Russian army under equipped?

[Armorgunner]

2 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Guys,

MOAB was just dropped in anger only a few hours ago. Worked great. Untouchable cave contents, including jihadists? Surely you jest?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/afghanistan-isis-moab-bomb/

MOAB BDA

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/14/asia/afghanistan-isis-moab-bomb/

One thing that really annoys me is our MOAB requires a highly permissive air situation in order to be usable from a C-130 series prop driven Hercules, whereas the Tu-160 can carry FOAB into battle while itself fitted with chaff, flares and jammers. Not to mention the speed differential. If you don't read the second link material, it says the area of destruction is the equivalent of nine city blocks.

Regards,

John Kettler

My estimates is that ISIS after the MOAB drop, now only have 564-764 fighters operating in the area. Although, some of them might be a little shellshocked 

[John Kettler]

Armorgunner,

If nine city blocks are devastated by a MOAB, burst (why couldn't they have reported it as a radius?), I wonder what the lesser damage figures might be? Would imagine there are lots of deaf ISIS fighters in the area to a great distance, magnified by the funneling effect of declivities and reverberation off rocks everywhere. While obviously not the same as applying an omnidirectional effect, it would, in fact, be much worse on certain axes as a function of the terrain. Have some familiarity myself with echoes in various canyons in the American Southwest, and I shudder to think how horrendous a crack of doom would be in a similar environment.  

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

4 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

While obviously not the same as applying an omnidirectional effect, it would, in fact, be much worse on certain axes as a function of the terrain.

But by the same token reduced along other axes. I would expect that in broken, uneven terrain the effects would undergo a net diminution compared to flat open terrain. Re the effects of the hills of Nagasaki.

Michael

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

Thought I'd covered that by saying it wasn't omnidirectional. Invoking the shielding effects of the mountains at Nagasaki to support your case is a fair point. For real excitement, imagine what would happen it the US had a thermobaric JDAM and dropped a bunch of those from a B-1B or B-52H. Would be useful to have such a capability, I believe.

Regards,

John Kettler

[IMHO]

@John Kettler,

First video is kind of strange. Definitely neither top FSB nor top SF Command units. They use different techniques and equipment in many cases caught on tape and instructors are considerably younger and all are in very good physical shape. To me it looks like a regional law enforcement "SF" unit. Bottom one is an Army SF unit but not a top one as well.

PS I'd even dare to say the first video instructor himself has never ever been to any top SF unit. They practice "cross-instructing" so most of the techniques are quite uniform except for the things closely related to the unit's specific role. And then one can tell the unit specialization from these little things done differently.

@Armorgunner,

1. Most of the units who handled Beslan were not from Alfa or any other top team. Actually some were - you wouldn't believe it - armed local irregulars. That was the core of the problem with Beslan. One of the main reasons for unusually high losses among Alfa was the fact that they were forced to try to save hostages while making up for others' mistakes. That's provable by detailed documents/accounts.
2. In Nord Ost theater crisis most of the human loss was due to the total **** up with the medical assistance. Medics were not told what to expect. That's again provable.
3. Lion's share of VDV is not SF And you should understand it's very fancy for every law enforcement or military commander in Russia to have a unit that goes by the name SF. Certainly it does not necessarily reflect the level of training.

Edited April 14, 2017 by IMHO

[IMHO]

2 hours ago, IMHO said:

@John Kettler,

First video is kind of strange. Definitely neither top FSB nor top SF Command units. The guys on the video are using improper techniques, equipment differs and SF/FSB instructors are normally considerably younger and all are in very good physical shape. To me it looks like a regional law enforcement "SF" unit. Bottom one is an Army SF unit but not a top one as well.

PS I'd even dare to say the first video instructor himself has never ever been to any top SF unit. They practice "cross-instructing" so most of the techniques are quite uniform except for the things closely related to the unit's specific role. And then one can tell the unit specialization from these little things done differently.

@Armorgunner,

1. Most of the units who handled Beslan were not from Alfa or any other top team. Actually some were - you wouldn't believe it - armed local irregulars. That was the core of the problem with Beslan. One of the main reasons for unusually high losses among Alfa was the fact that they were forced to try to save hostages while making up for others' mistakes. That's provable by detailed documents/accounts.
2. In Nord Ost theater crisis most of the human loss was due to the total **** up with the medical assistance. Medics were not told what to expect. That's again provable.
3. Lion's share of VDV is not SF And you should understand it's very fancy for every law enforcement or military commander in Russia to have a unit that goes by the name SF. Certainly it does not necessarily reflect the level of training.

 

[Armorgunner]

3 hours ago, IMHO said:

 

And after the gasing of the theatre, the military did not tell the medics/doctors what gas was used. So they could not give antidot in time to save meny lives.

In VDV there is to my knovledge only the 45th regiment which is spetsnaz. Maybe some recon units to??

[IMHO]

@Armorgunner

1. You're not exactly correct. The commanding structure was like this: counterterror forces do just the combat part but the overall coordination of the emergency is up to the regional civilian authorities. That was changed after this structure failed miserably at Beslan and Nord Ost. Whether counterterror forces didn't provide the necessary training and information or the civilian authorities failed to grasp the importance of it - it's not clear. Certainly the information was not passed to medics in advance.
2. When two girls escaped and ran away from the theater the terrorists starter to shoot at them. A officers ran to the building to help the girls and present themselves as targets to distract the terrorists. The terrorists started to shoot at A guys and the latter could not even return fire lest the hostages would be killed in retaliation as promised. One of the officers had just to "dance" under direct fire while the other two were saving the girls.
3. The gas had never been used in real combat operation and the exact effects were unknown. The preliminary assessment was that there were too many terrorists with access to explosives so most probably not all of them would be knocked unconscious. So when A and V guys went inside the building they fully expected that a good deal of them would never return home.

45th is recon and if you mean MoD SOCOM - that's the only VDV unit. But MoD SOCOM is not the only one.

Edited April 14, 2017 by IMHO

[Erwin]

Aside from being named after a gateway town to the lovely Arches National Park in NE Utah, MOAB looks like a weapon that was desperately looking for mission to justify itself.  Can't use it if enemy has AA.  Doesn't burrow into the grounds to get at deep shelters. 

I think CNN said it cost $17 million to kill a few dozen uncon.  Is that a sustainable ratio...? 

So, basically for use vs 3rd world oppos who are already living in the stone age, or... if you have a really serious gopher problem in your back yard...

 

[VladimirTarasov]

2 hours ago, Erwin said:

Aside from being named after a gateway town to the lovely Arches National Park in NE Utah, MOAB looks like a weapon that was desperately looking for mission to justify itself.  Can't use it if enemy has AA.  Doesn't burrow into the grounds to get at deep shelters. 

I think CNN said it cost $17 million to kill a few dozen uncon.  Is that a sustainable ratio...? 

So, basically for use vs 3rd world oppos who are already living in the stone age, or... if you have a really serious gopher problem in your back yard...

 

It did the job of multiple bombs in one go, even for an overpriced weapon I think it was a justifiable use that time. 

[Erwin]

If I didn't have to pay for it (thru my taxes) I would agree.  The question is how many Uncon or Taliban could be bribed with $17 million to switch sides or turn in comrades?  Seems like a defense company boondoggle.

[VladimirTarasov]

13 minutes ago, Erwin said:

If I didn't have to pay for it (thru my taxes) I would agree.  The question is how many Uncon or Taliban could be bribed with $17 million to switch sides or turn in comrades?  Seems like a defense company boondoggle.

I agree with you, but it worked so mission completed. 

[Artkin]

Who knows how many it killed. We aren't in Afghanistan.

[DreDay]

19 hours ago, IMHO said:

@John Kettler,

First video is kind of strange. Definitely neither top FSB nor top SF Command units. They use different techniques and equipment in many cases caught on tape and instructors are considerably younger and all are in very good physical shape. To me it looks like a regional law enforcement "SF" unit. Bottom one is an Army SF unit but not a top one as well.

PS I'd even dare to say the first video instructor himself has never ever been to any top SF unit. They practice "cross-instructing" so most of the techniques are quite uniform except for the things closely related to the unit's specific role. And then one can tell the unit specialization from these little things done differently.

This video is from Alexander Petrov's training seminars. He is a civilian contractor (ex mil though) that has his own take on "tactical" firearms training; kinda like we have guys like Costa and Haley... His seminars are attended by some Russian SF personnel, but they are not equivalent to actual unit training.

[IMHO]

@DreDay, some things he teaches are actually quite dangerous to operators IRL

[DreDay]

Just now, IMHO said:

@DreDay, some things he teaches are actually quite dangerous to operators IRL

That is one of his criticisms and also the reason that he was kicked out from Russian IPSC (where he was quite successful up until then). I personally reserve my judgement without seeing the full course setup, so take it for what it's worth...

[John Kettler]

Erwin,

I think you missed the chief point made in the articles, so let me state it plainly: Standard bombs were almost totally ineffective vs personnel, armaments and other supplies in the caves and tunnels struck, whereas MOAB, a thermobaric munition, is, by contrast, highly effective against such targets and destroys people and other contents of caves and tunnels with ease. This is so because the explosive cloud enters them and is then detonated, generating spectacular blast and temperatures when set off. MOAB turns excellent cover into a deathtrap and is squarely of the class of weapon the Russians were discussing in their military journals in the 1980s talking about getting tactical nuclear weapon effects but without radioactive contamination. What untold tons of bombs couldn't do, MOAB did in one devastating explosion. Were I in charge, I'd be working hard to resize it so it could be carried by a US strategic bomber. This would greatly improve its utility. If these were available, I'd feel compelled not to drop them. I fear they'd be utterly ineffective!

DreDay,

That is most helpful information about that second video. Thanks!  As it happens, I underwent specialized defensive shooting training many moons ago with two US IPSC pistol champions named Dalton and Fowler.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited April 15, 2017 by John Kettler

[IMHO]

@John Kettler, IPSC - that's the first video

PS I actually couldn't quite understand how come his full auto is so exceptional  Big thanks to @DreDay

Edited April 15, 2017 by IMHO

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

12 hours ago, Erwin said:

If I didn't have to pay for it (thru my taxes) I would agree.  The question is how many Uncon or Taliban could be bribed with $17 million to switch sides or turn in comrades?  Seems like a defense company boondoggle.

Ahahaha.

I have watched where 17 million can go in human assistance programs, or payouts for tips, and I will tell you dropping a MOAB on Kabul would do more for the humanitarian crises of that country than 17 million in aid.  

Some hyperbole for humor sake, but there's a time for kinetic tools. The kind of target would be stupidly dangerous to do on foot, with a lot of ways for the ISIS dudes to rabbit once they'd done some damage, conventional bombing likely couldn't have gotten everyone at once.  

I'm not saying we MOAB every cave complex, but assuming we just blasted a cell or two, it was a likely a net savings overall.  

 

[IMHO]

We'll MOAB them into Stone age

PS Don't take it seriously - just a joke.

[HerrTom]

8 hours ago, John Kettler said:

whereas MOAB, a thermobaric munition

Are you sure about that?  I'm pretty sure that the MOAB is just some 18 kips of TNT or tritonal in an aluminum body. The aluminum gives way easily maximizing the blast, instead of a focus on fragmentation like smaller bombs.

I thought you were confusing it with the BLU-82, which I've always heard was a fuel-air explosive, but apparently it's just 12 kips of ammonal.  Whodathunk?

By contrast the Aviation Thermobaric Bomb of Increased Power, which all the news is saying is the Russian "equivalent" of the MOAB, is, as its name suggests, a fuel-air explosive.

[Erwin]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast

The MOAB is not a penetrator weapon and is primarily intended for soft to medium surface targets covering extended areas and targets in a contained environment such as a deep canyon or within a cave system.^[17] High altitude carpet-bombing with much smaller 230-to-910-kilogram (500 to 2,000 lb) bombs delivered via heavy bombers such as the B-52, B-2, or the B-1 is also highly effective at covering large areas.^[18]

Specifications
Weight	9,800 kg (21,600 lb)
Length	9.1885 m (30 ft 1.75 in)
Diameter	103 cm (40.5 in)
Filling	H-6
Filling weight	8,500 kg (18,700 lb)
Blast yield	11 tons TNT (46 GJ)

In 2007, the Russian military announced that they had tested a thermobaric weapon nicknamed the "Father of All Bombs"; the weapon is claimed to be four times as powerful as the MOAB.^[4][2] But its existence and specifications are widely disputed.^[5][6][7][8] The Russian name "Father of All Bombs", FOAB, is a pun on the Mother Of All Bombs nickname of MOAB. The MOAB is the largest conventional bomb ever used in combat.^[9][10]

 

 

 

[John Kettler]

HerrTom,

Here's what the How Stuff Works: Science on MOAB said.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/moab3.htm

(Fair Use)

The MOAB is built by Dynetics and contains approximately 18,000 pounds of tritonal. Tritonal is a mixture of TNT (80%) and aluminum powder (20%). The aluminum improves the brisanceof the TNT -- the speed at which the explosive develops its maximum pressure. The addition of aluminum makes tritonal about 18% more powerful than TNT alone.

A Daisy Cutter, by comparison, contains 12,600 pounds (5,700 kg) of ammonium nitrate, aluminum and polystyrene, a combination known as GSX (gelled slurry explosives). GSX is commonly used in mining and is a commercial high explosive that is inexpensive and easy to produce. TNT is a military high explosive.

In light of the above, I'd say that the MOAB works by having a small charge/s disperse the finely powdered tritonal, which after a short interval sufficient to allow the cloud to expand to its maximum extent and sink into trenches, tunnels, caves, defiles, etc., the cloud is detonated, creating enormous broad area blast stronger than the same amount of TNT and with greater incendiary effects. In case you think I made up that stuff about increased incendiary effects, may I refer you to Page 301 of New Research on Hazardous Materials, by Philip B. Warey? Inter alia, aluminum increases the heat and duration of the reaction. Would interpret the later to mean the explosion lasts longer, prolonging the extraordinary application of blast and fire in the area struck.

BLU-82 was officially classed by the US as being an FAE. I ought to know, for I read the JMEM covering it and may, if I can ever recover my library (long story), have a copy of the UNCLASSIFIED weapon description page from the relevant JMEM in my files. It has/had a line drawing and full set of technical characteristics, including fill. Never did understand why quarterbacks kept chanting "BLU-82" "BLU-82" "Hike!" Never could figure out what FAE had to do with football! The BLU-82 Wiki flatly disagrees with the FAE characterization, but that's not anywhere nearly as interesting as the string of accounts of direct use as a weapon, as opposed to clearing LZs. Also of interest is that the primary destruction radius was 600 yards, which should provide at least some help in figuring out what the numbers for MOAB might be, after adjusting for fill amount, explosive characteristics, etc.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Edited April 15, 2017 by John Kettler

[Artkin]

We demand FOAB for Russians in  CMBS! Instant kill!

[Erwin]

Very useful when one's plan in a scenario goes to pot and you wanna say "Ah screw it...  send in the MOAB..."  Entire map is flattened... walk away...