It is reported that the Centuro B1 led the spearhead for the counterattack in Kupyansk. >Happy to share some neat info, the recent success in the Kupyansk sector can also be attributed to the Italian B1 Centauro’s Italy has donated to Ukraine. They successfully exploited a weak point in the Russian rear areas and managed to disrupt their logistic lines.https://x.com/NichoConcu/status/2000527548233421241?s=20What do we think of it?
>>64644345They look kinda goofy with those wheels, but they're relatively cheap cost effective armored vehicles that is exactly the kind of vehicle Ukraine badly needs. There are a lot of roads, so wheeled vehicles aren't bad.
>>64644345Did Russia ever return those centauros that were loaned(?) to them for evaluation or is there a non-zero chance the first AFV a centauro will knock out is itself and not even in Italian service?
>>64644356>There are a lot of roads, so wheeled vehicles aren't bad.There are also a lot of explosions and I've seen wheeled vehicles take FPV drones to the wheels better than tracked armor. One flat tire aint stopping it. One broken link stops a tracked tank.
but all the OSINT experts told me that mobile protected firepower platforms are obsolete on the modern battlefield?
>>64644345These are the 105s right? Wonder why they've been highlighted while the AMX-10s were just kinda seen as meh vehicles back when they were first seeing use. Better tactics? Or are Centauros better armored, more reliable...?
>>64644388>AMX-10s were just kinda seen as meh vehiclesHaving a gun stabilizer will instantly makes your vehicle quicker to react to every situation. Something the AMX-10 does not have.
>>64644376This does cut both ways though, roads have become such a regular target for drones both sides have scrambled to get protective netting up to have something to cover their trucks. Roads are a predictable path, easy pickings for an FPV as thier major issue is just finding a target>>64644388Definitely better tactics. Ukrainians, much like anyone that doesn't understand French doctrine, just saw a tank with wheels when they should've seen it as a jeep with a fuckoff gun. They were used as tanks and flopped because they weren't meant to do that, seems like they've learned their lesson now
>>64644392>no stabilizer>on the fast, mobile recon vehiclehuh, wtf are the frogs on, not even in the upgraded variants?
>>64644392What a piece of shit, typical French equipment.
>>64644356You hear similar positive stories from the British CVR(T) series in Ukraine designed for mobile airlift and of course Bradleys performing better than anyone ever thought they would.It remains an AFV world.
>>64644426From what I understand reading about the AMX-10 it simply did not have the technology at that time period it was being designed/built (1960-1970) to have a stabilizer and also be light, fast and speedy. The stabilizer for the 105 would eat up more internal volume then desired which would make the vehicle larger and thus heavier and slower. If they had instead put in a 30mm or 20mm autocannon then they probably would have a stabilizer. And I say probably since they might have just also skip having a stabilizer even with a 20mm autocannon considering the britbongs at that time period had unstabilized 30mm clip loaded autocannons for their light recon vehicles. There is also the whole doctine cope that goes something alone in the lines of:>"If we fight in a certain way that doctrine says we should, then we dont need stabilizers on our light mobile firepower vehicles, lets just hope we never get put in a situation where having a stabilizer would be the difference between life and death"The later modernisations was just quality of life improvements that improved service life and better communication equipment and so on but did not add a stabilizer for the gun. The AMX-10 version that have a stabilizer also have a whole new turret and it never left prototype stage.
>>64644510that's what fighting only nogs in Africa does to your """"doctrine""""
>>64644399>anyone that doesn't understand French doctrine, just saw a tank with wheels when they should've seen it as a jeep with a fuckoff gunbut that's what everyone else has been saying all alongit's the frogs who've been implying it's a tank on wheels, with the time-honoured old dodge of:>DON'T YOU DIMINISH OUR CONTRIBUTION>WE GAVE THEM TANKS TOO YOU BASTARDthey've never admitted that it's a jeep with a big fuckoff gun
>>64644376Yes, a wheeled vehicle can hit a mine and limp back to base.
>>64644345was it these or the swedish AFVs that appeared exactly once, destroyed in the woods, at the start of the flubbed counteroffensive?I remember there being a wheeled vehicle of some sort in that situation
>>64644510>stabilizerWhy would you need stabilizers? I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-60 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters.
>>64648109That was unnecessary, did you really have to sandbag me?
>>64644345Assault gun goes WEEEEEE! POW! POW! POW! YEE HAW! then jumps over bridge while playing Dixie and runs away, is not tonk.
>>64647253Those were french AMX-10 RCs
>>64644356Roads full of mines and zeroed in by artillery and watched by drones. And a lot of these "roads" aren't even metalled and will turn into mud after some rain.
>>64644345Look at these specs: stabilized gun, rifled 105 barrel, 1.6 million dollars per unit is a total steal and extremely cost effective. Ukraine should have 1000 of these. >>64650931Yes, yes, nothing is perfect and these are not invincible super weapons that can't be destroyed. If they use them for what they're good at, these will be highly effective.
>>64644345>counterattack
