You can follow the combat engineer here: twitter.com/ButtjerFreimann Some additional comments / corrections: The combat scenario at the beginning refers strictly to the attack on position in the woodlines. The Russian 30/40 mm don't have HEAT warheads. The DShK/Dschka on the Russian(!) side is very rare, the Russian use mainly other machine guns with the 12.7mm caliber and Tobias was basically speaking about that caliber.
Scimitar and Scorpion are effectively the same with different guns. A scimitar has a high velocity 30mm Radwn cannon. Scorpion a low velocity 76mm gun so more suited to troop support as light artillery.
The old British CVRT family such as the Scimitar produce less ground pressure than a human so may not even set off some anti personnel mines, there was an instance in the Falklands War where the commander of a Scorpion ( think Scimitar but with a 75mm low velocity gun rather than the 30mm Rardan cannon ) jumped off the vehicle and sank up to his waist in a swamp the vehicle didn't sink in.
I think Germany should expand on the Wiesel concept and keep it. Small, nimble and even silent. Transport is easy. And it gives the infantry so much flexibility and firepower. Bait and switch tactics. Night ops. That thing is so damn cool
Also, it does not require the expertise or the hoisting equipment of an armoured battalion's support element, so it can be permanently attached to infantry formations without serious readiness problems
The Scorpion was unfortunately discontinued in the 90s due to a problem with the gun; It vented toxic fumes back into the crew compartment and was deemed unsuitable for use almost immediately. I doubt these would get given to Ukraine due to this, they're not just obsolete, they're dangerous to the crew. The Scimitar on the other hand, is all the amazing things about the scorpion, but without the fumes problem. Driving it is an absolute piece of cake and was easier for me than driving a car. It has less ground pressure than an average person and much less than a fully equipped soldier, meaning it can accompany the troops into most places off the road. This thing is also slightly better armoured than the wiesel, so less of those fragments and 50.cals are going to take it out of action - though it's still not something you want to be in when 155mms land nearby. The UK took all 600+ Scimitars out of service this April, and my first thought was 'Ukraine could really do with them now we don't want them'. I'm not sure anyone's actually interested in buying these off us, so I don't know why they haven't been handed over. I've heard from multiple sources that assault units desperately want these support vehicles with them, and Ukraine have a very limited amount of Bradleys and BMPs. Seems like a simple solution to help plug that growing gap, but I'm not privy to that kind of decision making process, so maybe there's another reason why this hasn't happened.
I think the fumes would be the last thing they care about most of Soviet armor have the same problem and they deal with it cuz they have no choice they should send whatever weapon system they have be the Scorpion or the weasel as long as there is enough of that type of ammo I don't see a reason why not to send them they're not being used and will probably just sit there forever at least Ukraine can get some use out of it it's better than having nothing I guess it could at least fill in the spots for Infantry in areas that most Vehicles can't be used
An armoured vehicle , that handles poor ground conditions well , thats light (relatively) so easier to get across rivers and bridges , and has up to a 40mm auto cannon, Sounds great .. Its not a Bradley but they're in linited supply
Aside from the main role of formation recce one of the potential uses for CVR/T during a "real" Active Edge situation was to make slashing attacks at the flanks of BMP formations. Presumably Scimitar (and before it was withdrawn) Scorpion would have got in amongst the Pact infantry with Striker on overwatch for full MBTs.
@@stamfordly6463 Yes, even the FWD red army recce units had three plus MBTs with them in the vanguard. The 30mm Rarden of Scimitars were taking out T55 and the like during Op. Granby, which gave them usable firepower. Both Scorpion and Scimitar were capable of performance that exceeded the capacity of the occupants to withstand. A good driver could use that to the crews advantage when necessary. You really needed to see the performance for yourself to believe it. Wheeled alternatives could compete on hard ground but fell woefully and warfully short in soft mud/bog. Warfully being the objective here.
@@sandornyemcsok4168 A remote controlled vehicle would be better than a manned one for many missions. And probably worse for others. But we shouldn't ignore a good enough weapon in favour of a theoretically better alternative that doesn't exist, or is (for some other reason) unavailable.
@@gusgone4527 I've seen Scimitars on the move often enough and they do shift but I always found the old'n'bold's accounts of what they were supposed to do if Shock Army came West to be eye opening. As a not-quite-Chieftain-sized individual I found them a bit excessively bijou. So FR regiments were not in my plan, even if my host at a fam visit to Bovington back in the late 90s hadn't been 9th/12th and therefore a bit of a knob.
They just described the WW2 Univeral Carrier. Actually I think that in the muddy conditions of Ukraine, the Universal carrier would have been really useful.
@@mathewkelly9968 yeah thats a slight issue, though removing the roof does allow passengers to shoot and also the mounting of whatever fits on the thing..
@@mathewkelly9968 anything this small, the ability to bail out is probably more important than any advantage you may get from some very thin overhead protection.
Haha! Good catch! Its disappointing that governments are more willing to persecute free speech over crime. Side note: Its too bad that governments choose to not enforce the small drug laws. Anything that numbs your mind and gets you addicted will be a negative force in your life and it may be permanent. It can be anything from alcohol to drugs to video games. A sober life will make you a better person, even if you are easily handling your substances/addictions well.
@ew3612 Are you seriously advocating a zero tolerance War On Drugs?! That's been tried in countless countries for decades and doesn't work, which is why so many countries are moving towards decriminalisation/legalisation/harm prevention. I'm an ex drug addict, tea total for 12 years which is the best thing that happened to me so I personally don't disagree with your point about being sober, but it's not for most people and wasting Police and court time and resources on failed policies that only benefit organised crime is not the way forward.
@@nickrailsI am not advocating for zero tolerance from the government. What I meant was the laws which any country has regarding drugs and petty crime should be followed. Its the enforcing of censorship and thought crime which should be stopped. Zero tolerance of “drugs” is a bad position for governments to take but i dont believe that the law should say that everything is ok to do either. Its a very deep and complex issue but in the end its enforced by the individual on themselves. They make the personal choice to be sober because its the healthy option. I am happy to hear that you have gotten out of your addiction. I have met quite a few people who have been brought down by it. Im at the end of a 12 hour night shift so my thoughts are not coming together very well but I hope that I could clear that up.
Im assigned to a Wiesel company and we Train with them quite regularly and let me Tell you it is such a pain in the Ass to fight against. They just dissapear into the woods and attack you from the flank 5 Minutes later, especially the ATGM variant is an absolute nightmare for MBTs due to its tiny silhouette and sheer killing power.
Not nearly the ammo supply as a gun truck though Tbh these things are kinda weird mostly for defense or like the US ww2 Weasel good for coastal landings I highly doubt they would be of much use in Ukraine
@@off6848 This is essentially a vehicle that can stealthily harass enemy forces and when fitted with ATGMs, even deal with MBTs. So yeah, it likely wouldn't perform in the open grasslands of Ukraine. Put it in a forest however and it can be lethal. I've heard of army exercises where four of the Wiesel 2s working together took out an entire armoured company without even being spotted. Given their low noise, high speed and ridiculous mobility when compared to basically any other vehicle these can be very effective when combined with hit-and-run tactics or ahead of a larger assault.
@@off6848 They do oretty well in training scenarios, especially wooded areas, where they can take out actual mbt's etc. Well wiesel anyways. It's mostly just the lightest possible way to bring heavy firepower to a fight. the that autocanons or AT-missles.
@@off6848 its very useful for crossing difficult terrain quickly while maintaining a lowish profile. Its about recon and information gathering, not about firepower and armor. Too much of Ukraine turns into a muddy slog for wheeled vehicles or MBTs to reliably cross, and aircraft are easy to spot on radar unless they fly as low as possible, which is inherently dangerous even without gunfire.
Not in anyway an expert, but I remember from somewhere the design brief for the CVRT was to have a very low ground pressure of 8-10psi. According to rumours in testing it actually had a lower pressure on the ground than even that (turned out to be 5 psi - about 34.5Kpa, a human on one foot while walking is about 8psi). Though add on equip over the years probably increased the weight and ground pressure Also there is that story from the Falkland's war of a CVRT Scorpion crewman climbing off his stopped vehicle onto what he thought was solid ground the CRVT had parked on, only to sink in up to his knees...
according to service.gov.uk the upgraded 12.262 ton CVR(T)s (the EM235 & MK2 SCIMITAR) have a ground pressure of 33.8 KN/M^2, which converts to 4.9 PSI. the lighter orginal scorpion tanks were 7.93 tons would of had much lower than 4.9 psi. then again the same source lists the 9 ton mk1 scimitar varient to have a ground pressure of 4.9 psi, and the other ~12 ton varients at 50.2 KN/M^2 and 35.2 KN/M^2 (12.383 ton vehicle, at 7.28 psi. and a 12.321 at 5.1 psi) so maybe it was misprints? eitherway it seems inconsistant and thus unreliable. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025307/CVRT_MK_2_EM_FS.pdf assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025308/CVRT_MK1__FS.pdf
@@matthiuskoenig3378 One thing is certain though, the ground pressure is very low, even the most unfavourable figures end up being approximately comparable to a human footprint. Any further difference I find to be rather academic.
From my experienced fighting alongsinge Wiesels, they still have nice ground vibrations around them. So your junk gets a nice vibration if you are in prone position next to them, the GTK Boxer doesnt has this advantage.
The small unit tactical movement being employed by the Ukrainians in the south would probably benefit from light tanks; being able to bring a heavy machinegun or light cannon to an infantry fight would be great, and of course a second-class ride beats a fist-class walk any day. But once the fighting goes back open terrain these need to clear out and let the bigger stuff take over.
"...being able to bring a heavy machinegun or light cannon to an infantry fight would be great..." Erm, what about getting there and finding that the "infantry fight" DOES HAVE section antitank weapons...? There'll be NO "these need to clear out and let the bigger stuff take over" - one hit, by ANY antitank weapon ever made in world history, will clear this thing out, so to speak. All I see is a deathtrap for two brave well-trained soldiers.
I've been calling the death of the modern tank ever since the start of the war. It's nice to see these people finally agreeing. In the end - they will be replaced by slightly upgunned and uparmored IFV's that could do the job of the tank. Because having tons of armor is not really viable anymore due to almost all points on a modern tank being vunerable, either to a Javelin, a drone, or SMART munitions.
Because armor isn't what will make these things survivable. It's mobility. And IFV's are way more mobile and have better awareness than tanks And what does it matter, when it takes 1 hit to kill a super expensive tank or an IFV? @@TomasFunes-rt8rd
I was told by men of the Royal Armoured Corps that a cold war era ambush tactic of the Scimitar was to lurk on a reverse slope, preferably in a wooded area, where heavier armour was restricted to using tracks or paths. When heavier armour passed they would charge over the slope and down the other side in extended line, passing between the enemy armour and shoot at the rear of vehicles as they passed, gaining mobility kills at least. Continuing up the far side of the path, preferably another slope that they could crest and get behind. With a top speed of around 50mph (80 Km/h) it would be very hard for the heavy armour to defend such an ambush. Especially if they were battened down.
@@JamesOMalley-hb4tf Very probably, this was a mid 1980s tactic. No drones for starters. That said we just saw a pair of Bradleys disable a T90. I wonder what small groups of Scimitars could do with their 30mm rapid fire cannon? Not as advanced as the Bradley weaponry, nor as armoured. But faster than the Bradley, maybe the cannon could be upgraded?
I would be wary to say that the Wiesel can be used to clear a path of Anti-personel mines because its "armored". The Wiesel has, for all intents and purposes, no mine protection in its design at all. Its lower hull plate is 8-10mm RHA. A russian MON-50(claymore clone) AP mine contains 700g of TNT. Mines like the PMN-1 contain 240g of TNT. These are entirely capable of destroying a Wiesel that drives directly over them. Hell, they crack BTRs because of equally poor armor but BTRs at least have a lot of ground clearance and a little bit of V-shape from the amphibious requirement. Mines like the PMN-2 and PMN-4 would be kind of "safe" to drive over because they contain 100g and 50g of TNT respectively. But consider that a german DM51 hand grenade contains 60g of filler. So the crew will certainly feel that AP mine going off. It might also be contra-productive to the tracks health. The tracks of the Wiesel are little cute thing when compared to a "grown up" AFV, I dont see them lasting long if you intend to drive over a series of AP mines to clear a path.
I think a small plow could be feasible to be fitted to the front of the tracks but someone more versed in the available horsepower of the Wiesel would have to comment.
@@maduyn The wiesel has 86hp. Its powered by a Audi 5 cylinder. Its basically the engine of a civilian car lugging around 3t. There is not much pull left for attachments.
Mine detection built in to the forward hull with a readout for a dismount for marking would fit the Reconnaissance mission. I wonder if that is included? If it can pass over a minefield without detonating mines, that would be nice perhaps. But being able to warn infantry before they enter a minefield, then scout and locate the edges, makes more sense. Mines in woodlands are extremely effective if made hard to detect, but such a field cannot be covered by direct fire. Only mortars and howitzers, as at The Battle of the Bulge.
The weisel is one one of my favorite military vehicles. Small, light, mobile, versatile, good firepower, and doesnt have to play by the same rules as all the other vehicles.
I'm afraid the rules of physics, as applied by a 20mm round or kamikaze drone, apply to everyone. Even light skinned vehicles operating out in the open countryside without air cover or AA support. Ouch, it sounds even worse when I write it out.
@nickcharles1284 of course physics still apply to it. I am simply saying the small size and quickness of the Wiesel allows it to go places and fight in a way that tanks and IFVs can't. That plus the fire power capabilities of it mean that it is an extremely devastating tool in the hands of an experienced crew.
I'm afraid those qualities only work reliably n video games. On the battlefield, in Ukraine, there is no where it can operate without coming under fire that it cannot escape. Again: armor works when you have air support and AA cover. Ukraine has none of these things available in any significant quantity. Also: you say experienced crew; there is no such thing in Ukraine and it would take years to train them on this unit, then integrate them into a combat operations. @@Gearedfilm57
All 3, wiesel,scimitar & scorpion are fantastic armed recce, also as infantry close support in specific environments/scenarios. They should have a lot offer the Ukrainian forces if/when used correctly.
@@iatsd to be fair the toxic propellant fumes were never an insurmountable problem. The British army just decided that the gun didn't have enough firepower to justify the expense of redesigning the turret when they already had Scimitar with a far more effective rarden cannon. If the hatches were sealed and a system kept the interior at a slight overpressure any fumes would be blown out of the barrel whenever the breach was opened protecting the crew. I never worked on Scorpion but I suspect it had the same NBC system as the rest of the fleet which was designed to maintain a slight over pressure to prevent unfiltered air leaking into the tank through worn or damaged seals.
Wiesels in Ukraine and the woodlines but be quite sth. I also remeber an interview fairly recently were they praised the Leo 1's easy maintenance. A trait the the Wiesel is infamous for and Ukraine benefits a lot from especially when considering other more high tech gear in lesser numbers and more maintenance to it.
@@diegotrejos5780not many APCs in comparison to how many Bradley's are being blow up with Lancets/Artillery besides the MBTs & equivalent IFVs that are taking out Bradley's.
@@nationalsocialism3504 oh really? Lets see...Ukraine lost 5-7 Leos, one Challenger...and I think less than 20 Marder and Bradleys. Russia lost over 2500 MBTs and several thousand of those IFVs and APCs. Ya sure your claims make sense? Asking for a friend that loves to use idiotic triggered russian trolls to boost traffic for this channel
What it really shows is how dynamic and adaptable you have to be in real time. Coordinating infantry, air support, small vehicles, large, and artillery. Now you have to make it up every 30 minutes as the situation changes. This looks like a very flexible vehicle. The canon can take out other arms at better distances. Thanks, I never knew the options available.
All of the upgraded Scimitar 2’s that were in use by the British army have been donated to Ukraine and a few dozen of the regular Scimitar 1’s have been sent too. Great platforms, I hear the Ukrainians love them.
I didn't know these tanks existed before I started watching this channel, and the concept blew my mind. It's a wonderful addition to tanks and infantry in mixed terrain. Probably the closest thing to having an armoured suit in today's army. It also seems like the perfect platform for experimentation with new technologies, like tracking and anti-drone capabilities. Imagine one of these able to see and take down even small enemy drones or loitering munitions. Perhaps an electric version for stealth operations, etc.
Funnily enough, the more modern concepts of armoured fighting vehicles have trended towards large and complex. Consider the Boxer, Ajax, or Stryker; or even the M10 Booker. The concept of small, manoeuvrable, light vehicles for reconnaissance and infantry support seems to be an idea worth resurrecting in an age of ubiquitous aerial surveillance and ample, accurate artillery fires.
Bogs. Sounds like very useful along Dneiper delta and along banks. And lighter to transport across river. Especially with a little surprise in early days across river.
It's a great idea. Not as half as good as peace, but these light AFVs can be highly effective (& economic & more easily-supported) when employed to their strengths.
If I remember rightly the CVR (T) family had a ground pressure of 5LBS a sq inch a lot less than a human. In the Falklands it moved across country far better than anyone thought they would and should have been used more than they were.
I always liked the Wiesel and appreciated it's capabilities (speed, manoeuvrability, flexibility), especially in behind enemy lines ops, irregular/guerrilla tactics. But I say that as someone who has no professional experience or any operational knowledge. I'm not surprised that veterans think it would be useful and a great asset.
I am a former British Cavalry soldier who used the CVRT Scimitar. These would make excellent vehicles for use in Ukraine. They were specifically designed for use during the Cold War hence use in the European theatre of operations. It is light, very fast, and the ground pressure is that of a human, so works well on most terrain. However it should be employed in its designated purpose of reconnaissance and light strike. RPG and HMG are capable of taking them out. There are already other variants of the CVRT (Combat, Vehicle, Reconnaissance, Tracked) family already deployed in Ukraine, namely the Spartan APC variant. The Scimitar have been discontinued from use by the British Army so there are a lot of surplus available. I believe it is only a matter of time until they make an appearance out there.
I've heard there was somebody buying up Scimitars and Scorpions for Ukraine. I haven't seen any reports that they have been delivered yet thugh. However, Ukraine received three Scimitars along with the Spartans last autumn and they were used during the Kharkiv offensive.
Over a hundred CVRT vehicles have been bought by the Prytula Foundation, however these are all demilitarised and are to be used for reconnaissance, logistics, troop transport, etc. Mostly Spartans and some Sultan command vehicles and Samaritan ambulances. I wouldn't be surprised if some deactivated Scimitars were also sold. Although the CVRT is a fantastic vehicle, one of the finest reconnaissance vehicles ever produced, it is heavily outdated as a fighting vehicle. The unstabilised 30mm RARDEN cannon wouldn't be of much use to Ukraine methinks. Supposedly the RARDEN can frontally penetrate a T-62 as shown in Iraq, but compared to the rapid fire and stabilisation of the Wiesel's 20mm it feels inferior for most of Ukraine's immediate battlefield needs imo.
Small vehicles are hard to get them shot for MBT, ATGM or LoiteringMunition.. Cause of the small silhouette, as well as their speed and agility. They also protect two persons from fragments/small arms fire and make them continue the fight even in wet and cold conditions. And they are easyer and cheaper to produce to have a large number of them ready to support ground operations in multiple terrains. These systems could be - in combination with recon and ground mobile air defense - a gamechanger on the battlefield.
The video's suggestion of replacing Bradleys with Wiesel and Scimitar might hold some merit in specific scenarios, such as defending predetermined positions in urban environments where their maneuverability could be an advantage. However, in a broader context, the Bradley's multi-role capabilities, infantry transport capacity, and sustained firepower make it a much more versatile and adaptable platform for offensive operations and complex battlefield situations. Therefore, when looking at the "big picture," the Bradley's overall tactical flexibility and combat effectiveness outweigh the limited advantages offered by the Wiesel and Scimitar in specific tactical niches.
i would sya that the CV9040C's which Ukraines 21th mechanized brigade and 93rd mechanized brigade use fills the needs somewhat. Cv9040 replaced both PBV302 and IKV91 in Swedish military , Now if that was reduction of costs or due to improved functionality i dont know. Best regards.
A very capable vehicle, but even the original basic CV90 was 23t - latest versions are hitting 38t. Scimitar I is 8t and Wiesel about 4t, so very different concepts.
This is a really interesting idea. If you use the Wiesel to support light infantry in heavily wooded areas, even treelines, and you use it as an assault gun/ infantry support gun this could work. The Wiesel isn't a tank and shouldn't be used that way; it can't survive be the "center of attention". But if is kept right behind an infantry company, i.e. protected, and then brought up to bring that 20mm to take out targets that small arms can't handle, then this could work. The Wiesel is tiny and can work its way through thick trees and it's tracked so it shouldn't get bogged down in mud. Sadly it will need some sort of extra protection added to counter drones.
then you can also take into account the ATGM and AA variants, with the ATGM mounting a TOW-2 launcher and the AA variant mounting a Stinger launcher, with the ability to fire 4 tubes, and then have another set of 4 to reload, the ATGM variant could prove useful in ambush combat against tanks, thanks to their small size, while the AA variant could prove useful in providing air cover where it is not expected, catching enemy air units off guard, I think that should they be deployed in Ukraine, they would prove themselves highly effective is used correctly
There are a lot of specialized weapon systems out there and they would be very advantageous to have in specific situations where they can turn the tide of a battle. The question of every military is if these weapons systems will over a large enough advantage in the expected combat zones to be worth the price or allocation of resources. I agree with the argument of how useful these machines could be. There has been a lot of fighting in wooded areas like around Siversk and Kreminna where larger vehicles like BMPs or MBTs have difficulties and the Wiesel could have a large impact in areas like there.
That would make a good fire support, but it cant possibly cross a decently wide trench. What would be neat is if they give it a rack on the back to carry drones that can be launched on demand. Imagine a platoon has one of these as a support element hauling it equipped gun plus 5-10 heavy drones that the infantry can launch remotely.
Scimitar light tanks were retired some time ago, i have no idea if they are stored or were scrapped, the scimitar has the advantage over the wiesel of having the engine at the front which adds aditional protection for the crew if it is knocked out. Its also crazy fast. The british are retiring the warrior soon which is much better protected and fast moving IFV but i cant imagine that will be in time to be effective or to consider sending them without replacement ajax units.
@@davidty2006 Yeah which is a problem because the guns have to be deactivated before they can be handed off to civilians. Eddie hall has a scimitar and he cut off the deactivated gun and put on some stupid pipe to imitate a bigger gun and it looks ridiculous. They do a pretty good job of deactivating those guns to the point that i dont think they can even be restored for any amount of money.
They arn`t tanks at all - but armoured reconnaissance vehicles. UK Has the acronym CVR (T) - Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) for Scorpion with its 75mm main armament or Scimitar for the RARDEN30mm armed version.
The low height of those smaller vehicles would be a great help in. The Hummer has also enjoy a resurgence as it is low and fast. Not so good in Iraq against IED's, but Ukraine awesome. RPG's seem to be endemic on the Ukrainian battlefield so it would be better to assume they all have them than not.
I've always found the idea of mass amounts of very light armoured vehicles to be an interesting one. I forget where I heard of some of these ideas, but at times in the past, it was even suggested that you could have one-man machinegun armed "tanks" that you'd use to just overwhelm infantry. While that's likely a bit far lol - a great number of light tanks like Wiesel, Scimitar and Scorpion is likely more workable. Though saying that, I always found the ww2 British Universal Carriers to be a strong concept. They built a staggering number of those things, and amongst being gear carriers, battle taxies, and towers, they were pretty much very cheap, easily made, highly mobile, small arms proof, tiny machinegun bunkers that could also be adapted with pintle mounted machineguns, or mortars - or modified to carry flamethrowers (look up the Wasp - that shit is wild). I could see that framework, but modernised, being awesome on the modern battlefield. I also can't help myself imagine something like that having remote control capabilities for that high risk assault role. I'm getting carried away, aren't I?
We'l see vehicles like this a lot more in the future imo. With anti tank weapons now as advanced as they are and being able to deal with any thickness of armour, heavy tanks become pointless and mobility/small size most important. There will be unmanned UGV possibilities for them as well. Groups of smaller vehicles like this working with a larger tank stationed further back with an old fashioned big gun used more as conventional artillery, command and networking and as a dock for aerial drones, and then ifvs as the main frontline fighting vehicles and carrying the supporting infantry
In the Falklands a Scorpion commander dismounted next to his vehicle and sank into the ground, while the tracks were adequately supported on the Muskeg.
That is the advantage of tracked equipment: lower ground pressure per unit of measure. Tracked equipment also has more traction due to the grousers giving more bite into the ground.
The US Ripsaw light tank is somwhat similar but unmanned. These vehicles make more sense as time goes on considering the potentially low unit cost. They could carry light cannon, HMG's, ATGM's, AGM's, breech loading mortars and MANPAD's. An infantry transport version could carry SF squads, but that could include any type of specialised infantry.
Listening to podcast about Polish "roach" tanks in WWII pretty well convinced me there is a place on BF for these types of vehicles. Especially considering the advancements in auto cannons and ATGMs.
Not every vehicle with tracks is a TANK. Rheinmetall that it is a "LIGHT RECONNAISSANCE VEHICLE". German Army calls the Waffentrager which means "weapons carrier". Both make sense. A more generic term would be Armored Fighting Vehicle. As opposed to the Marders and Pumas which are IFV or Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The M113 is a tracked APC or Armored Personnel Carrier and sometimes a weapons carrier. The self propelled mortar carrier is an example. I really have no idea why more countries don't have a similar vehicle. Not everything needs to be a tank hunter/killer. Though I'd think that having the ability to mount a couple of NLAW's, LAW's or similar could be handy. I could also see the use of an APC version of a Weisel 2, that could transport 4 soldiers for short distances (up to 2-3 km) even if the soldiers aren't fully protected. In this role they would sneak the soldiers into unexpected positions (perhaps an OP or to do a a light assault or use 3 to quickly reposition 3 60-80mm mortars, grenade launchers, ATGM, or machine guns) with a decent loadout for the soldiers or weapons. They could also make good light ammo/supply carriers.
I do love the CVRT. Don't know anything about the Wiesel but the CVRT are the most fun vehicles I've ever been in, fast and agile doesn't do them justice. If that's what the guys on the front line want there are plenty knocking about in the UK, whether or not the political will is present to keep supporting Ukraine is a different matter. Israel now seems to dominate the news cycle and the disappointing summer offensive have reduced the enthusiasm for this war. We in the west really do have the attention span of a brain damaged goldfish.
What soldiers want and what they actually need is two different things. Remember that American tankers initially didn't want the 76mm gun because they preferred the sighting system on the 75.
Flakpanzer Gepards seem more useful in order to deal with the proliferation of cheap FPV drones, and the Wiesel seems like it'll be easy targets for these drones. Maybe if they can be used remotely, they could be much more viable.
I imagine something similar to the weasel would be really useful with how ukraine uses GMGs like light mortars. Even if not directly on the front line, it provides a stable firing platform that can be moved and concealed relatively easily. That would also let them use HE and frag munitions that are better suited for infantry engagement than the old 20mm.
I have thought that vehicles like the Scimitar and Weisel would be great for those tree line pushes and advances in Ukraine. Much smaller, MUCH harder to hit with drone munitions and RPG’s even if they are present. Having that quick very maneuverable autocannon is a huge boost in suppression in taking trenches. I’d love to see these vehicles show up there.
Maybe the lessons of all this point to an optionally manned ultra light tank, able to bring forward firepower and kit, harder to hit but doesn't matter if a drone gets it. Very flexible offering, can be mounted, unmounted, remote controlled in fpv etc
The New Zealand army still have scorpion tanks. Just looking at the wheels configuration of the Wessel. It almost looks like a universal carry, I could be wrong.
I would love to hear what he and people like him think about the French AMX-10 RC. It seems that speed and sensors are much more important than armour plates on the modern battlefield.
That is the one big thing about light tanks, yes pretty much whatever could and can take out a heavier tank like a MBT would absolutely destroy a light tank but here is the thing, the kind of threats Light Tanks today are planning to faced will not involve a light tank charging across open ground to a fortified position with lots of anti-tank stuff. Light Tanks are useful as they are light enough both logistically and in mobility that they can go to fairly rough terrain that a MBT can't go through and thus being able to attack positions that the enemy would most likely have little to no anti-tank capability because you would normally never suspect a tank coming from there, a light tank is meant to exploit that possibility and that is the main reason why Ukraine vet wants them. Lets buy a entire tank battalion's worth of light tanks for them!
Weasel with 2 antitank and 2 aa.missiles at the ready,with computer controled cannons in aa function would be a mighty beast indeed. Some surveillance drones would be necessary...
It's seems they'd work well in a fluid defense, rushing in as counter attack vehicles against infantry and light armour, then retreat back if there's a sustained attack. Plus they can go where heavy armour, or even just heavy wheeled vehicles couldn't, like the o known winter mud of Ukraine and Russia
Well, not along time ago Britain announce transfer of around 25 Scimitars to Ukraine. Also 3rd separate assault brigade bought demilitarised Wiesel last week
Would a smaller vehicle like the Wiesel be easier to get across the Dnipro river? Or would it be basically as hard to get across as a full battle tank or IFV? If so it could be useful to make a fast spearhead with infantry, provided high enough numbers of them.
@@eljanrimsa5843 a Wiesel has a ground pressure of 3kg/cm². That's less than a human foot. Getting bogged down in soft ground was never a concern of ours during my time with them.
I believe half the size of the weasel is getting closer to the mark. Made of polymer or other mouldable plastic type of material. One or two man with the option of unmanned units is where we are headed . Vehicles that weigh between 800-1000kg fully loaded & amphibious. Looking at small capacity two stroke diesels or rotary engines. Very light , cheap & basically disposable, possibly as light as 400 kg . Making use of recoilless weaponry.
Yeah I agree, I thought the same thing of small unmanned drone tank. basically a mobile weapon platform, light armor and expendable. Like what the machine gun/logistic tracked drones the russians are coming out with, but a bit more armoured and not battery powered.
@@McBenjiBoo for sure something like that will be just around the corner. I still believe there’s a spot in between a , weapons platform / drone & the Wiesel . Definitely manned , but all so unmanned versions of the same vehicle, for clearing mines , drawing fire & absorbing expensive missiles and other weapons. If the unmanned looks the same the enemy will have to take it out regardless.
Tankettes like Wiesel would make perfect sense. If used outside major hotspots: 1. they would increase the psycological pressure on opposing troops. (umdetected, unexpected, tiny and armored) 2. they would increase cost for the opponent by upgunning the trenches and stocking up rpgs to reach a higher hit probability. 3. they would drain opposing recources and tax supplychains .
Light tanks are back in vogue after getting a bad reputation, amongst us non-army types anyway. Thanks Bernhard, these videos are very good for filling in [large!] gaps in my knowledge.
Top attack ATGMs and air to ground make it almost impossible to armor protect a crew. Might as well go light and more manurable than try to go heavier. The real future are unmanned systems remotely operated.
Small light armor vehicles are good if available with spare parts and repair possible. Observation, drone operator transportation, medical evacuation then think about weapon systems. Updated TOW with 24 x Optics can observe and cover large areas. Number of rounds carried is small. Auto cannons and grenade launchers good if situation supports their use with parts, ammo and repair to hand.
I believe the UK already sent 23 the MK2 (modernised and bigger) version of the scimitars along with with a load of Spartans (APC versions) The public in the UK can privately own military vehicles like these and I know 100's of these types have been bought by the Ukrainian public. Some costing $30,000 - 50,000 each. It is said they are excellent in muddy conditions 👌
Very interesting, thank you. Could someone please advise if there is sufficient 30 mm automatic cannon ammunition available to Ukraine and its supporters to make the introduction of the Wiesel worthwhile? If not, could the gun be replaced by one for which there is more ammunition? I see the occasional article about artillery ammunition, but not much about ammunition for tank guns or automatic cannons.
The major reason they are desirable for Ukraine is that they are so light that when working in tandem they can traverse terrible muddy terrain with specialized towing gear like they did in the Falklands War. So when everything else can't move they can.
Seems like light fast infantry fighting vehicles are more suited for the muddy conditions in Ukraine. A group of these with AT capabilities would be better suited in comparison to using the leopard. It’s sad to see the leopard and the challenger get blasted to pieces.
The main question is ....are they cheaper and easier to maintain than the Bradly? Im sure that 3 of these things can provide more support than 1 bradly
What is the vehicle name to the left of the weasel? Also I think the weasel would work well in Ukraine especially in Forest areas and other areas where tanks and bigger IFv have trouble maneuvering through
Let me answer this as Ukranian. Because there are many units and shortage of transport and specifically armored transport. Transport gets lost just like drones, and even light armor is better than civilian car or school bus.
And if the Scimitars could be made waterproof that would be ideal for crossing the many ditches, watery muddy creeks and not least the Dnieper river.. when the time comes to enter the Crimea?
2001 g sam ga vidio na Kosovu u Njemačkoj K F O R bazi u Prizrenu .Čudio sam se tako malom tenku te sam ga uslikao a sliku još imam .Nikad nisam sumljao u Njemačko oružje😊
It is kind of funny that this is also a good idea im Hoi4 when you want to add offensive capabilities to infantry formations meant to attack in rough terrain.
a photo of a Wiesel 1 TOW in the 3rd OShBr appeared recently. It is likely that this is just a demilitarized sample that can be purchased on the civilian market.
There is no demilitarised "civilian market" version of Wiesel 1. There are 7 in US military posession for test and evaluation, the remaining fleet of 343 vehicles is exclusively used by the german military, plus a handfull of vehicles are still with Rheinmetall for test and evaluations.
I believe there was some discussion last year about the Wiesel being fitted with anti-tank systems and how they would benefit the Ukrainian forces because of this field-forest strip hedge-row type battlefield environment. Extremely difficult for Armor-especially with the AT weapons fielded by both sides. I say equipping Ukraine with these would be relatively inexpensive and it could be very effective. At least we would really know how effective aside from training exercises. I thought these were already part of the armament packages sent
Real talk though: Wasn't Mexico trying to get rid of it's amx-13 variants? Obvious Venezuela, and Indonesia aren't about to swap out theirs for very different reasons, but maybe Austria, since it's shift away from neutrality, might consider providing some Kurassiers? Given we know 105mm is actually working brilliantly in Ukraine I definitely think the amx-13 variants could be a solution. Actually if Australia and the US *really* wanted to, I'm sure Indonesia would love an alternative light tank in these troubling times. AFAIK theirs might be the best variant these days.
MBT's are great to have, but for Ukraine light tanks IFB's would be ideal. Rare is the tank on tank battles, plus arm a light tink with a couple TOW missiles like on the Bradley and there is your protection for enemy MBT's
![PASULOL รามเกียรติ์ ตอนที่ 4 นนทกพบรัก [Ramakien Ep.4: Nonthok in love]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tMUQgmZzf_A/mqdefault.jpg)
You can follow the combat engineer here: twitter.com/ButtjerFreimann
Some additional comments / corrections:
The combat scenario at the beginning refers strictly to the attack on position in the woodlines.
The Russian 30/40 mm don't have HEAT warheads.
The DShK/Dschka on the Russian(!) side is very rare, the Russian use mainly other machine guns with the 12.7mm caliber and Tobias was basically speaking about that caliber.
Scimitar and Scorpion are effectively the same with different guns. A scimitar has a high velocity 30mm Radwn cannon. Scorpion a low velocity 76mm gun so more suited to troop support as light artillery.
And Russian use bmd 1 and bmd 2
the longer you keep making videos, that disclaimer is going to get *really* ridiculous *really* fast :) :)
Great video as always. Daft question, what are those rectangular patches under the driver's hatch and on the left hand side?
@aking-plums6985 they have front mounted engines
The old British CVRT family such as the Scimitar produce less ground pressure than a human so may not even set off some anti personnel mines, there was an instance in the Falklands War where the commander of a Scorpion ( think Scimitar but with a 75mm low velocity gun rather than the 30mm Rardan cannon ) jumped off the vehicle and sank up to his waist in a swamp the vehicle didn't sink in.
Interesting thank you
Modern Russian landmines are magnetic 😊
Ah the Scorpion. Immortalized in the Amiga game Firepower
@@AshRaskin how would a magnetic antipersonnel mine work?
@@AshRaskin CVRT is aluminum
I think Germany should expand on the Wiesel concept and keep it.
Small, nimble and even silent. Transport is easy. And it gives the infantry so much flexibility and firepower. Bait and switch tactics. Night ops.
That thing is so damn cool
Also, it does not require the expertise or the hoisting equipment of an armoured battalion's support element, so it can be permanently attached to infantry formations without serious readiness problems
Makes/could be made for a decent cas evac variant as well
Damn cool for one shot of RPG. It was on the air for 70 years at least, get a grip.
They're already masters of the weasel concept.
Ontop of being light enough all you need is a small car trailer to move it.
The Scorpion was unfortunately discontinued in the 90s due to a problem with the gun; It vented toxic fumes back into the crew compartment and was deemed unsuitable for use almost immediately. I doubt these would get given to Ukraine due to this, they're not just obsolete, they're dangerous to the crew.
The Scimitar on the other hand, is all the amazing things about the scorpion, but without the fumes problem. Driving it is an absolute piece of cake and was easier for me than driving a car. It has less ground pressure than an average person and much less than a fully equipped soldier, meaning it can accompany the troops into most places off the road. This thing is also slightly better armoured than the wiesel, so less of those fragments and 50.cals are going to take it out of action - though it's still not something you want to be in when 155mms land nearby.
The UK took all 600+ Scimitars out of service this April, and my first thought was 'Ukraine could really do with them now we don't want them'. I'm not sure anyone's actually interested in buying these off us, so I don't know why they haven't been handed over. I've heard from multiple sources that assault units desperately want these support vehicles with them, and Ukraine have a very limited amount of Bradleys and BMPs. Seems like a simple solution to help plug that growing gap, but I'm not privy to that kind of decision making process, so maybe there's another reason why this hasn't happened.
Good points made. Totally agree with you - 600+ Scimitars would make a HUGE difference.
I think the fumes would be the last thing they care about most of Soviet armor have the same problem and they deal with it cuz they have no choice they should send whatever weapon system they have be the Scorpion or the weasel as long as there is enough of that type of ammo I don't see a reason why not to send them they're not being used and will probably just sit there forever at least Ukraine can get some use out of it it's better than having nothing I guess it could at least fill in the spots for Infantry in areas that most Vehicles can't be used
An armoured vehicle , that handles poor ground conditions well , thats light (relatively) so easier to get across rivers and bridges , and has up to a 40mm auto cannon,
Sounds great ..
Its not a Bradley but they're in linited supply
The Weasel could be used as a self propelled auto-cannon. It has the firepower to take out a BMP while being more mobile and easier to hide.
Aside from the main role of formation recce one of the potential uses for CVR/T during a "real" Active Edge situation was to make slashing attacks at the flanks of BMP formations. Presumably Scimitar (and before it was withdrawn) Scorpion would have got in amongst the Pact infantry with Striker on overwatch for full MBTs.
Do you mean a remotely controlled vehicle? Yes, why not.
@@stamfordly6463 Yes, even the FWD red army recce units had three plus MBTs with them in the vanguard.
The 30mm Rarden of Scimitars were taking out T55 and the like during Op. Granby, which gave them usable firepower. Both Scorpion and Scimitar were capable of performance that exceeded the capacity of the occupants to withstand. A good driver could use that to the crews advantage when necessary.
You really needed to see the performance for yourself to believe it. Wheeled alternatives could compete on hard ground but fell woefully and warfully short in soft mud/bog. Warfully being the objective here.
@@sandornyemcsok4168 A remote controlled vehicle would be better than a manned one for many missions. And probably worse for others. But we shouldn't ignore a good enough weapon in favour of a theoretically better alternative that doesn't exist, or is (for some other reason) unavailable.
@@gusgone4527 I've seen Scimitars on the move often enough and they do shift but I always found the old'n'bold's accounts of what they were supposed to do if Shock Army came West to be eye opening.
As a not-quite-Chieftain-sized individual I found them a bit excessively bijou. So FR regiments were not in my plan, even if my host at a fam visit to Bovington back in the late 90s hadn't been 9th/12th and therefore a bit of a knob.
They just described the WW2 Univeral Carrier. Actually I think that in the muddy conditions of Ukraine, the Universal carrier would have been really useful.
Except the total lack of overhead cover
@@mathewkelly9968 yeah thats a slight issue, though removing the roof does allow passengers to shoot and also the mounting of whatever fits on the thing..
If you look at combat vehicles today, Its almost as if the concept was developed and expanded already...
the Weasel oversnow vehicle as well.
@@mathewkelly9968 anything this small, the ability to bail out is probably more important than any advantage you may get from some very thin overhead protection.
That legal disclosure at the beginning is more amusing than usual . . .
Haha! Good catch!
Its disappointing that governments are more willing to persecute free speech over crime.
Side note: Its too bad that governments choose to not enforce the small drug laws. Anything that numbs your mind and gets you addicted will be a negative force in your life and it may be permanent. It can be anything from alcohol to drugs to video games. A sober life will make you a better person, even if you are easily handling your substances/addictions well.
@ew3612 Are you seriously advocating a zero tolerance War On Drugs?! That's been tried in countless countries for decades and doesn't work, which is why so many countries are moving towards decriminalisation/legalisation/harm prevention.
I'm an ex drug addict, tea total for 12 years which is the best thing that happened to me so I personally don't disagree with your point about being sober, but it's not for most people and wasting Police and court time and resources on failed policies that only benefit organised crime is not the way forward.
@@nickrailsI am not advocating for zero tolerance from the government. What I meant was the laws which any country has regarding drugs and petty crime should be followed. Its the enforcing of censorship and thought crime which should be stopped.
Zero tolerance of “drugs” is a bad position for governments to take but i dont believe that the law should say that everything is ok to do either. Its a very deep and complex issue but in the end its enforced by the individual on themselves. They make the personal choice to be sober because its the healthy option.
I am happy to hear that you have gotten out of your addiction. I have met quite a few people who have been brought down by it.
Im at the end of a 12 hour night shift so my thoughts are not coming together very well but I hope that I could clear that up.
Im assigned to a Wiesel company and we Train with them quite regularly and let me Tell you it is such a pain in the Ass to fight against. They just dissapear into the woods and attack you from the flank 5 Minutes later, especially the ATGM variant is an absolute nightmare for MBTs due to its tiny silhouette and sheer killing power.
Once you think of Wiesel or CVRT as more a mobility added gun truck than a lightly armored tank or IFV their employment makes perfect sense.
That's literally what they are and are classed as. lightly armored tracked recon. the term tank has no business being anywhere near it.
Not nearly the ammo supply as a gun truck though
Tbh these things are kinda weird mostly for defense or like the US ww2 Weasel good for coastal landings I highly doubt they would be of much use in Ukraine
@@off6848
This is essentially a vehicle that can stealthily harass enemy forces and when fitted with ATGMs, even deal with MBTs. So yeah, it likely wouldn't perform in the open grasslands of Ukraine. Put it in a forest however and it can be lethal. I've heard of army exercises where four of the Wiesel 2s working together took out an entire armoured company without even being spotted. Given their low noise, high speed and ridiculous mobility when compared to basically any other vehicle these can be very effective when combined with hit-and-run tactics or ahead of a larger assault.
@@off6848 They do oretty well in training scenarios, especially wooded areas, where they can take out actual mbt's etc. Well wiesel anyways.
It's mostly just the lightest possible way to bring heavy firepower to a fight. the that autocanons or AT-missles.
@@off6848 its very useful for crossing difficult terrain quickly while maintaining a lowish profile. Its about recon and information gathering, not about firepower and armor. Too much of Ukraine turns into a muddy slog for wheeled vehicles or MBTs to reliably cross, and aircraft are easy to spot on radar unless they fly as low as possible, which is inherently dangerous even without gunfire.
Not in anyway an expert, but I remember from somewhere the design brief for the CVRT was to have a very low ground pressure of 8-10psi. According to rumours in testing it actually had a lower pressure on the ground than even that (turned out to be 5 psi - about 34.5Kpa, a human on one foot while walking is about 8psi).
Though add on equip over the years probably increased the weight and ground pressure
Also there is that story from the Falkland's war of a CVRT Scorpion crewman climbing off his stopped vehicle onto what he thought was solid ground the CRVT had parked on, only to sink in up to his knees...
according to service.gov.uk the upgraded 12.262 ton CVR(T)s (the EM235 & MK2 SCIMITAR) have a ground pressure of 33.8 KN/M^2, which converts to 4.9 PSI. the lighter orginal scorpion tanks were 7.93 tons would of had much lower than 4.9 psi.
then again the same source lists the 9 ton mk1 scimitar varient to have a ground pressure of 4.9 psi, and the other ~12 ton varients at 50.2 KN/M^2 and 35.2 KN/M^2 (12.383 ton vehicle, at 7.28 psi. and a 12.321 at 5.1 psi) so maybe it was misprints? eitherway it seems inconsistant and thus unreliable.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025307/CVRT_MK_2_EM_FS.pdf
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025308/CVRT_MK1__FS.pdf
@@matthiuskoenig3378 One thing is certain though, the ground pressure is very low, even the most unfavourable figures end up being approximately comparable to a human footprint. Any further difference I find to be rather academic.
From my experienced fighting alongsinge Wiesels, they still have nice ground vibrations around them.
So your junk gets a nice vibration if you are in prone position next to them, the GTK Boxer doesnt has this advantage.
Scimitar was just retired this year from service so should be available. Wiesel should also have some availability.
I know 23 schimitars of the modern version mk2 was gifted to Ukriane. Don't know how many have been bought privately though
The small unit tactical movement being employed by the Ukrainians in the south would probably benefit from light tanks; being able to bring a heavy machinegun or light cannon to an infantry fight would be great, and of course a second-class ride beats a fist-class walk any day. But once the fighting goes back open terrain these need to clear out and let the bigger stuff take over.
Yeah, expansive LOS will surely protect lumbering behemoths from drones and infantry-borne AT missiles. lulz
@@SeanCSHConsulting My tougths.
"...being able to bring a heavy machinegun or light cannon to an infantry fight would be great..." Erm, what about getting there and finding that the "infantry fight" DOES HAVE section antitank weapons...? There'll be NO "these need to clear out and let the bigger stuff take over" - one hit, by ANY antitank weapon ever made in world history, will clear this thing out, so to speak. All I see is a deathtrap for two brave well-trained soldiers.
I've been calling the death of the modern tank ever since the start of the war. It's nice to see these people finally agreeing.
In the end - they will be replaced by slightly upgunned and uparmored IFV's that could do the job of the tank. Because having tons of armor is not really viable anymore due to almost all points on a modern tank being vunerable, either to a Javelin, a drone, or SMART munitions.
Because armor isn't what will make these things survivable. It's mobility. And IFV's are way more mobile and have better awareness than tanks
And what does it matter, when it takes 1 hit to kill a super expensive tank or an IFV? @@TomasFunes-rt8rd
I was told by men of the Royal Armoured Corps that a cold war era ambush tactic of the Scimitar was to lurk on a reverse slope, preferably in a wooded area, where heavier armour was restricted to using tracks or paths. When heavier armour passed they would charge over the slope and down the other side in extended line, passing between the enemy armour and shoot at the rear of vehicles as they passed, gaining mobility kills at least. Continuing up the far side of the path, preferably another slope that they could crest and get behind.
With a top speed of around 50mph (80 Km/h) it would be very hard for the heavy armour to defend such an ambush. Especially if they were battened down.
Это они во сне делали? Или когда дрочили?
Bad idea in 2024...
@@JamesOMalley-hb4tf Very probably, this was a mid 1980s tactic. No drones for starters. That said we just saw a pair of Bradleys disable a T90. I wonder what small groups of Scimitars could do with their 30mm rapid fire cannon? Not as advanced as the Bradley weaponry, nor as armoured. But faster than the Bradley, maybe the cannon could be upgraded?
@@never2late_mtb349 weisel would not last five minutes. Get real.... 🤣
@@JamesOMalley-hb4tf I wasn't talking about Wiesel.
I would be wary to say that the Wiesel can be used to clear a path of Anti-personel mines because its "armored". The Wiesel has, for all intents and purposes, no mine protection in its design at all. Its lower hull plate is 8-10mm RHA.
A russian MON-50(claymore clone) AP mine contains 700g of TNT. Mines like the PMN-1 contain 240g of TNT. These are entirely capable of destroying a Wiesel that drives directly over them. Hell, they crack BTRs because of equally poor armor but BTRs at least have a lot of ground clearance and a little bit of V-shape from the amphibious requirement.
Mines like the PMN-2 and PMN-4 would be kind of "safe" to drive over because they contain 100g and 50g of TNT respectively. But consider that a german DM51 hand grenade contains 60g of filler. So the crew will certainly feel that AP mine going off. It might also be contra-productive to the tracks health. The tracks of the Wiesel are little cute thing when compared to a "grown up" AFV, I dont see them lasting long if you intend to drive over a series of AP mines to clear a path.
Wary. Weary means you're tired
I think a small plow could be feasible to be fitted to the front of the tracks but someone more versed in the available horsepower of the Wiesel would have to comment.
@@maduyn In the forest? It is excluded.
@@maduyn The wiesel has 86hp. Its powered by a Audi 5 cylinder. Its basically the engine of a civilian car lugging around 3t. There is not much pull left for attachments.
Mine detection built in to the forward hull with a readout for a dismount for marking would fit the Reconnaissance mission.
I wonder if that is included? If it can pass over a minefield without detonating mines, that would be nice perhaps. But being able to warn infantry before they enter a minefield, then scout and locate the edges, makes more sense.
Mines in woodlands are extremely effective if made hard to detect, but such a field cannot be covered by direct fire. Only mortars and howitzers, as at The Battle of the Bulge.
Another thing a Weasel or Scimitar could also bring a more powerful set of modern optics for target identification and engagement.
The weisel is one one of my favorite military vehicles. Small, light, mobile, versatile, good firepower, and doesnt have to play by the same rules as all the other vehicles.
I'm afraid the rules of physics, as applied by a 20mm round or kamikaze drone, apply to everyone. Even light skinned vehicles operating out in the open countryside without air cover or AA support. Ouch, it sounds even worse when I write it out.
@nickcharles1284 of course physics still apply to it. I am simply saying the small size and quickness of the Wiesel allows it to go places and fight in a way that tanks and IFVs can't. That plus the fire power capabilities of it mean that it is an extremely devastating tool in the hands of an experienced crew.
I'm afraid those qualities only work reliably n video games. On the battlefield, in Ukraine, there is no where it can operate without coming under fire that it cannot escape. Again: armor works when you have air support and AA cover. Ukraine has none of these things available in any significant quantity. Also: you say experienced crew; there is no such thing in Ukraine and it would take years to train them on this unit, then integrate them into a combat operations. @@Gearedfilm57
@@nickcharles1284 I wasn't talking about using it in Ukraine. I was just talking about the vehicle in general and versus other military vehicles.
Copy that. I drew the inference from the title of the video. @@Gearedfilm57
The 3rd Assault Brigade bought some demilitarized Wiesels recently
Yeah, I saw a photo of a video supposedly in Ukraine.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized could also have been in the US, they own 7 Wiesel 1 and 2 for tests and evaluations.
@@zhufortheimpaler4041
T funny how USA always calls forced technology transfer into its own industry „testing“ lmao
I think the big foam hand would be a big game changer. You can point at a UAV and everyone will know where it is.
Germany was alway way ahead of the bell curve, that's what the 1970's Gepards are for!
All 3, wiesel,scimitar & scorpion are fantastic armed recce, also as infantry close support in specific environments/scenarios. They should have a lot offer the Ukrainian forces if/when used correctly.
Except for the whole "Scorpion poisoning/killing it's crew" thing, yeah ;)
@@iatsd to be fair the toxic propellant fumes were never an insurmountable problem. The British army just decided that the gun didn't have enough firepower to justify the expense of redesigning the turret when they already had Scimitar with a far more effective rarden cannon. If the hatches were sealed and a system kept the interior at a slight overpressure any fumes would be blown out of the barrel whenever the breach was opened protecting the crew. I never worked on Scorpion but I suspect it had the same NBC system as the rest of the fleet which was designed to maintain a slight over pressure to prevent unfiltered air leaking into the tank through worn or damaged seals.
Wiesels in Ukraine and the woodlines but be quite sth. I also remeber an interview fairly recently were they praised the Leo 1's easy maintenance. A trait the the Wiesel is infamous for and Ukraine benefits a lot from especially when considering other more high tech gear in lesser numbers and more maintenance to it.
Idk how the mechanics there work with soo many vehicles
Not supprised that they whant something that is easyer to maintein
@@Br1chtThose garbage Bradleys are still paying themselves by ruining so many Russian armored transports.
@@diegotrejos5780not many APCs in comparison to how many Bradley's are being blow up with Lancets/Artillery besides the MBTs & equivalent IFVs that are taking out Bradley's.
@@nationalsocialism3504 oh really? Lets see...Ukraine lost 5-7 Leos, one Challenger...and I think less than 20 Marder and Bradleys.
Russia lost over 2500 MBTs and several thousand of those IFVs and APCs.
Ya sure your claims make sense?
Asking for a friend that loves to use idiotic triggered russian trolls to boost traffic for this channel
Source? Laws are official. So it shouldn't be hard for you to cite them. Otherwise, don't talk out of your rear end.@@Br1cht
What it really shows is how dynamic and adaptable you have to be in real time. Coordinating infantry, air support, small vehicles, large, and artillery. Now you have to make it up every 30 minutes as the situation changes. This looks like a very flexible vehicle. The canon can take out other arms at better distances. Thanks, I never knew the options available.
All of the upgraded Scimitar 2’s that were in use by the British army have been donated to Ukraine and a few dozen of the regular Scimitar 1’s have been sent too. Great platforms, I hear the Ukrainians love them.
Ага, они все давно уничтожены. Как их могут любить погибшие экипажи?
I didn't know these tanks existed before I started watching this channel, and the concept blew my mind. It's a wonderful addition to tanks and infantry in mixed terrain. Probably the closest thing to having an armoured suit in today's army. It also seems like the perfect platform for experimentation with new technologies, like tracking and anti-drone capabilities. Imagine one of these able to see and take down even small enemy drones or loitering munitions. Perhaps an electric version for stealth operations, etc.
Funnily enough, the more modern concepts of armoured fighting vehicles have trended towards large and complex. Consider the Boxer, Ajax, or Stryker; or even the M10 Booker. The concept of small, manoeuvrable, light vehicles for reconnaissance and infantry support seems to be an idea worth resurrecting in an age of ubiquitous aerial surveillance and ample, accurate artillery fires.
(I say so as a big fan of the CRV(T)s Scorpion and Scimitar. Bring 'em back, with modernised sights, electronics, and communications.
Bogs. Sounds like very useful along Dneiper delta and along banks. And lighter to transport across river. Especially with a little surprise in early days across river.
It's a great idea. Not as half as good as peace, but these light AFVs can be highly effective (& economic & more easily-supported) when employed to their strengths.
This panzer gunner guy is really likeable - calm, knowledgeable, professional!
If I remember rightly the CVR (T) family had a ground pressure of 5LBS a sq inch a lot less than a human. In the Falklands it moved across country far better than anyone thought they would and should have been used more than they were.
I always liked the Wiesel and appreciated it's capabilities (speed, manoeuvrability, flexibility), especially in behind enemy lines ops, irregular/guerrilla tactics. But I say that as someone who has no professional experience or any operational knowledge. I'm not surprised that veterans think it would be useful and a great asset.
I am a former British Cavalry soldier who used the CVRT Scimitar. These would make excellent vehicles for use in Ukraine. They were specifically designed for use during the Cold War hence use in the European theatre of operations. It is light, very fast, and the ground pressure is that of a human, so works well on most terrain.
However it should be employed in its designated purpose of reconnaissance and light strike. RPG and HMG are capable of taking them out.
There are already other variants of the CVRT (Combat, Vehicle, Reconnaissance, Tracked) family already deployed in Ukraine, namely the Spartan APC variant.
The Scimitar have been discontinued from use by the British Army so there are a lot of surplus available. I believe it is only a matter of time until they make an appearance out there.
i am not sure, but I think Scimitars are actually already in Ukraine, which were bought by the Prytula Foundation
I've heard there was somebody buying up Scimitars and Scorpions for Ukraine. I haven't seen any reports that they have been delivered yet thugh. However, Ukraine received three Scimitars along with the Spartans last autumn and they were used during the Kharkiv offensive.
Over a hundred CVRT vehicles have been bought by the Prytula Foundation, however these are all demilitarised and are to be used for reconnaissance, logistics, troop transport, etc. Mostly Spartans and some Sultan command vehicles and Samaritan ambulances. I wouldn't be surprised if some deactivated Scimitars were also sold. Although the CVRT is a fantastic vehicle, one of the finest reconnaissance vehicles ever produced, it is heavily outdated as a fighting vehicle. The unstabilised 30mm RARDEN cannon wouldn't be of much use to Ukraine methinks. Supposedly the RARDEN can frontally penetrate a T-62 as shown in Iraq, but compared to the rapid fire and stabilisation of the Wiesel's 20mm it feels inferior for most of Ukraine's immediate battlefield needs imo.
Small vehicles are hard to get them shot for MBT, ATGM or LoiteringMunition.. Cause of the small silhouette, as well as their speed and agility. They also protect two persons from fragments/small arms fire and make them continue the fight even in wet and cold conditions. And they are easyer and cheaper to produce to have a large number of them ready to support ground operations in multiple terrains.
These systems could be - in combination with recon and ground mobile air defense - a gamechanger on the battlefield.
The video's suggestion of replacing Bradleys with Wiesel and Scimitar might hold some merit in specific scenarios, such as defending predetermined positions in urban environments where their maneuverability could be an advantage. However, in a broader context, the Bradley's multi-role capabilities, infantry transport capacity, and sustained firepower make it a much more versatile and adaptable platform for offensive operations and complex battlefield situations.
Therefore, when looking at the "big picture," the Bradley's overall tactical flexibility and combat effectiveness outweigh the limited advantages offered by the Wiesel and Scimitar in specific tactical niches.
i would sya that the CV9040C's which Ukraines 21th mechanized brigade and 93rd mechanized brigade use fills the needs somewhat.
Cv9040 replaced both PBV302 and IKV91 in Swedish military , Now if that was reduction of costs or due to improved functionality i dont know.
Best regards.
A very capable vehicle, but even the original basic CV90 was 23t - latest versions are hitting 38t. Scimitar I is 8t and Wiesel about 4t, so very different concepts.
This is a really interesting idea. If you use the Wiesel to support light infantry in heavily wooded areas, even treelines, and you use it as an assault gun/ infantry support gun this could work. The Wiesel isn't a tank and shouldn't be used that way; it can't survive be the "center of attention". But if is kept right behind an infantry company, i.e. protected, and then brought up to bring that 20mm to take out targets that small arms can't handle, then this could work. The Wiesel is tiny and can work its way through thick trees and it's tracked so it shouldn't get bogged down in mud. Sadly it will need some sort of extra protection added to counter drones.
then you can also take into account the ATGM and AA variants, with the ATGM mounting a TOW-2 launcher and the AA variant mounting a Stinger launcher, with the ability to fire 4 tubes, and then have another set of 4 to reload, the ATGM variant could prove useful in ambush combat against tanks, thanks to their small size, while the AA variant could prove useful in providing air cover where it is not expected, catching enemy air units off guard, I think that should they be deployed in Ukraine, they would prove themselves highly effective is used correctly
There are a lot of specialized weapon systems out there and they would be very advantageous to have in specific situations where they can turn the tide of a battle.
The question of every military is if these weapons systems will over a large enough advantage in the expected combat zones to be worth the price or allocation of resources.
I agree with the argument of how useful these machines could be. There has been a lot of fighting in wooded areas like around Siversk and Kreminna where larger vehicles like BMPs or MBTs have difficulties and the Wiesel could have a large impact in areas like there.
Once Russia finishes clearing those areas... then it makes it irrelevant for the flat steppes to the west
A hybrid electric/diesel makes sense. Extends range and allows you to approach the enemy silently.
That would make a good fire support, but it cant possibly cross a decently wide trench. What would be neat is if they give it a rack on the back to carry drones that can be launched on demand. Imagine a platoon has one of these as a support element hauling it equipped gun plus 5-10 heavy drones that the infantry can launch remotely.
Scimitar light tanks were retired some time ago, i have no idea if they are stored or were scrapped, the scimitar has the advantage over the wiesel of having the engine at the front which adds aditional protection for the crew if it is knocked out. Its also crazy fast.
The british are retiring the warrior soon which is much better protected and fast moving IFV but i cant imagine that will be in time to be effective or to consider sending them without replacement ajax units.
The engine of the Weasel is also placed in the front, if I remember it right on the right side and the driver sits beside it.
@@MrAE1978 Doesnt protect him then if hes at the side of it.
ALOT of CVRT's do end up in hands of civilians.
Since they are one of few tanks that easily fit on the roads.
@@davidty2006 Yeah which is a problem because the guns have to be deactivated before they can be handed off to civilians. Eddie hall has a scimitar and he cut off the deactivated gun and put on some stupid pipe to imitate a bigger gun and it looks ridiculous. They do a pretty good job of deactivating those guns to the point that i dont think they can even be restored for any amount of money.
@@eraldorh think they are dis-armed to the point the entire gun proberbly would need replacing. Though some can fire paintballs.
Yeah i feel like Wiesel is great for QRF and Weapon support weapon in the woodline.
They arn`t tanks at all - but armoured reconnaissance vehicles. UK Has the acronym CVR (T) - Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) for Scorpion with its 75mm main armament or Scimitar for the RARDEN30mm armed version.
The low height of those smaller vehicles would be a great help in. The Hummer has also enjoy a resurgence as it is low and fast. Not so good in Iraq against IED's, but Ukraine awesome. RPG's seem to be endemic on the Ukrainian battlefield so it would be better to assume they all have them than not.
I've always found the idea of mass amounts of very light armoured vehicles to be an interesting one. I forget where I heard of some of these ideas, but at times in the past, it was even suggested that you could have one-man machinegun armed "tanks" that you'd use to just overwhelm infantry. While that's likely a bit far lol - a great number of light tanks like Wiesel, Scimitar and Scorpion is likely more workable. Though saying that, I always found the ww2 British Universal Carriers to be a strong concept. They built a staggering number of those things, and amongst being gear carriers, battle taxies, and towers, they were pretty much very cheap, easily made, highly mobile, small arms proof, tiny machinegun bunkers that could also be adapted with pintle mounted machineguns, or mortars - or modified to carry flamethrowers (look up the Wasp - that shit is wild). I could see that framework, but modernised, being awesome on the modern battlefield. I also can't help myself imagine something like that having remote control capabilities for that high risk assault role. I'm getting carried away, aren't I?
The Wiesel is a badass tank, i wish we had these in the US Army. #sadface
hallo from Ukraine. cheers to German people for support. there is actually a few crowd fundings collecting money for Wiesel for our army :)
We'l see vehicles like this a lot more in the future imo. With anti tank weapons now as advanced as they are and being able to deal with any thickness of armour, heavy tanks become pointless and mobility/small size most important. There will be unmanned UGV possibilities for them as well. Groups of smaller vehicles like this working with a larger tank stationed further back with an old fashioned big gun used more as conventional artillery, command and networking and as a dock for aerial drones, and then ifvs as the main frontline fighting vehicles and carrying the supporting infantry
In the Falklands a Scorpion commander dismounted next to his vehicle and sank into the ground, while the tracks were adequately supported on the Muskeg.
That is the advantage of tracked equipment: lower ground pressure per unit of measure. Tracked equipment also has more traction due to the grousers giving more bite into the ground.
The US Ripsaw light tank is somwhat similar but unmanned. These vehicles make more sense as time goes on considering the potentially low unit cost. They could carry light cannon, HMG's, ATGM's, AGM's, breech loading mortars and MANPAD's. An infantry transport version could carry SF squads, but that could include any type of specialised infantry.
Listening to podcast about Polish "roach" tanks in WWII pretty well convinced me there is a place on BF for these types of vehicles. Especially considering the advancements in auto cannons and ATGMs.
In wargame Wiesels’ carried me against infantry and helicopters
Im starting to think that tank designers in the interwar period might’ve had the right idea about tankettes but the technology just wasn’t there yet
Not every vehicle with tracks is a TANK.
Rheinmetall that it is a "LIGHT RECONNAISSANCE VEHICLE". German Army calls the Waffentrager which means "weapons carrier". Both make sense.
A more generic term would be Armored Fighting Vehicle. As opposed to the Marders and Pumas which are IFV or Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
The M113 is a tracked APC or Armored Personnel Carrier and sometimes a weapons carrier. The self propelled mortar carrier is an example.
I really have no idea why more countries don't have a similar vehicle. Not everything needs to be a tank hunter/killer. Though I'd think that having the ability to mount a couple of NLAW's, LAW's or similar could be handy.
I could also see the use of an APC version of a Weisel 2, that could transport 4 soldiers for short distances (up to 2-3 km) even if the soldiers aren't fully protected. In this role they would sneak the soldiers into unexpected positions (perhaps an OP or to do a a light assault or use 3 to quickly reposition 3 60-80mm mortars, grenade launchers, ATGM, or machine guns) with a decent loadout for the soldiers or weapons. They could also make good light ammo/supply carriers.
I'm excited to see what armored vehicles we get from composite metal foam technology.
I do love the CVRT. Don't know anything about the Wiesel but the CVRT are the most fun vehicles I've ever been in, fast and agile doesn't do them justice. If that's what the guys on the front line want there are plenty knocking about in the UK, whether or not the political will is present to keep supporting Ukraine is a different matter. Israel now seems to dominate the news cycle and the disappointing summer offensive have reduced the enthusiasm for this war. We in the west really do have the attention span of a brain damaged goldfish.
What soldiers want and what they actually need is two different things. Remember that American tankers initially didn't want the 76mm gun because they preferred the sighting system on the 75.
Great info. Never knew about these.
Museum pieces that have no real purpose on a modern battlefield between Peer opponents
Flakpanzer Gepards seem more useful in order to deal with the proliferation of cheap FPV drones, and the Wiesel seems like it'll be easy targets for these drones. Maybe if they can be used remotely, they could be much more viable.
A wiesel is absolutly not a light tank. Neither really is the Scimitar, although it at least is sometimes (wrongly) called one.
Having equipment is better than having equipment. Even supply delivery can often be a dangerous undertaking without protected vehicles.
I think especially in the kremina forest the wiesel would be a huge power amplifier
I imagine something similar to the weasel would be really useful with how ukraine uses GMGs like light mortars. Even if not directly on the front line, it provides a stable firing platform that can be moved and concealed relatively easily. That would also let them use HE and frag munitions that are better suited for infantry engagement than the old 20mm.
CVRT Scorpion has low velocity 75mm gun for HE and smoke.
I have thought that vehicles like the Scimitar and Weisel would be great for those tree line pushes and advances in Ukraine. Much smaller, MUCH harder to hit with drone munitions and RPG’s even if they are present. Having that quick very maneuverable autocannon is a huge boost in suppression in taking trenches. I’d love to see these vehicles show up there.
Maybe the lessons of all this point to an optionally manned ultra light tank, able to bring forward firepower and kit, harder to hit but doesn't matter if a drone gets it. Very flexible offering, can be mounted, unmounted, remote controlled in fpv etc
The New Zealand army still have scorpion tanks.
Just looking at the wheels configuration of the Wessel. It almost looks like a universal carry, I could be wrong.
No tanks in the new Zealand army whatsoever... 🤣
I would love to hear what he and people like him think about the French AMX-10 RC. It seems that speed and sensors are much more important than armour plates on the modern battlefield.
That is the one big thing about light tanks, yes pretty much whatever could and can take out a heavier tank like a MBT would absolutely destroy a light tank but here is the thing, the kind of threats Light Tanks today are planning to faced will not involve a light tank charging across open ground to a fortified position with lots of anti-tank stuff. Light Tanks are useful as they are light enough both logistically and in mobility that they can go to fairly rough terrain that a MBT can't go through and thus being able to attack positions that the enemy would most likely have little to no anti-tank capability because you would normally never suspect a tank coming from there, a light tank is meant to exploit that possibility and that is the main reason why Ukraine vet wants them. Lets buy a entire tank battalion's worth of light tanks for them!
Weasel with 2 antitank and 2 aa.missiles at the ready,with computer controled cannons in aa function would be a mighty beast indeed.
Some surveillance drones would be necessary...
It's seems they'd work well in a fluid defense, rushing in as counter attack vehicles against infantry and light armour, then retreat back if there's a sustained attack. Plus they can go where heavy armour, or even just heavy wheeled vehicles couldn't, like the o known winter mud of Ukraine and Russia
Well, not along time ago Britain announce transfer of around 25 Scimitars to Ukraine. Also 3rd separate assault brigade bought demilitarised Wiesel last week
Would a smaller vehicle like the Wiesel be easier to get across the Dnipro river? Or would it be basically as hard to get across as a full battle tank or IFV? If so it could be useful to make a fast spearhead with infantry, provided high enough numbers of them.
The thin tracks don't look like a good idea in the swamps and sand dunes there
@@eljanrimsa5843 a Wiesel has a ground pressure of 3kg/cm². That's less than a human foot.
Getting bogged down in soft ground was never a concern of ours during my time with them.
Could you put Bobcat attachments on these things? (Backhoe, auger)
Stormer variant is still in service. So new builds are possible.
I believe half the size of the weasel is getting closer to the mark.
Made of polymer or other mouldable plastic type of material.
One or two man with the option of unmanned units is where we are headed .
Vehicles that weigh between 800-1000kg fully loaded & amphibious.
Looking at small capacity two stroke diesels or rotary engines.
Very light , cheap & basically disposable, possibly as light as 400 kg .
Making use of recoilless weaponry.
Yeah I agree, I thought the same thing of small unmanned drone tank. basically a mobile weapon platform, light armor and expendable. Like what the machine gun/logistic tracked drones the russians are coming out with, but a bit more armoured and not battery powered.
@@McBenjiBoo for sure something like that will be just around the corner.
I still believe there’s a spot in between a , weapons platform / drone & the Wiesel .
Definitely manned , but all so unmanned versions of the same vehicle, for clearing mines , drawing fire & absorbing expensive missiles and other weapons. If the unmanned looks the same the enemy will have to take it out regardless.
Tankettes like Wiesel would make perfect sense.
If used outside major hotspots:
1. they would increase the psycological pressure on opposing troops. (umdetected, unexpected, tiny and armored)
2. they would increase cost for the opponent by upgunning the trenches and stocking up rpgs to reach a higher hit probability.
3. they would drain opposing recources and tax supplychains .
Light tanks are back in vogue after getting a bad reputation, amongst us non-army types anyway.
Thanks Bernhard, these videos are very good for filling in [large!] gaps in my knowledge.
Top attack ATGMs and air to ground make it almost impossible to armor protect a crew. Might as well go light and more manurable than try to go heavier. The real future are unmanned systems remotely operated.
Small light armor vehicles are good if available with spare parts and repair possible. Observation, drone operator transportation, medical evacuation then think about weapon systems. Updated TOW with 24 x Optics can observe and cover large areas. Number of rounds carried is small. Auto cannons and grenade launchers good if situation supports their use with parts, ammo and repair to hand.
I believe the UK already sent 23 the MK2 (modernised and bigger) version of the scimitars along with with a load of Spartans (APC versions)
The public in the UK can privately own military vehicles like these and I know 100's of these types have been bought by the Ukrainian public. Some costing $30,000 - 50,000 each. It is said they are excellent in muddy conditions 👌
Very interesting, thank you.
Could someone please advise if there is sufficient 30 mm automatic cannon ammunition available to Ukraine and its supporters to make the introduction of the Wiesel worthwhile? If not, could the gun be replaced by one for which there is more ammunition?
I see the occasional article about artillery ammunition, but not much about ammunition for tank guns or automatic cannons.
The Wiesel uses 20mm, not 30mm.
Or TOW ATGMs. Depending on the variant.
Thank you.@@samfetter2968
Yeah, my hours of simulation in world of tanks blitz told me this a year ago
I think tankettes like this could be the future of warfare. Small and fast relative Good firepower and easier to produce
The major reason they are desirable for Ukraine is that they are so light that when working in tandem they can traverse terrible muddy terrain with specialized towing gear like they did in the Falklands War. So when everything else can't move they can.
It is basically the mech concept. It will make infantry more costly and who can afforded the most, will win.
With distance set exploding amunition that would make defending a trench a nightmare.
watching it ride around at 6:15 omg it's adorable
Seems like light fast infantry fighting vehicles are more suited for the muddy conditions in Ukraine. A group of these with AT capabilities would be better suited in comparison to using the leopard. It’s sad to see the leopard and the challenger get blasted to pieces.
A body bag is included, is it correct? Or the vehicle itself serves as a coffin?
I wonder if the capability to build new versions of these vehicles exist? With modern power trains etc.
The spartan is an updated version and is still in service so yes can be produced
The main question is ....are they cheaper and easier to maintain than the Bradly? Im sure that 3 of these things can provide more support than 1 bradly
What is the vehicle name to the left of the weasel? Also I think the weasel would work well in Ukraine especially in Forest areas and other areas where tanks and bigger IFv have trouble maneuvering through
This is moronic. The opposition would quickly adapt to dealing with these tanks. They blow up and burn as well as any other tanks.
Let me answer this as Ukranian.
Because there are many units and shortage of transport and specifically armored transport. Transport gets lost just like drones, and even light armor is better than civilian car or school bus.
This would be the perfect aid for the troops crossing the dnipro
And if the Scimitars could be made waterproof that would be ideal for crossing the many ditches, watery muddy creeks and not least the Dnieper river.. when the time comes to enter the Crimea?
2001 g sam ga vidio na Kosovu u Njemačkoj K F O R bazi u Prizrenu .Čudio sam se tako malom tenku te sam ga uslikao a sliku još imam .Nikad nisam sumljao u Njemačko oružje😊
OMG so much a cute tanky :D
It is kind of funny that this is also a good idea im Hoi4 when you want to add offensive capabilities to infantry formations meant to attack in rough terrain.
I fear any vehicle is going to be on the menu as long as there is no effective counter against drones.
a photo of a Wiesel 1 TOW in the 3rd OShBr appeared recently. It is likely that this is just a demilitarized sample that can be purchased on the civilian market.
There is no demilitarised "civilian market" version of Wiesel 1.
There are 7 in US military posession for test and evaluation, the remaining fleet of 343 vehicles is exclusively used by the german military, plus a handfull of vehicles are still with Rheinmetall for test and evaluations.
I believe there was some discussion last year about the Wiesel being fitted with anti-tank systems and how they would benefit the Ukrainian forces because of this field-forest strip hedge-row type battlefield environment. Extremely difficult for Armor-especially with the AT weapons fielded by both sides. I say equipping Ukraine with these would be relatively inexpensive and it could be very effective. At least we would really know how effective aside from training exercises. I thought these were already part of the armament packages sent
Long retired and need effort to get to fight
Real talk though: Wasn't Mexico trying to get rid of it's amx-13 variants? Obvious Venezuela, and Indonesia aren't about to swap out theirs for very different reasons, but maybe Austria, since it's shift away from neutrality, might consider providing some Kurassiers? Given we know 105mm is actually working brilliantly in Ukraine I definitely think the amx-13 variants could be a solution. Actually if Australia and the US *really* wanted to, I'm sure Indonesia would love an alternative light tank in these troubling times. AFAIK theirs might be the best variant these days.
The 105mm is working like absolute dogshit... it's way too obsolete to deal with modern platforms
MBT's are great to have, but for Ukraine light tanks IFB's would be ideal. Rare is the tank on tank battles, plus arm a light tink with a couple TOW missiles like on the Bradley and there is your protection for enemy MBT's
There is a TOW version of the Wiesel 1.