The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Thought you were "out of" this thread? Why did you quit your self imposed exile?
Bzzt. Wrong. I already said it here at least three times. Russia made their own thermal sights using microbolometers to replace the Thales ones in 2016. It took them two years after the 2014 sanctions due to the annexation of Crimea to make that sensor. And in 2017 they got MCT thermal sights working which are one step above that and were never available for import to Russia in the first place.
This is a repeat of the spiel that Russian cruise missiles were supposed to end two months ago because they did not get cruise missile engines from Ukraine anymore. Plus, it is not like the West has exclusive control of thermal sight technology. China also has it. And do they import it from the West? Nope.
Ukraine was getting it by paying for it. They have a factory to make thermal sights for the T-64 mod. 2017. The sight used some Western components and was basically a licensed production of US thermal sight technology. It was better than the one the French were supplying to Russia. Yet Ukraine is still losing. Right now Ukraine are getting T-72s from former Czechoslovakia and Poland as replacements for those tanks. The tanks NATO is providing have no thermal sight at all and are in fact worse than the Soviet T-72Bs Ukraine used to have in reserve.
Russia is not the Soviet Union but it is a mistake to underestimate the capabilities of their MIC. The amount of cruise missiles they have used in this operation is a good example of that.
Not just that. But the Afghan war was never existential for Russia. This war in Ukraine is. And the Afghan government the Soviets left there only collapsed years after the Soviet Union itself collapsed. The government the US put in Afghanistan didn't even last a single day after they left. In fact it collapsed while they were evacuating. The whole ordeal makes the US evacuation from Vietnam look stellar in comparison.
NY Times... Skip
I'm not sure what the implications are
Probably someone whose more pro war and more of a yes man. Alex Mer. said there were Russian rumors that Zelensky and the General Staff had differentiating opinions such as to pull back from Donbas. (Didn’t the Pentagon also say that a while ago?). It could be an indication of changing tactics.
Russian BMPT "Terminator" appeared in Ukraine. The combat vehicle was spotted in the vicinity of the settlement of Severodonetsk. The Terminator BMPT is a tracked fire support vehicle with powerful weapons, modern fire control devices and high maneuverability. The tank support combat vehicle is designed to operate as part of tank units in order to defeat anti-tank weapons and enemy manpower.
I'm not really a fan of the BMPT tho. But it will be the real test of the vehicle and thoughts behind it.
One may argue that dismounted infantry will be beneficial instead of dedicated vehicle as infantry can spread out, cover larger areas and overall having better situational awareness. The infantry may also have benefit of being less conspicuous to enemy, compared to hulking 2.2 m tall and 3m wide vehicle. With proliferation of man-portable drones, the infantry can safely scout the area and may direct firepower from the tank that it escorted.
The Russian school of thought however seems to view things differently as they desire protection level of a tank and relatively high firepower.
One may argue that dismounted infantry will be beneficial instead of dedicated vehicle as infantry can spread out, cover larger areas and overall having better situational awareness. The infantry may also have benefit of being less conspicuous to enemy, compared to hulking 2.2 m tall and 3m wide vehicle. With proliferation of man-portable drones, the infantry can safely scout the area and may direct firepower from the tank that it escorted.
The Russian school of thought however seems to view things differently as they desire protection level of a tank and relatively high firepower.
The BMPT is basically a weapon designed after the Russian experience of urban combat in Grozny. Most vehicles did not have enough gun elevation to hit high rise buildings with snipers on the higher floors. The Russians did have old AA systems which could do that like the ZSU-23-4 Shilka but that vehicle was too lightly armored and vulnerable to high caliber weapons (14.5mm) and missiles.
This is also why you see the BTR-82A with a +70 degree elevation turret and other programs like that.
Due to their low profile design the T-72 and T-80 aren't able to elevate their guns properly either. So in larger cities with high rise buildings they have limited use. So far the Russians have mostly been fighting in Ukrainian cities with typical Khrushchev era building topology with 5 floors. If they go to some of the larger cities with Brezhnev era high rises sending the T-72B3 on front to flush out missiles like they did in Mariupol won't work.
I also doubt the BMPT will have weak armor on top since the whole point of it is to assault well protected infantry in vantage points. Back then drones were not a problem but I suspect they could update the electronics to handle drones. It does have 30mm cannon and ATGMs.
The T-14 gets around that problem by having a really tall robotic turret. So it should have a lot more gun elevation and depression. Even then it might have issues due to the autoloader.
Back in WW2 Europe did not really have high rise buildings to speak of. So trying to apply things you read related to that experience to modern combat might not work that well.
This is also why you see the BTR-82A with a +70 degree elevation turret and other programs like that.
Due to their low profile design the T-72 and T-80 aren't able to elevate their guns properly either. So in larger cities with high rise buildings they have limited use. So far the Russians have mostly been fighting in Ukrainian cities with typical Khrushchev era building topology with 5 floors. If they go to some of the larger cities with Brezhnev era high rises sending the T-72B3 on front to flush out missiles like they did in Mariupol won't work.
I also doubt the BMPT will have weak armor on top since the whole point of it is to assault well protected infantry in vantage points. Back then drones were not a problem but I suspect they could update the electronics to handle drones. It does have 30mm cannon and ATGMs.
The T-14 gets around that problem by having a really tall robotic turret. So it should have a lot more gun elevation and depression. Even then it might have issues due to the autoloader.
Back in WW2 Europe did not really have high rise buildings to speak of. So trying to apply things you read related to that experience to modern combat might not work that well.
Last edited: