Jump to content

Russian arms topic revived... :)


IMHO
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • IMHO changed the title to Russian arms topic revived... :)
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 6 months later...

The International Army Games 2021 offer a generally great opportunity to watch Russia's latest hardware (and older weaponry) live fire, see special units demo capabilities and so forth, but unfortunately, rather than being able to watch the proceedings, hear the weapons fire and the engines of the AFVs and helos, there's a very loud Russian announcer drowning most of the desired audio and with no compensation in terms of subtitles. Even so, the range of weaponry being shown and the many videos provided makes at least some of the frustration and chewed on nerves bearable.

Some things I noticed are that the BMD-3, like the T-62 of youre, elevates the gun to reload. Also, the Cobra special tank-killing armored car uses a ripple two approach to firing the Kornet-E, likely as a way of getting through APS. In the sequence I saw, the first shot hit, and the second hit, despite the tank being completely enshrouded in smoke to such an extent it would've covered as much as three thanks end to end. Yet the missile went right in and unambiguously also hit the target. But Kornet-E can fail, too. The firing whose sequence begins at 16:54 resulted in an outright miss as the missile appeared to be having guidance issues close to the target, evidenced by considerable course wobble in a previously very stable trajectory. Miss distance was about a tank length in front of the rear tank, but the possibility exists that the target was the near tank and that the missile went high and overflew it slightly. Worthy of note is the low level of overhead fire protection afforded the Kornet-E tubes on the BMP-2 fitted with 2 x twin Kornet-E launchers. 
 

 Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/27/2021 at 2:36 PM, IMHO said:

SOF day showreel

The most interesting part (at least to me :))- the use of kamikaze drones:

 

IMHO,

Loved the SO vid and note with interest there is a Russian SOFLAM either fielded already or in trials. Revelation of the American version via CoD got some SEALs in deep trouble here in the US. Ref kamikaze drones, I understand the Turks are world class in this emerging important weapon category. 

 

On 10/11/2021 at 6:59 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

This is the drone we are looking for:

PS - Probably worth muting the commentary and just looking at the images TBH!  ;)

Sgt.Squarehead,

That was a very good and meaty report, so meaty am practically in shock. During the Cold War, something like the S-70 would've been picked up on recon sat coverage, and the analysis mill would've started churning. There would've been detailed engineering analysis contracts let to top aerospace firms and so on. Consequently, for the reporter not just to be allowed on the base and watch from afar but instead climb on it, sit in the control van, talk to the chief engineer and more just blows my mind. Would also note that if the serious RAM was applied, she'd be in something like a Tyvek body suit, because the RAM, at least, ours, is big time toxic and even a scratch can cause major problems. Have spoken to someone who worked on various US Stealth birds, so was speaking from experience. I Think FSB-GRU did quite a lot of unauthorized US technology transfer (how's that for a euphemism?) to make the S-70 possible.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though Russian language only, this video is a treasure trove ref primarily the BMP-2 but secondarily, the BMP-3. You can see the original BMP-2, the upgraded Afghanistan version I'd not seen before, turret face up armoring I say during the Cold War that was intended to defeat 25 mm Bushmaster fire, slat armor, drastically upgraded fire control, aftermarket upgrade paths, sensors, ammo and more. This is a great informational resource and image reference. One thin I noticed is that unditching beams are now painted the same color as the AFV, because contrast kills. The natural logs used to stand out sharply against the paintwork on the AFVs using them. Unlike the keyframe, almost all the BMPs shown are not just intact, but in some cases, factory fresh.
 

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

ou can see the original BMP-2, the upgraded Afghanistan version I'd not seen before,

Ahhh.....You've discovered what the 'Unusual Vehicles' from that Russian film were now.  ;)

1 hour ago, John Kettler said:

I Think FSB-GRU did quite a lot of unauthorized US technology transfer (how's that for a euphemism?) to make the S-70 possible.

If you reacall 'The Beast Of Kandahar' took a bit of an unauthorised excursion.....Suddenly the Iranians, Chinese & Russians all started playing around with flying-wing drones. 

 

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This T-14 Armata vs M1A2SEPV3 Abrams article is apparently a few years old, but I'd not seen it before. It's well worth a read. The big surprise to me is how relatively flimsy the T-14's turret is, relative to the Abrams's. As I expected, the writer gives the Abrams the edge on first detection, and we all know the implications of that!

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/does-russia’s-armata-tank-have-reason-fear-m1-abrams-192386?page=0%2C1

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Ahhh.....You've discovered what the 'Unusual Vehicles' from that Russian film were now.  ;)

If you reacall 'The Beast Of Kandahar' took a bit of an unauthorised excursion.....Suddenly the Iranians, Chinese & Russians all started playing around with flying-wing drones. 

 

Am aware of the Beast of Kandahar mishap/takeover and force down. But I think the S-70 design derives from the X-47B. In any event, ours is way ahead of theirs, to include autonomous in-flight refueling and CTOL (Carrier Takeoff and Landing). Also, would note that the S-70 is very much in the same size and payload class as the S-70. If I recall, the X-47B can carry a pair of 2000 pound class bombs, and a similar payload would be what I'd expect to see on the S-70.

https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/x-47b-ucas/

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a very good TOS-1A weapon system description, specs, organization and more. One thing I note with interest is that the range for TOS-1 and TOS-1A is way within the range limits for 152 mm and 155 mm tube artillery, both of which are in the game. Believe some maps are long enough to allow on-board firing to full TOS-1A range, a measly 6 kilometers. 
 

Here is a research paper analyzing thermobaric weapons.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322553927_Use_of_Thermobaric_Weapons

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2021 at 2:58 AM, ikalugin said:


T90M arrive to a combat unit in Western MD.

ikalugin,

First rate, and too bad it wasn't longer! Any word on how the tanker feel about having their tank heights drastically increased by all that stuff on the turret roof, stuff that looks highly susceptible to all manner of fires at that? Have no doubt it provides greatly increased combat performance, but at what battlefield cost in detectability?

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2021 at 12:26 AM, John Kettler said:

But I think the S-70 design derives from the X-47B.

I hadn't realised that someone had captured an intact X-47B!  :o

America really should be a bit more careful with their stealth drones!  :rolleyes:

PS - X-47B has very little in common with S-70:

1920px-X-47B_operating_in_the_Atlantic_T

Russian-UCAV-S70-Hunter.jpg?quality=70&w

One would have thought a trained 'threat analyst' might have noticed that.  :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Sgt.Squarehead,

In what universe? The inlet is similar in position and design to the X-47B. The planform is quite similar, too, but the Russians went with the simpler to engineer and build straight leading edge, and both have clipped wing corners. Both also have control surfaces behind both the primary wing and where it jogs back to the engine. A major design difference is that the X-47B has the same sort of IR signature reducing platypus exhaust as the B-2 does, while the S-70 has what appears to be a typical jet engine with no such IR  signature reduction capabilities. The paint job on the S-70 is very effective camouflage, in that it greatly interferes with determining the true shape of the S-70, especially the radar deflecting contours of the fuselage, if you will. All in all, I think Northrop Grumman or the US Government attorneys could make a strong case that the S-70 heavily borrowed from the X-47B design. Also, I strongly expect the S-70 shown does NOT have the RAM installed. Personally know someone who maintained both the SR-71 and F-117. According to him, you were completely shrouded in a Tyvek suit, gloves and other protections, because mere contact with the RAM was toxic.It's hard to say for sure, but the guy atop the S-70 appears to be wearing military boots, and I guarantee you our Stealth maintainers are wearing soft soled footgear which won't tear up the RAM, which is quite fragile.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

BMPT set to enter service with Red Army this December 1st. NIne will be delivered to the 90th Guards Tank Division. The thing is so scary looking I have a visceral response, something I do not have to the T-90, but maybe it's because tanks are normal to me and this is something alien. 

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/bad-news-russias-first-terminator-tank-enter-service-196046

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

It fell off a bridge.  :mellow:

  In the ground actually.  :mellow:

Was thinking that I might be seeing a chunk of bridge sidewall near the tank. As for buried in the ground, my presumption was that the crew wasn't in it when the tank departed the trailer on a one way trip. Was I wrong?

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall, this is a great article on the T-90 series in combat, almost exclusively vs ATGMs, heavily TOW-2A, but there is a small, but significant, error. The Shtora wasn't designed, that I know of, to defeat laser guided missile trackers, but SACLOS weapons by injecting rapidly changing false missile position data into the guidance feedback loop.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/russian-t-90-tank-got-smashed-bits-syria-195907

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My FB buddy, Alexey Tyuzhin posted this there, but just the pic. If any of our Russian or Ukrainian members knows anything of how this happened, please post. The wag in me thinks this was a bad way to hybridize and a tank and an IFV! On a more serious note, unless in bad weather, smoke or both, how does a tank run smack (ha!) into a BMP-2 right in front of it?

260576456_4796610547055912_7885408945320

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...