Jump to content

VladimirTarasov

Members
  • Content Count

    817
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by VladimirTarasov

  1. 13 minutes ago, Erwin said:

    If I didn't have to pay for it (thru my taxes) I would agree.  The question is how many Uncon or Taliban could be bribed with $17 million to switch sides or turn in comrades?  Seems like a defense company boondoggle.

    I agree with you, but it worked so mission completed. 

  2. 2 hours ago, Erwin said:

    Aside from being named after a gateway town to the lovely Arches National Park in NE Utah, MOAB looks like a weapon that was desperately looking for mission to justify itself.  Can't use it if enemy has AA.  Doesn't burrow into the grounds to get at deep shelters. 

    I think CNN said it cost $17 million to kill a few dozen uncon.  Is that a sustainable ratio...?  :unsure:

    So, basically for use vs 3rd world oppos who are already living in the stone age, or... if you have a really serious gopher problem in your back yard...

     

    It did the job of multiple bombs in one go, even for an overpriced weapon I think it was a justifiable use that time. 

  3. 19 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    Unless the T-90/T-72 upgrades dry up it stands to reason the Russian Army intends to keep those platforms as capable as possible for a time to come.  This indicates that T-14 procurement is not going to be sufficient likely for some years to come. 

    My read is the T-14 as a program has managed to get away from reality.  When oil was good, and sanctions were not a thing it was likely a more reasonable goal.  However it faces more hurdles than are reasonable in the short term, thus the sudden interest in T-90Ms and other similar upgrades.

    Not sure, Russian procurement at this stage is very weird in what they are deciding. Upgrading BMPs to BMP-2Ms in some numbers, buying BMP-3 version when BMP-3M is out. But I'm pretty sure T-14s will be brought into production as declared, just I highly doubt it's going to reach the number goals anymore.

    19 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    In the narrower context of right now, they serve the twofold mission.  To the domestic audience they are a counter to the narrative that Russia is second best (or worse) in the tank business, and fits the wider narrative of Russia ascendant.  To the foreign audience it is part of the mission to make Russian conventional forces appear unstoppable/able to meet and defeat NATO in open combat.  The T-14's part in this is a key weak spot for that perception of capability has been the perception Russian tanks are inferior to NATO's (thanks in no small part to 1991).  

    Well propaganda of tanks are done by all sides. I'd hype my tank up too if I made the M1A3 abrams. But in this context the T-14 is not only just a propaganda tool, the Russian military does actually want to field these tanks and replace alot of tanks with them. 

    19 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    1. Disrupt NATO as much as possible.  Ultra nationalist, isolationist parties need as much power as possible, but ideally NATO would be put in a place that it'd be unable to effectively respond to rapid Russian military actions against former Soviet NATO members.
    2. Enable Russian nationalists in border areas with the Russian federation with weapons, training, or direct support to build enclaves to support future operations.
    3. Display military might and nuclear deterrence to give the impression of being militarily able to win any war it starts.  

    These are all force multipliers to conventional warfare that happens. Of course Russia will use "hybrid" tactics as well as conventional tactics. War against NATO wouldn't be numerically fair at all for Russia at this current stage. 

    19 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    Regardless until there's more serious, more realistic modernization efforts in Russia's conventional forces, it stands to reason that their decisive element/main focus has little to do with waves of Armatas, and more to do with greenmen . 

    T-14 is a serious modernization effort, set backs doesn't make it unrealistic. Of course no one denies Russia still has to replace the aged up T-72B fleet it has. But keep in mind even with mediocre tanks like T-72Bs, locally Russia would for some time have superiority on the ground in terms of numbers. Since it is connected to Europe. Meanwhile the US needs to ship in all the armored vehicles and its logistics which I'm not sure how long would take, but would offer Russia advantages until the Abrams hordes arrive. If we're speaking of a Russian invasion of Baltics or Ukraine of course. 

    I agree with most of your points. Just I think you're belittling the T-14 program more than it should be. It's definitely not only going to be used as a propaganda tool. They're very serious about implementing the tanks into service in large scale. Sanctions took their toll of course. 

  4. 2 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    The T-14, T-90M etc have more to do with information warfare than technical capability. I place very little faith in the ability to field something soon. 

    T-14s will be fielded but it wont replace the fleet for a while. I don't think the T-90 upgrades will happen, as the T-14 is way better. I think the T-90As are enough for current NATO tanks speaking comparison wise for the most part, but we lack the numbers the US tank fleet has (as in we lack advanced tanks) you guys have like 1.5-2K M1A2s upgraded to latest standards, not counting the M1A1s. Meanwhile our fleet is relatively older, and less advanced (speaking about the many T-72Bs we have... which lack any thermal and the cannon is mediocre) But considering Russia's wars for the most part will be regional, the current fleet is ehhh enough. 

    I mean seriously, Russia needs to upgrade the tank fleet. The T-72B3 upgrades are good and all but the commander still lacks a thermal imager, which is dumb as hell... Just the B3M upgrade would bring the Russian fleet's quality up. But nah they like the B3s more I;m assuming. LOL 

  5. Biggest problem with the unbalance is that all US vehicles like Bradleys and Abrams have laser warning systems. If there was an option to for example to make them how they are in standard service it would be great. The American military has superior sensor equipments without the doubt, and they are very organized in what they do, however sometimes the spotting really goes too far. I recall having a T-90 diagonally across a field, behind a tree line in another tree line. And a Javelin team just spots it in a short amount of time as if he was expecting there to be a tank there. 

    US forces are great of course, high tier military. But I still believe there needs to be some tweaking to spotting issues. At night the Russian side is at a severe disadvantage obviously, that can stay. But illumination rounds should be implemented that would help alot. Also if artillery damage could be tweaked higher like in real life, that would be great too. This game is still very playable. Developers did a good job.

  6. 1 hour ago, Holien said:

    If you are trying to draw comparison with Ukraine it is no where the same, not even in the same ball park.

    America has up to now done it's best to focus on Isis and not intentionally attacked Syrian forces. The forces involved have been minimal and capped. 

    Isis have attacked Europe and present and clear threat to Europe and America. So not unreasonable for forces to be dispatched against them as Syria has been acting as a safe haven for them. Especially as Syria can clearly not deal with Isis alone.

    Perhaps if the Syrian government had listened to people's grievances rather than murdering them this situation would not be where it is now...

    Off topic heavily, but I can't help it. I don't want to hear any "whataboutism" from anyone on here relating Syria to Ukraine. The U.S. and some of America's allies (Turkey, Saudi Arabia) have been training and arming groups fighting the Syrian government, and making the situation even worse in the country. If you deny that US and allies' weaponry havent fell into Islamic terrorist hands then you are full of it. 

    The U.S. is legally not allowed in Syria no matter what. Whatabout to Ukraine all you want, use the same standards for yourselves as well. US was in Syria before Russia was in eastern Ukraine. And keep in mind the Donbas is miniscule compared to the Syrian crisis. But of course morals of protecting Syrians by funding groups that partake in terrorist operations is morally just. And I'm sure the rebels haven't used gas canisters (originating from multiple nations) in wartime either. 

  7. On 3/6/2017 at 9:18 PM, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

    Perhaps we're just reading this whole thing wrong, and Eastern Europe would be safe if it simply got rid of all of it's apartment blocks?  Do Russian Soldiers go to the range and shoot at giant pop up apartments?

    I know this to be false simply because they're quite able to hit hospitals with a high degree of precision, but it's worth asking questions about.  

    Yes it is standard training for Russian servicemen of all branches to target apartments and hospitals. 

  8. 41 minutes ago, HUSKER2142 said:

    The best option for the modernization of BMP-2: it would be the installation of the complex sight PNK-2-42, the installation commander's panoramic sight and replacement of 30mm ammunition to a more modern. Fortunately for the 30 mm ammunition finally took and decided to replace it.After that BMP-2 will last for another 15 years as BMP 2nd category if there is kurganets-25 entered service.

    Лучшим вариантом для модернизации БМП-2 : было бы установка прицельного комплекса ПНК-2-42 , установка панорамный прицела командирского и замена 30мм боеприпасов на более современные . К счастью за 30 мм боеприпасы наконец то взялись и решили заменить .После этого БМП-2 сможет прослужить ещё 15 лет , как БМП 2й категории если когда то КУРГАНЕЦ-25 поступит на вооружение . 

    Bro in there it says "Berezhok" has been installed, so basically it's the same as the ones in the game. Panoramic sight for commander included.

  9. 8 hours ago, kinophile said:

    Given Rus EW and battlefield hacking capabilites/intentions, the last thing i'd put near UKR troops would be a remotely controlled mobile weapons platform....

    Could still be used good, but in event of a full Russian incursion most of those will be in bad shape. I doubt Russia has used it's full EW potential in Ukraine. 

  10. 2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    Sorry, I misunderstood.

    No of course no problem

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    The Maidan Revolution was extremely popular in Ukraine because both sides of the political spectrum were tired of a president that knew nothing but greed. Yanukovych stole over 26 billion from Ukrainian government, he was not a president, but a criminal and he was a criminal before rigging the election to become president in the Orange Revolution in 2004. He was a criminal, not some democratically elected angel. Maidan Revolution would not have happened if he did not try to extort money from Putin, during EU talks by attempting to create a Ramzan Kadyrov scenario. His greed was his downfall.

    Without arguing into detail; has it gotten better or worse corruption wise? Most Ukrainian buddies of mine will say it's gotten worse... Government officials are more corrupt than ever now. The people are suffering more than they use too. Anyways; you argue that the rebellion and Crimeans voting to be a part of Russia is unconstitutional where as they same could be said for the coupe... So I don't know if this is just double standard or just coloring to make Russia look like the only bad guy there. It's really getting tiring being called Kremlin bot or Russian hacker because of some truths that people can't accept. But anyways let's stop the political arguments as they lead to nowhere because it's basically double standards back and forth.

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    This is a population that does not exist, just Russia trying to stoke nationalistic sentiment by making a Ukrainian "boogeyman". 

    Actually the Russian government didn't make this nationalistic sentiment lol... Any Ukrainian I know from the east actually says this. So no, please no more "Kremlin super plan" .... God it's really agonizing. 

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    The election was rigged by every international standard. Votes were cast by Russian troops, not the people. 

    WHAT! LOL! please man not this far... Go speak to any Crimean about this and they'll laugh at you. 

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    This name was given to the Ukrainian defenders by the separatists. Ukrainians didn't create that name for themselves.

    Yes they did give it to their selves. Now separatist terrorists from mongloid Russia use it as a joke. 

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    They were able to vote for next Ukrainian president. There were plenty of anti-EU candidates. Putin doesn't want people know that, of course.

    Hmm... no. If you really think Mr.Poroshenko is not corrupt then nothing I can say. 

    2 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    Georgian army had many of the same problems as the Russian army, except like 10 times worse. Especially, command and control.

    Not very true mi amigo es falso. They had the upper hand in command and control tactically... Their brigades deployed forward into combat were trained by NATO countries, and were operating good equipment. Tactically they were equal to or depending on the unit in better command and control, until of course Russian units broke through their defenses and ran through their lines. Once command structure gets smashed they break apart either way. 

    There's a bunch of analysis of the war, you could see that the Georgians weren't actually lacking equipment wise much. Of course in the overall picture Georgia stood absolutely no chance against an army that had a million soldiers at the time.

  11. 45 minutes ago, HerrTom said:

    the Russian military has had some embarrassingly bad performances in the past, in Chechnya, Chechnya again

    OT but I have too. Russia performed badly in the first Chechen war, the second Chechen war was way more successful. 

    46 minutes ago, HerrTom said:

    Georgia

    Airforce had embarrassingly lost 7 planes 2 of them to friendly fire. The ground forces performed really good against Georgian troops, even without the 3:1 Ratio in battles, and arguably Georgian troops had better equipment.

    48 minutes ago, HerrTom said:

    Now in Ukraine we have poor views of the much improved Russian army since their performance is lumped in with their piecemeal application amongst the rebels against the most largest army in Eastern Europe.

    Well... When the Russian army did perform in Ukraine (counter-offensives) they had good performance, but again they weren't able to operate in their full function for obvious reasons. 

    49 minutes ago, HerrTom said:

    On the original topic: Is there any more news about what's happening?  Has the Christmas/New Years cease fire in the area held?

    Offensive from Ukraine has stopped, now it's just some fire coming out both sides.

  12. 12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    the airport battle is nothing the DPR should be proud of.  It is nothing Russians should look at and say "this is a shining example of success".  It was a poorly fought battle which is considered a success only because the truth is not being told.

    Well documented from DPR footage, the airport battle was majority fought by DPR units and not Russian troops. Of course there probably were lads that were in the advisory role, but from when I was keeping up with it, nothing "polite" about the forces there. It was a symbolic victory at the airport, as that was a part of the territories.

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    the DPR (and to a lessor extent LPR) forces are not capable of successful offensive action without significant direct aid from Russia.  Ukraine, on the other hand, is showing that it is a capable fighting force. 

    Well of course, on paper the Ukrainian military is better than DPR and LPR. They have more numbers in equipment and in all other aspects. But still, DPR could put up a fight victorious or not, they have been improving and there are some battles where they have been able to hold areas on their own. The improvements I've seen from the DPR till now is that they have been increasing offensive abilities, with all the drills they're doing over there now. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    This further reinforces my opinion that if the war goes "hot" again Russia will have to invest even more forces than it did in summer 2014 just to keep DPR/LPR from collapsing.

    Not more IMO. It depends on Russia's goal in such a scenario. If Ukraine goes ATO 3, and Russia would like to expand the territories then yes of course it will take more forces. But if it will be a goal to destroy the Ukrainian military and make minimal gains like last time, then the same amount of forces or even less could be used now, considering the separatists have been improving overall as well, and I believe with active reserves could muster 50,000 troops alone in those territories.  

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    They are mercenaries and mercenaries desert sinking ships. 

    I don't think you're being fair, they are obviously not mercenaries. Majority of the forces will be and are locals, volunteers are there as well but even if you think they are foreigners most Russians go there thinking they are defending their own lands and their own people. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    Ukrainians are well aware that Putin is the one behind all the murder and destruction in the Donbas as well as the theft of Crimea.

    Not all Ukrainians but some are also aware that the ousting of their president was unconstitutional, maybe that's why majority decided to leave Ukraine in Crimea. Not so sure if Ukrainians are doing better than they were with Yanukovych. It's only normal to take up arms against something you had no say in. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    I see indications that there's building resentment, distrust, and dislike of the Russian people as well as Putin.

    Western Ukrainians as we call them, don't really like Russians either way. If they'll dislike us for protecting a legitimate Russian uprising (The breaking of Ukraine's constitution by illegally ousting a president that was legally elected by all means) then so be it. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    Russia had considerable difficulties against a much poorer equipped, poorer lead, and poorer motivated Ukrainian forces than what exists today.  Certainly Ukraine will have more problems fighting full Russian units than it does Russian backed units, but Russia will have much more difficulty against Ukraine's forces compared to 2014 and even 2015.  If one looks at Debaltseve objectively, Russia has a lot of problems even then.

    Yes, however still DPR units were experiencing more problems than Russian units (obvious reasons) Debaltsevo was still a total victory.  Anyways not to say Ukraine's military is a push over, but I'm still very much convinced from my own personal analysis and experiences in the military, that Russian forces are superior to Ukraine's by all means. And a major problem I happen to find with Western analysis of Russia's forces in Ukraine is that they assume DPR forces to be actual Russian ground forces. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    If Russia invades Ukraine in force there will be lots of Cargo 200 coming back to Russia.  And for what?  To keep Ukraine a slave state of Russia.  I hope you do not take pride in that.

    I wouldn't take pride in a war against our historical brothers. I'm already disappointed that they let politics destroy our relations... Supporting far right groups during Maidan revolution... EU and US leaders shaking hands with them, approving them into power while breaking Ukraine's own constitution. It's a stable country now of course, all the dust settled down, but it's not looking good for them economically at all. 

    12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

    Yes, it's one of the things we would like to fix, but I'm not sure it is possible.  The game was written with only two possible configurations... mounted or dismounted.  We do not have any support for two different types of mounting.  I don't know if the code can be reshaped to support it.

    If it's not possible no shame on you of course ;) I know how hard coding can be, I can't even imagine how hard it is for game development. If you can reshape the code for it, that would be excellent. 

  13. 1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

    That is a far more accurate account of the battle than what is said from the DPR side where coal miners and taxi drivers using sharp sticks managed to defeat the huge Ukrainian army with absolutely no help from Russia.

    Well in the beginning that was true, I remember check points with bats. But that's why Locals without any support got destroyed by Ukrainian forces. An army is definitely way better equipped than make shift local units, or volunteers from say Russia without any military standards. 

    This battle in Svetlodarsk arc doesn't really show much, the DPR hasn't been allowed to do much even with the Ukrainians storming their checkpoints, and advancing into the town Novoluhans'ke. The Ukrainians have successfully made the outer defense in that perimeter retreat tactically, but the casualties on both sides are around equal if we want to be fair. Most due to shelling... Other battles where actual offensives be it from Ukrainians or DPR with or without Russian motor rifles have resulted in far more devestating battles. Ones where pictures of popped up tank turrets and BMPs and BTRs shredded have resulted, those are decisive battles. 

    Anyways, Ukrainians have great soldiers they are still our Slavic brothers after all ;). But their effectivity let alone command is still poor for the most part(compared to Russian army), if we are to take analysis of Debaltsevo to heart. They have capable units of course, but against Russian troops especially if they came in with full combat arms support (fully fledged units) I don't think they'd be doing as good as against Locals and volunteers with limited Russian support, just like the August counter-offensive shows. Anyways enough of me rambling, I'm really bored I promised someone a battle but my computer is acting up... :) I really want to play 4.0 I heard you guys made it pretty good ;) but please please please sometime in the future add the ability to sit my poor Russkii and Ukrainian troops on top of those thin soviet "junk" as panzer would call it. :D 

  14. 3 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:

    Bit more than a battalion tbh.

    So 75 brigades/regiments/detachment  present according to inform napalm? Did I miss the push for Kiev or? ^_^ Yes Russian military was and is in Donbas, but those numbers are complete BS by any regard. The evidence presented by the video needs to be re analyzed... From those units maybe individuals have been present in form of at most battalion/company/platoon/squad... And we need to verify every single unit infonapalm has put forth in that video to verify those units exist and aren't some BS units. 

    And my battalion remark was for the airport battle, where Ukrainians believe they were fighting hordes of Russian special forces and motor rifle troops, the best of the best lol... 

  15. 1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

    Nominally under Ukarine control, actually was in grey zone. And this town was a gate for contrabanda. Also at south outskirt situates huge pigfarm, which was supplying DNR with meat. Some military are writing, that control over this source of food also have played some role in decision to enter in the town.

    I see why it was important than, I appreciate the info yet again. So the Ukrainian offensive is over now correct?

×
×
  • Create New...