Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "Why is no one storing old tanks?" video.

This nicely underlines stupidity of Poland buying 250 Abrams tanks. Current Polish army does not have enough personnel to operate its current tanks by a wide margin. Current Polish stocks are around 250 Leopard tanks and few hundred T-72s. Most of these tanks are not in combat units. By comparison Germany has around 300 tanks (!). With these 250 Abrams tanks Poland will have biggest EU panzer army. Even if they get rid of most T-72s they will have the largest one. Number of attack helicopters that are modern (upgraded less then 30 years ago)? Zero.
6
Re watch the video. Putin decreased storage 5x.
3
US occupied more then half of ME - mark them as black.
3
Actually all modern ideas are going light. Western tanks are too heavy and they are as easy to destroy as lighter tanks BUT they cost more to make & maintain. New idea is to have more autonomous vehicles that have small personnel in them or none & moving crews over to maintenance. We may see return to glass canon idea but without crews.
3
" You can train people quickly to use them." - video nicely explains why you cannot. When Poland purchased Abrams tanks I smiled at the estimate of when they will be battle ready. It will be few years after delivery. YEARS. If years is quick for you... You need to train basic crew operation. Then platoon level, then company, battalion and finally brigade. This is on crew side. Then you have maintenance side, people, tools and facilities.
3
@tts8361 Even more - they have essentially 2 (3) types of Leopards, 2A4 and 2A5 and are upgrading to 2PL - 2A4 and 2A5 have some major differences. Same with T-72s - they have multiple versions. I doubt they ditch all T-72s, maybe just sell of older versions and keep PT-91s. Even worse, Abrams program will cost much more then equivalent Leopard 2A7 and even worse for that premium they will not have them ready sooner then Leo2 A7 - Leos would take years to build but Abrams will take years to train crews for.
2
@REgamesplayer We must have watched different video. Non essential tasks to fighting are in boot camp. After that you are going 100% essential. If you cut down training by half you end up with less trained crews for combat. He says doubling the size of troops to 600k is easy, but increasing tank crews 2x in less then a year is impossible.
2
Imagine US budget cut in half - that would be 100s of billions of USD a year - they may even compete against China!
1
Turkey is not in EU. The big guy in EU is Poland. With recent purchase it has about the same number of tanks as Germany + France + UK.
1
@trevorbirkbeck4011 Part of the deal in removing nukes was Crimea stays in Ukraine and Russians get a base. Russia at first wanted Crimea back. It was the nukes that forced it into Ukraine. Ukraine out maneuvered Russia to get it. Then in 20+ years Russia out maneuvered Ukraine to get it back.
1
@REgamesplayer But that will not lead you too far - you end up with a force similar to that Soviets had in 1941. I.e. you will luck unit coordination. This means the tanks, as per Binkov, will be frequently abused and easy to destroy. It is certainly better then say nothing but of little value on modern battlefield with at peer that adversary. Also your year thing is not that simple, maybe you can finish somehow limited number of training at platoon and company level but you will luck larger unit training. Also how many instructors you have etc. - as you state is not "unlimited". Also of note is Korean conflict - NK tankers had "quick" training and their T-34s were easily destroyed. Their essential training was good enough for dealing with SK but was a disaster vs. US. One can also add ME conflicts, especially against Israel - here again "essential" training proven to be a disaster. Syrian tanks were certainly driven, their guns fired in the general direction of the enemy but was it.
1
@runi5413 They do have strategic reserves, if not for having simply replacement tanks for their losses. They have like 4x as many in storage as in front line deployment. The question is whatever they need 10x and the answer is no - as it simply would cost too much $$$ to have so many tanks & probably crews would not make it alive by tank #10. And we are talking about catastrophic tank destruction.
1