Chibot Mk IX

Former head of DPR militia Igor Strelkov detained in Moscow — wife - Society & Culture - TASS

I think this is a term carried over from CMx1 . As mentioned above, there is a difference between knocked out and destroyed, it has an impact in CMx1's campaign. But CMx2 doesn't reflect the difference. And yes, all the burning enemy vehicles in CMx2 are "knocked out". Guess that should be described as a fog of war?

Yes, there are additional ammunition on the vehicle. The Gerbirgsjäger sqd has two PzF3 with two projectile and Panzergrenadier sqd has 1 PzF3 with 1 projectile. On the IFV and APC there are 3 more projectiles

Most of the PzG squad has two AT solider but there is only one PzF3 in the OOB. What is the other AT solider's responsibility?

This tweet is a little bit of misleading. It highlights ICM vs fortification, but as many of us have learned from CMCW, the ICM is not effective against a fortified enemy. ICM can be deadly against exposed enemy especially personal and soft skin vehicle, so it is handy in fend off RUS's counter attack. ICM also improves UKR side's counter-artillery efficiency, pose a threat to the hovering NOE Ka-52. But this is not a magic bullet that can make the Russian fortification line melt away in a short period of time.

+1 And..... I even suspected the SMG squad will outperform the Stg44 squad at 150m distance. I thought about doing a test before, but haven't got a chance to do one. ************************************************************************************************ Regarding pickup SMG through first aid, here is my post, hopefully that helps. Only those with Pistol will pickup SMG

I proposed to strike airfield, FARPs, kill the birds when they are in the nests. Utilize Artillery to bomb the hovering Ka-52 and use FPV kamikaze drone. Unfortunately CMO cannot simulate the FPV drone idea. Maybe we will need the help from ARMA 3.

I haven't played this campaign so I have no idea what's going on. But I would bet it is a scripted AI strike mission. What's the distance between your deployment zone and the units detected by Russia? Air strike mission can have a 700m strike radius I had a similar experience recently. One of Russian ATGM kills my UKR BTR, then I wiped out this ATGM team. At the end of the game, I lost one more BTR to mine, guess what, the dead ATGM team got 2 BTR kills on its final tally...

As a Wargamer, one of the greatest joy we have is using various tools (even if they are amateur and used for entertainment purposes) to check if our crazy ideas are feasible. Here, we have a set of tools called CMO. I have created a few scenarios in the editor. Overall, I agree with your perspective that using an F-16 fighter jet to attack a low-flying Ka-52 helicopter within Russian-controlled territory is not an efficient approach. In the scenario, I assumed that Ukraine is using the F-16A MLU donated by the Netherlands, while the Russian military has a Ka-52 helicopter hovering at a low altitude 10 kilometers behind their first defensive line. The F-16's radar can generally detect the Ka-52 at a range of 16nm. If the F-16 is at high altitude, there is only one opportunity for an attack because the Ka-52 will quickly enter the radar's blind zone. If the F-16 decides to dive into low altitude or initiates the attack from low altitude, it must consider the threat from short-range air defenses. However, considering the threat posed by the Russian S-300 system, a low-level penetration might be a more viable option. Subsequently, I added more elements to the scenario, including A-50 and a full suite of short-range and long-range SAM systems for the Russian. The Ukrainian F-16 takes off near Vinnytsia, flies at high altitude over Zaporizhzhia, transitions to low altitude, and turns southeast towards Orikhiv. This brings an additional issue: after flying over 200 nm, the low-flying F-16 only has around 20 minutes of fuel remaining before Bingo Fuel, meaning it can only perform one attack before disengaging. Similar to before, the F-16's radar detects the Ka-52 at 16 nm, but both aircraft are in low altitude, significantly reducing the effective range of the AIM-120B missile due to air resistance (and yes, max range =/= effective range). The F-16 must close in to approximately 7 nm for the Ka-52 to be within the missile's Dynamic Launch Zone (DLZ). However, before reaching this distance, the F-16 pilot receives multiple SAM radar warning alerts. In summary, after conducting a single AMRAAM attack, the F-16 must turn and disengage. The success rate is not high, with a small probability of the F-16 being shot down by SAMs, and the chance of the AIM-120B hitting the Ka-52 at the extreme edge of its effective range is also low. According to the PoH calculation formula in CMO, this probability is only 29%. Please note that this simulation only considers the Russian ground-based SAM systems, and if a group of Su-35s are added to provide CAP, the F-16's chances of a successful attack would be extremely low. The conclusion drawn from this simulation is that the Ukrainian F-16 should focus on its main tasks, such as gaining air superiority and conducting SEAD, plus attacking Russian airfields and ground support. The mission of hunting down the airborne Ka-52 within Russian-controlled territory should be assigned to other weapons and equipment.

the Trench looks very clean, so I guess it is in the rear. A raid to take out HQ?

БК Боекомплект (боевой комплект, Б/К) Ammunition?

at least one recorded incident Has an artillery shell ever hit an airplane? - Quora

It is worthy to mention this post The issue of controversy remains unchanged since the introduction of the AH. The Ka-52 (or replace it with AH-1) is not likely to survive long in a strike mission over enemy-controlled territory due to the threat of MANPADS (or HMG and autocannon in the case of AH-1). However, with a carefully prepared flight plan and by loitering around friendly-controlled zones in close coordination with ground forces, the Ka-52 (or AH-1) can take a keyhole position to overwatch the road that the attacking force must pass through, making it a formidable tank destroyer. To counter this threat, Ukraine needs to target Russia's airfields and FARPs. When the Ka-52s are in an ambush position, things can become more complex, particularly in terms of detection. Ukraine lacks AEW assets, but quadcopters equipped with thermal imaging capabilities could be helpful. Additionally, adopting a good CM gameplay tactics would be beneficial. put yourself in the shoes of the Russians, think where you would position your Ka-52. If the airborne Ka-52 threat is detected, fire artillery, airburst artillery rounds and ICM should pose a significant threat to the Ka-52. While it may not be confirmed if it is possible, utilizing FPV kamikaze drones could be fatal to a hovering Ka-52. It might be worth considering deploying a few FPV kamikaze drones to patrol the areas that have been identified as potential ambush sites. what is range of switchblade again?

Oh, no. DesertFox asked a similar question below, but his expression was much clearer than mine. Yes, it gets me puzzled.

Just wondering why the right column take a zig-zag route, and turning in front of enemy line. Any possible explanation on this? My Guess: Using the treeline as the concealment, and later, after suffering casualty, trying to turn to center and regroup/combine with the friendly force there?

It's Orlan-10, Orlan, always about Orlan. Not sure on Ukraine/NATO side if they have any plan to deal with this threat.

that's essence of guerrilla warfare "When the enemy advances, I retreat. When the enemy encamp, we harass them. The enemy is tired and I offer an open battle. When they retreat, I pursue." ---Mao Tse Tung

Low RCS return, make it harder to be detected by AEW like A-50.

hopefully this helps.

Yes, and assign a team to be the ammo bearer always help. In CMBS I usually put the Inf plt HQ team as the ammo bearer. Inf squad/team take one to two Javelin missile, HQ stay behind, on their back there are additional 2-3 missiles. Besides perform their commander role, in case an Infantry team depleted their Javelin, the HQ team will rush forward share the missile with the Infantry team.

Haha, just reminds me TOAW. There is a special event called refugee, refugee clogging the road. If that happens the supply point drops and movement cost double by two. Looks like right now in Belgord the movement penalty should multiple by 10. Perhaps the pressure of the continuous raids will push him adopt a "brilliant idea" that he believes can simultaneously alleviate political pressure and meet military needs in further south, that is another round of mobilization (good luck with that).

They are not comparable. On paper Aegis is supposed to have far better performance. See the pic below. Patriot PAC3 is a terminal phase interceptor with very short window of opportunity to intercept SRBM and MRBM (see the blue dots there?), Patriot's speed is too low to work on an IRBM. The yellow Aegis BMD line in the graphic seems to be representing RIM-161 SM3, an Exo-atmospheric interceptor. As you can see , the right end of the yellow line does not extend to the x-axis, because SM3 doesn’t work in Endo-atmospheric. That makes this graphic a little misleading as the SM2 and SM6, two Endo-atmospheric interceptors deal with terminal phase interception also belong to Aegis BMD. They have better performance compared to Patriot PAC3, although they will have trouble to deal with IRBM. Put hypersonic weapon hypothesis, Kh-47 kinzhal is just an air launched Iskander SRBM with a limited maneuverability MaRV . It’s flight profile might be very similar to DF-21D and YJ-21 ASBM, but I guess DF-21D is the hardest to be intercepted due to its terminal speed. There is no way for Patriot PAC3 to intercept a DF-26B, an IRBM with anti-ship roles. That’s when you need SM3 to intercept before the RV from the IRBM dive into the terminal phase. So far there is no indication that the HGV from DF-17 has the anti-ship capability. But due to the HGV’s flight profile, it will make the detection very very hard, and it is also operating on upper edge of the atmosphere so SM3 is useless in the face of this threat. Also due to its flight profile, HGV won’t have a great potential energy to convert into speed at terminal phase, so THAAD and SM6 should be able to intercept that but it is still too fast and maneuver for Patriot PAC3. We don’t have any open source to study on this, this is just my guess Anyway, the key to successfully intercept a ballistic missile is not about the interceptor missile’s performance, its more about early warning, detection and classification. There are some discussions on this topic in Matrix game forum CMO section, I can see if I can find the discussion.

That's just not possible. or he just provide some exaggerate claims here to attract attention. During cold war a reinforced Soviets Mot Rifle Bn may deployed in an attack formation deal with 3km front, that would cause the Bn form in a multiple echelon formation that is 10-15km long. Now just image 160k + troops deploy in this kind of formation. The Soviet Division may initially concentrate the whole division's firepower in this 3-4km front to achieve initial breakthrough, then funnel the following battalions through this breakthrough point. But later they will have to expend the gap, because you will need as many roads as possible to support a large formation's safely maneuver and logistics.

It is a miracle that everyone managed to escape alive. On the other hand, it reminds me of CM gameplay. I have always felt that the effectiveness of armor penetration after-effects in CM is somewhat exaggerated. A single 45mm AP penetrating from the side can kill an entire PzG squad inside a sdkfz251. In CMCW, a hit from an AT-4 or AT-7 on the upper front hull of an M113 like this, or in CMSF2, a hit from an AT-13 on the YPR, often means that no pixeltruppen can survive and escape from the burning wreck.

I just watched the whole 1 hour video. I agree that the United States may not have a significant immediate need for hypersonic weapons, but they will still require such weapons in the medium to long term. Considering China's ongoing Midcourse Missile Defense tests and the potential development of a comprehensive space-based early warning system, as well as the presence of some hawks in the Pentagon who may plan SSBNs with hypersonic weapons for close-range strikes to seek the ability to destroy ICBM silos in Xinjiang and Gansu, the demand for such weapons is evident. In non-nuclear confrontations, hypersonic weapons also have their own demand. As Perun mentioned in the introduction of the USN's hypersonic weapons program, HALO serves as a supplement to the conventional subsonic anti-ship missile arsenal. Taking PLAN as an example, the current PLAN has almost no effective response to the saturation attacks of AGM-158C LRASM once it moves away from the coastal areas. However, in the future, PLAN may push its warning range further out to 50nm by building a cost-effective ISR system (equipped with radar and infrared detection devices on board UAV swarms) and use carrier-based aviation plus relatively inexpensive combinations of HHQ-16 and HHQ-10 for interception. In such a scenario, the US side would require a high-speed "disruptor" to dismantle PLAN's defense system.