying to sound chirp

M Kill - Mobility Kill. Your vehicle cant move but can still fight.
F Kill - Fighting/Firepower Kill. Your vehicle's weapons and/or FCS are damaged to the point they're inoperable.
K Kill - Complete/Catastrophic Kill. Your vehicle is no longer operable. Usually determined by a degradation of hull integrity or the vehicle catching fire.

APC/IFV only

P Kill - Personnel Kill. Over 30% of dismounts are incapacitated.

 

[KevinB]

M Kill - Mobility Kill. Your vehicle cant move but can still fight.
F Kill - Fighting/Firepower Kill. Your vehicle's weapons and/or FCS are damaged to the point they're inoperable.
K Kill - Complete/Catastrophic Kill. Your vehicle is no longer operable. Usually determined by a degradation of hull integrity or the vehicle catching fire.

APC/IFV only

P Kill - Personnel Kill. Over 30% of dismounts are incapacitated.

FWIW I’m using PK for Probability of Kill, which in the lethality area means K Kill.

For anti-armor work, a M Kill is still a fail as unless your NLOS, the tank can still FUBAR you.

Glass half full, most ATGM, 84mm or larger DF weapon hits on a Russian tank result in a K Kill if you hit the turret or turret ring area.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The loader/auto-loader question might be answered by the main gun selection on our next tanks.

From what I understand the 130mm rounds are significantly larger and heavier than the current 120mm tank rounds (1.5m long and 30-38kg depending on type for the 130mm vs around 1m long and 21kg for the 120mm round).

The 130mm L/51 round is specifically designed for an autoloader due to the weight and space constraints. Manually loading a 130mm round would be significantly slower than a 120mm round, result in much greater loader fatigue and require a larger turret due to the greater length of the round.

The South Korean K2 Black Panther uses an autoloader for its 120mm gun but apparently there is a limited (very slow and awkward) ability to manually load the gun if the auto loader fails (either the commander or gunner has to leave their position and ROF is only 1-2 rounds per minute.

FWIW I’m using PK for Probability of Kill, which in the lethality area means K Kill.

For anti-armor work, a M Kill is still a fail as unless your NLOS, the tank can still FUBAR you.

Glass half full, most ATGM, 84mm or larger DF weapon hits on a Russian tank result in a K Kill if you hit the turret or turret ring area.

An M-Kill just gives you a stable gun platform

 

[quadrapiper]

FWIW I’m using PK for Probability of Kill, which in the lethality area means K Kill.

For anti-armor work, a M Kill is still a fail as unless your NLOS, the tank can still FUBAR you.

Glass half full, most ATGM, 84mm or larger DF weapon hits on a Russian tank result in a K Kill if you hit the turret or turret ring area.

From a point of zero knowledge: how valuable is an M Kill as a means to fix the tank so something else can kill it?

 

[PrairieFella]

Valuable. One of the prime characteristics of armour is unparalleled battlefield mobility. Take that part of the iron triangle away (more of an octagon these days but I digress) and you're in trouble.

 

[KevinB]

From a point of zero knowledge: how valuable is an M Kill as a means to fix the tank so something else can kill it?

As @PrairieFella points out that isn't a set item.

If you can mobility kill it in the assembly area - well it's not in the fight -- but a MK on it's objective then it still in the fight, and can help against any counter attack.

Any enemies in the direct fire range of a mobility killed tank, will not likely appreciate that it was mobility killed - as it will be firing on them.

BUT, if you can mobility a whole bunch of them in a specific spot (think obstacles channelling) - then you can bring other systems on to finish them off.

 

[YZT580]

Poland has just ordered what? a thousand. We are talking about replacing 80 odd hulls on a 1 to 1 basis. What is the point?

 

[PrairieFella]

Poland has just ordered what? a thousand. We are talking about replacing 80 odd hulls on a 1 to 1 basis. What is the point?

Poland is all in on land warfare with Russia. We aren't.

That said, 200-250 tanks plus enablers sure would be nice.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As @PrairieFella points out that isn't a set item.

If you can mobility kill it in the assembly area - well it's not in the fight -- but a MK on it's objective then it still in the fight, and can help against any counter attack.

Any enemies in the direct fire range of a mobility killed tank, will not likely appreciate that it was mobility killed - as it will be firing on them.

BUT, if you can mobility a whole bunch of them in a specific spot (think obstacles channelling) - then you can bring other systems on to finish them off.

A MK also forces the opposition to try to save it, possibly with a HVT like a ARV. Particularity if as you mention they suffer 2-3 MK in the same area. A MK may also be a opportunity to inflict more damage on the enemy.

 

[KevinB]

A MK also forces the opposition to try to save it, possibly with a HVT like a ARV. Particularity if as you mention they suffer 2-3 MK in the same area. A MK may also be a opportunity to inflict more damage on the enemy.

Except that our enemies aren't really big on spending efforts to save equipment or crews.

 

[markppcli]

A MK also forces the opposition to try to save it, possibly with a HVT like a ARV. Particularity if as you mention they suffer 2-3 MK in the same area. A MK may also be a opportunity to inflict more damage on the enemy.

I think that’s doubtful now. Extraction / recovery of personnel or assets in the fight is a scar we picked up from years of counter insurgency. Unless it’s absolutely critical - ie the breach is obstructed, that’s not happening.

 

[KevinB]

I think that’s doubtful now. Extraction / recovery of personnel or assets in the fight is a scar we picked up from years of counter insurgency. Unless it’s absolutely critical - ie the breach is obstructed, that’s not happening.

110%, when you look at the loss rates of Russian tanks and other AFV's it is very clear that they aren't making any effort to recover systems.
Even the Ukrainians, who really can't afford to lose equipment, are having to abandon vehicles (they still do their best to recover crews).

Most modern Militaries do not have the CSS assets integral to BN's (and even Brigades) that would be needed to make large scale recovery possible, and Div potentially Corps assets would be needed to recover BN's - which is just a net impossibility. Furthermore they definitely do not have (even at Div and Corps) the ability and capabilities to do the repairs to modern equipment like what was seen in WW2.

 

[FJAG]

110%, when you look at the loss rates of Russian tanks and other AFV's it is very clear that they aren't making any effort to recover systems.
Even the Ukrainians, who really can't afford to lose equipment, are having to abandon vehicles (they still do their best to recover crews).

Most modern Militaries do not have the CSS assets integral to BN's (and even Brigades) that would be needed to make large scale recovery possible, and Div potentially Corps assets would be needed to recover BN's - which is just a net impossibility. Furthermore they definitely do not have (even at Div and Corps) the ability and capabilities to do the repairs to modern equipment like what was seen in WW2.

I'm reminded of the 72 hour burst put on by Pearl Harbor to get Yorkton operationally ready of the battle damage she sustained in the Battle of the Coral Sea in time for her to participate in the Battle of Midway. Don't expect that these days.

I'm also reminded that as a young gunner I could fix most the things wrong with my 3/4 ton and any major component replacement - including engines - could be done by your average battery RCEME team. These days, even for the simplest of vehicles, there are entirely too many specialized components which need specialized diagnostic tools with too few parts available. Don't get me started on optics and weapon systems.

 

[dapaterson]

I'm also reminded that as a young gunner I could fix most the things wrong with my 3/4 ton and any major component replacement - including engines - could be done by your average battery RCEME team. These days, even for the simplest of vehicles, there are entirely too many specialized components which need specialized diagnostic tools with too few parts available. Don't get me started on optics and weapon systems.

Trebuchet appreciation society?

 

[YZT580]

I'm reminded of the 72 hour burst put on by Pearl Harbor to get Yorkton operationally ready of the battle damage she sustained in the Battle of the Coral Sea in time for her to participate in the Battle of Midway. Don't expect that these days.

I'm also reminded that as a young gunner I could fix most the things wrong with my 3/4 ton and any major component replacement - including engines - could be done by your average battery RCEME team. These days, even for the simplest of vehicles, there are entirely too many specialized components which need specialized diagnostic tools with too few parts available. Don't get me started on optics and weapon systems.

and how many of those specialized components are truly necessary for the war machine to operate effectively? I can fully appreciate the value of the optics and weapon systems but engine electronics and computers are just that many more pieces that can render the equipment immobile. Better to go for the cheap frame and mechanical drive trains whilst spending your dollar on the add-ons that don't require Eveready replacements

 

[foresterab]

Trebuchet appreciation society?

Ponders the rate of return fire of trebuchet sling loads of 81mm mortar shells vs small caliber mortars

Never mind...there's a full zero in differences in range (5km to 500m).

So much for giggling at the thought of a trebuchet being used to shotgun release shells forward....definitely not practical.