VladimirTarasov

Fair enough, I agree with some things of what you said, I would argue about a few things but I am too tired, I will reply later more detailed though

A drill just recently called Dragoon ride, Showed that US armored vehicles going through Europe would take more time then originally expected, Break downs are common this doesn't show the US is weak or anything. It would take 3 weeks to prepare FOBs, Logistic routes, Medical bases, Defensive positions, Get all the troops ready for war, Secure safe zones to not risk and flank assaults. Also I am not saying I know anything about it, But I am more then sure that there are sabotage groups in Europe especially in Poland and Romania for certain conflicts like this. You can't just say "US is strong it has the best NATO logistics" Well sure it does, But there are certain things you can't skip through, And say C-5s and C-17s will do the trick. By the way, Poland can buy air defenses but you forget the almighty Iskandar-M stronk crew which can launch from Kaliningrad onto bases. Sure NATO will strike back too but the damage will be great for both sides. I don't want to fuel a hate war, As I wouldn't want to cause hate on the forum. But if NATO did mobilize in full gear it would be, Cold war gone hot, Even if nukes aren't used per say in the start of it heavy missiles will be used. And just a quick reminder, I don't wish to start a forum war, If you disagree with me please give me the facts and I will gladly change my perspective. I can share my knowledge on how Russian logistics would work in the scenario that is given in game.

If we are speaking about SU-25 (the standard baseline) then yes A-10Cs are way more advance and extremely more capable, But you can't just say the SU-25SM is less capable then the A-10C, Nor can you say the SU-34 is less capable in the ground attack than the F-15E... Keep in mind the Russian armed forces is not airforce based. It will be using air defense systems from ground to protect from massive air attacks. The Russian airforce doesn't have numbers to fight NATO, But they will be used in important places for example if air defense gets breached you will be facing the 2nd lair of defense. In a war like this CAS from planes like F-16s and F-15s or SU-34s and SU-24s just wont happen that often. And the NATO aircraft bases in range being hit by heavy artillery or missiles, Like the Iskandar. If we are speaking about the first weeks of the war I don't think NATO has enough time to set up its air defense systems into Ukraine, Giving the Russian armed forces a advantage because they will have already planned the assaults and the air defense and the logistics, Mean while NATO has to adjust its plans. In order for Russia to win a war against NATO in Ukraine, They have to take advantage of the deploy time before NATO can set up in Ukraine, My calculations which would take up to 3 weeks. If somehow the Russian armed forces cannot win against Ukraine in their offensive, And NATO is in full gear then there is only one choice. Iskandar spam all the bases not on the Redfor side

Bradleys can destroy whole combined arms offensives

Yep, I did see some interesting results indeed... Although it did work, The M1A2s even when my T-90AMs knew that the tanks were behind the smoke got insta shotted as it moved from cover and hit my T-90AM the funny part is at 1053 meters it penetrated my first T-90AM (which didn't shock me but this is what did: It penetrated and killed my other T-90AM behind him. America has some alien technology or something Edit: By the way both were penetrated from the front upper hull.

John Kettler, I was assuming you meant the number of aircraft Georgia downed, Yes Friendly Fire happened do to command problems. Fair argument

Huge thing I have to reply to John, I understand that the source you have showed me is written quite educated and in a organized manner. But keep in mind that the US was on the Georgian side during this war, And they got most of their information from Georgian intel, And reports from them. Russia didn't lose any artillery as far as I know. Also Russia didn't use Chechen irregulars they used real Chechens who volunteered to join the Russian forces, And it turned out they did so well because the Chechen men are quite tough, Experienced in the mountains of the Caucasus. Onto the loss of 7-8 aircraft. If that were to happen the Russian government would have no choice but to tell. Georgians don't have any evidence of shooting down that much aircraft if they do by all means show me. I would hate to get a forum locked Mr. Kettler so we should turn the topic back on track.

Ok thanks for the info, I will run a QB today and use some flank tactics onto the Blufor side.

From memory I can't remember but do they have multi-spectral smoke on the AFVs in combat mission? Or was it just regular smoke thermals see through.

I think it is C?

John Kettler you are right, Georgia basically happened unplanned, They got together the most experienced and also locals reserves too and attacked with lower tier equipment like the BMP-1, BTR-70, And even T-62s, Although there were T-72s too. The infantry was quite experienced, Infact it happened so poorly planned that some of the Russian military's short comings were seen, Such as losing a recon TU-22, And 2 SU-25s. But despite that war ended in 5 days which I mean is normal. No bad stuff was seen in terms of ground warfare, Everything went down well. But losing a TU-22 is quite embarrassing, And after that it is made sure to never lose aircraft like that again. The Georgians had a good air defense network with BUKs and Ukrainian crew, But as you said the surprise of that offensive caught them.

And a salute back to you too, Sure I will send you a PM right now, But for other people's eyes I think that Putin is a great leader.

About rifle optics, If we are talking about a Russian invasion into Ukraine, Then the troops sent there will be high tier and highly equipped, Which most will have rifle optics, Especially by 2017. Would be nice if some issues like those are fixed, Would make me playing redfor more fun.

Hehehe

Sounds hard to believe not to lose a single tank but, If you say so. You know more about the conflict then me. either way some good info. It would have been put on file, Sure some incident might have happened but not from the design, It would be the crews fault. I've sat inside a T-72B, Not in service though it was at a show where they allow you to check out the equipment, I didnt notice a problem with it, It was a snug fit, But I didn't face any trouble from the autoloader. Contrary to belief it is spacey in there when not in combat positions, But if you are in combat position, You will be aiming and looking through your optics which cancel out any chances of getting your arm crushed into the breech. The cramp feeling is not true, in that tank. I haven't had the chances of getting into any western tanks. But who's not to dream. Sleeping in a aircraft intake is funny, Did they party the night before

Your right, But I couldn't find another word for it.

Either scenario is extremely crazy, Would never happen. Donetsk People's Republic gains nothing from it other then being the second nation to nuke another country.

Early model T-72s didnt have protection on the autoloaders so you are right, And even so if the projectile has penetrated with enough strenght it will still penetrate the autoloader shield. You know, I watched a few American documentaries on the war of Iraq, And they stated stuff like not one single Abrams was lost or stuff like that. And me at the time I believed it because you know, American documentaries wont lie about their own war (what I was thinking as a teen ) But now that I have the chance to speak with a US tanker, How much were really lost? Counting ones that were mission-killed.

Of course the carousel has been hit and caused catastrophic destruction, I mean come on, M829A1 vs T-72M. Not a good reaction. The Chernobyl incident was not told to the public so fear doesn't strike the people. A fine job was done securing Chernobyl, And a lot of men died trying to secure the reactors. Going off topic, Now today Ukraine's government wants to turn it into a tourist attraction... But anyways, I never heard about the M1s ammo cook offs from IEDs thats a first for me. You know of any other incidents?

Super-defensive? I am on this forum because I like this game and discussions based on it, What you don't want any non-westerners here? Im not even replying to the rest of your reply. Soviet secrecy stuff also became popular in the west from the Afghan war, Whenever there were high losses amongst troops they started saying stuff like "died in a crash" or "died in a training accident" but it wasn't in huge numbers, Like stated by some. And escaping a BMP-1 or BMD-1 is not hard at all the back door can be kicked open in worst case scenario as long as you loosen it out, Or you can get out the other hatches. The autoloaders was a design against NATO type warfare, Tanks shoot at the most exposed part, Which should be around the lower turret and upper hull, Infact another reason why you see T-72 turrets fly in the air is because the crew put up a HE round inside the turret. To stay safe they only keep the ammo in the carousel. But of course having a bustle is a very good way to keep the crew safe, And I think a combination of these 2 would be a good solution. Although if you ask me, Todays T-72s would only be good with a T-72B(2,3,4) solutions, Other then those models you can expect modern NATO tanks to destroy them, With ease.

LNR lads probably rushed a advance before reinforcements of UA would arrive, That devil tank came and lit them up. Leader's mistake, I would have atleast set up a ATGM section watching the advance. Well, Sad losses for both sides.

Nice video, I had the chance to be 30-50 meters away from a RPO blast, Not a good experience. Surely just the shock wave and noise would break a soldier on the receiving end. Those things are nasty, Usually engineers of a company are issued those but more often a battalion attachment. Both videos show it correctly, If that round hits a village home that home is done, If the people inside somehow survive, They will be dizzy and crying. We would call these things, Shoulder mounted howitzer. Well atleast my squad did

What for will they use this dirty bomb for? This is non-sense...

I have lost friends and seen how battle is, My grandfathers and their brothers were in world war 2, My father was in Afghanistan and Chechnya, My uncles participated in Chechnya too. I don't get what you are honoring, Sure I respect him for serving his country in Vietnam but what are you going on about? What do you mean your gonna drop something what will you? What your going to drop something into the loading breech? Who is, the gunner or commander if so, they will know when the tank will shoot and it will load. To me it looks like you are very immature, And you yourself have never had any military experience as you are referring to other people's service. Chill out first of all, And if you have a problem too bad. This is as much as I will talk to you on this topic as you are provocative and I have had enough of people like you on the internet. As if pravda will post about soviet tank eating arms? I am a guy, Who knows people who served in the tanks in the 70s, They havent had any one incident. But you, All the way in your cozy seat seem to know about it? I would understand too if I was some guy who was speaking out of nowhere but I am telling you I have a friend who have served in the tanks when they first came into service.

I didn't mean any offense to you to sir, You are making me feel like I was a bit aggressive sorry if I offended The T-62, Didn't have a autoloader, But there was a T-64 with the gun of the T-62 which was a prototype which had a auto loader I think. It isn't impossible to happen but if used properly it wont happen at all. Maybe you heard a story, From Iraqi crews that it happened to them?