if the lower level units deployed don’t get said command because they lack the radio systems then the upper level command is just talking to itself.
They would be using open channel comms for the lower level infantry units. That reduces the strategic value of intercepting the communications in the first place. You just need one radio per squad to keep the comm channel to the upper level encrypted. Higher level command officers, in the field, will likely be in vehicles most of the time and those have had digital radios with encrypted communications for longer than the dismounted infantry. So there should be better coverage than for dismounts.
The infantry hand held R-187P1 Azart radio entered service in 2017. The vehicle mounted R-168E Akveduk radios entered service in 2000. These are encrypted digital radios with frequency hopping which are jam resistant.
I agree this is not optimal, even older vehicles might be using open channel comms, but you go to war with the army you have.
And like I said even a lot of armies in NATO are still like this.
You don’t want to touch that Russia had a convoy parked on said road for weeks. Tanks and armored vehicles try to avoid them Russian command launched to late the soil in the north was bog that even tanks were not suited to. They were funneled onto roads where they slowed to LA style traffic and got picked off.
See. You do know why they gave up going offroad for the most part.
Those other armies command are slowing to refuel in an extreme abundance of caution.
Uh right. You seem to think the sanitized image you got of US combat in Iraq is what really happens in the ground. I remember reading about the Iraqis blowing up US supply columns back then in 2003. Do you know after the US government caught a lot of flak in Vietnam with independent reporters showing atrocities, the US put a major media clampdown in Desert Storm in 1991? All "embedded" reporters had to be vetted by the US government and they could only show what the government wanted to be seen. The whole idea was to push a stronger media message and use that to wash out dissenting voices. That is how CNN came to preeminence worldwide. Back in 1991 they were one of the first internationally broadcasted channels showing footage from the war with embedded reporters. I still remember some reporters of other channels tried to do independent reporting, they showed injured, and got kicked out. All the news reports you see of US embedded reporters are basically censored sources today. One of the things the US government specified was that you were not allowed to show US casualties. Some of the other reporters who tried to show civilian or enemy casualties were also kicked out.
Sorry that’s not reflective of what is seen on the ground. It’s not just the the main types T72, T80 and T90. It’s the variants to variants that are often woefully obsolete.
...
What this means is that you have units with the same line of vehicle but completely different standard of protection, fire control and even communications.
You can’t just bolt T90M parts on a T72A. It’s not just the road wheels. It’s the ERA the fire control, the vision systems.
Turkish forces have paid the price for not modernizing their vehicles and improperly supporting them to. My main point here is the Russians love Tanks. They are capable of building very impressive vehicles. Yet despite the propaganda They deployed vehicles that were reviewed in the same configuration by Brezhnev.
I would not say that. Even the T-72A pictured there is using Kontakt-1 ERA. That variant only entered service in 1988. That was not long before the Soviet Union collapsed. The T-72 has the T-72B3 mod. 2016 upgrade available to it. You can basically convert almost any T-72 variant to it. This is a deep upgrade which changes basically everything and costs less than half the price of a new tank.
The M1 tank entered service in 1980. It is a later design but also came out when Brezhnev was alive. He died in 1982.
The Russian army should have retired the T80 it used them for export.
I cannot say I agree with the T-80BVM upgrade program either. If the Russians wanted to use T-80s they should have upgraded the T-80Us not the T-80BVs. The base armor in the turret is totally different. And no amount of modern ERA will change that. I suspect it is some kind of technical problem which makes upgrading that tank model cumbersome. I personally would have just upgraded the T-72 tanks. But I guess it is some kind of jobs program for the Omsk plant. Why didn't they just convert Omsk to the T-72 is beyond me. Perhaps they thought it would take too long to retool the plant. Perhaps the plan is to switch both plants to T-14 eventually.
Held off on the Armata MBT and used the funds to bring the T72 and T90 to a modern standard.
It is what they did. They pushed out the T-72B3 mod. 2016 and T-90M upgrades.
T-14 Armata is like 6 years late. I mean just look at the tank number. Supposed to be a 2014 tank model. Only late last year did it enter mass production. The 4th Guards Tank Division you see them talk about in the later video was supposed to be the first unit to use the T-14 Armata. That is why they still have the T-80Us and were not changed to a T-72 variant. Supposed to be one of the best equipped units and have worse equipment than a second line unit because of that.
They should have reduced the red army’s size and 20 year old canned rations
They did reduce the army size. But then they increased it again after reforms were made. So you wanted them to invade Ukraine with even less troops. lol. As for the Russian rations just look at Steve1989MREInfo on Youtube. They aren't that bad. No soldier likes eating rations.
And a city that is tied via a rail and sea route through Crimea. The bulk of my statements was in the north where the Russians failed. Failure give lessons to learn successes only affirm.
I see no evidence of major supply problems elsewhere either.
Not my point. The point is that they don’t have the numbers of flares needed. DIRCM has the advantage of not needing expendable flares.
Regardless of how many you carry eventually they will run out. Especially against opponents with such large amounts of MANPADs.
no I do. Yet even then BIG difference. Sand bags will stop spall. American troops used ballistic steel and armored glass. Wood might stop an Ak round anything bigger than that will probably turn it into shrapnel.
Hah. Like I said you don't remember it at all. A lot of troops used improvised armor and the steel wasn't ballistic at all. Only later after major political grumbling did they start proving ballistic steel plates to use in the vehicles.
