Are Tanks and Armored Vehicles Obsolete

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
8,704
Location
Atlanta,GA
My aunt was the same about Japanese products in general. This was in the mid-'70s, so 30 years after the end of the war. Insisted her husband buy Brit cars, which were problematic. I asked her why not a Toyota, and she said that the Japanese had done very bad things during the war. With the lack of tact of a teenager, I asked if the British firebombing of Dresden very late in the war had been OK.

My sister married a very good Japanese-Canadian man from a very loving family. Our aunt did attend, and I hope was OK with it.
ROFL..No sir throwing that back at her was pure gold.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
3,915
Location
Richmond, VA
They followed that up with a threat about $300 per barrel of oil.

Not understanding why Krazy Ivan and Company is doing this to itself..



My Grandfather when he was still alive, WW2 Army Combat Vet. Refused to buy anything Mitsubishi for their manufacture of the Zero.
My grandpa was the exact same, only he expanded it to anything made in Japan. When he saw that my 82 Plymouth had a Mitsu engine he mumbled something and walked away. He served in the USN in WW2 and they had a couple of run ins with zeros, so cannot really blame him.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Messages
9,523
Location
Marshfield , MA
Early on, people were fairly blase about nuclear weapons. The US Army had nuclear artillery shells in W Germany to deter Soviet Tanks or was discussing it in the early 50s. No doubt the Soviets had them too. Putin inherited them. Regardless of how the Sovs kept them in shape. What kind of shape are they in now? There was skimming going on in USSR bigtime. Since '89 they have been a kleptocracy, which is openly skimming anywhere it can.
What Ukraine needs ASAP is an American Volunteer Group. Mercenaries flying p-40s for Chiang Kai Shek. How many retired A 10 pilots could be raised to fly for Zylenskyy?
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
3,915
Location
Richmond, VA
At that point (August 1945), 500 Americans were still dying per day in the Pacific.

It's easy to criticise HST now, but at the time he faced quite the moral dilemma.
The estimates for making a landing in Japan were approx 1 million American men, my opinion is Harry didn't have any choice but to try and end the war with the smallest loss of American lives.
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
3,492
Location
Winnipeg MB CA
ROFL..No sir throwing that back at her was pure gold.
Thanks! In a way I was right, but she was a good and kind woman who had lived through WWII, and there was no way I was going to change her mind. I could have argued much more graciously.

After the final Brit car (a Ford Cortina), they bought a Mercury Comet which served them well. After her husband died, she learned to drive at 72. She thought it was hilarious that her lessons were through YDC (Young Drivers of Canada).
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
3,492
Location
Winnipeg MB CA
The estimates for making a landing in Japan were approx 1 million American men, my opinion is Harry didn't have any choice but to try and end the war with the smallest loss of American lives.
Besides the Allied soldiers, the casualties were projected to include some 10M Japanese, most of them civilians. If unconditional surrender was not negotiable, then the use of the A-bombs was probably the most humane option. Best might have been a negotiated face-saving truce.

And yet, General MacArthur's reforms during the postwar occupation transformed Japan in many good ways. For many years he was very well regarded, even revered, in Japan.
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
3,492
Location
Winnipeg MB CA
ROFL..No sir throwing that back at her was pure gold.
The other thing was I think she had had been very traumatized by how the Canadian Hong Kong POWs had been treated. I wonder if there had been a personal connection there.

That entire generation on my mother's side is gone now, so I'll never know.
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
3,492
Location
Winnipeg MB CA
My grandpa was the exact same, only he expanded it to anything made in Japan. When he saw that my 82 Plymouth had a Mitsu engine he mumbled something and walked away. He served in the USN in WW2 and they had a couple of run ins with zeros, so cannot really blame him.
Understandable, but on the flip side, I've heard that some members of the postwar occupation army were enamoured with the small nimble Japanese vehicles, and brought them back to the States, and we know what that led to. Fact or fiction?
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
3,492
Location
Winnipeg MB CA
A lot of that book seems fiction, if memory serves only 1-2 Tiger were destroyed in all of Kursk and the soviets claimed more tigers destroyed than existed on the entire front.
Yet Soviet commanders told Stalin "the tigers are burning!" and invented all sorts of german losses to cover up the tremendous losses of their own.

The battle of Kursk is a lot more nuanced than simply repackaging the soviet propaganda of its day.
At the key battle of Prokhorovka, the Soviets lost 550 of 850 tanks of all types while the Germans lost about 50 of 300.
I didn't know that!

Before reading the book a few years ago, I'd assumed that the German tanks were superior, but were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of Soviet tanks.

I took Caidin at face value because I'd always considered his military history writing excellent. Also, because the book came out during the Cold War, I figured if anything he would have been biased against the Soviets.

He also included a lot of technical comparisons of the respective design philosophies and implementation, which I took as fact.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,049
Location
down in the park
The Russians have few, if any, PGMs left. So they must drop dumb bombs from low altitude to be accurate. That puts them right into the Stinger's envelope. Plus, I doubt their countermeasures are very good. On top of that, their training is lax. You probably have undertrained pilots putting themselves into bad situations that make the Stinger even more effective.

As for armor, it isn't very good in tight urban areas where they can't maneuver. They also appear not to support the armor very well with infantry, as has been said.

Finally, let's face it. The Russian military is very good at brutality. But not very good as a professional force. They don't train enough and they don't have the best equipment, or even ammo, and their tactics appear to be well known by the Ukranians. I think the US Army would have shown much better in this kind of combat and I think we'd have a different view of the survivability and proper, effective utilization of armor.

The latest info is the russians are flying around 200 fixed wing sorties a day (up from 50-60), but staying in russian airspace and firing long range weapons from there. Those are PGM's.

Ukrainians are flying around 10 sorties a day.

I'd call that air superiority by the russians, through SAMs. Not total, but still overwehelming. Drones fly lower, slower and have smaller radar signatures, they are more effective in surviving the long-range SAM threat.

When the Ukrainians tried to launch a counter air attack they lost several Flankers in a day. Their combat ace, that alledgedly had 5 victories on feb 24 sadly got killed on Feb 25th, shot down by an S-400 located in Belarus while flying over Kiev.

su-25 are by their nature going to be in harms way, like th A-10 was going to be. They can survive 1 manpads hit (depends a bit where you get hit), but probably not 2 or more. Losses are expected and normal.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
2,467
Location
Danville, Indiana
The latest info is the russians are flying around 200 fixed wing sorties a day (up from 50-60), but staying in russian airspace and firing long range weapons from there. Those are PGM's.

Ukrainians are flying around 10 sorties a day.

I'd call that air superiority by the russians, through SAMs. Not total, but still overwehelming. Drones fly lower, slower and have smaller radar signatures, they are more effective in surviving the long-range SAM threat.

When the Ukrainians tried to launch a counter air attack they lost several Flankers in a day. Their combat ace, that alledgedly had 5 victories on feb 24 sadly got killed on Feb 25th, shot down by an S-400 located in Belarus while flying over Kiev.

su-25 are by their nature going to be in harms way, like th A-10 was going to be. They can survive 1 manpads hit (depends a bit where you get hit), but probably not 2 or more. Losses are expected and normal.
If they are flying and firing from afar, I think that right there shows they do not have air superiority. Air superiority is when you can fly with impunity over a given territory.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,049
Location
down in the park
Is there much tank vs. tank fighting in Ukraine? I was under the impression the Ukrainian army was not using a lot of tanks. Even when they capture a Russian tank in working order, they don't change the flag on it and go to the front, it's just going to get blown up. In other words a tank has some use as an offensive weapon, but the best defense against them is not a tank of your own.

There's stuff on the net about the russians capturing Ukrainian armor and giving it to donetsk and luhansk. They're not destroying them or using themselves.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,049
Location
down in the park
If they are flying and firing from afar, I think that right there shows they do not have air superiority. Air superiority is when you can fly with impunity over a given territory.
but why would ukraine want a no fly zone if they don't fear russian planes over ukraine? I suppose not ALL 200 flights stay in russia. US intelligence numbers btw...
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
2,467
Location
Danville, Indiana
but why would ukraine want a no fly zone if they don't fear russian planes over ukraine? I suppose not ALL 200 flights stay in russia. US intelligence numbers btw...
They get bombed even when Russia doesn't have air superiority. Also, even though Russia doesn't have it, neither does Ukraine. It is what I'd call contested airspace. The Russians clearly have the advantage.

But there's more than that to the request. It increases the West's support. That's as symbolic as it is strategic. It would have a huge political impact. But it has great risks, too. Right now, the risk outweighs the benefit, at least from NATO's point of view.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
13,466
Location
MA
I didn't know that!

Before reading the book a few years ago, I'd assumed that the German tanks were superior, but were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of Soviet tanks.

I took Caidin at face value because I'd always considered his military history writing excellent. Also, because the book came out during the Cold War, I figured if anything he would have been biased against the Soviets.

He also included a lot of technical comparisons of the respective design philosophies and implementation, which I took as fact.
I think in general the German tanks had about a 7-1 kill ratio but they faced more than that on the battlefield. On paper the T-34 was superior to what they had at the time when it was first encountered. But they did a few things that still gave the Germans an advantage on the battlefield. Once the soviets started doing the same thing along with British/Americans, things evened up a little more. Some basics were that the Germans fought with the hatch open so the commander could see the battlefield, which leads to more losses of tank commanders, but being able to see the battlefield was an advantage. Plus ever tank had a radio so they could coordinate better, the soviets did not. Blitzkrieg is about coordinating forces. Plus German forces were required to stay with the tank even when disabled, Russian forces would just abandon them. Stalin also meddled a lot with his forces and wanted immediate attacks, there were stories of smaller forces defeating 3 separate attacks whereas if they had been coordinated as one attack, they would have been wiped out. Later on, Stalin let his generals run the war and Hitler meddled a lot more with his forces.

Kursk was really a mistake on how not to use armor. Hitler wanted to wait for the Panther to be ready before the attack. But that gave time for the defenders to dig in deep, I think at some points defenses were 7 layers deep. Armor is good for attacking weak points and moving fast so you bypass strong points and surround those and cut them off. Had they done it earlier with fewer tanks and fewer defenses, they might have had a better chance and it was a standard pincer movement which the germans were good at. The Panther also had teething problems and didn't do well in the battle.
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,023
Location
PNW
Good, bad or indifferent....

Vlad has gotten tired of NATO and US intrusion into his world of influence.

Candidly... It's understandable to a degree.

Think about a Warsaw Pact nation trying to be brought to bear right on the southern US border...

Would the US take kindly to that ?

Ahh... No.

We almost start WWW III over Cuba having nuclear weapons on it. Which thank goodness JFK handled that circumstance about has well as could possibly have been done.

We also attempted taking out Cuba's leader a number of times.

This current circumstance has been brought about by very short sighted and thoughtless regard for Russian concerns in their region. Several US presidents have failed to recognize the potential for danger of closing in on a country like Russia.

Bringing forner Warsaw Pact nation's into NATO was a big, big mistake. Attempting to bring Ukraine into NATO is a massive miscalculation which is potentially and likely exceptionally dangerous and antagonist in nature.

The disarmament of the Ukraine sponsored by US and others was not very well thought out for long term negative consequences. Yes I know Russia signed that agreement as well... Though it made them quite pleased to have Ukraine disarmed at that time. Anyone think this would be happening if that agreement had never happened ?? Ahhh... No. Quite unlikely it would have. Our lack of truly understanding the difficulties in the past between people in those areas and what that could lead to is now on full display. The US and NATO opened the door for all of this to take place.

A cornered animal is the most dangerous one.

And we have been foolishly doing that for the past 25+ years.
Putin is trying to take back and reform the "old Russia" ... the one that existed before all the areas he's trying to get back had enough of Russia's rule and broke away to have a better way of living. That's the sole reason that NATO was created, to form an allegiance by the close counties to the west of Russia to form a stronger deterrent from future Russian aggression. This video does a good job of explaining some past history.



The Cuban missile crisis isn't really that analogous to what Russia is doing in Ukraine. Russia's goal during the Cuba missile crisis wasn't to "invade and take over" the USA because the USA use to be part of Russia. It was basically a deterrent by Russia during the cold war to help "protect" Cuba and give Russia an advantage to retaliate quicker if the USA ever attacked Russia or Cuba.

Thing is, Putin knows that NATO isn't going to attack Russia, so his invasion into Ukraine isn't really because he feels like NATO is going to attack him - if he actually thinks that then he's delusional and paranoid, which are the base ingredients to make for a true mad-man. NATO would never be an attacker of any country, only a defender against an attack. Putin is invading the Ukraine and any other bordering countries who are not part of NATO because he knows if they ever do join NATO that he will never be able to do a take-over with military force. He's doing it now because he's old, and he thinks this is the only opportunity for him to try and carry out a take-over that he's been thinking about for years, so he's acting it out now. And he has nukes, which he's using as a threat to try and get his way.

 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
8,049
Location
down in the park
He did have a point though when he said "What if Ukraine joins nato and then decides to take back Crimea by force? That would lead to a Russia/Nato conflict, one that Russia can't possibly win so wouldn't hesitate to go nuclear."

Nato attacked several countries though. serbia, libya... calling it a police action or peacekeeping mission doesn't make it any less an attack.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2021
Messages
4,499
Understandable, but on the flip side, I've heard that some members of the postwar occupation army were enamoured with the small nimble Japanese vehicles, and brought them back to the States, and we know what that led to. Fact or fiction?
To follow up your post, and at least the other two posters whose grandparents "Were the exact same way but extend to anything Japanese:"

1. I wonder if I was a smart *** even as a kid. I sometimes asked him why he had a Panasonic television set.

He would sit and watch 30, 40, 50-tape $100s of dollars documentaries (video, obviously) about the war, and war footage. Drinking Michelob. Had it delivered to the side of the house. I'll always remember that. Michelob.

He was an awesome guy and could play piano like nobody's business. He was a Victor Borge type of fellow . So great. Told me stories about how he'd play at people's homes, at bars and homes for the GIs traveling through as they advanced on and fought off the Axis powers, namely the Germans in WW2. He was in a pretty early regiment, I forget the exact details or if the US Army even uses the word Regiment but. Wanted to give him his praise, since I brought him up in conversation. R.I.P. Pop-pop. *tear*

2. I think me may have had some Matsushita or Makita drills, don't quote me on that. This part of a much larger business he ran. Maybe bought when they didn't have Craftsman available and just to abuse for fun due to being Japanese, who knows.

3. I would then engage my mind, or at least think, that the Mitsubishi and other companies.. weren't the same companies that produced the engines and heavy artillery for the war effort, particularly since Nihon/Japan (an American word as far as I know. Kanji Japanese but. Okay moving on) was decimated and rebuilt from the ground up, with an interest in producing to the West. Toyota with the Toyopet Crown, a vehicle that just couldn't cut it stateside, then Honda and Datsun.. maybe Subaru as Fuji Heavy Industries, not sure the origins of Kubota or Komatsu but take a look at construction sites.. My father worked for a contractor company called Takanaka. How soon after the war these came over to the West varies but.. are they "the same companies."

I think Matsushita Electric gave us both Panasonic and Technics. I used to love to analyze electronics.

So, could be true.. you would have to ask a vet, they are all different.

My father, a USMC, had a problem with... a specific ethnicity for a long time, and either had to deal with it or hide it when working the trades to give me what was, in hindsight, a pretty good growing up, until the peanut butter hit the fan for non-economic reasons .

As to Russia.. if they are isolated.. well then. What will they do now.. are they really failing in their war advance, a la Hitler and his two front advance in winter that lost him the war? Historians largely agree that he was "winning" the war up to that point.. everyone I talk to says, yeah, maybe, but he would have been overwhelmed by the force of the opposition eventually. Glad we never found out. Coward.

Happy St Patrick's Day, everyone. Sláinte.
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
21,414
Location
Silicon Valley
To follow up your post, and at least the other two posters whose grandparents "Were the exact same way but extend to anything Japanese:"

1. I wonder if I was a smart *** even as a kid. I sometimes asked him why he had a Panasonic television set.

He would sit and watch 30, 40, 50-tape $100s of dollars documentaries (video, obviously) about the war, and war footage. Drinking Michelob. Had it delivered to the side of the house. I'll always remember that. Michelob.

He was an awesome guy and could play piano like nobody's business. He was a Victor Borge type of fellow . So great. Told me stories about how he'd play at people's homes, at bars and homes for the GIs traveling through as they advanced on and fought off the Axis powers, namely the Germans in WW2. He was in a pretty early regiment, I forget the exact details or if the US Army even uses the word Regiment but. Wanted to give him his praise, since I brought him up in conversation. R.I.P. Pop-pop. *tear*

2. I think me may have had some Matsushita or Makita drills, don't quote me on that. This part of a much larger business he ran. Maybe bought when they didn't have Craftsman available and just to abuse for fun due to being Japanese, who knows.

3. I would then engage my mind, or at least think, that the Mitsubishi and other companies.. weren't the same companies that produced the engines and heavy artillery for the war effort, particularly since Nihon/Japan (an American word as far as I know. Kanji Japanese but. Okay moving on) was decimated and rebuilt from the ground up, with an interest in producing to the West. Toyota with the Toyopet Crown, a vehicle that just couldn't cut it stateside, then Honda and Datsun.. maybe Subaru as Fuji Heavy Industries, not sure the origins of Kubota or Komatsu but take a look at construction sites.. My father worked for a contractor company called Takanaka. How soon after the war these came over to the West varies but.. are they "the same companies."

I think Matsushita Electric gave us both Panasonic and Technics. I used to love to analyze electronics.

So, could be true.. you would have to ask a vet, they are all different.

My father, a USMC, had a problem with... a specific ethnicity for a long time, and either had to deal with it or hide it when working the trades to give me what was, in hindsight, a pretty good growing up, until the peanut butter hit the fan for non-economic reasons .

As to Russia.. if they are isolated.. well then. What will they do now.. are they really failing in their war advance, a la Hitler and his two front advance in winter that lost him the war? Historians largely agree that he was "winning" the war up to that point.. everyone I talk to says, yeah, maybe, but he would have been overwhelmed by the force of the opposition eventually. Glad we never found out. Coward.

Happy St Patrick's Day, everyone. Sláinte.

There is no permanent alliance nor permanent enemy in the world. People age and people die, new alliance are formed and old alliance broke off.

Usually it would take at least one or two generations for that to happen, look at how those former enemies turn allies and how those former allies turn enemies. Our newest "allies" is Vietnam, and our oldest one turned enemy was USSR / Russia (or was it Iraq or Egypt, can't keep track?). Nothing new under the sun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top