Letter from Prague Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Can someone who understands tanks explain how firing when buttoned up is different from firing when not buttoned up? Or do they not fire at all? Are the tanks just distractions nowadays? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcrof Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 38 minutes ago, AlsatianFelix said: Kreigsforscher says he is on the Vovchansk front. He had this interesting comment that Russian tankers don't fire when buttoned up because they don't know how. Would that make the crews Green or Conscript level? I believe closed firing position means hull down or from some protected position, not with hatches closed but I may be wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 1 minute ago, hcrof said: I believe closed firing position means hull down or from some protected position, not with hatches closed but I may be wrong. That would make sense too, but that's the sort of thing I think we've been seeing from Russian AFV drivers for some time now. They just go "direct path" and fire along the way, get to where they are going, fire like crazy, and then retreat. 3 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said: Can someone who understands tanks explain how firing when buttoned up is different from firing when not buttoned up? Or do they not fire at all? Are the tanks just distractions nowadays? Gunner and Commander's targeting aids require training and some degree of experience to use effectively. Aside from that, buttoned up means one has to use vision blocks and those take a while to get used to due to limited fields of view, cloudiness, etc. Unbuttoning bypasses all of this. The problem with the fancy stuff inside the AFV is that you really do need to know how to use it to, er, be able to use it. If you don't know how to use it I imagine you would get better results by having someone manually call out "raise the gun a bit" or "go to the left a bit". There is also the very real possibility of the equipment necessary to fire effectively while buttoned up simply not being there. Building on The_Capt's example, it could be that they don't have optical sights or they are so poor quality that even an experienced crew would struggle to use it effectively. It's all speculation that any of this is actually happening. Very well could just be poorly trained maneuvering and firing from buttoned state is not that big of an issue. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Probably a translation error. It's physically impossible for the gunner to fire while "unbuttoned" unless he's using his foot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 3 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said: Probably a translation error. It's physically impossible for the gunner to fire while "unbuttoned" unless he's using his foot. Dental floss 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Quote https://www.reddit.com/r/DroneCombat/comments/1din8nt/ua_65th_mechanized_brigades_44th_battalion_ronin/ UA 65th Mechanized Brigade's 44th Battalion "Ronin" drone team continues to degrade Russian logistics, using FPV strike drones to hit supply/transport vehicles in routine - but interesting - drone work. Published June 18, 2024 The last thing one poor fool did was turn his lights on, just to be sure the drone couldn't possibly miss. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Not to start THAT discussion again, but KNDS are developing (amongst other things) an upgrade (or sidegrade?) to the Leopard 2 chassis. TL;DR: 3-men in the chassis, turret with autoloader, 120 - 140mm gun, 30mm on swivel mount against drones etc..., maybe Trophy, < 60t. This is the right direction, but that doesn't mean it's good. Maybe if drone defense becomes effective, you will need tanks again. https://www.golem.de/news/unbemannter-turm-panzer-leopard-2-arc-3-0-mit-drohnenabwehr-vorgestellt-2406-186115.html 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 1 hour ago, Vanir Ausf B said: Probably a translation error. It's physically impossible for the gunner to fire while "unbuttoned" unless he's using his foot. I took it to mean "crew" with the gunner still under cover and the commander unbuttoned. We shouldn't put too much more thought into this. The report was vague, perhaps written by someone who doesn't know details very well, and finally translated by someone who probably doesn't know the details very well. Tough to know what's going on after all of that! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Quote https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-17-2024 Russian milbloggers largely focused on celebrating the dismissal of Pankov, Tsalikov, Shevtsova, and Popov and largely overlooked the apparent nepotism that benefited two of the new deputy defense ministers.[22] Russian milbloggers welcomed new MoD appointments, stating that Putin finally removed officials that thought of themselves as untouchable.[23] Russian milbloggers also claimed that these dismissals are a step in the right direction to resolve corruption in the Russian MoD and improve the defense industrial base (DIB).[24] Appointing the Czars relatives is going to reduce corruption....? Well I guess their is first time for everything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said: It's all speculation that any of this is actually happening. Very well could just be poorly trained maneuvering and firing from buttoned state is not that big of an issue. Or it could be because of flareback and toxic gasses released when the breech is opened, due to crap propellant and/or improper storage. Article may be paywalled (4 free views per month, I think). Basically the article debunks Russian claim that T-90M survived a Javelin hit. "When the tank gun fires, all the propellant is supposed to burn up in the explosion which drives the projectile forward out of the gun barrel. However, if it is only partly combusted, there will remain some very hot material which only needs oxygen to start burning. This can come into the crew compartment when the breech is opened to load the next round, with spectacular but not necessarily disastrous effects." https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2024/06/18/russians-claim-this-tank-survived-a-javelin-hit-the-truth-is-more-embarrassing 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 52 minutes ago, Sojourner said: Or it could be because of flareback and toxic gasses released when the breech is opened, due to crap propellant and/or improper storage. Article may be paywalled (4 free views per month, I think). Basically the article debunks Russian claim that T-90M survived a Javelin hit. "When the tank gun fires, all the propellant is supposed to burn up in the explosion which drives the projectile forward out of the gun barrel. However, if it is only partly combusted, there will remain some very hot material which only needs oxygen to start burning. This can come into the crew compartment when the breech is opened to load the next round, with spectacular but not necessarily disastrous effects." https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2024/06/18/russians-claim-this-tank-survived-a-javelin-hit-the-truth-is-more-embarrassing And of course there's all sorts of questions about reports like this! Which family of tank, for example. I can easily believe that the old T-62s firing without an auto loader and using (probably) very old ammo could be more of an issue than a brand new T-90. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FancyCat Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Just a little news article on Ukraine's Vietnamese community. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/18/this-country-gave-me-a-lot-the-vietnamese-people-staying-in-ukraine 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, Sojourner said: Or it could be because of flareback and toxic gasses released when the breech is opened, due to crap propellant and/or improper storage. Article may be paywalled (4 free views per month, I think). Basically the article debunks Russian claim that T-90M survived a Javelin hit. "When the tank gun fires, all the propellant is supposed to burn up in the explosion which drives the projectile forward out of the gun barrel. However, if it is only partly combusted, there will remain some very hot material which only needs oxygen to start burning. This can come into the crew compartment when the breech is opened to load the next round, with spectacular but not necessarily disastrous effects." https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2024/06/18/russians-claim-this-tank-survived-a-javelin-hit-the-truth-is-more-embarrassing This is a really good article. Given the enormous number of problems we have seen with Russian ammo storage the crews may be stuck between keeping the hatches closed and asphyxiating, or opening them and inviting a drone to visit. I wonder how many bad rounds you have to fire before you decide to take your chances with the drones? Edited June 19 by dan/california 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FancyCat Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 more emphasis from the U.S, Ukraine now has the ability to counter Russian forces massing anywhere in front of the border with Ukraine. Quote From our @JakeSullivan46 interview: US agreement with Ukraine allows Ukraine to fire US weapons into Russia across from Sumy: "It extends to anywhere that Russian forces are coming across the border from the Russian side to the Ukrainian side to try to take additional Ukrainian territory... That's happened in Kharkiv. We have seen initial indications that Russia has made exploratory moves across in Sumy. And so it would apply there as well." 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 15 minutes ago, FancyCat said: Just a little news article on Ukraine's Vietnamese community. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/18/this-country-gave-me-a-lot-the-vietnamese-people-staying-in-ukraine "Not satisfied with taking on the Ukrainians, Russia has decided to go fully suicidal and take on the Vietnamese, the Finns, the..." 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Flareback. I recall as far back as the US MBT-70/M60A3 programs the US had problems with combustible case conventional ammo not entirely combusting. They got around that with a complex air blower bore evacuation system that would woosh the embers (or however much was still there) up the tube. I have no recollection of 120mm gun cases having similar problems. I feel that info's in my head somewhere but its not surfacing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 9 hours ago, dan/california said: Appointing the Czars relatives is going to reduce corruption....? Well I guess their is first time for everything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zinz Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/nato-and-ukrainian-air-defences 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, zinz said: https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/nato-and-ukrainian-air-defences Excellent information and gives a good insight, well worth a read... Thanks for the link 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Our old pal, Tucker Carlson, is back in the news after an interview with a prominent economist who is either a useful idiot or on the Kremlin payroll: https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4727046-from-economist-to-kremlin-mouthpiece-the-troubling-transformation-of-jeffrey-sachs/ Not being familiar with Sachs (as far as I can remember), I looked into what's been going on with him over the years. It seems he has fallen into the familiar pattern of right wing ideologue "intellectuals" who view the West as the enemy in a struggle against beneficial authoritarianism. This article in The New Yorker makes it clear where his bias is: https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/jeffrey-sachss-great-power-politics I encourage people to read it because the interviewer did an excellent job holding his feet to the fire of his own creation. Specifically, that the murderous actions of people like Assad and Putin are 100% the fault of US policy. 0% blame assigned to the murders. "Your honor, I was forced to rape her because she chose to wear a short skirt. I can not be held responsible for her decisions". Disgusting. Towards the end Sachs basically threatens to end the interview because he doesn't want to answer relevant questions he KNOWS contradict his stated principles. This is the hallmark of someone who ascribes to far right ideology with the intellectual knowledge of what that ideology leads to. They know, somewhere (perhaps not even deep down), that their positions are inherently contradictory. Their solution is the tried and true playbook of blame the victim, whataboutisms, denial of obvious facts, attack the questions instead of answering them, and/or cite "secret knowledge" when asked for sources to back up counter-factual claims. Some are surprised to see smart people, like Sachs, behaving this way. The other way to look at it is only someone possessing intelligence and knowledge can pull this sort of charade off with any degree of believably. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Not surprisingly, Putin and Kim sign an agreement to work more closely together: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/kim-jong-un-and-putin-sign-pact-to-help-each-other-if-attacked/ar-BB1otMwO I think this Telegraph article does a good job summing up what this means: Quote Vladimir Putin’s journey to Pyongyang to meet fellow dictator Kim Jong-un is emblematic of the Russian leader’s isolation. Just 10 years ago, he was attending meetings of the G8 (now the G7) and rubbing shoulders with the leaders of the world’s richest nations. Now he has to go cap in hand to the pariah state of North Korea to seek both support for his war in Ukraine and the weapons to pursue it. ... It is not Putin who is the big player in this region but Xi Jinping, and he will not look kindly on the Russian leader trying to muscle in on Beijing’s sphere of influence. Putin may try to present himself as a major world figure; but fawning to the leader of such an odious regime merely diminishes him and his country even further than it has been already. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/putin-has-been-diminished/ar-BB1otVMU?cvid=73dd488f8acc4df1862556bc728374d9&ei=18 Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbindc Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said: Not surprisingly, Putin and Kim sign an agreement to work more closely together: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/kim-jong-un-and-putin-sign-pact-to-help-each-other-if-attacked/ar-BB1otMwO I think this Telegraph article does a good job summing up what this means: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/putin-has-been-diminished/ar-BB1otVMU?cvid=73dd488f8acc4df1862556bc728374d9&ei=18 Steve Something to add is that folks should be quite clear on the reality that none of this happens without China acquiescing to it. The DPRK's banking, trade, food supplies all depend on China fairly abjectly. So..while Xi is refusing to directly provide official Chinese aid to Moscow in the Ukraine war it should be understood that he is willing to let proxies do so. This is not necessarily because he wants Russia to win but rather that he does not want it to lose either. Edited June 19 by billbindc 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Yup. The thing is, Xi would not be happy to have NK start making deals with Russia on its own. I don't think there's any worry of that happening. Xi has all the levers of power to prevent it. So I expect we'll probably learn that China is backfilling NK artillery and missile inventories, much the way the US is backfilling its allies who provide stuff to Ukraine. And let the proxy war continue! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.