Haiduk

Hm... Really. And also UKR 2B11 still use guided Gran'. This was reported bug and as if fixed in 2,00. But now I open 2.10 and see this bug again. So, I have again reported. Thanks

@kinophile @cbennett88 Neither first, nor second. Ilovaisk battle consists of two independent parts. First, from 6th Aug to 12th Aug - there are attempts of town assault and since 18th Aug exactly heavy urban fights, after UKR forces could enter in the town. Though both sides haven't enough armor (Ukrainain side in the town was represented mostly with light armed volunteer units and less than combined army company with some BMPs and tanks), urban battle quickly turned out to stallmate. And second part - since 23th-24th Aug 2014 - withdrawal of Sector B army group and border gurad units from Russian border to Ilovaisk under pressure of invaded Russian troops. 25th Aug all Ukrainain groups around Ilovaisk were encircled. Up to 28th Aug there were position defensive clashes, 29th Aug UKR forces have received guarantees from Russian High Command about secure withdrawal in "green corridor". Troops were lined up in two columnes and in march order have drove in western direction. But after several kilometers Russian and DNR forces, entrenched on their way, became shot out both columnes. This wasn't "maneuver battle". This was shot out like on firing range. All vehicles were destroyed, survived personnel was saving own lifes in sunflower fields. Only 31st Aug Russians stopped headhunting and allowed Red Cross to enter to masacre zone and take wounded, POWs and bodies.

Concept. But due to renewing of MTLB manufacturing on Kharkiv's tractor factory it looks more real vehicle, which can substitute BMP park in nearest furure, than realiztion of heavy IFV projects.

I can say that most of artillery fire on Donbas has usual impact, not airburst mode. Several times airburst HE were used for example in 2015 during battle for Shyrokyne and troopers said "Russians use new shells", but indeed that were usual HE. Instead airburst both sides uses MLRS with cassete ammunitions. But 203 mm really terrify. One hit and 3-storey house ruined (not like in CM, when such tipe of building can survive after several 203 mm hits). Knowingly, several times, separs formations left positions, when seen 203 mm impact even in 200-300 m from own trenches.

This is known video, already posted here. This is episode of summer 2014 (writing 2015 on video is mistake). Separs hit BM Bulat with RPG-26 (or 22), but ERA worked properly. Looks like priority target for tankers were BTRs, so infantry with RPGs, against which ERA "Nozh" protects on 90 % was just ignored. Though, as you see, the tank shot a HEAT or APFSDS into infantry too (possibly it hadn't HE).

So, when CrowdStrike wrote "80 %" their reputation was proper. When they updated info on "15-20%" reputation turned out to "less than stellar". Well. Of course, information in VoA, which explains how it happened, is "fake". So, if you havn't 405 BP to buy access to MB2017, you can find Boyd's mail and ask him. VOA first contacted IISS in February to verify the alleged artillery losses. Officials there initially were unaware of the CrowdStrike assertions. After investigating, they determined that CrowdStrike misinterpreted their data and hadn’t reached out beforehand for comment or clarification. In a statement to VOA, the institute flatly rejected the assertion of artillery combat losses. “The CrowdStrike report uses our data, but the inferences and analysis drawn from that data belong solely to the report's authors,” the IISS said. “The inference they make that reductions in Ukrainian D-30 artillery holdings between 2013 and 2016 were primarily the result of combat losses is not a conclusion that we have ever suggested ourselves, nor one we believe to be accurate.” One of the IISS researchers who produced the data said that while the think tank had dramatically lowered its estimates of Ukrainian artillery assets and howitzers in 2013, it did so as part of a “reassessment” and reallocation of units to airborne forces. "No, we have never attributed this reduction to combat losses," the IISS researcher said, explaining that most of the reallocation occurred prior to the two-year period that CrowdStrike cites in its report. “The vast majority of the reduction actually occurs ... before Crimea/Donbass,” he added, referring to the 2014 Russian invasion of Ukraine. http://www.voanews.com/a/crowdstrike-comey-russia-hack-dnc-clinton-trump/3776067.html

Pointed, this is 2017 year info. Looks like new MB issue, you can buy access for 405 British pounds on their site and look %). Only I can say, that Henry Boyd is real person %) Ah. Now all clear. First report of CrowdStrike really said about 80 % of losses, but... Reading here: http://www.voanews.com/a/cyber-firm-rewrites-part-disputed-russian-hacking-report/3781411.html And some more detailed here: http://www.voanews.com/a/crowdstrike-comey-russia-hack-dnc-clinton-trump/3776067.html International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which publishes an annual reference estimating the strength of world armed forces, disavowed the CrowdStrike report and said it had never been contacted by the company. The company removed language that said Ukraine's artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers, which used aiming software that purportedly was hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to 20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the figures to IISS. The original CrowdStrike report was dated Dec. 22, 2016, and the updated reportwas dated March 23, 2017. The company also removed language saying Ukraine's howitzers suffered "the highest percentage of loss of any ... artillery pieces in Ukraine's arsenal... Finally, CrowdStrike deleted a statement saying "deployment of this malware-infected application may have contributed to the high-loss nature of this platform" — meaning the howitzers — and excised a link sourcing its IISS data to a blogger in Russia-occupied Crimea. In an email, CrowdStrike spokeswoman Ilina Dmitrova said the new estimates of Ukrainian artillery losses resulted from conversations with Henry Boyd, an IISS research associate for defense and military analysis. She declined to say what prompted the contact. So, CrowdStrike got some real info about malware, but in strange way decided to tie it with wrong interpretaton of IISS data about UKR D-30, taken from Russian blogger. Perfect! %) Of cource, after IISS "guys, what a s...t ?!", they updated report with more real data, but "80 %" already has flew throwout all internet.

Em... This is origin link on report. What do you want for quoting more ? All this story of "80 % D30 loses" have started from CrowdStrike report, which after was shared in many blogs and medias. You can google it. Here is Rusvesna separatist source, but they also point CrowdStrike report as source: http://rusvesna.su/news/1482595909

Ah... I have found origin of this: https://www.crowdstrike.com/wp-content/brochures/FancyBearTracksUkrainianArtillery.pdf This is report of US cybersecurity CrowdStrike company, which said Russian FancyBear hackers group infected UKR astillery soft with malware, which tracked their positions. But on first page of report in Key points we are reading: According to an update provided in March 2017 by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) Research Associate for Defence and Military Analysis, Henry Boyd, "excluding the Naval Infantry battalion in the Crimea which was effectively captured wholesale, the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost between 15% and 20% of their pre-war D–30 inventory in combat operations. Well, 18 lost howitzrs are really 16-17 % (between 15-20 %) of 108 howitzers, which be in service. But from where 80 % ? This is InformNapalm OSINT group and UCA (Ucrainian Cyber Alliance) investigation (in Ukrainian): https://informnapalm.org/ua/zvit-pro-zlam-fancybear/. They say really was several .apk files affected with malware, but this was primitive one, which couldn't to significantly help enemy in counter-battery fire. And all of this info of 80% losses was Russian PsyOps. Interesting, that artillery soft started to implement in artillery units only at the end of 2014, before all system were experimental and not mass - one of two batteries were equipped with this systems in 2012-2013.

OMG! What a weird stuff! I wonder how they count these "losses"? They want to say we lost on battlefield over 350 D-30 for 2014-2015 ? This is ridiculos. For that period D-30 were only in airmobile brigades - a battalion per each + two batteries in separate airmobile battalions + battery in one National Guard brigade and further one more battalion have received airborne brigade and new formed 81st airmobile brigade. And that is all. 108 howitzers of staff ! 18 confirmed losses (destroyed&captured). Of course, for years up to 2016 many howitzers could exhaust own barrels and have been decomissioned. But to decomission 300+ guns for two years, this would be battles lile Kursk %)

I like CM for opportunity to model historical enagements and will be glad if, for example, on IRON level would be implemented those "tools", useless for wargamers, but need for sim-fans. Even for addition money I have ideas to make complete historical campaign (or campaigns) of Donbas war 2014-2015, when all modules will be issued (UNCONS, please ), but scenarios will be like Steve said: A sim might have a platoon sized force do nothing more than maneuver a map without taking much fire, then be judged almost exclusively on friendly casualties with even 1 or 2 being enough to get a poor score. Will be interest to play most battles in about platoon-company size with lot of artillery on maps not less than 2*2 km ? I think, only for maniacs

@HerrTom Did you shell vehicles with precision ammunition or usual ? If usual, alas, dispersion of shell impacts still unrealistic dense (especially on screen with Bradley)... If usual rounds could hit with such density, then no need to develop Excalibur %). Sorry for offtop

Hm... This is different battIefields... I only can recognize now just BTR-4E of 2nd National Guard brigade, which during withdrawal from Debaltsevo have stuck in mud eastward from Nyzhnie Lozove village and after unsuccessful attempts to tow it, was abandoned and burnt. Destroyed tanks... need to see photos on Lostarmor, hard to say were its filmed.

As I said, infantry is "Aydar" battalion - on 2014 volunteer formation, which was arming from different sources and troopers often choose a weapon by own taste. "DMR" rifles are result of customaizing of weapon by soldiers. Usually they personally requests in social network "I (or my unit) need this, this, this and this. My card is...." Or if they have familiar civil volunteer, then they supply unit with need equipment. In 2014 exactly volunteer units have many custmized wepon. "Aydar" like other volunteer units had big pepole support. And they fought very hard. Probably they suffered heaviest losses among all volunteer units. (or this is volunteer battalion "Donbas"...) Yes, the medic-rifleman on video is a girl. In volunteer units in 2014 was many girls and women, which participated in combats. Only since 2016 in Army was officially permited combat duties for women. Untill that time they have two opportunity to fight - either go in volunteer unit or officially was in regular unit list as radio operator or staff personnel, but in real to be a rifleman.

Here is interest video, which representes direct encounter of tank and BMP and how looks standing under firing of 30 mm bursts 13 August 2014. Combined detachment of infantry of Ukrainan assault battalion "Aydar" and armor of 24h mech.brigade slowly advances along M-04 road from Khriashchuvate village in SE outskirt of Luhansk. T-64BV with infantry support moves forward rest of vehicles were in 50-100 m behind. From Luhansk in direction of Khriashchuvate also slowly advances group of LNR battalion "Zarya" with two BMP-2 to check presence of Ukrainian tanks in that village. As said LNR fighter, which sat in forward BMP, he suddenly have seen in sight Ukrainian tank on the road. There wasn't time to prepare ATGM on top for launch or turn back. He has opened fire from 30 mm gun with HE shells: 0:25 first 30 mm explodes less in 1 m from right side of tank. 0:37 30 mm hit in front turret. Looks like K-1 ERA activates 0:43 30 mm hit in front turret. Expolsion weaker. 0:48 tank sharply drives back 1:14 30 mm or MG burst on the road 1:21 30 mm explodes near operator and slightly wounds him 1:39 30 mm again explodes directly behind operator, but doesn't harm him LNR BMP gunner told he shot 31 shells in UKR tank and troops direction, but tank didn't shot back. Why ? Very interst question and obiously the answer we have on next video. where Ukrainan tanker, which participated in this engagement is showing damages from enmy fire. But interesting, that he says about RPG or SPG hits ! Looks like crew of T-64BV just didn't spot enemy BMP and after 2-3 hits has thought enemy shelled them by HEAT and abandoned danger zone. On video tanker says about damaged sight and HMG on top, shows a plate of activating K-1 PS: that engagemant finished by "draw" - both sides have retreated.

Alas, this is known problem with this web-page. Pictures are disappearing since some time, but still visible when you watch origin web-page by link. There is no info what conditions have this tank befire turned out a target for artillery practice.

Some pictures again. Firing range target M60A3 after direct hit with 155 mm HE in the glacis. Source: http://ftr.wot-news.com/2017/05/05/m60a3-hit-by-he/

Look also at "range determintaion" results. Polish team has Leo 2A5, Austrians have Leo 2A4, Germas Leo 2A6. Looks like Polish team hasn't experience in usage of Leopard. I have read somewhere, that exploitation of Leopards was too expensive fopr Poland and its was moved in reserve. Possibly this is a reason of sixth place and result would be better if they came on PT-91. Possible because this reason we participated on T-64BV, but not on BM Oplot, because we havn't experienced crews for Oplot platoon. Upd: there is unconfirmed info, that Polish tank(s) have problem with fire control system in one day, possibly this caused of poor result

Yes. Each team was passing 12 tasks. For tasks "platoon firing in offensive" and "platoon firing in defense" temas can take per 500 points. Call of fire - 700 points. Other tasks give per 50 points. I have insider photo of preliminary results of UKR team in offensive/defensive. Our vis-a-vis in offensive task was US team and our results were not so bad. In defense task target area set fire, competitions was stopped and five targets, which our team hit after ignition were not counted in our score. Some tasks were atypical for Ukrainian army. For example target spotting & artillery call - our tankers havn't such duty on battlefield. Or pistol shooting - our crews has AKS-74U. Also some other NATO standard tasks turned out unfamiliar for us. In last day we occupied 4th place with French team, but physical tests results downed us to 5th. Alas, from competition program was excluded 5 km firing and night shooting. Our team had upgradedd T-64BV with IR sights for commander and gunner and GPS navigation system, but were unable to check capabilities of sights in tasks in comparison with other tanks

Looks like you have seen a photo of PDA with preliminary results, where Ukrainian team had 750 points, but final results next: Austria, Germany, USA, France, Ukraine, Poland

There is too few info about its. These vehicles have many problems. Aftrer its were mathballed, their technical conditions now very bad. Many spare parts are abscent and serching by civil volunteers in many places or even produces in small private companies. Also I heard that some Shilkas in assault versions have additional MG on turret top and even ERA (very strange solution if this true - light armor just will crack after K-1 activation or special light ERA Nozh-L mounted, but this close to phantastic). Radars faulty, mounted radio equipment also mostly doesn't work. Here a video of combat usage one of these special Shilka units. Looks like December 2016 - January 2017. On first video just seen flame of Shilka shooting, on second video you can see how vehicle is passing near operator

Hm... How Tunguska in real world can be useful against T-72 ? Just for sights damaging. Or ambush in back or side акщь short range (phantastic version). Of course can be exceptions, but like in US army, Ukrainian and Russian also has own combat field manuals, when clearly written, where every unit (infantry, ATGM, AA, etc) must be deployed on battlefield. And troops fire support isn't primary Tunguska's task. As a rule each position has ZU-23. It uses often also against tanks - the rain of 23 mm shells tears down K-1 ERA containers from the hull and tank turns out vulnerable for PRG and SPG ammunition. And enemy tank commander forced to decide - to continue battle w/o ERA on front hull or move back. This tactic successfully was using in 2014-2015 campaign. Also shelling with AA gun has psyhological effect. Enemy unexperienced crews were often retreating after dozen boom-boom-boom in the hull or turret.

Never. Tunguskas only maintain close rear AA defense, though two vehicles of 128th mountain brigade were lost in Debaltsevo battle from enemy artillery fire. I know, that now separate batteries or battalions of ZSU-23-4 are establishing. Its functions - to hold possible breakthrough of enemy light armor and infantry until main forces, moved to rear due to Minsk aggreements, would not arrive. Only volunterrs are enlisting there, because in case of large scale enemy offensive, that will their last stand... Episodical usage of ZSU-23-4 have proved its effectiveness. Separatists havn't Tunguskas. Both sides are using ZU-23-2 - both towed and mobile versions.

In real world BMP should retreat as quick as possibly (if crew is not crack fanatics). Tank reloading is much shorter, then ATGM launch from BMP. For this, gunner should open up, prepare ATGM to launch, aim and guide a missile until hit. For this time tank could fire as minimum twise or more. Need to test this situation. How much time have passed from tank miss and ATGM launch in return ?

Ukrainian tank platoon of 14th mech.brigade have arrived to international tank competition Strong Europe Tank Challenge-2017 in Germany. Our team will participate on upgraded tanks T-64BV with added thermal sight TPN-1TPV and SN-4215 GPS navigation system. By rules of challenge all temas have to be standard NATO tank platoon of four tanks and one reserve. This version of T-64BV has been launched to modernisation in this year and ground forces are planing to uprade in this way most of T-64BV. So, these competitions is very good to check tank capabilities in real tasks (unlike pure show in Russian "tank biatlon") On the photo French tankers with amazing look at T-64BV as if: "Are you REALLY fighting on THAT?!" Single visible difference between standard T-64BV and upgraded is GPS antena on the turret top