Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ikalugin

Vostok-2018

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

Sadly no sight of BMP-3Ms, T-80BVM or even T-90s. I did catch a glimpse of a T-72B3 obr. 2016. But way more T-72BVs, which I haven't seen in a while. BMP-2s are still kicking it seems. Also saw a troop or two of Shilkas. All these relics look clean, functional and ready to rock, it looks to me. Which makes this look less like a glorified dress rehearsal and an actual military training exercise. 

Eastern distict. Best things are given to western districts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

I thought the 72 chassis was an overkill for an MLRS. 

Doesn't that depend entirely on what you want the MLRS to do? If you need it to follow in or behind the assaulting formation it makes sense to share the chassis hull protection. 

PS - to add value to the topic, impressive flaunting of support elements. 😁

jteXS97.jpg

Edited by BTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ikalugin said:

In some ways this is true, Chinese have deployed their top of the line Ground Forces with the new Type99a2 tanks and other modern AFVs while the bulk of our Eastern MD uses older equipment, such as the T72B with K1 era. 

ZTZ-99 "a2" isn't new, its 2008, ZTZ-99A is the new MBT they are using which is not deployed in Vostok

16 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

 

Welcome to the forums! I think I saw Wiki mention the 155 version which blew my mind. 122mm seems more practical. The 08 also looks more armoured than the 82... do you know what level of protection it has?

 

Ikalugin convinced (dragged) me into this forum to tackle the chinese questions but thanks nonetheless, Yes, i've seen the wiki claim but a lot of info out there in the internet about chinese stuff is wrong or falling wrong speculations....     

as for Armor level, I'm can't say much about it other than it is a mix of Steel and Ceramic "Composite" kind of armor, I think it can withstand 23mm AP from the front from 1 click out and .50BMG from 100m in the side....     Ah don't quote me on this, this is from discussions i had and we didn't really touch upon it too much because its an APC....

14 hours ago, ikalugin said:

Chinese servicement claimed that they got those recently and only had one year to train with the new gear.

 

This is fairly common in china as Production of new gear despite how large it is due to chinese industrial capacity is not fast enough to modernize the PLA at an effective rate due to the PLA's large size (Too large, they have too many tank divisions for one)     I'm guessing the brigades sent to vostok was recently re-equipped last year with the ZBL 08s

Edited by Rowdyhorse4
update

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rowdyhorse4 said:

 as Production of new gear despite how large it is due to chinese industrial capacity is not fast enough to modernize the PLA at an effective rate due to the PLA's large size (Too large, they have too many tank divisions for one)     I'm guessing the brigades sent to vostok was recently re-equipped last year with the ZBL 08s

I think i can word it better in a less confusing manner.... 

Chinese MilArms complex is already ******* out a lot of tanks thanks to China's industrial capacity however due to budget restrictions and how large the PLA is, its not ******* out new gear at a fast enough and effective rate....

A lot of tank brigades are being turned to "combined arms" mech brigades or Motorized to size down the tank force size....   
PLAGF is simply too large and the PLAAF/PLAN also suffers from this too...  PLAN to a lesser extent however. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DMS said:

It is replacing RPK.

Why replace RPK with a belt-fed 7.62x54R? When RPK could use AK-mags and parts?

I thought they were making RPK-16 the new squad automatic weapon?

10 hours ago, BTR said:

Doesn't that depend entirely on what you want the MLRS to do? If you need it to follow in or behind the assaulting formation it makes sense to share the chassis hull protection. 

PS - to add value to the topic, impressive flaunting of support elements. 😁

jteXS97.jpg

I guess it doesn't hurt, especially when you got plenty of 72 hulls lying around. Good chassis for support vehicles.

Are those Sprut airborne tank destroyers in the middle, past the PLA trucks?

chinese-forces.jpg?w=809

Type-86s, eh? 

Edited by DerKommissar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

Are those Sprut airborne tank destroyers in the middle, past the PLA trucks?

Yes. I counted seven vehicles which is a bit non-standard as each para-regiment gets issued a battery of six. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

Why replace RPK with a belt-fed 7.62x54R? When RPK could use AK-mags and parts?

Because there is no particular need for a slightly steadier 545 platform in the squad if you have a proper MG. RPK replacement is nothing new. It is a trend that started some decades ago that has accelerated with the 2008 reform. Seeing RPKs in their regular role is an anomaly, they are relegated to security detachments and marines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the TOS-1 question: I read on one of the Syria War sites that the MBT (T72/T90) chassis was so that the vehicle had the protection level to be brought up close enough to direct fire thermobaric warheads at bunkers/cellars/entrances to tunnels/lower levels of massive concrete buildings, particularly in an urban setting, where any lighter armoured vehicle would be vulnerable and enemies in these locations are very hard to take out without risking troops. I think also that it gives the arty better cross-country mobility and there are lots of T72 chassis lying around so it is an easy mod.  Sorry I can't remember where I read this, it was a few years back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, if a bunch of Uncons have fortified the lower level of a multi-storey car park and it has underground areas, as many have, raining arty down would be absorbed by the upper layers, and the enemy could retreat underground to safety. It would be hell to assault with infantry.  I think that's the sort of scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

Why replace RPK with a belt-fed 7.62x54R? When RPK could use AK-mags and parts? 

I thought they were making RPK-16 the new squad automatic weapon?

Because... It is belt-fed and 7,62x54, I guess. :) Because of firepower.

RPK-16 was made for special forces, as I know. To clear buildings with short barrel. (Though there is version with long barrel)

Edited by DMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5860287_original.jpg

To return to that map from original presentation, you can note that the operation is 21 squares broad and some 11 squares tall, this translates into 105 and 55 km respectively. Depth appears to be around ~70km, frontage ~60km.

5859799_original.jpg
While this is not broad enough for simulating an operation in Ukraine in it's entirety (after all training grounds are finite in size) the general staff wargames around the Cugol grounds component may have been, as other maps imply.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2018 at 7:02 AM, DMS said:

Because... It is belt-fed and 7,62x54, I guess. :) Because of firepower.

RPK-16 was made for special forces, as I know. To clear buildings with short barrel. (Though there is version with long barrel)

I get firepower. Yet, doesn't that mean the squad has to lug around 7.62x54R boxes with them? Is it worth for VDV guys, especially when ammo is an issue?

I guess when you have vehicles that carry the ammo near-by it's not an issue.

18 hours ago, BTR said:

Wearing full NBC gear and spraying vehicles. My definition of a **** day.

Yeah, everyone I talked to says NBC drills are nightmares. Praying that it'll never not be a drill.

airborne-repelling.jpg?w=809

Are those cameras mounted on the wings + tail -- or some sort of EW thing?

Edited by DerKommissar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are those cameras mounted on the wings + tail -- or some sort of EW thing?

Yes, they are part of the direction IR ECM package, advert of the export variant:

It is increasingly common for the new helicopters.

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2018 at 12:11 PM, DerKommissar said:

Why replace RPK with a belt-fed 7.62x54R? When RPK could use AK-mags and parts?

 

Reads like ad copy, but offers some details:

Russian PKP Pecheneg 6P41 gunfire is twice more efficient than PKM 

Posted On Thursday, 06 September 2018 13:57 

Despite outstanding characteristics of Kalashnikov machine gun and its upgraded PKM option Russian weapons producers faced a problem. The Afghan campaign exposed the necessity to arm platoons with additional heavy machine guns. The decision to replace post-war RP-46 by RPK (Kalashnikov hand-held machine gun) was not very successful, the Zvezda broadcaster said.

Russian_PKP_Pecheneg_6P41_gunfire_is_twi
PKP Pecheneg machine gun (Picture source: Russian MoD)

RPK is built with Kalashnikov rifle units and lacks firepower. The army preferred to have PK. A similar situation was reported during the Chechen campaign. The focus on PK as a hand-held machinegun produced new requirements to the weapon. It was necessary to engage in intensive fire without pauses to cool the barrel. There is no time to cool or replace it battle.

Tsniitochmash Institute began to deal with the problem in 1995.

Several R&D were necessary to determine the factors which decrease machinegun fire efficiency. The problem was the incorrect temperature balance of PK barrel. Uneven heating displaces the center of impact. The designers changed the barrel contour and made it heavier to promote even heating.

The prospective Pecheneg machinegun has a barrel jacket and finning to improve heat discharge. It allows the gun to fire 600 cartridges non-stop. The machinegun can fire up to 1,000 cartridges per hour without losing its characteristics. None of the same class weapons enjoys such a capability. The replaceable barrel is no longer necessary. The barrel jacket performs additional functions. It increases the rigidity of the construction and decreases barrel fluctuations. It rules out any contact of the barrel with the legs which promotes close grouping of shots. The jacket has a handle to carry the gun which bars heated air that triggers blaze from sighting devices.

Pecheneg fire efficiency is 1.7-1.9 times higher than PKM although it has up to 80 percent of PKM units. The production tools are compatible and simplify the transition of the army to the new gun.

Despite good characteristics Pecheneg upgrade and introduction dragged because of a lack of finances. Production was launched at the mechanical plant in Kovrov in 1999 and the machineguns were supplied to the army and police engaged in the counterterrorist operation in Chechnya. Pecheneg was accepted into service in 2001 under 6P41 index. The Russian military engaged the gun in the armed conflict in South Ossetia in 2008. 

The process of rearming units with modern “Pecheneg” machineguns of various modifications has finished in the EMD’s combined-arms army, located in Amur, Jewish Autonomous region and Khabarovskiy Krai.

Pecheneg upgrade is ongoing. In 2013 an assault modification appeared for commandos. The gun is designed by bull-pup operating scheme with Picatinni rails to mount various sights, a light, laser ranger and other devices, the Zvezda reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, akd said:

Reads like ad copy, but offers some details:

Russian PKP Pecheneg 6P41 gunfire is twice more efficient than PKM 

Posted On Thursday, 06 September 2018 13:57 

Despite outstanding characteristics of Kalashnikov machine gun and its upgraded PKM option Russian weapons producers faced a problem. The Afghan campaign exposed the necessity to arm platoons with additional heavy machine guns. The decision to replace post-war RP-46 by RPK (Kalashnikov hand-held machine gun) was not very successful, the Zvezda broadcaster said.

Russian_PKP_Pecheneg_6P41_gunfire_is_twi
PKP Pecheneg machine gun (Picture source: Russian MoD)

RPK is built with Kalashnikov rifle units and lacks firepower. The army preferred to have PK. A similar situation was reported during the Chechen campaign. The focus on PK as a hand-held machinegun produced new requirements to the weapon. It was necessary to engage in intensive fire without pauses to cool the barrel. There is no time to cool or replace it battle.

Tsniitochmash Institute began to deal with the problem in 1995.

Several R&D were necessary to determine the factors which decrease machinegun fire efficiency. The problem was the incorrect temperature balance of PK barrel. Uneven heating displaces the center of impact. The designers changed the barrel contour and made it heavier to promote even heating.

The prospective Pecheneg machinegun has a barrel jacket and finning to improve heat discharge. It allows the gun to fire 600 cartridges non-stop. The machinegun can fire up to 1,000 cartridges per hour without losing its characteristics. None of the same class weapons enjoys such a capability. The replaceable barrel is no longer necessary. The barrel jacket performs additional functions. It increases the rigidity of the construction and decreases barrel fluctuations. It rules out any contact of the barrel with the legs which promotes close grouping of shots. The jacket has a handle to carry the gun which bars heated air that triggers blaze from sighting devices.

Pecheneg fire efficiency is 1.7-1.9 times higher than PKM although it has up to 80 percent of PKM units. The production tools are compatible and simplify the transition of the army to the new gun.

Despite good characteristics Pecheneg upgrade and introduction dragged because of a lack of finances. Production was launched at the mechanical plant in Kovrov in 1999 and the machineguns were supplied to the army and police engaged in the counterterrorist operation in Chechnya. Pecheneg was accepted into service in 2001 under 6P41 index. The Russian military engaged the gun in the armed conflict in South Ossetia in 2008. 

The process of rearming units with modern “Pecheneg” machineguns of various modifications has finished in the EMD’s combined-arms army, located in Amur, Jewish Autonomous region and Khabarovskiy Krai.

Pecheneg upgrade is ongoing. In 2013 an assault modification appeared for commandos. The gun is designed by bull-pup operating scheme with Picatinni rails to mount various sights, a light, laser ranger and other devices, the Zvezda reported.

More dakka? I guess I can dig it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×