Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Vasta
vk1
Liige
Postitusi: 1607
Liitunud: 02 Juul, 2007 22:18
Asukoht: tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas vk1 »

saksa olukord on küll hapu, aga üks asi, millest pole eriti räägitud, on see, et masinad pole võitlusvalmid saksa standardite järgi, sõjaolukorras läheksid lahingusse ikka suuremad protsendid. osad probleemid on seal vist umbes nagu ´õlivahetusest on 1000km. üle´ ja ´tanki õhufiltri vahetuse tuli vilgub´ . eriti pidi see just lennumasinate probleem olema. rahuajal ei tohiks lennata, aga sõjaajal läheks käiku küll
Leo
Liige
Postitusi: 3303
Liitunud: 27 Dets, 2006 20:35
Asukoht: Tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Leo »

Vägagi õige on endise kaitseministri kommentaar olukorrale - 25 aastat kokkutõmbamisi ja kärpeid ei saa teha tasa vaid mõne aastaga! Tegelikult täpselt nii ongi ja süüdlased on kõik selle aja jooksul Saksamaad valitsenud poliitikud, kes on lasknud armeel niimoodi kiratseda, et on jõutud olukorrani, kus viiendik helikopteritest ja kolmandik lennukitest on lennuvõimelised ja piloodid lahkuvad teenistusest, sest kaotavad lennutundide puudusel kvalifikatsiooni.

Tegelikult on ju probleem selles, et sakslased ei ole tahtnud oma kaitsevõimega tegeleda, nii mugav on ju ameeriklaste selja taga istuda ja aegajalt mõnd väiksemat üksust missioonile saata. Ma pakun, et isegi kui täna otsustataks hakate kaitsevõimet rohkem rahastama, kuluks vähemalt 10 aastat selleks, et üksused muutuksid uuesti võitlusvõimeliseks. Nagu artiklis mainitakse, on oluline probleem ka sõdurite ning armeeteenistuse maine inimeste hulgas, see ei ole normaalne, et vormikandjasse suhtutakse halvasti.
vk1
Liige
Postitusi: 1607
Liitunud: 02 Juul, 2007 22:18
Asukoht: tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas vk1 »

sakslaste taasliitumise eeldused olid, et nad ei muutuks enam iialgi nii võimsaks, et sõjaliselt euroopas domineerida. see punkt oli nii brittide, prantslaste kui ka venelaste nõue. isegi praegu, kui nad paneksid kõik rattad pöörlema, tekitaks see nii nato, kui ka ELis palju küsimusi, näit. poolaski
Kasutaja avatar
Health
Liige
Postitusi: 863
Liitunud: 25 Aug, 2019 14:13
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Health »

Vähemalt siiamaani on pigem jäänud mulje, et poolakad on pigem mures selle kohta kui käpardlikuks Bundeswehr on muutunud. Ja ega see "kõik rattad pöörlema" kuidagi sakslasi veel mingiks kontinendi suurvõimuks muudaks.

Eks venelane lõugaks ning see kes tahaks punkte noppida nopiks punkte, aga kahtlen et ELis või NATOs mingi tõsine poeavangutamine selle peale hakkaks.
vk1
Liige
Postitusi: 1607
Liitunud: 02 Juul, 2007 22:18
Asukoht: tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas vk1 »

asjade loogika on lihtsalt selline. kui saksamaa hakkab järsku musklit näitama, siis hakkavad kõik naabrid mõtlikult telefoni kontakte vaatama, et kellega võiks mõni õhtu vaikselt maha istuda ja paar sõna juttu puhuda, pole ammu näinud. samamoodi, kui euroopa peaks looma oma ühendarmee, oleks selle vaat et suurimaks vastaseks USA. sama kehtiks ka siis, kui euroopa NATO raames hakkaks ehitama ameeriklaste senini unikaalsete võimete dubleerimiseks mingeid oma süsteeme. ´euroopa roll peaks olema ikka lihtsalt rohkem manööverüksuseid ameerika juhtimise all´. :)


kui saksamaa peaks taastama ajateenistuse ja iga aasta võtma ajateenistusse pea kogu aastakäigu, nagu soomes, siis oleks suht raske maha müüa ideed 80 jalaväepataljonist aastas. kui võtta vähem, siis tekib küsimus sotsiaalsest õiglusest - rahuajal sakslaste õiglustunnet riivata ei tohi, see oli ka vist eelmise ajateenistuse lõpetamise põhjuseid.

ma postitan siia mõned tsitaadid ühelt sakslaselt, kes on aastaid olnud tankneti nimelise militaarfoorumi liige ja oli ka vist aastaid ühe bundestagi saadiku abi. saadik ise oli ka riigikaitsekomisjoni liige . foorum ise on googli hoiatuse taga, ei tea kas avaneb võõrastele
Well, I'm old enough to be of the "kids today could use some military experience" ilk myself. I have to add that from German sources, the bit about amending the constitution appears to be further pursuant to the intention of creating a general duty beyond the military realm and substitute service for same. Which leads straight to a major problem in that it's likely to run headlong into international and European law banning forced labor, military conscription being the only exception as a possibly vital element of national security.



I've dealt with this all of my political "career". First of all, military service, or at least national security, needs to be the base of all such schemes. You cannot just oblige people to spend a year of their life on some undetermined character-building civic service with a free choice between all sorts of stuff including caring for the old and infirm, helping out in underdeveloped countries, or saving the rain forest.



What would probably work is a model we developed early in the millenium, based on a wide interpretation of homeland defense including against terrorist attacks, where you could have served in the military, police, firefighters, THW or any other first-responder organization. That was really not terribly original, since it was just giving equal emphasis to options that existed under the original system of conscription. People could actually be drafted into the Federal Border Guard long before it became today's Federal Police, and folks who enlisted as volunteers with first responder organizations for a certain length (I want to say seven years) were exempt.



Another model was similar to what France is now doing, which we termed "extended compulsory education"; kids in Germany are after all required by law to attend school until age 18 (including vocational schools in parallel to job training if going into the work market from age 15-16), so it would be easy to add a month or so where everybody is exposed to the options of military or civilian security service hands-on. You could even integrate it into the curriculum; there are already mandatory work internships in 9th grade IIRC. This was mostly aimed at making up for conscription's volunteer-generating function by internal recruiting.



There are several rather specifically German issues. One is the obsession with justice and equality, which means a compulsory service would need to apply to a sufficiently broad part of each class so not too many people are unfairly burdened or favored. That means selective service models like in Scandinavia, where you pick only the required number of the fittest, recommended early by a blue-ribbon committee under former President Richard von Weizsäcker, are right out.



Lack of Wehrgerechtigkeit is in fact mostly what led to the death of conscription; with a shrinking need for draftees, less and less people were inducted (in part by applying stricter fitness standards combined with declining fitness standards in society - but an increasing part of each class wasn't even examined anymore). Substitute service had long since become a choice rather than the exception based upon conscious objection anyway. Including women in the draft, another justice issue from the view of their male classmates, would increase the problem.



Attempts to compensate led to subsequent reductions of terms from twelve to ten to nine months, in a period where the focus went to foreign deployments for which draftees could only be used on a voluntary basis. Eventually it was felt that they were just tying up ressources in training, equipment etc. while providing no worthwhile service. Even with the change back to alliance defense, the question is how short you can make service terms to still get useful soldiers.



We discussed Swiss-type militia models with very short basic training terms and the rest of the obligation to be served in regular fiurther training, but there were economic worries. Employers don't like their staff getting off work for reserve service ever so often, and Germany is short on workforce anyway - which is a reason why professional military service is so incompetitive with the high-paying civilian sector in the first place. A lot is (post-Cold War) cultural of course, with little respect for military or even civilian first responder volunteers despite lip service. Even volunteer firefighters often find their employer pissed if they get called out too often.



This social/political issues collide with the sheer size of the German frame. We're finding it hard to recruit enough volunteers for a force suitable to our population and economic strength, but a "just" military conscription system producing useful soldiers would result in a force likely in excess of the 370,000 limit of the Two-plus-Four Treaty, and probably more expensive than we are prepared to pay for. So a cultural change is needed more than all else, and while there are some slow indications for this, it will need an extended period of a seriously perceived threat for substantial development - something our Eastern neighbors have over us, of course.
Some outlines are emerging for the defense planning until 2031. It’s all still pretty rough and full of buzzwords, but a direction is visible.



It has already been mentioned earlier that the level of ambition is



- fielding three fully equipped mechanized divisions with a total of eight to ten brigades, fully deployable within three months’ time;



- leading a multi-national air task force generating 350 combat and reconnaissance missions per day, three quarters of which by the Bundeswehr;



- ability to deploy at least 15 naval vessels at any time and giving the Marine the capability for maritime air warfare back.



The first of the newly reorganized divisions is to be combat ready by 2027. This “Division 2027” is supposed to comprise about 20,000 troops total, one Panzer and two Panzergrenadier brigades plus an organic helicopter force, with the capability to additionally integrate up to two allied partner brigades. The national brigades will have three mechanized and one infantry battalion each, organic artillery, enhanced capabilities against new air threats like sUAS, and a mixed reconnaissance company.



The division will additionally have a reconnaissance battalion, an artillery battalion covering ranges out to 300 kilometers, engineers equipped with a future blocking system, increased NBC defense and of course organic C4ISR and logistics capabilities which can be modularly used within the division as well as the brigade system. Add lots of terms like comprehensive digitalization, plug-in interoperability, sensor-to-shooter concept, joint and combined cyber and information operations, highly automated logistics possibly including autonomous driving, ad-hoc networked signature-reduced high-mobility command posts with increased reachback share, etc.



The necessary increase in personnel is to be reached partially through more use of reservists. Materially, it is expected that the number of Boxers alone will have to be at least tripled over the 200 already in service and 130 authorized for procurement. There will likely be more Pumas, too, and German-French cooperation for new artillery systems in addition to the future Main Ground Combat System project. Tiger is to be successively upgraded and supplemented by a light recce/attack helicopter, including for urban operations.



The way for the Luftwaffe is already mostly mapped out with the Future Air Combat System and Future Transport Helicopter, UAVs, the joint French-German C-130 squadron and possibly a multi-national A400M outfit (or alternately taking over the previously surplus-to-requirement aircraft again). Same for the Marine with F125, more K130s, additional U212s jointly procured with Norway, and MKS 180/F126. The minehunter fleet will have to be replaced, and it’s not yet clear how the future maritime air warfare capability will look. The government has allegedly agreed on the procurement of two new command and supply ships, though.



Then there’s finances.
On the thought that capabilities, not money should be the focus for German contributions to NATO:

Germany is no longer a frontline country rather than an essential rear area/logistics hub within the alliance, including lots of important headquarters and other installations. Most reinforcements and supplies for the new frontline countries from about anywhere in Western Europe and North America must pass across or by its territory. There are two main national missions following from this. We are arguably making much more progress in preparing for the second than the first one.

The first mission is protecting those installations and lines of communication. There are four main threat vectors:

- By air, including conventional aircraft and UAVs, ballistic and cruise missiles, and airborne operations. The conventional threat is the least problematic; with the dual-capability fleet of 140 Eurofighters, the chief issue is overcoming availability problems via sufficient stocks of spare parts and ammunition, and crew readiness via budgeted flight hours. Ground-based air defense however is sparse and in need of capability updates.

The replacement of Patriot (twelve squadrons of eight) by MEADS is still in limbo, with completion planned for 2031. While MEADS will use the PAC-3 MSE missile, an emerging threat of new IRBMs may require additional capabilities; despite housing NATO's missile defense headquarters at Ramstein, there are currently none nationally. Aster 30 Block 1 NT/Block 2 is unlikely, since Germany seems to be somewhat hitched to the US wagon with MEADS and separately, Standard for the Marine. PAAC-4/Stunner/David's Sling doesn't seem to be an improvement regarding target range (300 km). THAAD or SM-3/6, the latter for land and/or sea use, are more likely. So far though, the Type 124 frigates are at best envisioned to supply target data rather than provide effectors within the allied missile defense scheme.

Low-level AD is limited to two Ozelot platoons and two MANTIS firing units, now also operated by the Luftwaffe - though subordinated to the Dutch Defensie Grondgebonden Luchtverdedigingscommando as part of the bi-national cooperation with the Netherlands, which has a few additional Patriots, NASAMS and Stinger Fenneks. Ozelot and MANTIS have long planned to be replaced by SysFla involving a mobile 35 mm platform and the LFK NG missile; however, no procurement decision has even been made. It would make sense to revive the Heer's defunct anti-air branch for it.

- On the ground, though mostly by commando raids and hybrid warfare, including fomenting public unrest directed against NATO operations, all the way from civil disobedience by blocking bases and transports with peaceful protests to terrorist acts, as seen in the 70s/80s. The possible use of NBC agents against military targets or society at large shouldn't be neglected. This is partly a question of intelligence and policing, but constitutes a situation where civil means quickly meet their limits.

In the Cold War, there was an extensive territorial defense and host nation support system. Very little of that remains. Each of the current two mechanized divisions has a reserve support battalion with a somewhat cloudy mission, but including security tasks and support of domestic disaster relief. The inter-service force support base has been raising a total of 30 regional security and support companies of about 100 reservists each since 2012, with one each security, support and NBC/engineer platoon.

This April, three Bavarian companies were used as the initial building blocks for a new pilot territorial defense regiment that will be trialed until 2021. Of course if Bremen and the Saarland with their population of about 700,000 and one million respectively can raise a company each, we should really be able to field five regional regiments of 13-17 each - less a question of money than willing reservists, which should be the smaller problem.

The above doesn't include rebuilding the material, legal and administrative means for enabling quick military transports across German territory, another Cold War capability largely lost. Authorizing and securing military convoys has devolved to the state level, for example. Work is underway to improve the situation, but it will take some time.

- By sea. During the Cold War, Germany along with Denmark and Norway was the guardian of the Baltic Approaches, which expressed itself in a large fleet of fast attack craft, mine warfare craft, and coastal submarines. The mission then was to deny Warsaw Pact forces a breakout into the Atlantic. Today it is to enable NATO to operate in the Baltic Sea though most transports by sea will doubtlessly unload in North Sea ports and take the safer land route from there. But while Germany will have to contribute to it, then as now others are better positioned to secure the transatlantic link.

The customized Cold War fleet of course is long gone, though the Type 212A submarines remain capable of operating in the confined Baltic waters they were still designed in the 80s after all. Germany used to be NATOs center of competence for anti-mine warfare, but this capability has atrophied in the last expeditionary-focused decades. Of nearly 60 units, only ten dating from the 90s remain active in the mission. A follow-on system has been long debated, but nothing concrete has emerged so far.

The days of the FAC, another German chief competence, are probably gone. Even in the late 80s, thoughts for follow-on systems went towards either more smaller platforms, a complete change to shore-based missiles or, in view of the Cold War thaw, bigger units which could also be deployed in other European littorals, and eventually materialized as the Type 130 corvette. We are actually building a second lot of five now, which is probably the most cost-effective solution for control of Baltic waters, though the design could use some updates.

The most important measure for anti-surface warfare might be giving the Marine its own aerial warfare capability back, or at least make the Luftwaffe finally take it serious after promptly letting it slide after assuming it in 2005. The Kormoran AShM has been gone since 2012 without successor.

- Cyber warfare, not just against military installations but the civilian infrastructure enabling them, and the population via information warfare (also see above under hybrid warfare). Not exclusively a military mission either, and we've been making some steps to address this threat. The Bundeswehr established its Cyber and Information Space branch as its third inter-service branch in 2017, combining signals and electronic warfare troops with military intelligence, operative communication and cyber security (plus geographic information). The German capabilities and legalities of cyber warfare remain a little fuzzy and under debate.

Various other authorities are involved in the cyber security field, chiefly the Federal Office for Security in Information Technology, which also runs the small National Cyber Defense Center supposed to coordinate between other federal agencies - the foreign and domestic intelligence services, the Bundeswehr's counter-intelligence agency, Federal Police, the Customs Criminal Investigations Office, and the Federal Office for Public Protection and Disaster Relief. Operators of critical infrastructures (water, electricity, communications etc.) are also supposed to cooperate.

The second mission is of course providing quick backup/reinforcements to the frontline countries. Germanys traditional role here is in mechanized warfare, and the plans for NATO's 2031 defense posture have been widely depicted here. A lot remains to be done, but I think too little (at least public) attention is paid to the first mission - which needs to be secured to enable the second.

Edited to expand on the territorial regiment concept. Edited again to put the long hyphens and apostrophes back in which the mobile board version killed during the first edit.
allajoonimised ja tumedad jooned minu poolt
Leo
Liige
Postitusi: 3303
Liitunud: 27 Dets, 2006 20:35
Asukoht: Tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Leo »

Sakslastel oleks ilmselt täna väga raske oma inimestele põhjendada, millise strateegilise vajaduse pärast oleks vaja taastada ajateenistus ja toota reservi sealt tekkivad reservüksused. Meenutame, et viimastel aastatel sisaldas sakslaste ajateenistus ka paljusid tsiviilteenistuse inimesi, kes armee asemel töötasid näiteks haiglates sanitaridena. Nii et kui ajateenitus taastada, siis ei oleks see kindlasti populaarne ja osalise ajateenistuse puhul tekiks võrdse kohtlemise probleem ning kolmandaks, ma väga ei usu, et oleks kohe võtta kasarmuid, koolitajaid ja varustust kogu selle seltskonna koolitamiseks. Ma ei jaksa ka uskuda, et tänapäeval keegi Kesk-Euroopa riikidest sakslaste tugevnemist ohuna näeks, see võis olla teemaks kohe peale II MS lõppu, kui armees oli märgatav osa Wehrmachti taustaga kaadriohvitsere, kuid see kaotas oma aktuaalsuse esimese 10 a jooksul.

Bundeswehris on küll tänapäeval 180000 sõdurit ja ohvitserit, kuid nendest ainult kolmandik on maaväes, mis tundub Eesti ja Soome maaväekeskseid kaitsevägesid vaadates natuke kummaline. Ehk siis ametlikult on sakslastel:

Maavägi 62000;
Merevägi 16000;
Õhuvägi 28000;
Toetuse väejuhatus 28000, kusjuures ainuüksi Sõjaväepolitseid 3 rügementi;
Meditsiiniteenistus 20000;
Küberväejuhatus 13000.

Ehk siis põhimõtteliselt tagalas, meditsiiniteenistuses ja kübervägedes teenib rohkem inimesi kui maaväes kokku ja tagalateenistus on sama suur kui kogu õhuvägi. Kusjuures see oleks loogiline, kui organisatsiooni kohustus oleks vajadusel kiiresti mobiliseerida suur armee, siis oleks isegi mõistlik mehitada tehnilised erialad juba RA piisavalt paljude spetsialistidega, sest reservist on neid raske värvata.
nimetu
Liige
Postitusi: 7574
Liitunud: 25 Mär, 2016 21:16
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas nimetu »

Ainult 20 Bundeswehri helikopterit 152-st on ametlikult lahinguvalmis ja see mõjutab negatiivselt pilootide väljaõpet. Kasutusvalmis on 8 Tiger ja 12 NH90 helikopterit.
https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/poli ... .bild.html
Põhiliseks probleemiks on rutiinsete kontrollide viibimine. Airbus ei tule oma kohustustega toime. Põhimõtteliselt on masinad ilmselt enam-vähem korras ja lennuvõimelised, kuid piloodid ei saa neid lihtsalt kasutada. Kõlab üsna demoraliseerivalt.
Leo
Liige
Postitusi: 3303
Liitunud: 27 Dets, 2006 20:35
Asukoht: Tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Leo »

Siin jah ilmselt ei ole tegemist sellega, et mingi mutrite pingestuse kontrolli allkiri on puudu, vaid pigem sellega, et ei ole piisavalt raha ja spetsialiste hooldustöödeks. Näiteks see NH90 on üldse üks paras nurisünnitis, soomlased siiamaani kiruvad seda hanget, sest kogu aeg olid probleemid. Näiteks 30.1.2015 kirjutas Helsingin Sanomat, et alla poole kõikides kopteritest on kasutusvalmid, teised olid korralises remondis või pandi neile uut varustust külge https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000002796596.html
Kasutaja avatar
Fucs
Liige
Postitusi: 15550
Liitunud: 12 Dets, 2006 21:43
Asukoht: retired
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Fucs »

Selline artikkel siis melkon.lv lehel viitega "Die Welt"-ile
Европа обеспокоены планами Польши купить много танков
http://www.melkon.lv/news/2020/01/04/ev ... polshi-ku/

(Google tõlge)
Berliin ja Pariis, mis jätsid Poola oma ühistest kaitseprojektidest välja, sundisid Varssavi keskenduma Ameerika relvadele, kirjutab Die Welt. Nüüd plaanib Poola osta kaasaegsemaid tanke, kui Saksamaal ja Prantsusmaal on kokku, väidab Saksamaa väljaanne.

Poola on sõlminud Ameerika Ühendriikidega lepingu osta enam kui 400 miljoni dollari eest 20 Ameerika kaasaskantavat raketiheitjat ja sellega seotud varustust. Lisaks kavatseb Varssavi asendada Saksa tankid teiste moodsamatega, vahendab InoTV Die Welti artikli sisu.

Väljaande viidatud ekspertide sõnul on Poola Saudi Araabia järel suuruselt teine ​​Ameerika relvade ostja.

Väljaande autor näeb selles Pariisi ja Berliini vastutust, kes on Varssavi ees „suletud“ kaitseküsimustes. Saksamaa ja Prantsusmaa teevad selles valdkonnas koostööd, kuid ei luba Poolal koostööd teha, ehkki Varssavi osaleks hea meelega uute tankide väljatöötamises, öeldakse artiklis.

Berliini ja Pariisi sarnasel positsioonil on kaugeleulatuvad tagajärjed Euroopa ühisele kaitsepoliitikale ja seega ka Euroopa julgeolekule, hoiatab Saksa ajaleht. Autor väidab, et Poola tagab NATO niinimetatud idapoolse külje turvalisuse. Euroopa armeede integreerimist muudavad keeruliseks kahepoolsed lepingud Poola ja USA vahel, on artikli autor kindel.

Poola “võõrandumine” olulise partnerina julgeolekupoliitikas on ohtlik, hoiatab väljaanne. Poola soovib, et temas ei nähtaks mitte ainult potentsiaalset sõjatehnika ostjat, vaid ka partnerit ning seetõttu on ta huvitatud osalemisest Euroopa tanki väljatöötamisel. Kuid Berliini kurb kogemus näitas, et suured Euroopa projektid suurendavad kulusid ja suurendavad viivituse tõenäosust.

Sellest vaatenurgast jääb lahtiseks küsimus, kui mõistlik on Poolat sellistesse projektidesse tööstuspoliitika osas kaasata, kirjutab ajaleht. „Kui Berliin ei hoolitse Varssavi edukama integratsiooni eest Euroopa kaitseprojektidesse, surub see Poola Donald Trumpi kätte. See on täpselt see, mis praegu toimub, ”öeldakse artiklis.

Autor märgib, et mitte ainult USA, vaid ka Lõuna-Korea on valmis tegema koostööd Poolaga, kes on valmis pakkuma Poola vajadustele kohandatud K2 mudeli versiooni ja viima läbi isegi Varssavi soovitud tehnoloogiasiirde. Läbirääkimised sellel teemal on küll algfaasis, kuid me räägime juba 800 eksemplarist.

"Pärast sellist kindlat tehingut on Poolas rohkem kaasaegseid soomukeid kui Saksamaal ja Prantsusmaal kokku," lõpetab Die Welt.
LupusII
Liige
Postitusi: 512
Liitunud: 03 Veebr, 2015 22:06
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas LupusII »

Bundeswehri maavägi on täna sisuliselt võõrleegion. Põlisrahva hulgas ei ole teenistusse minek peaaegu üldse mingi varjant. Kõik tahavad suurteks ärijuhtideks saada. Maavägi on sisserännanute pärusmaa. Aga see oli juba ka ajateenistuse ajal mõnes üksuses suht vene keelne.
nimetu
Liige
Postitusi: 7574
Liitunud: 25 Mär, 2016 21:16
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas nimetu »

See korea K2 võib tulevikus ka paljude teiste Euroopa riikide valikusse sattuda. Juba praegu on näha K9 haubitsa edu välismaal. K2 on igati modernne ja tõenäoliselt taskukohasem kui saksa-prantsuse uus leiutis, sest enamus selliseid ühisprojekte muutuvad ajapikku rahaauguks. Tuletagem ka meelde, et prantslaste Leclerc on tegelikult üks kalleimaid tanke tänu oma eksootilisele soomusele.
Lemet
Liige
Postitusi: 19914
Liitunud: 12 Apr, 2006 15:49
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Lemet »

Aga see oli juba ka ajateenistuse ajal mõnes üksuses suht vene keelne.
Küll OT, aga lihtsalt tuli meelde, kuid Bremerhavenis üks sadamas töötanud volgasakslaset taat (aga neid oli seal ikka massiliselt) mõningase hapuvõit muigega suunurgas tähendas, et kui ümberasumislaine algul oli neid, kel alust selle saamiseks, olnud poolteist-kaks miljonit, siis tänaseks on neid juba viis miljonit kohale jõudnud ja lõppu pole näha. Ja lisas, et rsk, iga tolgus, kelle vanaisa saksa lambakoera on pidanud, kuulutab end nüüd poolsakslaseks ja trügib siia hüvesid nautima.
Errare humanum est-aga veel inimlikum on selle teise kraesse väänamine...
Viiskümmend
Liige
Postitusi: 2083
Liitunud: 04 Aug, 2010 12:33
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Viiskümmend »

K2 klooni nimega Altay toodab ju ka Türgi ning Lõuna-Korea on teinud ka Poolale pakkumise K2PL Wilk koos-tootmiseks, see on neil kindlasti hea argument, et sakslasi ja prantslasi survestada. :D
vk1
Liige
Postitusi: 1607
Liitunud: 02 Juul, 2007 22:18
Asukoht: tallinn
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas vk1 »

nimetu kirjutas:See korea K2 võib tulevikus ka paljude teiste Euroopa riikide valikusse sattuda. Juba praegu on näha K9 haubitsa edu välismaal. K2 on igati modernne ja tõenäoliselt taskukohasem kui saksa-prantsuse uus leiutis, sest enamus selliseid ühisprojekte muutuvad ajapikku rahaauguks. Tuletagem ka meelde, et prantslaste Leclerc on tegelikult üks kalleimaid tanke tänu oma eksootilisele soomusele.
leclerc on kallis, kuna kogu logistika, varuosade kalkulatsioonid olid tehtud kaheksakümnendate lõpus vähemalt poole suurema kogutoodangu arvestusega. siis aga ootamatult lõppes külm sõda ja kõik kohad olid täis võileivahinnaga nato ja idabloki tanke.
Puurija
Liige
Postitusi: 1666
Liitunud: 01 Mai, 2014 11:20
Kontakt:

Re: Ülejäänud NATO militaarne areng

Postitus Postitas Puurija »

Saksamaa välispoliitika ja julgeoleku instituudi (SWP) teadur Janis Kluge: „Üha enam leitakse, et Saksamaal ei peakski meie ajaloo pärast olema sõjaväge. Saksamaa oli välisküsimustes pikka aega rahulikus olekus ja üha vähendas kulutusi relvajõududele. See peab muutuma, aga see saab juhtuda vaid siis, kui rahvas kaasa tuleb.“
https://leht.postimees.ee/6865030/saksa ... epalgeline
Vasta

Kes on foorumil

Kasutajad foorumit lugemas: Registreeritud kasutajaid pole ja 7 külalist