Ukraine - Superthread

[MilEME09]

Rick it seems was forced to play the Ottawa game and deliver affects without calling anything a Tank.

Luckily Afghanistan made plans change

 

[Kirkhill]

Stormer is old, but gets the job done IIRC

Alvis Stormer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If the MMEV vehicle flipped when firing at 90 degrees off axis then don't fire when 90 degrees off axis.
This is a support vehicle not a close contact vehicle. It has time to sort out its firing positions and its arcs. Site it like a machine gun.
Three vehicles in a triangle covering each other and +/- 30 to 60 degrees of arc.
8 km bubble created.

 

[Spencer100]

In what way was that wrong?

Or, for that matter the MGS?

View attachment 77736

We can argue about execution.
We can argue about protection and mobility levels.

But, fundamentally, conceptually, in what way was Rick's System of Systems approach wrong?

Or for that matter his BHS

LPD - Big Honking Ship (BHS)

www.globalsecurity.org

About the MGS the thing being it didn't work.
I think its been removed and they are replacing with a "not tank" tank.


The GD Griffin. Mobil Protected Firepower MPR, its not a tank.

 

[Kirkhill]

Luckily Afghanistan made plans change

I disagree.

The plans should not have changed. Ottawa should have bought the Wheeled System of Systems. And the BHS.

Where they went wrong was in getting rid of the Tanks and the AEVs

Same problem as the GMG/C16s and the 60mm mortars.

False equivalency.

 

[MilEME09]

I disagree.

The plans should not have changed. Ottawa should have bought the Wheeled System of Systems. And the BHS.

Where they went wrong was in getting rid of the Tanks and the AEVs

Same problem as the GMG/C16s and the 60mm mortars.

False equivalency.

Fair point but perhaps we should take this to the tank thread less we derail this thread further

 

[Kirkhill]

About the MGS the thing being it didn't work.
I think its been removed and they are replacing with a "not tank" tank.

View attachment 77737
The GD Griffin. Mobil Protected Firepower MPR, its not a tank.

If the Ukrainians are capable of killing tanks in the open with towed 100mm anti-tank guns then the MGS had a role as a Self Propelled Anti-Tank Gun. The MGS performed for the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan as a Direct Fire Support Vehicle supplying occasional bunker buster rounds to infantry companies that could use them.

The concept represents everything that the Armoured Corps detests. Supporting others.
Same problem as the USAF with the A10s and Armed Helicopters.
The MGS is to the Tank what the A10 and Apache is to the F35.

The Griffin is being allocated to Light Divisions on a scale of One Battalion per Division. The Infantry wants penny packets of tanks up front. The Armoured guys will want to hold the entire Battalion in Reserve for the One Big Punch.

I just got through watching The Battle of Britain movie again. And I am reminded of Leigh-Mallory's Big Wing.

And by the way - the Griffin in mobility and protection is comparable to the Leopard 1s we had, abused and discarded.

 

[Kirkhill]

Fair point but perhaps we should take this to the tank thread less we derail this thread further

Fair point.

But everything is connected to everything else.

 

[Spencer100]

If the Ukrainians are capable of killing tanks in the open with towed 100mm anti-tank guns then the MGS had a role as a Self Propelled Anti-Tank Gun. The MGS performed for the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan as a Direct Fire Support Vehicle supplying occasional bunker buster rounds to infantry companies that could use them.

The concept represents everything that the Armoured Corps detests. Supporting others.
Same problem as the USAF with the A10s and Armed Helicopters.
The MGS is to the Tank what the A10 and Apache is to the F35.

The Griffin is being allocated to Light Divisions on a scale of One Battalion per Division. The Infantry wants penny packets of tanks up front. The Armoured guys will want to hold the entire Battalion in Reserve for the One Big Punch.

I just got through watching The Battle of Britain movie again. And I am reminded of Leigh-Mallory's Big Wing.

And by the way - the Griffin in mobility and protection is comparable to the Leopard 1s we had, abused and discarded.

Ok. Some interesting points.

To look at the A-10 in the Ukrainian war. The SU-25 are just being shredded. The Su-25 being a good or close stand in for an A-10. If I was the USAF now I would retire them ASAP. Yes keep some for COIN or something. But there life over the battlefield is over. I as was a fan of the Warthog. It's UAV etc for that role going forward.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If the Ukrainians are capable of killing tanks in the open with towed 100mm anti-tank guns then the MGS had a role as a Self Propelled Anti-Tank Gun. The MGS performed for the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan as a Direct Fire Support Vehicle supplying occasional bunker buster rounds to infantry companies that could use them.

The concept represents everything that the Armoured Corps detests. Supporting others.
Same problem as the USAF with the A10s and Armed Helicopters.
The MGS is to the Tank what the A10 and Apache is to the F35.

The Griffin is being allocated to Light Divisions on a scale of One Battalion per Division. The Infantry wants penny packets of tanks up front. The Armoured guys will want to hold the entire Battalion in Reserve for the One Big Punch.

I just got through watching The Battle of Britain movie again. And I am reminded of Leigh-Mallory's Big Wing.

And by the way - the Griffin in mobility and protection is comparable to the Leopard 1s we had, abused and discarded.

The MGS barely met exceptions, ammunition capacity was to small, crew overheating issues, etc. Yes it is funny that the new Griffin despite all the talk is basically an updated Leopard 1.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Ok. Some interesting points.

To look at the A-10 in the Ukrainian war. The SU-25 are just being shredded. The Su-25 being a good or close stand in for an A-10. If I was the USAF now I would retire them ASAP. Yes keep some for COIN or something. But there life over the battlefield is over. I as was a fan of the Warthog. It's UAV etc for that role going forward.

UAV's are getting shredded at an even higher rate over there as well. If it flies, it's likely to die.

 

[Good2Golf]

Slightly O/T warning…ish…

Rick it seems was forced to play the Ottawa game and deliver affects without calling anything a Tank.

Probable why THIS was called an ‘F’ and not a ‘G’…



A real ‘F’…



…and a ‘G’…

 

[Spencer100]

Probable why THIs was called an ‘F’ and not a ‘G’…

View attachment 77738

A real ‘F’…
View attachment 77739


…and a ‘G’…
View attachment 77740

To be fair the top one one doesn't have the hoist or refueling probe.

And the black paint! The black paint is the real difference! You get the M....with the paint.

 

[Good2Golf]

To be fair the top one one doesn't have the hoist or refueling probe.

And the black paint! The black paint is the real difference! You get the M....with the paint.

To be equally fair, the top one has all the fittings to accept a hoist AND a refueling probe.

Canadian Gs…oops, I mean Fs aren’t tasked with primary non-combat SAR so the external hoist is just added weight and drag that would barely ever be used. In combat, the internal hoist rigs through the centre hook door and has more length and capacity than the external drag chute…

G operators may also have advised Canadians not to bother with the probe because a G….oops, I mean a Canuck-F would already have twice as much fuel as a not-Canuck-F (more than 13,000lbs (more than a fully-loaded CH-146 Griffon!) or 7+ hours endurance) and the G guys really don’t use the probe…thought their 60 guys do.

G operators may have also collaborated with Canadians to benefit from the new enhanced systems that the Canadian G…ooops, I mean F, had installed…like 1/6 MW of electrical power (more than 2x a non-Canadian F), or advanced dual digital 4-axis auto-pilot that auto hovers stationary or to moving targets at speeds up to XX kts, or multi-point fast-rope systems that non-Canadian *Fs don’t have, etc…

…or so I’ve heard…


Edit to add: …oh, and Canadian Gs…oops, I mean Fs, have Nemisis AN/AAQ-24(V) DIRCM active laser anti-IR missile protection, that even SOCOM MH-47G (non-Block IIs) didn’t have for quite some time, and unlike most Fs, a very capable MX-15 multi-spectral EO/IR sensor system tied into the aircraft’s mission management system…even SOCOM’s MH-47s ‘only’ have a Raytheon EO/IR unit that’s a few ticks off the MX-15HDi mark.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ok. Some interesting points.

To look at the A-10 in the Ukrainian war. The SU-25 are just being shredded. The Su-25 being a good or close stand in for an A-10. If I was the USAF now I would retire them ASAP. Yes keep some for COIN or something. But there life over the battlefield is over. I as was a fan of the Warthog. It's UAV etc for that role going forward.

Which battlefield and when?
Even Su-25s are achieving kills. When the Russians invaded Russia from Ukraine one of the first tools the Russians in Russia reached for was the Frogfoot. It fulfills the Fustest with the Mostest principle. It is useful until it is no longer useful and something else must be done.
The A-10 has utility.
So does the F-35.
But a lot of the utility of the F-35 is being handed off to Hypersonic Long Range Missiles and fleets of Big Buy Quadcopters. And satellites.

 

[Kirkhill]

The MGS barely met exceptions, ammunition capacity was to small, crew overheating issues, etc. Yes it is funny that the new Griffin despite all the talk is basically an updated Leopard 1.

But if you were a platoon commander in Irbil that bucket load of 7.62 and 12.7 came in handy for brassing up targets. And, occasionally, a 105 was found useful. Better than sending your Carl Gustav forwards naked.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ok. Some interesting points.

To look at the A-10 in the Ukrainian war. The SU-25 are just being shredded. The Su-25 being a good or close stand in for an A-10. If I was the USAF now I would retire them ASAP. Yes keep some for COIN or something. But there life over the battlefield is over. I as was a fan of the Warthog. It's UAV etc for that role going forward.

They're being shredded becasue no one has air superiority.

Solve that problem and you'll find that you don't have enough ground attack aircraft.

 

[YZT580]

They're being shredded becasue no one has air superiority.

Solve that problem and you'll find that you don't have enough ground attack aircraft.

from the amateur armchair, the availability of the A10 as a loitering bombtruck for the F35 to use would appear to allow the A10 to be used effectively without significant attrition rates until air superiority is achieved. The back to ground support

 

[KevinB]

If the Ukrainians are capable of killing tanks in the open with towed 100mm anti-tank guns then the MGS had a role as a Self Propelled Anti-Tank Gun. The MGS performed for the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan as a Direct Fire Support Vehicle supplying occasional bunker buster rounds to infantry companies that could use them.

I saw a grand total of 8 MGS in Iraq and Afghanistan -- all where parked and tarped as they were unanimously useless. Any comments about them being used seems to have been utter tripe, and the units that had them, could not get rid of them fast enough.

The concept represents everything that the Armoured Corps detests. Supporting others.
Same problem as the USAF with the A10s and Armed Helicopters.
The MGS is to the Tank what the A10 and Apache is to the F35.

I would totally disagree - the MGS is to the Tank what a Dog is to a Horse, yes they both have 4 legs but one you can ride on, the other well it won't work if you ride it...

The Griffin is being allocated to Light Divisions on a scale of One Battalion per Division. The Infantry wants penny packets of tanks up front. The Armoured guys will want to hold the entire Battalion in Reserve for the One Big Punch.

The only reason the Griffon is going to the Light Divisions, is so the LD's have the ability to bring light armor somewhere if they get in trouble - as it is in integral part of the Div (think Somalia, and instead of 10th Mountain having to mooch APC's and Tanks off the UN Forces)

I just got through watching The Battle of Britain movie again. And I am reminded of Leigh-Mallory's Big Wing.

And by the way - the Griffin in mobility and protection is comparable to the Leopard 1s we had, abused and discarded.

Ideally Light Forces are not being used in places suitable for Armored Combat. we have this thing called doctrine that specially outlines what Light Infantry and Light Forces roles are, and what they are not.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I saw a grand total of 8 MGS in Iraq and Afghanistan -- all where parked and tarped as they were unanimously useless. Any comments about them being used seems to have been utter tripe, and the units that had them, could not get rid of them fast enough.



I would totally disagree - the MGS is to the Tank what a Dog is to a Horse, yes they both have 4 legs but one you can ride on, the other well it won't work if you ride it...


The only reason the Griffon is going to the Light Divisions, is so the LD's have the ability to bring light armor somewhere if they get in trouble - as it is in integral part of the Div (think Somalia, and instead of 10th Mountain having to mooch APC's and Tanks off the UN Forces)

Ideally Light Forces are not being used in places suitable for Armored Combat. we have this thing called doctrine that specially outlines what Light Infantry and Light Forces roles are, and what they are not.

If you replace the word 'light' with 'cheap' you would nicely describe the key motivation behind the 'Cult of Light Forces' in countries like the UK.

And that would explain why it's largely a huge mistake to invest too much in Light Stuff, apart from a small % of troops that will inevitably need to be rapidly deployable by air/land/sea for specific tasks.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Still, even the Iroquois class were heavily invested in ASW, no?

As built yup. When the CPF came along they were refitted to a more anti aircraft role. But the maintained some ASW, but the CPFs were world class ASW platforms when built.