Military Review

British dream of “Prokhorovka” on the fields of Europe

109
Based on the results of NATO’s Winter Camp 2018 NATO exercises completed in Estonia, the British military concluded that one of the most effective means of counteracting aggressive plans allegedly available to Russia would be powerful tank NATO compounds.
British dream of “Prokhorovka” on the fields of Europe



The publication Daily Star, reports that the British military came to this conclusion by conducting exercises in conditions as close as possible to the fighting (temperature -19 degrees C and 150 km from the Russian border), and having completed the actions of company groups in defense and offensive. The exercise, according to the publication, was attended by 200 units of military equipment, including Challenger tanks (probably Challenger II, Challenger with weapons of the United Kingdom armed forces), CV9035 and Warrior infantry fighting vehicles, as well as Pasi armored personnel carriers.

Perhaps the British had such optimistic thoughts because during the “Winter Camp - 2018” exercise “there was practically no equipment failure due to low temperature” (one of the problems of the Challenger II).

However, in reality, it will be extremely difficult to reproduce the standoff of tank armadas in Europe in the spirit of the Cold War. For the simple reason that the European members of NATO simply do not have as many armored vehicles as in the 70s of the last century. So, at the disposal of the same Britain no more than 400 is far from the most advanced machines Challenger II.

In the Bundeswehr, which was assigned the role of NATO armored fist during the Cold War years, the situation is no better. Recently, the German edition of Die Welt, citing a secret document of the German Ministry of Defense, said that the German armed forces lacked tanks to carry out the tasks assigned to them by the North Atlantic Alliance.

Thus, the ninth tank brigade of the Bundeswehr in Münster, which in 2019 should be the basis of the international high-alert operational group "Spearhead", can put only nine Leopard-2, instead of 44 machines, and three BMP Marder, instead of 14.
Recall that in 2015, the German military department decided to increase the tank fleet by 103 vehicles, and bring it to 2017 units by 328. But to realize these plans, as we see, failed.

At the same time, Berlin quite clearly makes it clear that he does not see his army as a strike force, or rather, the main cannon fodder of the alliance.

Speaking at the opening of the Munich Security Conference, German Defense Minister Ursula von der Lyayen said that for Germany, NATO is primarily a military-political and not a “purely military” bloc.

“Generally speaking, we have a two-tier security environment. If the USA is first of all weapon and military strength, then Europe is a soft power to prevent future conflicts, ”said von der Lyayen.

But the fact is that the “military force” of the USA is not too ready today for large-scale land battles in the European theater of operations. And it's not just that the main tank of the US Armed Forces "Abrams" is already pretty outdated, and almost exhausted the possibilities for modernization. According to the American military leaders, he has insufficient maneuverability for operations in Eastern Europe, which is abundant in rivers and swamps. During the last years exercise, it turned out that a significant part of the bridges in Poland and in the Baltic countries are not able to bear the weight of American tanks.

Deputy Chief of Staff of the Combat Training Command and the Development of the Principles of Combat Use of US Ground Forces Ricky Smith acknowledged that the M1 Abrams in service with the United States are not always able to support shooters due to their solid weight and limited mobility. At the same time, according to Smith, combat infantry tactical brigades will have to operate in the operational area, for which they will need mobile fire support.

In addition, the weight of the Abrams creates problems for its air transport - the US Air Force C-17 transport aircraft can carry only one car. In light of this, the Pentagon last autumn announced the Mobile Protected Firepower program, under which a "light tank, superior to its Russian counterparts" should be created.

The requirements of the military are as follows: to get a car with weapons no less powerful than that of the Abrams, with similar protection, but with the highest maneuverability and maneuverability. And its weight should be less than two times so that the C-17 Globemaster III can carry two tanks in one flight. At the same time, the developer company should submit ready-made prototypes within fourteen months after signing the contract.

The winner of the competition, in which practically ready-made samples are participating today, must be determined during the current year. This haste suggests how difficult NATO has to deal with armored vehicles in the European direction.

After Russia's decision to modernize and return the T-72 and T-80 in storage, the block’s lag behind the chosen enemy becomes disastrous. And the question is not only in the number of tank parks, but also in the fact that, in contrast to our country, the Western bloc does not currently have innovative developments of armored vehicles. And countless upgrades of outdated machines can no longer “reach out” them to the level of a new generation of tanks, say, T-14.

Summing up, it can be stated that their dreams of large-scale tank battles with the Russians, the scale of Prokhorovka or El Alamein, the British military (as well as their allies) are not yet able to realize.

Actually, the Daily Star indicates that British officers are aware of the power of Russia, and based on this they consider the possibility of a war between NATO and Russia at the moment only as “hypothetical” and not as an event that must necessarily occur in the very near future .

That is, NATO representatives admit that as long as Russia surpasses the Western bloc in armored vehicles, the possibility of a land war on a European theater will remain only “hypothetical.” It seems that this statement contains a factual recognition that it is not Russia, but its opponents, who are carrying aggressive intentions.
Author:
109 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pax tecum
    Pax tecum 19 February 2018 07: 04
    +12
    ... German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said that for Germany, NATO, primarily a military-political, rather than a "purely military" bloc

    Bench Press ...
    Basic instinct of self-preservation as an indicator of sanity.
    Yes, and their memories (Germans / Europeans) are terribly unpleasant from the word Eastern Front.
    1. Finches
      Finches 19 February 2018 07: 53
      +22
      Nothing new! The idea is a hundred years ago! There was such a German leader, talented, however a warrior, one of the pioneers of motorized methods of warfare, the founder of a similar doctrine nicknamed the "Fast Heinz"! So, somewhere near Tula he was pointed out the imperfection of his theory ... And in area of ​​Berlin finally put a deuce!laughing

      By the way, at one time he commanded the so-called “Iron Brigade” in Latvia, where he improved his theory of tank blitz cries. The historical parallel however ...
      1. Varyag_0711
        Varyag_0711 19 February 2018 09: 13
        +31
        Eugene, my respect! hi I am generally touched by such military "analysts" as shaving (something British "scientists" proved to be ...) and even more so by such "military experts" as a former gynecologist, and now proctologist, ugh, you are German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen. This is really the apogee of German military thought, all these Mashteins, Guderians, Goths, Rommels and others in the coffin turned upside down, but what turned upside down, they spin there at the speed of a windmill, seeing what the descendants of the Third Reich turned into.
        However, the article is still bravura, in the place of the author I would not be so optimistic about the same Germany, the story she knows is such a tricky thing, it repeats itself often. If we recall the state of the Reichswehr in the Weimar Republic, then it was no better than in the modern Bundeswehr, nevertheless, with the advent of Hitler to power, the situation changed radically. Germany in a very short time created such a military machine, which equal to 41 years did not exist all over the world. And I would not rule out the appearance of the Fuhrer 2.0 in Germany in the light of recent events. Merkel, with her migrant policy, brought Germany to the pen, the Germans are increasingly discontented and the extreme right can take advantage of this. And where is the guarantee that among them there is no new Fuhrer? Given the industrial potential of Germany and the fact that in the event of an attack on Russia, the Americans would not put the Germans in the wheel, I would not be so optimistic. This is on the one hand.
        And on the other hand, British military analysts, as I already wrote, are not much smarter than their fellow "British scientists." What the hell is Prokhorovka 2.0? Despite the fact that NATO will have overwhelming superiority in the air, well, at least quantitatively, the likelihood of a nuclear strike in response to an attack on our country increases by a multiple. No, I’m not saying that ours will be waved with a baton right and left, but in the event of an obvious defeat in a non-nuclear conflict, we will simply have nothing else left. We will not be left alive, which means we will have nothing to lose. So in the place of their "analysts" I would be concerned about one single question, but is it worth attacking Russia at all ...?!
        1. Finches
          Finches 19 February 2018 09: 32
          +13
          Alexey! hi They are absolutely right and I am still very interested in such a moment, if we take our European theater of operations, especially Belarus, and the North-West, how their 63 ton Abrams will move, with a ground pressure of 1,07 kg / sq. see on the local roads, which are not numerous and the bridges that can withstand such a mass, given the fact that there are enough rivers and rivulets there ... These, of course, are trifles, but the obvious tank-dangerous directions for these monstrous tanks are not very here a lot of! Here in the south-west, yes ... but so far the Abrams have not been brought to Ukraine ... A trifle, I repeat, but a pleasant trifle. The gauge of the railway track is different, the same hemorrhoids for transporting tanks over considerable distances, increasing communications ... There are many small things that analysts forget to take into account sofas! True, there are clever heads in their headquarters, but they are not public and work quietly in the quiet of their offices - do you need to know what they get there? This is important to us!
          1. Varyag_0711
            Varyag_0711 19 February 2018 09: 54
            +14
            Again, a colleague fully agrees! As they say, it was smooth on paper and forgot about the ravines, and walk on them ... No one has yet canceled the impassability of the Russian winter. Although here, in the Rostov Region, the last really cold winter was 4 or 5 years ago. Abrams, if they are transported along our roads, will very quickly turn them into directions, taking into account the fact that some roads without any abrams already have the same directions. And then, how many tanks mattresses need to be thrown by the sea to create a more or less large tank fist. And where is it written in our doctrine that we cannot use nuclear weapons for this very fist, be it in Poland, Ukraine, or in the Tribaltics? Or do they think that we will silently sit back and wait until they reach us on their monsters? Tanks are certainly good and the Syrian conflict is a confirmation of this, but who told their analysts that Russia will be the same as in Syria?
            No, of course I understand that their Wishlist have no boundaries, but sometimes MosK sometimes needs to be included, though if it certainly is. request
          2. AllXVahhaB
            AllXVahhaB 19 February 2018 16: 28
            +2
            Quote: Finches
            if we take our European theater of operations, especially Belarus, and the North-West, how their 63 ton Abrams will move, with a ground pressure of 1,07 kg / sq. see on the local roads, which are not numerous and the bridges that can withstand such a mass, given the fact that there are enough rivers and rivulets there ... These, of course, are trifles, but the obvious tank-dangerous directions for these monstrous tanks are not very here a lot of!

            Quote: Varyag_0711
            No, I’m not saying that ours will be waved with a baton right and left, but in the event of an obvious defeat in a non-nuclear conflict, we will simply have nothing else left.

            You measure some past century. In the absence of a preventive or instantly retaliatory nuclear strike on our part, due to total superiority in the air, including cruise missiles, our entire military infrastructure will be destroyed. Then it will not include NATO tank wedges, but PMCs, Bandera and, in extreme cases, some Poles ... And they will recruit policemen from the local fifth column ...
            1. Finches
              Finches 19 February 2018 17: 33
              +3
              After reading your post - I give up in advance! laughing
            2. your1970
              your1970 19 February 2018 21: 00
              +3
              Quote: AllXVahhaB
              Then it will not include NATO tank wedges, but PMCs, Bandera and, in extreme cases, some Poles ... And they will recruit policemen from the local fifth column ...
              and who forbids broadcasting PMCs and Bandera? The first do not fall under the Geneva Convention, the second God himself ordered ..
              Politsaev? And they will be? Something I don’t believe - that the current supporters of democracy from 5 columns are able to fight in principle ...
              1. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 20 February 2018 09: 12
                0
                Quote: your1970
                Who forbids broadcasting PMCs and Bandera?

                Apparently hang?
                Quote: your1970
                Politsaev? And they will be? Something I don’t believe - that the current supporters of democracy from 5 columns are able to fight in principle ...

                And who is talking about the war? They will carry out punitive actions ...
            3. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 19 February 2018 22: 44
              +2
              Indeed, what is Russia? On it, PMCs alone are enough. Especially with "overwhelming superiority in the air ...
              But I forgot what the combat radius of tactical aviation of NATO? Curiously, do they have enough tankers? By the way, they are also not eternal and will also suffer losses. Like the one that surpasses everyone, I guess. Well, PMCs in Russia are in a hurry, even for a lot of money, yeah.
              1. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 20 February 2018 09: 19
                0
                Quote: Vlad.by
                But I forgot what the combat radius of tactical aviation of NATO?


                Enough for the Urals ...
                1. Vlad.by
                  Vlad.by 21 February 2018 09: 48
                  +2
                  I studied this tablet as a cadet. More than 45 years ago.
                  Let them fly to the Urals. On them, in this case, a crop of fuel, there will be no other "weapons". They won’t take it away.
                  Yes, and the speed and maneuverability in this case as in the passenger. Cool target, nothing more.
                  1. AllXVahhaB
                    AllXVahhaB 21 February 2018 15: 42
                    +1
                    Quote: Vlad.by
                    I studied this tablet as a cadet. More than 45 years ago.
                    Let them fly to the Urals. On them, in this case, a crop of fuel, there will be no other "weapons". They won’t take it away.
                    Yes, and the speed and maneuverability in this case as in the passenger. Cool target, nothing more.

                    Do you know the proportion of cruise missiles? Or, as always, are you hoping for hats?
        2. zyzx
          zyzx 19 February 2018 09: 52
          +2
          Quote: Varyag_0711
          While NATO will have overwhelming superiority in the air,

          Show me at least 1n plane that captured at least a meter of land? Note that not a single modern aircraft, the area of ​​responsibility of modern air defense does not fly. If even the C200 is capable of shooting down a modern aircraft, then what will be against systems 50 years older?
          1. Varyag_0711
            Varyag_0711 19 February 2018 10: 07
            +11
            Yes, it’s all clear that planes do not seize territory, because this is not about that. It's about their plans for a global disarming strike on Russia. As far as I understand, the plan is that first a massive strike is carried out with cruise missiles, then the aircraft suppresses the surviving air defense, and then they hope to take us with their bare hands apparently. I just can hardly imagine how they will seize the territory? Nobody has yet canceled partisans in our country, and the army is not made up of just one air defense. So they can hardly expect an easy walk, but are they ready for it. Vietnam and Korea are apparently not a lesson to them? And Russia is far from Vietnam!
            1. BAI
              BAI 19 February 2018 10: 29
              +4
              I just can hardly imagine how they will seize the territory?

              Put liberals and the other 5th column in power and no intervention. The external aggressor is a powerful factor that unites all sectors of society to combat the common threat (which is why the message about Russian aggression is so exaggerated in Ukraine). And there will be - "divide and conquer."
              1. Varyag_0711
                Varyag_0711 19 February 2018 11: 11
                +22
                This is true, the worst weapon of the Americans is not “Abrams”, not “Apaches”, not “Fu-35”, not “Ajis” and not even “tridents”, the most terrible weapons are Chubais, Alekseevs, bulk and other abomination.
                It is difficult to even count how much Russian blood was spilled in the entire history of Russia, thanks to this very notorious fifth column. Examples of torment lead, rather fingers on the keyboard will be erased.
              2. VB
                VB 20 February 2018 17: 08
                +1
                Why put, she’s all in power, and now, a little to correct Putin.
            2. zyzx
              zyzx 19 February 2018 12: 42
              +5
              We are respected for another 10-20 years of such a culture and education and we can be taken with bare hands.
            3. tezey
              tezey 23 February 2018 14: 53
              +1
              How do you imagine a global disarming strike against Russia with cruise missiles. Given the existing range of cruise missiles and the length of the territory of Russia, as well as the possibility of air defense to repulse the strike, the possibility of disabling the entire military infrastructure of the Russian Federation is very doubtful. Russia is a land country with a vast territory, and therefore, to win the war with Russia, aviation superiority is not enough. The basis of victory certainly lies in the strategic ground operations of the ground forces. And this is another song. Here all the advantages are on the side of Russia. Russia is not Iraq and the Russian army is not Iraqi. The armament and training of the Russian army is comparable to the NATO armies and in terms of operations on its territory has an advantage in logistics and management. Moreover, it is not at all clear whether NATO military units will be able to withstand the high intensity of warfare and the high losses in equipment and personnel. They must understand that the losses in technology will not be calculated in pieces of destroyed tanks, as they are used to, but in hundreds in a short period of time, and personnel losses in the hundreds of thousands. They are ready for such a development. I think not ready. I think that the military in the US and NATO understand that it is not possible to win a war with Russia by attacking cruise missiles and attacking aircraft. If this were not so, then they would already have been winners with us.
          2. Koshak
            Koshak 19 February 2018 16: 19
            0
            "What will be against systems 50 years older?"
            You wanted to say - newer? yes
          3. AllXVahhaB
            AllXVahhaB 19 February 2018 16: 30
            0
            Quote: zyzx
            Show me at least 1n plane that captured at least a meter of land?

            Two aircraft with the “Baby” and “Fat Man” on board captured all of Japan! And she is still under occupation !!!
            1. your1970
              your1970 19 February 2018 21: 02
              +3
              Quote: AllXVahhaB
              Two aircraft with the “Baby” and “Fat Man” on board captured all of Japan! And she is still under occupation !!!
              - And the Kwantung army too ??
              "The chapel of the 12th century? Not, is it before"
            2. Sinbad
              Sinbad 19 February 2018 21: 05
              +1
              In fact, Japan capitulated after an almost blazing-out defeat of the Kwantung army. Left defenseless before the invasion of the Red Army, she chose to capitulate to the Americans. And the greatest effect and victims brought carpet bombing of Japanese cities, however, the military command did not care about the civilian population.
              1. yehat
                yehat 21 February 2018 11: 54
                +1
                Left defenseless before the invasion of the Red Army

                nonsense, Japan could quite safely keep the Red Army out of the sea.
                they surrendered for another reason - there were no motives for defense.
        3. sib.ataman
          sib.ataman 19 February 2018 15: 03
          +2
          Varangian 0711, you are completely behind the best military thought in Western Europe! It is with the help of such soft power (you can only imagine how unique the former gynecologist-proctologist has unique capabilities!) The West will crush the fighting spirit of the formidable Ivan! You look how much already the Ministry of Defense in NATO is occupied by “formidable lionesses”! A widespread recruitment of ladies is that just so you? No, our fighters have not yet encountered such a formidable opponent! There will be no time to shoot, because and under each bush, both the table and the house will be ready. And a terrible battle near Prokhorov’s is very possible, if all this soft power is not too lazy to descend on us. And our fighters, I think, will not mind at all. The main thing is to agree on where and when the meeting consists!
          1. Varyag_0711
            Varyag_0711 19 February 2018 15: 16
            +9
            sib.ataman Today, 15:03 ↑ New
            Varangian 0711, you are completely behind the best military thought in Western Europe!
            Humor appreciated! good
            Only here is the catch, in Europe there are not so many pretty women, especially in the army. Everything is mostly ugly there, and some are so ugly that they can scare even our ten timid guys. A reasonable question arises, where do we get so much vodka? And then, there is a fine line between the period when, under the influence of alcohol, a woman becomes attractive and you can still, and the period when you are already on a drum for women, vodka is already ending, and go to the nearest store to scrap, and after 22-00 no longer buy alcohol. Straight "pichal-bida" ...
            P.S. And they also forgot about the fact that they are now trending transgender people, tranny, and other LGBT people, there’s a chance that I’m drunk and I don’t make out “hu hu”, as if later in the morning there would be no surprise ... recourse laughing
            1. Paranoid50
              Paranoid50 19 February 2018 23: 50
              +2
              Quote: Varyag_0711
              A reasonable question arises, where do we get so much vodka?

              Well, that’s not even a question. yes In English, the question is: "What can I do?" But here, the same phrase is a universal answer to many questions. laughing
        4. yehat
          yehat 21 February 2018 12: 00
          +1
          the threat of an attack on the Russian Federation forces us to spend a lot on defense, which in turn inhibits economic development. And this makes it possible to soft infiltration. This is the goal, not the war itself. The USSR was able to break out of this vicious circle for a short while by creating the Warsaw Pact, the CMEA and reducing the cost of armaments to 2-2.5% of GDP, which is tolerable.
          as much as it is being spent now, it is impossible to spend for a long time - this is a degradation of the economy.
    2. 97110
      97110 19 February 2018 14: 12
      +3
      Quote: Pax tecum
      Yes, and they have memories

      The fact that the majority of defense ministers in their NATE are still women involuntarily makes one recall a sexist joke:
      Frau Leyen, how are you not afraid of going to the service? After all, they can rape!
      So what? They raped me yesterday ... I'll go again tomorrow!
    3. AllXVahhaB
      AllXVahhaB 19 February 2018 15: 55
      +1
      Quote: Pax tecum
      Yes, and their memories (Germans / Europeans) are terribly unpleasant from the word Eastern Front.

      I doubt that modern Germans / Europeans, at the mention of the Eastern Front, in general, will understand what is at stake ...
    4. Vladimir 5
      Vladimir 5 23 February 2018 18: 13
      0
      No need to take two-faced English people straightforwardly, these are big liars and deceivers. For us, they will repeat one thing to deceive, and we would go the wrong way. Today, the rapidly begun development of intelligent weapons, possibly tankless tanks, will become an offensive base. with primary drone drone ... The British amateurs, so that others would drag chestnuts out of the fire, perhaps the emphasis will be on robotics and connecting different ones, from the Baltic states to the Asians ......
  2. svp67
    svp67 19 February 2018 07: 10
    +9
    ... However, in reality, it will be extremely difficult to reproduce the confrontation of tank armada in Europe in the spirit of the Cold War. For the simple reason that European NATO members simply do not have as many armored vehicles as they did in the 70s of the last century. So, at the disposal of the same Britain no more than 400 far from the most advanced machines Challenger II ....
    ... So, the ninth tank brigade of the Bundeswehr in Münster, which in 2019 should become the basis of the international spearhead task force “Spear Point”, can only exhibit nine Leopard-2s, instead of 44 vehicles, and three Marder infantry fighting vehicles, instead of 14 ... .
    So we now have them "one left", they say that only in the Donbass roofing felts 600, roofing felts 900 Russian tanks ...
    It always touched me that when people talk about NATO, for some reason they only remember the USA, Germany and, at best, Britain, but they forget that:
    - Poland - about 900 tanks
    - France - about 550 tanks
    - Turkey - almost 4000 tanks
    - Spain - 500
    - Italy - 500
    1. Vard
      Vard 19 February 2018 07: 21
      +10
      I know a couple of guys ... They are engaged in scrap metal ... They say FAS and the problem will be solved ...
      1. svp67
        svp67 19 February 2018 07: 25
        +16
        Quote: Vard
        I know a couple of guys ... They say FAS and the problem will be solved ....

        I guess I know them too ...
        1. Aleks2048
          Aleks2048 19 February 2018 09: 35
          0
          Well, that’s ... I’ll be happy going until evening. laughing
      2. your1970
        your1970 19 February 2018 21: 04
        +1
        Quote: Vard
        I know a couple of guys ... They are engaged in scrap metal ... They say FAS and the problem will be solved ...
        - especially Italy and Spain ... they just whistle .. they themselves will cut and load ..
    2. Maki Avellevich
      Maki Avellevich 19 February 2018 07: 51
      +21
      Britain will fiercely fight until the last ally.
      1. svp67
        svp67 19 February 2018 07: 54
        +7
        Quote: Maki Avellievich
        Britain will fiercely fight until the last ally.

        That is, that is, and then SELF will be declared winners ...
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 19 February 2018 09: 23
        +8
        Quote: Maki Avellevich
        Britain will fiercely fight until the last ally.

        Refinement is not of the Anglo-Saxon branch.
        1. svp67
          svp67 19 February 2018 09: 49
          +3
          Quote: NEXUS
          Refinement is not of the Anglo-Saxon branch.

          Why do you think so? You think that they will be especially sorry for some Canadians there,


          Australians ...
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 19 February 2018 09: 58
            +8
            Quote: svp67
            Why do you think so? You think that they will be especially sorry for some Canadians there,

            Australians ...

            Because these are all parts of the Anglo-Saxon world. Have you ever wondered why the United States itself never imposed sanctions against Canada or Australia? This is not about individual states, but, as it may sound strange, the British Empire, which includes the USA, Canada, Australia, etc. ... note that in all Anglo-Saxon states (except England itself and its appendage Scotland ) national currencies is the dollar. Why didn’t it come to mind?
            1. svp67
              svp67 19 February 2018 10: 13
              +3
              Quote: NEXUS
              note that in all Anglo-Saxon states (except England itself and its appendage of Scotland), national currencies are the dollar. Why didn’t it come to mind?

              Apparently so historically ... but by the way, not in all countries of the Anglo-Saxon world, the dollar is the national currency ...
              Gibraltar - Gibraltarian pound, Jersey, St. Helena, Ascension Island, Tristan da Cunha - Pound, South Africa - rand, India - rupees.
              And you are not surprised that no less than the dollar, in many countries national currencies are named "franc"?
              1. karabas-barabas
                karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 22
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                And you are not surprised that no less than the dollar, in many countries national currencies are named "franc"?

                And what, open your mind, what's the plot?
                1. your1970
                  your1970 19 February 2018 21: 06
                  0
                  Quote: karabas-barabas
                  Quote: svp67
                  And you are not surprised that no less than the dollar, in many countries national currencies are named "franc"?
                  And what, open your mind, what's the plot?
                  frank is Switzerland good
      3. 97110
        97110 19 February 2018 14: 28
        +1
        Quote: Maki Avellevich
        Britain will fiercely fight until the last ally.

        After a series of attempts to defeat the Russians in various theaters of the Crimean War and the statement of their governor Palmerston about the insufficient water in the Pacific Ocean to wash off the shame from the British flag only for trying to capture Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, the United Kingdom in all subsequent wars acted as an ally of Russia ...
        1. Maki Avellevich
          Maki Avellevich 19 February 2018 17: 51
          +1
          Quote: 97110
          The United Kingdom in all subsequent wars acted as an ally of Russia ...

          It would be better for Russia to remain an opponent of Britain.
          1. 97110
            97110 19 February 2018 19: 24
            +1
            Quote: Maki Avellievich
            It would be better for Russia to remain an opponent of Britain.

            But what about the great victory at El Alamein? Would British 2MB history be poorer? Or enriched by the heroic death of the British army next to the Italian?
      4. vladimirvn
        vladimirvn 19 February 2018 15: 36
        +1
        They still have laying the first stage in the form of our not brothers, but the Baltic states. The second stage, in the form of Eastern Europeans.
        Quote: Maki Avellievich
        Britain will fiercely fight until the last ally.
    3. kerosene
      kerosene 19 February 2018 17: 23
      +2

      Do you know what it is? This is SPBE - a self-aiming combat element. They can be equipped with rockets for the Grad, Smerch, Hurricane and Tornado multiple launch rocket launchers, as well as planning bomb shells. Volley - and no more your tanks.
      1. 97110
        97110 19 February 2018 19: 29
        +3
        Quote: kerosene
        your tanks.

        And to clearly indicate who you are poking so cruelly, you have not yet learned? Try the Quote. And we will be grateful to you ...
      2. yehat
        yehat 21 February 2018 13: 12
        0
        so MLRS and without aiming will sweep all tanks
        maybe there will be no flying towers, but it is very unlikely that they will remain combat ready.
    4. tank64rus
      tank64rus 19 February 2018 20: 34
      0
      Well, about Turkey and France, there are big doubts, so is Italy. In words, they are all eagles, but there are doubts about how to fight against crazy Russians. Moreover, in the entire history of their repeated trips to Russia, the result was very sad. Experience says Russia can only be defeated by betrayal, as in the 91st.
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 19 February 2018 08: 12
    +5
    British military concluded ... there will be powerful NATO tank formations
    How it worked on the minds of waist-deep sweeping in the snow during exercises. Having frozen one place, they decided that tank formations could not be dispensed with. When they warmed up a little they realized that for some reason various problems were with the tanks. It’s just interesting, who will allow them to move tanks to Russia, supposedly in order to “contain” it?
    1. karabas-barabas
      karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 30
      0
      Well, yes, NATO has problems with tanks, with their more than 5000 modern MBTs .. where they are against the Russian Federation with its T72 armada of various reincarnations, not one of which turns out to be called modern language ..
      1. mkop
        mkop 19 February 2018 14: 54
        +1
        Answer, you’re smart, why is the T72 modification a bad tank, and the Abrashi modification a good one?
        The difference at the beginning of production is 6 years.
        Or for example, the leoprad you are flowing on, its tuning is good, but the T72 tuning is bad?

        You have read your propaganda, and in the head of your nonsense.
        1. yehat
          yehat 21 February 2018 13: 21
          0
          whatever one may say, NATO tanks are many heavy, but our MBTs are rather average
          It’s difficult to ignore the weight of the reservation. Plus equipping with sighting equipment,
          modern shells. NATO tanks are definitely a big threat
          and ignoring them will fail. And our tanks often undergo modernization on the principle - cheaper, so that there is enough for fluidity. The same pine sighting system was far from the best when it first began to arrive at equipment.
          With shells, too, not everything is alright. Dynamic protection requires substantial R&D in order to bring it up to date. What is missing is not enough.
          Logistics for moving tank units also has questions. Ours is cheaper, but not the fact that it is good. And the last - by no means all tanks undergo at least modernization on time, so there are enough problems.
          1. mkop
            mkop 22 February 2018 13: 35
            +1
            The weight of the reservation, in addition to thickness, also depends on the size of the tank. And NATO tanks are larger than ours.
            I have never said that there are no problems, but what Karabas writes is bullshit. Listen to him, because our tanks are at the level of almost MS-1 tankettes and it’s difficult to drive, and their directly indestructible - let them go alone - they will tear everyone to pieces.
            1. yehat
              yehat 22 February 2018 13: 50
              0
              wedges MS-1

              Well, moving on to this slang, but our tankers have pre-tanks)))
              1. mkop
                mkop 22 February 2018 14: 09
                0
                I have never meant a potato game.
      2. kerosene
        kerosene 19 February 2018 17: 07
        +1
        The T-72B3 is equipped with a new 2A46-M5 gun with a new automatic loader. This gun is capable of firing shells "Lead-1/2" of increased elongation. Penetration armored homogeneous steel covered DZ - 850-900 mm. That is, all NATO tanks are hit in the forehead, without exception. And tell the tales to the Jewish "warline" to tell.
        1. karabas-barabas
          karabas-barabas 20 February 2018 20: 23
          +1
          Do you know the frontal armor Leo2 and Abrams? I very much doubt that there is no such data anywhere, there are only assumptions, without knowledge of the properties of the latest steel grades and other materials. In modern Abrasha and Leo, the front end has long been holding anything for a meter. For 20 years, the Germans and Americans have been gathering dust to develop more powerful weapons, or platforms with the layout of Almaty, the question is, and why do not they do it? Type can not? All this is nonsense of course, the aggregate FRG with the USA have an order of magnitude, or orders of magnitude more powerful and modern industry, finance, technology. No matter how the answer itself should be asked, neither the Chinese nor the Russians have made any significant breakthroughs in tank building so that they would have to worry and develop new platforms. Armada parades and powerful propaganda in the media to some ignoramuses, dreamers like you, finally demolished the tower, that is, a waste of time with you the state of the NATO and Russian tank formations to discuss, I am delirious and fantasies uninteresting.
          1. mkop
            mkop 22 February 2018 13: 25
            0
            I have never read such perfect nonsense as yours. You are on a par with Khokhlovoins and protoukry. Seriously, you have a clinical case. And so write more about meters, about KILOmeters of armor and cardboard Armata. Let the people demand spectacles and fun.
          2. yehat
            yehat 22 February 2018 13: 57
            0
            what nafig coefficient?
            there is only one ordinary measure - the equivalent of a solid steel armor plate
            and the best indicator now is not among Germans or Americans, but at type 99 Chinese and at Almaty. About K2 Korean I do not remember. Israeli carrots are also well protected, but they have an emphasis on protection around the perimeter (which is a huge weakness of the Abrams) further,
            Americans (not Germans) really have a lot of dust, but almost all of this is unsuitable development. They also have 155mm guns, but they are WORSE worse than what is now on Abram. The Germans have one prototype 130mm gun, there is nothing more.
            more powerful and modern industry, finance, technology

            what is more powerful technology is a mystery to me, but for the rest -
            you rely on completely stupid landmarks. Power can be determined by the size of GDP in financial terms, but here is how to count.
            Much more important is the proposed nomenclature and diversification of industrial production. Here we are very far behind, but for aviation it is simply disastrous.
      3. your1970
        your1970 19 February 2018 21: 11
        0
        Quote: karabas-barabas
        Well, yes, NATO has problems with tanks, with their more than 5000 modern MBTs .. where they are against the Russian Federation with its T72 armada of various reincarnations, not one of which turns out to be called modern language ..
        - if you aren’t in the know, it’s enough just to bomb the Kraegs in Europe and they won’t reach our reserves stupidly - diesel fuel will end ....
        We certainly won’t run into Europe - but how are they on our roads on our fuel in our weather in the opposition of our army and our partisans ??
        I wouldn’t have gone their place - I would have scooped up more budget money and wouldn’t have gone, and then I would have thought up an excuse .....
        1. karabas-barabas
          karabas-barabas 20 February 2018 20: 44
          +1
          Engineering troops are very developed in NATO, they can make a bridge in the shortest time .. The question is, who will bomb it? The lag both in terms of quality and the number of airborne airborne forces in Russia is very strong from NATO; therefore, we must reckon with the fact that NATO will take away the sky quickly, and they will not even be allowed to enter its territory. In order to control Russian airspace, hundreds of Su-57s are needed, supported by dozens of A-100s. A couple dozen Su35 will not play any role. Of course, some kind of "treacherous attack on Russia by NATO" is a sore and senseless nonsense, the only option is if a civil war breaks out in Russia, the central government loses control over the region and some kind of radical military group tries to take possession of nuclear weapons ... but this is certainly unlikely . Perhaps, hypothetically, of course, if Putin suddenly orders to occupy the Baltic states, this is the only, although unlikely, but impossible option. Then NATO will knock out the troops of the Russian Federation and then NATO will have to throw armored vehicles and war on earth will be possible in this place. Somewhere in Poland or Romania, I exclude, the Russian Federation does not have such forces to penetrate Europe, except for the Baltic states, of course.

          Quote: your1970
          I wouldn’t have gone their place - I would have scooped up more budget money and wouldn’t have gone, and then I would have thought up an excuse .....


          I completely agree, the war of Europeans and Americans against Russians is complete absurdity and does not make sense. Russia is just as frequent a Christian civilization as Europeans are with Americans, we are the same in everything, from simple families to elites. 99% of Russians and Europeans with Americans hate each other does not make sense. For the Chinese, Arabs and others, we are on the same face. But this is what the Russians must understand.
  4. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 19 February 2018 08: 29
    +9
    British tanks learned to get to the European theater of operations on the bottom of the sea under its own power?
    I would like to make a mistake, but where, and most importantly, what will the British float on if the script comes to an open Russia-NATO confrontation? Nobody will give them something in advance to transfer. Do they not realize that the response warheads will be the first to fall into the ports and military transport infrastructure of this old floating galosh?
    1. karabas-barabas
      karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 33
      +1
      Quote: g1washntwn
      Nobody will give them anything to transfer in advance


      And who will forbid them?
    2. 97110
      97110 19 February 2018 14: 42
      +1
      Quote: g1washntwn
      but where, and most importantly, what will the British sail on

      The British have experience. In both 1 and 2 world wars, British tanks entered the territory of Russia as allies! Although, shortly before these wars, the British positioned themselves as ardent opponents of the Republic of Ingushetia and the USSR. They will consider, they will recall the separatism of the states of the 18th century and will stand together with the Russian Federation and China against Trump and the Germans.
  5. sxfRipper
    sxfRipper 19 February 2018 09: 23
    +1
    Ricky Smith acknowledged that US-armed M1 Abrams tanks are not always able to support gunners due to their solid weight and limited mobility
    How long has this caterpillar coffin become an infantry support tank?
    1. karabas-barabas
      karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 39
      +1
      Again, some Amer general froze the next nonsense ... though there is never any evidence .. The tank from its very appearance has been and remains a means of supporting infantry.
  6. Galleon
    Galleon 19 February 2018 09: 29
    0
    Great Britain’s military concluded that one of the most effective means of countering the aggressive plans allegedly available to Russia would be powerful NATO tank formations

    The primitiveness of the military thinking of Great Britain is distressing and worrying. They could not come to any other conclusion and would not say anything else: they are better off, as usual, fighting on foreign territory with foreign (European) soldiers, than preparing their soldiers' defenses on their English soil. Bored, girls ...
    1. Akuzenka
      Akuzenka 19 February 2018 09: 48
      +1
      Yes, yes, it's just an old song, “Give the dough, otherwise they will defeat us”, in other words.
    2. shinobi
      shinobi 19 February 2018 13: 15
      0
      If my memory serves me right, NATO has since the mid-90s, in principle, no plans for a defensive war. And all that is, more like police actions against rebellious Europeans.
    3. 97110
      97110 19 February 2018 14: 51
      +1
      Quote: Galleon
      Bored, girls ...

      There was a richly illustrated article about tank assistance to the Soviet Union. I remember a photograph in which a pair of British women screw a cannon to the tank tower under (over?) The approving glances of the British. British women in shoes and skirts of decent length (according to the fashion of the forties ...) stand on the tank, the British on the floor of the assembly shop ...
  7. novel66
    novel66 19 February 2018 09: 30
    +4
    The requirements of the military are as follows - to get a car with weapons no less powerful than that of the Abrams, with similar protection, but with the highest cross-country ability and maneuverability. And her weight should be less than half
    - easily! make it out of pressed toilet paper
  8. zyzx
    zyzx 19 February 2018 09: 45
    0
    If that shave vigorously sail away on the ships, waving a handkerchief ...
    1. BAI
      BAI 19 February 2018 10: 48
      +2
      They from Dunkirk made a heroic saga. Not the first time.
  9. Insurrection
    Insurrection 19 February 2018 13: 03
    0
    The territory of Eastern Europe is replete with rivers and swamps, a significant part of the bridges can not withstand the weight of NATO tanks. In general, Eastern Europe is of little use for the actions of Western armored vehicles. From this we can conclude: NATO armies should be concentrated at the turn of the Warsaw Pact countries.
    Western partners hastened to expand NATO to the East, I even said, they made a rash decision.
    1. karabas-barabas
      karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 53
      +1
      Quote: Rise
      a significant part of the bridges cannot withstand the weight of NATO tanks

      I wonder who only spreads such nonsense? Interesting, but how do they carry out exercises? Is photoshop and lie as always?
      1. your1970
        your1970 19 February 2018 21: 14
        0
        just read about the teachings, for example, in Limitrofah. Almost literally - "Bad logistics in these countries !!" .. If there is poor logistics, then we don’t have it at all ...
        1. karabas-barabas
          karabas-barabas 20 February 2018 21: 00
          +1
          But how do the Swedes and Finns conduct exercises at home, where everything is enough? Before such a conflict, the political situation first builds up, then the concentration of troops in some areas, intensified intelligence will begin. That is, NATO will not only start throwing its tanks into Poland when they shoot, but in advance. The war will begin in the air, first of all, then they will comb out the air defense. In general, of course, what we are discussing is very unhealthy garbage.
      2. Insurrection
        Insurrection 21 February 2018 12: 24
        0
        What does stupidity mean? You read the article, it is literally word for word from it.
  10. shinobi
    shinobi 19 February 2018 13: 09
    0
    The attacker must have a three-fold advantage in power, these are the basics of military affairs spelled out by Sun Tzu. The Russian Federation does not attack anyone, and if it takes away, it’s only their own and those who themselves want it.
  11. Boris Muromtsev
    Boris Muromtsev 19 February 2018 13: 46
    0
    Pull yourself a point that would not break
  12. Boris Muromtsev
    Boris Muromtsev 19 February 2018 13: 48
    0
    Urgent privatization needed shell bp total threat to national security
  13. Kurochkin
    Kurochkin 19 February 2018 13: 51
    0
    Hurray of the Russian Army the strongest in the WORLD !!! Hurray Russians !!!
  14. andrew xnumx
    andrew xnumx 19 February 2018 14: 16
    0
    It’s good that we decided to upgrade the tanks in storage! It is urgent to create infrastructure for tank armies. They will still have their say on the western theater. And not only.
    1. karabas-barabas
      karabas-barabas 19 February 2018 14: 49
      +1
      Do you think that tuning the T72 under the name B3 is equivalent to Leo2A6 and higher, or A1M2SEP?
      1. mkop
        mkop 19 February 2018 15: 22
        0
        Your Leo and Abrash are the same tuning of old cars.
        Your Hitler, too, believed in tigers, etc. with their unpronounceable names - it didn’t help.
        1. karabas-barabas
          karabas-barabas 20 February 2018 21: 21
          +1
          These "old" cars were originally designed with a great deal of modernization. This applies to the potential of the motor, as well as the bath. Leo and Abrams received additional anti-mine modules, you can’t shove this bathtub on the T-72, as it was all over the bottom cardboard belt and remained unchanged from the very beginning, Leo and Abrams baths were strengthened more than once. It’s the same with the tower, which has been unchanged for years, all hope for DZ, when the Leo2 and Abrams towers were reinforced with additional modules of passive armor, I’m not talking about the option to put KAZ. The Germans even have their own, the Americans will buy from the Jews. All these upgrades, although they have increased weight, but the new automatic transmission and performance characteristics of the engines move the machine as briskly as without them. The T-72 is still the same engine that it has long been and it has already reached its maximum, we need a new one. The Germans changed the motor in the field in 20 minutes, the BREM with the motor drove up, 2 crew members under the tank, 4 huge bolts were unscrewed from below, the other 2 were unhooked from above, the motor was lifted, the other was inserted, connected, the bolts were tightened, 20 min. And how is it in the T-72? 2 days mat on the mat. In principle, the B92 engine is good, but at least it needs to be done with an automatic transmission in one unit and easier maintenance, this would make Russian tanks more interesting for export. If you follow the development of MBT throughout the world, then the Russian Federation, unlike the same 90s, is not very developing. So far, there’s no point in touching armature, for me there’s still a cat in a bag, and I don’t believe all kinds of bureaucrats.

          What does Hitler have to do with and whose is he ours? And who cares what Hitler thought?
  15. Kokarev Mikhail
    Kokarev Mikhail 19 February 2018 14: 22
    0
    Yes, first let them come to the tank biathlon to play, and then dream. Maybe the arrogance will subside after the first game!
  16. Simon
    Simon 19 February 2018 14: 24
    +2
    Oh! Where are we going to put so much NATO scrap metal! recourse belay laughing
  17. Simon
    Simon 19 February 2018 14: 26
    +2
    Quote: Boris Muromtsev
    Pull yourself a point that would not break

    Interestingly, but whose address is this ?!
  18. IStreebok
    IStreebok 19 February 2018 14: 51
    0
    Yes, by the way, in tank battles for the Donetsk airport, who is who? Svidomye ... Or these ... Ikhtamnet?
  19. PValery53
    PValery53 19 February 2018 15: 11
    +1
    The next Prokhorovka will be in the territory of Great Britain, by its "order". She should like ... The Queen’s Palace will move to Kolyma.
  20. AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 19 February 2018 15: 47
    0
    And countless upgrades of obsolete vehicles can no longer “reach” them to the level of new generation tanks, say, T-14.

    It's too early to judge the level of T-14 ...
  21. krokus792
    krokus792 19 February 2018 17: 36
    0
    They didn’t forget about Operation Bagration ...
  22. Kent0001
    Kent0001 19 February 2018 18: 12
    0
    Even this idiot got wild, he needs to explain that you can die from Russian weapons just by not understanding anything .... in the center of London, ... well, if CHE ... tank strategist damn it.
  23. 1536
    1536 19 February 2018 19: 26
    0
    We interfere with them, obviously interfere. Hence the conclusion: it is impossible to allow the repetition of 22 on June 1941. And much needs to be done for this.
  24. Forever so
    Forever so 19 February 2018 19: 41
    0
    What ?? Everything is in the spirit of the Judeo-Anglo-Saxons, while the inferior ones will wet each other, the Angles with amers will make a gesheft.
  25. tank64rus
    tank64rus 19 February 2018 20: 27
    0
    In my opinion, they forgot how the battle of Prokhorovka ended for the Wehrmacht's tank divisions.
  26. Mih1974
    Mih1974 19 February 2018 23: 43
    0
    belay
    with weapons no less powerful than the Abrams, with similar protection, but with the highest cross-country ability and maneuverability. And her weight should be less than half

    Is this an implementation of a joke about seven hats from one sheepskin? fool How the hell are you “stupid people” going to reduce weight by TWO times while maintaining protection and not reducing combat power? They found some kind of revolutionary method to make armor twice as easy or they would use an "electromagnetic gun" on it or a laser. How can this even be, because even if they throw the crew out of the tank at all and even charge the Negro, this will not solve the problem of the weight of the armor.
  27. Cetron
    Cetron 20 February 2018 00: 13
    0
    Quote: your1970
    Quote: karabas-barabas
    Well, yes, NATO has problems with tanks, with their more than 5000 modern MBTs .. where they are against the Russian Federation with its T72 armada of various reincarnations, not one of which turns out to be called modern language ..
    - if you aren’t in the know, it’s enough just to bomb the Kraegs in Europe and they won’t reach our reserves stupidly - diesel fuel will end ....
    We certainly won’t run into Europe - but how are they on our roads on our fuel in our weather in the opposition of our army and our partisans ??
    I wouldn’t have gone their place - I would have scooped up more budget money and wouldn’t have gone, and then I would have thought up an excuse .....

    The Russian army has a lot of tanks and not bad ones, but what will you refuel yourself? The oligarchs have all the fuel, and there Kolya from Urengoy with his dad, banderlog and other liberals who have children, wives, mistresses and denyushki in geyrops. They will not give fuel! Private property is not a touch !!
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 20 February 2018 18: 03
      0
      Quote: Cetron
      They will not give fuel! Private property is not a touch !!

      Seriously??? do you imagine a “kolyusurengoy” not giving fuel to tankers? wassat
  28. naidas
    naidas 20 February 2018 15: 39
    0
    There are certain doubts that large-scale wars (not peripheral and local) will be waged by tanks.
  29. jurijsv
    jurijsv 21 February 2018 19: 34
    0
    Why be surprised? That the British, that the Americans are always ready to fight. The guys are "brave." They know how to fight very well .... The truth is always with the wrong hands.
  30. Ivanov IV
    Ivanov IV 25 February 2018 14: 19
    0
    And EurOpa never grew out of the pants of the Reich. It’s so hard for them to understand that there will never again be a local military conflict between Europe and Russia. Any conflict will be thermo-nuclear. Any.
    And there to the bulb, how many tanks you will have. More important is how many warehouses with nuclear warheads will be. The effect of a powder keg !!!! Just .... Bang !!! And there will be no Europeans. Absolutely ......
  31. mervino2007
    mervino2007 25 February 2018 18: 39
    0
    Quote: kerosene
    This is SPBE.

    So in the west there is such a thing. And created before. And with a big "stuffing". And they can apply. That is, it is interesting, but not decisive ...