Are the various NATO Tanks immune from a EMP strike ? ...

[dogtag]

Modern tanks are a far cry from the WW2 Shermans or T34s as
are modern cars from Model As. Everything is more complicated
and fielding 4 different tanks into the middle of a complicated war
seems it might be inviting trouble. If Ukraine can figure out how
to get them to the front it could up the ante alarmingly.
See my thread on the subject on the 2nd amdt forum.

[jdmcgrath]

If Russia goes nuclear then Ukrainian tankers won't matter.

[dogtag]

Getting those tanks into action may never happen. Delivery. training, parts.
It will be a fiasco.
What could set Putin off would be us giving Zelensky F16s.
I hope we don't. We've already given Ukraine 30 Billion worth of money and equipment
with zero accounting for where the money went.

[Art]

Logistics is already a problem for the Ukes but they are managing to get stuff into action. They have a lot of NATO self propelled artillery, most is ours but they have a good many SP artillery pieces including heavies from several partners. I figure they have parts problems with all of them. Fortunately while the vehicles aren't the same the ammo is. I saw a video of a US 155mm SP gun in action cranking off Polish ammo.

The length of training for a US tank crewman is 22 weeks, I figure its about the same for a Brit or a German tanker. Especially since I expect a lot of the "sensitive" stuff that would be the hardest to train on, to be removed before they get them. Retraining an old boy who is already a tank crewman on the T72 might cut that in half. Unfortunately, unlike artillery ammunition, NATO tank ammo isn't necessarily 100% interchangeable.

As bad as the problems the Ukrainians might have with logistics I figure it couldn't be worse than the Japanese in WWII.

[jdmcgrath]

Getting those tanks into action may never happen. Delivery. training, parts.
It will be a fiasco.
What could set Putin off would be us giving Zelensky F16s.
I hope we don't. We've already given Ukraine 30 Billion worth of money and equipment
with zero accounting for where the money went.

California Senator Hiram Johnson swore WW2 would break and bankrupt the USA. Even after Pearl and Hitler's declaration of war.

[dryheat]

Never heard of him, but I can understand his concern. As it turned out, WWII worked out OK for us and the down beaten. I can't understand what the leadership of the world is thinking. Russia is a wheat field. Ukraine is a wheat field. You can't make that work without war? They have to break their noses, bloody their lips and then maybe go have a drink. And the old saw: when the elephants fight a lot of ants get trampled. Not nice, but there's no shortage of ants.

[Major Tom]

Getting those tanks into action may never happen. Delivery. training, parts.
It will be a fiasco.
What could set Putin off would be us giving Zelensky F16s.
I hope we don't. We've already given Ukraine 30 Billion worth of money and equipment
with zero accounting for where the money went.

It is common knowledge that Ukraine is a 'money laundering' scheme for you know who! Cost of 31 M1 Abram tanks and training/support is north of 820 million!

[Mark in Ottawa]

I think that some of the comments about logistics and training are right on. In addition to the Russian tanks that they have, they will now have a small number of British Challengers, a modest number of American Abrams and a fairly large number of Leopard 2s. Even Canada is providing them with a small number of Leopard 2s out of our very small fleet (about 120 apparently) Perhaps a slightly more practical solution would be for Canada to turn its entire fleet of Leopards over to Ukraine and replace them with an equal number of Abrams. That would reduce the risk factor of Abrams falling into Russian hands and reduce the logistics and training issue. Ditto, the Brits might be better off getting 14 Leopards somewhere instead of giving 14 Challengers to Ukraine

[Allen]

I think that some of the comments about logistics and training are right on. In addition to the Russian tanks that they have, they will now have a small number of British Challengers, a modest number of American Abrams and a fairly large number of Leopard 2s. Even Canada is providing them with a small number of Leopard 2s out of our very small fleet (about 120 apparently) Perhaps a slightly more practical solution would be for Canada to turn its entire fleet of Leopards over to Ukraine and replace them with an equal number of Abrams. That would reduce the risk factor of Abrams falling into Russian hands and reduce the logistics and training issue. Ditto, the Brits might be better off getting 14 Leopards somewhere instead of giving 14 Challengers to Ukraine

Sounds good.

The Ukraine needs advanced tanks in numbers, not different manufacturers.

I'm surprised Canada and the UK don't already have the Abrams.

[jdmcgrath]

Wartime and peace time maintenance are different. Ukes probably have some of the best war time mechanics anywhere right now.