DreDay
-
Posts
477 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DreDay
-
-
Russia's current tank force would be perfectly adequate if it weren't hell bent on fighting wars of expansion along its border. If your tank isn't performing up to expectations in Ukraine may I suggest you simply withdraw from Ukraine. Problem solved.
I am having a bit of a hard time grasping your point. For one thing - I have not seen any evidence of Russian T-72Bs/BAs/B3s not performing up to an expectation. These are all battle-tested machines with strengths and weeknesses that are very well known. Now the expectation of their combat effectivenes might be quite low compared to M1A2, but that is to be expected. Can you point to any particular unexpected issues that were encountered by Russian Tanks (let's keep this discussion strictly to Russian forces proper) in Donbas? I seriously doubt it...
Also, you (or I) might want Russian regulars to stay out of East Ukraine all together, but I fail to see how their tank performance has anything to do with it.. I mean, our Humvees had performed quire poorly in Iraq prior to being up-armored. Does that mean that we should have stayed out of Iraq? Again, I personally would have preferred that; but that sure as hell has nothing to do with Humves.
-
I agree. Everything is relative. And relative to Russia's most likely adversaries the T-72B3 is quite good. Which is one reason why I keep harping on the economic foolishness of investing so much money in Armata. The most likely use of Russia's tank force is beating up on its non-NATO neighbors. The T-72B3 is superior to almost everything else out there, the T-90 even more so. So why spend 2-4 times as much and not significantly change the equation?
Steve
Right. I would definitely agree with your point if talking about the immediate future (i.e. next couple of years). But what happens when Russia's unfriendly non-NATO members get Leo2s or maybe even M1A2? More importantly – how long can the Russians keep selling T-90As to their foreign customers? Another decade at most, I would imagine – and what then?
Russians need to advance their military industrial complex (which is one of their few progressive and competitive industries). It is absolutely essential for them to design and be ready to build next generations of core weapon platforms. However, I do agree with your point that (rationally speaking) - they should not feel any strong press to start fielding them for now.
-
Politics has consigned comrade T-80 to the history books I am afraid.
Looks like T-90AM we have ingame will just be designated T-90M by the MoD then. The turret on Proriv-3 model and 3d model has a different hatch configuration than T-90AM.
The future of T-80s in RF Armed Forces is still a bit ambiguous. A recent interview by a commander of 2nd Guards Tomanskaya Division seemed to indicate that they are expecting to get latest upgrades of T-80s in a near future... Still though, I don't believe that such upgrades have been fielded (or even presented) so far..
-
well all i know is if BS is even a 75% approximation of reality T72B3 s are terribad tanks. like really terribad. Steve any plans for T80s in a module? cmon man..
"Terribad" compared to what? To a basic T72B? To a basic T-64BV, even to a T-64 Bulat? I think not! It is definitely inferior to T-90A/AM; but that is also why it costs half as much. It is certainly vastly inferior to M1A2, but again - it cost 1/4 of what our MBT sells for. T-72B3 is a very low-key and relatively cheap update that significantly boosts the vehicles FC, and protection. We will have to see if T-72B4 goes into service this year, as it is much closer to T-90A in its capabilities and components..
-
I believe the point of putting suppressors on sniper rifles isn't to make them quiet or stealthy close-in, but to make them more difficult to locate at longer ranges. Even the best suppressors won't make a rifle totally silent, and a high-power rifle round (like .300, .308, or .388 - even .223) will still make a "crack" as it passes, but they do reduce the muzzle report (as opposed to the sound of the bullet itself) and the muzzle flash. Suppressors on sniper rifles therefore aren't so you can kill sentries or something close-in, it's so the guy across the valley can't tell exactly where you are by light and sound.
Agreed, we are not talking about silenced weapons in the pure sense of that word. These suppressors/silencers are intended to further disguise the location of the shooter, as you correctly point out. However, in-game US sniper teams consist of 3 men (1 marksman with a suppressed weapon - MK21, 1 marksman with an unsuppressed weapon - M110, and a support trooper/spotter with M4/M320). Now let's forget about the M4 rifleman for a second... what we have are 2 marksmen engaging the targets with both suppressed and unsuppressed weapons; thus negating the advantage of a marksman with a suppressed weapon, as his buddy is firing an unsuppressed M110 right next to him.
To be quite honest, I am not really confident that the silenced/suppressed weapons are modeled at this point. If they are not, hopefully the developers will find a way to integrate them into the future releases...
-
I dont know it for sure, but i trust in Battlefronts habit to model weapon systems as accurately as possible. If the silencer is not functional, it is probably a bug.
I hope so too; but if it is indeed functional - there needs to be an option to tell other members of such sniper team to hold fire... otherwise the is no point to having a silencer when your parnter next to you is firing an m4 at full rate...
-
On a related note, has anyone been able to confirm that the silencers on MK21 PSRs (as seen in game) are actually functional?
-
Thank you for your clarifications John. I used to read Glantz back when he was writing for the FMSO. At the time, I did not find him to be too tedious... but that was many moons ago.
Now I do have a lot of respect for Leutenant Colonel Lester Grau (also of FMSO fame). His reseach was always original, thourough, relevant, and unconventional. I wonder, what he is up to nowaday?
-
Glantz has too much human interest?? lmao!! you should really read some of his work it.s dry as can be. Soviet official orders and reports. 76th Div. moved north to X. No comrade Popov ramming his tank stories.
Touche Sublime! You got me. I have somehow managed to mistake Glantz for Antony Beevor... no idea why... who knows where thoughts come from
-
DreDay
Damn ! I confused "Rusich" with so-called fast reaction group "Batman".
Perfectly understandable, since Rusich was suboordinated to "Batman" for quite a long time in 2014. Although, to be completely accurate, the "Batman" unit (battalion) was not wiped out either. Its leader (not an SOF guy either, but a retired Ukranian policeman) was killed along with several body guards in an ambush (supposedly conducted by a Russian PMC made out of ex SOF persone).
You know, Azov and Volunteer Ukrainian Corps of Right Sector both very demonized by Russian media and western liberal journalists. Now most of fighters in these units are guys, who are not a member of any right party or movement. In these units go volunteers, who are ready to fight or want to learn how to fight by modern methods unlike in regular army training centers, where just some time ago began to implement experience of warfare in Donbas... Of course among these fighters, especially in Azov present neo-nazis and ultra-right followers, but their number not significant. Also among Azov fighters many neo-heathens with their predilection to runic and other ancient symbols. In this case really too hard to know where the edge between paganism and neo-nazism. For example, ancient swastika symbol uses as ornament on territory of Ancient Rus' up to Mongolian invasion and even now sometime appearing in Easter Eggs painting. One of my familiar fight in Azov - he never interest a politic, but actively participated in Maidan, was wounded in 20th Feb by "Berkut" and later enlisted in Azov. It's like WWII period UPA (Ukrainian Insurgent Army) was composed mostly from peasants far from politic, but political and military control over them conducted nationalist force OUN. Main difference between most of our right followers and Russian - our just stay on defending of our land and traditions, but Russian right stay on imperialistic and chauvinistic positions, they want establish own "Russian world" orders in neighbor countries, considering it as "native own".
That was just remark - I think don't need to develop here these theme. Or in PM
Fair enough, would you also be willing to agree that the same standard applies to Russian ultra-right nationalists fighting against them (i.e. Rusich)? We can take it to the PM if you wish…
-
This is my summary, systematized by different sources (official press-release, twitters of servicemen on positions, twitters and FB of journalists and civil volunteers). So, this is my point of view. Of course, with time will be more details known. For development of battle I can add, that before our artillery strike reinforcement arrived on positions of 28th brigade, possibly it was units of 30th brigade, also first report about casualties was wrote in twitter from words of 1st tank brigade servicemen, so they also were involved. Yes, it sounds weird, but our official information sources almost useless - they gives just general and belated information, media and TV often spread panic news, so main source of normal information is proved twitter&FB accounts and our military forums. Just need a time to analyze and compose the puzzle.
Agreed 100%. All that we can discuss with a high degree of certainty right now is that Maryinka has not fallen so far (as there is no video/photographic evidence that would point to the contrary). All other information bits are highly dynamic and subject to propaganda (and just pure ignorance) by both sides.
As for confusion regarding the 1st Tank Brigade (and other units that one would not expect to be there); I have read several Ukrainian non-official reports stating that most of tank units from 1st and 17th Armored brigades have been re-subordinated to other brigades as reinforcements. Do you happen to know anything regarding this?
It's too hard to say about their subordination. Their appearance in Donetsk pointed about they now DNR-controlled. But this sort of detachments (like destroyed by Russian special forces diversion group "Rusich", composed from ultra-right Russian nationalists) often acting as "free agents".
Right. I was just curious, as Ryazan seems to be one of the first Russian ex-VDV/SF officers to take part in fighting there. As for “Rusich” - do you have a source confirming them being destroyed? I must have missed it… Don’t get me wrong, I have very little regard for them, much like some of their ultra-nationalistic counterparts in Azov; but I have not seen any evidence of neither their destruction, nor their affiliation with Russian SOF. Their commander (quite a creepy character) was an assistant platoon commander in a VDV infantry platoon (76th VDV Division)… so he might be well trained, but not on par with SOF guys.
-
Right on. Irony is hard to detect within board messages sometimes; but I see what you had meant loud and clear now. I mostly agree with your assessment of Glantz (although my exposure to his work has been quite limited). He is definitely a good writer, and an unconventional/original historian. However, his works are a bit less grounded in research than I would like to see (albeit I am not a historian myself by any means); and he seems to include too much human interest and sensationalist reports in his books without proper context or reference.
As for the book on Russian MOD Reforms in 2008 - 2012; I would be very curious to hear your thoughts. That was the last period of Russian policies that I had followed professionally, so I happen to have some decent background into them. Please feel free to PM me if you'd like to trade some ideas.
-
DreDay,
The OpenBrief folks had a customer, and this is an example of the kind of product the firm creates. I was essentially dreaming aloud: "Wouldn't it be great if..." That, of course, is a long way from actually obtaining the funding, having the work done and devouring the results. An info high were that to happen!
Regards,
John Kettler
Hey John, I would love to dream along with you. It would certainly be great to have access to such well-researched reports. Unfortunately, I am a bit skeptical, because:
- Many military formations change their OOB and equipment all the time without making much noise about it
- Such reports would be a compilation of multiple sources that are digested and interpreted by multiple analysts; many times these sources (or the researchers' interpretation of them) would be contradictory and we would more likely get the more "popular" than more "realistic" version of such data.
As I've said, I would love to be proven wrong on this; as I certainly love the concept.
-
In my opinion- people don't care whether you show them numbers or coffins or corpses. They wont care unless it is connected to them or their family. I remember going to some practical courses in a police station in Novi Sad. There was a black marble plaque with names and dates of police officers killed on duty. Not one of my colleagues stopped and looked at their names. Life is cheap and no one will care whether you died in a car crash, in Iraq or Ukraine.
That (IMHO of course) is only partially true. Your premise does not allow for the role of news outlets and social media (whether independent - a concept that I am very skeptical of at this point), or politicized. Realistically speaking, most recent unconventional conflicts had resulted in relatively scalable losses by the superior force. Look at Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Chechnya, Lebanon, etc... All the military losses by dominant powers in those conflicts were much smaller than those from car accidents (or even just DUI accidents alone) for those respected nations… yet one would not see things from such perspective when their TV screen or the computer monitor is filled with the reporting on the demise of these unfortunate servicemen.
Back on topic, more trust-worthy Russian opposition sources put the number of Russian Army KIA’s in Ukraine at no more than 500. That number is challenged by more centrist sources that estimate it to be no more 150 servicemen. Obviously, every human death is a tragedy; but, statistically speaking, these numbers are negligible for a nation of 145 million people… yet – look at the impact that such reports are stirring up…
-
It certainly does not offer anything especially "new" vs weapons packages carried by other RU/UKR assets and given the high threat environment simulated, it seems less likely for realistic employment as an attack helicopter.
Agreed. One would find very few examples of Mi-8s being used as designated gunships in Afghanistan/Chechnya/Ukraine. They do have some pretty capable weapon systems, but they are there (as a rule) for self-defense and not attack. The role of MI-8s (much like UH-60s from what I understand) is to get to the LZ safely and to drop off their troopers/cargo in 8-20 seconds. They would almost always be supported by dedicated Attack Helicopters (i.e. AH-64, MI-24, etc..) on such missions.
On a bigger note - Air Assault operations require elaborate planning that would cover, ETAs, Echelons, Formations, SOPs and all kinds of other factors. I would love to see this modeled at some point, but it would take a ton of work to include this into the current engine.
-
Interesting concept, and a great reference for CMBS (albeit more relevant future modules). This list seems to be a bit inaccurate (i.e. confusing BMD-3 and BMD-4, revising RPG-16), but still interesting. I would love to see more... but I am very skeptical of civilian contributors dropping any significant funding for this initiative. Hopefully I will be proven wrong.
-
Found this study by the Centre for Research and Strategies and Technologies, Moscow. Some guy named Glantz wrote the foreword!
www.cast.ru/files/book/NewArmy_sm.pdfRegards,
John Kettler
Thank you for this lead, John. I am looking forward to reading it at my leisure. One important note to keep in mind - is that this source seems to focus on the reforms that were implemented by Mr. Serdyukov (Russian "civilian" Minister of Defense) and Army General Makarov (Commander of Russian General Staff) in 2008-2012. These were, by far, the most radical changes to Russian military structure (at all levels) in many decades. They definitely deserve a detailed understanding. However, it is also worth noting that some of these changes have been reversed or adjusted since the replacement of Mr. Serdyukov by Mr. Shoygu in 2012.
Also, and (I don't mean it as a criticism), David Glantz is more than just some dude - he is a very well-known and established (albeit controversial) historian focusing on Soviet military operations in WW2... His name is well known amongst the historians that cover that period.
-
DNR/Russia: "international brigade Piatnashka", units of brigade "Vostok", diversion-assault group "Riazan' "
Thank you for giving us the synopsis of latest reports Haiduk. Obviously you are quoting the Ukrainian sources (for the most part); which is fine - as both sides seem to agree that the control of Maryanka is contested, but no breakthrough has been accomplished there by DNR. The actual casualty numbers are very preliminary at this point. DNR is claiming the exact opposite ratio of losses, compared to ATO reports... but we would not know the actual casualty numbers for (at least) a few days.
What I am curious about - is the subordination of "Ryazan" Recon Co. They had fought for DNR (and later LNR) since the early summer of 2014. I have also read that their commander (callsign "Ryazan", real name - Edward/Eduard, AFAIK) had been asked to leave the DNR/LNR territory and not to come back (per multiple sources, including Strelkov). However, now it appears that he is back... Do you happen to know whom his unit is subordinated to at this point?
-
i worked in the recon end of things for a while. The inherent stealthiness of an OP or similar position isn't the end result of Delta extreme master force team membership. It's the training and the experience of the team doing so. From that, a team formed of the absolute best mechanized infantrymen to ever walk the face of the earth will outperform recent graduates of the Q-Course. The SOF guys would certainly outperform a normal rifle team though.
Which gets to me, the absurdity of your argument. The CMBS doesn't recognize SOF as different kinds of humans. It works off of different quality of humans (in terms of experience and training) with different equipment.
Which is a much better model, it just happens folks really overestimate just how "elite" a mechanized infantry platoon is. You really should be seeing a large pool of regular, maybe 30ish percent veteran, and then like zero elite level guys outside of tier awesome zulu operator doom squad guys. Trying to break down which type of infantry "earns" bonuses is problematic too, as given your logic, the scout teams because of their superior scoutness should get stationary bonuses too for being scoutstealth, when in reality, again, a green scout team is going to be worse than a regular rifle team at hiding, training or not.
With all due respect sir, I fail to see the absurdity of my argument. Of course SOF personnel are not different from any other kind of humans; they are mere mortals like the rest of us… however, they do receive extensive training in certain areas (i.e. concealment) compared to regular Mech Infantry grunts. Would a conscript level SOF guy (I know that it's a bit of an oxymoron) be as good at concealment as an elite Mech Infantry TL? That is for the game engine to decide, but it is perfectly reasonable to adjust the SOF guys' attributes per the unique training that they receive. Same goes for recon/sniper/scout and similar elements.
As I have mentioned, I have never served - so I would not want to challenge your personal experience. However, I do have quite a few close friends that have made it to E-7/E-8/E-9 grade through multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. I would consider them to be the elite of our light/mech infantry; yet when they talk about being trained by SOF guys, it is very clear that there are some skillsets that they simply don't poses compared to their SOF comrades... Much like the SOF guys would not know what to do with an M2A2, unlike my buddies that know it like the back of their hand...
-
I think the author is too pessimistic in some sense, but generally his points are valid and important, and references are well provided. I also think Putin and Russia will be on the crossroad very soon.
Lol. When have they not been "on the crossroards"? Are you saying that they are in deeper trouble than when Putin took over in 2000? I seriously doubt that..
IMO, clearly, Russians know that their financial future is quite disappointing, and try to do something. But I really, really think that they need to solve corruption problem and brain drain problem, otherwise there will be no chance to recover.
Not only that, but they also need to find a cure for cancer and to define the meaning of life... no sweat, right?
-
I thnk what you want can be done with the tools available in CMBS. In the scenario editor, make an infantry unit with Fanatic motivation and Elite training. They spot faster, shoot more accuratly and are less likely break under heavy fire than Regular infantry. They are the best of the best. And there you have your SOF soldiers.
Go try it out, take a small MOUT QB map and match a russian infantry only platoon with Regular/Normal stats vs. a US Elite/Fanatic infantry only platoon. You will be surprised by the results. For even more extreme results, set the Russians to Conscript/Low/Unfit. The Americans will masaccre them.
Thank you for your advice sir. As a matter of fact, I have tried it out... And I am really not all that obsessed with MOUT/CQB to begin with. My only point was that different branches of service receive different training and it is perfectly fine to have an elite Mech Infantry team recieve different perks than an elite SOF team...
-
I disagree. When talkig about SOF/Sniper/Recon concealment bonuses, I am refering to their stationary positions (i.e. OPs) and not some generic movement. Realistically speaking, these units receive special training in OP cammo/concealment; so I don't see why CMBS cannot replicate that.And I'm saying the "bonuses" are off base. SOF isn't harder to stop vs some regular infantry dude, they're just allocated with the time and resources to accomplish their given mission accordingly. So if they're doing a movement to a hide site, they've got the 12 hours to go 2 KM sneakily. Having some baseline "harder to spot" thing is dumb, as it's not like SOF is trained to run on their tip toes sneakily or something, the kind of stealth movement training they do is the long duration infiltration stuff, which is not something done in CMBS.
Whatever advantage in skills or fitness can already be played out using the tools CMBS has, its just we lack the proper SOF type organizations to use those tools
-
Yeah, but what I'm saying is you're describing the sort of mission that doesn't translate out to being worth playing in a game. If you're going to model the SOF doing a mission that is well replicated by CMBS it's going to be the high energy raid sort stuff, or they're going to have to allow for mission timers that go out to days to replicate how slow infiltration actually is, and weeks to show how long duration observation rolls.
Oh, I am with you. I certainly was not advocating having "low and slow" missions in CMBS. The only reason that I had mentioned those types of scenarios was to highlight the fact that SOF teams are not some game-changers; but rather just another component in the overall OOB of CMBS forces (with all the strengths and weaknesses that come along with them).
-
The T-15 is a back to front T-14, an odd but typically Russian solution.
I am not sure what makes you qualify it as "typically Russian solution", as I cannot think of any Soviet/Russian vehicle that has used the same design...
The T-15 could well be designed as an anti Infantry companion to the T-14 on the basis of recent Russian combat experience.
I know what you mean; and it is certainly not unreasonable to think of such approach, given Russian experiments with BMPT and such. However, T-15 (as seen during the recent parade) simply does not offer enough firepower to be a true anti-ATGM/RPG companion to T-14.
News about T-90 upgrade plan
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
My bad, I stand corrected. Good catch! Do you happen to have the specs for T-80UE-1?