@@mathewgreen5957 That's their official tactical marking.. Search for "CNN Kupiansk" for example - our supposed allies adopted crosses when they launched Kharkiv and Kherson offensives.
An armored box with a gun on it will never go out of style, so long as you have the men and material to maintain them. It's not a wunder-weapon, but it doesn't have to be. It's just an upgrade to a cargo truck or pickup truck. So long as you don't overestimate them, they won't fail you.
Truth. I remember building a model of the Marder as a kid and I always liked the aesthetics of it. It was and is a good “gen 1” (at least for NATO) IFV. I can only imagine that the Ukrainians agree, and simply hope to get a few such reliable platforms in LARGE numbers, rather than a dozen different ones in small lots. Managing logistics, sustainment, training and tactics across 30 different vehicle types during a fight for national survival must be a pain in the ass of epic proportions….
@@rikspring yes. Infantry are your primary weapon. The truck is just a means of getting them in and out of trouble. Above all else, the purpose is to increase the long range mobility of infantry. Marching is bad for moral, and causes excessive fatigue. Heavy weapons and armor are totally optional. Tanks are for pushing the front line, mechanized transports are primarily for helping the infantry keep up with said front line. The IFV concept is an attempt to compress the role of an infantry tank and transport into one vehicle. It's a viable, but more expensive method. It's geared toward quality over quantity. The cost of your transports increases, and their carry capacity decreases. But it negates the need for dedicated fighting vehicles like infantry tanks. When it comes to fielding large numbers of troops, a plain dedicated armored transport mixed with dedicated weapon carriers will do the same job more economically. Different strokes for different folks.
@@Fabrizio_Ruffo You're correct, we learned that lesson in Iraq, where our opponent was ALWAYS infantry. Ambushing infantry, dug in infantry, infantry doing drive by's in Opal hatchbacks & BMW's, shoot n' scoot mortar and RPG attacks, but always infantry. The lesson was that YOUR infantry still need bigger guns to arrive in support, and gun trucks were key, not MBT's. The uparmored hummer, for all its faults and all that we lost, delivered the goods. Light armor & Technicals are about more than hauling crunchies as dragoons, but gun platforms with high mobility. Even when I was a tanker, the majority of targets (and threats to your well-being) on the battlefield aren't other expensive tanks, but loads and loads of cheap, fast moving, missile packing threats to your armor, and heavy machine gun toting threats to your infantry and unarmored support. The Coax machine gun and m242 auto cannons always get more trigger time than the big gun. And the best defense against the revitalized threat of artillery (thanks to UAV's on the battlefield) is to be as mobile as possible. Infantry on foot is more hideously vulnerable to arty, rocket & mortar fire now than every before. Because it's nearly impossible to hide anymore when the Evil Eyes in the Sky are everywhere.
The Marder is probably a significant improvement over a BMP. Though against a 100mm equipped later model BMP it would suffer in a gun fight. It will almost certainly need to be supported by dedicated anti tank missile teams. Ukraine needs Abrams/Leos. The French 105mm Wheeled Armoured Cars will be useful as infantry fire support vehicles VS strongpoints and light Armour.
I actually served as a "Panzergrenadier" (squad Mg3 operator ) on a Spz Marder. despite its old age (first was deliverd 1971) its still a very capable combat taxi. Its mostly relaible and the crew is able to repair a lot of damge itself. As said in the video it can only shoot precise while standing, The milan (tow) system is good to have but very slow ( 2 KM ~ 13seconds) . So it was said to us: before you even reach target it can happen that you are detected and will be destroyed by an enemy tank. The thermal imaging system (wärmebildgerät)of the marder is also good to have, with mixed feelings. I remeber some maneuvers , where i have to play the enemy, dismounted and eqipped with a milan system, wich we hid in the field, aiming on a feigned enemy Marder. they didnt notice us ( about 100 meters Away) while day time. and in antoher maneuver at night we where like 200 m away. (milan also have a additional Thermal imagine system called "mira" but its very noisy and makes a lot of heat itself.) The Talibans really feared the marders 20mm bmk it has a swivel range from -17° to + 65° so fuck your ambush attempets from hilltops. also good against enemy Helicopters etc. To make this clear : the marders job is that of a fast armoured combat taxi. protect the 6 man squad inside, throw them out and give them some cover. if need be, its able to destroy tanks.
The problem is, Ukraine is going to need to use them as an infantry support IFV rather than just transport. With a cannon that can't kill BMPs and armour that can't resist 30mm cannon I personally would want to be assigned to a Bradley. Thanks Germany for your belated decision - but at least what France is sending CAN destroy BMPs. Must be quite sad to be outclassed by French armoured cars.
@@occamraiser they are completely different weapon systems, of course they will not do the same... the AMX can not transport troops (main task of the marder). Must be a hard life if one can not distinguish those two...
@@occamraiser Well, with anti-tank capability and a top off-road speed almost twice as fast as a BMP, I wouldn't consider a Marder exactly 'defenseless'... though I get your point re: procurement from a buncha 'surrender monkeys'! :-p
For the: „crew comfort and ergonomics” of BMP1/2, I have been inside of both of them, while they were moving around. And the comfort, or the lack of it is just unbelievable. I am Czech, and these were ex czechoslovakian BMPs. But, in Czech Republic, both soldiers and civilians who own them call them „Kostitřas” or "Boneshaker” in english. So yes, they are extremely uncomfortable. I’ve never been in a Marder, so I cannot compare. 😅👍
Funnily enough it seems the Ukrainians developed a sort of tolerated barter system(as long as there is no profiteering) amongst the commanders to supplement the usual centrally planned logistics.
@@nhatmnguyen There is nothing to hold, what NATO fascism does it raping the dead corpse of Ukraine while laughing about it and counting the money they make with it somehow.
In Ukraine, now volunteers from "Come Back Alive" are engaged in the purchase of a large batch of repair and maintenance vehicles. Of course, this is still in addition to state and foreign support, but our volunteers have an ambitious goal to completely close this area. I am sure we will figure it out.
Yeah, but luckily, their Eastern neighbours have "donated" quite a lot of hardware so far which is often used for parts to repair the old Soviet era weaponry.
in the 70s maybe, 50 years later it is considered very shit. Russias APC, IFV and armored cars are even better, the new Russian armored cars have an unmanned 30mm gun on top.
@@mrzoinky5999 they have about 25,000 total apc, ifv, armored vehicles etc in service and in storage, that we know of. And probably some that we dont know of.
Marders are real heavyweights compared to the BMP-1s that Germany bought for Ukraine, Marders were designed in response to the BMP and its armour upgraded after the BMP-2 was introduced. They can work in the mud which is always important in Ukraine
The Marder does not have armor to withstand either the 73mm low velocity guns HEAT or the 30mm APDS by the BMP1 and BMP2 respectively. The Marders armament is NOT stabilised and therefore cannot be accuratly fired while it moves. In order to fire the MILAN missile the commander has to stick half his torso out of the hatch. The Marder is NOT designed to fight other AFVs so the discussion of Marder vs BMP is superfluous. The Marder is a support vehicle designed to keep infantry off of the MBTs back. The armament of the Marder will shred infantry but is purely a defensive measure when it comes to fighting armor.
Marder for modern standard is not an IFV, it's just an APC, like the M113, designed to take infantry near the front line and then reverse at full 65kmh speed.
@@othertipo thats also wrong. The Marder stays at the front line and provides fire support with its MG3 and Rh202 autocannon. And that it does very well and the grenadiers love it. The Marder even provides amazing fire support in urban areas were AFVs usually hate to go. Because the armament of the Marder Elevates to 60° meaning that it can reach a rooftop if its half the buildings height away from it. If you are looking for a "battle taxi" APC the Panzergrenadiers are the wrong address to look at. You might want to check on Jägers and their Boxers and Fuchs APCs.
It is interesting to see all of these NATO cold war vehicles finally going into combat against Russian forces, the role in which they were meant for. 🧐
We are kicking Russias ass despite we have our greatest trump cards unused: Air power and modern main battle tanks. And we don't use attack helicopters and cluster bomb rocket artillery either. With those weapons would the red army have been wiped out in a month.
@@nattygsbord Objectively natos biggest trump would simply be numbers. That's the reason Russian propaganda had to switch to wunderwaffeln, cause the soviet narrative of "a huge mass of the simple working stuff" no longer applied, since NATO also got more mass in most fields at this point.
@@nattygsbord Russia would not fight the US for obvious reasons of technological lagging...yet it would nuke the US and use bacteriological, chemical and biological means. Also don't confuse the offensive war where people don't know why the government sent them there (like the Americans in Afghanistan/Iraq/Vietnam) vs a defence of the homeland. The Russian public, unlike the US public, in my mind is ready for a full out nuclear exchange. Just count to 6,000 and this is the number of declared warheads each side has and one needs to be naive to think that other "prohibited" means won't be used. So now pause for a second and think whether the US would go for a full nuclear exchange over...Ukraine? Poland? Germany? the clear answer is NO. This is why the UK and France have their own stockpiles. World is a lot more complex than "we kick their ass". How did the ass kicking in Afghanistan go?
We have so many of them becase of the peace dividend. It has not been needed to replace mcuh since the USSR colpased themself. Its very much a quesrion of generation. So many things has changed by nasty invensions. . But I would say some has been in used in Afghanistan, Irak, Libya even I has been against it.
Dudes, this is a troop transporter. And a pretty well working one. Comparing it to the Leopard is like comparing a transport helicopter to an interceptor. Two completely different tasks.
@@ahemzal Arbtek has knowledge. Both sides have a lot autocannons and antiarmor weapons.Ex Soviet Union is well armed.Marder has too weak armour and is swiss cheese in few seconds.Only good for transport.
@@ahemzal Ukrainians and Russians are not unarmed bare handed tribes. They both mass produce and use autocanons and antiarmor weapons.Marders even tanks are swiss cheese in few seconds.
@@ahemzal Marders are good iff enemy don't posses autocanons or better.But it is not true in this case. IFVs and pickups are very fast but they are not faster than missiles and autocannon shells and bullets.They are moving swiss cheese. I survived Yugoslav wars. Infantry tankers and minefields engineers are 90% of killed and crippled soldiers. That's why Royal family members don't serve in infantry tanks armour and minefields engineers. Why any royal majesty is not tanker or IFV crew or infantryman?
@@ahemzal Yes.Western is better.But Ex Soviets Ukrainian and Russian older tech is cheaper several times for good enough quality or modern Russian ones is better for a little less money. Russia has less than 200 000 troops in Ukraine and Russia has sanctions and robbery against property and everithing in western countries and satanisation even against dead artists and writers from 18 19 and 20 centuries.Ukraine has over 700 000 troops and 45 countries help them.But still can't win.Russians are still there.And show who is stronger and better.The Taliban fighters in slippers are the best against NATO.
@@SonsOfLorgar Na A American that is fed up with Our country starting wars.. By the way F2ck Putin too . The People of Russia do not want Nato on their border. Trying to pin it on one person Like "evil Hittler Or evil Saddam" is the way Nato brainwashes people to think they are not going after the people just the evil guy...It is all BS
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized No, thanks you for ADEQATE analysis - 'cause everything we hear from typical journalists - are bold claims and hype-oriented subject lines, with no details and realities of war taken into an account - and these details often change the whole picture. What sets this video of yours apart and compelety ignored by most of the speakers - the attention to general visibility out of the armored vehicle (periscopes, observation devices, thermals, etc.). And this is far more important topic, than most of the people think - paying attention to the gun and armor only and making the conclusions. The thing is, if you ever been in BMP-1 or BMP-2, you can notice how bad it is in terms of situational awareness and target acquisition, to be direct - you simply can't see shit out of these vehicles. I'm not even touching the comms and even an ability to install them reliably without complete re-do of the vehicle. Combine this with crammed space, not really sufficient for a modern soldier with body armor, tons of ammo and other things he needs to carry into the battle, no mine protection, bad armor - you'll end up with a combat-taxi, wich is quite blind, soldiers riding on top of it, it has no good comms with the infantry + can't detect the targets fast enough on it's own. It's good in terms of using it as mobile firepower for defence (we use BMP-1s for NLOS shooting for years, using software to do the math, it's super-common thing), but as a weapon for rapid assault - it has insufficient capabilities to be protected firepower that can carry troops into battle, see what's going on, provide rapid suppression of enemy positions, detect targets quick and engage them. If we look at our 92nd brigade, that had ~100 BTR4s, equipped with modern comms, 30mm stabilized gun, tons of internal space, +- good protection, thermals (not just integrated into the sight as monocular, but big screens for commander and gunner(!), that have wide FOV and good resolution), GPS, integrated system for firing ATGMs, excellent situational awareness. May not be the best protected vehicle, but it was the main machine that in cooperation with tanks helped to not let RU forces enter Kharkiv in the early stage of the war, and despite heavy losses, inflicted much more damage on Russian BMPs and tanks than anyone could expect. Plus, a lot of mahinces managed to survive and played an important role in Kharkiv counter-offencive, we even used BTR-4MV1 - with 5(!) triplexes for the driver + 360 view cameras and even more focus on protection, target acquisition capabilities, exists only in 1 machine, but seems to be the right direction to go to with BTRs, that can act as something capable, not just battle-taxi) Of course, it's just an equipment - it all comes down to training of the crews and tactics of application + the understanding of the commanders on how to use them + organizing the comms (BTR-4 has Harris, this is the main comms provider for Air Assault branch of UAF, and internal comms as well + and ability to be connected with commander on the ground, who can also help with target acquisition and interaction with dismounts). Hoping for good training to be received for Marders, as all these stats are just stats, until you know and trained how to use them to your advantage :)
Just a minor thing, but Rheinmetall recently restarted the development and production of 20mm ammunition. The newest additions being APPIE and SAPPIE, Armor Piercing with Pyrothecnically Induced Effect and Semi-armor Piercing with Pyrotechnically Induced Effect. In practice, both are evolutions of the PELE, Penetrator with Enhanced Lateral Effect round. If supplied or procured, these rounds could offer a lethality increase to the Rh202 main gun against various targets.
Given the timing, I think it's either that, or Germany will send their current stock of older ammunition and replace them with new production high performance ammo.
Conduct actually penetrate the sides of a Russian T-90A T-72B3 Kontakt-5 4S22 then Relikt 4S24 Explosive Reactive Armour Sides T-90M T-80BVM T-72B3 Model 2016 like a Ukrainian APC having to fight against a Russian T-72 or not? If not Marder is destroyed by T-72
As a Ukrainian, I will say that ANY combat vehicle will be useful in this war, we successfully use even old Soviet models, especially with modifications. So Marder will be more than useful and effective, especially against a poorly equipped enemy
@@iamasmurf1122 It's not a civil war. It's an invasion by an eastern empire with ambitions of control and domination of as many peoples and countries around them as possible. The only decent thing is to help against that.
Good analysis, but the Marder is much better than the trucks the Ukrainians are riding now. I’m pretty sure they will appreciate having these systems, especially the Bradleys which are more powerful.
Dmitri Medvedev, the politician Putin used as a stooge to stand in form him to avoid term limits has been placed in charge of munitions production. There can be no doubt Russian MBT tank and IFV production will start to ramp up, including some of the advanced ones. He may be a stooge but he reveals real power and is a nasty POS (read his hateful and vile speech on the orthodox christmass cease fire) Ukraine will need the latest Western Tanks and IFV because in a year the latest Russian equipment will start flowing.
@@williamzk9083 I normally hate corrupt politicians but in this case I will make an exception and hope that these Russian politicians all stick their hands in the cookie jar and there’s no money left for munitions production.
The US say they will send 50 Bradleys. They themselves use 56 Bradleys in each rifle battalion, and a single battalion is nothing in this war, Ukraine has already lost the men corresponding to 100 battalions as KIA. What good would 40 20mm gunned Marders do? 1,000 would be a starter.
This thing is better then anything that they have received yet - i mean they got a lot super old apcs M113 or even smaller more modern apc from england but they never got a real 30+ ton IFV. And that the Marder has Milan and thermal will make it a great defender - greatings from an ex panzergrenadier. PS: its not necesarry to maintain these. The Ukraine is happy to have these of course with a very bad logistics and maintainance but they will find a way. This is much better to have 40 Marders then having NONE. And i bet the russians will be very suprised if they run into a full ukraine bttl with 40 Marders then running into a less quipped Inf bttl
I agree with you it's a great battle taxi no AFV is designed to go toe to toe with MBT 's definitely are deadly in the ambush with good anti armor capabilities a good crew definitely helps.
They should give them the M113 variant the M901 Hammerhead if they still have any in stock those where equipped with a TOW launching system. Use the M113a3 track for better mobility than that of the older a1 or a2 variant of the M113 Just my opinion.
There where ideas of sending modernized M60s but the US doesn't have those and will have to ask allies for a swap. For now, the west isn't keen to send post-modern MBTs.
I was trained in a Marder during my serv in the Bundeswehr back in 2004. What i think is big draw back is the rear door, or hatch where the grenadiers dismount. It takes an age and a half to open and close. No Problem when your are still undetected but dismounting while enaged with the enemy, well good luck. Also when the turret moves it can get quite dangerous between the front and back part, keep your arms close to your body or they will be crushed. But this is not an issue as long as everybody is in his seat.
With the Marder it is like with most western vehicles. They have to be handled very carefully and in their role with expert crew and under the circumstances they are especially designed for and with the tactics they are designed for. Simplyfied, its the old thing, we (the west) build stuff that works great when used under specific circumstances, russians build stuff which works anytime and anywhere but not so great overall.
@@polarstorm5986 Ah, the good old "russian stuff is reliable" BS 😀 Russian stuff is ultra flawed and prone to failure. Guess why almost no nation with a normal budget is buying anything russian? Their machines are simply not as reliable and long lasting + their performance is low. In the essence, the russians are still using the V-2 T-34 engine in their tanks...and that one was invented in Ukraine. Anything they tried after that wasn't too reliable either. The myth of "old reliable russian tech" is nothing but a myth :)
@@moritamikamikara3879 Not in my area, we have Fisher cats, very secretive, but, I've seen 2 live ones, and one road killed in 28 years in an area surrounded by trees and squirrels. Black fur, very fast afoot.
To be honest, seeing what Ukraine already achieved with clapped out Danish/US/Aussie M-113s, Dutch AIFVs and British Spartans, imagine what they could do with a proper IFV.
@@tomk3732 There is absolutely no indication of that. Putin already had to announce two mobilizations because of how many losses Russia takes, despite really not wanting to do so (because it had huge ramifications domestically, as the war is not as widely supported as one might think). The difference in strategy and tatics and knowing, how little the Russian command cares for losses of personell (I am Russian), I believe that our country had lost more troops than Ukraine for sure.
Great vid. Would like to visit museum if ever back in Germany. I was 🇨🇦Army stationed at Lahr, Schwarzwald ’80-‘84 serving on Leopard C1. Exercised with & against Marders various times - lot of memories. Germany a beautiful country and very much enjoyed my time there. 👍
The marder is a solid vehicle. Good or very good at its task, depending on your viewpoint. Pitted against the equipment currently used in ukraine, it will do well. The ukrainians will love it. They use any given tool to great effect.
For someone whose position is focused on defense policy, Hellmich's statement is ridiculous to the point that it feels disingenuous. Ukraine is defending its nation from a massive strategic threat. To do so involves both defensive and offensive action at a tactical level. Does he really expect people to believe that in order to defend themselves, Ukraine should sit in the defense and wait for Russia to attack them over and over? Quite obviously, a Leopard 2 offensively attacking Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory would be defending their nation. Great video, as always, sir! I enjoy your detailed coverage of these topics.
Honestly that statement made my blood boil because it is so blatantly disingenuous that it insults the intelligence of the listener merely by being uttered. It's political cowardice not even excusable with the "escalation" nonsense because Poland already send MBT's en masses.
Probably the real reason is the risk of our modern NATO tanks being captured and/or the risk that inadequate logistics (Western MBTs are a bitch to maintain) that they'd look bad being abandoned.
Thank you for you videos. I find them extremely thorough, balanced and informative. I admire and appreciate that you post your corrections when required, your integrity and transparency are to be applauded. Keep posting great content like this!
The Leopard 2 is an MBT, it’s as much a defensive tool as an offensive one. It’s better for defending and holding ground than a marder. Marders are still useful and good to have though, but they’ll be more useful in offensive operations moving troops up, or for support/specialized units to operate out of. Compared to a tank they’re light duty, but quite a step up from unarmoured trucks and even a lot of lightly armoured vehicles. Plus, anything with tracks is useful in Ukraine.
So the Leopard 2 is an attack tank now? Yeah, pull the other one. The Leo 2 was developed and designed to delay a Soviet armor offensive through the Fulda Gap. And guess what, delaying actions are generally considered to be defensive in nature, exchanging ground for time.
What you heard there was a german social democrat politician playing word gymnastics to help justify the position of social democrat Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who is currently a shining example of lackluster leadership and lack of decisiveness when it comes to the Ukraine war. So like any other political word games, I wouldn't take that "tanks for defense" statement seriously from a technical expertise perspective.
Die Wannenfront, die Seitenflächen sowie das Heck sind abgeschrägt und bieten der Besatzung begrenzten Schutz gegen Beschuss aus 20-mm-Maschinenkanonen (frontal), Granatsplittern und Infanteriewaffen (bis 7,62 mm). Deutlich besser als der BMP der kaum schutz vor Kaliber 50 Munition bittet.
It's not a different caliber, same 105mm gun as an AMX-30 tank, it is just half pressure as it is a 15 ton Recon vehicle not a 32 ton MBT, this is to better manage recoil.
@@Frencho9 plus, they developed APFSDS for it.. so even with lower recoil, it has comparable penetration as L7.. but of course, it cannot use standard NATO 105mm ammo...
The Marder A1 could already resist 30mm APDS frontally with the exception of the turret, so the 1A3 variant's armor upgrade mostly helps protect the sides at angles closer to oblique, but still not 90 degrees.
Nothing at all would mean they can't fight further = they stop dying for nothing = they stop ruining the country for nothing and also don't have to pay for useless crap. So nothing at all would be endless better than this shit.
0:52 1. It's flat out wrong to state that the AMX-10RC(R) uses the same gun as the Leopard 1. Both guns have the same caliber of 105mm and that's pretty much where the similarities end. The AMX-10RC(R) uses a medium-pressure F2 gun chambered in 105×527mmR, the Leopard 1 uses the high-pressure L7 chambered in 105×617mmR. That also obviously means that ammunition is not interchangable. 2. I have never seen any half-way knowledgable person refer to the AMX-10RC(R) as a tank-destroyer. The function of a tank destroyer is neither its doctrinal purpose nor is it equipped for said task. It's either described as a light tank, scout tank, mobile gun system or a derivative of these. The main cannon is not sufficient to reliably square up against MBTs (even the ones that were considered standard at the time of its introduction). Having said that I understand that vehicle classifications aren't black and white and this is just a minor gripe of mine.
The real utility of this is being able to make the types of aggressive mechanised attacks we saw in places like Kharkiv.Hopefully we get to see a bit more of it.
Thanks for another great Video; and the "Marder" possibilities" humour at the end - absolute top! You deserve a lot more subscribers than you currently have.🙂
The AMX 10rc does not have the same 105 as a leopard. The Germans elected to use the L7 British design gun. The French on the other hand decided to use an indigenous 105 mm gun. If I remember correctly they're gun is a low pressure gun so the effective range is a little less than the L7.
Mostly correct, but the 105mm gun of an AMX-30 tank is slightly better than the Leopard due to it's incredible (for the time) french ammo, and it has just as much pressure and range, if not more as an L7. The low pressure one is the 105mm gun on the AMX-10RC, which the same as the one on the AMX-30 MBT, but just half pressure as it is installed on a 15 ton Recon vehicle not a 32 ton MBT, this is to better manage recoil.
Small correction: The BTR-82 is just the stabilized variant of the normal BTR-80 with the 14,7mm Machine gun. The BTR-80A or BTR-82A have the Machine Cannon
Not really btr 80A is a btr 80 with 30mm cannon instead of 14.7mm Btr 82 , btr 82AM , btr 82A all of them have additional upgrades to the armour and thermals and other stuff
But the Marder is able to travers up to 2 meter deep bodies of water right? Its not amphibious as the BMPs the russian used but at least you dont need a bridge for every small piece of water
Amphibious ability is not something you can use as river canceling though, it doesn’t work like that. Even more or less fully amphibious units in Eastern armies hardly use this ability - you still have to prepare the crossing and sometimes vehicles, plus your logistics need a bridge or ferry. It is ongoning debate in post Warsaw Pact armies if it is worth all the limitations that amphibious ability brings (see for example polish Borsuk that might serve only in limited numbers as heavy IFV might be chosen as main system).
@@Rabarbarzynca Yeah,but if you consider that an amphibious IFV could bypass bridges and engages the defensive positions from the flanks or cross a river at a badly defended position and establish a small beachhead and shielding the bridge from getting build compared to wait for a crossing before moving further i can see why the soviets would invest into it since their plan was to "crush nato" and move west while nato was well aware that they needed to delay the soviet armored formation as good as they could and wait for reinforcements to show up i would still say that the ability of the marder to pass small rivers without preperation gives it enough mobility in the field so that a small stream would prevent a real obstacle to them
At this point, I really don't think the general condition of Russian Army military vehicles currently in Ukraine would instill confidence that any BMP would be capable of amphibious operations.
Previously, the USSR Armed Forces were considered masters of attacking over a water obstacle. In Ukraine, on the other hand, the attacks by the Russian armed forces over water obstacles largely failed with the heaviest casualties.
The Bradley is lighter armored than the Marder A3 but has the higher mobility, the Bradley is probably the most mobile combat vehicle in Ukraine at the moment. In this respect, it is obvious to examine whether the Bradley should not also be used as a reconnaissance vehicle, as other armed forces do.
@LOLO / VAL The AMX-10 RC has certainly proven itself extraordinarily well in desert use. But even the AMX-10 RCR has a combat weight of only 17 tons compared to 34 tons of the Marder A3 (Bradley 33t), which will have a significant impact in the operating conditions in Ukraine.
@LOLO / VAL The AMX-10 RC has certainly proven itself extraordinarily well in desert use. But even the AMX-10 RCR has a combat weight of only 17 tons compared to 34 tons of the Marder A3 (Bradley 33t), which will have a significant impact in the operating conditions in Ukraine.
@LOLO / VAL AMX 10RC won't be good in war when enemy have got a lot of artillery, and where a lot of trees and dirt. Ukraine is not desert with empty space and solid ground.
The WBG X thermal imaging device is only installed from A2 or higher, but all Marder have been modernized to at least level A3, so that actually none are in service without it. The A5 has additional the Hensoldt Spectus installed, but this system is only for the driver and also includes a reversing camera. If equipped with MELLS/Spike, the associated display console is installed.
2 года назад+4
Nice Video. I didnt realize that the Missile system of the BMP-2 has to be reloaded manually. Also nice footage from the DPM.
I assume these will not be received with anti-tank missiles. This means they will likely be integrated in with T-64 and T-72 tank groups. The Bradley’s are capable of operating semi-autonomously. I’m sure both will be used to great effect though
@@5co756 Kamikazi drones that Russia uses have no cameras or ability to track targets. They can therefore only hit stationary targets in well known locations and are thus very ineffective at destroying Ukrainian military assets. This is why Russia uses them to hit civilian targets rather than using them on the frontline battles with Ukrainian forces
If Germany runs out of 80s vintage Tanks, we could still send the furry variant of the Marder. They are realy good at achieving mobility kills via chewing cabels.
Martens are extremely shy animals. There were tracks of them where I grew up and lived for 15 years and I never saw any of them. I saw several badgers and lynx, but martens are even more "run away, ran away, ruuun awaaay!"
@@larrynivren8139 I can differ between reality and propaganda Many seem to suffer from so serious brain damage that they cannot do that. They believe anything that known fraudsters lie about, they live in fantasy world and have no ability to connect with reality, no matter what happens.
Imprecise fire from an IFV is useful under current NATO doctrine when the IFVs are being tasked with firing at a likely avenue of escape, to discourage infantry from leaving cover while other units manoeuvre in to eliminate them.
Thanks for this great summary. I know more about the Bradley than the Marder and thought they were more similar in capability. I see that without a stabilized main gun and the potential issues with operating the ATGM in combat, the Bradley has at least a couple notable advantages.
@@Mortablunt Probably pretty bad for Russian armor since all Bradleys have anti tank rockets on them. They already went up against T72s in Iraq, and wasted them.
@@Mortablunt The Ukrainians will not use them against tanks, for that they have tanks of their own. Used in combination with tanks they are a great way to provide infantry with fire support, but it will be the infantry with missile launchers and the tanks that kill the T-72s and T-90s.
Bradley is in some aspects the more modern vehicle, it was introduced more than 10 years after Marder. Its main advantage is the bigger stabilized gun and TOW can be fired under armor-protection.
Perhaps you already know it: the Marder is the base for Argentina's domestically produced tank, the TAM (Tanque Argentino Mediano, Argentinian Medium Tank). It was designed by Krauss-Maffei I think, it sports a 105mm main gun and has amphibious capabilities. In recent years Elbit from Israel modernized their armor and targetting/control systems. No idea how much the tank differs from the original Marder, but it somehow shows the Marder can take more bells and whistles
The amount of territorial gain for Russia is equal to the size Portugal I believe. The territories include Ukraine's ports on the black sea, the majority of Ukraine's metallurgical industry and lastly Ukraine's gas fields. Those three are very important economic assets.. which they lost. How would you explain this as a loss for Russia?
@@Habib_Osman because russia captured much more at start, when noone expected the invasion, and then lost half of it - all capured in the north, all captured in Kharkiv Oblast, now Kherson, and will lose more. They proclamed all those territories their own forever core, and now lost. This is disaster for russhist image :) How can they explain that, if acc to their own info Ukrainian army is long time dead? :) And about industry...well...half of was in disrepair before, other half sadly will be or already are stolen by russians or ruined. It is no more an economical asset, but opposite - all this territories will need costly restorations :(
A "Marder 2" was planned with either a 35mm or 50mm gun and a 7.62 coaxial MG and also with much better armour. Weighing 45 tons with a 1000hp engine, it was quite a monster. Like many military projects of the time (1991/1992) it ran into the problem of lack of enemies. Prototypes and test vehicles were built and tested before it was cancelled in 1992 as unnecessarily expensive. It would be helpful now though...
It appears NATO will allow Ukraine a slow death while trickling in just enough weapons to keep the war going and withholding what would help them win. Sadly, everyday Ukraine is losing men it can't replace.
The Ukrainians *have been counter attacking Russina invaders for months* ~ They have NO OTHER CHOICE The German politicians hiding behind weasel words of 'we will only supply 'defensive' armour' WHILST PUTIN'S MISSILES RIP APART CIVILIANS AND DEFENDERS ALIKE *That is despicable, self-serving hand-wringing self-indulgence of the worst sort*
Quit pointing out that the BMP is amphibious. DId you see the pictures of the Russians' attempted river crossing of a modest river back in May? It is designed to be amphibious, but in all its long years of service, has the BMP ever been used amphibiously in war/combat?
Exactly, Bradleys (or Marders) could be very usefull in that role or comparable rolls, or in their role as transports and close support. The dream of mechanized ukrainian infantry division rolling all the way to Moscow just because now they will have some Bradleys (Marders) is absurd. The ukrainians just don't have the capabilitys to form such brigades and even if they do they only can use them as a qucik reaction force, not for breaking lines, etc.
The Marder and the BMP may each have pluses and minuses, but as you or one of your colleagues pointed out, a well-trained crew counts for a lot. The topic in that case was the M4 Sherman versus the Panzer V Panther tank. The Sherman crews had trained in the UK for 2 years, before the invasion of France, while the Panther crews in comparison did not benefit from such extensive training. The result was that Sherman crews often made more effective use of their vehicles.
They barely saw any Tiger 1 or Panther in France , about 70% of the Wehrmacht was at the eastern front . Crew training sure helps , but Tiger and Panther crew's mostly had many expirience . They started with Stug's or Pz4's , no 20 year old boys were operating the big German cats .
@@5co756 Historian Mark Felton says that the American Sherman crews were better-trained than the German Panther crews encountered on the Western Front. If you view the video, you can hear his narrative for yourself.
@@patrickcloutier6801 I really appreciate Felton's videos and research, but US tank crews that were not in Torch or at Anzio etc. are nowhere near to be compared to tank crews with 4 - 5 years of warfighting experience. Survival of the fittest, good habits, and that's not to downplay US training and kit, but compare why in fighter aircraft we have Red Flag, aggressor squadrons/ Top Gun etc. Those programs were all created to replicate real combat experience. Which the Wehrmacht had since Sept 1st, 1939...
What is it that you said at 13:16 Did you say Pyrrhic War 2.0? It's interesting that there is always politics going on behind the scenes, even in war. I'm no history buff but I seem to recall that during the Spanish civil war Germany and Russia and other countries used the opportunity to develop and practice new war tactics like bombing civilian targets. I hope the use of a tactical nukes is not in the future.
Great Patriotic War 2.0, Great Patriotic War is the Russian name for their part in the Second World War. The Patriotic War was the fight against Napoleon.
The numbers of Bradley's, Marders, AMX etc promised are a drop in the Ocean versus actual requirements along a 1000 Km Battlefront-50 Bradleys won't change the tactical situation, they need hundreds, the multitude of donated armoured platforms is also worrying in terms of maintenance of so many different platforms from the many donor countries, this war is going to drag on and on without supporting Economies adopting a serous upturn in manufacturing of the required kit for the UA.
If Ukraine uses these effectively, they will get many more. The US has a couple thousand Bradley's that they no longer use. There are training and logistics issues that are easier to work out with a small number of vehicles. Once the AFU has figured out the logistics of fueling and maintaining them and figured out what is involved in training soldiers to use them effectively, then it makes sense to send more.
True... but if you see hundres of fish stranded on the beach and you pick up only a few ones and throws them back into waster before they die... does this seems like not much success but it means the world for those who got saved. Same here... every crew sitting in a Marder or Bradly compared to a truck or SUV or old BMP1 will really value it
You are right. But wirth many drops, which are given, You can make a cup of coffee or tea. Those are not stand alones. There are other incommers every day and also at the civile level.
As I’ve said it’s applying for victory was actually a concern the Western powers needed to make a lot of hard and final decisions back in the spring about what to supply and how they were going to ensure a sustained logistical chain. Basically they had to choose if they were going to ultimately convert Ukraine into a westernized force or set up their own production facilities for Soviet equipment. Have they gotten that done back in April or May, pieces of new production would be hitting the battlefield about now right when Ukraine is at a critical collapse. It’s too late now.
Marder and Bradley will make good heavyweight IFVs for Ukraine, they already have lightweight options such as the CVR(T) variants of a similar age, these have an even lower ground pressure. I wish the UK would offer the even newer Warrior series since we're ditching them already. Many are in storage and in good condition, more vcan be sent as Boxer comes into service.
The italians have although some interesting vehicles in their arsenal.Dardo-IFV and the Centauro-light tank,that is more powerful than the french AMX10.
Thank you for the detailed view on what Germany is likely to provide to Ukraine - it's good to round out our understanding of what all parties are supplying. As an American, there's a lot of details on our armament that is being sent, but not so much on our allies. Do you have any connections with the French Armor community and could provide us more information on the French supply to Ukraine? I'm curious how each contribution might be combined and used. Do you have any insight on this too?
That would actually make for a really cool video in itself. Ukraine has a lot of systems in use right now, and several of them should work well in combined arms!
France is outsourcing vab because of new systems, so they send outsourced vabs, same germans marder start getting outsourced. Nato is sending nearly 1500 armoured systems 30.000 rockets and 2 million heavy ammo
I don’t think that it has a deficiency in its anti tank capability because the launcher isn’t a hard mounted system like on the Bradley but one that can be easily taken off. This should make it possible to mount more modern systems then the Milan like stugna p or TOW with a little DIY work.
The Marder A5A1 has a Spike missile (modern top attack like the Javelin) so yes very possible. While a A5A1 has a lot of other upgrades which would take more time I don't see why you couldn't just do the Spike on it's own.
@@XMysticHerox well spike itself is a problem but maybe something for a NATO country? The normal A5 still uses the Milan but all of them are going to be upgraded to spike. I don’t think that they need heavy modifications for the Milan to spike change.
You say that Germany repeatedly denied requests to send Marders to Ukraine, but my impression was that they had accepted and were in the process of refurbishing a number of old ones they had rusting away in storage. The condition of the vehicles, the only ones they had to spare, was very poor and they gave an estimate of six to eight months for delivery after repairs and upgrades, which would've landed their availability around early 2023. Are these not the refurbished ones they've been talking about? Is it not possible that France, the US, and Germany all coordinated to have their shipments ready simultaneously to not overshadow each other and to show solidarity?
I would imagine it has more to do with logistical support and combat readiness than pure politics - even if politics plays a part of every decision! The NATO countries and allies would have to coordinate with each other according to Ukrainian needs and what they can supply.
From what I recall, it was the *industry* that began refurbishing 100 Marders months ago on their own dime, perhaps anticipating that the government would change track at some point. Chancellor Scholz' position was always that he doesn't want Germany to be the first (in order to avoid being seen as "escalatory" - I'd disagree with him, but I can see where he is coming from), and now that France has stepped forward with the AMX-10, he can follow suit and just say Germany wants to be a reliable ally. If anyone were to start sending Abrams, LeClercs or Challengers, I have a hunch the Leopard 2 would follow, too. Then again, who knows what sort of talks may have taken place behind the scenes? I don't think this was planned months ago, but it is pretty interesting that these three announcements all came within only 24h.
@@ddshiranui Im not "all hate on Germany", and I know most Germans want to support Ukraine, but other NATO countries already sent hundreds of IFVs, tanks and other heavy equipment to Ukraine. This whole "escalatory" thing is just a cover for Sholtz and his ungrounded fears.
"There are a lot of spare parts, logistics and production available for the Marder" I am sorry but where did you pick up that information? Because from my end and my talking with people from KMW and Rheinmetall that was one of the ways they "got away" with the growing expenses of the Puma. Because producers of very critical parts for the Marder went out of business long ago and spare parts were very expensive and hand fitted for existing vehicles. That also gives a hint at the existing stockpile of spare parts if you have to manufacture single parts to be fitted.
Iam no expert and I assume it's a really good weapon. But is it suitable for a winter war when the battlefield is deep mud. Seen tracked vehicles get bogged down. I'd be interested if anyone could let me know how it performs in muddy conditions
If you look at the Bundeswehr Div. Recce or the old American Cavalry Group and the taskings of the Tanks in these Batt. you have what the AMX10RC was developed for. The reason for wheels you have to go to 1980's French military thought.
@LOLO / VAL Yes, we can say it started with the EBR and AML to be able to travel to the central front and for Africa. The French Rapid Reaction Corps carried out some exercises with various light Div reinforcing the French I Corps. At the same time there was a budget constraint as they built up the Force D'Frappe. In the eighties the rebuilding of the Army begun, both AMX variants, AUF1, TRF1, VAB, Leclerc and supply vehicle inventory. Costs where some of the reasons but transportation and overseas intervention also play a big role. French thought on tactics is based on the 2nd DB's experience in WW2, the AMX10RC was issued to the Corps recce I believe the 8 Hussards in Altkirch at the time, the various schools and 6DLB anf 1st RCLE ( the marine and airborne used the ERC). The small armoured div. were meant to operate in fast stinging attacks the Recce was a mixture of Jeeps and AMX or AML this was only at Corps and the DL's. Div had a coy on jeeps and VAB. Having mentioned the size of the Div they consited of 3 mch Inf 2-3 tank and 2 Arty. A slight bit larger then the American WW2 armoured Div. So they did have a tactical operational vision, plus the Pluton Artillery. Jim Storr and his book battlegroup is highly reccomended. Track vehicles are more mobile cross country and less ground displacement. I can't see Jaguar filling in the AMX10 role but as a proper recce vehicle. Did see a prototype vehicle with 8 wheels and 120mm low pressure.
@@ArchOfficial I remember how in the 80's the Canadian Army failed the trials of the Cougar for Recce in Germany, fear of overall replacement by wheel AFV's.
Have you ever thought about pairing up with Perun for a video? Seems like y'all would make a good pair, and you both do very well with the "visual presentation via slides" style.
I agree with Mortablunt. I have to say though that Perun definitely has the same capabilities as Military History.. its just such a pity he wants to repeat all the negative news/anti-Russian propaganda about Russia that western media channels promote. Example: there was a video of a singular Russian soldier showing 2 extremely rusted guns. Western media reported: "Russian army has terrible weapons maintenance, their soldiers fight with rusted weapons!" Perun repeated that claim multiple times despite that little rumour being based on like 3 private videos of 10 isolated pieces of equipment.
Another example: there was a panel discussion about the war in Ukraine. A panellist showed a photo showing a Russian vehicle with certain cracks in its wheels, and explained that the reason for that type of damage to wheels happens because 1 side of the vehicle was exposed to sun, while the other was not. Hence, the panelist concluded, Russia is inept at maintenance of wheeled vehicles. Perun repeated that claim multiple times despite that rumour being based on 1 singular source that showed 1 singular photo as evidence.
The Marder is best understood as an armored personnel carrier. Its primary purpose is to move troops around the battlefield, a very important function, but it should try to avoid any fights with tanks. It is very useful in a defensive role, and the Ukrainians would be happy to have them on the front in Bakhmut, but holding a fixed position, it is vulnerable to artillery. It does weigh 33 tons, which means it can't just skip lightly over the Ukrainian mud. For that, the the AMX-10 recon vehicles provided by the French (16 tons) are more appropriate.
@@acceptablecasualty5319 And yet it was admitted they were designed to accompany Leopards into battle, which does not have the same limitations or capabilities as Soviet T-series tanks. Ideally, you wouldn't want 40 of these ending up on the battlefield where they can be engaged, because they most definitely won't have the armor to shrug off artillery, a missile, or cannon round. That being said, being able to go as quickly in reverse as it can forward, it can get somewhere quickly, take some shots, and get out as quickly as it came in.
Doesn't dividing the content of one's fighting vehicle armada into so many types from different nations create problems with logistics? There must be different teams trained on each one, differing spare part sets, tactics and so forth. That sounds like a nightmare to me.
Yes, across all of the aid provided to Ukraine, does make a logistics nightmare for maintaince and repair. It is mitigated by close proximity to the original manufacturer and their supply chain. Poland and the baltic republics have been supplying support services for a bunch of Nato gear Ukraine is running. While this supply situation sucks it is better than lacking said equipment. Ideally Ukraine would want native wargear but since they dont have that big of an arms industry they need outside supply. Even the captured gear is becoming a supply problem.
They are just send there because it's all crap and to ruin western Ukraine further and somenone is for sure making nice profit with it. Doesn't matter if they work.
@@miriamweller812 go ahead and aim your attitude at the proper target, Russia. They can stop the fighting and pull out. And maybe after some contrition attempt to rejoin the cvilized world. They can stop this…..at any time.
needing to open the hatch to reload the ATGM is a downside, but with the way the hatches are laid out, you are most likely to lose only your hands, and not your Hans.
The Marder (A1/A2) was an exceptionally agile vehicle, but by fitting the extra armor, while very effective against hollow charge ammunition, the Marder A3 unfortunately lost much of that agility. The 20mm gun's APDS ammunition is exceptionally powerful for its caliber, penetrating the sides of a Centurion turret. Due to the large elevation range, a rate of fire of 1000 rounds per minute and a muzzle velocity of 1000 meters per second, the weapon system is very well suited for combating air targets. Furthermore the combination of the thermal imaging device and the 20mm HE ammo is excellent for fighting infantry. And as a bonus you still have the MG3 as a coaxial weapon to the 20mm.
Unfortunately, the Russians have no Centurion. They only have T64, T72, T80, T90 and Marder's 20mm cannot damage any of them even at point-blank range.
@@tvgerbil1984 Well, destroying MBTs is not the main task of an AIFV. The 20mm of the Marder is capable of destroying anything used in Ukraine except MBTs, for fighting MBTs you have to fall back on the Milan.
@@tvgerbil1984 Wait, the russians also have nukes. OMG, the marder probably won't survive a direct hit. OMG OMG. Because fighting a war is "two vehicles enter the ring and fight it out!" Simple people talking about complex matters is more painfull than getting hit by 20mm i guess.
The Marder 1 A3 to A5A1 is a very good tank. We used them until 2 years ago. And is now out of Service , but the Main Gun is very good. Plus it can Take Milan and TOW Missiles attached to the Turret
It looks like the same concept as a Bradley fighting vehicle; which as done well enough in fights against old hardware. This is a chance to see how it does against peers.
I once was Panzergrenadier,then gunner,then driver of such a thing. With nowadays antitank- weaponry I would rather be elsewhere but not in such a tincan
With so many guided weapons around today, I would keep a distance of 30 meters from any kind of heavy equipment while within 50 km of the front. Bunching together 9-10 men into such a rolling steel coffin only makes killing more easier for an enemy that has practically monopoly on artillery and air force.
I myself was an armored infantryman in the Bundeswehr. We had the Marder1A3 version. Since only a few were converted to the Marder1A5 version and these are still active in the Bundeswehr today, I strongly suspect that it will be the Marder1A3 version. This also has the ability to fire an anti-tank guided missile (even if this is not a fire and forget weapon).
@@ifv2089 Well I hope the brits don't have to open up garbage bins to look for them. If they had enough, they would've sent them already to Ukraine. They aren't in service for 17 years (replaced by Javelin). So they are probably scrap metal now.
@@ifv2089 Afaik, the last Combat use of Milan in british service was in 2006. If they still have usable quantities of Milans, why didn't the UK sent them to Ukraine as France abd Italy did? If you have any evidence I'd be happy for Ukraine ...
@@theodorkorner1497 - Depends on what you're fighting. This is a scout vehicle or a transport. You can't expect it to accomplish anything in an advance against unknown opposition, at any real range, or while moving. You can expect it to contribute fire to an unexpected meeting engagement at close range. 20 mm might take out enemy light armor, or it might not but this vehicle has no business encountering enemy armor at all. Bradley's evolved into more of a tank destroyer than its original purpose as an APC, but in large part that's because it wasn't much of a transport in the first place. The passenger compartment was smaller than the box of a small pickup in the original model. I haven't been in any newer ones.
Well, the Ukies have a really hard time restraining themselves from throwing AFVs face first at heavily defended Russian positions. I wouldn't be surprised if I saw them using Marders to spearhead an assault (they've been doing it since forever with BMP-1s/2s and captured BMP-3s). Such maneuvers usually end with a tube artillery or AT mine vibe check, followed by a prompt retreat.
Seems like these are far better than fighting just with small arms! I'm sure Ukraine will be glad to get them and put them to good use. Hopefully, rolling all the way to Melitopol and then on to Crimea.
how long does it take to train a crew to operate a Marder? And since they were designed to be used along Leopard main battle tanks, how will they be used without tanks on battle fields where enemy has tens or hundreds of tanks?
@@ArchOfficial Fact that every news that talk about these Marder and Bradley, and French "tanks" say that Ukraine has been asking them for months now, and that has been refused so far, if they had tanks they wouldn't be asking for them, would they? And about Leopards watch video again, it says that they were designed to be used along with Leopard tanks.
Compared to a PzH2000 or a Gepard , Marder is quite simple.I think ukrainians will not need much training in infantry tactics,because they will not send housewifes to germany.So it may not need 8 weeks.
Germany doesn't send new classes of heavy equipment individually. France and America seem to have similar notions and due to the timing of all 3 announcements it's likely all 3 countries had to coordinate it and waited for a moment when all countries were happy with sending it.
Upgrade is an interesting word. Armored vehicles become more armored and add technical systems but at great cost to speed and mobility. An early American Bradley or M1 tank is race car compared to the latest version after all the upgrades. (A driver might think they are downgrades not upgrades!)
This argument that Ukraine "only needs defensive tanks" made me so angry! My brother in Christ, Ukraine is currently on a counter offensive to take back what the Russians stole, and for that they absolutely need offensive capabilities! If all they can do is defend, then it will be a frozen conflict forever, the very thing that everyone pretends to be worried about!
I agree the German government should be ashamed of themselves. How is Ukraine supposed to regain their territory if they can’t attack. Just lying to justify their inaction.
Putin needs to be driven out of Ukraine, then perhaps he will learn a lesson, that's going to take a lot of AFV's & MBT's. It's difficult to judge whether Russia would disintegrate if Putin falls, however there are always indeterminate outcomes in the aftermath of war.
They may be tired, and many are justifiably so, but they are correct that donors of weapons and their kibitzers are sillily distinguishing defensive and offensive equipment. This is ground maneuver war gear. Categorizing as offensive or defensive has more to do with whose land you are on than comparative technology.
The AMX-10 doesn't have a standard NATO 105mm gun like in the Leopard 1. That's what I also assumed until I looked it up. It's got some weird "medium pressure" gun that fires a lower-velocity special round. It's the only tank in existence that has this gun and that uses this ammo. And it's not stabilized, either. Oh well, it's better than nothing. I hope the US will send all their M1128 Stryker Mobile Gun Systems which DO have a standard and stabilized 105mm NATO gun.
@@murphy7801 I didn't say it was "bad". It's just not as good as I thought it was after I first heard about it. It shoots a low velocity proprietary round that must be in limited supply, and the gun isn't stabilized so it can't shoot on-the-move. Never-the-less, I'm glad and I thank France for sending them. I hope France sends all 248 of them. I know Ukraine can put them to good use.
It's happy to see Germany finally decided to send more heavy equipment, but as u discussed before, would 40 Marders really be able to achieve anything? I guess they could be used with about 4 companies of PzGren. but are they really worth using in the front line? Or maybe they could be used as training vehicles for further aid?
First I think it is important to show combined and ongoing support for Ukraine, so the delivery of AFVs from France, the US and Germany is significant in that way. Second Ukraine is outsourcing a lot of their 3rd and 4th level maintenance so to speak. A more diverse set of vehicles is not as problematic, because they get send back for heavy repairs and maintenance anyway. With multiple vehicle types in service, this load can be spread over more countries. Every support that can unload the Ukraine industry and economy, besides preferably supporting their military is worth it imho.
Anything is better than nothing. The Bradleys will be more significant but the Marders I'm sure will also be useful. Even if it was just 10 Marders it would make a difference to some Ukrainian unit somewhere.
The first batch is probably to train a cadre of Ukrainians in preparation for larger deliveries so they don’t get bombed while in storage awaiting trained crews Ukraine’s principle deficiencies for its ground combat forces are 1. Ammunition supply and 2. Equipment provisioning, so few in number they are, it does provide more armored vehicles which is in desperate need
On the possible Leopard2 delivery, it is one of the mysteries of current German politics. What is the goal actually? How one can argue on ATTACK or DEFENSE armament, when Ukrainians are deep on their territory, trying to get it back? It sounds like reasoning of 5yo. Anyway, based on steps taken so far, I would suggest that once Marders are delivered and Russia is not able to retaliate, then the next step are heavies finally.
German extreme pacifism have never been logical. Now it is colliding with reality. And more realistic pragmatism and less hypocrisy is probably the result.
The Marder A1 and the 1A3 are by far the best auxiliary combat vehicles Germany has ever produced. ATGMs, 20mm with various ammo storage, armoured enough for street fighting and small enough for ambushes against heavier tanks. Marder is absolute murder on the battlefield. :D
The armor is definetly total underrated, it seems everyone is only looking at the guns and stuff (20mm is enough in my opinion btw.) but they forget, that they carry 9 people around. Losing a Marder to a lack of protection would mean losing 9 people at once.
This is an absolutely childish analysis. "by far" the best? Did you forget about the Lynx which is "by far" more capable? And "Marder is absolute murder on the battlefield" Which battlefield? War Thunder battlefield? Smh. 🤦♂
Thanks for the coverage 👍 I've googled a bit and I didn't found info regarding when the Puma is going to enter service, and since there's an in-house alternative already at Rheinmetall, the Lynx (basically an amped up Marder, using the same chassis), is there a chance that the Bundeswehr's going to ditch the Puma and opt for the relatively less expensive and simpler Lynx?
@@poki580 yeah, not only that but they had to change requirements for maximum height as a panzergrenadier. You are not allowed to be bigger than 186 cm, as you are to big. Atleast that is the last info I have regarding that issue. Enraged a few people how were already in the army and about to join a puma company
@@poki580 well, considering the failures were mostly rather minor, you can debate if it is a fiasco. A parking heater was forgotten to be turned on in one Puma, deemed broken and the Puma classified as out of service…
@@poki580 No the real fiasco is the fake news by our useless defense min. It appears these "failures" were totally exaggerated and mainly caused by lack of maintenance and user error. All of the 18 are already back in service. Looks like they tried to shift the blame to the industry bc otherwise the military and ministerial admin. would have to take the blame for management mistakes. Fucking shit show as always.
AS a US Army Infantry officer.... I did several training deployments with the 342 Panzer Grenadiers out of Koblenz. Gotta Say.... The way they handled mud/terrain was superior. And quick in acceleration then when needing to pull back in reverse (front to enemy while gunner engages) was also the best. The rear troop roof and rear hatch setup was very well designed (just low/high enough) to do your task. Gotta say. Its what i want to ride into a treeline/farmland fight such as the terrain of a Ukraine. Especially if i need the rear infantry with heads up and assisting in seeing drones. Yep.... Those weeks i spent in the back of a Marder is where i would want to be if we are holding a treeline and need to jump forward on command for a raid/counter and return to my positions. (Its as good in reverse and fighting its way out and it is in forward and taking ground)
Like The Chieftain said in your sit down. If the Ukrainians could manage to pull a brigade or two off the line for a couple months of training with some of this new Western equipment, they’d have a heck of a force to counterattack with in the Spring. Mobilized dudes with rusty AKs and Wagner penal battalions would get shredded up against a competent combine arms force.
A this rate it's going to be 2 battalions every two months being pulled away to train on Bradleys and Marders. The number of brigades will depend on how many M113s they're willing to throw into the mix. An American ABCT requires 3 Bradley Battalions and two tank battalions.
Leopard 2 is also good in attacking. It is a main battle tank. You cannot say "Russian T-80/T-72 is for attacking and Leopard 2 is for defending." It is a battle between two main battle tanks. Nothing more.
The leopard 2 is designed for the combined arms warfare of Verzögerungsgefecht. Which means giving up territory while slowly retreating from one defensive line to another and letting the enemy bleet out for every meter it gained. When the point of exhaustion is reached, a violent counter attack is followed to recreat the former Frontline or even gain a little more. I dont think Ukraine can pull of such operations. So the leopard 2 is of questionable value.
Established german news outlets are reporting today that Germany will find it impossible to send more than 40 of these vehicles.Without the anti-tank Milans as well.Same old hot air from ScholZ
It's important to remember Russia is an artillery army. Virtually all of Ukraine's vehicle losses have been to Russian artillery which pounds armored vehicles before they can get close enough to engage Russian troops. Any armored vehicle sent by NATO would have to be resistant to artillery to make a difference. Unfortunately, one has not been invented yet. Abrams, Bradley, Marder, leopard, none of them can withstand being inside the blast radius of a standard Soviet 152mm HE shell.
Nice to see in comments a list of what Ukraine needs (tanks, IFV etc), but nobody mentioned peace for Ukraine. That's actually all that you need about this warfare.
And that can only happen when the last russian on Ukraine soil either leaves across the border, bleeds out on the ground left behind by his coward commanders or is captured as a PoW, and the Kremlin admits total defeat and unconditional surrender while Putin is overthrown by the Russian people.
@@SonsOfLorgar you"re a profund moron if you think russkies will overthrown putin, and if that happens the one replacing him might even be more aggressive. Let's see how this 10 th wave of ukrain enrollment goes and if they manage to push russkies
It simply isn't the time for peace. Think of it this way to get an idea why: Was there time for "peace" in 1942 and should the the allies and germany just have come together and have a talk and after that its all over? It is sad, but it is as simple as this, sometimes there is the right time for making peace and sometimes there isn't.
@@polarstorm5986 in the forties Churchill and Roosevelt just wanted to impose liberalism and destroy Germany forever; today it's not wise to wish such a thing against the biggest nuclear power on the planet
Corrections:
The AMX-10 RC has only the same caliber (105mm) not the same gun as the Leopard 1.
Glad you caught that before the bombardment of corrections. 😁😁
It does not really matter - both vehicles would trigger Russians the same once they would get adorned with crosses and other WW2 signs...
They will stuff in troops and storm Russian positions that are under cannon fire. It's what they do.
@@ijustwanttogosailing8248 Are you for real?
@@mathewgreen5957 That's their official tactical marking..
Search for "CNN Kupiansk" for example - our supposed allies adopted crosses when they launched Kharkiv and Kherson offensives.
An armored box with a gun on it will never go out of style, so long as you have the men and material to maintain them. It's not a wunder-weapon, but it doesn't have to be. It's just an upgrade to a cargo truck or pickup truck. So long as you don't overestimate them, they won't fail you.
Truth. I remember building a model of the Marder as a kid and I always liked the aesthetics of it. It was and is a good “gen 1” (at least for NATO) IFV.
I can only imagine that the Ukrainians agree, and simply hope to get a few such reliable platforms in LARGE numbers, rather than a dozen different ones in small lots. Managing logistics, sustainment, training and tactics across 30 different vehicle types during a fight for national survival must be a pain in the ass of epic proportions….
An upgrade really?????
@@rikspring yes. Infantry are your primary weapon. The truck is just a means of getting them in and out of trouble.
Above all else, the purpose is to increase the long range mobility of infantry. Marching is bad for moral, and causes excessive fatigue.
Heavy weapons and armor are totally optional. Tanks are for pushing the front line, mechanized transports are primarily for helping the infantry keep up with said front line.
The IFV concept is an attempt to compress the role of an infantry tank and transport into one vehicle. It's a viable, but more expensive method. It's geared toward quality over quantity. The cost of your transports increases, and their carry capacity decreases. But it negates the need for dedicated fighting vehicles like infantry tanks. When it comes to fielding large numbers of troops, a plain dedicated armored transport mixed with dedicated weapon carriers will do the same job more economically.
Different strokes for different folks.
@@Fabrizio_Ruffo You're correct, we learned that lesson in Iraq, where our opponent was ALWAYS infantry. Ambushing infantry, dug in infantry, infantry doing drive by's in Opal hatchbacks & BMW's, shoot n' scoot mortar and RPG attacks, but always infantry. The lesson was that YOUR infantry still need bigger guns to arrive in support, and gun trucks were key, not MBT's.
The uparmored hummer, for all its faults and all that we lost, delivered the goods. Light armor & Technicals are about more than hauling crunchies as dragoons, but gun platforms with high mobility. Even when I was a tanker, the majority of targets (and threats to your well-being) on the battlefield aren't other expensive tanks, but loads and loads of cheap, fast moving, missile packing threats to your armor, and heavy machine gun toting threats to your infantry and unarmored support. The Coax machine gun and m242 auto cannons always get more trigger time than the big gun. And the best defense against the revitalized threat of artillery (thanks to UAV's on the battlefield) is to be as mobile as possible. Infantry on foot is more hideously vulnerable to arty, rocket & mortar fire now than every before. Because it's nearly impossible to hide anymore when the Evil Eyes in the Sky are everywhere.
The Marder is probably a significant improvement over a BMP. Though against a 100mm equipped later model BMP it would suffer in a gun fight. It will almost certainly need to be supported by dedicated anti tank missile teams. Ukraine needs Abrams/Leos. The French 105mm Wheeled Armoured Cars will be useful as infantry fire support vehicles VS strongpoints and light Armour.
I actually served as a "Panzergrenadier" (squad Mg3 operator ) on a Spz Marder.
despite its old age (first was deliverd 1971) its still a very capable combat taxi.
Its mostly relaible and the crew is able to repair a lot of damge itself.
As said in the video it can only shoot precise while standing,
The milan (tow) system is good to have but very slow ( 2 KM ~ 13seconds) . So it was said to us:
before you even reach target it can happen that you are detected and will be destroyed by an enemy tank.
The thermal imaging system (wärmebildgerät)of the marder is also good to have, with mixed feelings. I remeber some maneuvers , where i have to play the enemy, dismounted and eqipped with a milan system, wich we hid in the field, aiming on a feigned enemy Marder. they didnt notice us ( about 100 meters Away) while day time.
and in antoher maneuver at night we where like 200 m away.
(milan also have a additional Thermal imagine system called "mira" but its very noisy and makes a lot of heat itself.)
The Talibans really feared the marders 20mm bmk it has a swivel range from -17° to + 65° so fuck your ambush attempets from hilltops.
also good against enemy Helicopters etc.
To make this clear : the marders job is that of a fast armoured combat taxi.
protect the 6 man squad inside, throw them out and give them some cover. if need be, its able to destroy tanks.
Thx for the info, and actually the speed & ease of repair oughta be very well suited to the ever-'resourceful' Ukrainians! 🇺🇦👍
Very interesting comment 👍
The problem is, Ukraine is going to need to use them as an infantry support IFV rather than just transport. With a cannon that can't kill BMPs and armour that can't resist 30mm cannon I personally would want to be assigned to a Bradley.
Thanks Germany for your belated decision - but at least what France is sending CAN destroy BMPs. Must be quite sad to be outclassed by French armoured cars.
@@occamraiser they are completely different weapon systems, of course they will not do the same... the AMX can not transport troops (main task of the marder). Must be a hard life if one can not distinguish those two...
@@occamraiser Well, with anti-tank capability and a top off-road speed almost twice as fast as a BMP, I wouldn't consider a Marder exactly 'defenseless'... though I get your point re: procurement from a buncha 'surrender monkeys'! :-p
For the: „crew comfort and ergonomics” of BMP1/2, I have been inside of both of them, while they were moving around. And the comfort, or the lack of it is just unbelievable. I am Czech, and these were ex czechoslovakian BMPs. But, in Czech Republic, both soldiers and civilians who own them call them „Kostitřas” or "Boneshaker” in english. So yes, they are extremely uncomfortable. I’ve never been in a Marder, so I cannot compare. 😅👍
In German they were called "Kotzkübel" "vomit bucket" from what I know, but I omitted that, since I only heard it once. (edit: plural -> singular)
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized Wow, never heard that, but the name is very relatable 😂👍
hence why everyone preferred to stay on top of bmp
Has to be uncomfortable enough to encourage the infantry to come out!
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized BMP whre called "Muckerbus" in NVA
Can you imagine what a logistical nightmare it must be to keep Ukrainian Army moving with all those different vehicles and ammunition types!
Funnily enough it seems the Ukrainians developed a sort of tolerated barter system(as long as there is no profiteering) amongst the commanders to supplement the usual centrally planned logistics.
@@nhatmnguyen There is nothing to hold, what NATO fascism does it raping the dead corpse of Ukraine while laughing about it and counting the money they make with it somehow.
In Ukraine, now volunteers from "Come Back Alive" are engaged in the purchase of a large batch of repair and maintenance vehicles. Of course, this is still in addition to state and foreign support, but our volunteers have an ambitious goal to completely close this area. I am sure we will figure it out.
No it wouldnt be because finland and poland have been doing it for decades now.
Yeah, but luckily, their Eastern neighbours have "donated" quite a lot of hardware so far which is often used for parts to repair the old Soviet era weaponry.
I was British infantry mid 70,s. The marder was and is a first class AFV. We looked on with envy as they flew past our 432,s
I still love the warrior ✊️
in the 70s maybe, 50 years later it is considered very shit. Russias APC, IFV and armored cars are even better, the new Russian armored cars have an unmanned 30mm gun on top.
@@Writeous0ne And the Russians can only afford to build 12 of them?? :)
@@mrzoinky5999 they have about 25,000 total apc, ifv, armored vehicles etc in service and in storage, that we know of. And probably some that we dont know of.
@@Writeous0ne hahahaha, why 130mm and not 330?
Marders are real heavyweights compared to the BMP-1s that Germany bought for Ukraine, Marders were designed in response to the BMP and its armour upgraded after the BMP-2 was introduced. They can work in the mud which is always important in Ukraine
And it's gonna freeze today and for the next week. Wonder when these will show up on the front?
@@jimmiller5600not after weeks or months training
The Marder does not have armor to withstand either the 73mm low velocity guns HEAT or the 30mm APDS by the BMP1 and BMP2 respectively.
The Marders armament is NOT stabilised and therefore cannot be accuratly fired while it moves. In order to fire the MILAN missile the commander has to stick half his torso out of the hatch.
The Marder is NOT designed to fight other AFVs so the discussion of Marder vs BMP is superfluous. The Marder is a support vehicle designed to keep infantry off of the MBTs back. The armament of the Marder will shred infantry but is purely a defensive measure when it comes to fighting armor.
Marder for modern standard is not an IFV, it's just an APC, like the M113, designed to take infantry near the front line and then reverse at full 65kmh speed.
@@othertipo thats also wrong. The Marder stays at the front line and provides fire support with its MG3 and Rh202 autocannon. And that it does very well and the grenadiers love it. The Marder even provides amazing fire support in urban areas were AFVs usually hate to go. Because the armament of the Marder Elevates to 60° meaning that it can reach a rooftop if its half the buildings height away from it.
If you are looking for a "battle taxi" APC the Panzergrenadiers are the wrong address to look at. You might want to check on Jägers and their Boxers and Fuchs APCs.
It is interesting to see all of these NATO cold war vehicles finally going into combat against Russian forces, the role in which they were meant for. 🧐
We are kicking Russias ass despite we have our greatest trump cards unused: Air power and modern main battle tanks.
And we don't use attack helicopters and cluster bomb rocket artillery either. With those weapons would the red army have been wiped out in a month.
@@nattygsbord Objectively natos biggest trump would simply be numbers. That's the reason Russian propaganda had to switch to wunderwaffeln, cause the soviet narrative of "a huge mass of the simple working stuff" no longer applied, since NATO also got more mass in most fields at this point.
Modernized M60 Patton's? TTS isn't that new compared to Turkish and Taiwanese models.
@@nattygsbord Russia would not fight the US for obvious reasons of technological lagging...yet it would nuke the US and use bacteriological, chemical and biological means. Also don't confuse the offensive war where people don't know why the government sent them there (like the Americans in Afghanistan/Iraq/Vietnam) vs a defence of the homeland. The Russian public, unlike the US public, in my mind is ready for a full out nuclear exchange. Just count to 6,000 and this is the number of declared warheads each side has and one needs to be naive to think that other "prohibited" means won't be used. So now pause for a second and think whether the US would go for a full nuclear exchange over...Ukraine? Poland? Germany? the clear answer is NO. This is why the UK and France have their own stockpiles. World is a lot more complex than "we kick their ass". How did the ass kicking in Afghanistan go?
We have so many of them becase of the peace dividend. It has not been needed to replace mcuh since the USSR colpased themself.
Its very much a quesrion of generation. So many things has changed by nasty invensions. .
But I would say some has been in used in Afghanistan, Irak, Libya even I has been against it.
Dudes, this is a troop transporter. And a pretty well working one. Comparing it to the Leopard is like comparing a transport helicopter to an interceptor. Two completely different tasks.
@@ahemzal Arbtek has knowledge. Both sides have a lot autocannons and antiarmor weapons.Ex Soviet Union is well armed.Marder has too weak armour and is swiss cheese in few seconds.Only good for transport.
@@ahemzal Ukrainians and Russians are not unarmed bare handed tribes. They both mass produce and use autocanons and antiarmor weapons.Marders even tanks are swiss cheese in few seconds.
@@ahemzal Marders are good iff enemy don't posses autocanons or better.But it is not true in this case. IFVs and pickups are very fast but they are not faster than missiles and autocannon shells and bullets.They are moving swiss cheese. I survived Yugoslav wars. Infantry tankers and minefields engineers are 90% of killed and crippled soldiers. That's why Royal family members don't serve in infantry tanks armour and minefields engineers. Why any royal majesty is not tanker or IFV crew or infantryman?
@@zoranninkovic697 Depending on the version, the marder can withstand frontal fire with 30mm rounds. So they are resistant to 30mm autocannons.
@@ahemzal Yes.Western is better.But Ex Soviets Ukrainian and Russian older tech is cheaper several times for good enough quality or modern Russian ones is better for a little less money. Russia has less than 200 000 troops in Ukraine and Russia has sanctions and robbery against property and everithing in western countries and satanisation even against dead artists and writers from 18 19 and 20 centuries.Ukraine has over 700 000 troops and 45 countries help them.But still can't win.Russians are still there.And show who is stronger and better.The Taliban fighters in slippers are the best against NATO.
Thanks for making a video so quickly on the Marder! Love the current event focused videos. I know it takes a lot more work to do this so fast.
Thank you!!!
@@TheLexstrong says Putins rim job groupie...
@@SonsOfLorgar Na A American that is fed up with Our country starting wars.. By the way F2ck Putin too . The People of Russia do not want Nato on their border. Trying to pin it on one person Like "evil Hittler Or evil Saddam" is the way Nato brainwashes people to think they are not going after the people just the evil guy...It is all BS
@@SonsOfLorgar does everyone that disagrees with you belong to a evil dictator group.?....Is that group in the room with us now?
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized No, thanks you for ADEQATE analysis - 'cause everything we hear from typical journalists - are bold claims and hype-oriented subject lines, with no details and realities of war taken into an account - and these details often change the whole picture.
What sets this video of yours apart and compelety ignored by most of the speakers - the attention to general visibility out of the armored vehicle (periscopes, observation devices, thermals, etc.).
And this is far more important topic, than most of the people think - paying attention to the gun and armor only and making the conclusions.
The thing is, if you ever been in BMP-1 or BMP-2, you can notice how bad it is in terms of situational awareness and target acquisition, to be direct - you simply can't see shit out of these vehicles. I'm not even touching the comms and even an ability to install them reliably without complete re-do of the vehicle.
Combine this with crammed space, not really sufficient for a modern soldier with body armor, tons of ammo and other things he needs to carry into the battle, no mine protection, bad armor - you'll end up with a combat-taxi, wich is quite blind, soldiers riding on top of it, it has no good comms with the infantry + can't detect the targets fast enough on it's own.
It's good in terms of using it as mobile firepower for defence (we use BMP-1s for NLOS shooting for years, using software to do the math, it's super-common thing), but as a weapon for rapid assault - it has insufficient capabilities to be protected firepower that can carry troops into battle, see what's going on, provide rapid suppression of enemy positions, detect targets quick and engage them.
If we look at our 92nd brigade, that had ~100 BTR4s, equipped with modern comms, 30mm stabilized gun, tons of internal space, +- good protection, thermals (not just integrated into the sight as monocular, but big screens for commander and gunner(!), that have wide FOV and good resolution), GPS, integrated system for firing ATGMs, excellent situational awareness. May not be the best protected vehicle, but it was the main machine that in cooperation with tanks helped to not let RU forces enter Kharkiv in the early stage of the war, and despite heavy losses, inflicted much more damage on Russian BMPs and tanks than anyone could expect.
Plus, a lot of mahinces managed to survive and played an important role in Kharkiv counter-offencive, we even used BTR-4MV1 - with 5(!) triplexes for the driver + 360 view cameras and even more focus on protection, target acquisition capabilities, exists only in 1 machine, but seems to be the right direction to go to with BTRs, that can act as something capable, not just battle-taxi)
Of course, it's just an equipment - it all comes down to training of the crews and tactics of application + the understanding of the commanders on how to use them + organizing the comms (BTR-4 has Harris, this is the main comms provider for Air Assault branch of UAF, and internal comms as well + and ability to be connected with commander on the ground, who can also help with target acquisition and interaction with dismounts).
Hoping for good training to be received for Marders, as all these stats are just stats, until you know and trained how to use them to your advantage :)
Just a minor thing, but Rheinmetall recently restarted the development and production of 20mm ammunition. The newest additions being APPIE and SAPPIE, Armor Piercing with Pyrothecnically Induced Effect and Semi-armor Piercing with Pyrotechnically Induced Effect. In practice, both are evolutions of the PELE, Penetrator with Enhanced Lateral Effect round.
If supplied or procured, these rounds could offer a lethality increase to the Rh202 main gun against various targets.
Man I can't bother reading all that when restarted is spelled as "restarded" my phone even fixed it by itself when I typed it.
That's good, since Sweden is kissing Russia's butt cheeks and won't sell (30mm) Gepard ammo to Germany anymore.
Given the timing, I think it's either that, or Germany will send their current stock of older ammunition and replace them with new production high performance ammo.
Conduct actually penetrate the sides of a Russian T-90A T-72B3 Kontakt-5 4S22 then Relikt 4S24 Explosive Reactive Armour Sides T-90M T-80BVM T-72B3 Model 2016 like a Ukrainian APC having to fight against a Russian T-72 or not? If not Marder is destroyed by T-72
@@EpicThe112 the marder is not an MBT... if you engage a t-72 with an IFV, you aüre either desperate or an idiot. it's not what the marder is for.
As a Ukrainian, I will say that ANY combat vehicle will be useful in this war, we successfully use even old Soviet models, especially with modifications. So Marder will be more than useful and effective, especially against a poorly equipped enemy
Slava Ukraini !!!!
Stay Strong! 💪
Why should we all fight your civil war ?
@@iamasmurf1122 because we need someone to clean our toilets in germany.
@@iamasmurf1122 It's not a civil war. It's an invasion by an eastern empire with ambitions of control and domination of as many peoples and countries around them as possible. The only decent thing is to help against that.
Good analysis, but the Marder is much better than the trucks the Ukrainians are riding now. I’m pretty sure they will appreciate having these systems, especially the Bradleys which are more powerful.
So it’s got more armour than a Toyota Hilux? 😂. Worst case I suppose they can use it for Medevac purposes.
@@philshyu5248 Stick barrels on the sides and an outboard motor and use them for amphibious operations ala Top Gear
Dmitri Medvedev, the politician Putin used as a stooge to stand in form him to avoid term limits has been placed in charge of munitions production.
There can be no doubt Russian MBT tank and IFV production will start to ramp up, including some of the advanced ones. He may be a stooge but he reveals real power and is a nasty POS (read his hateful and vile speech on the orthodox christmass cease fire)
Ukraine will need the latest Western Tanks and IFV because in a year the latest Russian equipment will start flowing.
@@williamzk9083 I normally hate corrupt politicians but in this case I will make an exception and hope that these Russian politicians all stick their hands in the cookie jar and there’s no money left for munitions production.
The US say they will send 50 Bradleys. They themselves use 56 Bradleys in each rifle battalion, and a single battalion is nothing in this war, Ukraine has already lost the men corresponding to 100 battalions as KIA. What good would 40 20mm gunned Marders do? 1,000 would be a starter.
This thing is better then anything that they have received yet - i mean they got a lot super old apcs M113 or even smaller more modern apc from england but they never got a real 30+ ton IFV. And that the Marder has Milan and thermal will make it a great defender - greatings from an ex panzergrenadier. PS: its not necesarry to maintain these. The Ukraine is happy to have these of course with a very bad logistics and maintainance but they will find a way. This is much better to have 40 Marders then having NONE. And i bet the russians will be very suprised if they run into a full ukraine bttl with 40 Marders then running into a less quipped Inf bttl
I would say that the best system they got so far is the pzh2000
I agree with you it's a great battle taxi no AFV is designed to go toe to toe with MBT 's definitely are deadly in the ambush with good anti armor capabilities a good crew definitely helps.
We need 400 of them. 40 is enough for one local operation, not a major advance.
They should give them the M113 variant the M901 Hammerhead if they still have any in stock those where equipped with a TOW launching system. Use the M113a3 track for better mobility than that of the older a1 or a2 variant of the M113 Just my opinion.
There where ideas of sending modernized M60s but the US doesn't have those and will have to ask allies for a swap. For now, the west isn't keen to send post-modern MBTs.
I was trained in a Marder during my serv in the Bundeswehr back in 2004. What i think is big draw back is the rear door, or hatch where the grenadiers dismount. It takes an age and a half to open and close. No Problem when your are still undetected but dismounting while enaged with the enemy, well good luck.
Also when the turret moves it can get quite dangerous between the front and back part, keep your arms close to your body or they will be crushed. But this is not an issue as long as everybody is in his seat.
With the Marder it is like with most western vehicles. They have to be handled very carefully and in their role with expert crew and under the circumstances they are especially designed for and with the tactics they are designed for. Simplyfied, its the old thing, we (the west) build stuff that works great when used under specific circumstances, russians build stuff which works anytime and anywhere but not so great overall.
@@polarstorm5986 Ah, the good old "russian stuff is reliable" BS 😀 Russian stuff is ultra flawed and prone to failure. Guess why almost no nation with a normal budget is buying anything russian? Their machines are simply not as reliable and long lasting + their performance is low. In the essence, the russians are still using the V-2 T-34 engine in their tanks...and that one was invented in Ukraine. Anything they tried after that wasn't too reliable either. The myth of "old reliable russian tech" is nothing but a myth :)
nice we will see bunch of ukrainians in these coffins soon !
@@polarstorm5986 its the other way around execpt that Nato vehicles often excel in tasks they were never meant for.
For anyone who doesn't know, a Marten is a weasel like critter
Tree weasel.
Pine Martins are what the yanks will be most aware of
@@moritamikamikara3879 Not in my area, we have Fisher cats, very secretive, but, I've seen 2 live ones, and one road killed in 28 years in an area surrounded by trees and squirrels. Black fur, very fast afoot.
A normal day in Beijing
ruclips.net/video/QckLGfuP9OY/видео.html
and every German lives in fear of one of those critters destroying their car by eating the cables next to the engine. A force to be reckond with.
To be honest, seeing what Ukraine already achieved with clapped out Danish/US/Aussie M-113s, Dutch AIFVs and British Spartans, imagine what they could do with a proper IFV.
What exactly? They got smashed bad in these armored cars, are almost out of tanks and IFV.
@@tomk3732…from what was communicated, they lost a lot smaller numbers than the Russian troops… so, still well done, even if lost a lot too…
@@tomk3732 LOL. Check Osint
@@tomk3732 There is absolutely no indication of that. Putin already had to announce two mobilizations because of how many losses Russia takes, despite really not wanting to do so (because it had huge ramifications domestically, as the war is not as widely supported as one might think). The difference in strategy and tatics and knowing, how little the Russian command cares for losses of personell (I am Russian), I believe that our country had lost more troops than Ukraine for sure.
@@tihonannenkov4114 There was only one mobilization so i highly doubt you have any clue about anything.
Great vid. Would like to visit museum if ever back in Germany. I was 🇨🇦Army stationed at Lahr, Schwarzwald ’80-‘84 serving on Leopard C1. Exercised with & against Marders various times - lot of memories. Germany a beautiful country and very much enjoyed my time there. 👍
Nato puppet ukraine
Ha ha touching them is the real thing...
So you speak German!? 😮
The marder is a solid vehicle. Good or very good at its task, depending on your viewpoint. Pitted against the equipment currently used in ukraine, it will do well. The ukrainians will love it. They use any given tool to great effect.
For someone whose position is focused on defense policy, Hellmich's statement is ridiculous to the point that it feels disingenuous. Ukraine is defending its nation from a massive strategic threat. To do so involves both defensive and offensive action at a tactical level. Does he really expect people to believe that in order to defend themselves, Ukraine should sit in the defense and wait for Russia to attack them over and over? Quite obviously, a Leopard 2 offensively attacking Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory would be defending their nation.
Great video, as always, sir! I enjoy your detailed coverage of these topics.
Yeah, that quote just made me angry. It's either profoundly ignorant or incredibly dishonest, and neither is agood.
Honestly that statement made my blood boil because it is so blatantly disingenuous that it insults the intelligence of the listener merely by being uttered. It's political cowardice not even excusable with the "escalation" nonsense because Poland already send MBT's en masses.
I think that the Allies could once again teach them a lesson.
Probably the real reason is the risk of our modern NATO tanks being captured and/or the risk that inadequate logistics (Western MBTs are a bitch to maintain) that they'd look bad being abandoned.
@@salisburysings254 More like bullshit politics. Germany has already sent PzH2000 which is actually their newest armored vehicle besides Puma.
Thank you for you videos. I find them extremely thorough, balanced and informative. I admire and appreciate that you post your corrections when required, your integrity and transparency are to be applauded. Keep posting great content like this!
The Leopard 2 is an MBT, it’s as much a defensive tool as an offensive one.
It’s better for defending and holding ground than a marder.
Marders are still useful and good to have though, but they’ll be more useful in offensive operations moving troops up, or for support/specialized units to operate out of.
Compared to a tank they’re light duty, but quite a step up from unarmoured trucks and even a lot of lightly armoured vehicles.
Plus, anything with tracks is useful in Ukraine.
So the Leopard 2 is an attack tank now? Yeah, pull the other one.
The Leo 2 was developed and designed to delay a Soviet armor offensive through the Fulda Gap. And guess what, delaying actions are generally considered to be defensive in nature, exchanging ground for time.
Everything has offensive capabilities if you are brave enough 😇
@@xaldorsnotgrimdark5972 not my point, but a fair observation.
What you heard there was a german social democrat politician playing word gymnastics to help justify the position of social democrat Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who is currently a shining example of lackluster leadership and lack of decisiveness when it comes to the Ukraine war. So like any other political word games, I wouldn't take that "tanks for defense" statement seriously from a technical expertise perspective.
In the 80th my uncle sank a Marder in the river during a military exercise. So I can also state that it doesn't swim. 😀
Die Wannenfront, die Seitenflächen sowie das Heck sind abgeschrägt und bieten der Besatzung begrenzten Schutz gegen Beschuss aus 20-mm-Maschinenkanonen (frontal), Granatsplittern und Infanteriewaffen (bis 7,62 mm).
Deutlich besser als der BMP der kaum schutz vor Kaliber 50 Munition bittet.
The gun on the AMX-10 is not the same caliber as the Leo 1. It uses different (slightly weaker)ammo due to the heavy recoil
it's the same caliber alright but a different "cartridge"
@@webboy998 105x527 mm cartridge necked up from a 90 mm rather than a 105x617 mm from the L7, the NATO standard
It's not a different caliber, same 105mm gun as an AMX-30 tank, it is just half pressure as it is a 15 ton Recon vehicle not a 32 ton MBT, this is to better manage recoil.
@@Frencho9 plus, they developed APFSDS for it.. so even with lower recoil, it has comparable penetration as L7.. but of course, it cannot use standard NATO 105mm ammo...
@@webboy998 What is of course the most important part...
Else you could compare ammunition with a pan.
The Marder A1 could already resist 30mm APDS frontally with the exception of the turret, so the 1A3 variant's armor upgrade mostly helps protect the sides at angles closer to oblique, but still not 90 degrees.
in comparison to NOTHING AT ALL they're a wunderwaffen indeed.
Nothing at all would mean they can't fight further = they stop dying for nothing = they stop ruining the country for nothing and also don't have to pay for useless crap.
So nothing at all would be endless better than this shit.
0:52
1. It's flat out wrong to state that the AMX-10RC(R) uses the same gun as the Leopard 1. Both guns have the same caliber of 105mm and that's pretty much where the similarities end. The AMX-10RC(R) uses a medium-pressure F2 gun chambered in 105×527mmR, the Leopard 1 uses the high-pressure L7 chambered in 105×617mmR. That also obviously means that ammunition is not interchangable.
2. I have never seen any half-way knowledgable person refer to the AMX-10RC(R) as a tank-destroyer. The function of a tank destroyer is neither its doctrinal purpose nor is it equipped for said task. It's either described as a light tank, scout tank, mobile gun system or a derivative of these. The main cannon is not sufficient to reliably square up against MBTs (even the ones that were considered standard at the time of its introduction). Having said that I understand that vehicle classifications aren't black and white and this is just a minor gripe of mine.
The real utility of this is being able to make the types of aggressive mechanised attacks we saw in places like Kharkiv.Hopefully we get to see a bit more of it.
Это вряд ли
Thanks for another great Video; and the "Marder" possibilities" humour at the end - absolute top! You deserve a lot more subscribers than you currently have.🙂
The AMX 10rc does not have the same 105 as a leopard. The Germans elected to use the L7 British design gun. The French on the other hand decided to use an indigenous 105 mm gun. If I remember correctly they're gun is a low pressure gun so the effective range is a little less than the L7.
Different cannon ammo I presume?
Mostly correct, but the 105mm gun of an AMX-30 tank is slightly better than the Leopard due to it's incredible (for the time) french ammo, and it has just as much pressure and range, if not more as an L7. The low pressure one is the 105mm gun on the AMX-10RC, which the same as the one on the AMX-30 MBT, but just half pressure as it is installed on a 15 ton Recon vehicle not a 32 ton MBT, this is to better manage recoil.
Small correction: The BTR-82 is just the stabilized variant of the normal BTR-80 with the 14,7mm Machine gun. The BTR-80A or BTR-82A have the Machine Cannon
Not really btr 80A is a btr 80 with 30mm cannon instead of 14.7mm
Btr 82 , btr 82AM , btr 82A all of them have additional upgrades to the armour and thermals and other stuff
But the Marder is able to travers up to 2 meter deep bodies of water right? Its not amphibious as the BMPs the russian used but at least you dont need a bridge for every small piece of water
Amphibious ability is not something you can use as river canceling though, it doesn’t work like that. Even more or less fully amphibious units in Eastern armies hardly use this ability - you still have to prepare the crossing and sometimes vehicles, plus your logistics need a bridge or ferry. It is ongoning debate in post Warsaw Pact armies if it is worth all the limitations that amphibious ability brings (see for example polish Borsuk that might serve only in limited numbers as heavy IFV might be chosen as main system).
@@Rabarbarzynca
Yeah,but if you consider that an amphibious IFV could bypass bridges and engages the defensive positions from the flanks or cross a river at a badly defended position and establish a small beachhead and shielding the bridge from getting build compared to wait for a crossing before moving further i can see why the soviets would invest into it since their plan was to "crush nato" and move west while nato was well aware that they needed to delay the soviet armored formation as good as they could and wait for reinforcements to show up
i would still say that the ability of the marder to pass small rivers without preperation gives it enough mobility in the field so that a small stream would prevent a real obstacle to them
At this point, I really don't think the general condition of Russian Army military vehicles currently in Ukraine would instill confidence that any BMP would be capable of amphibious operations.
Previously, the USSR Armed Forces were considered masters of attacking over a water obstacle.
In Ukraine, on the other hand, the attacks by the Russian armed forces over water obstacles largely failed with the heaviest casualties.
@@herosstratos and they used improvised bridges all the time and not the amphibious ability of its vehicles.
Marders are a good addition for Ukraine, any AFV's are better than none. The Bradley's the U.S. is sending are a good addition as well. 🙂
The Bradley is lighter armored than the Marder A3 but has the higher mobility, the Bradley is probably the most mobile combat vehicle in Ukraine at the moment.
In this respect, it is obvious to examine whether the Bradley should not also be used as a reconnaissance vehicle, as other armed forces do.
@LOLO / VAL The AMX-10 RC has certainly proven itself extraordinarily well in desert use.
But even the AMX-10 RCR has a combat weight of only 17 tons compared to 34 tons of the Marder A3 (Bradley 33t), which will have a significant impact in the operating conditions in Ukraine.
@LOLO / VAL The AMX-10 RC has certainly proven itself extraordinarily well in desert use.
But even the AMX-10 RCR has a combat weight of only 17 tons compared to 34 tons of the Marder A3 (Bradley 33t), which will have a significant impact in the operating conditions in Ukraine.
@@herosstratos I think BMPs more mobility than Bradley and Marder (15 tons VS 30+ tons), aren't they?
@LOLO / VAL AMX 10RC won't be good in war when enemy have got a lot of artillery, and where a lot of trees and dirt. Ukraine is not desert with empty space and solid ground.
The WBG X thermal imaging device is only installed from A2 or higher, but all Marder have been modernized to at least level A3, so that actually none are in service without it. The A5 has additional the Hensoldt Spectus installed, but this system is only for the driver and also includes a reversing camera. If equipped with MELLS/Spike, the associated display console is installed.
Nice Video. I didnt realize that the Missile system of the BMP-2 has to be reloaded manually. Also nice footage from the DPM.
I assume these will not be received with anti-tank missiles. This means they will likely be integrated in with T-64 and T-72 tank groups. The Bradley’s are capable of operating semi-autonomously. I’m sure both will be used to great effect though
They will be sent with anti-tank missiles, just the French MILAN ones.
It's an IFV - deployed with tank is how they always were meant to be used... 👍
They will come with the milan system
I think they will be blown up by arty or kamikaze drones .
@@5co756 Kamikazi drones that Russia uses have no cameras or ability to track targets. They can therefore only hit stationary targets in well known locations and are thus very ineffective at destroying Ukrainian military assets. This is why Russia uses them to hit civilian targets rather than using them on the frontline battles with Ukrainian forces
There are very few Milans left. I really hope that there's the will and the ammunition crates.
If Germany runs out of 80s vintage Tanks, we could still send the furry variant of the Marder. They are realy good at achieving mobility kills via chewing cabels.
Martens are extremely shy animals. There were tracks of them where I grew up and lived for 15 years and I never saw any of them. I saw several badgers and lynx, but martens are even more "run away, ran away, ruuun awaaay!"
@@bjorntorlarsson see, they are very stealthy warriors.
I hope You did not like Putin-Propaganda in Internet,,,,,
@@larrynivren8139 I can differ between reality and propaganda Many seem to suffer from so serious brain damage that they cannot do that. They believe anything that known fraudsters lie about, they live in fantasy world and have no ability to connect with reality, no matter what happens.
The Marder is a capable platform, go Ukraine!
Ukraine is a Baby Russia is DADDY don't get confused
The Ukrainians were the tank and aircraft suppliers to Russia. They can probably do some modifications.
ZOV!
RIP USA.
very capable to die inside.
Imprecise fire from an IFV is useful under current NATO doctrine when the IFVs are being tasked with firing at a likely avenue of escape, to discourage infantry from leaving cover while other units manoeuvre in to eliminate them.
If they have thermal imaging, they're much better than 90% of Russian equipment.
JUP.... and Marder is just a PERFECT TROOP-TRANSPORTER and TROOP-SUPPORTER... that's what it is made for.....
Thanks for this great summary. I know more about the Bradley than the Marder and thought they were more similar in capability. I see that without a stabilized main gun and the potential issues with operating the ATGM in combat, the Bradley has at least a couple notable advantages.
And how do you think it’s going to go versus brigades of advanced T72 and T90 models?
@@Mortablunt Probably pretty bad for Russian armor since all Bradleys have anti tank rockets on them. They already went up against T72s in Iraq, and wasted them.
@@Mortablunt The Ukrainians will not use them against tanks, for that they have tanks of their own. Used in combination with tanks they are a great way to provide infantry with fire support, but it will be the infantry with missile launchers and the tanks that kill the T-72s and T-90s.
Bradley is in some aspects the more modern vehicle, it was introduced more than 10 years after Marder. Its main advantage is the bigger stabilized gun and TOW can be fired under armor-protection.
@@kpadalldotablet1009 the bushmaster could pen it easily below the turret.
Perhaps you already know it: the Marder is the base for Argentina's domestically produced tank, the TAM (Tanque Argentino Mediano, Argentinian Medium Tank). It was designed by Krauss-Maffei I think, it sports a 105mm main gun and has amphibious capabilities. In recent years Elbit from Israel modernized their armor and targetting/control systems. No idea how much the tank differs from the original Marder, but it somehow shows the Marder can take more bells and whistles
TAM has a stroner engine(720hp vs 600hp) than Marder
Thanks for support !!!
MHV: “ah finally, the Christmas season break has arrived”
German government: *”I’m about to end this man’s whole career”*
”I’m about to end this man’s whole vacation”
Hey, the Russians had far more modern tanks than the Ukrainians, but still got their arses whupped.
This could be good for a combined thunder run.
93% gone lol
maybe because all that modern tanks were a either a show off paper tigers or sold, in a month or two russhist had to open old ww2 times storages.
@@hirdbarding3399 ive seen ukranians using ww1 mgs the shitshow is from both sides and +1 on ukranians since the idiots even sell new weapons....
The amount of territorial gain for Russia is equal to the size Portugal I believe. The territories include Ukraine's ports on the black sea, the majority of Ukraine's metallurgical industry and lastly Ukraine's gas fields. Those three are very important economic assets.. which they lost. How would you explain this as a loss for Russia?
@@Habib_Osman because russia captured much more at start, when noone expected the invasion, and then lost half of it - all capured in the north, all captured in Kharkiv Oblast, now Kherson, and will lose more. They proclamed all those territories their own forever core, and now lost. This is disaster for russhist image :) How can they explain that, if acc to their own info Ukrainian army is long time dead? :)
And about industry...well...half of was in disrepair before, other half sadly will be or already are stolen by russians or ruined. It is no more an economical asset, but opposite - all this territories will need costly restorations :(
A "Marder 2" was planned with either a 35mm or 50mm gun and a 7.62 coaxial MG and also with much better armour. Weighing 45 tons with a 1000hp engine, it was quite a monster. Like many military projects of the time (1991/1992) it ran into the problem of lack of enemies. Prototypes and test vehicles were built and tested before it was cancelled in 1992 as unnecessarily expensive. It would be helpful now though...
You can’t retake territory by defending. They need to be able to attack.
It appears NATO will allow Ukraine a slow death while trickling in just enough weapons to keep the war going and withholding what would help them win. Sadly, everyday Ukraine is losing men it can't replace.
The Ukrainians *have been counter attacking Russina invaders for months* ~ They have NO OTHER CHOICE
The German politicians hiding behind weasel words of 'we will only supply 'defensive' armour'
WHILST PUTIN'S MISSILES RIP APART CIVILIANS AND DEFENDERS ALIKE
*That is despicable, self-serving hand-wringing self-indulgence of the worst sort*
Quit pointing out that the BMP is amphibious. DId you see the pictures of the Russians' attempted river crossing of a modest river back in May? It is designed to be amphibious, but in all its long years of service, has the BMP ever been used amphibiously in war/combat?
There's places where they snuck across rivers and delivered troops to wooded areas in flanking maneuvers. Depends where you use it and who sees it.
Lmao, ok cuck. Not like there isnt amphibious accidents in the US military regarding amphibious equipment.
The main problem in overcoming water obstacles is not getting to the other side, but getting back onto the bank on the other side.
Be perfect to tow howitzer's and the 6 man artillery crew wouldn't it as well as small fire protection while the howitzer is operating?
Exactly, Bradleys (or Marders) could be very usefull in that role or comparable rolls, or in their role as transports and close support. The dream of mechanized ukrainian infantry division rolling all the way to Moscow just because now they will have some Bradleys (Marders) is absurd. The ukrainians just don't have the capabilitys to form such brigades and even if they do they only can use them as a qucik reaction force, not for breaking lines, etc.
The Marder and the BMP may each have pluses and minuses, but as you or one of your colleagues pointed out, a well-trained crew counts for a lot. The topic in that case was the M4 Sherman versus the Panzer V Panther tank. The Sherman crews had trained in the UK for 2 years, before the invasion of France, while the Panther crews in comparison did not benefit from such extensive training. The result was that Sherman crews often made more effective use of their vehicles.
They barely saw any Tiger 1 or Panther in France , about 70% of the Wehrmacht was at the eastern front . Crew training sure helps , but Tiger and Panther crew's mostly had many expirience . They started with Stug's or Pz4's , no 20 year old boys were operating the big German cats .
@@5co756 I recommend that you view Mark Felton Productions "Sherman vs Panther: France 1944".
@@patrickcloutier6801 For what ? You just wanted to say that Sherman crew's had more expirience than a Panther crew , wich is just nonsense to me .
@@5co756 Historian Mark Felton says that the American Sherman crews were better-trained than the German Panther crews encountered on the Western Front. If you view the video, you can hear his narrative for yourself.
@@patrickcloutier6801 I really appreciate Felton's videos and research, but US tank crews that were not in Torch or at Anzio etc. are nowhere near to be compared to tank crews with 4 - 5 years of warfighting experience. Survival of the fittest, good habits, and that's not to downplay US training and kit, but compare why in fighter aircraft we have Red Flag, aggressor squadrons/ Top Gun etc. Those programs were all created to replicate real combat experience. Which the Wehrmacht had since Sept 1st, 1939...
Upgraded Marders are top, really.
What is it that you said at 13:16 Did you say Pyrrhic War 2.0? It's interesting that there is always politics going on behind the scenes, even in war. I'm no history buff but I seem to recall that during the Spanish civil war Germany and Russia and other countries used the opportunity to develop and practice new war tactics like bombing civilian targets. I hope the use of a tactical nukes is not in the future.
Great Patriotic War 2.0, Great Patriotic War is the Russian name for their part in the Second World War. The Patriotic War was the fight against Napoleon.
The numbers of Bradley's, Marders, AMX etc promised are a drop in the Ocean versus actual requirements along a 1000 Km Battlefront-50 Bradleys won't change the tactical situation, they need hundreds, the multitude of donated armoured platforms is also worrying in terms of maintenance of so many different platforms from the many donor countries, this war is going to drag on and on without supporting Economies adopting a serous upturn in manufacturing of the required kit for the UA.
If Ukraine uses these effectively, they will get many more. The US has a couple thousand Bradley's that they no longer use.
There are training and logistics issues that are easier to work out with a small number of vehicles. Once the AFU has figured out the logistics of fueling and maintaining them and figured out what is involved in training soldiers to use them effectively, then it makes sense to send more.
True... but if you see hundres of fish stranded on the beach and you pick up only a few ones and throws them back into waster before they die... does this seems like not much success but it means the world for those who got saved.
Same here... every crew sitting in a Marder or Bradly compared to a truck or SUV or old BMP1 will really value it
You are right. But wirth many drops, which are given, You can make a cup of coffee or tea.
Those are not stand alones. There are other incommers every day and also at the civile level.
As I’ve said it’s applying for victory was actually a concern the Western powers needed to make a lot of hard and final decisions back in the spring about what to supply and how they were going to ensure a sustained logistical chain. Basically they had to choose if they were going to ultimately convert Ukraine into a westernized force or set up their own production facilities for Soviet equipment. Have they gotten that done back in April or May, pieces of new production would be hitting the battlefield about now right when Ukraine is at a critical collapse. It’s too late now.
@@Mortablunt Agreed the West Fu$$ed up its logistics horribly. Infuriating.
The Milan ATGM is not french, it is a co development by France and Germany.
Das WBG beim Marder 1A3 ist Klasse, man kann dadurch alles sehr klar und scharf erkennen. Selbst kleine Schützen Gruppen.
Marder and Bradley will make good heavyweight IFVs for Ukraine, they already have lightweight options such as the CVR(T) variants of a similar age, these have an even lower ground pressure.
I wish the UK would offer the even newer Warrior series since we're ditching them already. Many are in storage and in good condition, more vcan be sent as Boxer comes into service.
The italians have although some interesting vehicles in their arsenal.Dardo-IFV and the Centauro-light tank,that is more powerful than the french AMX10.
@@CharlesNauck A lot of stuff only gets announced after the training is done. I'm fairly certain we're going to see that in aircraft
Thank you for the detailed view on what Germany is likely to provide to Ukraine - it's good to round out our understanding of what all parties are supplying. As an American, there's a lot of details on our armament that is being sent, but not so much on our allies. Do you have any connections with the French Armor community and could provide us more information on the French supply to Ukraine? I'm curious how each contribution might be combined and used. Do you have any insight on this too?
40 marder 1, usa is providing 50 Bradleys.
That would actually make for a really cool video in itself. Ukraine has a lot of systems in use right now, and several of them should work well in combined arms!
@@ddshiranui I wonder how much NATO is tracking this unexpected joint forces experiment Russia has provided at Ukraine's expense.
Netherland sent a number of YPR765. How many is secret. But they frequently pop up in footage from kherson and bakhmut.
France is outsourcing vab because of new systems, so they send outsourced vabs, same germans marder start getting outsourced. Nato is sending nearly 1500 armoured systems 30.000 rockets and 2 million heavy ammo
It is not the sword that kills the enemy, but the knight who knows how to use it.
I don’t think that it has a deficiency in its anti tank capability because the launcher isn’t a hard mounted system like on the Bradley but one that can be easily taken off. This should make it possible to mount more modern systems then the Milan like stugna p or TOW with a little DIY work.
Or even strap an NLAW to it in a pinch
@@SonsOfLorgar yea or the javelin. Considering that you need to go out any way you could use fire and forget weapons at closer ranges.
The Marder A5A1 has a Spike missile (modern top attack like the Javelin) so yes very possible. While a A5A1 has a lot of other upgrades which would take more time I don't see why you couldn't just do the Spike on it's own.
@@XMysticHerox well spike itself is a problem but maybe something for a NATO country? The normal A5 still uses the Milan but all of them are going to be upgraded to spike. I don’t think that they need heavy modifications for the Milan to spike change.
@@XMysticHerox The Spike missile can't be sent as Israel is blocking the export of it to Ukraine.
The AMX10 would have a variation of 105 on the AMX30. Leider no, it's a low pressure 105.
Is it me or does the turret of the marder 1 look like that on of the YPR 25MM daff IFV that the dutch sent in the begining
You say that Germany repeatedly denied requests to send Marders to Ukraine, but my impression was that they had accepted and were in the process of refurbishing a number of old ones they had rusting away in storage. The condition of the vehicles, the only ones they had to spare, was very poor and they gave an estimate of six to eight months for delivery after repairs and upgrades, which would've landed their availability around early 2023. Are these not the refurbished ones they've been talking about? Is it not possible that France, the US, and Germany all coordinated to have their shipments ready simultaneously to not overshadow each other and to show solidarity?
I would imagine it has more to do with logistical support and combat readiness than pure politics - even if politics plays a part of every decision!
The NATO countries and allies would have to coordinate with each other according to Ukrainian needs and what they can supply.
From what I recall, it was the *industry* that began refurbishing 100 Marders months ago on their own dime, perhaps anticipating that the government would change track at some point.
Chancellor Scholz' position was always that he doesn't want Germany to be the first (in order to avoid being seen as "escalatory" - I'd disagree with him, but I can see where he is coming from), and now that France has stepped forward with the AMX-10, he can follow suit and just say Germany wants to be a reliable ally. If anyone were to start sending Abrams, LeClercs or Challengers, I have a hunch the Leopard 2 would follow, too.
Then again, who knows what sort of talks may have taken place behind the scenes? I don't think this was planned months ago, but it is pretty interesting that these three announcements all came within only 24h.
@@Luca-sz5uy yes, which party is the good friend of putin, Gerhard Schröder, from? Connections and the agenda never changes.
Maybe Scholz just forgot to deliver tanks. He has a bit of a memory Problem as his finance scandal showed...
@@ddshiranui Im not "all hate on Germany", and I know most Germans want to support Ukraine, but other NATO countries already sent hundreds of IFVs, tanks and other heavy equipment to Ukraine. This whole "escalatory" thing is just a cover for Sholtz and his ungrounded fears.
"There are a lot of spare parts, logistics and production available for the Marder" I am sorry but where did you pick up that information? Because from my end and my talking with people from KMW and Rheinmetall that was one of the ways they "got away" with the growing expenses of the Puma. Because producers of very critical parts for the Marder went out of business long ago and spare parts were very expensive and hand fitted for existing vehicles. That also gives a hint at the existing stockpile of spare parts if you have to manufacture single parts to be fitted.
I'd say the AMX-10 is a wheeled tank destroyer or a recon vehicle, _depending on its mission_
Iam no expert and I assume it's a really good weapon. But is it suitable for a winter war when the battlefield is deep mud. Seen tracked vehicles get bogged down. I'd be interested if anyone could let me know how it performs in muddy conditions
If you look at the Bundeswehr Div. Recce or the old American Cavalry Group and the taskings of the Tanks in these Batt. you have what the AMX10RC was developed for. The reason for wheels you have to go to 1980's French military thought.
@LOLO / VAL Yes, we can say it started with the EBR and AML to be able to travel to the central front and for Africa. The French Rapid Reaction Corps carried out some exercises with various light Div reinforcing the French I Corps. At the same time there was a budget constraint as they built up the Force D'Frappe. In the eighties the rebuilding of the Army begun, both AMX variants, AUF1, TRF1, VAB, Leclerc and supply vehicle inventory. Costs where some of the reasons but transportation and overseas intervention also play a big role. French thought on tactics is based on the 2nd DB's experience in WW2, the AMX10RC was issued to the Corps recce I believe the 8 Hussards in Altkirch at the time, the various schools and 6DLB anf 1st RCLE ( the marine and airborne used the ERC). The small armoured div. were meant to operate in fast stinging attacks the Recce was a mixture of Jeeps and AMX or AML this was only at Corps and the DL's. Div had a coy on jeeps and VAB. Having mentioned the size of the Div they consited of 3 mch Inf 2-3 tank and 2 Arty. A slight bit larger then the American WW2 armoured Div. So they did have a tactical operational vision, plus the Pluton Artillery. Jim Storr and his book battlegroup is highly reccomended. Track vehicles are more mobile cross country and less ground displacement. I can't see Jaguar filling in the AMX10 role but as a proper recce vehicle. Did see a prototype vehicle with 8 wheels and 120mm low pressure.
Wheeled AFVs was pretty forward thinking considering it's the modern go-to for lighter AFVs. They're just superior in most cases.
@@ArchOfficial I remember how in the 80's the Canadian Army failed the trials of the Cougar for Recce in Germany, fear of overall replacement by wheel AFV's.
Have you ever thought about pairing up with Perun for a video? Seems like y'all would make a good pair, and you both do very well with the "visual presentation via slides" style.
MH is actually a good presenter who deals in facts. Perun is a propagandist.
I agree with Mortablunt. I have to say though that Perun definitely has the same capabilities as Military History.. its just such a pity he wants to repeat all the negative news/anti-Russian propaganda about Russia that western media channels promote. Example: there was a video of a singular Russian soldier showing 2 extremely rusted guns. Western media reported: "Russian army has terrible weapons maintenance, their soldiers fight with rusted weapons!" Perun repeated that claim multiple times despite that little rumour being based on like 3 private videos of 10 isolated pieces of equipment.
Another example: there was a panel discussion about the war in Ukraine. A panellist showed a photo showing a Russian vehicle with certain cracks in its wheels, and explained that the reason for that type of damage to wheels happens because 1 side of the vehicle was exposed to sun, while the other was not. Hence, the panelist concluded, Russia is inept at maintenance of wheeled vehicles. Perun repeated that claim multiple times despite that rumour being based on 1 singular source that showed 1 singular photo as evidence.
To be fair, BMPs are only amphibious if they're maintained... As some unfortunate Russians have recently found out.
The Marder is best understood as an armored personnel carrier. Its primary purpose is to move troops around the battlefield, a very important function, but it should try to avoid any fights with tanks. It is very useful in a defensive role, and the Ukrainians would be happy to have them on the front in Bakhmut, but holding a fixed position, it is vulnerable to artillery. It does weigh 33 tons, which means it can't just skip lightly over the Ukrainian mud. For that, the the AMX-10 recon vehicles provided by the French (16 tons) are more appropriate.
It os, in every sense of the word, an IFV.
@@acceptablecasualty5319 And yet it was admitted they were designed to accompany Leopards into battle, which does not have the same limitations or capabilities as Soviet T-series tanks. Ideally, you wouldn't want 40 of these ending up on the battlefield where they can be engaged, because they most definitely won't have the armor to shrug off artillery, a missile, or cannon round. That being said, being able to go as quickly in reverse as it can forward, it can get somewhere quickly, take some shots, and get out as quickly as it came in.
It is getting cold enough that there might not be any mud in the next day or two.
@@lasagnakob9908 They are IFVs. That's all i said, and it's the empirically correct Term.
@@acceptablecasualty5319 Yes, and that does not mean it will be used as one.
Doesn't dividing the content of one's fighting vehicle armada into so many types from different nations create problems with logistics? There must be different teams trained on each one, differing spare part sets, tactics and so forth. That sounds like a nightmare to me.
Yes, across all of the aid provided to Ukraine, does make a logistics nightmare for maintaince and repair. It is mitigated by close proximity to the original manufacturer and their supply chain. Poland and the baltic republics have been supplying support services for a bunch of Nato gear Ukraine is running. While this supply situation sucks it is better than lacking said equipment. Ideally Ukraine would want native wargear but since they dont have that big of an arms industry they need outside supply. Even the captured gear is becoming a supply problem.
They are just send there because it's all crap and to ruin western Ukraine further and somenone is for sure making nice profit with it.
Doesn't matter if they work.
@@miriamweller812 go ahead and aim your attitude at the proper target, Russia. They can stop the fighting and pull out. And maybe after some contrition attempt to rejoin the cvilized world. They can stop this…..at any time.
needing to open the hatch to reload the ATGM is a downside, but with the way the hatches are laid out, you are most likely to lose only your hands, and not your Hans.
The Marder (A1/A2) was an exceptionally agile vehicle, but by fitting the extra armor, while very effective against hollow charge ammunition, the Marder A3 unfortunately lost much of that agility.
The 20mm gun's APDS ammunition is exceptionally powerful for its caliber, penetrating the sides of a Centurion turret.
Due to the large elevation range, a rate of fire of 1000 rounds per minute and a muzzle velocity of 1000 meters per second, the weapon system is very well suited for combating air targets.
Furthermore the combination of the thermal imaging device and the 20mm HE ammo is excellent for fighting infantry.
And as a bonus you still have the MG3 as a coaxial weapon to the 20mm.
Unfortunately, the Russians have no Centurion. They only have T64, T72, T80, T90 and Marder's 20mm cannot damage any of them even at point-blank range.
@@tvgerbil1984 Well, destroying MBTs is not the main task of an AIFV. The 20mm of the Marder is capable of destroying anything used in Ukraine except MBTs, for fighting MBTs you have to fall back on the Milan.
20mm can't pierce the new bmp-3 armor.
What I’m see their armor is substandard so a 20 mm can do some damage
@@tvgerbil1984 Wait, the russians also have nukes. OMG, the marder probably won't survive a direct hit. OMG OMG. Because fighting a war is "two vehicles enter the ring and fight it out!" Simple people talking about complex matters is more painfull than getting hit by 20mm i guess.
The Marder 1 A3 to A5A1 is a very good tank. We used them until 2 years ago. And is now out of Service , but the Main Gun is very good. Plus it can Take Milan and TOW Missiles attached to the Turret
"It's a troop carrier, not a tank!"
The Marder cannot use the TOW. The Marder 1A3 can use MILAN and the 1A5 can also use MELLS (aka Spike), but not TOW.
It looks like the same concept as a Bradley fighting vehicle; which as done well enough in fights against old hardware. This is a chance to see how it does against peers.
>peers
I once was Panzergrenadier,then gunner,then driver of such a thing. With nowadays antitank- weaponry I would rather be elsewhere but not in such a tincan
With so many guided weapons around today, I would keep a distance of 30 meters from any kind of heavy equipment while within 50 km of the front. Bunching together 9-10 men into such a rolling steel coffin only makes killing more easier for an enemy that has practically monopoly on artillery and air force.
I myself was an armored infantryman in the Bundeswehr. We had the Marder1A3 version. Since only a few were converted to the Marder1A5 version and these are still active in the Bundeswehr today, I strongly suspect that it will be the Marder1A3 version. This also has the ability to fire an anti-tank guided missile (even if this is not a fire and forget weapon).
If there are still enough Milan to spare .. I doubt it
Lots of Milan in uk
@@ifv2089 Well I hope the brits don't have to open up garbage bins to look for them. If they had enough, they would've sent them already to Ukraine. They aren't in service for 17 years (replaced by Javelin). So they are probably scrap metal now.
@@bjoernschneider7762 "Garbage bins to look for them" - "not in service" - "already sent to Ukraine" or Phone a friend and make up your mind.
@@ifv2089 Afaik, the last Combat use of Milan in british service was in 2006. If they still have usable quantities of Milans, why didn't the UK sent them to Ukraine as France abd Italy did? If you have any evidence I'd be happy for Ukraine ...
You are quickly becoming my favorite channel for the German perspective.
It reminds me of tank destroyers. As long as you remember they are not tanks, and don’t use them as such, it is effective within its original purpose.
It reminds me of a truck with a MG on the hood. It's a transport with a quick self-defense capability against infantry.
@Hamlet K Squid That would describe an APC. The Marder, on the other hand, is an IFV just like the Bradley
@@theodorkorner1497 - Depends on what you're fighting. This is a scout vehicle or a transport. You can't expect it to accomplish anything in an advance against unknown opposition, at any real range, or while moving. You can expect it to contribute fire to an unexpected meeting engagement at close range. 20 mm might take out enemy light armor, or it might not but this vehicle has no business encountering enemy armor at all.
Bradley's evolved into more of a tank destroyer than its original purpose as an APC, but in large part that's because it wasn't much of a transport in the first place. The passenger compartment was smaller than the box of a small pickup in the original model. I haven't been in any newer ones.
Well, the Ukies have a really hard time restraining themselves from throwing AFVs face first at heavily defended Russian positions. I wouldn't be surprised if I saw them using Marders to spearhead an assault (they've been doing it since forever with BMP-1s/2s and captured BMP-3s). Such maneuvers usually end with a tube artillery or AT mine vibe check, followed by a prompt retreat.
Seems like these are far better than fighting just with small arms! I'm sure Ukraine will be glad to get them and put them to good use. Hopefully, rolling all the way to Melitopol and then on to Crimea.
LOL!
Omegalulz
300 thousand Russian troops have just hit the frontline ..................
how long does it take to train a crew to operate a Marder? And since they were designed to be used along Leopard main battle tanks, how will they be used without tanks on battle fields where enemy has tens or hundreds of tanks?
I think 8 weeks, if I remember correctly, read it after I had finished most of the work.
Who said Ukraine has no tanks? Who said they're fighting the 1970's soviets in Germany and absolutely need specifically Leopards to be effective?
@@ArchOfficial Fact that every news that talk about these Marder and Bradley, and French "tanks" say that Ukraine has been asking them for months now, and that has been refused so far, if they had tanks they wouldn't be asking for them, would they?
And about Leopards watch video again, it says that they were designed to be used along with Leopard tanks.
Compared to a PzH2000 or a Gepard , Marder is quite simple.I think ukrainians will not need much training in infantry tactics,because they will not send housewifes to germany.So it may not need 8 weeks.
@@Nauda999 Even if Ukraine had 5000 M1A2 SEP V3s they would ask for more. You always need more, there is no actual point when there is enough.
I’m loving 🥰 this move by Germany 🇩🇪 and America 🇺🇸 but why not do this much sooner ?
you're loving it .......... sending more weapons to kill people??? ............Americans will fight to last Ukraine ..
Ow my apologies Just let Russia 🇷🇺 invade Ukraine 🇺🇦 👏 what planet 🌎 are you living on ? You want another soviet empire ?
Our politicians are idiots, that's why. Sadly there were no alternatives available at the lasr election, low IQ was kinda the theme
Germany doesn't send new classes of heavy equipment individually. France and America seem to have similar notions and due to the timing of all 3 announcements it's likely all 3 countries had to coordinate it and waited for a moment when all countries were happy with sending it.
Going to be a major logistical nightmare to maintain those 100's of different high tech systems in Ukraine..
Upgrade is an interesting word. Armored vehicles become more armored and add technical systems but at great cost to speed and mobility. An early American Bradley or M1 tank is race car compared to the latest version after all the upgrades. (A driver might think they are downgrades not upgrades!)
This argument that Ukraine "only needs defensive tanks" made me so angry! My brother in Christ, Ukraine is currently on a counter offensive to take back what the Russians stole, and for that they absolutely need offensive capabilities! If all they can do is defend, then it will be a frozen conflict forever, the very thing that everyone pretends to be worried about!
Same here
I agree the German government should be ashamed of themselves. How is Ukraine supposed to regain their territory if they can’t attack. Just lying to justify their inaction.
Putin needs to be driven out of Ukraine, then perhaps he will learn a lesson, that's going to take a lot of AFV's & MBT's. It's difficult to judge whether Russia would disintegrate if Putin falls, however there are always indeterminate outcomes in the aftermath of war.
Guys go sleep you are tired
They may be tired, and many are justifiably so, but they are correct that donors of weapons and their kibitzers are sillily distinguishing defensive and offensive equipment. This is ground maneuver war gear. Categorizing as offensive or defensive has more to do with whose land you are on than comparative technology.
The AMX-10 doesn't have a standard NATO 105mm gun like in the Leopard 1. That's what I also assumed until I looked it up. It's got some weird "medium pressure" gun that fires a lower-velocity special round. It's the only tank in existence that has this gun and that uses this ammo. And it's not stabilized, either. Oh well, it's better than nothing. I hope the US will send all their M1128 Stryker Mobile Gun Systems which DO have a standard and stabilized 105mm NATO gun.
I find it funny you think a amx 10 RC is bad. It's actually performed very well given french actually regularly doing things with there military.
old vehicles, still Germany will unlikely deliver them... all talk, only real action Germans macht schnell on is butt licking Chinese...
Why foist those death traps on the UAF?
@@murphy7801 I didn't say it was "bad". It's just not as good as I thought it was after I first heard about it. It shoots a low velocity proprietary round that must be in limited supply, and the gun isn't stabilized so it can't shoot on-the-move. Never-the-less, I'm glad and I thank France for sending them. I hope France sends all 248 of them. I know Ukraine can put them to good use.
@@tunahxushi4669 Hopefully, Germany and the whole Western world will soon stop "butt licking Chinese" as you put it.
They are still good, at least because of their latest upgrades. I was driving one 20 years ago!
The fact remains Ukraine needs hundreds of real competitive current tanks and they’re getting armored cars.
It's happy to see Germany finally decided to send more heavy equipment, but as u discussed before, would 40 Marders really be able to achieve anything? I guess they could be used with about 4 companies of PzGren. but are they really worth using in the front line? Or maybe they could be used as training vehicles for further aid?
First I think it is important to show combined and ongoing support for Ukraine, so the delivery of AFVs from France, the US and Germany is significant in that way.
Second Ukraine is outsourcing a lot of their 3rd and 4th level maintenance so to speak. A more diverse set of vehicles is not as problematic, because they get send back for heavy repairs and maintenance anyway. With multiple vehicle types in service, this load can be spread over more countries. Every support that can unload the Ukraine industry and economy, besides preferably supporting their military is worth it imho.
Considering that a single BTG is a noticeable fighting unit in current conditions, yes, 2 armored BTGs' worth of Marders is significant.
Anything is better than nothing. The Bradleys will be more significant but the Marders I'm sure will also be useful. Even if it was just 10 Marders it would make a difference to some Ukrainian unit somewhere.
@@p_serdiuk Yes that's a good one; guess i'm still in my ww2 mindset where battalions are relatively small units...
The first batch is probably to train a cadre of Ukrainians in preparation for larger deliveries so they don’t get bombed while in storage awaiting trained crews
Ukraine’s principle deficiencies for its ground combat forces are 1. Ammunition supply and 2. Equipment provisioning, so few in number they are, it does provide more armored vehicles which is in desperate need
On the possible Leopard2 delivery, it is one of the mysteries of current German politics. What is the goal actually? How one can argue on ATTACK or DEFENSE armament, when Ukrainians are deep on their territory, trying to get it back? It sounds like reasoning of 5yo. Anyway, based on steps taken so far, I would suggest that once Marders are delivered and Russia is not able to retaliate, then the next step are heavies finally.
German extreme pacifism have never been logical. Now it is colliding with reality. And more realistic pragmatism and less hypocrisy is probably the result.
The Marder A1 and the 1A3 are by far the best auxiliary combat vehicles Germany has ever produced.
ATGMs, 20mm with various ammo storage, armoured enough for street fighting and small enough for ambushes against heavier tanks.
Marder is absolute murder on the battlefield. :D
The armor is definetly total underrated, it seems everyone is only looking at the guns and stuff (20mm is enough in my opinion btw.) but they forget, that they carry 9 people around. Losing a Marder to a lack of protection would mean losing 9 people at once.
I like the Lynx more.
And the Wiesel for stylepoints.
Both of those are solid. Good pick!
This is an absolutely childish analysis. "by far" the best? Did you forget about the Lynx which is "by far" more capable? And "Marder is absolute murder on the battlefield" Which battlefield? War Thunder battlefield? Smh. 🤦♂
Is that not what this Is? Dafuq? It's a real world thing? Oh well, you win. Good job.
Thanks for the coverage 👍
I've googled a bit and I didn't found info regarding when the Puma is going to enter service, and since there's an in-house alternative already at Rheinmetall, the Lynx (basically an amped up Marder, using the same chassis), is there a chance that the Bundeswehr's going to ditch the Puma and opt for the relatively less expensive and simpler Lynx?
the puma is already in service
puma is a debacle and a fiasco it appears, all of the pumas used in exercise recently failed, even germany isnt ordering more of them anymore
@@poki580 yeah, not only that but they had to change requirements for maximum height as a panzergrenadier. You are not allowed to be bigger than 186 cm, as you are to big. Atleast that is the last info I have regarding that issue. Enraged a few people how were already in the army and about to join a puma company
@@poki580 well, considering the failures were mostly rather minor, you can debate if it is a fiasco. A parking heater was forgotten to be turned on in one Puma, deemed broken and the Puma classified as out of service…
@@poki580 No the real fiasco is the fake news by our useless defense min. It appears these "failures" were totally exaggerated and mainly caused by lack of maintenance and user error. All of the 18 are already back in service. Looks like they tried to shift the blame to the industry bc otherwise the military and ministerial admin. would have to take the blame for management mistakes. Fucking shit show as always.
AS a US Army Infantry officer.... I did several training deployments with the 342 Panzer Grenadiers out of Koblenz. Gotta Say.... The way they handled mud/terrain was superior. And quick in acceleration then when needing to pull back in reverse (front to enemy while gunner engages) was also the best. The rear troop roof and rear hatch setup was very well designed (just low/high enough) to do your task. Gotta say. Its what i want to ride into a treeline/farmland fight such as the terrain of a Ukraine. Especially if i need the rear infantry with heads up and assisting in seeing drones. Yep.... Those weeks i spent in the back of a Marder is where i would want to be if we are holding a treeline and need to jump forward on command for a raid/counter and return to my positions. (Its as good in reverse and fighting its way out and it is in forward and taking ground)
Like The Chieftain said in your sit down. If the Ukrainians could manage to pull a brigade or two off the line for a couple months of training with some of this new Western equipment, they’d have a heck of a force to counterattack with in the Spring. Mobilized dudes with rusty AKs and Wagner penal battalions would get shredded up against a competent combine arms force.
A this rate it's going to be 2 battalions every two months being pulled away to train on Bradleys and Marders. The number of brigades will depend on how many M113s they're willing to throw into the mix. An American ABCT requires 3 Bradley Battalions and two tank battalions.
That’s less than two weeks of attrition versus the Russians. The arithmetic shows this just isn’t working.
@@Mortablunt That's no where close to what I'm seeing in terms of loses. Unless you're using the Kremlin's absurd claims.
The spring? Really? That's when all the mud returns, but ok.
Someone please tell those SPD-leaders that the Leopard I and II were build to defend Germany against an attack by the USSR = They are defence weapons!
Leopard 2 is also good in attacking. It is a main battle tank. You cannot say "Russian T-80/T-72 is for attacking and Leopard 2 is for defending." It is a battle between two main battle tanks. Nothing more.
Angriff ist die beste Verteidigung!
The leopard 2 is designed for the combined arms warfare of Verzögerungsgefecht. Which means giving up territory while slowly retreating from one defensive line to another and letting the enemy bleet out for every meter it gained. When the point of exhaustion is reached, a violent counter attack is followed to recreat the former Frontline or even gain a little more. I dont think Ukraine can pull of such operations. So the leopard 2 is of questionable value.
MBT are Defender and Attacker at the same time.
Someone also remind them that similar to the Great Patriotic War, the 2.0 version started with Russian invasions of Eastern Europe
Established german news outlets are reporting today that Germany will find it impossible to send more than 40 of these vehicles.Without the anti-tank Milans as well.Same old hot air from ScholZ
The most funny thing will be when a Marder ended in the Kubinka tank museum in Moscow with the Tiger and Maus.😂😂
Might for sure happen but not sure if the dickhead who started this war will be still in charge in Mocow when that happens.
@@booyacash Yes.....Putin will be there...enjoy it.
The real funny thing is all the captured T-90Ms that will end up in European and US tank museums!
@@thedausthed Yes, is true..i will love see the russians take a Leopard 2, but Germany and Poland will NOT sennd to Ukraine...i don´t know why😂😂😂
John Deere is not supplying recovery vehicles for the Russian Army, so fat chance of that happening.
It's important to remember Russia is an artillery army. Virtually all of Ukraine's vehicle losses have been to Russian artillery which pounds armored vehicles before they can get close enough to engage Russian troops. Any armored vehicle sent by NATO would have to be resistant to artillery to make a difference. Unfortunately, one has not been invented yet. Abrams, Bradley, Marder, leopard, none of them can withstand being inside the blast radius of a standard Soviet 152mm HE shell.
Artillery is indirect fire. Good luck hitting a moving target.
@@carlosandleon Artillery hits moving targets just fine.
In Austria in the the early 90s we had Pinzgauers :D They took us everywhere. :D
The Pandur came a bit later.
Nice to see in comments a list of what Ukraine needs (tanks, IFV etc), but nobody mentioned peace for Ukraine. That's actually all that you need about this warfare.
And that can only happen when the last russian on Ukraine soil either leaves across the border, bleeds out on the ground left behind by his coward commanders or is captured as a PoW, and the Kremlin admits total defeat and unconditional surrender while Putin is overthrown by the Russian people.
@@SonsOfLorgar All warmongers are highly welcomed at the front lines. Your heroic death won't be forgotten.
@@SonsOfLorgar you"re a profund moron if you think russkies will overthrown putin, and if that happens the one replacing him might even be more aggressive. Let's see how this 10 th wave of ukrain enrollment goes and if they manage to push russkies
It simply isn't the time for peace. Think of it this way to get an idea why: Was there time for "peace" in 1942 and should the the allies and germany just have come together and have a talk and after that its all over? It is sad, but it is as simple as this, sometimes there is the right time for making peace and sometimes there isn't.
@@polarstorm5986 in the forties Churchill and Roosevelt just wanted to impose liberalism and destroy Germany forever; today it's not wise to wish such a thing against the biggest nuclear power on the planet