Ok, one for tank nerds ... with a particularly British slant. If you aren't a tank nerd, maybe make a cup of tea rather than wade through it.
That said, I'm about as far from a tank nerd as you can get and I found it weirdly fascinating.
"Since I can't really write about anything in Ukraine, except what they agree to release...
One thing I can though write about are the tanks going to Ukraine, and from a slightly personal perspective to boot.
Our Leopard IISE (5+) are getting a bit long in the tooth, and it is time to get new ones.
Buying any new equipment is a lengthy process, so this one started back when I was an active colonel, and for reasons that will become clear I hung around the process up until it passed from the colonel stage towards generals and politicians.
5 tank colonels was picked with slightly different backgrounds and tank experiences.
I was included since I am so ancient that I drove I commanded one of the trial tanks from the last time around, and drove the others back then.
Cheese I am old.
I got foisted with the T90 the Russians hoped to sell back then to Sweden, it was an actual option back in the day.
I have also tested upgrades of the T90 and the T72s, so that was probably the reason.
Also having briefly owned a T84 Oplot impressed the powers that be.
On top of that I have commanded or tested various Leopards, Challengers and Abramseees.
The first option was to build a new MBT ourselves, but we have no spare capacity for the next 10 years to do so, and we have also ordered the light tank CV90/120 Ghost... so no. It would just have been to expensive and delayed.
So, shopping abroad was the idea.
6 countries offered to sell 7 different tanks.
France offered the Leclerq 120mm
Germany offered Leo 2A7 or Leo 3/A1 with the 130mm Rheinmetall/Bofors.
South Korea offered the K2 in 120.
UK offered the Challenger III in 120 with the option of a 130mm gun.
Ukraine offered the T84 Oplot V2 with a 1800Bhp diesel, new electronics from west, and the 130mm gun.
US offered the Abrams M1A2 SEP3 in 120mm
France
The Leclerq is a superb tank with a good balance between speed and protection.
Really manouvrable and good swamp float.
Problem was that it is a goddamn spaceship with way to much electronics that can go poop and disable the tank.
Secondly, the gun is the same we use already, and the armour is not better than what we have now.
But, sexy as heck.
Not good enough to warrant buying them over what we have.
Germany
The Leo 2A7 offering is the fastest and most manouvrable of all tanks on offer, the armour is improved, but the gun is the same. The electronics is highly upgraded, but we have had ours revamped too.
Plus here was the improved armour that the A6 and A7 has, but otherwise not enough new capability to warrant buying it.
The Leo 3A1 has the same hull and electronics as the Leo 2A7. What is new here is improved suspension, so even better swamp float and manouvrability, and the gun is the brand new 130mm Rheinmetal.
In short, gun is majestic. Whatever you hit will fly apart like if the Angel of Death struck it. We tested it from the front with a HESH grenade on a T72 with had for some mysterious reason.
The T72 exploded like a rotten pumpkin.... HESH is not meant to be used against armour, but nothing remained of the tank to test the Tungsten Sabot on.
Only drawback with the gun is that the shells are beastly large, but it comes equipped with a semi-autoloader.
We declined due to...
Interlude
We have learned a lot during the war in Ukraine.
Number one is that tanks to be viable must be much better armoured than previously believed, while still being agile and able to perform other tasks like offensive attacks on armoured structures and trenches.
The tank is now back in the historical role. At the same time it must be agile and fast.
This means that we need phat armour and a gun that can do almost anything to anything that might come in the next 30 years on the enemy size.
North Korea
The K2 is a superb tank, but it is basically a good and slightly better armoured comparison to the Leo 2A7.
So, it did not bring enough to the table.
Ukraine
Firstly, the T84 Oplot has nothing to do with the normal Soviet/Russian crap.
The armour is Chobham equivalent of high standard, the new engine is a beast, the turret was increased in size and fairly comfy for oversized Swedes, the driver did though complain and I could not drive it.
The electronics is a best of version using German/Swedish/French thingamabobs, and it worked really well.
It came with the same 130mm Fruitblower as the Leo 3.
It scored the same as the Leo 3A1, and beat the others flat out. So far it was the best armoured by far.
But, sadly... Ukraine can't deliver the until the war is over, and probably not for a year or two after that.
I can though say this, if Ukraine had 100 of these the Russian invasion would have gone differently fast.
The only Russian weapon that can take one out is 152mm artillery hitting directly, the rest will just **** off the crew.
US
Enter the thunder of Detroit.
Gun is the same as we have, the M1A2 SEP3 has all the electronic modcons, but not enough to warrant changing over.
The armour is almost on the scale of the Oplot, but of a slightly older design.
It can definitely boff everything China and Russia has now comfortably.
It does though have an elephant in the Room.
It uses 2.8 times more fuel than the second thirstiest tank... and this is a big nono in the new Green Army we are building.
UKians
This is a true beast of a tank.
Every other tank is a Medium Battle Tank (MBT), UK has given up on all attempts of being sensible here.
In fact, BAE and the UK have gone so bonkers that only UKians can go on to much tea and tallyhoo!
It is a full on 80 ton Heavy Battle Tank (HBT).
Last one stupid enough to build on was Stalin and Hitler.
Problem is that they did not have the engines and technology to pull it off.
The new and improved Chobham armour is THICC.
On that UKians have put on spaced extra armour, and on top of that they have slapped on two different layers of Explosive Contact Armour after learning from Ukraine.
Fully loaded, and with the full battle armour it is pushing close to 100 metric tons.
When the UKians heard that we wanted the 130, the whacked one in.
And then they fired it on another Challenger III (not a full one, but the armour...).
It is as such the only tank in existance that can't kill itself from the front. Holy m..... f...k
It also has automatic track tensioning built in, all the driver need to do is push a button, every other tank you need a greese gun and a giant arsed spanner and 15 minutes (fun if in a firefight...)
It also comes with a built in teakettle, but the one we got had a coffee maker in it, bless the UKians for understanding Swedes.
Obviously it needs a whale of an engine. It has that, and it is a full dieselelectric plug-in-hybrid. You can drive it on electricity for 50km... silent... yum...
It is though a tad slower than what we wanted, but UK promised to fix this by adding more power.
The gun is yum...
Armour is yum...
The top 3
We had a top 3 list in the end, with all others scratched out.
1. Challenger 3... It is blooming fab.
2. Leo 3A1, it has gooood boomstick.
3. Ukrmesh Oplot V2. Second best, but when?
In the end Challenger is the best in all metrics except manouvrability, but it is not worst in that regard.
It got everyones vote.
Also, due to Sweden and UK aligning our weapons purchases (See UK Archer deal), this would further improve commonality between us. We also share a lot of weapons manufacturing companies with BAE and SAAB both having factories in both countries.
Unless the generals sabotage things, we believe our politicians will agree with us meagre colonels.
I here feel that I need to repeat myself, the UKian offer won on being both PHAT and THICC.
Ukraine
I should here point out that all of the tanks offered are way way better than the Soviet crappola that the Russians run around in.
Each one can amply fulfill the 5:1 engagement criteria.
That is to be able to engage 5 T90s at the same time and be able to win.
Our tentative figure for the Challenger 3 is 40:1... and the 40 is the amount of 130 rounds you can cram inside of it.
The only thing that can whack it is a 152mm at a falling trajectory directly hitting the turret top.
Problem is that the Challenger 3 is not going to Ukraine... they get the Challenger 2, but with all the hang-on extra bits... it is still a blooming potent tank, the best that is coming to Ukraine."
That said, I'm about as far from a tank nerd as you can get and I found it weirdly fascinating.
"Since I can't really write about anything in Ukraine, except what they agree to release...
One thing I can though write about are the tanks going to Ukraine, and from a slightly personal perspective to boot.
Our Leopard IISE (5+) are getting a bit long in the tooth, and it is time to get new ones.
Buying any new equipment is a lengthy process, so this one started back when I was an active colonel, and for reasons that will become clear I hung around the process up until it passed from the colonel stage towards generals and politicians.
5 tank colonels was picked with slightly different backgrounds and tank experiences.
I was included since I am so ancient that I drove I commanded one of the trial tanks from the last time around, and drove the others back then.
Cheese I am old.
I got foisted with the T90 the Russians hoped to sell back then to Sweden, it was an actual option back in the day.
I have also tested upgrades of the T90 and the T72s, so that was probably the reason.
Also having briefly owned a T84 Oplot impressed the powers that be.
On top of that I have commanded or tested various Leopards, Challengers and Abramseees.
The first option was to build a new MBT ourselves, but we have no spare capacity for the next 10 years to do so, and we have also ordered the light tank CV90/120 Ghost... so no. It would just have been to expensive and delayed.
So, shopping abroad was the idea.
6 countries offered to sell 7 different tanks.
France offered the Leclerq 120mm
Germany offered Leo 2A7 or Leo 3/A1 with the 130mm Rheinmetall/Bofors.
South Korea offered the K2 in 120.
UK offered the Challenger III in 120 with the option of a 130mm gun.
Ukraine offered the T84 Oplot V2 with a 1800Bhp diesel, new electronics from west, and the 130mm gun.
US offered the Abrams M1A2 SEP3 in 120mm
France
The Leclerq is a superb tank with a good balance between speed and protection.
Really manouvrable and good swamp float.
Problem was that it is a goddamn spaceship with way to much electronics that can go poop and disable the tank.
Secondly, the gun is the same we use already, and the armour is not better than what we have now.
But, sexy as heck.
Not good enough to warrant buying them over what we have.
Germany
The Leo 2A7 offering is the fastest and most manouvrable of all tanks on offer, the armour is improved, but the gun is the same. The electronics is highly upgraded, but we have had ours revamped too.
Plus here was the improved armour that the A6 and A7 has, but otherwise not enough new capability to warrant buying it.
The Leo 3A1 has the same hull and electronics as the Leo 2A7. What is new here is improved suspension, so even better swamp float and manouvrability, and the gun is the brand new 130mm Rheinmetal.
In short, gun is majestic. Whatever you hit will fly apart like if the Angel of Death struck it. We tested it from the front with a HESH grenade on a T72 with had for some mysterious reason.
The T72 exploded like a rotten pumpkin.... HESH is not meant to be used against armour, but nothing remained of the tank to test the Tungsten Sabot on.
Only drawback with the gun is that the shells are beastly large, but it comes equipped with a semi-autoloader.
We declined due to...
Interlude
We have learned a lot during the war in Ukraine.
Number one is that tanks to be viable must be much better armoured than previously believed, while still being agile and able to perform other tasks like offensive attacks on armoured structures and trenches.
The tank is now back in the historical role. At the same time it must be agile and fast.
This means that we need phat armour and a gun that can do almost anything to anything that might come in the next 30 years on the enemy size.
North Korea
The K2 is a superb tank, but it is basically a good and slightly better armoured comparison to the Leo 2A7.
So, it did not bring enough to the table.
Ukraine
Firstly, the T84 Oplot has nothing to do with the normal Soviet/Russian crap.
The armour is Chobham equivalent of high standard, the new engine is a beast, the turret was increased in size and fairly comfy for oversized Swedes, the driver did though complain and I could not drive it.
The electronics is a best of version using German/Swedish/French thingamabobs, and it worked really well.
It came with the same 130mm Fruitblower as the Leo 3.
It scored the same as the Leo 3A1, and beat the others flat out. So far it was the best armoured by far.
But, sadly... Ukraine can't deliver the until the war is over, and probably not for a year or two after that.
I can though say this, if Ukraine had 100 of these the Russian invasion would have gone differently fast.
The only Russian weapon that can take one out is 152mm artillery hitting directly, the rest will just **** off the crew.
US
Enter the thunder of Detroit.
Gun is the same as we have, the M1A2 SEP3 has all the electronic modcons, but not enough to warrant changing over.
The armour is almost on the scale of the Oplot, but of a slightly older design.
It can definitely boff everything China and Russia has now comfortably.
It does though have an elephant in the Room.
It uses 2.8 times more fuel than the second thirstiest tank... and this is a big nono in the new Green Army we are building.
UKians
This is a true beast of a tank.
Every other tank is a Medium Battle Tank (MBT), UK has given up on all attempts of being sensible here.
In fact, BAE and the UK have gone so bonkers that only UKians can go on to much tea and tallyhoo!
It is a full on 80 ton Heavy Battle Tank (HBT).
Last one stupid enough to build on was Stalin and Hitler.
Problem is that they did not have the engines and technology to pull it off.
The new and improved Chobham armour is THICC.
On that UKians have put on spaced extra armour, and on top of that they have slapped on two different layers of Explosive Contact Armour after learning from Ukraine.
Fully loaded, and with the full battle armour it is pushing close to 100 metric tons.
When the UKians heard that we wanted the 130, the whacked one in.
And then they fired it on another Challenger III (not a full one, but the armour...).
It is as such the only tank in existance that can't kill itself from the front. Holy m..... f...k
It also has automatic track tensioning built in, all the driver need to do is push a button, every other tank you need a greese gun and a giant arsed spanner and 15 minutes (fun if in a firefight...)
It also comes with a built in teakettle, but the one we got had a coffee maker in it, bless the UKians for understanding Swedes.
Obviously it needs a whale of an engine. It has that, and it is a full dieselelectric plug-in-hybrid. You can drive it on electricity for 50km... silent... yum...
It is though a tad slower than what we wanted, but UK promised to fix this by adding more power.
The gun is yum...
Armour is yum...
The top 3
We had a top 3 list in the end, with all others scratched out.
1. Challenger 3... It is blooming fab.
2. Leo 3A1, it has gooood boomstick.
3. Ukrmesh Oplot V2. Second best, but when?
In the end Challenger is the best in all metrics except manouvrability, but it is not worst in that regard.
It got everyones vote.
Also, due to Sweden and UK aligning our weapons purchases (See UK Archer deal), this would further improve commonality between us. We also share a lot of weapons manufacturing companies with BAE and SAAB both having factories in both countries.
Unless the generals sabotage things, we believe our politicians will agree with us meagre colonels.
I here feel that I need to repeat myself, the UKian offer won on being both PHAT and THICC.
Ukraine
I should here point out that all of the tanks offered are way way better than the Soviet crappola that the Russians run around in.
Each one can amply fulfill the 5:1 engagement criteria.
That is to be able to engage 5 T90s at the same time and be able to win.
Our tentative figure for the Challenger 3 is 40:1... and the 40 is the amount of 130 rounds you can cram inside of it.
The only thing that can whack it is a 152mm at a falling trajectory directly hitting the turret top.
Problem is that the Challenger 3 is not going to Ukraine... they get the Challenger 2, but with all the hang-on extra bits... it is still a blooming potent tank, the best that is coming to Ukraine."