Chieftain's Q&A 27: Air Defence, AGS and AMXs
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 07. 2024
- Episode #27 of the increasingly inaccurately described trilogy of "Ask Chieftain armor-related questions". For the full list of previously asked questions, see docs.google.com/document/d/15...
00:00 Intro, Warfighters.
3:22 German heavy tank doctrine in WW2
5:25 Thoughts on the Israeli Nagmachon
7:15 Why was there a shift in Soviet artillery from towed to self-propelled guns
7:50 Opinion on the AGS
13:20 Steel wheels on wheeled vehicles
14:54 If you could retrofit one thermal to either an old tank or an IFV, which vehicle?
15:26 Room for return of SPAAG
17:30 How good is modern thermal vision at target discrimination/
19:03 How modular are vehicles?
20:04 Are you considering a second book?
20:36 Would WW2 "ghost army" tactics work today?
21:14 Do we train for scenarios in which friendly forces do not have air superiority
21:36 Reliable King Tiger vs post-war tanks
22:42 Is Challenger 3 worth-while?
23:50 Chieftain's life story(!) and why the move to the US
25:45 Is the use of rubber track blocks vs all-steel related to live vs dead track?
26:15 When were crew ergonomics first seriously considered as a factor?
28:00 Is Sentinel's turret still the worst you've encountered?
28:56 Why is a drone operator on an individual tank a bad idea?
30:35 Does a unit commander's tank's second-in command have autonomy to deal with threats?
32:20 Why is the US Army deleting MGS when other nations have continued operating wheeled cannon vehicles?
33:12 What goes into determining track commonality?
34:14 What music types do you listen to?
34:31 Is Merkava suspension basically Christie?
35:04 Would earlier introduction of serviceable high velocity HEAT have made heavy tanks pointless in WW2?
35:42 Why a fixed hull MG on the T-54?
36:39 Are autocannons better suited for untrained/undertrained crews?
37:38 How do you manage a logistics situation like the Ukraine?
40:47 Are there differences in casualties of men or vehicles between petrol and diesel Shermans?
41:15 Who would, hypothetically, have taken over for the various generals who crash-landed in Ireland had their internment been more than brief?
46:21 Opinion on post-WW2 French tanks?
49:44 Did the Germans consider Panther to be a medium or a heavy tank?
50:17 How has and will the war in the Ukraine affect AA doctrine
52:30 Why was no armored vehicle fitted with the Oldsmobile 37mm from P39?
53:04 Is the platoon or company the main armored fighting element for the US Army?
Links to things.
MoD article on Warfighter. www.army.mod.uk/news-and-even...
Book: www.amazon.com/Can-Openers-De... (Or other retailers)
T-Shirt sales. (Open for a little over 2 weeks, then closed and sent to batch production.)
everpress.com/the-chieftain
That said, if they are showing as 'campaign ended', try these direct links.
Vehicle offends me: everpress.com/remove-it-1-2
Drive me closer: everpress.com/drive-me-closer
The Tank is on Fire: everpress.com/the-tank-is-on-...
Significant Emotional Event: everpress.com/significant-emo...
Emotional Support Missile: everpress.com/emotional-suppo...
T28 Superheavy: everpress.com/27-year-hide-an...
US Generals crash in Ireland: worldoftanks.com/en/news/chie...
ITCH Sentinel: • Inside the Chieftain's...
ITCH Strv m/42: • Inside the Chieftain's...
ITCH A.10: • Inside the Chieftain's...
ITCH Panzer III: • Inside the Chieftain'a...
Armored Assault Company (6-Bradley platoons). • The Armored Assault Co...
Financial donations:
Patreon: / the_chieftain
Direct Paypal: paypal.me/thechieftainshat
Utreon: utreon.com/c/thechieftain
Non-T-Shirt Merchandise
the-chieftains-retail-hatch.c...
Public facebook page:
/ thechieftainarmor
Was the Blackadder quote along the lines of "Field Marshal Haig is about to make yet another gargantuan effort to move his drinks cabinet six inches closer to Berlin."?
That was stated by their G35.
@@TheChieftainsHatch I believe the t shirt link is faulty it's showing all campaigns as ended
@@kylehardman9135 Hmm. I'm not sure what's going on, but I've updated the links directly to the shirts
I came into the middle of a conversation once and the first term I recognized was, "toad frog." I misunderstood the context and added, "I've always felt that the towed FROG is inferior to the self-proprelled FROG."
Free Rocket Over Ground; old, old weapon system.
Obviously the EBR's steel wheels aren't the same as WoT's.
Logistics/NSN story.
I was once temporarily the person in charge of filling out and tracking orders for parts from a maintenance battalion.
One day I got a phone call from a bird colonel asking if I'd filled out ABC form requisitioning XYZ item. After finding my file copy I told him yes. He then asked "why". After a few evasive answers from the colonel I determined he wanted to know why I'd put that specific NSN in the appropriate box on the form. I then dug out the relevant maintenance manual, found the NSN for the part in question, and told him because that's the NSN of the part according to the manual. I was told to "hang on". Several minutes later (I assume after the colonel got a copy of the manual to look at himself) I was told it was a misprint and that was not the NSN of that part.
Needless to say I was curious why a bird colonel was so interested in my attempt to order that NSN and asked. I was told "It costs over $1,000,000 an ounce and you can't have any".
Back when the US telephone system was divided into regional baby Bells, a friend was a consultant for the local company's account payable department. He told me a story, I don't have any reason to doubt him, about an engineer ordering a couple of transformers for a project and was quite surprised when they showed up on two flatbed semis rather than the shoebox sized shipping container he expected.
Apparently, in the 1960s, a Saphire jet engine was sent from the UK to Singapore.
The Royal Signals chap did not get his reel of cable.
What was it that costs so much?
You tried to order relative bearing grease, didn't you...
@@randompanda876 Not a clue.
BUT given a bird colonel was grilling me about why I'd tried to order the item, and "you can't have any" I'd guess plutonium or something similar.
0:00 Intro and news
3:22 German heavy tank doctrine in WW2
5:25 Thoughts on the Israeli Nagmachon
7:15 Why was there a shift in Soviet artillery from towed to self-propelled guns
7:50 Opinion on the AGS
13:20 Steel wheels on wheeled vehicles
14:54 Thermal vision retrofitting
15:26 Room for return of SPAAG
17:30 How good are modern thermal vision
19:03 Modularity of future vehicles
20:04 Considering a second book
20:36 Deception army tactics
21:14 Training for when there is no air superiority
21:36 Reliable King Tiger vs post-war tanks
22:42 Is Challenger 3 worth-while
23:50 Chieftain's life story(!) and why the move to the US
25:45 Track types
26:15 From when was crew ergonomics seriously considered
28:00 Is Sentinel's turret still the worst
28:56 Why is a drone operator on an individual tank a bad idea
30:35 Does the tank second deal with threats for a unit commander
32:20 The army is getting rid of the MGS, why aren't other nations
33:12 What goes into determining track commonality
34:14 What music is enjoyed
34:31 Merkava suspension
35:04 Heavy tanks development vs high-velocity HEAT
35:42 Why a fixed hull MG on the T-54
36:39 Are autocannons more effective to untrained crew
37:38 How do you manage a logistics situation like the Ukraine
40:47 Are there a kill-difference between petrol and diesel Shermans
41:15 Who would, hypothetically, have taken over for Gen. Devers
46:21 Opinion on post-WW2 French tanks
49:44 Was Panther a medium or heavy tank to the Germans
50:17 How has and will the war in the Ukraine affect AA doctrine
52:30 Armored vehicle with the P-39 37mm cannon
53:04 Is the platoon or company the main armored fighting element
Mvp
Thank you so much!
W
Random thing; Whenever someone writes "Greetings all!" I literally always hear it in my head in Chieftains voice. This, of course, is a great thing, because it means the writer automatically seems much friendlier and smarter ;-)
With reference to British officers being on first name basis with each other, I recall reading an article some forty years ago (yes, I'm ancient!) by a US army officer who had been attached to the British army for a tour of duty. Among his observations was that he thought there was a bigger 'gap' between British officers and other ranks than in the US army, possibly due to greater social and class divisions in the UK. But he also noted that within the officer ranks there was a greater sense of equality. Possibly this was also a class thing (officers in those days always being 'one of us'), but also due to the strong regimental nature of the British army. Once someone was commissioned into a regiment, they could spend their entire career (or a large part of it) with that regiment. Serving long-term with the same group, working alongside them, facing the same problems, the same deployments, eating formal dinners together etc all producing very close bonds between the officers. Consequently, first name basis was more appropriate, regardless of the pips and crowns on someone's shoulder. In contrast, the article suggested, officers in the US army would move between units much more frequently, as the needs to the army dictated.
My father’s experience in early 1943 was different. He noticed that US junior officers almost ignored their men and left everything to their NCOs and this included the welfare of the men and supervising the NCOs. Whereas junior British officers were expected to know their men and make their welfare a priority by monitoring their situation and the work of their NCOs. Maybe times have changed. I see it as a USA employment mindset and the British a family one.
If there is a need to quote anyone, Blackadder is a darn good choise.
The russians had a cunning plan for the ukraine. 🙃
Flashhart: "woof!"
choise (sic)
“I have a cunning plan!”
My heartiest contrafibularities to you sir!
Modern FLIR is amazing, even in the consumer range. In the mid-2000s, I was doing physics demos for the university and got to play with a thermal camera which cost $50k. Last month I ordered a 256x192 camera for a couple hundred and it's hands down better than what I used to play with. Not only are the sensors better and affordable, the image processing means you get more out of the same sensor resolution..
Is that 256x192 pixels or millimeters?
@@MrNicoJac Pixels. It's hard to be sure what size the sensor is without taking it apart, but my estimate from the optics it's larger than most cell phone sensors.
As much as I enjoy the technical content of your channel, I think your ability to explain historical events and/or strategy as it applies to armored warfare in ways that the average armchair historian can understand is unmatched. A video you made about the fall of France in 1940 did more to illuminate my understanding of that event than 50 years of reading many different authors. I hope you get the chance to do similar videos about such events as the armored warfare in the Sinai Desert during the Yom Kippur war. You have a an unexcelled ability to explain how it's not just a matter of technical quality, but tactical ability that wins armored engagements, and I encourage you to utilize this talent.
My late Cold War reading on the Soviet shift from towed towards SP artillery was pretty much the same as drove the mechanization of the US Pentomic division - the expectation of fighting WWIII on an NBC battlefield, and the need to protect the crew (and the bits they have to fiddle with) from being slimed. Plus, this way the fires units can better keep up with the armored assault echelons (armored up in self contained APCs, IFVs, and MBTs, in large part to avoid the NBC hellscape that would be Western Europe) smashing their way to Bremerhaven and Cherbourg, as the guns are faster into and out of position when firing missions.
Of course, once you've already decided to encase the gun in metal, well, might as well armor it up against small arms and shell fragments.
The Operational-Maneuver Group concept also played a role. SP was the only way the arty could keep up with the tanks and BMPs in deep operations.
@@jarink1 Yeah, I kinda said that.
"Plus, this way the fires units can better keep up with the armored assault echelons... smashing their way to Bremerhaven and Cherbourg..."
"A compounding effect of maintenance problems would result" A now decades long problem with the US Navy
The damn truth
Feel like all Navies across the world are like this at the moment for sure.
The USN definitely laxed after the fall of Russia. Spent so much money on test toys over putting effective hulls into the water.
Now the age of those hulls is catching up. I'm not even sure if the Ford is worth it to be honest as aircraft make the platform, but that won't show till a few decades from now whether the Ford was a success or not.
I don't hear much about the silent fleet. I suspect they like it that way, haha.
Something to do with Congress arbitrarily ordering the size of the fleet the be held at a certain level even if ships had to be taken out of mothball, and then requiring that the battleships be kept in active service whether they wanted them or could afford them or not?
@@justforever96 You either accept civilian control of the military or not. The Navy is already trying to ignore the law/mandate on the number of amphibious ships. Looking at the LCS, Zumwalt, Ford fiascos, the Bonhomme Richard fire, Fitzgerald accident etc. etc. the Navy hasn't proven itself more capable of determining the number, type and mix of ships or how to run them than members of congress. You have a Navy with a major leadership ethics problem with the Fat Leonard Scandal and 4 of the 5 past CNOs went to work for defense contractors within 18 months of retirement.
"I have a cunning plan..." I see the Blackadder quoting is contagious.
26:00 crew ergo, while I knew about your Hatch series I just recently had the time to watch them all. I was struck, while far from perfect, how the M60 series had damn good ergonomics. Everyone had plenty of room to work and move around. No real strange things hanging about to get in the way, I am 6'2. The M60 turret had enough room for the whole crew including the driver to hang out in, drink coffee and talk about our up coming day. It amazes me even newer designed tanks have such crappy ergo that just added to the stress of doing your job. Side bar, love the bloopers and such, it's nice to see the Tanker come out. I still have issues in polite company.
As much as I love watching you jam yourself into tanks, these Q&As are just SO educational.
Nagmachon and Nakpadon - were used mostly for armoured border patrols (used mostly in the Lebanon border), they were not meant for combat assaults' duties (that's why the silhloete is high) - Achzarit was used for combat troop transport and puma was used for combat engineer squad carry
Its more aking to a moving pillbox than an APC
@30:35
TC:"Driver move out!"
AI DVR: "I'm sorry Dave, but I can't do that."
This is why Baldermort's Servitor driver is the way to go.
Towed artillery is not NBC safe and with soviet doctrine of fighting on a battlefield "cleaned" by use of tactical nukes the hiding personnel under armour with filtered air support was considered important.
Not so much because of the nukes but because of chemical weapons... While it technically would be possible for the artillery crews to operate suited up, doing so REALLY sucks, and greatly reduces their ability to operate.
@@jnievele It was the whole CBN ickyiness that was to be avoided. Enclosed vehicles carry a degree of blast/flash/rad protection that towed guns do not. Its RIP to a towed battery that gets caught not dug deeply in, suited up or not.
26:30 first tank that comes to mind about crew ergonomics was the M3 Lee/Grant with the british getting several redesigns to the internal space to improve crew comfort and allow for a radio man, as well as ditching the ridiculous hull mounted machineguns
it probably was taken into consideration on prewar designs but the M3 is the first war design where they actually cared about the crew's ability to run the tank long periods of time and then the M4 was designed with a lot of those lessons in mind
The M3 Medium had a radioman, the British removed him and moved the radios to the turret, which is what the extra space was for. They didn't give the turret crew more space, in fact they just gave them another thing to do. The hull machine guns weren't making anyone uncomfortable, they were just useless, and they didn't change anything in the hull. It would be pretty weird if the British, who made most of the most miserably uncomfortable and unergonomic tanks (and aircraft, British controls and crew positions were a running joke to Americans, because they literally just threw whatever wherever it fit on the first try and said "ryght, good show old chaps, now off for a spot o' tay", while the American aircraft makers spent weeks mocking up cockpits and testing them) of the war actually went out of their way to make the tank they got from America more comfy for the crew. They built Comet after this. They built the Firefly after this, after the US summarily rejected the concept as to cramped and uncomfortable to fight in. Hell even American carriers and submarines are huge and spacious compared to British ones, and all US ships amazed the British sailors with the "luxury accommodations" and food compared to the cramped misery and terrible food of British vessels. So sorry, no I don't buy that the British figured out ergonomics and showed the US how to build the M4 Medium. Unless they learned and then completely forgot their lesson in record time.
The M3 Medium was already quite spacious and roomy for a tank, the most uncomfortable positions were related to the 75mm which was added on as an afterthought. The turret was quite roomy for a 2 man turret, especially when they only had to load 37mm shells.
Speaking of Soviet artillery, towed vs self-propelled. There wasn't a shift from one to another really. All the way to the end of USSR, every mass produced SPG had towed 'sibling', ending with Msta-B (towed) and Msta-S (SPG), Hyacinth-B and -S and then prototypes Pat-B and -S. And where numbers are known, towed variants were produced in larger numbers. So apparently, Soviet theorists still saw great value in towed artillery even in late 80s.
In Hebrew-language discourse on heavy APCs (they're very important to doctrine) the Kangaroo is indeed considered the first of the type.
The stated doctrinal purpose of the Namer in high-intensity warfare is as as a specialist vehicle - getting combat engineers, medics, and sustainers into and out of high threat environments. Most of the vehicles are variants for those purposes, plus command vehicles and some ARVs built on the platform. Only two brigades are equipped with the Infantry Namer, and they do a lot of urban combat these days.
(For the bulk of the force, the IDF is phasing in a light wheeled APC, for ease of strategic movement between regions within the country).
Side note: the ch in Nagmachon is pronounced as a German ch.
Well that was super interesting. Thank you. What threat is great enough to kill an AFV but not an old tank? I was thinking IEDs but armored from the front and sides is not the same as armored from above and below. I don't know how resistant those old tank hulls are to the anti-tank options arrayed against Israel.
Is the idea, we have the hulls, might as well use them still a factor?
As the vehicles got heavier with each iteration, it started reaching the limits of what was possible with the Centurion hull while maintaining good mobility. Wear and tear on the tracks, road wheels, sprockets, etc
@@iivin4233 for the high-intensity conflict case, it's opposing tank fire - Merkava's armor is quite a bit better than a T-62 or Centurion. Even for low-intensity stuff, Israel comes up against fairly recent ATGMs quite often.
Plus Merkava is just an easier platform to build an APC on, with the engine already up front out of the way. That and parts commonality.
Another great segment- keep up the work 👍
I found it indeed very Interesting and Informative, thank you good Sir!
Took part in two TEWTs during the late 80s, after completing an Intelligence cadre. I was given the right flank of 8 Tanks Guard Army to play with while my CO and Bn head shed wargamed their responses, with support from Yeomanry and air assets. Brilliant fun!
Huzzah for the donkey wallopers!
Good to see you back here. Missed your talks
"i have a cunning plan" 😅
As cunning as a fox that became an Oxford professor?
Baldrick has been unleashed. 😅
Been looking forward to this . Thank you Colonel .
Thank you for your service, Chieftain!
Excellent Q&A, you are the Perun of Tankers!
“More money, better weather, bigger guns!” I love it!!!
A bit too American if you ask me
Back when California actually could make you more money.
Okay you can still make pretty good money, you just have to spend and pay it all in taxes. You couldn't pay me enough to live in California.
I will always be willing to listen to anything you have to say about tracks!
Good to see you!
Really great as always! Thanks!
I love Nicholas's clear, matter-of-fact, assessments of often complicated issues. The Pentagon should give him an award for helping us taxpayers understand military procurement decisions and tactical doctrine.
I doubt the Pentagon wants us understanding what they are doing. Maybe "understanding" "what they are doing". But not really understanding.
Of course we will have two man crew.
Just as soon as the hovertank and powergun is figured out.
And find Alois Hammer
If it is ever made, the USA will field them first.
Slammers forever
And the baby fusion reactor to power the beast.
Thanks Nick
Welcome back, sir. Hope you are doing well, I'd be better if they give me back my hours.
Great stuff
It is a little known fact that under Queens Regulations all British Officers must be able to quote extensively from Blackadder.
Kings Regulations Now!
*Ackshually* it's "King's Regulations" now... why do I suddenly hear guns cocking?
What about Monty Python?
Too silly?
Thanks very much, sir. I did indeed find it interesting and informative. My late father worked on thermal imaging, so I was particularly interested by your answers to the questions concernen with that.
Having people outside of the tank control the drones is probably best because they typically have better field of vision and hearing than people instead of a tank. And modern drones can drop grenades, etc really more of an infantry task.
The flying heritage and armor museum is back open in Everett WA and I had the Chieftain echoing in my head as we watched a Stuart driving demonstration as I looked for track tensioning
I was scared the museum was gonna go poof when it was bought by Steuart Walton, but thankfully, they decided to keep it here. I still remember my first time going for an aviation day and doing a double take when i saw the Komet on display.
Funny how car radios are still a thing. In this age of techno tomfoolery. I still just go with radio in the car. Cheers for the vid Chieftain.
They only play crap. And the DJs are so annoying,I can't. We have a couple classical stations in the region but the mountains limit the reception, so it's hard to listen to one station for more than 20 miles. And there is so much good music on like CZcams, I just go for that. Stuff from all over the world, you can educate yourself in music, for free.
I have the same exact problem! I don't want to stand in the back when group photos anymore!
You want some sort guy to stand behind you and not be seen at all? Or like make them stand on step stools so you can get full frontal for once? Seems reasonable.
Can’t wait for the tracks one😄
Thanks for another fact-filled, esoteric adventure into the world of military minutia.
Thank you for sharing
🤗🙏🏆🇺🇲
An anecdote relating to the General Devers question. My Dad grew up in Southern Ireland during WWII, being in his early to mid teens. His statement regarding interred combatants was along the lines of, "even by Irish standards, the security around allied internees was remarkably lax. Not so much around axis internees."
HA! I remember that snowstorm in Raleigh quite well. The most snow we ever got, and we were out of school for two weeks straight.
Glad I was a lowly 11B10 '80 - '83 and was in 172nd Brigade Alaska. We didn't have armor. This tank stuff is too complicated for me. Though I like to listen to LTC talk about it.
What a great aloha shirt, the designs look like Siapo!
Damn a general quoting black adder, that's really neat. So long as they're not explicitly quoting Melchett.
Not sure why they wouldn't. Generals are just humans. Most of them act normal enough around friends and family, and the informal approach has become popular all through society.
Looking forward to a better understanding of tracks!
That question on Ukraine logistics was great and yes it's going to be an interesting read once it all ends
Black Adder on of the best UK 1980's Sit-coms
You had me at "Black Adder"...
The question of general replacability *does* bring up an idea for a new question: Who would be *the least* replaceable general in that time period (defined to be as either the actual hardest to seek a replacement for *or* the most impactful, whichever is greater), and crucially why?
I honestly don't know if I can answer that
Just ordered your book today.
Thank you. Hope you find it interesting and informative!
@@TheChieftainsHatch I'm sure I will. Can't wait!
I have many thoughts about these drones.
Would a tethered drone not give away a tank by being an object flying above it?
Regardless, I don't think the tether needs to be physical. It can be as simple as the drone firing a laser/maser at a receptor or reflector on the tank, or as complex as software in the drone that recognizes its mother tank and knows how remain above it.
Rotars can be less efficient than wings or simple helium, so it might be better from an engineering standpoint for the drone to have the ability to know where it is rather than to installing a gimbal and software on the tank so that the tank can know where the drone is.
Plus, firing a laser into the air might be a great way to guide missiles onto the tank.
Then again, a future tank might have drone tracking sensors anyway.
So tank/drone pairing makes sense, and here's more. Could a paired drone not also spoof radar, IR or even visual returns to misdirect missiles? A sufficiently advanced drone might carry active protection itself, or, though this seems unlikely, be able to "look out, sir!" an incoming missile.
However, if I have to husband the resources of drone procurement, I think I agree with Col. Moran that the drones should be piloted by a dedicated crew member in a separate position.
I can see multiple ways to do this, and I don't know which way is best.
You could treat the drone operator as a crew member. They are one specific tank's extra eyes. Depending on how good drone operators end up being as being eyes, they might be given the ability to slew the gun, or commanders might be given the ability to "slew" the drone as Col. Moran suggests.
Instead, you might roll drones into their own platoon, company, battalion. Let these units of specialists focus on keeping the drones maintained, airspace clear of enemy drones and counter-drones, and its intelligence clean. You could let unit commanders or even TCs patch into the "cloud" of drones to get better views. It's probably easier to let the drone cloud's contribution to a TC's decision making be it's constant updating of the digital battle map.
There are many...fun? options with the above setup:
You can send little messages to tank gunners.
"Drone cloud is 95% sure target is enemy tank."
"Enemy AFV breakdown ahead. You are still on the fastest route. Is it still there? Click yes or no."
"CO says/Command says/The President says definitely shoot at the targeted object. They accept the consequences."
Taking the task of ID-ing mostly out of a tank crew's hands makes some sense. I don't know if it is any ethically different from directing artillery to fire at what its crew can't see.
That being said, spoofing and jamming are concerns. To counter this it might be best to organize drones into a separate branch. You could have an Army Drone Corp. whose purpose is to dominate the information space with and for drones.
In this case, you could get an additional message appearing on your battle map: "[Drone Corp. Says] This grid square is not secure. Do not trust friendly/enemy locations marked in this grid square."
I'd love to know what anyone else thinks.
In the case of a tether, you want it to be physical so that you are not emitting any signals from your tank.
Good radio direction finding will have a large boom headed your way in seconds. May take 2 minutes to arrive, but they know where you are within seconds of transmitting.
@@ScottKenny1978 your RDF is going to have to be close. The small UAVs are up in the 5ghz bands. Essentially the same as a WiFi signal. How far away could an RDF unit even detect a couple watts? Background clutter will be a problem as your own side is probably emitting oodles of wifi signals.
It's a silly idea anyway. Give the company its own UAV platoon and just share the data among the vehicles. Have a function in your Blue Force tracker for the TCs to request spotting.
I did some work with this kind of stuff in AFG. Every vehicle with a drone would be madness unless you had a very very smart drone that go out and hunt for threats in a general area and quickly share the pertinent info back to the crew.
I hope you were given lots and lots of tea.
35:46 Fixed MG in T-54. I also wondert about this an said as much in one if my Videos. I then got a comment from an ex NVA (East German Army) Tanker. He claimed that they were used tu supress troops in trenches and fire at vision slits of Bunkers. And he also wrote that you could actually hit those targets quite well with the tank. I thought that was interesting, but I am still quite a bit sceptical.
I would be extremely skeptical. Not least, the drivers job is supposed to be providing a stable platform for the turret crew, not throwing the tank around trying to hit things
In '71 I was in the 8/1 Air Cav Squadron at Ft Knox. One of our missions was supporting the Armor School, doing all kinds of activities, using our mortars to simulate live artillery, setting up the 106 recoilless to turn stacked ammo boxes behind them into splinters, and demonstrating
infantry insertions from the Hueys, tho none of us were actually 11B, I suppose some of us 11Ds would have actually done this in Nam, since most reconnaissance missions were carried out by full infantry platoons rather than the 6 man sections we trained with.
Another was supplying runners for their wargaming, at that time being done on a huge map table, the type you see in the Battle of Brittan movies. Learned to run a switchboard for the field telephones along with delivering messages by hand. I remember overhearing a discussion between a couple of Captain students about what kind of medal citations they should write up for themselves.
Next year, when I started a tour with an armored battalion in Bamberg, I admitted to knowing how to type, so I spent a couple of months as the S2 clerk. Very surprised to see one of those Captains was the S1, am sure he didn't remember me. Small army.
3/35 What years?
@@raybrindos4514 '72-74, CSC Company. I take it that you are another Gate 2 1/2 user?
Ordered a couple T-shirts with literal less than a minute of time left 😂 Got the T-28 Hide and Seek one and the “Oh Bugger, the tank is on fire”. Wanted to the significant emotional event one but decided paying $40 with shipping for a white T-shirt to get stained wasn’t worth it. Looking forward to them coming in
14:51
I would like to shake the hands of the PFC that managed to pull that off.
A group of generals should be a “galaxy” due to the number of stars? Worth noting the collection of stars on the US flag are officially the “constellation” (hence the ships by that name). I'd argue that term should be used for US senior officers over Galaxy.
Fun (and treacherous if you're on staff duty or gate guard) fact: A group of multiple female officers is to be addressed as "Ladies" as you salute and issue the standard greeting of the day.
The trick is trying to successfully explain this actual fact of military custom and courtesy to a fire team of enraged female colonels about to deliver you some wall-to-wall counseling for exercising said courtesy.
@@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing how many times did they bounce you off the concrete before you got someone to explain what they were objecting to?
@@ScottKenny1978 There actually was a Sergeant Major called over to get involved, and SHE confirmed it for the officers. But it was agreed that, as a best practice, just say good morning and address it to the highest rank you see, even if it sounds like you're ignoring the ranks of the rest of the gaggle. Which is an appropriate term for a group of bird colonels.
@@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing yeah, "gaggle" sounds like the appropriate collective noun for a bunch of birds.
Because they'd object to "short bus"! 🤣
The catch is that any given officer can have up to 4 stars, which makes them a constellation all by themselves.
The astronomical term would be "cluster," but I think we all know how well that would be taken.
An bit of trivia about the 37mm aircraft cannon. Some PT boats did scrap it from aircraft and mount it on their ships. Apparently the boost in firepower was appreciated enough that they started to factory mount them later in the war.
There is also at least one photograph that I have seen of an LVT with the 37mm from a P39 mounted on it.
The factory installed 37mm on the PT boats was the M9. That was derived from the Army 37mm AA gun. Much larger and more powerful cartridge than the M4.
On the logistics side for vehicles it looks so far like the Ukrainians are dividing units up by national origin of equipment, so one battlegroup using all Scandinavian equipment, one using all Polish supplied, one German, one Anglo/French etc...
For small arms its more ad-hoc, you have a common pool at a supply depot and the soldiers just take whatever they fancy, trading in the rifle you have for what they have available ammunition for or what's perceived an upgrade, anti-tank missiles for example there were no attempts to issue different units different equipment and you could see a single squad carrying half a dozen different systems.
54:30 2016, checks out, hope we can train like this considering the near-peer threat evisaged in Army 2030.
I will say, the type 16 *does* have the same limitations, it just got around those buy having the entire armor package able to be removed and transported on a differnt vehicle. But it also had the advantage of being a hell of a lot newer so you know, you can forgive the MGS that
On the Ukraine style logistics situation, on a small scale back 8n WW2 the British Home Guard dealt with the mix of USA small arms and UK ones by making each Company either 0.300” with P14s and US Lewis, BAR or Browning MMG or otherwise 0.303” UK SMLE and UK Lewis, Bren and Vickers MMG. So one ordered either 0.300” or 0.303” but not a mix.
Regarding drone defense, it's pretty surprising we haven't seen a resurgence of 40mm bofors with VT shells and the like. Would seem the perfect tool for the job, and not exactly brand new technology. Certainly easier to feed a bofors with VT shells than 30/35mms as well.
Not enough standoff range to deal with glide bombs. The US Army is going to 50x319mm (same overall length as Bofors L70) with a guided shell for CRAM work, and I expect it to get bought in large enough numbers to use for drones as well.
40mm before is a very large and heavy weapon. It's also clip fed with a relatively low rate of fire
Learned a lot from these war games.
Big thing don’t expect anything but HE from artillery.
Don’t ask for anything fancy.
Aka flatten this square to this square and have fun lmao
You can expect Smoke and Illum . Ex Mortarman.
Very interesting!
Your last response generate a new question: how had the numbers changed in time/army and why?
I'm not sure I understand the question, can you elaborate?
@@TheChieftainsHatch Sure. How much variation exist in the number of tanks in one platoon between different armies? How much/often has this changed between 1916 and today, and why?
15:26 another realistic stopgap solution is the MANTIS or Skyranger 35. They are firing magnetically programmed (when exiting the barrel) burst munitions
My Son was on the same Exercise (from Fort Bragg), the GOC chatted to him one to one for 20 minutes.
While we all know by now that affairs out east do not represent the "death of the tank" despite the hubbub some still make, do you suspect it might represent any change in the way we think about tank design, features, or operation (ie, reduced emphasis on armor protection to ease logistical requirements)? Or, as with so many other aspects of the war, has it just served to confirm what was already known?
Hi everybody! Hi Col. Nick!
I have a question regarding M1s and modern tanks in general:
I have seen Australian M1A1s with fridges located on the bustle rack. These seem to be purpose made for the job, but outside of the land down under, I have not seen examples of such kit (I imagine having a small fridge or at least a cooler for water would have been a handy thing to have in hot conditions). Do you know any examples of tanks with built-in or otherwise purpose built kitchen appliances? Is it possible to connect a fairly regular fridge to a tank's power supply?
Thanks in advance!
In terms of logistics I imagine it would also be good to make sure that people with previous service and knowledge of Soviet era equipment get trained on how to service Western equipment too, as the result would be someone who knows how to maintain both. Assuming that a large proportion of the army has experience with maintaining older weapons systems in the first place, which are also likely to be replaced postwar and are fairly simple to maintain anyways means that you really only need to focus on training how to maintain the new stuff.
FUN FACT: the "Dukes of Hazzard" was recorded in California.
Fun fact 2
First 5 episodes were shot in Georgia!!
@@jeffhawley2441 Thanks for clarifying! The episodes I remember looked like southern California (I grew up in GA).
The big news here was the "Army bus architecture standard" is the best news I've heard in a LONG while.... I suspect, however, they're going to need to specify it in such a way that it can eventually be replaced or upgraded... or they're going to get a standard that obsoletes itself in five to ten years.
Piggy-backing on the answer regarding unit COs as TCs, and having more autonomy in a commander's crew; my unit in Desert Shield/Storm/Sabre (C 1/3 ACR), our troop CO had an E-5 gunner and an E-6 loader, and the CO left much of the TC job to his loader during firefights. In addition, as the loader on the platoon leader's tank, our LT handed over the tank fighting to me such that I was TCing (as an E-4) for the gunner (an E-5) and driver (another E-4) during firefights as well, especially at ar Rumaylah airfield. As noted, this does tend to be a bit idiosyncratic rather than dogmatic or doctrinal. Since the loader does not have a primary sight extension, it can be a PITA to do target scanning and shot locating with binoculars, but we made it work.
This does highlight an underlying truth about the US military's (as well as those of other nations) reliance on low-level leadership and personal initiative-in or out of combat. It can be fatal to wait for explicit "permission" to react to a threatening situation, so the US expects its soldiers, and especially NCOs and junior officers, to not necessarily wait for it. Understanding the missions, the overall objectives, and taking personal initiative to react to situations that require action even in the absence of explicit orders (and sometimes even contravening explicit orders, when the circumstance calls for it) is expected in the US military, and this extends to having trust in one's tank crew when a soldier with dual responsibilities-such as a platoon leader or company/battalion/squadron CO/XO, etc.-needs to attend to higher-order issues than personally conducting the fighting of their tank.
Nobody asked me, but it would seem to make sense for the armored assaults company Brad PL to be a warrant officer, promoted from highly experienced NCOs.
I just recently watched your video on US armour doctrine WW2 videos. In my opinion, the battle between horse Vs truck has many parallel with arguments between human soldier Vs drone soldiers. Does making those videos give you any pause on whether robot soldiers will eventually replace human soldiers just like trucks replaced horses.
If my unit ever gets Stryker M1135 CBRN RV, would you do a video on it. You could swing by Camp Ripley and look at the M4 Jumbo.
T54 hull mg, I recall it was intended to be remote controlled. I would say giving the usual Soviet style the hull mg was slammed on since they didn't want to only have one mg but could get the remote mg to work well enough so they put the hull mg in. My best guess all.
As a palestinian the IDF heavy APC's are meant more for 360 protection against small arms/ improvised mini explosives and vision rather than protected dismount as in most cases the dismount area is already secured by some undercover elements
(I was a Mech Infantry rifle platoon leader on active duty, and a tank company Executive Officer in the TXNG.) Concerning 4-vehicle (U.S.) versus 3-vehicle (pretty much everybody else), I wonder if the difference is the professional (lifer) non-commissioned officers which the U.S. relies on in a way few other nations (Warsaw Pact / Russia) do (or did?). The 3-vehicle platoon plays follow-the-leader and guides on the P.L. The 4 (or in my day, 5) vehicle platoon works in sections with the platoon sergeant commanding the smaller section ( or second pair, wingman concept). As to the six Bradley I.F.V.'s in a platoon. Glory halleluiah ! The U.S. Army finally thought to count seats in a Bradley... I had four M-113A1's and three squads; plenty of room for extra people. Considering how often we had a vehicle down for maintenance in peace-time, or under-strength in people, I always want TO&E of 4 vehicles in a platoon, and 4 soldiers in a tank.
Great to see a video from you again! One question I have regarding modern Western MBTs The war in Ukraine has shown how effective the 125mm HEFRAG rounds are for the Soviet-designed guns, and also, how adaptable the Soviet era MBT is for indirect fire support. Is there anything in the US, French, British or German MBT field manuals that applies to using Abrams, Challenger Leopard or LeClerc in an indirect fire role?
Seems to be a waste of a tank. If you have to resort to using tanks as self propelled artillery, you have bigger problems to worry about.
I mean, it is a gun tube, and it does fire HE, so *in a pinch* it works, but doing so means increased wear on your tank barrels (which makes them less effective over time until the barrel is replaced/relined). I would presume that there is some method for doing so, but that it is heavily discouraged unless circumstances require it.
Yes
We've been doing it since WW2. Deflection set by the tank's Azimuth Indicator, Elevation set by using a Gunner's Quadrant. czcams.com/video/81BWmO2QEL0/video.html
@@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh It wasn't a waste in WWII when whole companies or squadrons, or even regiments of M4 Mediums were lined up to provide indirect fires to support an operation. This trend continued in Korea with M26 being used in a similar role as well. This was when there were plenty of artillery tubes available. This is also the case with one army that had overmatched NATO with tube artillery. My question is, is this still something that is trained for in NATO MBT formations?
Can we have time stamps? I would love to start with the AMX and then savour the rest :)
46:21
See new post.
@@mooneyes2k478 What?
As to hull mounted machine guns - it's my understanding - that there were some tank drivers in Vietnam that had a mount for an M-60 welded to the front of their tank - which they could at least fire remotely. No idea if that worked out well or not.
.
I was wondering if you can do a video on the coolest light tank ever. The M50 Ontos
On the topic of SPAAG return I would say. That Rheinmetall's skyranger uses the same tempier able 30 mm solution as the 30mm gun from the Puma ifw so so when used skyranger on a boxer chassis it is practicly that but I would wonder if there arnt Plans to Put the 4 Radar pannels on Puma ifw to use the common gun also in Air defence Mode.
Woo Sentinel! We’re not the worst!
Could you recommend any good tank model kits in the mid skill-level range? (Preferably models that look ok without paint)
Any particular manufacturers that make consistent quality kits?
Or if you’ve already talked about this in a previous video, where can I find it?
Also to add as a sidenote for return of SPAAG, the experiences with 30mm in Ukraine in general show that the more platforms you can slap it on to, the better off you are as long as logistics can survive the consumption of ammunition. Overwhelming firepower a single 30mm can provide compared to 50cal and under is noticeable difference.
Is there anywhere that documents the many different variants of Armored Vehicle "Test Articles" and "Standardized"? For example, what were the Heavy Tank T2 through T13 and T15 through T25? Or Heavy Tank M2 through M5 (with Heavy Tank M1 possibly being a design that didn't get a T#)?
There may be, but I don't recall ever seeing one
At least the T23 turret ended up on the late M-4s.
Regarding the idea that some people are considering 2-man tanks with AI helping with the information processing: didn't Sweden have some experiences that taught them that 3 men were the minimum crew to prevent psychological/social issues within the crew? I seem to remember that from a video on the development of the S-Tank from the Swedish Tank Museum (I think it was from them but I could be wrong). As someone who has served in tanks and IFVs in action, do you think that the idea of such issues within small crews has merit?
I also remember that bit from an S-Tank video, but I seem to remember it from The Chieftain's video on it (can't remember if personal video or a WoT Inside the Hatch).
Not to mention maintenance requirements, lots of work to do for three guys, even more with 2.
Re: thermal imagers at 17:30, how are they not using sensor fusion at this point? You can buy thermals that work with daytime tv and NV cameras that can overlay thermal imagery.
Good evening... Bob...
Woof?
@@TheChieftainsHatch 'Yeah, I dumped the kite on the proles, so send a car. General Melchett’s driver should do. She hangs around with the big nobs, so she’ll be used to a fellow like me! Woof, woof!'
Damn, they don't make TV like they used too, good times. :D