Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
Oct 31, 2022 7 tweets 3 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
The reasons Italy's Army never received all the funds to modernize its heavy equipment are:

1) an army doesn't need main battle tanks, tracked IFVs, long range air defense systems, self-propelled artillery, armored bridgelayers, etc. if its adversary are the Taliban.

1/n Image
2) Italy focused heavily on modernizing its Navy and Air Force equipment, which costs muuuuuuuch more than army equipment.

Two F-35 (or two Eurofighter) cost the same as the yearly salaries for an entire army brigade. Italy bought 96 Eurofighter and 90 F-35.

2/n Image
A modern frigate costs the same as raising and equipping a tank battalion with brand new Leopard 2A7V. Since the war on terror startet Italy bought/is buying 17 frigates (and 2 aircraft carriers, 4 destroyers, 8 submarines, 3 amphibious ships, etc. etc.)

3/n Image
Staying with ships: Italy bought 500+ Aster-15/Aster-30 surface-to-air missiles for its Navy, which cost the same as three battalions worth of brand new PzH 2000.

Equipping two Eurofighters with a full air-to-air load of Meteor & IRIS-T missiles costs the same
4/n Image
as four M142 HIMARS with around 500 GMLRS missiles.

Italy's Army isn't the only one that suffered this lack of investment over the last decade. The British Army is in even worse shape... in some countries all branches of the armed forces suffered (i.e. Germany, Netherlands)
Now that more funds become available it is imperative to invest in land systems. Poland is charging ahead and buying more tanks than France, Italy, Germany and the UK posses now.
Italy's Army has the plans how to modernize and grow its capabilities ready since 2014.

6/n Image
And Europe doesn't need an increase in troops (European NATO members field 150+ brigades, vs. 31 active US Army brigades). What Europe needs is more and newer equipment, a lot more logistics to move troops and equipment, and especially more of this smiley fella:
7/end Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @noclador

Mar 19
Here comes the thread about anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) guidance systems 🧵:

Thursday I did a thread about ATGM warheads & a thread about non-guided anti-tank rockets like the AT4 or Panzerfaust 3 (I will link these threads below); but now it's time for the big ones.
1/27 Image
Let's begin with the Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight (SACLOS) missiles, which we have to divide in two groups:

Direct attack:
🇺🇸 TOW, TOW-2A
🇫🇷 Milan, Eryx
🇷🇺 Konkurs, Metis-M, Metis, Fagot

Overfly top attack:
🇺🇸 TOW-2B
2/n ImageImageImageImage
Simplified explanation of Semi-Automatic Command to Line Of Sight:

• "Semi" = the gunner has to aim at the target / keep it in his line of sight from launch to impact.
• "Automatic Command" = the launch unit tracks the missile and automatically sends steering commands to
Read 27 tweets
Mar 17
Earlier I did a thread about the two types of warhead anti-tank weapons carried by infantry use: HEAT and EFP warheads (link in the next tweet).

Now a thread about 🧵:
trajectories, fuzes and tandem warheads of anti-tank rockets and missiles; and reactive and ceramic armor.
If you have not yet read my HEAT and EFP thread - please do so now. I have linked it here:

Almost all anti-tank missiles and rockets fly in a (more or less) straight line towards the target and detonate upon impact, but there are a few exceptions:
• top attack missiles (Javelin, Spike, Akeron) fly a lofted trajectory and strike the target from above. Their warheads detonate upon impact.
• overfly top attack missiles (BILL/BILL 2, TOW-2B, NLAW) fly a straight line slightly above the target and fire their EFP warheads
Read 29 tweets
Mar 16
Infantry anti-tank weapons

A look at anti-tank guided missiles, shoulder launched anti-tank rockets, anti-tank warheads, missile guidance systems, as well as armor countermeasures and active protection systems.

You will learn a lot in these threads 🧵:
I will focus on NATO, Ukrainian & Swedish vs. russian anti-tank weapons. Like i.e:

Javelin, Spike MR/LR, Akeron
Milan, TOW-2A, Eryx
NLAW, Spike SR
Stugna, Corsar
Kornet, Konkurs, Metis/Metis-M, Fagot, RPG-7
APILAS, RGW 90, AT4, Panzerfaust 3, C90, Alcotan
All of the above (except four) use a jet-forming shaped charge warhead known as High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT).

The exceptions are the overfly top-attack BILL/BILL 2, TOW-2B & NLAW, which use a slug-forming shaped charge warhead known as Explosively Formed Penetrator (EFP).
Read 22 tweets
Mar 14
Germany ordering just 10x PzH 2000 is damaging the German defense industry. 10x are just enough to keep the production line open... but in times like ours an expansion of production is needed.

In Europe🇬🇧🇪🇸🇫🇷🇵🇹🇦🇹🇧🇬🇷🇴 need to replace their older self-propelled artillery,
while 🇮🇹🇱🇹🇳🇱🇭🇷🇬🇷 need more PzH 2000 and Ukraine needs masses of them. Germany's future army organization requires ~90 new PzH 2000. In total Europe has a need of ~500 armored self-propelled howitzers... with the current production line it would take around 30 years to build
that number of PzH 2000.
As long as Germany itself doesn't commit to buy more PzH 2000 it is better for a nation to buy the South Korean K9 Thunder, of which ~60 are produced every year.
If Germany orders 100x PzH 2000 (= €1.57 bn) then other European nations will buy too,
Read 4 tweets
Mar 11
All this doom mongering about how "difficult" it will be for Ukraine to breach the russian trenches in the South... people need to man up and do some military service before running their mouths like that.

A thread about offensive operations 🧵:
1/36 Image
Yes, breaching a defensive line with an anti-tank ditch out front, a minefield, deep trenches filled with machine guns and ATGM teams is difficult... IF you don't have the right tools.

A trench line is barely an inconvienance for NATO, because of this ⬇️⬇️
Ukraine doesn't have air supremacy, but Ukraine is receiving other tools. Like i.e. JDAM ER bombs to plough through those russian trenches.
Here a Taliban compound is flattened by GBU-32 JDAMs (1,000 lb Mk 83 bombs).
Ukraine won't be able to use the JDAM ERs at their max.
Read 36 tweets
Mar 3
Three videos of Ukrainian DIY kamikaze drones hunting down russian tanks in the eerie ruins of a destroyed town.
The drones are bought by @natochka_zaya from donations she collects for this Ukrainian special operations drone unit.
The more drones the fewer russian tanks survive.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!