CM Black Sea – BETA Battle Report - Russian Side

[Bil Hardenberger]

Why? Abrams has a large enough weak zone under the turret, every schoolboy in Russia who plays WoT knows about it. Under 1000m it is no problems to get this weak zone at static Abrams, trajectory is flat. In it geometrical center of the tank, at the end.

 

It's pretty easy to say that when you aren't faced with the behemoth in actual combat.. I bet that small window would be incredibly hard to target and hit when you are fearing for your life and faced with an actual fire breathing M1A2... and they rarely operate alone.  Heh.. I think there can be no doubt about the supremacy of the M1A2 SEP v2 on the battlefield, virtual in CM or real.. I would take it comfortably against any other potential opposing force tank in existence.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

This is someone who just used WOT as a training tool with a straight face, and then somehow linked Soviet stuff 1945 to being relevant to Russia 2015.  Think we can discard it pretty out of hand.

[Codename Duchess]

Why? Abrams has a large enough weak zone under the turret, every schoolboy in Russia who plays WoT knows about it. Under 1000m it is no problems to get this weak zone at static Abrams, trajectory is flat. In it geometrical center of the tank, at the end.

And what do you think about resistance of external equipment to hits? Abrams spotting equipment is not grandfather's hole in the commanders's turret. Will it survive a hit? Subcaliber round hit? HE hit? RPG? Good "Grad" shelling? I think, that Abrams armor is enough to save a crew and a tank from single random hit, but it is not enough to keep tank fighting. You all saw photos of "Tiger II" and "Ferdinand" from Soviet firing tests. Abrams will look like that after multiple hits.

Even if World of Tanks was the most realistic simulator, which it isn't even close to, the Abrams isn't in it. Also that precise of a shot under combat conditions won't happen. Real life isn't like a free to play video game. If you want a closer approximation, try Steel Beasts. You'll soon learn A) Abrams can take a pounding B ) Abrams is not invincible and C) Precise gunnery is impossible Edited January 10, 2015 by Codename Duchess

[womble]

In other words, frontally, 1-1, the Abrams is likely going to spot and hit first. And, it has a chance (but not a gurantee, and it may take damage) to survive a frontal hit from a T90, while the T90 has to get lucky to survive a frontal hit from the Abrams. So, the T90's main problem vs. an Abrams is making sure it can get a shot in. 1-1, that's looking tricky. 2-1 and you may be trading 1-1 in lost tanks or doing a little better. 3-1 and the T90s may be dominating the Abrams in frontal clashes.

Why? Abrams has a large enough weak zone under the turret, every schoolboy in Russia who plays WoT knows about it. Under 1000m it is no problems to get this weak zone at static Abrams, trajectory is flat. In it geometrical center of the tank, at the end.

What has a weak point under the turret got to say about spotting advantages? And doesn't that weak point represent the bit of the armour where that chance of survival got missed? Are you saying that the T-90 having to hit the weak spot makes the Abrams less well-protected than the Russian tank? And if the range is 1000m or less, how did you get to that range if the Abrams is static? Or are you saying that a moving T-90 will see the static Abrams before the Abrams sees the T-90? Reliably? And then you assume a gunner can automatically hit a precise targeting point. Or you're simply ignoring the fact that Macisle goes on to say:

...It's not that the Abrams has a large advantage over the T90. It's that the Abrams has several slight/marginal advantages (speed of spotting, speed of acquisition, accuracy, and better frontal armor) that add up and are multiplied as the number of Abrams increases.

In which of those areas of small advantage do you think Macisle is incorrect? Note that no one is saying the M1 is invulnerable or can't be destroyed by a T-90, just that the American system has an advantage over the Russian for any number of reasons, yet you appear to be arguing that the T-90 is at least even with the Abrams. Please say how the T-90's armour is less vulnerable to the Abrams, or how the T-90 will spot the Abrams faster, or something. Or bring another factor into the equation which counters the advantages that the Abrams measurably has. Rather than just spouting nonsense about WoT and how straightforward combat tank gunnery is.

[VladimirTarasov]

M1A2 has great FCS and a great Sabot round,  But I am not much convinced that the M1A2 has the Advantage over the T-90A and especially the AM variant which has Relikt. But the T-90AM will not be so common in the Russian army in the year 2017 because in 2016 the Armata will already be in service and T-90AM may be bought together with the Armata (T-14) which would be a great balance. The Armata will bring whole new armor into play but its understandable that the game makers cannot put it in because there is not even one picture of it.  But it would have been nice if they maybe put the advantage the T-90A(M) really does have against the M1A2. Like its 2A46-5 125mm cannon, Its advance FCS its got new navigation and communication systems.  M1A2 should be equal to the T-90A not be able to go against the T-90AM with a great chance, Also on the T-90 series and the T-72B3s has Nakidka a radar absorbing material which helps against thermals, tv seekers.  Making the T-90AM being able to be destroyed by the M1A2 Abrams by a large chance should not even be a thing.  Only if the M1A2 gets the first shot which would contuse the crew of the T-90AM because being hit by a very fast sabot will shake the tank very roughly.  The T-72B3 and T-90A and AM variants have thermals so spotting should be equal among these tanks not to mention their FCS is modern level.  

[antaress73]

T-90A and T-72B3 have no commander panoramic sight. T-90AM does so it gives a good spotting advantage to the T-90AM and no disadvantage against m1A2sepv2. Personnaly, i wish we never find out if one side is right or wrong. That would mean guys like Vadim and Scott would be in harm's way and nobody in his right mind would want that.

Edited January 10, 2015 by antaress73

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Eeeeeh.  The M829E4 is strongly suggested to have been tested against anything short of an actual T-90 parked on the tarmac somewhere, and the ERA stuff especially has likely been compromised at this point.  The M829A3 is believed to be largely unaffected by ERA, stands to reason the E4 wouldn't be strongly deterred either.  Under the ERA the T-90's armor is nothing special  

 

I've seen Russian optics.  They'd have been pretty strong for 1999-2001ish in the US Army, but they're still many years behind.  Thermals especially seem to have problems maintaining resolution while moving.  Additionally the Nakidka requires frequent cleaning or else the dirt/dust will cause it to become ineffective.

 

Given superior optics, one of the strongest armor arrays in the world, and a weapons system that'll plow through ERA and into the juicy still filled with explosives center of a T-90, it's pretty reasonable to say the T-90 operator better have backup or a better plan than throwing tanks at a M1A2.

 

Finally the odds of an operational T-14 in 2017 is pretty low.  Personally I think it's going to be a rehash of what happened with the T-95/Black Eagle/etc, but a two year turnaround on a totally new tank in the middle of some of Russia's worst economic times.....yeah.  Doubting we'll see it in time to make a game set two years from now.  T-90AM is already science fiction enough at this point (although no worse than the M1A2 APS at this point, the reasonably close to happening vs the T-14's "sometime soon I promise!").  

 

Addendum:

 

 

 

Personnaly, i wish we never find out if one side is right or wrong. That would mean guys like Vadim and Scott would be in harm's way and nobody in his right mind would want that. 

Edited by antaress73, Today, 10:24 AM.

 

Down for this sentiment.  As much as wargames are cool, the real thing is not something to be wished for.

Edited January 10, 2015 by panzersaurkrautwerfer

[antaress73]

There a lot more different factors than tank against tank in play at war. If that was the case, Germany woukd have won WWII, and remember that a lot of germany's superior tanks were not lost in combat but because of mechanical failures and logistic failures. The M1A2 is indeed a gas guzzling monster for that matter and efficient logistics in a war against Russia is not a done deal.

Edited January 10, 2015 by antaress73

[Splinty]

Welcome Vladimir. The T 90AM is an excellent tank, there is no doubt about it. But I think you are under estimating the M1A2 SEP v2 Abrams for one critical reason. It's not that a single Abrams has that great of an advantage over a T90AM in spotting or first round K-kill capability. It's that the Abrams is datalinked to every single friendly spotting asset on the battlefield. So that single Abrams and all his buddies know you are coming  and from where you are coming before you get there. The US military as a whole is way ahead in inter-communications capability, and has so much data capacity that it is very hard to significantly degrade by either jamming or destroying a particular asset or assets. They will simply be replaced or remaining units will pick up the slack. That is the US's great secret in combat.

[DMS]

womble, Codename Duchess, panzersaurkrautwerfer

 

I don't know how it is possible to understand my post in that way. ("Even if World of Tanks was the most realistic simulator, which it isn't even close to, the Abrams isn't in it.", e.t.c.) Probably language problem.

 

I said that weak spot of Abrams under the turret is widely reknown in Russia amongst everyone, who knows difference between BMP and T-72. And T-90 gunners would aim at that point. And that is near to the geometrical center of the tank, by the way.

 

Bil Hardenberger,womble

 

Sure. But it is far not invincible IRL. And T-90 also have "strong points", Abrams would have to aim at weak spots too.

I didn't say that Abrams is easy target or something like this.

 

It is like IS-1 against Tiger I think, very rough estimate, of course. Tiger upper front plate is vulnerable, gun mask hardly penetreateable, lower plate is protected by track and has larger slope.

 

And what do you think about external equipment? Would Abrams loose it's superior spotting advantages after several hits or close enough artillery shelling?

[antaress73]

The one thing that has been unaffected in Russia's budget during this wildly exagerrated but still serious economic downturn is the défense budget (especially the procurement funds). Their finance minister was shown the door for even suggesting cuts to it.

[DMS]

The one thing that has been unaffected in Russia's budget during this wildly exagerrated but still serious economic downturn is the défense budget (especially the procurement funds). Their finance minister was shown the door for even suggesting cuts to it.

 

Rouble exchange rate hardly can affect tank plants, I think.

[sburke]

Rouble exchange rate hardly can affect tank plants, I think.

think not?  Better think again.  Those tanks aren't built from legos.  They need components, the plants need components, the workers need to eat.  Building a strong military requires absolutely a strong economy.  The Allies beat Germany partly by the fact that they had economies that could adjust and far out produce the Reich.  The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of a poor economic model and an expensive military.  Russia's economy is more on par with Italy versus Germany and forget considering the US.  This is a game Russia has no hope of winning, to even attempt it ignores what is in the best interests of the Russian people.  They need a solid diversified economy that is growing as part of the world community, not a petro dollar dictatorship trying to play world power.  It will fail and collapse like every other country that has followed this path.  Unfortunately for Russians, they will have to start all over again from where they were 25 years ago.  Russia has lost a generation repeating the mistakes of an empire that will never come again.

[antaress73]

 

 

and has so much data capacity that it is very hard to significantly degrade by either jamming or destroying a particular asset or assets

 

 

 

According to many reports, two high end US UAV were brought down (hijacked) in Iran and Crimea (from a recon unit based in Bavaria) by having their datalinks compromised so I wouldnt be so sure about the jamming resistance of data sharing systems on either sides. Russia has one too called constellation (not as powerful)  actually and its in the game. I guess you are military and I dont question your knowledge of the system actually. 

Edited January 10, 2015 by antaress73

[Splinty]

According to many reports, two high end US UAV were brought down (hijacked) in Iran and Crimea (from a recon unit based in Bavaria) by having their datalinks compromised so I woulnt be so sure about the jamming resistance of data sharing systems on either sides. Russia has one too called constellation actually and its in the game.

Certainly individual components of the data system and even entire subsystems can be jammed/hacked/destroyed, but the entire data sharing system? Unlikely. Degraded maybe.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Splinty

[antaress73]

 

 

think not?  Better think again.  Those tanks aren't built from legos.  They need components, the plants need components, the workers need to eat.  Building a strong military requires absolutely a strong economy.  The Allies beat Germany partly by the fact that they had economies that could adjust and far out produce the Reich.  The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of a poor economic model and an expensive military.  Russia's economy is more on par with Italy versus Germany and forget considering the US.  This is a game Russia has no hope of winning, to even attempt it ignores what is in the best interests of the Russian people.  They need a solid diversified economy that is growing as part of the world community, not a petro dollar dictatorship trying to play world power.  It will fail and collapse like every other country that has followed this path.  Unfortunately for Russians, they will have to start all over again from where they were 25 years ago.  Russia has lost a generation repeating the mistakes of an empire that will never come again.

 

I was going to post a response to this but this would be off-topic. Let's go back to the topic at hand. The game  

[antaress73]

 

 

Certainly individual components of the data system and even entire subsystems can be jammed/hacked/destroyed, but the entire data sharing system? Unlikely. Degraded maybe.

 

Maybe you are right. Thus you must not agree with the design team's decision to switch it off completely with the Heavy jamming setting in the scenario parameters ?

[c3k]

Bil,

That Bloodboard update looks grim.

Awaiting (eagerly) your next...

Ken

[Sergei]

Sergei is slipping, all this talk of "Gavins" and he hasn't jumped on it yet!

 

No need to, I'm just enjoying the spectacle

[VladimirTarasov]

Armata will be shown off in parade of may 9 this year,  It will be in service by 2017 but it will be in large numbers in the year of 2020. What would be cool is if they could have put in Kornet-EM, it's the Kornet ATGM with a 8km range and has ability to fire two rockets in salvo at a tank which would bypass APS or totally overwhelm a tank.  As you know Kornets are very powerful, And that would also help Russian side if you ask me. It would be good if they could also put in the T-72B3M(or B4) Which is the T-72B3 with a panoramic sight and also I think it adds a few more things but I do not know.

 

Welcome Vladimir. The T 90AM is an excellent tank, there is no doubt about it. But I think you are under estimating the M1A2 SEP v2 Abrams for one critical reason. It's not that a single Abrams has that great of an advantage over a T90AM in spotting or first round K-kill capability. It's that the Abrams is datalinked to every single friendly spotting asset on the battlefield. So that single Abrams and all his buddies know you are coming  and from where you are coming before you get there. The US military as a whole is way ahead in inter-communications capability, and has so much data capacity that it is very hard to significantly degrade by either jamming or destroying a particular asset or assets. They will simply be replaced or remaining units will pick up the slack. That is the US's great secret in combat.

Thanks, And yes I know the U.S. is known for their organization in their wars,  But Russia also has its own sure not as good as the U.S.'s but its not going to be a major difference except for a few advantages the U.S. will get from that. The T-90AMs and the T-90As, T-72B3s also have data link capability.  In terms of spotting I think they should be equal, M1A2 has a commander panoramic site which the T-72B4 and the T-90AM have.  

[Splinty]

Maybe you are right. Thus you must not agree with the design team's decision to switch it off completely with the Heavy jamming setting in the scenario parameters ?

I don't agree with the total shutdown effect, no. My perspective is from having spent most of my last ten years in the US Army as a network tech. It's very hard for potential opponents to jam our stuff without also jamming their own. We can and do train to operate without it, but usually we can find a way to avoid being jammed in the first place.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Splinty

[Chops]

VladimirTarasov, on 10 Jan 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

Armata will be shown off in parade of may 9 this year,  It will be in service by 2017 but it will be in large numbers in the year of 2020. What would be cool is if they could have put in Kornet-EM, it's the Kornet ATGM with a 8km range and has ability to fire two rockets in salvo at a tank which would bypass APS or totally overwhelm a tank.  As you know Kornets are very powerful, And that would also help Russian side if you ask me. It would be good if they could also put in the T-72B3M(or B4) Which is the T-72B3 with a panoramic sight and also I think it adds a few more things but I do not know.

 

Thanks, And yes I know the U.S. is known for their organization in their wars,  But Russia also has its own sure not as good as the U.S.'s but its not going to be a major difference except for a few advantages the U.S. will get from that. The T-90AMs and the T-90As, T-72B3s also have data link capability.  In terms of spotting I think they should be equal, M1A2 has a commander panoramic site which the T-72B4 and the T-90AM have.  

 

Vladimir, thanks for posting and sharing your insight on tactics and equipment as a former Russian soldier.  How would you handle the situation that Bil and his Russian force is currently encountering?

[John Kettler]

VladimirTarasov,

 

Welcome aboard!

 

Not that you've been welcomed, I'd like to express my appreciation for your meaty post. That said, tell us everything about your VDV experience, starting with the Voenkomat (link here for those who don't know what that is) and carry on from there. Did the VDV ever implement the notion of dropping paratroopers in a kind of parachute and retrorocket equipped shipping container that simply rolled out the back of an An-12 and maybe the Il-76? I know this was being looked into circa the mid 1980s. Read the intel report which talked about it. Did you have to personally pack and sign your parachute? We have another Russian military veteran here who calls himself NaVaske. Believe he was Motorized Rifle. Look forward very much to seeing your take on matters all too often seen not only through a Western military-technical lens, but an even more confining American one. 

 

Since I'll never remember all the other commenters (a condition traceable to belly full of great barbecue, terrific beer I never had before and my very first Sachertorte), I'll mention a few things. ChrisND convincingly demonstrated the T-90AM can get frontal kills on the M1A2SEPV3 or whatever is in the game. In his multipart series on APS, he showed that at 750 meter range the T-90AM could wreak havoc on the Abrams. I don't recall whether there were any one-shot kills, but even the tanks that survived the first hit were so hurt they couldn't return fire. In seconds, every single Abrams in a platoon was either dead or nonfunctional. T-90AMs are formidable opponents, and I'd presume the Abrams would be facing something very like the M829A4. The Russians are no dummies and are very good at preparing for future US weapon developments.

 

Anyone know how Kornet-E (Kornet-EM a separate matter) would fare vs M1A2SEP frontally and from flank? Naturally, I'd welcome thoughts on Kormet-EM vs M1A2SEPV3 without APS. The discussion of ripple two assumes very close missile spacing, but is it close enough to beat the APS reaction cycle time to a target noticed mere tens of meters out? How does the US APS (Trophy?) stack up in terms of performance vs Arena?

 

The Gavin guy has some good arguments. In places. But the ones which aren't good can be real howlers. The flying tank thing is something the Russians tried and rejected. As dyed-in-the-wool as they were, seeing as how they pioneered mass airborne ops and were highly motivated to solve the problem of delivering supporting armor, the fact they gave up on it should've been at least a warning to him. Fortunately, he and the SecDef aren't bosom buddies. That I know of. Thank you for the status of Russian optics update based on direct observation. If we're talking drone losses, this is a scary analysis of the diversion and capture of the "Beast of Kandahar" RQ-170 Sentinel at Iran's hands. Am relieved to know it's unlikely jamming would kill US data linking outright, but I'd be worried about some variety (worse, arrays) of network intrusion. That sort of event could cause all sorts of problems, including the fatal sort.

Bil,

 

pnzrldr is again behind on the turns. Am dying to see what happened on his end when his tanks got pounded by all that fire from your guys.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited January 10, 2015 by John Kettler

[VladimirTarasov]

Vladimir, thanks for posting and sharing your insight on tactics and equipment as a former Russian soldier.  How would you handle the situation that Bil and his Russian force is currently encountering?

Well since a tank company of U.S. M1A2s and supporting Bradleys have arrived I will move my units into advantage points  and go defensive I am no longer in a situation to break through the enemy,  Now my goal will be to artillery enemy positions so they can lose morale and get hurt or destroyed.  I would use a team that can lase units to artillery and a team to support them equipped with RPGs and would try to stealthily expose enemy flanks and call in artillery support more accurately. After the massive barrage takes place I will move with the T-90AMs into tree lines and try to spot any other enemies.  After picking off enemies I will move my khrisantemas to a position overlooking my assault, My infantry will defend the flanks,  My tanks will now move in with the cover of the Khrisantemas and the support of infantry I will try to break his now weakened lines, I would use artillery without over thinking it because that will be the best way to weaken the enemy without taking major damage. 

[Rinaldi]

Bil,

That Bloodboard update looks grim.

Awaiting (eagerly) your next...

Ken

 

What, a post on the actual AAR? Stop it c3k, you're cheating the system!

 

At the risk of cross pollination, it sounds like "Speed" and "Power" have run into a few snags; hopefully you've shown him you still got some sting left in your tail.