Advertise on Northwest Firearms
Sporting Systems
Oregon Rifleworks
Buster Beaver Cerakote
Southwest Firearms
Simply Triggers
HighLine Firearms
Low Price Guns
J&B Firearm Sales
Gun Deals
Defensive Arts

tac

Messages
8,334
Reactions
20,981
The British have never fielded armor as numerously as other countries. Dan Carlin said it best during his WWI series the British had the army of a sea power. The problem is they no longer are a sea power either .

When they had empire they used local colonial forces for much of the peace keeping after pacification occurred. Not knocking their competence or their military tradition just stating the realities of things .

The sun set long ago of their prowess as a military power.
Yeah yeah................................................:rolleyes:
 
Messages
987
Reactions
2,096
There exactly two times the British have had armor superiority . WWI and the time right before WWII before Germany began its re-armament. The largest most powerful tank force in the world after WWI was the French Army , that includes going into WWII .. Had they not been so gun shy when zee Germans invaded they could have easily routed the Germans before it even started good. Still 4 years of being fed into the meat grinder by your leadership , then a short time later being forced to face a horde of crazy young men with guns and tanks who are hopped up on Pervitin will do that to you .

Meth ... they called it Panzer Tablets for good reason .


It was American tanks and trucks the Allies rode to victory on and yes that includes the Russians .


Yeah yeah................................................:rolleyes:
 
Last Edited:

tac

Messages
8,334
Reactions
20,981
Trust me, the ability to have near-instant boiling water 'on tap' can be very useful. I'd like you to imagine times when YOU would have like to have had it handy.

Before I transferred, the crew I worked with had done a non-approved field-exigency [NAFE] to our tracked repair and maintenance vehicle and fitted it with FOUR BV's [correct terminology for Boiling Vessel].

The other 'ripping wheeze' developed by those crafty Brits was the GEU - Generator, electrical, unit. This is a small, usually three-cylinder, i/c engine used to provide electrical power to all the tanks systems when the main engine is not running, for tactical or economy reasons. Apart from keeping all the batteries charged up, and the electrics going, it provides power for heating for the heated crew suits for colder climates.

There's some other stuff, too, invented by British armoured vehicle engineers, like the almost impenetrable Chobham Armour, now even better, and called Dorchester - whose secrets were given to NATO some partners who build their own tanks - the US of A and Germany.

No tank so-equipped has EVER had a penetration where that armour was installed. The single Challenger 2 lost in Iraq to an 'own-goal' had a shot enter the commander's cupola and end up brewing the ammunition from the inside - no amount of external armour could prevent that.
 
Messages
2,386
Reactions
5,756
You got any data/documentation to back that up? Because I sure don't remember us(US) giving any sort of logistical support to the Brits for the Falklands campaign?
I was alive at the time and I remember them relying heavily on US refueling and transport capabilities, which they lacked or were insufficient. But here are a few articles.

"...the Falklands campaign "could not have been mounted, let alone won, without American help."

"Pentagon officials spoke of extraordinary coordination between the American and British services. The United States supplied 12.5 million gallons of aviation fuel diverted from U.S. stockpiles, along with hundreds of Sidewinder missiles, airfield matting, thousands of rounds of mortar shells and other equipment, they said."

From:


"The leading assault ship, HMS Fearless, did not have enough fuel to dock when it arrived off Ascension. The Americans diverted a supertanker to fill up the Navy’s tanks."

From:


"The Chilean military Junta support to Britain during the 1982 conflict “was important, but did no influence the outcome of the war; United States support to Britain was decisive”, remarked former Argentine Army Commander General Martin Balza interviewed by the Chilean media."

From:

 

tac

Messages
8,334
Reactions
20,981
Please check the NATO mission - 'an attack on a member of NATO requires the support of all other members of NATO in a position to give it.'

Please let's move away from all this - it had already resulted in a swathe of posts being taken down on this thread by the Mods.

I can tell you that it really gets tiresome very quickly.
 
Let Freedom Ring
Cerberus Training Group
Sporting Systems
Advertise on Northwest Firearms
Southwest Firearms
Copeland Custom Gunworks

Upcoming Events

Albany Rifle & Pistol Club (ARPC) Gun Show 2021
Albany, OR
Rimfire Challenge Oct 9th @ DRRC
Eagle Creek, OR
Nrl22 at DRRC
Eagle Creek, OR

Latest Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Top