Vanir Ausf B
-
Posts
9,587 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Vanir Ausf B
-
-
37 minutes ago, sburke said:
hit their bases. Soooo we need to help with the info and the weapons to ... hit their bases.
That's well-within Storm Shadow range. Not sure why it hasn't been hit.
-
3 hours ago, dan/california said:
The whole thread is worth your time. We need to push stuff to Ukraine fast enough to stay ahead of the curve. The fact that there are not F-16s making Ka-52s too scared to come within 50 miles of the front line is exhibit A. Not equipping the stuff we sent with APS is example B.
Different article in the NYT talking about the evolution of Russian tactics (paywalled, I assume).
___________
American officials acknowledge that Russian tactics have improved. But those officials believe, based on battlefield intelligence reports, that the success in Bakhmut was largely because of Wagner’s willingness to throw prisoners into the fight, no matter the cost in lives.
But the soldiers on the ground saw something else happening.
Soldiers fighting for Ukraine in Bakhmut described a fight that ended much differently from how it began. Prisoners were not as prevalent. Instead, they said, Wagner’s professional fighters coordinated ground and artillery fire on Ukrainian positions, then quickly outflanked them using small teams.
As Ukrainian territory shrunk to a final few blocks, for example, Russian forces saturated a Ukrainian-held building with artillery. Moments after they retreated, Russian troops were inside.
“The Ukrainians just couldn’t keep up,” said one foreign legion soldier. To counter Russia’s strategy, Ukrainian forces wired buildings to explode, detonating them as they retreated.
The March mission report shared with The Times alluded to this type of enemy: “Assumed to be Wagner group,” the report read. “Evidence of being well-trained.”
“Used effective fire and maneuver,” it continued, describing “the best equipped Russian soldiers.”
But prowess in one area or during one mission has not yet translated widely. And American officials say that while Russia has adapted its tactics, its troops overall are not growing more sophisticated.
________
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/17/world/europe/russia-ukraine-war-tactics.html
-
Guardian article. The drone operator interviewed says the offensive is going better than territorial gains would suggest, but acknowledges that Russian helicopters are a problem.
________
... despite the gradual progress so far, the group argue it is going better than the slow rate of village capture might suggest.
“Maybe it is not very obvious because we are not moving very fast, but we destroy equipment, tanks, everything,” says Spielberg.
Gennadiy also describes determined opponents, notably using some weapons for which his brigade had no effective counter. “There are constant attacks from helicopters, three or four times a day,” he says, describing the Russians’ deadly use of Ka-52 attack craft in and around the frontline, and admitting they are difficult to shoot down from the ground, eluding his own efforts on the battlefield.
_______
-
Looks like two targets were hit.
Not sure how he determined they were Bradleys, given the crappy video quality.
-
14 minutes ago, dan/california said:
We send the Israelis several billion dollars a year, they could be encouraged if we set our minds to it.
That's... a whole different discussion. Suffice to say the US relationship with Israel has become entangled with US domestic politics to the extent that the Administration has limited room to maneuver. It also doesn't help that Netanyahu and Biden despise each other.
-
3 hours ago, dan/california said:
Also allow me to add that a BIG part of the failure of this attack is due to NATO supplying Ukraine older kit they wouldn't go to war with. If the vehicles in that attack had APS, they drive right thru and start killing Russians.
I feel your frustration. Anyone who has played Black Sea knows APS is a literal game changer. In the game. This would be the ideal conflict to test if that is also true in reality.
But I'm not sure we can place the blame entirely on "NATO". All of the APSs presently deployed on NATO vehicles are made by Rafael and it is unlikely Israel would approve the re-export.
-
1 hour ago, Baneman said:
Plus, maybe they've had that kind of footage all along, but now that it's Western kit, it's worth them posting it.
Not likely. But it is likely that many of these strikes are not resulting in total losses. Lancets are typically guided to their target by a spotter drone. If no spotter drone footage is provided showing a burning vehicle the vehicle probably did not burn.
-
50 minutes ago, Simcoe said:
Also, seems like there was a lot of footage of Russian lancet drones hitting air defense systems this past month. I wonder if the attacks on Kiev and attrition at the front are hampering their ability to provide AA cover.
Could be. While I take it with a massive heap of salt, Rybar said as much.
-
47 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:
Julian is having predictable meltdown. Like in the clock.
"Predictable" indeed
-
A RUSI article on JDAM vs. Russian EW.
Jamming JDAM: The Threat to US Munitions from Russian Electronic Warfare
-
17 minutes ago, dan/california said:
Many of his complaints seem valid, although a great many of them seem to have many historical parallels when a country/army tries to do to much with nit enough in a screaming hurry. Of course not doing things in a screaming hurry involves losing the war.
That is a good take on it.
-
Biden's just carrying on a tradition.
-
Ok, enough drone talk. How about tanks!
Illia Ponomarenko has a good article on the M1 Abrams Ukraine is receiving and the associated technical challenges.
_________
According to the Kyiv Independent's sources, the Ukrainian military expects to get the M1A1SA variant, which confirms earlier reports by U.S. media.
The SA ("Situational Awareness") variant notably features FBCB2 communications platform for tracking hostile and friendly units nearby and a thermal scope for a .50 caliber machine gun, which improves the tank's effectiveness against hostile infantry in urban warfare.
According to Kyiv-based think tank Defense Express, the fact that, against expectations, Ukraine gets the older M1A1 version of the tank is not bad news. The M1A1 SA version Ukraine will get is generally as good as the M1A2 SEPv2 modernization introduced in the 2010s
However, Ukraine’s tanks will not come equipped with third-generation depleted uranium armor because of the U.S. export ban on such...
..."When you compare the Abrams to other western tanks, it's just a very difficult task — not for the crew but for those who support it," says Mark Hertling, the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General and the former commander of the 1st Armored Division....
And in this regard, from Hertling's perspective, the Ukrainian military currently has shortcomings with supply chain management. This remains the biggest concern for the retired general, who is deeply supportive of Ukraine's war effort.
For instance, when it comes to engine repairs, M1s variants are powered by a singular integrated propulsion unit titled Full-Up Power Pack (FUPP), a combination of a Honeywell AGT1500 turbine engine and an Allison X1100-3B transmission.
And since it's a jet engine, air filters must be cleaned every 12 hours via startup and cool-down procedures.
"All those things can be taught to the crew, but if ever they make a mistake — and they will — it blows a million-dollar engine that can't be repaired in the field," Hertling says.
"It has to be taken out of the vehicle, shipped back over the supply line, and replaced with a new engine. You can ask why can't it be repaired in the field. I guess if you have a bunch of jet mechanics in your field location where the tanks are, you could. But that's not what the U.S. military does. We pull the engine and ship it back to depot-level maintenance, and they repair both the engine and the transmission."
_________
https://kyivindependent.com/what-will-it-take-for-ukraine-to-maintain-and-operate-the-m1-abrams/
-
10 minutes ago, Haiduk said:
Reportedly the distillery was hit in Ostachevo, suburb of Moscow
Perfect. Take away the vodka and there WILL be blood in the streets.
-
-
5 minutes ago, Holien said:
Just watching the BBC report I don't think the drones had any explosive on them, it could just be a big stunt. The Russians have not shown any serious damage and the media have a bit easier access to film any serious damage in Moscow.
We will have to see what the drones were to understand the possible range and any possible payload, but its looking like it was more of a psychology opportunity than a serious military hit.
It also looks like the number of drones was closer to 5 than 25.
-
2 hours ago, Astrophel said:
What is Nato to do? My instinct is to confront Turkey immediately with a demand to allow Swedish and Ukrainian accession or leave. Erdogan will concede in my judgement while the Turkish electorate will be made sharply aware that Nato membership under Erdogan is not a given.
2 hours ago, womble said:And risk him running into Putin's arms? The man's almost as delusional a narcissist as Vlad is, and has all the autocratic tendencies. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that he cuts his nose off to spite his face. Then you have to do the same to Hungary, with the same, though slightly lower risk.
Even if doing so were feasible (it is not) placing the Turkish Straits outside of NATO control would be a huge own goal.
-
2 hours ago, danfrodo said:
3. The strikes on Kyiv are dreadful and despicable but militarily it does have a positive side: all those missiles weren't hitting things that could disrupt the UKR campaigning season. So in the end it's just more murder but does not hinder what's coming.
I think this is mostly true but we should remember that we don't see or hear about everything consequential that happens.
-
2 hours ago, NamEndedAllen said:
A far more persuasive reason for the Soviet economic decline is the rigid "command economy" imposed by Stalin in the early 1930s.
That, plus the collapse of oil prices.
-
4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
This is also the way I think it works, but if I understand Artkin's post correctly, his vehicle's spotting is being penalised for being inside a tree square and looking out?
From the screenshot provided it looked to me like the vehicle was not on the edge of the trees. But it's hard to say for sure from that angle and he didn't specify.
-
2 hours ago, Dynaman216 said:
I've had a tank hit trees in adjacent grid square, or is this for mortars and indirect fire weapons? I don't think I ever remember them hitting something in the firing location.
It's for all units.
To satisfy my own curiosity I set up a test consisting of T-34/85s area firing through trees of one, two and three action spots deep. I let them fire all HE ammo -- 39 rounds each. All 117 rounds passed through the trees. My conclusion is that the safe zone is even larger than I thought, at least 24 meters and probably more.
I can't explain what you saw. Either you were mistaken or it was a rare bug.
-
12 minutes ago, PEB14 said:
I quote you…
That would mean that the firer is ALWAYS safe. For flat trajectory HE weapons, it means that premature detonation endanger only friendly units placed in tiles with trees beyond 8 meters. Correct?
For balistic fire like mortars, it would mean that you NEVER can endanger friendly troops. Correct?Correct. And the more I think about it I feel the distance is more like 16 meters. It's been a long time since this was brought up so the details are vague in my head. But the gist of it is shooters don't have to worry about hitting themselves. But friendly forces down range absolutely can be hit by friendly fire of 12.7mm or larger.
14 minutes ago, womble said:Maybe I'm thinking about buildings then...
Yes, I don't think the same rule applies to buildings although I have never seen a unit hit the building they are shooting from. But I have seen grenades bound back to the thrower.
-
Nah. Outbound fire ignores all vegetation within a small radius of the shooter, on the x and y axes. IIRC it's 8 meters, but don't quote me.
-
16 hours ago, AlexUK said:
It does seem like a problem to me. Isn’t it advised tactically to place your armour within the tree line when setting up ambush positions? If CM current setup means this is penalised then it would be a problem. Intuitively you would expect the opposite to occur. The ambusher spots the moving target in open ground much easier and the ambushed having a very hard time spotting the stationary, in shadow, and partially concealed by foliage ambusher.
Trees in action spots between units can block or degrade LOS but trees in the same action spot as the unit(s) never do, as far as I can tell. So your tank can see fine out of a tree line so long as it is on the edge.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted