Russian arms topic revived... :)

[Bufo]

2 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

how does a tank run smack (ha!) into a BMP-2 right in front of it?

In the T-72 the driver only has one periscope looking at the front. My guess is the BMP was coming from the right and by the time the tanks driver saw it, it was already too late.

[Erwin]

Clearly someone ran a red light.

[ZPB II]

Sneeze at the wrong time and things can happen.

The Terminator looks supremely cool, but raises many questions. How often do targets that require dual autocannon fire to succesfully engage come up? It seems jam-packed with sensors, making it highly expensive, how many of these can a struggling economy build and maintain? The BMP-3 tried to fit as many weapon systems on a single platform as possible and I'm under the impression it was deemed a bit of a failure, but was it? What should I cook for dinner?

[John Kettler]

Bufo,

Appreciate the explanation.

Erwin,

Obviously.

Zeb II,

Believe the buy is currently planned as 90. That's basically one battalion. If the scale of issue is one BMPT Company per Tank Battalion, that works out to one Tank Regiment with a BMPT Battalion in support.  Not all that much, to be sure, but it paves the way for FMS (Foreign Military Sales), where the BMPT is receiving the star treatment in terms of being promoted. Also, the lifting of US sanctions (info is for geostrategic purposes) on several key energy projects will greatly help Russia's crippled economy, in turn feeding more money into the MoD military purchase accounts. That will allow not only purchasing more weapons. but fielding them sooner, which is great news for the Armata family and other new weapons. Thus, we are almost certainly going to see that 90 BMPT buy, presuming the BMPT works out in service trials of the nine coming into service, hugely expanded, with the goal, I believe, of equipping every Tank Regiment with a BMPT Battalion in support. The first place I would expect to see the BMPT deployed in earnest would be with the go to BTGs, the tactical combined arms teeth of the new pattern Red Army.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited November 24, 2021 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Oops! Wrote wrong number, and it screws up everything based on it. The present planned 90 BMPT buy funds one Regiment, not one Battalion. Consequently, this means a single Tank Division is the maximum force size that can have BMPT support if we posit 1 BMPT for each Tank Platoon. If the scale of issue is instead one for one, then only a single Tank Regiment would be able. to have proper BMPT support. 

Regards,

John Kettler

[chuckdyke]

18 hours ago, John Kettler said:

If any of our Russian or Ukrainian members knows anything of how this happened, please post.

The Tank T-boned the AFV cause? One or two drivers didn't think. If something like this happens in Oz the cops come out with their AlcoLimit breath analyzing kit. Sorry I am not Russian or Ukrainian. 

Edited November 25, 2021 by chuckdyke

[John Kettler]

Over in the Super Bundle thread, dan/california spoke out in support of a Winter Module for CMBS, a notion I wholeheartedly support. As a result of what he said, I went looking for Modern Red Army winter video and found this longish (badly flawed) gem. Why badly flawed? There is very little actual audio of weapons firing, engines running, etc., but instead a maddening superabundance of techno, with some less intrusive music here and there, but mostly also masking the desired audio. That truly regrettable situation aside, this thing is grog gold, with everything from guys firing a black AK-74 or Shmel-M clear up to the gigantic, majestic and gorgeous Tu-160 White Swan strategic bomber. All sorts of armor and artillery (including the mighty 2S7 Pion) are on the Poligon at what am all but dead certain is Alabino, site of both the Army Games and Tank Biathlon. Of particular note are the T-14 Armata and the BMPT Terminator, both in platoon strength, both in temperate camouflage. The BMPTs were operating in a platoon fairly closely spaced line abreast, unlike the usual tank line abreast formation, which is considerably more widely spaced. This could mean that the BMPTs will be fought using a pure formation, rather than being parceled out on a scale of one BMPT per Tank Platoon. Speaking of winter camouflage, the range is from none through overall whitewash, fabric wraps and white snow nets. Also, you won't see ice breaching ops in the current CMBS!
 

Regards,

John Kettler

[Haiduk]

On 11/24/2021 at 10:17 AM, John Kettler said:

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?

John Kettler

During maneuvers "Center-11" (probably 2011 year) the crew of T-72 got poisoning from gunshot residue (maybe fail of venting) - driver lost consciousness and rammed BMP. All members of tank crew and one crewman of BMP got traumas

Here the same situation Tunguska vs. BMP

[ng cavscout]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43273/russian-t-80-tank-with-improvised-anti-drone-armor-reportedly-appears-in-crimea

[akd]

24 minutes ago, ng cavscout said:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43273/russian-t-80-tank-with-improvised-anti-drone-armor-reportedly-appears-in-crimea

Clearly T-72B.

[Bufo]

26 minutes ago, akd said:

Clearly T-72B.

Yep.

[Combatintman]

On 11/24/2021 at 8:20 AM, Bufo said:

In the T-72 the driver only has one periscope looking at the front. My guess is the BMP was coming from the right and by the time the tanks driver saw it, it was already too late.

 

16 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

The Tank T-boned the AFV cause? One or two drivers didn't think. If something like this happens in Oz the cops come out with their AlcoLimit breath analyzing kit. Sorry I am not Russian or Ukrainian. 

More like the commander - being aware of where the wagon is and what is going on around it and then telling the driver where to go, stop and start as a result of said observations is a big part of commanding an AFV.

[Bufo]

2 hours ago, Combatintman said:

 

More like the commander - being aware of where the wagon is and what is going on around it and then telling the driver where to go, stop and start as a result of said observations is a big part of commanding an AFV.

You assume there was a commander inside... I don't know what they were doing, but this is not always the case. If they just need the tank to go around so for example infantry can practice things, a single driver suffices. 

[chuckdyke]

4 hours ago, Combatintman said:

telling the driver where to go

Da Da Net Durak only Russian I know. Yes Yes No You Idiot. 

[John Kettler]

Haiduk,

Many thanks! Your explanation jibes directly with a tanker veteran from Kursk, where the combination of blazing heat and built up propellant fumes caused the driver to pass out, resulting in an agonizing decision to breach combat regulations by unbuttoning the tank. Had Special Detachment found out, it could've been very bad, for the combat regulations were full-on military law and prosecuted accordingly. The second pic in your post is enhanced by the soldier in the frame barely holding it together to keep from laughing out loud. 

Regards,

John Kettler

[Combatintman]

21 hours ago, Bufo said:

You assume there was a commander inside... I don't know what they were doing, but this is not always the case. If they just need the tank to go around so for example infantry can practice things, a single driver suffices. 

As the imagery demonstrates - it clearly does not.  Commanders or ground guides are pretty useful.

[civdiv]

21 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Da Da Net Durak only Russian I know. Yes Yes No You Idiot. 

Peetchka and Speetchka are the only ones I know. I can’t remember which is which.

[John Kettler]

The Russians have, as of November 26, 2021, deployed to Ukraine (occupied Crimea) at least one T-80 tank with expedient overhead turret protection against what some seem to think are drones, but others, Javelin. Ukraine has both. The new armor, which has several feet of standoff, exclusively protects the turret and nothing else. Adding to the novelty, the video showing that particular tank entering Ukraine comes as a TikTok! That tank is fitted with mine plows and has ERA blocks stacked on the engine deck, though this may just be for transport. There's a pic in the article showing three more tanks (T-72s?) with the newish protection scheme and no mine plows, though the article says the turret cages are nothing new for the Russian tank brigades.

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2021/11/26/russian-tank-with-improvised-anti-drone-armor-entered-ukraine-video/?fbclid=IwAR2Rmum9c6yJdH1ibgr1FZeB07k8vF-1Y8oZoNDKqNaqxCp5lU0fFJXA1t8

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited November 27, 2021 by John Kettler

[Sgt.Squarehead]

If it works it's a wonderfully cheap fix for a big problem.....Looks ridiculous though. 

[John Kettler]

22 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

If it works it's a wonderfully cheap fix for a big problem.....Looks ridiculous though. 

Slat/bar armor blew my mind when I first saw a large format pic of a Stryker looking like a hippo in a tutu while encased in the stuff. But if you understand how the RPG projectile and similar are structured, it makes all the sense on the world. The new overhead turret protection should work great against small suicide drones or drones dropping small bombs a la what we've seen jihadists use, but my jury's definitely still out on Javelin and such. Would consider it reasonable to expect it could prevent a K-Kill, but would fully be prepared to believe it would, given the extremely potent warhead, wreck most or all of what's atop the turret if buttoned, and maybe the whole tank itself if the TC's hatch is open and he's up and looking about. A shaped charge jet and/or detonation wave entering the fighting compartment wouldn't be good!

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Edited November 28, 2021 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

A colleague from my local tabletop gaming group posted this most interesting article on a Russian near silent, and certainly flashless, mortar. 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/23443/russian-commandos-are-getting-silent-mortars-that-are-as-quiet-as-a-suppressed-rifle

 

Believe the Belgian firm PRB first invented this technology in the late 1960s or early 1970s. My recollection is that it came as both a mortar and something more akin to the WW II ASW weapon Hedgehog with a whole bunch of these projectiles sitting on an array of spigotsa la Blacker Bombard or PIAT.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

[John Kettler]

Found this highly interesting and informative video on RATNIK, to include the latest near SF grade third version. The presenter is/was an infantryman himself, so is not some featherbed merchant pontificating. The video discusses the militarily embarrassing, sometimes, fatal combat origins of RATNIK in the Georgia War, what's in it, where it's going, combat experience in multiple theaters with it. There is a related sidebar discussion of the armor protection and another on the AK-12 and new thermal sights for it and the MGs. One of the things I found out about RATNIK is there is a digital system that allows a squad to be run at the individual soldier level and is done from an electronic tablet. Know the US has all kinds of goodies, but am unaware we have anything down to the individual soldier level in terms of digital battle control, as opposed to BLUFOR unit locations. From the brief glimpse shown, it sure looked to me as if individual Russian soldiers could each be given a specific order/s.

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

This well-illustrated article goes into a great deal more detail on RATNIK, and I have to say that some of its capabilities read like something out of the Robert Heinlein classic SF novel Starship Troopers ref the features of the powered armor suit. The RATNIK soldier monitoring system is remarkable. Offhand, I know of no other such system deployed. Also, it appears that comprehensive measures have been made to reduce IR emissions and that much careful thought. has gone into designing the ballistic protection, including the surprising to me capabilities of the uniform fabric itself to stop small fragments from injuring areas not protected by the body armor per se. What a far cry from soldiers running around practically naked against almost any threat!

https://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_russian_military_field_equipment/ratnik_future_soldier_individual_soldier_combat_gear_system_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_12205165.html

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited December 17, 2021 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Here is another article on RATNIK, complete with high res color of it in troop trials in 2016. Would love to know how BFC modeled the impressive array of capabilities possessed even in  RATNIK 1. Also, while I get the French selling arms to Russia (see, for example, the Catherine thermal sights), Rheinmetall is another matter altogether.

https://defence.nridigital.com/global_defence_technology_dec21/ratnik_soldier_system

As of 2019, RATNIK 2 was operational (not sure on what scale, but supposedly force wide), and the article below describes not only the advancements in the thermal sights in both weight reduction and range doubling, but also the transfer of the new technologies into the T-90 and BMP-3, to name but two AFVs.

https://tass.com/defense/1075716

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited December 17, 2021 by John Kettler

[Haiduk]

3 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Here is another article on RATNIK, complete with high res color of it in troop trials in 2016. Would love to know how BFC modeled the impressive array of capabilities possessed even in  RATNIK 1. Also, while I get the French selling arms to Russia (see, for example, the Catherine thermal sights), Rheinmetall is another matter altogether.

As of 2017 the game timeline, Ratnik was in service only of special forces and some recon units. Usual ground forces sometime had only some elements of Ratnik. As I read Russian forums - main problem was insufficent educational level of personnel to use such complex properly - chiefs of brigades supply services often even didn't want to receive this equipment, because any loss or breaking (or even theft for selling) of expencive Ratnik element by the guilt of persoonel inflicts huge amount of bureacracy, trials with highest chiefs, committees, reprimands etc - who wants such headache?  

About Cathrine thermals - after imposition of sanctions Russia uses Chinese matrix. At least Belarusian-designed Sosna-U thermal sight, which mounts on T-72B3 now has Chineese matrix with 2500 m detection range instead 3500 m of Cathrine.