You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Poor man's Spike(not even that poor, operational capability is in many ways superior if there is no EW), for a fraction of weight, price - and you can literally make them yourself.
No wonder.
DJI offers FPV drone models. FPV drone races are a new sport.
Wow, I just pu together the picture about the events in Vuhledar, and the strategy of the Russians.
View attachment 108743
This is not a bomb, this is a demining vehicle.
The Russians send these on the road to blow up mines - ot loaded with air blast, non cratering munitions.
Most likelly the vehicle drive up and down on the target area, and if blown up then they send another one.
Afterwards they sent the units there, but in meantime the Nato trained units with Nato provided munitions mined with artillerythe road.
So, next time the Russian army will use remote controlled demining vehicles on the roads in the front of the convoys - that is the only way to make sure ther is no mines on the road.
I think these things are called UR-77. This one might be missing the wok like thing on top with an arm.
It was an MTLB filled with detonators and aerial bombs.I think these things are called UR-77. This one might be missing the wok like thing on top with an arm.
"If they destroy the bridges, there will be a new army forming on the other side of the Dnieper with no means to defeat it."If they destroy the bridges, there will be a new army forming on the other side of the Dnieper with no means to defeat it.
With the bridges open, that equipment is flowing to the frontlines to be destroyed and Russia have the option to go to the other side of the Dnieper without passing by Belarus if the bridges remains in relative good order.
I cannot see other good reasons than that for not blowing the bridges or at least trying to hit them. Recycling old ICBM first stage to toss a 10t warhead would be awesome for that kind of target...
that is absolutely NOT the reason why they dont hit the bridges lol, there are enough units on the east side for russia to handle.
also the ICBM first stage is a bad idea, as their heat signatures are already catalogued by the US, and using them may cause undue panic. old ICBM rockets also cant just be recycled, as they can be dangerous.
We can say that using the Dnieper as a border, blow up the bridges and Ukraine declaring itself part of NATO would deter Russia to go farther than the Dnieper. Keeping the link and a Whole Ukraine to protect for UFA block that option."If they destroy the bridges, there will be a new army forming on the other side of the Dnieper with no means to defeat it."
that is absolutely NOT the reason why they dont hit the bridges lol, there are enough units on the east side for russia to handle.
also the ICBM first stage is a bad idea, as their heat signatures are already catalogued by the US, and using them may cause undue panic. old ICBM rockets also cant just be recycled, as they can be dangerous.
If the only means to go on the west bank of the Dnieper is by landing a force in the Odessa region... or passing from Belarus bordered by Poland into a NATO Ukraine, it would be a no go for Russia.
NB: they have recycled old ICBM to launch satelittes... the DNPR rocket, Rokot was another, dangerous side is nonsense:
Misidentification could be an issue but long range cruise missiles used by Russia have a nuclear warhead variant... Iskander too. So any launch of these could be misinterpreted. It's just that to destroy bridges you need quite a big hit. If the weapon is known and missing the upper stages it would no have the same flight signature and range anyway. A short range ballistic missiles with a giant warhead would be interesting to have. No need to toss it 10000km just 2000km is enough...
Last edited:
tl:drTypically you'll want to shoot your miclic *ahead* of your engineering vehicle...
If the goal is to sanitize a path through either a known or suspected minefield, this is a fairly inefficient, costly, and imprecise way of doing so - and doesn't appear to be synchronized with any supporting or exploiting sub-tasks. I've been out for a bit now, but speaking off the cuff from my experience as a m'reen 03 - it's not very sensible to conduct the tAcTicAL tASk "Situational Breach" in the scenario depicted. I am, of course, assuming that the video you linked actually depicts one of those explosive-laden UGVs.
Firstly, Breaching Operations are extremely difficult, require well trained, highly coordinated forces employed en-masse, and are hugely sensitive to disruption and attrition. We got taught these things called the "Breaching Tenets" which form the bedrock of any such operation:
Intelligence is by far the most important tenet (imo). The strength, disposition, and location of the enemy force is a bare minimum. Beyond that, the location and nature of emplaced obstacles (precise location of easily identifiable obstacles such as concertina wire or tank traps, areas of suspected obstacles such as anti-personnel or anti-tank mines, etc. etc. - really just the more info the better here), the known and likely locations of adversary IDF systems (with particular attention paid to how they could throw a wrench into things during obstacle reduction and lane clearance/sanitization), and other such sorta-no-brainer-but-hard-to-actually-operationalize intelligence should be obtained before any deliberate breaching operation. By understanding your own forces, understanding the enemy's forces, and having a clear and cohesive grasp of the battlespace, planning becomes oodles and oodles easier. You NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER want to hastily assault a prepared, complex defensive position with complex obstacles if you haven't conducted the requisite Intelligence activities.
- Intelligence
- Breaching Fundamentals
- Breaching Organization
- Mass
- Synchronization
Breaching Fundamentals are easily remembered with the ditty "SOSRA" - standing for:
In a nutshell, these are the irreplaceable, foundational tactical tasks necessary to conduct a successful breaching operation.
- Suppress
- Obscure
- Secure
- Reduce
- Assault
Breaching Organization is pretty much what it says on the tin. Success in a breaching operation requires the commander to task-organize his forces into (most commonly - and what we used as the "Default") three groups:
These groups are responsible for a specific set of tactical tasks (as specified during planning), and should understand their role during the breach as clearly as possible, and should be integrated into a minimally complex, maximally intuitive, and failure-prone C2 system.
- Support Force
- Breaching Force
- Assault Force
Mass is a fairly simple principle to grasp. Having identified the weakest enemy defenses (which is usually chosen as the breaching point), the greatest possible concentration of force should be directed against the enemy's vulnerabilities. If the enemy presents insufficient vulnerability, fires can be employed to fix and/or suppress critical enemy forces, or to destroy/disable them outright.
Synchronization is another intuitive concept. In order to effectively employ forces and fires, they must be precisely synchronized and choreographed. If the support force is even 5 minutes late to provide obscuring smoke for the Breaching Force, the entire operation can go from "likely to succeed" to "lucky to survive."
In order to apply these 5 tenets, a Deliberate (preferably Combined Arms) Breaching Operation requires a substantial amount of planning, preparation, rehearsal, and a buildup of forces sufficient to not only conduct the initial breach, secure the reduction area, reduce obstacles within (mine plows/miclics/other specialized combat engineering kit is basically a requirement to breach a complex defensive position with anti-personnel and/or anti-tank mines), and mark sanitized lanes for the Assault Force to travel through, but to then assault out of the breaching area until the far-side-of-the-obstacle enemy forces capable of placing direct fire or spotting indirect fires onto friendly forces have been destroyed.
The execution of a breaching operation will vary significantly in duration, depending on the size of friendly and enemy forces, the complexity of the obstacles and defensive positions, and a gazillion other factors. A fairly bog-standard timeframe for generic Battalion-level deliberate breaching ops is 45min to 1 hour from initiation to end-of-mission (and ideally, a battle handover has occurred and your forces have been relieved by follow on formations).
Now... I don't know about you, but I'm not sure I saw that level of complexity demonstrated in that video lol. A single lightly armored vehicle being driven haphazardly along a non-reproducible route (and thus having failed to even clear the lane directly in its wake) in the middle of day () with zilch in the way of supporting fires (suppressing the ATGM team said to have disabled the vehicle would probably have been nice - or, barring that, at least putting some smoke in their faces), zero support/covering force synchronization to suppress and reduce enemy forces (...such as that ATGM team), practically RNG-tier obstacle reducing on the part of the vehicle (driving off in a random direction or in wibble wobbles is *not* effective mine clearance lmfao), zero capability to exploit a cleared, sanitized lane in the event that god himself decides to make one for you, seemingly no objective beyond the obstacle (perhaps the berm? but in that case, why bother clearing mines for an assault at all?), and to really put the cherry on top: doing so with such anemic supporting EA that a Ukrainian Drone could just chill out and film the whole thing! I mean come on, it's not even that hard to fry those things (UA drones seldom survive to fly double digit numbers of times, and even as goofy as the Russian military may be, they've still been able to dunk on sUAS)
So.
Either Russia is completely, utterly, bafflingly retarded, going against quite literally every single tenet of conducting breaching operations - which in fairness, isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility - or you're overanalyzing what is probably just a supersized RC-XD (RC-ZD?) Pro Max being spat out at an enemy position with some sandbags flex taped on top of the thin armor so that it might survive enough hits, and it might keep rolling forward long enough to introduce the targeted UAbros to a neat trick they heard about in Syria.
don't send BMP full of explosives to clear mines...
send dozens of green privates poking the dirt with bayonets/multi-tool
What happened to the Chechens? We no longer hear about them anymore. Did they demobilize or die? The last time we heard about them in a big way was summer last year when Russia was attacking lyman. Now we hear more about wagner but not about the Chechens
As far as I know, they are mostly in the south, Kherson-Mariupol area. Not many offensives going on there right now and I think they are one of the units tasked with fortifying the area.What happened to the Chechens? We no longer hear about them anymore. Did they demobilize or die? The last time we heard about them in a big way was summer last year when Russia was attacking lyman. Now we hear more about wagner but not about the Chechens
What happened to the Chechens? We no longer hear about them anymore. Did they demobilize or die? The last time we heard about them in a big way was summer last year when Russia was attacking lyman. Now we hear more about wagner but not about the Chechens
Heavily fighting in the Belgohorivika - Kremenneya - Spirne area.