Where will Challenger and Leopard arrive in Ukraine?
Today, many say that the Armed Forces of Ukraine will soon receive new gifts in the form of British tanks "Challenger-2" from the British and German "Leopard 2A4" from Polish bounties.
In general, our opinion is an openly political action. Western partners, who last year collected old Soviet-made equipment from the dumps of former socialist countries, without even a hint about giving the Armed Forces of Ukraine modern heavy weapons, frankly lost their fear after a series of deafening “successes” of the Russian army.
And weapons went to Ukraine, if not today, then at least yesterday. But no longer Soviet, originally from the 70s of the last century.
But everything has its own nuances.
The supply of modern artillery systems such as "Crab" and PzH 2000 should not be taken lightly. Even a small number of them can change the situation on a separate theater of operations, since these self-propelled guns easily shoot all Russian artillery systems, which, we admit, come from the USSR, in terms of range and accuracy.
With tanks, things are a little different. Tank - weapon battlefield, its use occurs precisely in contact with the enemy. And, if the self-propelled guns work from a safe distance, because of the wide back of the same tank, then the tank has a hard time in battle, because everything that the enemy has is flying at him. All calibers. Specific application...
Therefore, if you ask the question “how many”, say, the same German self-propelled guns PzH 2000 (the Armed Forces of Ukraine received 28 pieces), then the answer will be “decently”. Indeed, these mobile, accurate and long-range howitzers are capable of inflicting very tangible strikes from an absolutely safe distance for themselves.
Let's ask another question: "Is 25 Challenger 2 tanks a lot"? The answer will be negative. It's only two companies. Of course, 25 tanks at the forefront of a strike against a populated area is very sensitive and significant. But the very principle of using tanks implies that tanks will suffer losses upon contact with the enemy. This is not a self-propelled gun that can ride at a distance and send its shells to points, and even with adjustments using UAVs.
Quantitatively, 25 Challengers and 10 Leopards are not many. Actually, this is one of the arguments that the action is political. They just openly say to Russia: we are no longer afraid of you. Draw your "red lines" until you run out of paint, and we will do as we see fit. That is, to give Ukraine more and more modern models of weapons.
What to do, the weak are always despised, humiliated and beaten. In theory, practice sometimes differs from theoretical calculations.
Therefore, we will finish with the political part, and let's talk about the usefulness of these tanks for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It is clear that any tank, serviceable and with ammunition, cannot be useless. This is a combat vehicle, the purpose of which in battle is to destroy everything that can be reached with a cannon or caterpillars.
But here such problems arise that I would like to talk about first of all, leaving all comparisons of performance characteristics for later, although for some this is the most interesting.
Let's start (as in the case of self-propelled guns) with logistics. Because if there is no timely delivery of ammunition and spare parts, the value of the tank begins to tend to zero.
In terms of logistics, the APU is a complete nightmare. No, they bring everything they need, they are quite good. Another question: how much and what do you need to bring? And here ... However, let's go through what the tank forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine consist of.
And they consist of "only" of:
1. T-90A and M.
2. T-80 of all modifications.
3. T-72 of all modifications.
4. RT-91 (Polish modification T-72M1).
5. T-64 of all modifications.
6. T-62M, MV.
7. M-55S.
8. "Leopard-2A4"
9. Challenger 2
Many will now notice that the T-84U "Oplot" and the so-called BM "Oplot" are not in the list of tanks in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the vehicles are different, but the same in that they are not. It's simple: 5 produced cars - no reason to be distracted. 12 captured Russian T-90s are much more valuable than a tank that did not go into mass production. Well, like the T-14 "Armata" approximately, so there is no point in considering it here at all.
For nine tank models we have:
- 7 basic engine models (T-72 and T-90 have almost the same engine, V-92);
- oils: a separate headache, because each engine requires its own oil;
- 5 calibers of guns (100 mm (T-55), 105 mm (M-55S), 115 mm (T-62), 120 mm (Leopard and Challenger), 125 mm (from T-64 to T-90);
- the Challenger, T-55 and M55 have rifled guns, the RT-91, T-62, T-64, T-72, T-80, T-90 and Leopard have smoothbore guns. Shells, of course, are also different;
- transmissions, ventilation equipment, sights, thermal imagers, rangefinders - the list can be continued for quite some time.
All this requires a huge range of products, which must be hauled to the points of supply and refueling of tanks and to maintenance points.
Maintenance
That, as everyone knows, is a thing without which it is impossible. For the tank can simply refuse, moreover, it will do it at the most inopportune moment. Therefore, it is necessary to serve, whether you like it or not.
And here the interesting things begin.
Okay, we will immediately put aside the Soviet tanks, because there are no problems with their maintenance. Everything is known and worked out since the 50s of the last century. But in our list there are machines that are somewhat different from those that are registered in the basic "bios" of Ukrainian technicians.
Let's take the M-55S, kindly donated to Ukraine by Slovenia. The Slovenes, of course, expect to receive the same Leopards or BMPs in exchange for their tanks, but everyone wants this today.
What is M-55S? This is the modernization of the Soviet T-55A for the Slovenian army, which was completed by ... the Israeli company Elbit Systems. The modernization was very impressive: Blazer dynamic protection, anti-cumulative screens, 105-mm L7 gun, a modular turret on the Rafael turret with a DShK machine gun, the new Fotona SGS-55 fire control system (with an integrated digital ballistic computer, laser range finder, gunner's sight SGS-55 with a two-plane stabilizer and an atmospheric parameter sensor), a surveillance system for the commander Fotona COMTOS-55, a driver's periscope Fotona CODRIS equipped with night vision devices, two six-barreled smoke grenade launchers with a LIRD-1A laser sensor system. Everything, of course, except for the gun, is made in Israel.
And the modernization of the M-55S1 is the M-55S, into which the MAN engine was inserted, with a capacity of 850 hp. With.
Attention, a question for connoisseurs: how many technical personnel are there in the Armed Forces of Ukraine who can take and carry out maintenance of such a tank? Yes, I think so, a little. The number is likely to go to zero, as mathematicians would say. And the tank is quite old, and there may not be technical documentation. And the fact that about fifty such tanks were made in total casts doubt on the possibility of any quick repair or maintenance.
The Challenger is even worse. This tank is generally unknown to the "general public" in oiled overalls.
Yes, there were more than four hundred British cars produced, but here's the problem - they served in the British army and the army of Oman. And that's all.
It is clear that in order for the Challengers to fight, either specialists from Britain or specialists trained in Britain are needed. The third, as they say, is not given. The problem is uniquely solvable, but it takes time and trained people.
By the way, the Leopard is even worse. There, the Germans and those who use German tanks should have a well-developed system of maintenance and repair. That is, in a tank battalion - a repair platoon, in a regiment - a remrota, and so on.
But the most important thing is not even the presence of specialists in these units, but the availability of a material base. That is, there is a certain set of equipment, and the larger it is, the wider the work schedule.
In the media, by the way, not a word about whether technical equipment for their maintenance and repair will be transferred along with the tanks. A company of Leopards, which is 10-14 units, is clearly not worth bringing expensive equipment to Ukraine. This means that we can conclude that the Polish Leopards will serve the Poles on Polish territory as well. Which already casts doubt on the feasibility of the undertaking.
Well, it's logical: there is a platoon set of repair equipment for work as part of a battalion. There, of course, there are not as many cars as in the divisional set of workshops (30-32), but there are. The key word here is "battalion kit". That is, three companies. It is very difficult to say how to tear it apart so that one company can be serviced, because if there is ONE workshop for repairing tracked vehicles in the battalion set, then you can hardly make it into two parts.
And the Leopard is not the kind of tank that will allow itself to be operated without proper maintenance. If there is no maintenance, it will need repair. There will be no repair - there will be no tank. This is the essential difference between German technology and Soviet technology.
And it turns out that if the Poles do not want to share the repair equipment (and there are special keys there, only designed for the Leopard), then what, the Germans will get up? It turns out that yes. Or on trawls and to Poland. Which is even more reasonable.
But what is this tank that looms back and forth? Instead of spending a day or two on maintenance, will he be driven to Poland and back for a week?
In general, the situation does not look very well thought out, which means it smells like politicians. Well, where there is politics, you yourself know, do not expect good.
And the supply of tanks for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, alas, is managed by politicians. Like Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and Andrzej Duda, the President of Poland, they are serious and powerful men, but first of all they are politicians.
Demonstration of support for Ukraine? Yes, that's understandable. Gain? There are more questions than answers.
Combat application
The Challenger 2 tank seems to be not bad, but apart from rare uses in Kosovo and Iraq, it did not show itself in any way. Yes, the losses were minimal, but the question is: what caused them, the good combat qualities of the vehicle or the excellent training of the crew?
And secondly, the British did not bother themselves with modernization very much. Indeed, why? They somehow did not plan to fight on the continent, with rare exceptions, and the use in Iraq and Kosovo, frankly, was episodic. So the main task of the Challenger is the hypothetical defense of the islands during a hypothetical military aggression.
Therefore, not aiming to make money on the sale of the tank, the British drilled the crews and did not bother with upgrades at all. Because "Challenger 2" came out so ... peculiar.
The 120mm rifled gun is just a great thing for high-precision shooting. No wonder the record of a confirmed defeat belongs to the Challenger - in March 2003, in a battle with an Iraqi T-55 unit, the Challenger crew hit an Iraqi tank from a distance of 5100 meters.
Yes, there are nuances, a smooth barrel was created to disperse feathered "crowbars", that is, BOPSs. The rifled one is not able to provide projectile speeds comparable to the speeds of projectiles of smooth barrels. But it provides accuracy at distances over 2 km, which smooth-bore guns never dreamed of.
That is, even the use of the Challenger is not an easy task. Although in general, despite the simply huge size (15 cm higher than the M1 Abrams) and weight (the latest versions of the Challenger overtook even the Abrams in weight by almost a ton and a half, the tank is decent and stubborn. Many cases have been recorded when a recognized the authority of close anti-tank combat RPG-7 did not penetrate the armor of a British tank.
It will not work to say something essentially new about the Leopard-2, the tank is well known, its strengths and weaknesses are known both in battle and after it.
And yet politics?
Yes. Policy. Military, but politics. Great Britain and Poland will not contribute anything significant to the Ukrainian theater of operations with their tank deliveries, except, perhaps, Germany.
Why is Germany here? Well, after all, it is Germany that is the largest European manufacturer of tanks, which Ukraine needs so much. And it depends on Germany whether the Ukrainians will receive tanks in an amount that can turn the tide of hostilities.
And this is unrealistic without technical assistance from Germany, which not only produces and modernizes tanks, but many years of experience is concentrated in the hands of German engineers. In other words, the German technical support for the Leopards provided to Ukraine is crucial. Germany has repeatedly opposed sending tanks, but many European (and non-European) military experts believe Germany could eventually reconsider its restrictions if another NATO country takes the lead.
Without the technical support of Germany, all other attempts to saturate the Armed Forces of Ukraine with any tanks, except for Soviet ones, which are pulled from all over the world.
Perhaps, British and Polish-German tanks in such quantities, if they can change something, then definitely not on the battlefield, but in the arena of political games. Therefore, in answer to the question posed in the title as to where European tanks might arrive in Ukraine, only one thing can be said: they will bring further political escalation, since on the battlefield their value in such quantities is more than doubtful.
Information