What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
jhungary said:
It REALLY depends on how you use the tank and how you use those ATGM.

If you do what the Russian do, which is don't bother to run any infantry screen in front of on top of the column, whichever country did that would have the same result. You are effectively allowing your enemy to ambush without you seeing it, and inside that tank, you cant see shit.

From all the footage I saw on how Russian run their Armor, that can be made in a compilation video title "How not to run your armor in modern warfare" I don't see any unit coherent, I don't see dismounted infantry, I don't see overhead gunship accompanied the armor. I mean, it would be stupid not to expect your armor are going to cut to piece if you do stuff like this, sort of like how are you going to expect anything is going to be different? As that is the only logical outcome.

On the other hand, Ukrainian have used their knowledge of their own land pretty well, and the excellent use of cover vs concealment is the key to how those Russian Armor getting cut to ribbon.
Click to expand...

How more infantry will help when it is not a man with LAW jumping on you from a ditch threatening your armour, but somebody with 2km+ man portable ATGMs, and very likelly multiple of them.

We've seen videos of single tanks receiving up to 5(!) ATGM hits, without them even trying to return fire, because they likelly never seen them.

Send infantry 2-3 km ahead to clean every tree line? How will they find the enemy in a tree line, when thermal sight on a tank itself can't see an infantry man in IR camo from 1km? How will the tank return fire, and support troops ahead from such distance?

Ukrainians themselves make light ATGMs costing only few thousand USD per shot. And we have not yet spoke about long range non-line-of-sight ATGMs now entering service.

When even piss poor armies can field multiple ATGM teams per moto company today, I think it really puts all current assumptions about mechanised combat upside down. An armoured convoy is seriously outranged by everything now, and, most importantly, outranged by infantry. If even an MBT can be destroyed by a top attack ATGM from up front, then why do you need an MBT?

I believe the doctrines will go back to sixties now. Motorized will be more about a lot of indirect fire support, and bigger formations to stand against more lethal indirect fire coming from other side.

Russian experiment with light regiments, and BTGs has been proven a total, complete failure for so many reasons.

I think its biggest vulnerability is how small autonomous units get totally paralysed by C&C loss, which is inevitable when command sections stay just few kilometers from where contact warfare takes place.
 
Last edited:
Paul2 said:
How more infantry will help when it is not a man with LAW jumping on you from a ditch threatening your armour, but somebody with 2km+ man portable ATGMs, and very likelly multiple of them.

We've seen videos of single tanks receiving up to 5(!) ATGM hits, without them even trying to return fire, because they likelly never seen them.

Send infantry 2-3 km ahead to clean every tree line? How will they find the enemy in a tree line, when thermal sight on a tank itself can't see an infantry man in IR camo from 1km? How will the tank return fire, and support troops ahead from such distance?

Ukrainians themselves make light ATGMs costing only few thousand USD per shot.

When even piss poor armies can field multiple ATGM teams per moto company today, I think it really puts all current assumptions about mechanised combat upside down.
Click to expand...
Depends on what do you want?

If you want to run Armor up in Urban environment without any casualty. that is NOT possible. That's why I keep saying you would not see me doing that.

But if you have to, there is a way to minimize your lost. Which is why the term "Combine Arms" is important.

Infantry need to screen ahead and make sure the immediate area of the tank is safe, then you need gun ship overhead to pick up contrail. The infantry job is to see if there are any type of encampment, you don't need to see the team, but if they had camp there (You usually leave team in place for days and rotate the position within a certain area), then you need to work with your Armor and artillery and try to find those team. Tank and Artillery can support the team a few kilometre away

If you can't and they fired, that's what's the gunship is for, they can pick up the trail as soon as they fired and put guns or rocket on them and eliminate them.

The problem is, they don't run gunship because they can't deal with the MANPAD threat, and since they don't run gunship, they probably did not bothered to run infantry screen/observer or check point to curb the AT team, either that, or they are really incompetent and think running Armor single along the road without either infantry and gunship on top is going to be okay....I am giving the Russian the benefit of the doubt,....
 
Last edited:
jhungary said:
Depends on what do you want?
Click to expand...

Offensive armoured warfare.

It's clear that even low density, town like urban terrain is death for armour.

But armour is now challenged in an open field. A single AT team lying in a ditch can easily carry firepower enough to cripple an entire armoured company from 2km+ in one ambush.

And if you slowdown your movement in contested territory to poke every ditch around, you will make yourself a target for something bigger than an AT team, and of course the speed, and shock advantage itself is lost.

APS? Maybe, but will it help with multiple hits? I think it will not save you from ambushes we seen in Ukraine. And even if APS will save few heavier vehicles in a company, you still have to return fire somehow at 2+ kilometers against few footsoldiers in a ditch, who will likelly scuttle right after firing.

Wasting air support/fire support on every AT team every few kilometers? Not feasible.
 
Last edited:
Paul2 said:
Offensive armoured warfare.

It's clear that even low density, town like urban terrain is death for armour.

But armour is now challenged in an open field. A single AT team lying in a ditch can easily carry firepower enough to cripple an entire armoured company from 2km+ in one ambush.

And if you slowdown your movement in contested territory to poke every ditch around, you will make yourself a target for something bigger than an AT team, and of course the speed, and shock advantage itself is lost.
Click to expand...
As I said, if you are using this war to gauge the effective of armor, you probably will get the lowest end of it, this is like an episode of "When Armor Corp failed"

You need to understand the dynamic, AT team in battle are treated like static defence, due to its mobility. Yes, they can be hidden but so does almost all static defence, which make the mobility of tank is important. Which is what the Russian is taking away from their armor.

In this case, the armor are limited to use on road, and in the urban area. There are no room to retreat or conduct a counter AT drill and without proper support, this is what lead to the footage we all saw from the past month
 
Foinikas said:
It shouldn't have dragged on so much. If the situation was solved in 2014 or before the invasion now by the Ukrainian government signing treaties of neutrality and accepting Crimea as Russian land and maybe granting autonomous status to Donbass or a special treaty for eastern Ukraine...this war could have been avoided.

USA and those in NATO who insisted on an aggressive policy are the ones to blame. These ones encouraged and pushed the Ukrainians,these are the ones you could say,who seduced the Ukrainian people to go to their side and to rely on them foolishly. The Ukrainians who wanted to be "de-Russified",were seduced by the money of the EU and the promises of the West. It's the Eastern Bloc complex. After the fall of communism,these people frantically tried to get out of poverty. I don't blame them. Some remained moderate,some returned to religion but many were blinded by a love of money and luxury.
I don't blame them for trying to escape poverty and the oppression of the communist tyranny,but they fell for American and Western European promises.

What did the Russians ask for? The only thing they asked for was not to mess with their sphere of influence,their neighborhood,countries like Georgia,Armenia,Azerbaijan,Belarus,Ukraine,Kazakhstan.

But no,the Warhawks in Washington and Brussels had to have these countries too. To weaken an already weak Russia.

Instead on focusing on China for example,they did everything they could to weaken Russia. Proxy wars,sanctions,adding more neighbors to NATO,presenting the Russians as the old evil communists of the Cold War.

Religiously speaking,to destroy Orthodoxy,which was the soul of this nation and still is. The bond that unites the people,that talks about family,traditions,faith in God and love for the motherland.

Just like when they want to destroy Islam they either try to seduce muslims or introduce hardcore nutcases to them and keep them divided.

Putin with all his faults,supported the Orthodox Church. And the Orthodox Church contrary to Protestantism,does not tolerate the modern Western culture: LGBT rights,teaching children about transgenders,SJW movements,feminism, political correctness,idiotic music and Hinduist and Buddhist practices.

See,this way they couldn't corrupt Russians easily. Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church had started putting a stop on all that. Faith,Patriotism and a sense of slavic identity was coming back to them. And the West didn't like that.

What would have happened if Belarussians and Ukrainians woke up and remembered they were the same people? What would have happened if the 3 Russias united again? It would have been a nightmare for the Freemasons and Zionists of USA and Europe.

So they probably thought...China can wait.
Click to expand...
Entirely the US and its Nato lackeys fault.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

_NOBODY_
Russia's energy empire: Putin and the rise of Gazprom | DW
Replies
0
Views
2K
_NOBODY_
_NOBODY_
Muhammed45
  • Poll
Poll : Will Russia use nuclear and WMD weapons against Ukraine?
Replies
3
Views
697
Muhammed45
Muhammed45
F-22Raptor
Ukrainian spies with deep ties to CIA wage shadow war against Russia
Replies
0
Views
372
F-22Raptor
F-22Raptor
beijingwalker
Nightmares: If Ukraine Loses
2 3 4 5
Replies
60
Views
4K
Han Patriot
H
beijingwalker
Zelenskiy tells Europe: Russia will attack others if Ukraine loses
2 3
Replies
38
Views
2K
Oldman1
O

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Military Forum Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom