The War in the Ukraine

P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
solarz said:
And I suppose all those frigates and subs don't need ammunition?
Click to expand...
They have belief in high tech short war. few thousand standoff weopons suppose to solve all the problem.
Look at Sweden. it is among the first AESA radar manufacturer. now it has Gripen NG. they are not going to shift there labor to make more than necessary ammunition.
solarz said:
Not trying to put you on the spot, just looking to get a discussion going.

The hypothesis that the US is intentionally dragging this war out is no more convincing than the hypothesis that Russia is doing the same. A decisive Ukrainian victory over Russia has way more benefits for the US than a long dragged out war. The more this drags on, the further it cements Russia's relationship with China, and at the same time gives China more time to further strengthen its hand over Taiwan. It's simply not in US' interest to do so.

Therefore, there are only two possibilities: either NATO cannot produce the necessary hardware, or they can't send that hardware to the frontlines. Either way, it reflects poorly on their ability to wage war in a peer scenario.
Click to expand...
Russia clearly want to prolong this war from start. otherwise these cruise missile would have destroyed infrastructure much sooner. they still not after bridges and railway line that dignitaries use to meet Ukranian President.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
That is with the YPR-765 variant of the M113 which has applique armor on it. Even then it can only protect against 0.50 cal on the sides. An RPG-7 will go right through it. The bog standard BMP-3 without applique armor has roughly the same protection. A BMP-2 only has protection on sides for 0.33 cal. But you can add applique to the BMP as well. The Soviet did this in Afghanistan. And the engine in the BMP-2 has more power than the one in the M113. Which means it can carry more armor if they want to. The BMP-3 has like twice the engine power even.
 
Last edited:
sheogorath

sheogorath

Colonel
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
That is with the YPR-765 variant of the M113 which has applique armor on it. Even then it can only protect against 0.50 cal on the sides. An RPG-7 will go right through it. The bog standard BMP-3 without applique armor has roughly the same protection. A BMP-2 only has protection on sides for 0.33 cal. But you can add applique to the BMP as well. The Soviet did this in Afghanistan. And the engine in the BMP-2 has more power than the one in the M113. Which means it can carry more armor if they want to. The BMP-3 has like twice the engine power even.
Click to expand...

The armor performance and survivability of the M113 has always been lackluster even when new, there is the fact that BMP are also way more properly amphibious than the M133, which highly precarious when you look at it and then there is the massive difference in firepower
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Ukrainians taken as prisoners.


Two Ukrainian Mi-8 taken out.


Ukrainian BMP-1 and BMP-2 taken out by artillery.


Ukrainian P-18 taken out by Lancet. We have seen that before, but there's another video that shows a near miss by a Lancet on an S-300, followed by a direct hit. Inaccuracy by the first Lancet could have been caused by strong winds.

 
C

CrazyHorse

Junior Member
Registered Member
sheogorath said:
Well, talk about running out of tanks and equipment to modernize them, and they just come up with a new variant closer to the T-90M down to the anti HEAT nets.
Click to expand...
The problem with the t-72 is that it still has somewhat shit composite underneath the ERA. I really wish they did more upgrades to the t-80U, since that turret armour is actually nice, unlike that on the t-80b which they decided to up armour with relikt instead.
 
sheogorath

sheogorath

Colonel
Registered Member
CrazyHorse said:
The problem with the t-72 is that it still has somewhat shit composite underneath the ERA. I really wish they did more upgrades to the t-80U, since that turret armour is actually nice, unlike that on the t-80b which they decided to up armour with relikt instead.
Click to expand...

The base T-72B Obr 1989 armor with K5 could defeat the western APFSDS rounds of the time from the front, including the M829. With newer thermals, better ERA and modernized FCS still is a valid tank, its main limitations being that the carousel can't handle the newer longer penetrators used by the T-80BVM and T-90M, lack of reverse speed and RWS.
 
baykalov

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
Video of Ukrainian soldiers in one of the trenches near Artemovsk.

The main thing in the video:

1. The commanders have not been seen at the positions for several weeks.

2. Despite these being positions in the second line of defense, 8 out of 20 people have been killed in three weeks. Several corpses are still stored at the position in the trench in question because they cannot be moved out.

3. Supply is poor, soldiers light fires that give away their position, but they don't care - the main thing is to keep warm because it is cold.

4. Part of the losses were due to the fact that Polish 155-mm self-propelled guns "Krab" with Polish crews came to them, fired and immediately disappeared. This gives away their position to the Russians, who begin firing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Weapon go missing in Ukraine. Again and again.

“We had two trucks with 84 M4s, 12 SCAR-Heavies… a couple of Javelins, and some M240-Bravo’s, and an absolute truck full of ammo – [which] just went missing in the convoy,” complained British mercenary Joseph McDonald.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top