Jump to content

Ukraine: Slava Ukraini!!!


Ser Scot A Ellison
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

If T-55s become the Russian mainstay will Bradley’s not be more than capable of standing up to them?  T-55s lack an auto loader… don’t they?

Again, armor vs armor isn't particularly common. Tanks are used as ways to take territory and support combined forces. Infantry and artillery are more than capable of dealing with tanks right now; gone are the days where you need a tank to deal with a tank. 

This is a bit less true, mind you, for Russia. Russia does not appear to have nearly as much man-portable antitank weaponry. They may require having armor to deal with things, and a T55 going up against an Abrams is probably not super awesome for the T55 - even if the Abrams doesn't have reactive armor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using depleted uranium rounds on T-55s is going to be interesting. Line them up in a row and see how many tanks one shell can obliterate (three I think it reasonable, four not impossible).

In more WTFery, Roscosmos has begun constructing a new space launch facility in eastern Siberia to replace the Baikonur Spacedrome in Kazakhstan, reportedly because Putin is irritated at Kazakhstan's annual $100 million fee to use the facility. Roscosmos has started moving their stuff from Baikonur to the new facility, which is fine, but then some of their workers from a subsidiary decided it would be a splendid idea to start tearing up infrastructure belonging to the Kazakh government from the area and ship it out as well (i.e., stealing it). The Kazakh government said fuck that noise and has seized the assets from the subsidiary and effectively nationalised it.

In response Medvedev has said this is apparently evidence that the Kazakh government is about to start ethnic cleansing of the Russian-speaking minority in the border area and urged a special military operation to resolve the problem (presumably conjured out of the ether).

If the situation isn't resolved, then Roscosmos might not be able to use the Baikonur facility any more, which means no more Russian space programme launches until 2025 when the Siberia facility is supposed to come online (but probably won't). I suspect Putin will be on the phone for a quasi-apology of sorts to try to resolve the situation shortly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bradleys did very well against T-55 and T-62 tanks in Desert Storm.  It is definitely an advantage to have your IFVs capable of going toe to toe against enemy tanks.  Probably not going to come up too terribly often, but when it does, the Ukrainians will be very glad they aren't going up against a more modern tank with better armor and sensors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Bradleys did very well against T-55 and T-62 tanks in Desert Storm.  It is definitely an advantage to have your IFVs capable of going toe to toe against enemy tanks.  Probably not going to come up too terribly often, but when it does, the Ukrainians will be very glad they aren't going up against a more modern tank with better armor and sensors. 

That's true, but that was 30 years ago in a very different environment. That kind of action is not hugely common in Ukraine as far as I can tell, even with the video that @Werthead is referring to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were also other IFV tactics being used, like them being used to shoot out the tanks' treads and disable them, then someone would come over later with a Javelin or NLAWS to finish them off (by which time the tank crew, if they were sane, had long since scarpered). Or a Ukrainian farmer would show up with a tractor. Or the tank would run out of fuel 10 miles from the nearest help and the crew would leg it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

If T-55s become the Russian mainstay will Bradley’s not be more than capable of standing up to them?  T-55s lack an auto loader… don’t they?

T-55s won't become the Russian mainstay. Other than the ammo issue I mentioned, I doubt there are more than 50 of them in Russia that are operational (in the minimal sense that they can move on their own and fire their main gun). The remaining ones that weren't scrapped, (and we are talking about hundreds, not thousands) would need a major overhaul to become operational.

Overhaul assumes that Russian tank repair plants won't be busy with other work (and I think they kind of are at the moment), and that are enough still-living tank maintenance technicians who know how to overhaul a T-55.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

There were also other IFV tactics being used, like them being used to shoot out the tanks' treads and disable them, then someone would come over later with a Javelin or NLAWS to finish them off (by which time the tank crew, if they were sane, had long since scarpered). Or a Ukrainian farmer would show up with a tractor. Or the tank would run out of fuel 10 miles from the nearest help and the crew would leg it.

Lack of fuel was pretty much what destroyed Russia's elite 1st Guards Tank Army (the first time, they were reinforced and then effectively destroyed two more times in this war). They were supposed to attack Kyiv from the east, so they bypassed the city of Sumy in their rush to get there.

Big mistake. Defenders of Sumy (basically civilian volunteers) would sneak out of the city and ambush fuel convoys that were intended to supply the tanks. Leading to a whole bunch tanks being abandoned without fuel, and the tractor brigade doing its thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I’m just waiting for them to start arming their infantry with pikes and sending them in mass wave attacks…

You don't do mass wave attacks with pikes! They're mostly a defensive weapon. It takes a lot of training and discipline to use them offensively.

I don't know shit about tanks. I was feeling left out. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2023 at 4:59 AM, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Yes, Vladimir Putin and Russia is famous for their valuing of lives and valuing of the future

Just to be clear I wasn't surprised at the terrible ethics of the decision. I wasn't even surprised by the poor utilitarian decision making, just commenting on how self destructive this is long term. All for the "legacy" of a man that will be dead sooner or later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SpaceChampion said:

Instead they're doing massive wave attacks with shovels!  Much better!

Are they doing that thing from 41/42 where they send one guy out with a shovel, and another guy out with some gloves so that he can pick up the shovel and bury the first guy?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Werthead said:

In more WTFery, Roscosmos has begun constructing a new space launch facility in eastern Siberia to replace the Baikonur Spacedrome in Kazakhstan, reportedly because Putin is irritated at Kazakhstan's annual $100 million fee to use the facility. Roscosmos has started moving their stuff from Baikonur to the new facility, which is fine, but then some of their workers from a subsidiary decided it would be a splendid idea to start tearing up infrastructure belonging to the Kazakh government from the area and ship it out as well (i.e., stealing it). The Kazakh government said fuck that noise and has seized the assets from the subsidiary and effectively nationalised it.

In response Medvedev has said this is apparently evidence that the Kazakh government is about to start ethnic cleansing of the Russian-speaking minority in the border area and urged a special military operation to resolve the problem (presumably conjured out of the ether).

If the situation isn't resolved, then Roscosmos might not be able to use the Baikonur facility any more, which means no more Russian space programme launches until 2025 when the Siberia facility is supposed to come online (but probably won't). I suspect Putin will be on the phone for a quasi-apology of sorts to try to resolve the situation shortly.

This is just complete absurdity. The Russian attitude toward Kazakhstan during all this has just been insane.  Kazakhstan has always had good relations with Russia and is a major trading partner not to mention a decently wealthy and influential country in Central Asia. To spite them for no reason and continue to drive them into China's arms for random nationalist feelgood emotions with no material or political benefit is just mind boggling. Kazakhstan was an economic and political ally before all this, the deliberate spiting of one of Russia's more important allies with constant provocations and insults for no reason, just shows how drunk on their own kool aid the Russian government is.

One fun aspect of this would be if Kazakhstan uses the cosmodrome to start their own space program, they have the money for it, and they could take over the market the Russians are leaving. But realistically the money that would be earmarked for that is probably going to go towards weapon purchases from China.

Edited by Darzin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Gorn said:

Similar problem exists with Leopard 1s, no-one has 105mm shells in stock anymore.

IIRC the French AMX-10RC still has a 105mm cannon, and at least Greece also has active Leo1s. These two will definitively have und produce 105mm shells, question is if it's enough.  

This calibre may not be very effective against modern MBTs but against fortified positions, infantry and light armour, (in situations for close infantry support) it still is very much an effective weapon. Also, I've heard the idea that instead of direct fire support, the T55s can be used for indirect fire - with a much greater range (10-14km), but of course even worse accuracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alarich II said:

with a much greater range (10-14km), but of course even worse accuracy.

When the Russian tactic is to abuse and terrify the civilian population into capitulation rather than actually being effective against the opposing military that tactic makes a certian cold sense.  T-55/T-54’s suck against modern militaries but they’re still effective at terrifying captured or threatened populations.

:frown5:

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

When the Russian tactic is to abuse and terrify the civilian population into capitulation rather than actually being effective against the opposing military that tactic makes a certian cold sense.  T-55/T-54’s suck against modern militaries but they’re still effective at terrifying captured or threatened populations.

:frown5:

Both Russians and Ukrainians use tanks for indirect fire. It's an old soviet tactic. Same as tilting your helicopters nose up before shooting with unguided missiles. Increases the range, which means they won't be fired at by the enemy. Not very efficient in terms of ammo consumption, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Gorn said:

T-55s won't become the Russian mainstay. Other than the ammo issue I mentioned, I doubt there are more than 50 of them in Russia that are operational (in the minimal sense that they can move on their own and fire their main gun). The remaining ones that weren't scrapped, (and we are talking about hundreds, not thousands) would need a major overhaul to become operational.

Overhaul assumes that Russian tank repair plants won't be busy with other work (and I think they kind of are at the moment), and that are enough still-living tank maintenance technicians who know how to overhaul a T-55.

This illustrates a point that I think is missed in the T-55 discussion.  At this point, Russia is sending basically every serviceable tank to the front.   Whether you are talking about T-72s, T-62s or T-55s, Russia has a lot of them in storage, and is combing through that inventory to find the ones that still run.  In the case of T-72s, many were still working (and were sent to the front), and many more could become serviceable with a minor overhaul.  Once Russia had already sent all the working T-72s, they then went on to the working T-62s, and now the T-55s, but they almost assuredly aren't going to go to the trouble of refitting and upgrading T-55s.  That effort would be better spent on T-72s.  But for the tiny fraction of T-55s that are still working?  Russia decided they might as well send them out as well, and I can see the logic in that. 

The fact that we are seeing T-55s means that Russia is probably out of working T-72s and T-62s in storage.  That's not a good sign for Russia.  But it certainly still has a huge inventory of T-72s and T-62s in some state of disrepair that can be brought back online with time.  The big limiting factor is time for skilled repair crews/facilities.  The same facilities that are repairing inoperable T-72s are also the ones maintaining/repairing the T-72s that are worn out or damaged at the front.  This heavy repair/maintenance work is a burden that Ukraine can often hand off to allies like Poland, but Russia has to do it entirely on its own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

This illustrates a point that I think is missed in the T-55 discussion.  At this point, Russia is sending basically every serviceable tank to the front.   Whether you are talking about T-72s, T-62s or T-55s, Russia has a lot of them in storage, and is combing through that inventory to find the ones that still run.  In the case of T-72s, many were still working (and were sent to the front), and many more could become serviceable with a minor overhaul.  Once Russia had already sent all the working T-72s, they then went on to the working T-62s, and now the T-55s, but they almost assuredly aren't going to go to the trouble of refitting and upgrading T-55s.  That effort would be better spent on T-72s.  But for the tiny fraction of T-55s that are still working?  Russia decided they might as well send them out as well, and I can see the logic in that. 

The fact that we are seeing T-55s means that Russia is probably out of working T-72s and T-62s in storage.  That's not a good sign for Russia.  But it certainly still has a huge inventory of T-72s and T-62s in some state of disrepair that can be brought back online with time.  The big limiting factor is time for skilled repair crews/facilities.  The same facilities that are repairing inoperable T-72s are also the ones maintaining/repairing the T-72s that are worn out or damaged at the front.  This heavy repair/maintenance work is a burden that Ukraine can often hand off to allies like Poland, but Russia has to do it entirely on its own. 

The way Russia has conducted this war, they’ve probably sent their tank engineers/mechanics to the front and used them as cannon fodder in Bakhmut

Edited by Derfel Cadarn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...