Now that the dust has settled

Was ukraine right about French weapons being shit?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s French and is therefore defective.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Name one tank that’s "practical" for attacking in this war. Tanks have one of exactly two fates in Ukraine:
    1. Run over a mine, finished off by a drone
    2. Killed via ATGM or some top-attack munition

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you forgot 3
      running over zigs

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >french weapons
    no
    >amx30
    for the context, yes. There are breakpoints in armor: stops 762, stops HMG, stops autocannon, stops basic HEAT, full tank frontal arc etc.

    You need HMG to HMG+ level armor to realistically survive 155mm shrapnel and therefore a conventional battlefield. The AMX30 met the same fate as the perforated VDV tracks from early war. They are roughly 762 proof and rapidly died to artillery which T55s and T62s survived.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >. There are breakpoints in armor: stops 762, stops HMG, stops autocannon, stops basic HEAT, full tank frontal arc etc.
      breakpoints are a meme
      even marginal increases in armor are welcome even if they do not cross a breakpoint

      an extra 15mm armor plate doesnt stop M111 from penetrating a T-72A, but it was still welcome for limiting the range and angles from which that round could stop
      and the 10% increase in protection from the M2 to the M3 half-track did not cross any breakpoints but was still considered a massive improvement to the crew by simply increasing the protective envelope against .30cal AP from within 300m to within 200m

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >amx 30
      >amx 30
      >amx 30
      There are no amx 30 in Ukraine, dumbass.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe there should be. It is has a 20mm coax, use it like a bradley.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >stops 762, stops HMG, stops autocannon, stops basic HEAT, full tank frontal arc etc.
      Jesus christ, go back to your PrepHoleidya, moron.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's not a tank though. It's an armored car with a big gun.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A year old Ramesh. Has your handler been drafted ?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You don't need to be a pajeet to see that a wheeled tank with the armor of a bmp isn't a good idea

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Was ukraine right about French weapons being shit?
    It seems like the French have at least one good weapon.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The wheelbase of this butthole allows it to quickly get out of position, even if it has already been opened

      An open butthole that won't sit still, and thus cannot be penetrated. Truly the most terrifying thing imagineable to zigger.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >muh glorified technical with 155mm
      It's debunked a while ago.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        kys

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          No, you.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >debunked
        May we see it?

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "tank is dead, just build IFV" Black folk on suicide watch

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    French: "we won't give you tanks, but we'll give you scout armor cars with a gun. Dont use it as a tank"
    MsM: "The French are donating tanks"
    AFU: "We cant use this as a tank"
    French: "This is not a..."
    noGunz: "SHIT TANK! Frog tanks suck!"

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ukies love the Caesar though. Problem is the west just dumps a bunch of random surplus on Ukraine and it's a total crap shoot whether it's suitable for the particular conflict or not

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. The AMX-10RC is a large armored car with a big gun. It's useful for bullying jighabus in the heart of darkness, but too vulnerable against an enemy possessing heavy artillery and flying bombs.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why are they still manufacturing recon vehicles? What is this 1950?
    >The AMX-10 RC is fitted with a 105/47 F2 MECA 105 mm medium-pressure gun mounted in a GIAT Industries TK 105 three-man turret. The F2 cannon fires 105×527R proprietary ammunition. The turret uses a SAMM CH49 electrohydraulic gun control system. No stabilization system is fitted.
    >No stabilization system is fitted.
    Jfc....

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Was ukraine right about French weapons being shit?
    those vehicles just aren't made for any real purpose. Wheels get blown up by infantry mines, the thing has to frick off the field. The recoil makes it rock, it can't maneuver etc etc

    It's literally just a barely armed Black menacing machine. For when the enemy has kalashnikovs and flip-flops only.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    french cant do anything right
    reminder their policy if they get nuked is to nuke literally everyone (including their allies) "because we wouldnt be able to tell where the nuke came from" they're morons of the highest order and its why their country is full of muzzies now

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ukrainians say that it is not the lack of armor that is the most problematic, it's the wheels. Once artillery strikes happen, you don't need a direct hit to immobilize it, shrapnel shreeds the wheels and AMX becomes a sitting duck.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >fire support vehicles can't lead an attack
    >shit
    You are a fricking idiot.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >tank
    >with wheels
    wat

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    French armored vehicles are for shooting barely armed Africans, not frontal assaults in a peer war.

    Ukraine should be thankful nonetheless, France could have sent them golf carts.

    More CAESARs, ammo and SCALPs would be nice.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Using a scout vehicle from the 70s for full frontal assaults
    It's not that the vehicle is inherently bad it's just that the Ukies are moronic + it's no longer practical to use in the current year even for it's intended role anyway.
    They would have been better off just parking those things at the Belarusian boarder or shaking the frogs into giving them something that's actually useful on a drone and artillery infected battleground

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    frogs shoulda donated the Leclerc

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They considered it but didn't want to do it because Ukraine would be close to a dozen different tank designs in their military, a logistics nightmare.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        ...because the AMX has parts commonality with something else in the AFU military?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It was the first.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            okay, so it has nothing to do with parts commonality then
            so now are we going to see Leclerc?

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >moron nationalist can not comprehend that French weapons are suited for French wars
    yeah

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Compared to the heavy armored american & german tanks that are also impractical for attacks and gets taken out by rudimentary weapons?
    The era of heavy armor is over, you might as well build light and fast as everything under the fricking sun can take it out regardless of how panzered it is.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's the exact same thing the Leopard 1 designers said. And then we kept building heavy armor anyway but better. Innovation doesn't only happen in the anti armor space

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The era of heavy armor is over, you might as well build light and fast as everything under the fricking sun can take it out regardless of how panzered it is.
        thats an absolutely stupid idea, with even scout vehicles getting increasingly armored over time
        the israelis were slapping the AMX-13s gun inside of the M4 sherman simply because it had heavier armor than the AMX-13

        "why bother armoring it when it still cant stop the heaviest ATGM" has never been followed or used in a widescale in practice, with even the leopard 1 getting heavier armor over time
        and crews repeatedly preferring heavy armor over light armor, even in scout or recon roles

        I can understand that from the crew's perspective it'll feel much better psychologically to sit in a proper tank than an armored vehicle that's only about half as protective, but if this war is indicative of anything it's that ATGMs are mass produced and no amount of protection is capable of stopping them. The amount of ressources spent building this junk is just not worth it when it gets taken out anyway by a conscripted farmer rotting away in a trench instructed to just shoot at anything that moves. Hell, even drones with half the payload are sufficient.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The extra armor is not Psychological, its physical
          Even if the extra armor cannot stop a heavy ATGM it can still stop autocannon rounds, artillery fragments, and handheld rockets

          More armor is always better, which is why armor has tended towards heavier
          Even the leopard 1 has compromised on that and got upgraded armor

          If anything, light armor is disappearing in favor of heavier vehicles

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The era of heavy armor is over, you might as well build light and fast as everything under the fricking sun can take it out regardless of how panzered it is.
      thats an absolutely stupid idea, with even scout vehicles getting increasingly armored over time
      the israelis were slapping the AMX-13s gun inside of the M4 sherman simply because it had heavier armor than the AMX-13

      "why bother armoring it when it still cant stop the heaviest ATGM" has never been followed or used in a widescale in practice, with even the leopard 1 getting heavier armor over time
      and crews repeatedly preferring heavy armor over light armor, even in scout or recon roles

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >instead of being immune to 50% of enemy heavy weapons, why don't we be immune to just 10% of heavy weapons for nothing?

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Frogs give AMX (Aka Armored Recon).
    >Ukies b***h about being "Thin-armoured" tanks

    Are they naturally moronic or they doing it on purposed ?

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >A glorified armored car is impractical in frontal assaults on heavily defended and intrenched enemy.
    >Shocked
    OP is gayer than the French.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it's useless without shells

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What did France do this time?
    It is because of yesterday's nuclear missile test?
    >https://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/actualites/tir-devaluation-forces-du-missile-strategique-asmpa-renove
    It is, right?

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >give Ukies free weapons
    >they shit on it in the media
    Why are we supposed to like these people again?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ukrainians are the equivalent of a door mat littered with caltrops
      I for one am glad to see them, Russia, and NATO fight to the last Ukrainian

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What did the guy actually say? Journos are famous for misrepresenting things, the full statement could easily be something about preferring to use it for defense/counterattacks.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        "But a 34-year-old battalion commander within the 37th Marine Brigade, who uses the call sign Spartanets, said the tanks' "thin armour" means they can be used as fire support, but not in front-line assaults.

        "Unfortunately, there was one case when the crew died in the vehicle," the major told AFP on Friday.

        "There was artillery shelling and a shell exploded near the vehicle, the fragments pierced the armour and the ammunition set detonated."

        The crew of four inside were all killed, he said.

        "The guns are good, the observation devices are very good. But unfortunately there is thin armour and it is impractical to use them in the front line (attack)," Spartanets said.

        "There were such cases when a 152-mm shell exploded nearby and the shrapnel penetrated the vehicle," he said

        He added that the French AMX-10 also had issues with gear boxes breaking down, possibly due to their use on dirt roads.

        "Just sending out the (AMX-10) vehicles (into combat) so they get destroyed, I consider it is impractical and unnecessary because it's primarily a risk for the crew," Spartanets said."

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Those are completely fair critiques.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Golf cards are more effective than french tanks.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For a weapon to not be shit it needs to:
    A. Be suited for the doctrine/environment/tempo
    B. Be fairly decent at what it needs to do

    French weapons satisfy A and B for France, which is why they get decent exports.

    Idk wtf Ukraine is trying to do with them. Print a trillion more dollars for Zelensky and Bibi

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *