Ukraine had less than that and is winning the war against Russia.PS: With all these exotic weapons can Poland still beat Russia 1 on 1? Ask yourself this question and you shall find the answer that you're looking for
Polish Military Modernisation : News & Discussions
- Thread starter BMD
- Start date
We don't need to 'cause we are sensible and we already have a sufficiently large military to build up on. This delivery is part of a deal for 114 Abrams signed last year for second-hand old M1A1 tanks. We don't have to resort to such moves, we can take our time and make calculated decisions resulting in actual benefits.
While Poland's signed some incredible deals recently, it's still gonna take a decade to fructify. If things change and NATO goes to war with Russia within the next 2-3 years, then Poland will have nothing to defend itself with.
And they plan on developing a 4th gen tank with the Koreans called K3. So more numbers are coming.
They have bought the best options possible, particularly the K2 and K9 purchases. 22 Narews means they plan to raise 22 armoured brigades. The French have 2 in comparison.
Until they throw the Ruskies out of their entire land including Crimea, no. Plus it ain't 1 on 1. One side we have Russia versus the other side which has entire might of NATO pushing them towards slaughter, lol
Poland is in NATO, so 1:1 is impossible. NATO will really be behind Poland, unlike in Ukraine, where every request is discussed for fear of escalation, where we still haven't supplied any serious aircraft or offensive weapons in general. What's more, the quantities we supply are merely samples, and are often outdated weapons that we were going to scrap.Until they throw the Ruskies out of their entire land including Crimea, no. Plus it ain't 1 on 1. One side we have Russia versus the other side which has entire might of NATO pushing them towards slaughter, lol
Polish army will become the first in Europe, except russia. By far !
Very impressive.
The quality of armoured vehicles being delivered is irrelevant because they are being taken out by anti-tank mines, drones and attack helicopters. And even the latest armoured vehicles operational in the West today do not have sufficient defences against them. Whether it's a Leo 1 or Leo2A6, both are being taken out the same way.
Otoh, what's killing the Russians is Western artillery, and that's been supplied in sufficiently large numbers.
It's not enough though. Multiple countries need to repeat this, 'cause the Russians are bound to build such a number every year or two for the next several years. With Armata, Kurganets and Bumerang, they had already planned a massive modernisation program. Recall that they had planned to build 500 Armata vehicles a year? Probably as much Kurganets and Bumerangs as well. Now the numbers will just increase, for both the old and the new.
Germany and the US will have to build up too. The world can't afford the Russians to be bigger than NATO, a balance is necessary.
I'm just happy the Polish are taking it more seriously.
Of course, I know this! I just presented a hypothetical scenario.
Politely disagree. Storm Shadows, HIMARS etc. are pretty damn cutting edge. NATO is helping Ukraine as much as possible without starting WW3 with nuclear repercussions. Their purpose is to bleed Russia dry and to fight them till the last Ukrainian. And apparently they are succeeding in this mission!
The Storm Shadows and SCALPs need to be refurbished. For example, the French have refurbished some of them and almost 600 have not been refurbished, that's what we're giving the Ukrainians, they sometimes reach their goal, but it's not the top.
As far as the HIMARs are concerned, we haven't given them long-range missiles.
And if they had ten times as many, we could say we were making an effort, but for the moment we're spending our pocket money.
We don't need to be a superpower. We just needs to keep Chinese & Pakistan away from our land. If you keep on waYou can't become a military superpower with imported weapons. For short term, they are fine but not good for long term solution.
I find our approach of importing high-tech/exotic weapons where there are no desi substitutes along with trying to indigenize other low/medium tech weapons; a very nice one. By using this process, we are slowly but surely developing our MIC and heading towards the goal of self-reliance in defence.
PS: With all these exotic weapons can Poland still beat Russia 1 on 1? Ask yourself this question and you shall find the answer that you're looking for
500 Armata per year ? With what money?
Same can be said of Su57.
USSR may be on par with NATO, but Russia is now far too small to be. Remove the nuclear arsenal and it is already a 2nd rank army.
Russia's begun militarising.
Full production of UVZ will be aimed at making only battle tanks.
Russia's UVZ halts all secondary output, begins tank mass production
Russia's Uralvagonzavod [UVZ] halts all secondary output, begins tank mass production. Such consolidation of assets can be seen as game-changing, even radical.
bulgarianmilitary.com
The standard Russian pre-war army had around 2500 tanks. If they have decided to triple the size of their army, then they will need 7500 tanks. And since they plan to do it only in a few years, the production will have to match that rate. I suppose the majority will be T-90Ms rather than Armata.
Combined with their stored away tanks, they could easily have about 50% more tanks and more modern than NATO's 11000, including stored and old tanks, with only 2000 being adequately modern.
If NATO is to compete, then the number of modern tanks will have to match.
The Russians have also claimed they will manufacture 100 jets a year, with deliveries at such numbers beginning in 2026.
They are using their previous years' energy bonanza and debt to fund everything. We can assume that Russia's capital budget for modernisation is many times higher than the US budget for this year and that could continue for a few more years.
When it comes to losses and production in Russian tanks, it's really not easy to get a clear picture. Most sources throw out figures rather haphazardly.
The Russian government has announced that it aims to build 1,500 tanks by the end of the year, so I'll give you a quick summary.
In terms of new tanks, there are only 2 models that can be produced in Russia: the T90M and the T14. The other production lines no longer exist. There is no longer any way of producing new T72s and T80s.
There is a line of new T90M. How many tanks can it produce per year? It's not clear, but in the history of the factory, at the peak of production in 2008 (production has fallen sharply since then because India has taken over a large part of its T90 production), the figure was less than 150 tanks. Note that at that time the Russians had a stock of old turrets assembled in the early 90s, which simplified production. I'm not sure, but I wonder if there weren't two production lines at the time. Only 67 T90Ms delivered between 2019 and early 2022 (new + refurbished).
There was one T14 production line that produced exactly... 0 T14. The line was set up 3 years ago, started assembling T14s and was shut down with the vehicles still being assembled on it. At the beginning of 2023, photos of the factory showed that nothing was moving on the line. Around thirty pre-production tanks were delivered between 2020 and 2022, but they did not come from the line but from unit assembly in the workshop. The tests are not yet complete, and in 2022 the automatic loader had not yet been perfected. Which is annoying, because it's no longer possible to load the gun manually...
What wasn't a problem before the war is now a huge headache because it immobilises an assembly line that would be very useful to the Russians.
Now for tank refurbishments:
The T62: Upgrading the T62 to the M version. This is a light modernisation: no major gun or component changes. We're just adding new optics, which aren't so new, and we're giving the vehicles an overhaul.
According to Russian propaganda, 800 tanks are to be overhauled in 3 years. The work is carried out in a single, fairly small factory. It's impossible to know how many T62s the Russians have in reserve, whose condition allows them to be refurbished.
T72s: Even before the war, the Russians had modernised many T72s to several modern standards: the B3 (2010) and the B3 2016. These two upgrades require a change of gun with the previous versions (which is quite painful because the production of tubes is a major bottleneck, especially when it must also provide for repairs). Lots of T72s in stock, but it's hard to say how many or which versions. Very little information or communication from the Russians about the T72 upgrades in progress. Only one 2022 model destroyed on the front. I personally think that the number of refurbished T72s coming out must be quite low. The workshops that deal with them have partially transitioned to refurbishing T90s to M standard in recent years.
The T80s: to start with RIP the U variants, very few were produced, most of them were in service and were cut to pieces at the beginning of the war. There is no sign of any stocks being returned to service. For reasons that escape me a little the Russian T80s in long term storage seem to have been more numerous to be usable quickly than the T72s. But there weren't that many. The T80BV variant dates from 1985. BVM modernisation requires a change of barrel, engines, and so on. In short, it's a big job. Only 50 will be modernised between 2020 and 2022 (public contract).
T90s: In addition to the new T90Ms coming off the assembly line, there has been a major modernisation programme since before the war to convert the T90As to the M model. But while there were 350 T90As officially in service in the Russian army in 2022, only 200 were in reserve. So the number of reserve tanks that can be refurbished from reserves is quite small. Here again, the gun in particular has to be changed.
So much for the tanks.
In short, compared to what NATO produces, it's a lot. Compared to what the Russians are losing on the front (an average of 5 tanks a day, confirmed and visually lost), it's not much. Very low. And 1500 tanks by the end of the year... Not a chance. If they get out 500 or 600 with refits (including 200/300 T62s) that will already be miraculous).
The last communication about a batch of T90Ms delivered dates back to January, and we don't know whether it was a batch of 4 or 8 vehicles (the photo only shows 4). Nothing more since then. In short, in the best-case scenario the Russians will continue to lose their tanks twice as fast as they receive them. If we take into account those that will die of natural causes (mechanical breakdowns), it's even worse.
But what's to stop the Russians multiplying their production by 5? After all, the USSR used to produce 1000 T34s a month. Well, the bane of modern factories: CNC parts. CNCs are so expensive to buy and maintain that there is almost no margin left on their use (they have to run at maximum capacity). So the only way to multiply production by 5... Is to multiply the number of CNCs by 5. Delivery times are important. You need space, you need to adapt workshops, you need to find ways of getting around embargoes... In short, hell. You can't do that in a year. And there are many other problems.
We're starting to see some interesting trends when we look at Russian tank losses by model over time:
The proportion of T80s among total losses continues to rise. The proportion of T72s is decreasing. In fact, almost 60% of Russian losses at the moment are T80s.
The proportion of T90s is not changing much, it's stable.
The T62s suffered a huge peak in losses in November-December when a large number were simply abandoned during the retreat from Kherson. Since then it has been stable and they are more in support than really in the front line (or in "quiet" sectors).
Among the T80s:
Disappearance of T80U, between 60 and 70% of losses in the first few months, less than 10% now.
Stable proportion of T80BVMs (20%) since the start of the conflict. I'd almost say they're losing them at the rate they're replacing them...
T80BVs have gone from 20% of losses at the start of the conflict to almost 80% now.
So why are we seeing this trend...
A bit of history is in order.
The Russian army hasn't liked the T80 for a long time. But it has a turbine engine, so it's handy for the extreme cold. But they don't run very well and production stopped in 2001, with many tanks going into storage without really having been used.
In 2010, the Russian army decided to modernise the T72s by upgrading the models in long-term storage to the T72B3 standard. This is supposed to increase volume, because the future T14 will take a little longer to arrive (the design is just starting) and to be produced.
The T90 is not in fashion either.
Then came 2014 and the start of the Ukrainian conflict. The Russian army was reviewing its plans and wanted to modernise. But the T14 was behind schedule, had development problems and was costing more and more. So plans are changing.
A new modernisation standard was released for the T72 (T72B3 2016), again based on long-life stocks, which had been badly depleted (in the interests of economy, you can imagine that they didn't take the worst T72s as a basis for their work).
But it's clear that this won't be enough, so in 2017 the Russian army ordered 'around a hundred' T72 BVMs. The decision to modernise BVs rather than the more modern Us comes from the fact that the majority of Us are still in service and the army wants to add more tanks to its inventory, and that there are relatively few Us that could be modernised but many BVs (there are major structural differences between Us and BVs, even the dimensions are not the same). Strangely enough, deliveries of BVMs stop in 2019 and we have to wait until 2020 for a new order for a batch of 50 (I think it's a question of budget).
But once again, that's not enough and the T14 is still costing more and is still behind schedule....
In short, you've understood that the Russian army is launching an upgrade of the T90 to the T90M standard from 2020.
But the consequences are that:
- The T72 modernisation programme started much earlier than that of the T80 and consumed a lot of tanks in storage, giving priority to those in better condition.
- The T80s started later and only 150 were ordered before the war.
- The T90s were very few, but we all know the rumours about the reliability of the T90A.
So after a year of conflict in which the Russian army tried to refurbish everything it could quickly without going to the factory:
There aren't many T72s left that can be easily refurbished, because the refurbishment programme took a massive hit on stocks over a good decade.
There are still quite a few T80BVs left (or were left, we don't know when that will dry up) so their proportion in the Russian army is increasing. What's more, many of them have never really served.
There doesn't seem to be any effort to line up T90As. Yet there are some in long-term storage under heated cover. This may be reserved for the T90M modernisation line and the poor performance of the A's.
The T62Ms that were in storage were well underway at Kherson and deliveries have not looked astronomical since.
Interesting final stat: before the war the Russian army had ordered a maximum of 150 T80BVMs (we know that the second batch was 50 but we don't have the figures for the first but it's 100 max), 83 were confirmed lost, we don't know how many have been delivered since but the next batch wasn't ordered until September 2022.
In short, it's understandable that we're starting to see T54/55s coming out because the only way to make money now (I've already done a piece showing that Russian factories should be able to produce 50 tanks a month at the most) is to look at other models. If they don't, there will be areas of the front without tanks because the front is long. And an old tank is better than no tank. But the Russians are losing between 100 and 150 tanks a month, so they really need numbers.
When you think about it, on such a long front with such intensity, kamikaze drones, laser-guided shells, anti-tank missiles... between 3 and 5 tanks a day lost is not that many.
Correction
In short, it's understandable that we're starting to see T54/55s coming out because the only way to makemoney numbers now (I've already done a piece showing that Russian factories should be able to produce 50 tanks a month at the most) is to look at other models.
In short, it's understandable that we're starting to see T54/55s coming out because the only way to make
The article is quite a bit overestimated the problem. The T-90 is just a T-72B with a slightly modified hull compared to the original T-72A and came with a T-80U turret, which was later replaced by a welded turret on the T-90A.
The Russians can use the same processes the Soviets used to produce the tank. So UVZ has always had the ability to make 500 tanks a year with stored away production tools, that we know of.
Also, out of some 2500 tanks in service, India's produced less than 600 and in the process of producing 464 more. The rest were all produced by Russia. So they already had the ability to produce 150-200 tanks a year during peacetime. And UVZ's civilian production is 2/3rds of their business. If that entire chunk is now going into military production, then that's 500 a year easy even without using Soviet production processes.
They make a lot of rail cars.
So old process + new process + kick out civilian production + extra shift + more workers = increased production rate.
All as we have seen in Ukraine, it that their best tanks, T90, without the export limitations (the excuse served for the bad results in Irak during desert storm), were not very potent.
I think all the west modern MBT (ie Leo2, M1, Challenger 2, Leclerc, K2,...) are more than on par with the best russian ones.
I just give the french MBT Leclerc spécifications : to be able to fight 1 versus 10 against the best russian tanks (it was a cold war specifications).
Western tanks being overwhelmingly superior to Soviet tanks was just propaganda.
1980s:
T-80U
1990-2000s:
T-90A
Challenger 2
You can see that the Leclerc is similar in values to the T80 released in the 80s, in fact inferior in some areas. The other two tanks provide similar levels of protection too, although a bit superior to the Leclerc.
But the problem is people compare Western tanks to the T-72A instead.
All 'cause of Desert Storm, when the export model of this tank went up against this one:
So the M1A1's main competitor in Europe was the T-80U. But because the US fought the Iraqi Army with a tank 2 generations ahead, people have fallen to Western propaganda.
Today, the Leo 2A6 and T-90M completely blow the Leclerc out of the water with protection levels above 1100mm in the turret. The Leo 2A6, T-90M, T-72B3 and Leclerc have very similar firepower, slight edge to the Russians 'cause of the new Svinets. Both T-90M and Leclerc have similar mobility. Leclerc should have the edge in maintenance and electronics.
In conclusion, 200 Leclercs can't fight thousands of T-90Ms. A modernised Leclerc needs to be put in production and a lot of NATO countries have to buy it along with the Leo 2A6/7. There's still time though, 'cause of NATO's existing stocks.
All the russian MBT turrets flying in the air in Ukraine is the best and definitiv answer. Not to speak of desert storm.
A 45 tons russian MBT can't be superior to a western 60 tons one.
PS : about the Leclerc armor : the exact figures were NEVER released. It's a secret. It is why Leclerc lost the greek contest because we refused to give them the exact datas and greeks used the sole they knew about a french tank : AMX30 one... We loose on that. If not Leclerc was best on fire tests in all aspects (rate of fire, accuracy and range even moving)
Western, eastern, northern, southern oor mot, it doesn't matter which part of the world had produced a tank. A tank is bound to get evaporated in modern day battlefield.