Blyatskrieg

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
Grumble
Light of Blast
Posts: 4747
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Grumble » Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:03 am

I
jimbob wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 6:26 am
And if this is true, it says quite a bit about the anti air and anti-missile capabilities of their flagship.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/4 ... t-flagship
According to a supposed Russian intercept (consider information unconfirmed), Ukraine flew a TB2 Bayraktar around Mykolaiv, grabbing the Moskva’s attention, which has apparently been providing anti-air radar and missile services during the war. A translation by a random Twitter user translated the gist of the intercept (full of military slang that stymied a lot of people):

A "trojan horse" aircraft was flying between Voznesensk and Mykolaiv, around Kryviy Rih. Moskva was providing long range air defense for them and got distracted long enough, with the target AND poor weather as well, to have two Neptunes stick their tridents through the hull.

Thus, focused on the drone on the Ukrainian mainland, the Neptunes flew in under cover of distraction and stormy seas to hit the ship. Another Russian report, posted multiple times by several credible OSINT people, reported a similar sequence of events (running it through Google Translate):
If the Moskva has been supporting other operations with anti-missile defence then presumably it’s far more than a symbolic loss.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Woodchopper » Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:08 am

lpm wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:00 am
Grumble wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 6:18 am
Millennie Al wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:43 am


If this is to be believed, https://militarycognizance.com/2022/04/ ... sian-tank/ production is limited to 6,500 per year.

And if this is accurate: https://armourersbench.com/2022/03/13/j ... n-ukraine/ the kill rate is 280 vehicles for 300 fired.
280/300 is extraordinary isn’t it?
Shifting over to this thread as it's thigh rubbing weapons stuff.

No way is 280 out of 300 going to be true. 93% in proper language. That's either fantasy or Ukraine propaganda.

More likely something like 10%? It's obviously highly effective and a lot of tanks have been destroyed by it. But war is hard. There will be a lot of misses that don't make it onto those Ukrainian videos with added patriotic music on twitter.

Plus loads of Javelins will be destroyed/damaged by Russian attacks, or hastily abandoned when a squad comes under fire.

I'd say we'd need to supply Ukraine with >1,000 javelins if we want to destroy 100 Russian tanks. That sort of ratio?
Its probably a lot higher than 10%.

The video evidence from Syria is that:
Based on the analysis of TOW [missile] strikes, rebels achieved a 76% hit rate, with 16.5% unclear result, 6.5% missed shots, and just 1% missile failures during the launch.
Source: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/20 ... -missiles/

Its unlikely that there were large numbers of unrecorded misses as the Syrians had to post evidence of the missiles being used before they could be issued with new ones by their CIA handlers (this was to try to stop them selling the missiles to groups like IS). So the hit rate will probably be below 76%, but its unlikely to be anywhere near as low as 10%.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Woodchopper » Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:15 am

lpm wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 7:18 am
Incompetence must play a part. Poorly trained crew not using the ship's defences properly? Plus it has been wandering around for weeks in predictable ways.
Or the defences just not working. The ship is supposed to be protected by rader guided automatic cannon which should destroy any fast moving object rapidly heading toward the ship. But obviously they didn't.

As for wandering around in predictable ways, that was bad practice. I assume though that the Ukrainians were given very accurate real time targeting information. Most likely from a NATO aircraft flying in Romanian airspace.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:49 am

jimbob wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 6:26 am
And if this is true, it says quite a bit about the anti air and anti-missile capabilities of their flagship.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/4 ... t-flagship
According to a supposed Russian intercept (consider information unconfirmed), Ukraine flew a TB2 Bayraktar around Mykolaiv, grabbing the Moskva’s attention, which has apparently been providing anti-air radar and missile services during the war. A translation by a random Twitter user translated the gist of the intercept (full of military slang that stymied a lot of people):

A "trojan horse" aircraft was flying between Voznesensk and Mykolaiv, around Kryviy Rih. Moskva was providing long range air defense for them and got distracted long enough, with the target AND poor weather as well, to have two Neptunes stick their tridents through the hull.

Thus, focused on the drone on the Ukrainian mainland, the Neptunes flew in under cover of distraction and stormy seas to hit the ship. Another Russian report, posted multiple times by several credible OSINT people, reported a similar sequence of events (running it through Google Translate):
The Slava class is an old design, and Moskva was launched before the Falklands War taught everyone just how dangerous sea-skimming missiles can really be. You see the lessons of that war in the design of ships like the British Type 45 destroyer, where every design decision is geared towards defence against that sort of threat. The Slava class has a very impressive anti-air capability, but it's one designed to defend against manned aircraft flying high, it has less defence against missile attacks.

User avatar
TimW
Catbabel
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TimW » Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:57 am

I'm reading that the Neptune missile has just gone into service, its first claimed use 10 days ago. Awesome propaganda value if it's just sunk the Russian flagship.

I'm a bit puzzled about the previous "UK to send anti-ship missiles" story though, given that we don't seem to have anything worth sending while they're all Neptuned up.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:00 am

TimW wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:57 am
I'm reading that the Neptune missile has just gone into service, its first claimed use 10 days ago. Awesome propaganda value if it's just sunk the Russian flagship.

I'm a bit puzzled about the previous "UK to send anti-ship missiles" story though, given that we don't seem to have anything worth sending while they're all Neptuned up.
Ukraine's previously reported the destruction of effectively all of their arms manufacturing capacity, and the Neptune wasn't even fully in service at the start of the war. They probably don't have very many of them, and can't get more.

User avatar
TimW
Catbabel
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TimW » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:09 am

Perhaps the Ukrainians are happy with any old Harpoony (or whatever) rubbish now because they know the Russians will sh.t themselves if something is incoming. Maybe stencil "Neptune" on the side for a laugh.

User avatar
Grumble
Light of Blast
Posts: 4747
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Grumble » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:29 am

lpm wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:00 am
Grumble wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 6:18 am
Millennie Al wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:43 am


If this is to be believed, https://militarycognizance.com/2022/04/ ... sian-tank/ production is limited to 6,500 per year.

And if this is accurate: https://armourersbench.com/2022/03/13/j ... n-ukraine/ the kill rate is 280 vehicles for 300 fired.
280/300 is extraordinary isn’t it?
Shifting over to this thread as it's thigh rubbing weapons stuff.

No way is 280 out of 300 going to be true. 93% in proper language. That's either fantasy or Ukraine propaganda.

More likely something like 10%? It's obviously highly effective and a lot of tanks have been destroyed by it. But war is hard. There will be a lot of misses that don't make it onto those Ukrainian videos with added patriotic music on twitter.

Plus loads of Javelins will be destroyed/damaged by Russian attacks, or hastily abandoned when a squad comes under fire.

I'd say we'd need to supply Ukraine with >1,000 javelins if we want to destroy 100 Russian tanks. That sort of ratio?
I meant extraordinary as in it was an extraordinary claim
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:31 am

TimW wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:09 am
Perhaps the Ukrainians are happy with any old Harpoony (or whatever) rubbish now because they know the Russians will sh.t themselves if something is incoming. Maybe stencil "Neptune" on the side for a laugh.
Harpoons aren't that bad, if they can work out what to launch them from. The difference between a ship launched Harpoon and a land one isn't huge. The missile needs a bearing and expected distance to the target that would usually come from the ship's radar, but once it's on its way, it doesn't need a targetting radar. The alleged presence of a Bayraktar TB2 is interesting in this regard - it's at least as likely that it was providing targetting information to the Neptune operators as it was acting solely as a decoy.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by lpm » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:34 am

Woodchopper wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:08 am
So the hit rate will probably be below 76%, but its unlikely to be anywhere near as low as 10%.
OK, so basic maths. We want to destroy 10,000 Russian tanks and armoured vehicles, then they're eliminated as a fighting force for a decade. So far Ukraine's destroyed something like 1,000.

Call it 50% and that's 20,000 Javelins.

We've already supplied something like 7,000 Javelins from an earlier link? Plus all the other anti-tank systems?

Javelins cost $178,000 each. That's $3.6 billion for 20,000. For context, the UK has spent $4 billion on each aircraft carrier.

It feels to me that we're in touching distance of an unbelievably cheap victory against a major global military force - if only we commit at this golden opportunity. The blood toll is being paid in Ukrainian soldiers giving their lives and Ukrainian civilians being murdered. The financial toll to the west is so trivial it's hardly worth counting. $3.6 billion for f.cks sake. Pocket change. We can finance this war, and rebuild Ukraine's economy and cities, and put it on a credit card.

It's clear not only Putin has made bad military forecasts. The west is holding onto weapons it will now never need, because major warfare is an impossibility anywhere on the planet. And the west has spent a fortune on vulnerable armaments - tanks, aircraft carriers - instead of vast volumes of cheap weapons.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:45 am

Grumble wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:29 am
lpm wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:00 am
Grumble wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 6:18 am


280/300 is extraordinary isn’t it?
Shifting over to this thread as it's thigh rubbing weapons stuff.

No way is 280 out of 300 going to be true. 93% in proper language. That's either fantasy or Ukraine propaganda.

More likely something like 10%? It's obviously highly effective and a lot of tanks have been destroyed by it. But war is hard. There will be a lot of misses that don't make it onto those Ukrainian videos with added patriotic music on twitter.

Plus loads of Javelins will be destroyed/damaged by Russian attacks, or hastily abandoned when a squad comes under fire.

I'd say we'd need to supply Ukraine with >1,000 javelins if we want to destroy 100 Russian tanks. That sort of ratio?
I meant extraordinary as in it was an extraordinary claim
It's not that stunning a claim. For context, Suheil Mahmoud - a Syrian rebel tank-hunting ace nicknamed Abu TOW for his proficiency with the weapon - has an even better success rate. To achieve a high success rate the Javelin needs to hit the target, and then destroy it. Modern guidance systems are pretty capable, and the Javelin isn't trying to operate over long distances or against fleeting targets, nor is it going especially fast. Then it has to destroy it, and that isn't very difficult either; the Javelin flies up, then comes down onto the target from above. Tank's by necessity have thin armour on the top as weight limits mean they can't have thick armour everywhere. The tank that can survive a hit against the top armour from a large HEAT warhead has yet to be built.

User avatar
TimW
Catbabel
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TimW » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:48 am

EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:31 am
Harpoons aren't that bad, if they can work out what to launch them from.
I read this Navy Lookout thing though, saying
Current weapon stocks are mostly life-expired. Even if well looked after and maintained by the Defence Munitions organisation, the explosives and propellants in a missile degrade over time. These elements need to be replaced and the weapons re-certified or they can become at best unreliable or even dangerously unsafe. Unless there has been a crash program to rapidly re-certify UK Harpoon stocks, there are probably only a handful of usable weapons left.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:48 am

TimW wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:48 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:31 am
Harpoons aren't that bad, if they can work out what to launch them from.
I read this Navy Lookout thing though, saying
Current weapon stocks are mostly life-expired. Even if well looked after and maintained by the Defence Munitions organisation, the explosives and propellants in a missile degrade over time. These elements need to be replaced and the weapons re-certified or they can become at best unreliable or even dangerously unsafe. Unless there has been a crash program to rapidly re-certify UK Harpoon stocks, there are probably only a handful of usable weapons left.
Yes, I think I mentioned it earlier. Another consequence of appalling planning that treats capability gaps as acceptable.

User avatar
TimW
Catbabel
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TimW » Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:57 am

That's probably why I read it.

Allo V Psycho
Catbabel
Posts: 735
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Allo V Psycho » Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:50 am

Suggestion from Russian MoD that the Moskva is under tow, from just south of Odessa, presumably to Sevastopol.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/15 ... 8557486086

User avatar
shpalman
Princess POW
Posts: 8244
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond
Contact:

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by shpalman » Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:52 am

So much for "careful not to provoke Putin into escalation" it's more like "no it wasn't the Ukrainians it exploded on its own".
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk

User avatar
Grumble
Light of Blast
Posts: 4747
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Grumble » Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:55 am

shpalman wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:52 am
So much for "careful not to provoke Putin into escalation" it's more like "no it wasn't the Ukrainians it exploded on its own".
Makes you wonder if they’re trying to kid Putin as much as other people.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three

User avatar
jimbob
Light of Blast
Posts: 5276
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by jimbob » Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:03 am

shpalman wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:52 am
So much for "careful not to provoke Putin into escalation" it's more like "no it wasn't the Ukrainians it exploded on its own".
The Russians are basically saying that it did to itself what the defenders of Snake Island told it to do.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:04 am

Allo V Psycho wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:50 am
Suggestion from Russian MoD that the Moskva is under tow, from just south of Odessa, presumably to Sevastopol.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/15 ... 8557486086
I'll believe it when I see it. It's certainly not impossible, but if the fire was small and containable, they wouldn't have abandoned ship.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:39 pm

jimbob wrote:
Wed Apr 13, 2022 8:04 pm
Video

Tanks are Obsolete - apparently since 1919

https://youtu.be/QPth_xqBXGY

Lots of sources and discussion
It's a good video, with some pretty solid points being made.

A lot of the people rushing to declare tanks obsolete are failing to understand that capability and counter-capability are locked into an evolutionary arms race. We are likely to see changes to tanks - and armoured fighting vehicles in general.

The most obvious is the importance of active protection systems, whether that's things like Trophy, or close-in systems designed to stop projectiles just before they hit the hull. The anti-shipping missile didn't make the ship obsolete, but it did spur the development of improved air-defence ships. It is possible militaries may add more escort SHORADS designed to deal with drones and incoming fire from further away than the vehicles own active protection systems.

A current major weakness of tanks is limited vision, but it is possible that could be addressed by directly linking up the tank to a drone, possibly even a small drone carried on the tank and launched when needed. An active protection system could also be hooked up to indicate to the crew where attacking fire is coming from, perhaps even allowing them to automatically train the turret that way so they can identify, is possible, the attackers and return fire. That in itself would allow for the defeat of command-guided weapons, if fired from far enough away.

A lot of drone development in the last couple of decades has been focussed on counter-insurgency operations. The switchblade is a case in point, designed to be carried by the operators, and previously only used by special forces. That said, systems like the switchblade could also be integrated into armoured vehicles. It wouldn't take much work to add drone launchers, a supply of drones and a few positions for drone operators to an infantry fighting vehicle, creating a specialised loitering munition carrier.

This is all pure speculation, but what can be said is that people will try and counter threats, they always have - the tank itself was first developed as a counter to the seemingly unbeatable combination of barbed wire and machine guns.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by lpm » Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:50 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:04 am
Allo V Psycho wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:50 am
Suggestion from Russian MoD that the Moskva is under tow, from just south of Odessa, presumably to Sevastopol.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/15 ... 8557486086
I'll believe it when I see it. It's certainly not impossible, but if the fire was small and containable, they wouldn't have abandoned ship.
This says it was a crap ship because Russia couldn't afford/couldn't be arsed to give it an essential refit.

https://twitter.com/delfoo/status/1514510627045265408

It's not clear why it was loitering close enough to shore to get hit. What was its mission? It's one thing to lose a ship when it's on an important mission, knowingly taking a risk in return for a military gain. Another thing to lose a ship when it was doing almost nothing.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:00 pm

lpm wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:50 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:04 am
Allo V Psycho wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:50 am
Suggestion from Russian MoD that the Moskva is under tow, from just south of Odessa, presumably to Sevastopol.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/15 ... 8557486086
I'll believe it when I see it. It's certainly not impossible, but if the fire was small and containable, they wouldn't have abandoned ship.
This says it was a crap ship because Russia couldn't afford/couldn't be arsed to give it an essential refit.

https://twitter.com/delfoo/status/1514510627045265408

It's not clear why it was loitering close enough to shore to get hit. What was its mission? It's one thing to lose a ship when it's on an important mission, knowingly taking a risk in return for a military gain. Another thing to lose a ship when it was doing almost nothing.
It's mission was most likely air defence, as its S300s could cover seaward approaches to Sevastapol and also areas around Kherson and Mykolaiv.

The Slava class is certainly dated, and without upgrades vulnerable. There's a reason the ability of American Aegis-equipped ships and the British Type-45 and similar to track and intercept multiple targets is hyped.

As of current Pentagon spokesman claims, Moskva is afloat but very clearly damaged. I would be very surprised if she takes any more part in this conflict.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Woodchopper » Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:14 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:00 pm
As of current Pentagon spokesman claims, Moskva is afloat but very clearly damaged. I would be very surprised if she takes any more part in this conflict.
Assuming the damage is extensive she'll probably be scrapped. Rebuilding a three decades old warship doesn't make sense. If Russia were in a position to spend that much money it would be better spent on a new ship.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:30 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:14 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:00 pm
As of current Pentagon spokesman claims, Moskva is afloat but very clearly damaged. I would be very surprised if she takes any more part in this conflict.
Assuming the damage is extensive she'll probably be scrapped. Rebuilding a three decades old warship doesn't make sense. If Russia were in a position to spend that much money it would be better spent on a new ship.
Four decades old, and absolutely. Ships that are repaired after heavy damage are often permanently affected, for example Warspite had steering issues for the rest of her career after taking damage at Jutland.

User avatar
lpm
Junior Mod
Posts: 5944
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by lpm » Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:54 pm

jimbob wrote:
Wed Apr 13, 2022 8:04 pm
Video

Tanks are Obsolete - apparently since 1919

https://youtu.be/QPth_xqBXGY

Lots of sources and discussion
I'm confused by that video because it completely skipped WW2.

You can't do that, surely. That was when the tank showed how mobile warfare could be devastating to defenders. The front moved much faster than defenders could adapt to, with defenders trying to grind the offensive to a halt once the attackers resupply was over-extended. Massed tanks - with all that support he described - conquered a huge part of Europe plus a lot of North Africa. And did it fast.

The blitzkrieg started on 10 May 1940. Dunkirk started on 26 May 1940. That's 16 days!

Barbarossa started 22 June 1941. They began the siege of Kiev on 7 August. They reached Leningrad 8 September. That's 46 and 78 days!

This war has been going 59 days.

Tanks have completely failed to achieve any sort of mobility in Ukraine. It's not enough to state that tanks have always suffered bad losses and there's plenty of ways to defend - the point is tanks have overcome that in the past and surged onwards. Nor is it enough to imply that there'll always be an evolutionary arms race. Sometimes things just end. Or stay out of balance for decades.

And the video failed to address tanks used by defenders vs tanks used by attackers. What can make sense for one can be useless for the other. For starters a tank with limited mobility, defending a set area, doesn't need a long chain of fuel trucks following behind. The video for some reason disqualified abandoned Russian tanks from consideration, presumably feeling they were undefeated by counter measures. This is incorrect. You can defeat tanks by denying them resupply or demoralising their crew. In WW2 wasn't there some amazingly powerful German tank that was the master of the battlefield, but rarely reached the battlefield because it had massive maintenance demands and the Allies bombed the sh.t out of all maintenance facilities?

Theory is useless if reality on the ground strays. Which has happened in Ukraine. A tank might not be considered obsolete if it's repurposed to be an armoured vehicle for other goals, but it looks obsolete as a weapon to achieve rapid movement across enemy territory.
⭐ Awarded gold star 4 November 2021

Post Reply