British Army to possess most lethal tank in Europe

Have a look at how many the Turks lost.
Yes, but they were the down-graded export variant, sold to non-EU customers.

Oh, wait...
 
Wasn't a major factor in that lack of Infantry support?
1620554424822.png


Plus ca change, as the Germans would say.
 
We will own the "most lethal tank in Europe".... nothing like telling the owners of the most lethal tank in Europe that the SAS are coming to make their job easier.
 
But surely the first mission is defence of these islands and I'd be surprised if you could argue that the BA is in any shape or form ready or configured for this primary task?
Projecting hard power across the channel IS defence of these islands.

Would you rather have the pitched battle in Kent, or somewhere the other side of the Channel? Or not at all because our likely adversaries know that they wouldn't get to the Channel in the first place.
 
I presume that 148 tanks will equip three armoured regiments at about 45 per regiment? Not many reserves though. The Krauts have seven battalions of Leopard 2A7s (or six-and-a-bit depending on source) and the Frogs four regiments of Leclercs (for all my mind wanders towards an armoured Citroen it's supposed to be OK for a thirty-year-old vehicle). Once again our politicians are going for the cheap alternative.
 

Dwarf

LE

Saw this yesterday, and what struck me was the waffle the minister was coming out with. When it was pointed out that a few years ago the Army had 900 tanks (?) he looked panicky and said the usual face saver of how much more lethal this tank is. It doesn't take into account the fact that the other side will have tanks that are more lethal than they were a few years ago.
He also mentioned future deployments and seems he is thinking of limited excursions and as usual a potential resurgent Russia seems to play no part in this.

The usual, run down the Army to save money, when a crisis comes we will not be in office and can't be blamed for the failure.

Nice tank, arrseholes of politicians, as always.


ed for typos.
 
Last edited:
Projecting hard power across the channel IS defence of these islands.

Would you rather have the pitched battle in Kent, or somewhere the other side of the Channel? Or not at all because our likely adversaries know that they wouldn't get to the Channel in the first place.

neither, Trident ensures no ones invading Kent anytime soon.
 
The British Army is getting the Army it deserves.

it did nothing, precisely zero, to come up with a viable vision for what it wants to be, and a costed and realistic equipment plan to get there in the last 10 years.

instead, it’s lived in a fantasy land of powerpoint armies, swanning majestically across Europe and the Sahel smitting all and sundry, while it experienced block obsolescence of whole capabilities, and its existing equipment plans became ever more disasterous.

the Chickens have come home to roost - the civilians DID come and sort them out.
 
I presume that 148 tanks will equip three armoured regiments at about 45 per regiment? Not many reserves though. The Krauts have seven battalions of Leopard 2A7s (or six-and-a-bit depending on source) and the Frogs four regiments of Leclercs (for all my mind wanders towards an armoured Citroen it's supposed to be OK for a thirty-year-old vehicle). Once again our politicians are going for the cheap alternative.

A current CR2 regiment is a "Type 56" which unsurprisingly means it comprises 56 tanks. There are 3 such regiments in the regular Army, if we assume one more could be constituted from the Yeomanry that would be 4 regiments, 224 tanks in total, which was just about possible from the 227 CR2's owned, including a regiment's worth on the training area in Canada, and assuming that the half of them in storage haven't been cannibalised for parts already. Deploying even an armoured brigade would be a massive undertaking that I don't believe the Army could do without at least a year's notice, probably 2. An armoured division would probably require 10-15 years notice and a vast investment, assuming the people could be recruited to man it!

So 148 CR3's would give you 3 "Type 49" regiments with one spare (!) or keep 2 type 56's and shrink one to a "Type 36". No idea how the Army will actually play it, but shrinking the manning and kit in order to preserve a unit on-paper with its all-important capbadge is perfectly normal these days...
 
neither, Trident ensures no ones invading Kent anytime soon.
You think Trident alone would stop our likely adversaries from reaching the Portuguese coast? How would we fare with Trident alone when we were staring at the hordes across the Straight of Dover?

Should we let our adversaries do what they like in the sub-nuclear threshold world? Where do we draw the red line? Poland? Berlin? Paris? London? Do you think a Labour PM would press the button?
 
The British Army is getting the Army it deserves.

it did nothing, precisely zero, to come up with a viable vision for what it wants to be, and a costed and realistic equipment plan to get there in the last 10 years.

instead, it’s lived in a fantasy land of powerpoint armies, swanning majestically across Europe and the Sahel smitting all and sundry, while it experienced block obsolescence of whole capabilities, and its existing equipment plans became ever more disasterous.

the Chickens have come home to roost - the civilians DID come and sort them out.
Any more generalisms you would like to trot out? The Army doesn't own the big equipment programs. I think you'll find they are politically led. Do you think we would chose what we get if given a choice?
 
Just for the sake of clarity.

When the MoD say “the most lethal Tank in Europe”

We have checked that they mean to the enemy, rather than the crew, haven’t we?

I mean, we know how the MoD aren’t always the best at writing contract specifications for equipment...l
 

Daxx

MIA
Book Reviewer
148? I bet the Russian Tank Reginents are shaking with fear.

They have 2300 of these


1620574173657.png
 

Latest Threads

Top