Machor

My thoughts as well. The tank does not appear to have been in combat when the missile was fired; I think the YPG team may have infiltrated what was thought to be a secure area, or blended in with the civilians there. Also note the (white?) civilian car that was parked next to the tank, and sped away right after missile launch - proof that they detected the launch. In related news, the FSA intercepted a large shipment of ATGMs, including Konkurs, to the YPG, that originated from a town under Al Nusra control. The Syrian conflict's mess of disparate interests, loyalties, and alliances is certainly up there with the 30 Years War:

The missile has been confirmed as a Konkurs (AT-5): Five tankers - including a lieutenant - were KIA. Does a LEO2 have space for five people inside?: Presumably the destroyed LEO2, with a crewman who was KIA. I assume he was the loader, as he held the lowest rank:

A rule of thumb that I've picked up from playing Slitherine's Pike&Shot / Sengoku Jidai / Field of Glory 2 at their hardest settings is to give the AI a 50% point advantage, on top of whatever advantage it is already getting for attacking etc. To achieve this in CM, I increase the AI's points by 70% when I'm defending [the AI is very vulnerable to ambushes if you can set up one where the map designer didn't expect it], and decrease my own points by 40% when I'm attacking. If I give the AI even more points, that tends to kick in the "quantity has a quality of its own" phenomenon. I have been able to win total victories in CMBS rolling with Abrams against Russians in poor visibility, when I had the full 60% penalty for my own force. I remember that ancient movie every time I play against the AI - it should be made obligatory for all wargamers.

Bellingcat investigation by Nick Waters, an ex-British Army officer. Lots of images, an alleged video of the January 6 attack, and thorough analysis: "The Poor Man’s Air Force? Rebel Drones Attack Russia’s Airbase in Syria" https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2018/01/12/the_poor_mans_airforce/

"Black Market Sold Drones Used in Russian Base Attack" https://www.thedailybeast.com/black-market-sold-drones-used-in-russian-base-attack "... days before the unique, jury-rigged drone bomber surfaced in the attack, a seller in a rebel social media arms market based in Syria’s Idlib province posted an advertisement for an identical-looking model of rickety homebrew drone along with similar munitions, casting serious doubt on Moscow’s tales of high tech transfer. ... ... the black market drone advertisement, posted on Dec. 31 in a Telegram arms market where rebels trade everything from motorcycles to machine guns, suggests that the weapon may have been available to any rebels who had the cash to buy it. The seller offered the drone alongside two small, grenade-sized munitions. “Brothers,” the author wrote next to pictures of the weapons, “reconnaissance plane which drops shells for sale.” ... In a Facebook post after the air base attack, Russia’s defense ministry wrote that its electronic warfare systems defeated six of the drones and that its Pantsir air defense systems shot down an additional seven during the attack. Photos accompanying the post reveal a nearly identical drone to that seen in the Telegram arms market with the same boxy fuselage covered in green plastic wrap and tape, capped by a wood casing surrounding the engine. Captured munitions from the photos posted by the Russians also show starkly similar munitions to the ones offered on Telegram, with semi-transparent casings, white plastic fins, and a thick metal hook to attach them underwing. The bombs contain “BB’s embedded in epoxy around an explosive core and then placed in an aerodynamic plastic shell,” says Nick Waters, an analyst who researches for Bellingcat, an investigative journalism nonprofit. “They were designed for fragmentation rather than destroying planes.” But the Hmeimim incident wasn’t the first sighting of that particular model of slapdash drone in the wild. On Jan. 1, the day after the black market drone posting, Saray al-Areen, an Assad regime-aligned militia, posted pictures of another identical drone with similar munitions fragments on its Facebook page, writing that it had captured “two aircraft with munitions outside of Qeraha and Jablah,” villages not far outside the Russian air base at Hmeimim. “The explosions heard today at noon are the results of these shells,” the group advised. The capture followed a New Year’s Eve attack on Hmeimim which killed two Russian troops and which Russian authorities subsequently described as a mortar attack. Then again on Jan. 2, wreckage from what appears to be another of the same model drone surfaced in a separate attack. The Russian publication Rusvesna published pictures of wreckage sporting the same same green tape, plastic and plywood-covered engine, claiming that the aircraft had been launched by the Islamist Ahrar al-Sham rebel group at a Russian military engineers’ training facility in northern Homs province before being shot down by local troops. The aircraft has a unique, improvised design, which doesn’t appear to come from any known commercial models or kits, suggesting a stronger connection between the drone offered for sale on Telegram and the models captured by Russian and Syrian forces. “From what I can see, this ‘drone’ was fabricated using wooden parts and tape. Perhaps the servos and engine were purchased online, although it’s more likely been scavenged from a model airplane,” says Mike Blades, a drone industry analyst at Frost & Sullivan."

This just in: "Who is attacking Russia’s bases in Syria? A new mystery emerges in the war." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/who-is-attacking-russias-main-base-in-syria-a-new-mystery-emerges-in-the-war/2018/01/09/4fdaea70-f48d-11e7-9af7-a50bc3300042_story.html?tid=pm_world_pop&utm_term=.32c85e2ed4f8 "Perhaps the biggest question of all, however, is who was responsible. What makes the attacks especially unusual is that there has been no claim, triggering a frenzy of speculation in the Russian and Syrian news media over who may have carried them out. Russia’s Defense Ministry on Tuesday appeared to accuse the United States of supplying the technology for the drone attack, saying that assault required a higher level of expertise than any armed group in Syria is known to possess. Compounding the suspicions, the ministry said in a statement on its Facebook page that a U.S. Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft was in the skies above the area for four hours during the drone assault. Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon said the allegation was “absolutely false.” The Islamic State has often used armed drones against U.S.-allied forces in eastern Syria and Iraq without “significant impact” he said, adding that small drones are readily available commercially. But the nearest Islamic State positions are hundreds of miles away from the western coastal province where Khmeimim is located, making the group one of the more unlikely culprits. Most of the Islamic State drones used against U.S. allies, moreover, had a range of no more than one to two kilometers, according to an analysis by the defense consultancy IHS Markit group. The Russian Defense Ministry statement said the drones used in the Khmeimim attack came from between 50 and 100 kilometers away, making them far more sophisticated and expanding the pool of potential suspects, the IHS analysis said. One of the myriad Syrian opposition groups is the most probable suspect, Suchkov said. But, none of the rebel groups is known to be within mortar range of the base, and they typically assert responsibility for all their operations. “If it was the opposition, they tend to put everything online and boast about it,” he said. Among the theories circulating widely is that disgruntled Alawites from Assad’s own minority sect were responsible. A statement about the attacks on the base, which is in a predominantly Alawite area, was posted online in the name of a shadowy group called the Free Alawite Movement. It warned Alawites who support the Syrian regime that the attacks proved Assad’s hold on power is not secure but did not explicitly claim that it carried out the attacks. A number of Alawite opposition members said they did not think the group is real and speculated that foreign intelligence agencies are seeking to create the impression of strife among regime loyalists. Another claim made in Syrian opposition news outlets is that an Iranian-backed militia fighting on behalf of the regime and located in the government-controlled hills nearby, was responsible. According to that theory, Iran wants to thwart Russia’s efforts to impose a peace settlement on Syria that would undermine Iranian interests." One thing that seems certain is that CMSF2 couldn't be timelier.

I do not see the basis for this. Just two days ago, Chechen jihadists in Idlib suffered a huge loss after their HQ was attacked with a VBIED presumably by a rebel group that supports the Astana agreement, and yesterday, a Turkish military convoy was ambushed in Idlib, presumably as retaliation. Ever since it adopted the 'contain the YPG first' strategy, Turkey has stayed very close to the Russian line. It is understandably mad at Assad exploiting the civil war among the rebels to gain territory, but this is not a motive to attack Russia. In fact, in light of the S-400 procurement and calls among pro-government circles for Turkey to withdraw from NATO, abetting an attack against Russia would be outright bizarre. Do note that the fuses and explosives that were captured may well be of Turkish or US origin, which proves nothing as they were most likely taken from existing stock, and may have been bought or captured from third parties. What will be of interest is the analysis of the parts that would have required precise machining. Whoever used the UAVs should have known that some were highly likely to be captured intact, so they would have taken steps to hide where the parts were sourced. One thing that seems certain is that both attacks were carried out by the same group and with a symbolic intent, as they fell on New Year's eve and the eve of Russian Orthodox Christmas.

Looks like they have an SOP where the loader covers the rear of the vehicle while a column is moving through close terrain.

Am not going to even quote from this one: "Thai penis whitening trend raises eyebrows" http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42575155

By all accounts that have appeared online, the M60T outperformed early build LEO2s in Syria. One even survived a Kornet hit in Iraq, though it was also particularly lucky in the angle of impact. That being said, the M60T was a very expensive project whose main purpose was to transfer technology to build a domestic tank; therefore, it was something more than an 'upgrade.' Interestingly, the M60T project came about after the failed bid to build the Ukrainian Yatagan, which didn't work out since the Russians refused to transfer their APS technology. Considering this was Yeltsin's cash-strapped Russia, it speaks volumes about the strategic value they placed on APS.

This had been buzzing around online for some days and now appears to be official - it would dwarf the previous ISIS attack on Russian helicopters near Palmyra: "Syria war: Photos 'reveal' Russia jet damage at Hmeimim base" http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42580378 "A Russian military journalist has published photos of Russian warplanes which are believed to have been damaged by rebel shelling in Syria. Roman Saponkov posted them on social media after reports of the attack. Russia's defence ministry acknowledged a 31 December rebel mortar attack on Hmeimim airbase but denied any jets had been disabled. It also confirmed two servicemen's deaths. Russia's Kommersant newspaper said seven jets had been destroyed. ... According to Kommersant, in the attack "at least seven planes were destroyed: four frontline Su-24 bombers, two Su-35S multi-role fighters and an An-72 transport plane". Posting on the social media site vKontakte, Saponkov listed the losses as: six Su-24s; one Su-35S; one An-72; one An-30 spy plane; and one Mi-8 helicopter." I couldn't help but think about the RAND report Snakes in the Eagle's Nest. To quote from the conclusion of that study: "In conclusion, attacks by small forces with the limited objective of destroying aircraft have succeeded in destroying or damaging over 2,000 aircraft between 1940 and 1992. This fact is powerful testimony to the effectiveness of small units using unsophisticated weapons against typical air base defenses and is a sobering precedent for those responsible for defending USAF bases against this threat." I think there's an argument to be made here - putting aside naval airpower - in favor of long-range bombers and strike aircraft, using PGMs to compensate for long distance missions with loitering.

She actually wasn't military. Continuing Soviet tradition, Russian prosecutors have parade uniforms.

@Michael Emrys & @3j2m7, My previous post was only meant to be funny and did not reflect my own taste. To my eyes, a winterized IS-2 looks like this: For factory finish photos: "OK Google: Anastasiya Scheglova" Am putting the lid on this perceptual - if not perceptive - discussion before the thread goes south.

Happy New Year to everyone!

Road signs / traffic lights? [Just guessing; I don't have the game.]

It's not an AT-4, but here's a similar RL video: http://www.military.com/video/operations-and-strategy/antitank-weapons/where-not-to-fire-a-rocket-launcher/1949145105001 There was also this thread: There was a thread discussing the TacAI not staying put under bombardment, which may have been triggered in your case as well:

1- Why would the vehicle be different in CMFB than in previous titles? 2- The vehicle had only three crewmen, with the driver in the front. Why would the gunner face backwards? Here's a Hungarian Marder II in action: http://ftr.wot-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/n1qPszg.jpg

I'm pretty sure it's a bug, since he doesn't face backwards in CMFI and CMRT. My question would be: Does a bug like this affect spotting, or is it purely aesthetic?

I think the TD discussion got rather too abstract without taking into account the bewildering variety of these vehicles. The heavy ATGM vehicles you mentioned fit in exactly with the employment of the Nashorn, which was so successful against the KV and T-34 when first introduced precisely because it could engage them at ranges where they couldn't shoot back. Similarly, modern ATGM vehicles can engage Western tanks at ranges where the enemy can't return fire; Soviet/Russian/Ukrainian tanks can, of course, shoot back with their own ATGM, but the 'exchange rate' in terms of materiel loss would still favor ATGM vehicles.

Sorry to go OT, but I have a burning question after watching the second episode of National Geographic's The Long Road Home yesterday, and this thread seems like the best place to ask it: Two rescue convoys were sent into Sadr City to save US troops who had been ambushed and surrounded; the insurgents had also ambushed and repelled an Abrams platoon that had been sent to rescue, thus heavy resistance was expected. The commander of the first rescue convoy had a Bradley in lead, but decided to overtake it with his armoured Humvee since the dust from the Bradley's tracks was obstructing his vision; the battalion CO was apparently leading the second convoy with his armoured Humvee from the very start - even though he had at least two Bradleys in the convoy. I won't spoil the episode, but let's say the armoured Humvee has significantly lower survivability than the Bradley. Why wouldn't the officers lead their convoys in Bradleys?

I didn't want to create a new thread for this, and went for this one as the CMBS thread. Interesting new BBC online investigation that reveals a development I wasn't aware of: "Inside a pro-Russia propaganda machine in Ukraine" http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-41915295 The purpose of my post isn't 'Russia-bashing,' but to point out a RL phenomenon that could provide a convincing backstory for CMBS scenarios/campaigns. To quote the end of the article: "The revelations point to a problem for the propaganda-makers - making their often-absurd claims believable. But Aric Toler of the investigative website Bellingcat, suspects that believability may not be the whole point. "I think that the fakes are not meant to be extremely convincing," Toler says. "All it takes is a few popular news outlets... to run a headline about a video of a Ukrainian far-right group 'reportedly' making a threat. The vast majority of people only look at headlines for stories and won't see any future retractions - so the damage is done." Toler believes that the fake Russian Liberation Movement claiming the suspected Rostov arson - despite any evidence to back up the claim at all - may also have been somewhat effective. "Perhaps the video was a smokescreen to hide the real purpose of the arson, or maybe it's just an opportunity to create this bogeyman of the anti-Putin ultranationalist.""

That was exactly @HerrTom's point previously on this thread: Anyone with interest in the topic must also go through his outstanding analysis on the following thread - lots of RL evidence there from the war in Ukraine as well:

To add: Because of the upcoming module that will take the Italian front to the end of the war, certain nations/forces have been added to the QB menu that will become available once the new module comes out - and we purchase it. +1 The date is also very important for equipment availability - even a single month makes a difference.

Are you mentioning the possibility of equipping them with thermals - of which I am aware - or are vehicles with thermals already in service with Ukraine? The latter would be a huge capability improvement. Steve did mention how they failed to foresee the speed with which Ukraine adopted drones, so I assume this issue will be resolved with the next module. My understanding is this wasn't done for the sake of playability; i.e. the effect of MLRS in the scale of the game is almost like a nuclear weapon.

Also, I'm pretty sure that Skif has a thermal sight in game, whereas Corsar doesn't - the manual isn't very clear about this. Since Russian tanks also have thermals (only the Oplot does on the Ukrainian side), this can make a crucial difference depending on visibility or if the Russian player spams smoke. The tank to watch out for is the T-90AM; its ERA seems capable of defeating Skif with at least 50% probability.