Posted on 04/13/2025 5:06:46 AM PDT by hardspunned
A German military assessment exposes major issues with NATO weapons in Ukraine. The PzH 2000 howitzer, while advanced, is so technically fragile that its combat usefulness is in doubt. The Leopard 1A5 tank is used mostly as makeshift artillery due to weak armor. The Leopard 2A6 is too expensive and complex to maintain at the front. Air defense systems also face problems. The IRIS-T works well, but ammo is too costly and scarce. The Patriot system is called “unsuitable for combat” because its MAN carrier vehicles are outdated and lack spare parts. This information was revealed in a transcript of a lecture given by the deputy military attaché of the German embassy in Kiev. The summary of the paper is very clear: “Hardly any large German piece of equipment is fully suitable for war.”
(Excerpt) Read more at open.substack.com ...
he Leopard 2A6 is too expensive and complex to maintain at the front.
That excerpt is a retelling of the story of German armaments and materiel in WW II.
Absolutely right. If the only thing a tank is good for is a mad dash of a few hundred yards supporting infantry before it is droned, what’s the difference if the tank is a Sherman or an Abrams?
Slightly different, but in the run-up to WWI one of the areas of contention between Germany and Great Britain was that Germany was trying to build a big, powerful navy. Britain didn’t like the competition and wanted Germany taken down a bit. WWI saw only a small number of serious naval engagements because both Britain and Germany had spent so much money on their precious little navies that neither country really wanted to risk their ships in battle. Jutland was the only serious battle that really resulted in the loss of ships. And neither country wanted to repeat that by using their ships again. Too expensive to risk.
European countries sometimes lose wars because they are afraid of losing the war.
The United States (once upon a time) and Russia are two countries that really go “all in” and take risks because they have no intention of losing.
This is always the rule. Cheap and durable has the advantage in the dirt and rigor of war. Western militaries have been building a lot of fancy expensive prom dresses for the last 40 years.
Well said.
The Ruskies have no intention of losing the war with US/NATO/Ukies. If it gets anywhere close to that, it'll be scorched earth time like Saddam and the oil fields.
Your "once upon a time" comment sure got it right. We've done nothing but lose since our bold and brave fathers and grandfathers saved us in WWII. They'd turn over in the graves at the disasters we've made in places like Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Ukieland.
And now we're about to do it all over again with China.
What numbskulls we have for leaders.
A few years back, I sold my MB just before the warranty expired due to the fact that the machine developed a problem each few weeks. When it ran, it was wonderful. But it was always a game pushing the start button and guessing which electrical malfunction would surface. Summary, I am completely underwhelmed with the supposed “excellence” of German engineers.
The US developed and fielded the first shape charge/rocket-propelled antitank weapons.
Sounds like the Panther. Mechanical reliability coupled with a lack of spare parts.
Military hardware that does not survive the first engagement with the enemy causes more grief than an all-out blitzkrieg with no warning. Here is all that useless war materiel scattered all over the landscape, and you can’t get out of your own way.
But GIs at the front have often converted machinery that is a liability into a makeshift assault weapon, as the WWW 2 jeep was made into a platform not only for scouting and personnel transport, but a potent gunship.
There are no perfect weapons systems, certainly the Russian/soviet tanks, APCs, and AFVs have shown themselves to be flawed.
Soviet doctrine was always mass, and that capability is gone as well.
And yes drones have changed everything.
No where to hide, and even the best equipment can be at the least relatively easily disabled.
It's not the purchase price of a Mercedes that should discourage people, it is the maintenance costs.
There are no perfect weapons systems, certainly the Russian/soviet tanks, APCs, and AFVs have shown themselves to be flawed.
Soviet doctrine was always mass, and that capability is gone as well.
And yes drones have changed everything.
No where to hide, and even the best equipment can be at the least relatively easily disabled.
Maintenance pays
Next tactical iteration has recently entered use and may change that. We've added a laser guidance package to (already existing in large numbers) 2.75" Hydra 70 rockets so they can shoot them down. Already compatible with multiple launcher options. Greatly increases the number of targets one aircraft can take out and greatly decreases the cost per shot to either not much more expensive or even less than the cost of the drone. The initial version APKWS has already been in use against Houthi drones, but requires keeping the target lazed until hit. Next version adds an infrared seeker which takes over once laser points out its target, increasing rate of fire without adding much to cost. It should be operational next year. So fight cheap drone swarms with cheap short range anti-drone smart rocket swarms launchable from most friendly planes, helicopters or ground.
Every now and then the Germans develop brilliant weapons, like the panzerfaust, but I think the norm for them is to way over engineer things. Like the one MB auto I owned.
++++++++++
You are correct but there are qualifications as there are two ways to over engineer - the smart way and the stupid way.
I too am (was) a Benz owner. The best most reliable vehicle my family ever owned was a 1979 M-B 240 D. It was a dog (slow) in acceleration terms. It would top out at about 100 mph. You could drive it all day at 75 mph and get 30+ mpg. A tree crushed the car, totaling it. The car had 400,000+ miles on the odometer. No engine work, no trans work, no mechanical issues whatsoever. Body succumbed to Chicago winters as it did have rust issues. So perhaps this car was over engineered, but in a GOOD way.
M-B now over engineers their vehicles in the most stupid ways imaginable and in turn their reliability sucks. I will never own another one, unless it is an old one.
Bttt
> We’ve done nothing but lose since our bold and brave fathers and grandfathers saved us in WWII. <
Some wise person (I forget who) once made this remark:
“Democracies should go to war reluctantly, and fiercely.”
Since 1945 we’ve done the exact opposite.
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.