Blyatskrieg

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Sep 19, 2022 10:06 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 9:30 pm
It's not from a remotely trusted source, but there's rumours about Slovenia sending a few dozen M-55S tanks to Ukraine. These are old T-55s that have been radically upgraded with new engine, armour, electronics and an L7 105mm gun. IF, and I emphasise IF this happens, they won't be for frontline service, but it might put pressure on Germany to part with its remaining Leopard 1s. One of the arguments for not doing so was that the L7 was allegedly useless and there was no ammunition for it - though America's chosen the L7 to arm it's new "Light"* tank, which rather puts at least the former of those claims in doubt.

*No tank weighing almost fifty tonnes - as much as a Warsaw Pact MBT - has any business calling itself a light tank :roll:
Now being reported by Oryx. Thing is, a radically upgraded T-55 - or an upgraded Leopard 1 - isn't going to do very well in toe-to-toe tank battles in open terrain. Though there have been some of those, that isn't most of the fighting that's going on. Will both of these tanks have the firepower to attack fortified positions? Yes. Do they have the ability to take out any vehicle short of a tank with direct fire? Yes. Do they have the armour to resist the more common direct fire anti-tank launchers? Also yes, at least in the M-55S's case, and the Ukrainians wouldn't put tanks into combat without first slathering them in reactive armour blocks.

Much of this is also true for the T-62, though in that case the electronics aren't as well upgraded.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm

"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here. American tanks are quite a bit tougher than Russian/Soviet ones, and much more capable of firing on the move, but they are also just more tanks. More tanks is good, because more tanks means more tank-fists the Russians have to defend against. More opportunities to feint and bluff, and more ability to punch through Russian positions. Ukraine can put a million men and women in arms. It's time to arm them properly.

They said this about HIMARS. Witness the effects once HIMARS was supplied.

In addition, Ukraine is managing to operate PzH2000s - and while they have had some problems, that's been due to a design flaw that was known before they were ever supplied. PzH2000s and Krabs are more complicated than the vast majority of tanks. PzH2000s are also heavy enough to call into question fears about the weight of western tanks.

In addition, this attitude is being applied to Infantry Fighting Vehicles - for those not familiar with the terminology, an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) is a vehicle that can transport troops in an armoured troop compartment while carrying reasonable firepower to support the troops in battle. This is particularly frustrating as Ukraine is already operating American IFV chassis in combat - that's what the M270 is based on. These are probably the most vital vehicles for Ukraine now, aside from air defence. The capture of >100 Russian IFVs in Kharkiv will have helped of course, as BMP-2s are a perfectly reasonable example of the breed.

In addition, repairs can often be carried out outside the country. America could send technicians to Poland to handle the more major work.

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TopBadger » Tue Sep 20, 2022 9:21 am

EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm
"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here.
[snip]
They said this about HIMARS. Witness the effects once HIMARS was supplied.
Upthread you acknowledged the value of capturing a T-90M, I expect the US are wary of the shoe being on the other foot and their own potential for losing modern MBT's in the field. That said - surely they have some older models which would be better. They don't have to send their best kit.

HIMAR's is a different beast - it can stay well away from the front and losses to enemy counter fire should be recoverable.

It seems clear to me though that Ukraine has more than proved itself worthy of increased support.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5717
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by dyqik » Tue Sep 20, 2022 11:28 am

TopBadger wrote:
Tue Sep 20, 2022 9:21 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm
"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here.
[snip]
They said this about HIMARS. Witness the effects once HIMARS was supplied.
Upthread you acknowledged the value of capturing a T-90M, I expect the US are wary of the shoe being on the other foot and their own potential for losing modern MBT's in the field. That said - surely they have some older models which would be better. They don't have to send their best kit.

HIMAR's is a different beast - it can stay well away from the front and losses to enemy counter fire should be recoverable.

It seems clear to me though that Ukraine has more than proved itself worthy of increased support.
Something like an M1 Abrams is already well known to the Russians, as they've been around for ages, and in use in Iraq etc.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Sep 20, 2022 11:35 am

TopBadger wrote:
Tue Sep 20, 2022 9:21 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm
"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here.
[snip]
They said this about HIMARS. Witness the effects once HIMARS was supplied.
Upthread you acknowledged the value of capturing a T-90M, I expect the US are wary of the shoe being on the other foot and their own potential for losing modern MBT's in the field. That said - surely they have some older models which would be better. They don't have to send their best kit.
Exactly that. M1A1s rather than M1A2s. Frankly, even the long-retired M1s would be useful if they could get them running, though A1s would be a lot better. For Europe, the most likely candidate, based on what's in inventories and not being used, would be Leopard 2A4s, not the top of the line 2A7.

An M1A1 Abrams or Leopard 2A4 is still a tougher, more accurate and more sophisticated tank than the overwhelming majority of AFVs in Russian service.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Sep 20, 2022 9:29 pm

And this is why destroying Russian depots is the least worst option. That's thermite, raining down on the village of Ozerne.

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TopBadger » Wed Sep 21, 2022 6:40 am

Wondering how many fighting troops this partial mobilization will bring to bear for Russia... those extra people are going to need to be supported with extra logistics... something Russia has not proved itself to be good at.

It's going to be a "target rich environment" for HIMARS.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TopBadger » Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:02 am

Re: M1 tanks and Longer Range missiles for HIMARS - this is one retired US Generals take:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/60 ... 6e0479cefe

Seems less sure about supplying M1's (too big - needs jet fuel rather than diesel).

Seems rather more keen on supplying ATACMS.

I think the US needs to give them ATACMS and the Germans need to hand over some Leopards.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:22 am

TopBadger wrote:
Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:02 am
Re: M1 tanks and Longer Range missiles for HIMARS - this is one retired US Generals take:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/60 ... 6e0479cefe

Seems less sure about supplying M1's (too big - needs jet fuel rather than diesel).
I'm afraid he's wrong on this point, and badly so.

The Abrams is powered by a fifteen hundred horsepower gas turbine that can run on most liquid hydrocarbons, including petrol, diesel, kerosene and jet fuel. The USA fuels them on jet fuel - specifically JP8 - because they run a lot of things on jet fuel and it makes sense to use the same fuel. The Australians, who don't have jet fuel in their army supply chain, run them on diesel, and they run happily on diesel.

As for weight, an M1A1 is only approximately 10% heavier than a PzH2000, which are not proving to be a problem.

However, the Abrams is a thirsty machine. If they are to be provided, they should a) be provided in sufficient quantity to outfit entire formations and b) should be provided as part of a package that includes appropriate armoured recovery vehicles, transporter-trailers for strategic movement and logistics vehicles especially fuel tankers.
Seems rather more keen on supplying ATACMS.

I think the US needs to give them ATACMS and the Germans need to hand over some Leopards.
I agree on this point. However, Leopards and Abrams use the same ammunition, so there isn't much issue mixing them in the army, so long as enough of each are supplied that they don't have to be mixed in small formations. Platoons and companies should be of the same vehicle type, ideally regiments would be too, but they could get away with being mixed.

While I would like to see the Ukrainians at least able to borrow those Challenger 2s we aren't intending to upgrade to Challenger 3s*, it's not a great plan as there'd be no potential for any more to be supplied, and they need their own specific ammunition that reportedly is in pretty short supply.



*Though we should be upgrading all the 2s to 3s ffs.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Woodchopper » Wed Sep 21, 2022 12:58 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm
"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here. American tanks are quite a bit tougher than Russian/Soviet ones, and much more capable of firing on the move, but they are also just more tanks. More tanks is good, because more tanks means more tank-fists the Russians have to defend against. More opportunities to feint and bluff, and more ability to punch through Russian positions. Ukraine can put a million men and women in arms. It's time to arm them properly.

They said this about HIMARS. Witness the effects once HIMARS was supplied.

In addition, Ukraine is managing to operate PzH2000s - and while they have had some problems, that's been due to a design flaw that was known before they were ever supplied. PzH2000s and Krabs are more complicated than the vast majority of tanks. PzH2000s are also heavy enough to call into question fears about the weight of western tanks.

In addition, this attitude is being applied to Infantry Fighting Vehicles - for those not familiar with the terminology, an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) is a vehicle that can transport troops in an armoured troop compartment while carrying reasonable firepower to support the troops in battle. This is particularly frustrating as Ukraine is already operating American IFV chassis in combat - that's what the M270 is based on. These are probably the most vital vehicles for Ukraine now, aside from air defence. The capture of >100 Russian IFVs in Kharkiv will have helped of course, as BMP-2s are a perfectly reasonable example of the breed.

In addition, repairs can often be carried out outside the country. America could send technicians to Poland to handle the more major work.
Yes, the problem is maintenance, and armored vehicles in combat need a lot of it. Specifically the time it takes to train technicians and set up supply chains for parts. They've presumably been able to solve those problems with PZH2000s and HIMARS (and presumably CAESAR and Archer). However, those have been supplied in small numbers (eg 16 HIMARS, 18 CAESAR).

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Wed Sep 21, 2022 1:11 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Wed Sep 21, 2022 12:58 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:23 pm
"U.S. defense official said "tanks are on the table" for Ukrainian forces but Ukraine will need to show the ability to maintain more modern variants to receive them."

This is the bit where I once again yell at the frankly bigoted attitudes on display by the Americans here.
Yes, the problem is maintenance, and armored vehicles in combat need a lot of it. Specifically the time it takes to train technicians and set up supply chains for parts. They've presumably been able to solve those problems with PZH2000s and HIMARS (and presumably CAESAR and Archer). However, those have been supplied in small numbers (eg 16 HIMARS, 18 CAESAR).
Amounts of maintenance vary. In general, wheeled vehicles require less, which is one reason a lot of forces are moving more towards wheeled vehicles - though cost, and complacency about difficult terrain after two decades of fighting in arid areas are also factors. HIMARS is, when it comes down to it, an all terrain truck with a launcher on the back. CAESAR is a gun on a truck - the clue's in the name.

M270s, Krabs and PzH2000s are a lot more complicated, yet the only problem noted has been a long-known problem with PzH2000s struggling with the workload of full scale war. Ukrainians are used to dealing with tracked, armoured vehicles. They were a major manufacturer of them for crying out loud. They are not slow, or simple, and we aren't talking about untrained civilian volunteers any more, and we haven't been for six months.

It takes time to train maintenance personnel. It also takes time to train crew. It takes even longer if the start point is delayed. Tomorrow will mark thirty weeks of war. Thirty weeks is more than enough time to train crews from scratch for tanks and IFVs in the US and British armies, at peacetime pace. Mechanics can also be trained. In the time it takes to train the crews, manuals can be translated, and mechanics can receive training on specific details that might require particular training.

It's also worth noting that modern fighting vehicles are designed to be easy to maintain, with modular powerpacks that can be replaced in a few hours, so broken down vehicles can be put back into service by people who know how to change a powerpack, but not repair its internals. Powerpacks can be shipped to Poland, or even the USA for repair, then returned to the pool of spare powerpacks.

We are no longer thinking about what weapons can be placed into the hands of newly raised volunteers to best resist Russian advances - NLAWs were great for that, but we aren't arming territorials any more. We're looking for ways to aid Ukraine's conventional armed forces in defeating the Russian occupation in a conventional war. It takes time to train crews and maintenance personnel for tanks and IFVs, but we'll be very lucky if the war's over in less time than it would take to raise a brigade combat team or three.

User avatar
jimbob
Light of Blast
Posts: 4226
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by jimbob » Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:50 pm

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... evastopol/
Ukraine’s New Weapon To Strike Russian Navy In Sevastopol
A previously unreported drone boat, known as a USV (uncrewed surface vessel), appears to have slipped past Russian Navy patrols. The device was found on a beach close to the major Russian Navy base of Sevastopol in Crimea.
Speculates that it was a kamikaze drone boat. Might explain this story

https://news.usni.org/2022/09/20/russia ... ys-u-k-mod
Russian Navy Moving Kilo Attack Boats to Safety from Ukraine Strike Risk, Says U.K. MoD
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Woodchopper » Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:22 pm

jimbob wrote:
Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:50 pm
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... evastopol/
Ukraine’s New Weapon To Strike Russian Navy In Sevastopol
A previously unreported drone boat, known as a USV (uncrewed surface vessel), appears to have slipped past Russian Navy patrols. The device was found on a beach close to the major Russian Navy base of Sevastopol in Crimea.
Speculates that it was a kamikaze drone boat. Might explain this story

https://news.usni.org/2022/09/20/russia ... ys-u-k-mod
Russian Navy Moving Kilo Attack Boats to Safety from Ukraine Strike Risk, Says U.K. MoD
Interesting. It doesn’t look big enough to have motored all the way from Odesa with a warhead. But I guess it could have been carried by another vessel part of the way.

Another possibility is that it was used for surveillance.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:04 am

Russian sources reporting Russian units encircled at Drobysheve. Probably not significant numbers, but part of a broader effort to encircle Lyman and push east from the Oskil/north from the Siverskyi Donets.

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TopBadger » Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:21 am

Hopefully they'll surrender.

The Ukrainians should also consider mobilizing more forces, and holding locations, because if Russia commits more conscripts to the field it might be expected that they've worked out that the safest place for them is to be a Ukrainian POW.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:46 am

TopBadger wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:21 am
Hopefully they'll surrender.

The Ukrainians should also consider mobilizing more forces, and holding locations, because if Russia commits more conscripts to the field it might be expected that they've worked out that the safest place for them is to be a Ukrainian POW.
There's already a major campaign - titled "I Want To Live" - of leaflets and electronic communications trying to persuade Russians to surrender. Some have. Not least, because if the rumours about Kadyrovtsy shooting retreating Russians are true - or perhaps it would be better to say that if the Russians believe that they are, which many clearly do - then it's safer to go over to the Ukrainian side than to retreat.

And Ukrainian propaganda emphasising that Russian POWs get medical treatment and calls home can't hurt either.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:57 am

Regarding Drobysheve, I don't think it's a big coincidence that Ukraine's claims for Russian personnel losses have been very high over the last two days, with yesterday's claim nearly as high as the peak of the Kharkiv counteroffensive. That could indicate units surrendering or being overrun.

It's clear that the goal is to encircle Lyman and - one presumes - to push the Russians beyond the Zherebets river.

User avatar
jimbob
Light of Blast
Posts: 4226
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by jimbob » Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:27 am

https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/statu ... cX1zTZscOQ

Elsewhere I made the observation that some of the mobilised troops might get the same T62s that they were assigned to for the failed Soviet war in Afghanistan.

It now looks quite possible.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

User avatar
TopBadger
Snowbonk
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by TopBadger » Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:38 am

The mobilizing of 300k reserves now appears to be a mobilization of 1M men (of any age and status) in the hope they end up with 300k troops... of course they lied about who would be called upon.

Perhaps they should allow themselves to be armed and then fight their way to Moscow instead?
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:42 am

TopBadger wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:38 am
Perhaps they should allow themselves to be armed and then fight their way to Moscow instead?
Or to kick the Moskali out of Buryatia, Tuva, Sakha, Dagestan, Buryatia, Bashkortostan and so on.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3556
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by Grumble » Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:51 am

EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:42 am
TopBadger wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:38 am
Perhaps they should allow themselves to be armed and then fight their way to Moscow instead?
Or to kick the Moskali out of Buryatia, Tuva, Sakha, Dagestan, Buryatia, Bashkortostan and so on.
How many times should they be kicked out of Buryatia?
A bit churlish

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:59 am

Grumble wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:51 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:42 am
TopBadger wrote:
Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:38 am
Perhaps they should allow themselves to be armed and then fight their way to Moscow instead?
Or to kick the Moskali out of Buryatia, Tuva, Sakha, Dagestan, Buryatia, Bashkortostan and so on.
How many times should they be kicked out of Buryatia?
AS MANY TIMES AS IT TAKES!

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 3:20 pm

Iranian "Shahed 136" - aka герань-2 - "suicide drone" getting intercepted over Odesa.

The Shahed 136 really is more of a cruise missile, just a weirdly shaped one. It functions like a cruise missile more than it does a drone.

And big and slow may not be that effective against nations that know what air defence doing. For all the overexcited speculation that these things manoeuvre to make them harder to hit, every piece of footage has seen them going straight and level.

Given the frequent targeting of Odesa, it would be worth seeing if any C-RAM type systems like Phalanx or Goalkeeper could be provided. Stuff like the герань-2 wouldn't stand a chance if they passed in range. That or park a Gepard or two there.

User avatar
EACLucifer
After Pie
Posts: 2417
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: Behind you

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by EACLucifer » Fri Sep 23, 2022 6:47 pm

There are such things as amphibious aircraft. The Iranian Mohajer-6 drone is not one of them. I can think of an awful lot of intelligence agencies that would like a look at that. I agree with James Rushton's assesment that this was likely electronic warfare that downed it.

Given the location - Odesa, which has been targeted with Shahed-136 munitions - it is quite possible this was the drone actually targetting them. Shahed-136's don't have targetting optics, they need to be told where to go.

User avatar
jimbob
Light of Blast
Posts: 4226
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: Blyatskrieg

Post by jimbob » Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:13 pm

Meanwhile, some conscripts are not impressed with their weapons

https://twitter.com/CalibreObscura/stat ... AOvS82EmTQ
See new Tweets
Conversation
Cᴀʟɪʙʀᴇ Oʙsᴄᴜʀᴀ
@CalibreObscura
·
2h
#Ukraine: Apparently this is the condition of some of the AKMs that mobilised Russian men have been receiving. Pretty surprising they're not AK-74.

Although these could be probably just fine within hours, not a great look! Also, note 74-style refurb stock.
0:14 / 0:21
From
NEXTA
Cᴀʟɪʙʀᴇ Oʙsᴄᴜʀᴀ
@CalibreObscura
Er no, worse than I thought. Internals
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

Post Reply