Armour combat footage

[TAKODA]

I wouldn't post combat footage here if it wasn't something special, this video will interest all you guys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G96TBLcNTzI#t=512

Edited August 12, 2015 by TAKODA

[AlexUK]

No idea what's going on there?

[Kieme(ITA)]

Looks to me, if that's the video, a unit with BTR-70 was advancing in a large open field and then enemy tanks appeared at close distance. The tanks seems to having been engaged with RPG or something and they were blown up. But also a couple of BTR-70s were hit.

[Boche]

"Crazy video. Luhansk People’s Republic separatist fighters advance in a line across an open field under accurate fire, toward Ukrainian military positions.  At just over three minutes into the video, panic sets in as a Ukrainian main battle tank appears out of the woodline. The rebels frantically launch RPGs at the tank, but it quickly destroys at least two of their armored personnel carriers. The separatists retreat, dragging their wounded with them"

 

I was just about to post this one aswell jaja

[akd]

It is old, though. From summer 2014.

[John Kettler]

TAKODA,

 

Most interesting, but my kingdom for a SteadiCam™! Nearly hurled because the super jumpy imagery! I believe the squad we see killed the not well seen threat, whose appearance inspired the alarmed word we all understand-- "Tank!". Several times in the vid there's a blooping sound and dust obscuration in the near field. I believe that's from RPG fire. Clearly, a bad decision on the Ukrainian side in using what seems to be unsupported armor. I find the terrain exhibits the kind of micro relief CM doesn't depict, but which IRL provides considerable protection for infantry. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[Haiduk]

This is fight near Novoannivka village south-east from Luhansk. Mid or end of August 2014. Two BTR-80 were destroyed by BM "Bulat", which survived several hits of RPG-7 and RPG-26. One BTR was abandoned and took by UKR troops. No this episode on this video, but known photo with it. LNR APCs have sign of Russian 23th motor-rifle infantry brigade (rectangle with three dots) painted above with LNR markings. 

Edited August 12, 2015 by Haiduk

[H1nd]

Aye, it looks like they hit the tanks several times like Haiduk told us and then we can see the tank firing from the smoke created by the earlier rpg hits. One of the rounds seem to hit pretty close to the camera man.

[Red Rage]

Incident details:

 

http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/2333614.html

 

 

In 3 sentences or less: LNR elements f'ed a dog tactically. Sketchy advance in an open steppe with unknown tactical goals ending with an "oops" moment when a T-64 showed up. Ukrainians lost 2 T-64s, 1 BTR-80 and 1 BMP in the same sector, but it appears that the losses were from an earlier action.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Red Rage

[VladimirTarasov]

Incident details:

 

http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/2333614.html

 

 

In 3 sentences or less: LNR elements f'ed a dog tactically. Sketchy advance in an open steppe with unknown tactical goals ending with an "oops" moment when a T-64 showed up. Ukrainians lost 2 T-64s, 1 BTR-80 and 1 BMP in the same sector, but it appears that the losses were from an earlier action.

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.

[Haiduk]

Ukrainians lost 2 T-64s, 1 BTR-80 and 1 BMP in the same sector,

 

These losses were caused by heavy artillery strike on positions possibly during Russian offensive on Novosvitlivka and Khriashchuvate at the end of August (many craters and completely destroyed tank hulls) - in the same way were destroyed many UKR armor on positions in that settlements.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Haiduk

[TAKODA]

Thanks for all the feedback guys, I was unsure myself of what was actually happening in this battle, thanks for explaining. 

[MikeyD]

I've read a couple accounts where the Russian/proxy troops on the ground are often given orders no more specific than 'attack in this direction'. So they attack in that direction.

Frankly, I've used similar tactics to the video while playing the game. You've got to get across a stretch of open ground with bad LOF from the jump-off point. So you rely on your units ability to suppress any incoming fire as it pops up with concentrated fire. A bad show if you've misunderestimated the strength and cohesiveness of the opponent but it usually works against scattered resistance.

[TAKODA]

Found a WW2 picture taken from a perspective that looks very similar to a typical Combat Mission scene.

Found it here on this magnificent website, it contains hundreds of the best WW2 pictures I have ever seen - http://fhpubforum.warumdarum.de/index.php?topic=24.12240

 

[rooibos]

that last pic. WHOAH

[Luka]

@TAKODA wow thanks for that links, heaps of awesome photos that aren't familiar.

 

Since it seems this video is old, does anyone happen to know where i could find a version to see it? My curiosity kicked in and the link is no OP's longer available.

[Bozowans]

Since it seems this video is old, does anyone happen to know where i could find a version to see it? My curiosity kicked in and the link is no OP's longer available.

I think it's this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N0rplcH32g

Pretty interesting video. Would be freaky to have to advance across a giant open field under fire like that. 

Or maybe not. Maybe it would be worse to have to attack in an area with a lot of cover. Then it would be a lot more confusing when you can't see anything. At least in that big field you can see what's going on.

[Luka]

@Bozowans Thanks for that. Damn I would not want to be those guys, just reminds you that talking about war and playing wargames is fun and all but you would never want the real deal.

At least with a lot of cover you might have some hope of hiding if everything goes fubar.

[Los]

Yep just like combat mission I advance my APCs across an open field and they get blown up.

 

 

[Kinophile]

Yep just like combat mission I advance my APCs across an open field and they get blown up.

 

 

Tru dat! 

[Kinophile]

Yep just like combat mission I advance my APCs across an open field and they get blown up.

 

 

Tru dat! 

[Battlefront.com]

One thing that has to be remembered is that tactical situational awareness, for both sides, was pretty bad during the August 2014 timeframe.  A lot was going on and there wasn't the time to figure out what was what at any one specific point at any one specific time.  Which is why that LPR unit should never have tried to cross that field in the open like that.  This is where Combat Mission has a lot to offer in terms of training small unit leadership valuable lessons.

The typical CM game involves situations exactly like the one in the video.  You are in command of a fairly small, isolated force and do not have the luxury of choosing what you go into combat with.  ATGM overwatch can only happen if you have an ATGM to overwatch with, for example.  Which means your plan has to be developed around what you actually have vs. what you want to have or perhaps even should have.  That's the first lesson.

The second lesson is to understand that you don't have much of a clue what is going on ahead of you.  Making assumptions is not a very good idea.  Which means you have two possible courses of action to choose from (presuming you have no ability to get a change in conditions):

1.  Recon well ahead of your main force with the smallest and quickest element at your disposal.  Higher up command might set conditions which make this either impossible to do ("you will advance NOW!"), which means you're left only with the second choice...

2.  Choose a path and an advance method which maximizes cover and escape options, even if it is slower and/or in other respects sub-optimal.  Hopefully higher command doesn't interfere with this either.

In the case of the situation in this video (something I and others have discussed at length in private some months ago), it would be to dismount the infantry and have them advance without the BTRs.  There appears to be some treelines that could be used for infiltration.  If I had time for recon I'd send a couple of 3 man teams off to the left and right so they could get a view of potential enemy firing positions in the space between (i.e. the big open field).  If the coast was clear then I'd advance the BTRs through the field, otherwise I would not do so until I eliminated the threat to them (i.e. the T-64).  If I could not eliminate the threat then I'd pull back, regroup, and develop a new plan based on the information gained.

If I did not have time for recon I'd have sent all my infantry along the most covered route and held the BTRs back until they reached a point where they could give a reasonable "all clear", then move the BTRs up and perform the same leapfrog maneuver as many times as necessary to reach my objective.

This is what CM teaches us is a good idea for the exact reasons that video teaches us what a bad idea looks like.

Steve

[Haiduk]

Steve, difference is that in CM you can read in scenario an information about expected enemy forces and, for example, for this situation on video, beware tank appearance. In this situation and in whole during summer 2014 camapaign most of engagements were characterized by full "fog of war" for troops and chaos in C&C. Platoons on neightbor checkpoints didn't know situation of each other, reckon and intelligance support was very poor, so in many times both sides during advance suddenly got "ooops"-engagement. 

[Bozowans]

Sometimes I feel more comfortable attacking across open ground in CM. When everyone can see everything with those wide open lines of sight, I can more easily achieve fire superiority with my superior numbers as an attacker. What really sucks is attacking into forests or urban areas. The defenders can get more even match-ups with the broken up lines of sight.

Maybe that's why I suck so much at Black Sea though. I don't understand modern warfare at all. Maybe it would actually be more difficult to brute force your way across a field like in WW2. With all the ATGMs and thermal optics and other fancy modern stuff, being stealthy must be more important. It feels like I'm playing a stealth game more than a war game sometimes. 

Playing the Germans in CMRT, open ground always felt like my friend. With all the Soviet SMGs around, staying away from close combat in dense terrain was important. I would just bypass any forests without clearing them of Soviet infantry if I didn't have to. They're not a threat to me out in the open. I would stick to open ground, spread out, keeping my distance, while advancing slowly but steadily to avoid enemy artillery fire. I would just destroy any buildings, walls, or trees that break up my LOS, never getting close until I absolutely have to. And it would work pretty well for the most part. 

 

 

 

 

In the case of the situation in this video (something I and others have discussed at length in private some months ago), it would be to dismount the infantry and have them advance without the BTRs.  There appears to be some treelines that could be used for infiltration.  If I had time for recon I'd send a couple of 3 man teams off to the left and right so they could get a view of potential enemy firing positions in the space between (i.e. the big open field).  If the coast was clear then I'd advance the BTRs through the field, otherwise I would not do so until I eliminated the threat to them (i.e. the T-64).  If I could not eliminate the threat then I'd pull back, regroup, and develop a new plan based on the information gained.

Perhaps they already did have guys trying to infiltrate through those treelines. Maybe they had been trying to do so for hours beforehand, and simply couldn't see anything except a screen of enemy troops. The guys in the video might have been part of a much larger advance, and the T-64 might have showed up much later, after the BTRs had already been committed. I know that kind of thing has happened to me many times before playing the game. And then I watch in horror as my troops are cut to pieces. 

[slysniper]

Sorry, I totally disagree with you Steve as to one assumption with what this units tactical choices were.

Your comments were all spot on other than that.

If they had a choice to cross that field any way they wanted to. yes I would assume they might have liked to use your suggestions or something along that lines.

What I think you and most everyone that plays war games have is a belief that the small level unit leaders have much of a chance to really make any decisions at all. They generally do not, its not like the freedom we have in the game.  (The exemption to that is in the US, we allow small level unit leaders more freedom on how to achieve a mission more than most any  other army in the world.)

If I had to play a guessing game as to what we see and what is known about this event which is all any of us is doing here. I assume that command was  pushing a advance. They were willing to risk this platoon. They likely wanted to advance at a quick pace. hoping to catch the enemy still in a unprepared defense from a likely earlier withdrawal. This unit would advance and capitalize on what ever the situation allowed or it would meet resistance and be held up til reinforced or destroyed by a stronger force if they ran into it.

I can bet you that after the contact seen in this video. That next berm line and tree row was where the next major arty strike was.

What I think is the mindset needed. Infantry is nothing more than a tool to locate and force the enemy to expose themselves with so you can go about killing them with something more appropriate. I think you see a platoon ordered for just that cause. they found a line of resistance and most of them lived to tell about it. To tell you the truth, they appear to be pretty lucky in that they are able to withdrawal without any counter attack. Most likely the reason for that is because as I mentioned the other side was already likely in a state of retreat. Now the next event would be do the Ukraine' pull out before being hit or do they stay and take losses for what ever reason they think they need to stay there for.

When you are in a real war, small level unit action is always stupid and there is really no good meaning to it or does it make sense. You are always being placed in situations where you or your men may die and most of the time you have very limited abilities of how you can take your orders and adjust them to improve the situation much. And as pointed out. You do it with what you are given, you do not get to go and hand select what forces will be at your disposal.

So what is my point after all of this. Real war sucks. This video is a perfect example of it and would be about as much as anyone would understand of a firefight after they were in one. Just look at the different guys and read the attitudes they have in their faces and actions. What has been proven, what was achieved. Other than a few less people on the earth determined to destroy each other. Really why do any of us find this stuff interesting. The sad thing is I do. But don't think that it ever makes sense when you are at the small level stuff in a real conflict. it doesn't.