Nyheder af generel dansk interesse fra Denys Davidov.

• Det politiske spil omkring længere rækkende raketter til HIMARS:
  Det Ukraine har gjort er, at lege "Ole Opfinder" med oldgamle S-200 missiler og sænke flagskibet i Sortehavet. Den, der tror at kystbatterier er virkningsløse tager kæmpefejl.
  Resultatet er, at taktikken var rigtig! Materiellet utidssvarende. Nu er Storm Shadow og ATACAM kan bære den taktik videre - for dels løber Ukraine tør for gamle missiler, dels vil de missiler ikke virke næste gang. Men moderne systemer vil sætte det russiske baseforsvar overfor udfordringer, de ikke kan klare. Det bedste er, at de - relativt set - ikke koster noget videre.
  
• 12 ud af 20 Leopard 1 kræver "en kærlig hånd" før de bliver brugbare:
  Det er ikke overraskende! Fidusen er, at det er opgaver, der kan klares af mindre firmaer, som Flensburger Fahrzeugbau. Det væsentlige er, at det kan klares relativt - relativt - hurtigt. For folkene på frontlinien er det frustrerende, fordi de havde brug for materiellet i går.
  Dansk priotitering er, at - uanset hvad - så holder Rusland ikke op: Enten kommer der en anden Putin eller der udbryder generel borgerkrig i Rusland - begge dele er skide farlige og kræver man overvejer modforholdsregler.
  Det er ikke overraskende, at Leopard 1 ikke umiddelbart kan smides ind i kampen. Det er vogne, der har været oplagret i 30 år med minimum af vedligehold: De skal gennem en hovedreparation. MEN: Der er masser af dem og de kan bringes til at formere middelsvære enheder til  supplement af Leopard 2 - således at en bataljon består af 1 eskadron Leopard 2 og 2 eskadroner Leopard 1. De øvrige chassiser skal laves til f.eks. minerydnings- og bjergnings køretøjer, som der bliver masser af brug for.
  
• Polen har et absurd antal HIMARS i ordre:
  Vi taler mere end 500 systemer. Ukraine har - så vidt jeg forstår - 18 systemer, som har smadret det russiske artilleri - indtil videre uden tab af andet end attrapper. De systemer vil aldrig blive leveret; men gør, at fabrikanterne har en solid ordre, der gør at de kan nærme sig pensionskasser og andre finansinstitutioner og få anskaffet/opstillet produktion i en helt anden skala. De kortere missiler har rent faktisk gjort det tunge artilleri forældet.
  Bliver de leveret? Nej, det ved Gud, de ikke gør: Men andre Nato-lande vil købe og kan så få de første eksemplarer. Nu har Ukraine jo - i alt væsentligt skrevet reglement og håndbog.
  
• Danmark får brug for nogle stykker - bl.a. til kystartilleri til beskyttelse af korvetterne i de Baltiske havne. Jeg så dem så gerne på et Piranha chassis. En Piranha V er bedre beskyttet og kan komme i stilling, hvor lastbiler ikke kan.
  

Well, I would not take the Slovakian idiot tooooo seriously. Denmark is in the process of aquirering artillery systems to replace the CAESARS donated to Ukraine. The slovakian Zuzana-2 is an all right system - Better than the CAESARS, as it uses a heavier truck chassis and the crew is somewhat protected at all times in a turret. The point is however that the idiot will be held responsible by their constituency. The threat of cancelling a procurement due to unreliability of the government is overhanging.
The CAESAR is in french service because they want it to be air mobile for use in the former colonies. This leads to a flimsier construction. On video's you can see it jumping under a maximum charge.

Will it work with the morons in Slovakia? I don't know anything, but stupidity has no limits in general. It should be said that it worked with Switzerland, when the government threatned to veto the transferring of old Piranha III vehicles to Ukraine. The Swiss parliament overturned the governments decision. I´m guessing here, but a government needs parliamentary backing - a parliament needs a majority for executive decisions - as opposed to the presidential system of the USA, where the congress ability to block a president is limited to deprive funding. That is why there are frequent shut-downs in the USA - and a lot of nonsense about super majority. If a government in a parliamentary constitution has a majority against it - it must resign. This means a center coalition government can play the extreme wings against each other. If the left wants to block something, then government turn to the right and get them to abstain, thus the center does not have a majority against it. In the US we see that the clowns on the extremes vote against for different reasons. One wants to stop the help to Ukraine - and one right wing member in the right wing (he is so far out - where they elongate the horizon with wooden planks).

This is the real background for the center government in Denmark: The liberals and the social democrats have their differences, but the price of placating either the left or the right wing for a government exceeds the trouble of ironing out the relative minor internal disagreement in the government. The The opposition cannot overturne the government, because the extreme wings fear to be wiped out in the following election.

Generally I am very much for different producers of weapons, as it is in the long run the best and cheapest solution.
The US wants to press their weapons down the throat of the allies to obtain the economy of scale. For stuff like aircraft that are complicated there is an economy factor that says that man-hours (thus cost) spend reduces with between 10 and 20 percent by each doubling of production number. I.e. the cost of producing aircraft number 200 is 10-20% cheaper than production of aircraft number 100.
The downside to the scale of production argument is that it forms a monopoly, where the marginal revenue is equal to the marginal cost. This means a higher price to the costumer in general.

The European model is having more producers that each produce at higher cost pr. unit but if the producers gets to arrogant there is the competition that can make something as good (or better) for - say 10% - lower price. This means the competitive producer will get the order and thus the volume of production.
In Denmark there is a discussion about restarting production of 155 mm artillery shells. I don't think it will happen, because the cost is to high - and it will need a hefty government contract to start again. The factory was sold off 10-20 years ago and ran for some time at a loss to the producer.
The point is however, that the mere threat will persuade a producer to set the price more competitively, as he needs the volume to write off his investment.