User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:24:35 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By general_cluster: Any reliable updates on this? Twitter is awash with mostly bad but conflicting news. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By general_cluster: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: 4 hrs ago.
Any reliable updates on this? Twitter is awash with mostly bad but conflicting news. Not as of yet, War Monitor is pretty reliable as to what is happening on the front lines. The Video from Bakhmut I posted showed the men under Russian spotting artillery fire and they claimed to have lost 50 to 100 meters in some places. They also were requesting more drones. Honestly, if it was up to me, I would have HIMARS pound the Russian artillery and manpower masses in the troubled areas, then use Excalibur rounds on the newly taken Ukrainian defensive lines and push the Russians back again like they did a week ago. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:25:38 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SoCalExile: MBTs without thermals are deathtraps on a modern battlefield. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SoCalExile: Originally Posted By Special-K: Originally Posted By B5Sluggo: Originally Posted By Special-K: Considering how the Stryker is like a much improved BTR, and the Ukrainians have been using the fuck out of those, I can't imagine Strykers wouldn't be useful - especially given its many variants. Maybe even the Mobile Gun System would be a welcome addition to them. FWIW, IIRC, our Stryker Brigades were modeled after/inspired by the Russian Motorized Rifle Regiments from the Cold War. I'd like to see them get Stryker's, LAV-TOW variants, and anything else in that vehicle family that helps their mobility, firepower and surviability. If there are any M901 Hammerhead TOW variants in depots, I'd like to see those fixed up and handed over too. Frankly, if we're reluctant to hand over M1's because of Maint requirements, are there any M60's that haven't been handed off? An old MBT is better than no MBT's. Agreed on the M-60's - and the same with talk some months ago that Germany may give them Leopard 1's. Lots of M-60's out there still + spare parts. Maybe not so much for Leopards, but they can still be really useful for however long they can keep them running. This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:31:03 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: The plot thickens my friends.  https://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/poland/exhibition/mspo_2012/news/pictures/raytheon_essm_PELICAN_2k12_kub_modernized_MSPO_2012.jpg https://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/poland/exhibition/mspo_2012/news/pictures/raytheon_essm_PELICAN_2k12_kub_modernized_MSPO_2012_2.jpg Article from 2012 with Raytheon upgrading Poland's BUK system with Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles. https://www.armyrecognition.com/mspo_2012_show_daily_news_pictures_video_uk/raytheon_evolved_sea_sparrow_missile_essm_modernizes_polish_medium_range_air_defense_system.html pdf file with brochure of the SAM network using these missiles. https://wzu.pl/sites/default/files/Mobile_air_defense_missile_set_BIRDS.pdf Those would work nicely against cruise missiles. |
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:32:46 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: 4 hrs ago.
Almost like taking one or two Mobiks, having them run to center of village, take a picture and report village is taken. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:35:31 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: Originally Posted By SoCalExile: Originally Posted By Special-K: Originally Posted By B5Sluggo: Originally Posted By Special-K: Considering how the Stryker is like a much improved BTR, and the Ukrainians have been using the fuck out of those, I can't imagine Strykers wouldn't be useful - especially given its many variants. Maybe even the Mobile Gun System would be a welcome addition to them. FWIW, IIRC, our Stryker Brigades were modeled after/inspired by the Russian Motorized Rifle Regiments from the Cold War. I'd like to see them get Stryker's, LAV-TOW variants, and anything else in that vehicle family that helps their mobility, firepower and surviability. If there are any M901 Hammerhead TOW variants in depots, I'd like to see those fixed up and handed over too. Frankly, if we're reluctant to hand over M1's because of Maint requirements, are there any M60's that haven't been handed off? An old MBT is better than no MBT's. Agreed on the M-60's - and the same with talk some months ago that Germany may give them Leopard 1's. Lots of M-60's out there still + spare parts. Maybe not so much for Leopards, but they can still be really useful for however long they can keep them running. This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). I agree with this. If the West can provide trained Ukrainian crews that know how to use the night vision systems on the vehicles and have dismounts with night vision, they can be a serious force multiplier. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:36:48 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Schmigs: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Flxips1XEAAUNOq?format=png&name=900x900 I wonder if the big spike in armoured vehicle kills is a sign the ground is freezing. Huge spike in other vehicles gone leads me to believe they hit a depot or big azzed convoy (maybe train carrying all that?) somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:37:12 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Evil_Chaos: It was a bit over a week ago there was video in which Kadyrov said Soledor was his, just needed to clean up details. I am sure someone has that vid. Didn't believe the goatfucker then and don't believe this shit now. Almost like taking one or two Mobiks, having them run to center of village, take a picture and report village is taken. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Evil_Chaos: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: 4 hrs ago.
Almost like taking one or two Mobiks, having them run to center of village, take a picture and report village is taken. That certainly has been going on in the past on the Russian side. Wagner has the extra goal of claiming any gains in the area as well for monetary compensation, so we'll have to wait for video and geolocation to help tell what is going on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:37:48 AM EST
[#8]
Here’s another theory: The Battle of Bahkmut is all about the salt. Sort of a real-life “Dune.”
Personally, I think that’s nuts, but Reuters says they have a White House source pushing that narrative. (Behind a paywall) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-thinks-putin-ally-prigozhin-wants-control-salt-gypsum-mines-near-bakhmut-2023-01-05/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:38:56 AM EST
[#9]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:40:59 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). I think you are correct. Also, there seems to be the assumption they can only be used the way we use them, and that Ukrainians cannot develop tactics to fit their battlefield. If anything, they’ve demonstrated a tremendous ability for that. T-72 may not be an Abrams, but there’s no reason they can’t work in tandem once trained and equipped. I also wonder about the TOWs being sent. The press release indicated a single load-out for each Brad and no more. That just can’t be correct. |
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:42:10 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: I am not an expert, I'm a casual observer. I know nothing about battle strategy, training & tactics. But it seems to me that this conflict will fundamentally change our TRADOC in a lot of ways. I have a hunch that a lot of smart people are already frantically conducting analyses and assessments, and will do much more as more details become available from AFU. How assets are deployed, positioned, and used is going to be changing a lot as a result of the changes we see from battlefield technology. The other interesting thing here is that, like the wealth, the difference between the haves and the have-nots is getting dramatically bigger. The difference between peer and near-peer conflicts and other conflicts is getting wider. How to mount an invasion of, say Venezuela, versus Japan will take vastly different battlefield tactics. And the proliferation of technology also is a game changer. Cheap, high-tech drones are being produced in places that aren't commonly thought of as top-rate industrial powers (see Iran, Turkey). They don't have to meet US concepts of "mil-spec" to be effective on the battlefield. I feel like we're watching fundamental changes coming into play, just as in the Crimean War and WWI. I wish Sylvan were in this thread. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad: They just got those French 155mm BONUS anti-tank smart cluster rounds into action a day or two ago, 35km range. If they received enough they greatly improved Ukrainian long range anti-tank firepower and probably caught a lot of Russian armor napping who thought they were more or less safely out of range. I know that armor has remained relevant thus far, but I don't know how tanks are supposed to accomplish anything when they're under constant surveillance from drones and there's a 20-30km death zone before you even reach the front with smart cluster bombs raining down. They'd have to firewall the accelerator and try to outrun the drone/artillery response time for an hour just to have a chance to reach the front. And when smart loitering munitions reduce the response time to zero the pell-mell zerg rush won't work either. I am not an expert, I'm a casual observer. I know nothing about battle strategy, training & tactics. But it seems to me that this conflict will fundamentally change our TRADOC in a lot of ways. I have a hunch that a lot of smart people are already frantically conducting analyses and assessments, and will do much more as more details become available from AFU. How assets are deployed, positioned, and used is going to be changing a lot as a result of the changes we see from battlefield technology. The other interesting thing here is that, like the wealth, the difference between the haves and the have-nots is getting dramatically bigger. The difference between peer and near-peer conflicts and other conflicts is getting wider. How to mount an invasion of, say Venezuela, versus Japan will take vastly different battlefield tactics. And the proliferation of technology also is a game changer. Cheap, high-tech drones are being produced in places that aren't commonly thought of as top-rate industrial powers (see Iran, Turkey). They don't have to meet US concepts of "mil-spec" to be effective on the battlefield. I feel like we're watching fundamental changes coming into play, just as in the Crimean War and WWI. I wish Sylvan were in this thread. Sylvan is not my favorite person but I do agree that his knowledge base would provide quite a few interesting details here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:42:50 AM EST
[#12]
1 hr ago.
|
|
|
|
WI, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 10:45:15 AM EST
[#13]
I just thought this historical bit about the Crimean War was interesting in light of today's conflict:
The destruction of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Sevastopol and other naval docks was a humiliation. No compulsory disarmament had ever been imposed on a great power previously... The Allies did not really think that they were dealing with a European power in Russia. They regarded Russia as a semi-Asiatic state... In Russia itself, the Crimean defeat discredited the armed services and highlighted the need to modernize the country's defences, not just in the strictly military sense, but also through the building of railways, industrialization, sound finances and so on... The image many Russians had built up of their country – the biggest, richest and most powerful in the world – had suddenly been shattered. Russia's backwardness had been exposed... The Crimean disaster had exposed the shortcomings of every institution in Russia – not just the corruption and incompetence of the military command, the technological backwardness of the army and navy, or the inadequate roads and lack of railways that accounted for the chronic problems of supply, but the poor condition and illiteracy of the serfs who made up the armed forces, the inability of the serf economy to sustain a state of war against industrial powers, and the failures of autocracy itself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:05:42 AM EST
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: I think you are correct. Also, there seems to be the assumption they can only be used the way we use them, and that Ukrainians cannot develop tactics to fit their battlefield. If anything, they’ve demonstrated a tremendous ability for that. T-72 may not be an Abrams, but there’s no reason they can’t work in tandem once trained and equipped. I also wonder about the TOWs being sent. The press release indicated a single load-out for each Brad and no more. That just can’t be correct. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: Originally Posted By Dominion21: This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). I think you are correct. Also, there seems to be the assumption they can only be used the way we use them, and that Ukrainians cannot develop tactics to fit their battlefield. If anything, they’ve demonstrated a tremendous ability for that. T-72 may not be an Abrams, but there’s no reason they can’t work in tandem once trained and equipped. I also wonder about the TOWs being sent. The press release indicated a single load-out for each Brad and no more. That just can’t be correct. Regarding the TOW loadouts, Bradley M2 IFV's usually carry two rounds in the launcher and 5 reloads. Plus the US sent Ukraine 1,500 additional TOW rounds back in August. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:19:06 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t while the situation is going on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:32:54 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
Wtf..is Bakhmut falling? |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:33:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: MFP_4073]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). this is a very good post we tend to play the game kids play -- can a tiger beat a gorilla. can chuck norris beat mike tyson. those are theoretical match-ups based on hypotheticals / measureables. in the end you have to analyze it in terms of the SPECIFICs of the actual conflict as Dominion has done above. terrain / weather matters. NCO proficiency matters. logistics matter. training matters. we are providing the Bradleys to a highly experienced fighting force. we are not providing them to a third world country where the crews need training from square one. the 'phase in' could happen very quickly. ukraine has proven to be highly efficient in adopting 'foreign' equipment very quickly / skillfully 50 bradleys does not sound like a lot. and i wish it was more. but incorporated into the correct 'mix' of armor (ie Ukrainian T64s / T72s with well-trained crews) you would immediately have a significant new capability to serve as a powerful penetration force. i have no doubt Ukraine can skillfully employ these assets. with 50 Bradleys you could theoretically organize -- 5 tank heavy battalions -- each with 2 armor companies and one Bradley infantry company (if you shorted each platoon one Brad -- 3 Brads per platoon x 16 platoons / 3 platoons per company). as mentioned above -- Ukraine is not short of tanks... 5 of these battalions could be a decisive force if used in the right place at the right time. |
|
|
ND, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:36:25 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: 1 hr ago.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FlzAlUbaYAAP7dU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 One of Russias biggest advantages in this conflict, and historically biggest advantage is flesh. They have lots of meat to throw at an opponents army. They are going back to that way of fighting, because that’s all they have. It’s like one of those zombie games. Just masses of bodies attacking. Give a rusty AK to an illiterate meat bag, tell him it’s Nazi/NATO/Pole army attacking Russia, go forward to defend the motherland, off they go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:37:59 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dominion21: Originally Posted By SoCalExile: Originally Posted By Special-K: Originally Posted By B5Sluggo: Originally Posted By Special-K: Considering how the Stryker is like a much improved BTR, and the Ukrainians have been using the fuck out of those, I can't imagine Strykers wouldn't be useful - especially given its many variants. Maybe even the Mobile Gun System would be a welcome addition to them. FWIW, IIRC, our Stryker Brigades were modeled after/inspired by the Russian Motorized Rifle Regiments from the Cold War. I'd like to see them get Stryker's, LAV-TOW variants, and anything else in that vehicle family that helps their mobility, firepower and surviability. If there are any M901 Hammerhead TOW variants in depots, I'd like to see those fixed up and handed over too. Frankly, if we're reluctant to hand over M1's because of Maint requirements, are there any M60's that haven't been handed off? An old MBT is better than no MBT's. Agreed on the M-60's - and the same with talk some months ago that Germany may give them Leopard 1's. Lots of M-60's out there still + spare parts. Maybe not so much for Leopards, but they can still be really useful for however long they can keep them running. This is the point: nearly all Russian tanks encountered in Ukraine are T-72 variants (soon to be backed up by refurbed T-62s). Most of these lack functioning thermal sights, due to poor manufacture, lack of maintenance, and THEFT. Lack of training and lack of refresher training further dooms the few Russian tanks with functioning thermals. The US military officers in this thread are largely basing their predictions on: - assuming Russia is fielding only T-90 or better, and - assuming Russian tank crew training is equal or superior to our and maximizes the tanks full capabilities and - assuming the best Russian tank commanders are in charge and fully committed to the fight. None of these assumptions have proven true in Ukraine. The tanks lack thermals, the crews are incompetent, and the leadership is absent in battle. These facts are why I believe the Bradleys will have an oversize impact going head to head against Russian armor. Moreover, as pointed out above: Ukraine already has more MBTs than they need or can even handle. Due to western military advice, they wisely hold their MBTs in reserve; used them to assault Kherson, and put them back into hiding. The Bradleys can join the fight on day 1, and prevail over the real, actual, threats they are likely to encounter in Ukraine (not theoretical foes based on assumptions). I agree. Bradley's will be key in the spring |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:42:28 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlabamaFan64: And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t while the situation is going on. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlabamaFan64: Originally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t while the situation is going on. This one has had decades of non-intervention already. We are now at the “invaded Poland” stage. Except Poland held, and the western powers didn’t declare war because they can feed Poland. Dealing with an expansionist minded authoritarian is nearly impossible, especially one ramping up his power and rhetoric over time. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:45:29 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: Wtf..is Bakhmut falling? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
Wtf..is Bakhmut falling? No, but they've been in this situation before. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:48:55 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: Wtf..is Bakhmut falling? Just Russia doing what they've done many times before. Saving up extra manpower and munitions, throwing it at layered defenses, breaking a line or two, becoming exhausted, and eventually being dislodged. Bakhmut is defense in depth, taking 100 meters like that video indicates isn't remotely close to a breakthrough. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:49:26 AM EST
[#23]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:51:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#24]
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:53:39 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: Here’s another theory: The Battle of Bahkmut is all about the salt. Sort of a real-life “Dune.”
Personally, I think that’s nuts, but Reuters says they have a White House source pushing that narrative. (Behind a paywall) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-thinks-putin-ally-prigozhin-wants-control-salt-gypsum-mines-near-bakhmut-2023-01-05/ it is nuts. a friend worked at a US salt production facility, told me that their product was cheaper than topsoil when sold in bulk -- that is to say, literally cheaper than dirt. It is probably the least lucrative mining there is. Then there is gypsum. Basically drywall. $9 a (metric) ton in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/219363/wallboard-products-crude-price-in-the-us/ Literally cheaper than dirt. These are some of the least valuable least strategic assets in Ukraine. If he wants them, it's only so he can claim to have gotten them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 11:55:36 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By general_cluster: it is nuts. a friend worked at a US salt production facility, told me that their product was cheaper than topsoil when sold in bulk -- that is to say, literally cheaper than dirt. It is probably the least lucrative mining there is. Then there is gypsum. Basically drywall. $9 a (metric) ton in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/219363/wallboard-products-crude-price-in-the-us/ Literally cheaper than dirt. These are some of the least valuable least strategic assets in Ukraine. If he wants them, it's only so he can claim to have gotten them. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By general_cluster: Originally Posted By Jack67: Here’s another theory: The Battle of Bahkmut is all about the salt. Sort of a real-life “Dune.”
Personally, I think that’s nuts, but Reuters says they have a White House source pushing that narrative. (Behind a paywall) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-thinks-putin-ally-prigozhin-wants-control-salt-gypsum-mines-near-bakhmut-2023-01-05/ it is nuts. a friend worked at a US salt production facility, told me that their product was cheaper than topsoil when sold in bulk -- that is to say, literally cheaper than dirt. It is probably the least lucrative mining there is. Then there is gypsum. Basically drywall. $9 a (metric) ton in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/219363/wallboard-products-crude-price-in-the-us/ Literally cheaper than dirt. These are some of the least valuable least strategic assets in Ukraine. If he wants them, it's only so he can claim to have gotten them. They make a profit off of all of it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:05:15 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prime: Russian position taken. Dead Russians. https://t.me/supernova_plus/16327
I need a thermal scope |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:06:00 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: Here’s another theory: The Battle of Bahkmut is all about the salt. Sort of a real-life “Dune.”
Personally, I think that’s nuts, but Reuters says they have a White House source pushing that narrative. (Behind a paywall) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-thinks-putin-ally-prigozhin-wants-control-salt-gypsum-mines-near-bakhmut-2023-01-05/ Salt has a lot of industrial uses. A big one is the production of chlorine and caustic soda. But it's so plentiful that I'd have a real hard time believing Russia is fighting over it.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:14:36 PM EST
[#29]
Is Ukraine assessed as doing all they can at Bakhmut to hold on by their fingernails? I'm hoping they're feigning strain to the limit and are using it as bait to draw in Russian resources from other parts of the front where they plan to launch their offensive(s). They've had resources to spare for the slow but steady offensive on the Svatove-Kreminna line, so that's encouraging. They keep softening up Crimea and Melitopol with strikes that could have more directly relieved the pressure on Bakhmut instead. Ukrainian priorities seem suspect at times, if Bakhmut is really touch and go.
I keep thinking it smells like Stalingrad, when Stalin's generals convinced him to feed in just enough men to stave off defeat and keep Paulus stuck in place tantalized by the prize just out of reach while new Russian units were assembled and trained up and launched an encirclement as soon as it got cold. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:22:15 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mal_means_bad: I keep thinking it smells like Stalingrad, when Stalin's generals convinced him to feed in just enough men to stave off defeat and keep Paulus stuck in place tantalized by the prize just out of reach while new Russian units were assembled and trained up and launched an encirclement as soon as it got cold. if that is it -- pure speculation on my part -- it would be very smart. in boxing -- the equivalent of letting your opponent punch himself out while you are planning your counter-attack for when he is fatigued |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:27:25 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SoCalExile: MBTs without thermals are deathtraps on a modern battlefield. IIRC both the M-60 and the Leo-1 have them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:38:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: Jaehaerys]
[#32]
Poland is considering a request from Ukraine to donate its German-made Leopard tanks, a senior Polish diplomat says. The source says Poland eventually will give all 240 tanks to Ukraine, depending on how quickly Poland receives replacement - WSJ
Speculation in the comments is that this is a negotiating measure to bully Germany into sending Leopards. |
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:48:38 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlabamaFan64: And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t while the situation is going on. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlabamaFan64: Originally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t while the situation is going on. Fair point. On the topic of nukes and WW3, the two most often stated fears, I have to ask this: if neither of those two things have kicked off by now, aren't they less likely to happen at a future point? Putin repeatedly threatened to use nukes...as early as, what? June? July? The only other likely belligerents I can see escalating this to a World War scope are Poland and/or Belarus throwing in with actual boots on the ground; none of that has happened either. I just have a hard time picturing what else might lead to an actual releasing of nukes or World War-level conflict if the fighting remains more or less the same as now: Ukraine gradually retaking ground, and Russia gradually taking more losses in all sectors (economy, the UN, military projection/might, etc). Ukraine and her allies have pretty much zero reason to hold back "because of those fears," given how the course of the war has gone so far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:51:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mal_means_bad: Is Ukraine assessed as doing all they can at Bakhmut to hold on by their fingernails? I'm hoping they're feigning strain to the limit and are using it as bait to draw in Russian resources from other parts of the front where they plan to launch their offensive(s). They've had resources to spare for the slow but steady offensive on the Svatove-Kreminna line, so that's encouraging. They keep softening up Crimea and Melitopol with strikes that could have more directly relieved the pressure on Bakhmut instead. Ukrainian priorities seem suspect at times, if Bakhmut is really touch and go. I keep thinking it smells like Stalingrad, when Stalin's generals convinced him to feed in just enough men to stave off defeat and keep Paulus stuck in place tantalized by the prize just out of reach while new Russian units were assembled and trained up and launched an encirclement as soon as it got cold. As an example of what might be, Soledar sounds bad, but the first hint I saw of it was a Russian source saying that the Ukrainians had “fallen back to the north side of the city”. That’s subtly different from “Russian advances”. Soledar Geolocated to North of Soledar Older, but….Ma Deuce.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 12:52:54 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fervid_dryfire: Fair point. On the topic of nukes and WW3, the two most often stated fears, I have to ask this: if neither of those two things have kicked off by now, aren't they less likely to happen at a future point? Putin repeatedly threatened to use nukes...as early as, what? June? July? The only other likely belligerents I can see escalating this to a World War scope are Poland and/or Belarus throwing in with actual boots on the ground; none of that has happened either. I just have a hard time picturing what else might lead to an actual releasing of nukes or World War-level conflict if the fighting remains more or less the same as now: Ukraine gradually retaking ground, and Russia gradually taking more losses in all sectors (economy, the UN, military projection/might, etc). Ukraine and her allies have pretty much zero reason to hold back "because of those fears," given how the course of the war has gone so far. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fervid_dryfire: Originally Posted By AlabamaFan64: Originally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. And they may be right, but early non-intervention in the late 1930s arguably led to a world war. Some of these situations, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't while the situation is going on. Fair point. On the topic of nukes and WW3, the two most often stated fears, I have to ask this: if neither of those two things have kicked off by now, aren't they less likely to happen at a future point? Putin repeatedly threatened to use nukes...as early as, what? June? July? The only other likely belligerents I can see escalating this to a World War scope are Poland and/or Belarus throwing in with actual boots on the ground; none of that has happened either. I just have a hard time picturing what else might lead to an actual releasing of nukes or World War-level conflict if the fighting remains more or less the same as now: Ukraine gradually retaking ground, and Russia gradually taking more losses in all sectors (economy, the UN, military projection/might, etc). Ukraine and her allies have pretty much zero reason to hold back "because of those fears," given how the course of the war has gone so far. I could see Putin using nukes if it appears certain the war is lost and he looks likely to lose power or end up dead. What would he have to lose? It's not like he cares about his people and he cares about the rest of the world even less. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:14:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#36]
Visible ID on Ukrainian aircraft and helicopters is, vivid.
  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:18:11 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Visible ID on Ukrainian aircraft and helicopters is, vivid. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FlyjY8VWAAEqIr5?format=jpg&name=medium https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FlyjIaPWAAAfboG?format=jpg&name=medium |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:18:44 PM EST
[#38]
Bakhmut
Air defense? Not sure what this is.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:19:35 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. It seems that there has been a lot less talk of Nuclear weapons as of late. I’m not sure what that’s a sign of. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:27:06 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Capta: Now there’s an interesting development. I guess since Sparrow is SARH, the BUK radar is good enough for guidance? If its the old Sparrow range is obly 10 miles. The newer model gets 27 miles per wiki. Very interesting. Can it be rigged to a Mig29? Air launched? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:28:48 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: It seems that there has been a lot less talk of Nuclear weapons as of late. I'm not sure what that's a sign of. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By Aikibiker: Why do you think biden has been holding back so much. How many Bradley's do we still have in active service? We could easily give the Ukrainians 2-300 out of storage. Same for F-16's and even F-15's I want to see the Ukrainians utterly destroy the russians and they could do it with a fraction of our old cast off equipment, but the people in charge are dribbling stuff to them in small batches that just give them enough ability to continue, but not win the war. It is like Vietnam all over again we let brave men suffer and die because they are not adequately supported. I hope it will change. Ukraine will eventually win at this rate, but it will take years at this rate. If we fully supported them it would be over in a year or less. The global elite love war because they can make a ton of money at it. Because lots of people are afraid we are rushing towards WW3 as we increase our participation in this conflict. It seems that there has been a lot less talk of Nuclear weapons as of late. I'm not sure what that's a sign of. IMO it's a sign that Putin realized that it wasn't working. International support not only has not wavered, but is stronger than ever. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:29:14 PM EST
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#42]
Video in tweet
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:29:49 PM EST
[#43]
This is their evidence of Wagner in Soledar. I doubt this is the “center”.
⚡️Exclusive⚡️Wagnerites in the center of Soledar⚡️ PMC "Wagner" made significant progress in Soledar. The guys sent us this video from the city center. This section of the front is given completely under the control of the "musicians". It is too early to talk about the capture of Soledar, the fighters asked not to rush with victorious statements. Although, if Wagner is already operating in the city, there is no doubt about victory. @wargonzo https://t.me/wargonzo/10217
|
|
|
|
WI, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:31:08 PM EST
[#44]
Not that anybody needs a reminder, but intelligence and discernment are not required to be a member of the US Congress
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:32:36 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AgeOne: this is about as big a FUCK YOU as I can imagine.
Finally a link that worked for me. Very interesting. Now we know that the min. arming distance for the RU 125 Frag shell is "short"... Once a tank gets into your trench line, it can get very ugly. I read somewhere that Russian tankers of WWII had a maneuver where once they were over a trench or fighting position, they would basically do a donutty running in a tight circle and grinding down into the dirt. It's probably a standard maneuver for all tankers. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:38:44 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Not that anybody needs a reminder, but intelligence and discernment are not required to be a member of the US Congress
TIL that dental school must not be that difficult. I'll put him the mental file right next to Don Jr. and MTG. |
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:42:25 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: Here’s another theory: The Battle of Bahkmut is all about the salt. Sort of a real-life “Dune.”
Personally, I think that’s nuts, but Reuters says they have a White House source pushing that narrative. (Behind a paywall) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-thinks-putin-ally-prigozhin-wants-control-salt-gypsum-mines-near-bakhmut-2023-01-05/ Keep in mind that Russia is literally ruled by a gang of thieves…..it’s entirely plausible that Prigozhin wants to add to his business empire. Another Siloviki stole a huge amount of farmland in occupied territory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:46:02 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Special-K: Yup. I suspect we have lots of it. Not only from Cold War stocks, but I seem to recall there was some newly manufactured stuff for the MGS. Not only that, but there are many other countries that still have tanks that use those rounds in active (and recently active) service, so not only would they have large stocks that they could donate, but that also implies there is still an active production capacity. Even if the 105mm rifle is a bit underpowered for later model tanks in the frontal arc, they can still kill anything from the side and rear, and they have a huge variety of shell types they can fire which makes them very useful in the Infantry support role - APFSDS, APDS, HEP, HEAT, HE-frag, WP, etc. Plus, that new Light Tank the US is developing sports a 105 so there are probably some really good rounds for it developing/already fielded. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:46:24 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Not that anybody needs a reminder, but intelligence and discernment are not required to be a member of the US Congress
 Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/6/2023 1:47:58 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FlzyifWakAIcMXj?format=jpg&name=900x900
Video in tweet
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
