Jump to content

IMHO

Members
  • Content Count

    753
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

IMHO last won the day on August 22

IMHO had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

1,134 profile views
  1. You'd better describe your test setup in detail. Detection/Identification in CMxx is not so trivial so to confidently say that one unit consistently outperforms the other in this department you'd probably need 50+ or even 100+ experiments if the difference is too small. When you say you used "typical" Russian crew it means you don't control experience/leadership/motivation variables for Russian side. You don't know what values were assigned to the Russian crews. Means the only thing you can do with your results now - throw them in a trash can.
  2. There will be no victory for RUS to claim however it ends up. The grand aim of RUS to sway UKR pro-Western choice is unattainable. And if it ends up with Ze "building a wall" around L/DNR then the latter will be a huge drain on an already weak RUS budget. And the wall around L/DNR is not a loss for UKR. The grand aim of UKR to bring L/DNR back on its terms is unattainable as well. If L/DNR is back then there's no fast track to the West - there need to be a national compromise. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/06/ukraine-better-without-donbass-costly-reconstruction-pro-russia-west/ Oversimplified and one-sided to a great extent, IMO, but to the point in many ways.
  3. Have a look if you have time. It's the first so direct a statement in an A-list newspaper saying that Poroshenko is untouchable whatever facts one may dig up. It's a pity since if Ze will not be able to clean up the corruption mess then his popularity will fade away quickly
  4. Mea culpa - I don't follow military developments so closely More interested in economy in general and Military Industrial Complex in particular. Sensing RUS elite sentiments - they're not particulary against UKR civil police keeping order in no man's land, they rather want to avoid UKR forces suddenly overtaking the positions that L/DNR vacated plus they want to have more or less a balance of responsibilities between UKR and L/DNR units. And the last but not the least they want the ceasefire to succeed and that can be achieved only through geniune disengagement. If lots of real combat troops are kept on no man's land (whatever side) then tensions will flare up sooner rather than later irrespective of intention of higher echelones of power. There's no less war fatigue on RUS side than it's in UKR. Seems like disengagement and POW exchange are the only two areas where an agreement is both possible and desirable for everyone. On all other issues the positions are world apart and there's no compromise in sight. Anyway the end of active phase of hostilities will be huge step forward for both sides.
  5. @Haiduk, I recall ORDLO side was very much against National Guard since "terrbats" like Azov were the core of NG. So it seems they decided to go easy in anticipation of the Paris talks. Hope they'll be able to extend disengagement zones to the whole front there. National Guard or National Guard it's significantly quieter in the disengagement zones. And seems disengagement and prisoner swaps are the only outcomes to expect. And what do you think about the yesterday's article in Gazeta Wybozca claiming anti-corruption investigations against Poroshenko's people are launched by Putin?
  6. @Haiduk, in case you know what was the end result of "volunteers patrolling the gray zone" conflict? Guess they're there but it was tacitly decided not to bring up the topic lest it poisons Normandy talks?
  7. I tried to find something about OPs regarding air guards but I wasn't able nothing more than a couple of casual mentions. Yet two things I saw again and again: Air guards are used outside of built-up areas but not in high threat urban environment Air guards when used are armed with M240s, they are not left with mere M4s @MikeyD, @DougPhresh, @Attilaforfun are these points valid?
  8. Somehow I miss the fun IMO Ukrainian approach to tank upgrades - mass modernization of line tanks - gives viable results at a fraction of cost when compared to hundreds of billions spent on a handful of Red Square parade Armatas.
  9. But that's still a bit illogical. RL BRM-3K manning consists of the three-men crew and three-men recce group. So BFC manning schema assigns first two men to the crew and the third man to the recce group. And out of the next three men one compliments the crew and the other two go into recce group. Kind of breaking down each team.
  10. Found out why, the "idle" man of the first three-men team is made a compulsory observer so that observer seat takes precedence over the leader seat.
  11. Stumbled upon a strange irregularity in taking up Ldr seat in BMP-3 and BRM-3K. If one uses a three-men team to man BMP-3 then after some hacking around one can force one of the three men to occupy the TC seat in normal BMP-3 but there's no way to do the same in BRM-3K. One man of the first three-men team will become an idle passenger in BRM-3K and only if one loads another team in BRM-3K then one of men of this other team will take up the TC seat. Very inconvenient - if one wants more battle awareness then one needs to waste another team.
  12. @Thewood1, do you happen to know any FM or text weighing pros and cons of an unbuttoned ride? May be some post-deployment write-ups?
  13. Russian OTH radar "Container". As it uses low-frequencies it can see stealth objects up to 2K km away. But certainly just a detection not a weapons grade track. https://topwar.ru/152227-rls-29b6-kontejner-v-mordovii-zastupit-na-boevoe-dezhurstvo-v-tekuschem-godu.html
  14. I've just had the same situation in CMBS as I wrote here. An infantry squad riding a Stryker saw an enemy infantry. And just like I said - in CMBS they do not unbutton automatically and try to shoot at the enemy. Only if you orders them to do so. That seems to be more logical behavior - after all APC is a battle-taxi first not a platform to deliver the wrath of fire on enemy heads. It seems Engine 4 CMSF2 is not quite Engine 4 I tried to play CMSF1 these days and CMSF2 feels much closer if not equal to its predecessor than to "real" Engine 4 CMBS. With CMSF2 I feel like being taken a decade back in terms of TacAI clumsy logic and stupid decisions
  15. Why simplified? On Khlopotov pics the thing behind the turret is not a dispenser - only two of them to the left and to the right of the turret just like on the trials pic. Moreover if you zoom in you'll see trials containers have more projectiles than on exhibition pic. And the containers are not equal between themselves. Looks like they are testing two container versions at the same time.
×
×
  • Create New...