Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Share

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  medo on Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:41 pm

    They talk, Russian army have around 40.000 soldiers near border with Ukraine. Enough to secure border in case of civil war, but to invade 40 million country, Russia need 1 million soldiers. 40.000 soldiers are not enough to attack 1 larger town.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:55 am



    Ural Typhoon line.



    Also comes in 4x4 now apparently.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Zivo on Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:58 am

    TR1 wrote:


    Also comes in 4x4 now apparently.

    I never liked the idea of putting so much weight on just four wheels. Especially on a vehicle expected to operate in areas were road conditions are less than desirable.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:46 am

    Zivo wrote:
    TR1 wrote:


    Also comes in 4x4 now apparently.

    I never liked the idea of putting so much weight on just four wheels. Especially on a vehicle expected to operate in areas were road conditions are less than desirable.

    What would you say if they were double wheeled, 2 tires per space to increase traction area?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15450
    Points : 16157
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:45 am

    I never liked the idea of putting so much weight on just four wheels. Especially on a vehicle expected to operate in areas were road conditions are less than desirable.

    I rather suspect this vehicle is not intended for Army use cross country... it would more likely be used by police and paramilitary forces and spend 99% of its time on proper roads. It is a personnel delivery van that protects those on board with moderate armour.

    If a light patrol vehicle gets into trouble this will likely be the vehicle they send to get lots of troops in there as quickly as possible.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Tue Apr 15, 2014 6:10 am


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15450
    Points : 16157
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 15, 2014 10:09 am

    Interesting... lightweight ATGM for use from light vehicles, or weapon designed to engage light vehicles... or both?

    I suspect the former.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:54 am

    GarryB wrote:Interesting... lightweight ATGM for use from light vehicles, or weapon designed to engage light vehicles... or both?

    I suspect the former.
    i agree, HEAT is not efficient against light armor due to lack of behind armor effects when striking something soft, and this one seems to have a HEAT warhead(probe at front).

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3223
    Points : 3347
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Vann7 on Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:41 pm



    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Apr 15, 2014 2:05 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Interesting... lightweight ATGM for use from light vehicles, or weapon designed to engage light vehicles... or both?

    I suspect the former.
    i agree, HEAT is not efficient against light armor due to lack of behind armor effects when striking something soft, and this one seems to have a HEAT warhead(probe at front).

    There is only HEAT rounds widespread that are suitable for Anti-Armor role of lightweight class, delayed impact fuzed HE-Frag ammunition will either not penetrate and detonate on surface like the harder frontal armor of IFV's or will have to penetrate the side armor which gets thicker and thicker over the last 20 years, so the ammunition of choice for light armored vehicles is still HEAT rounds.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Zivo on Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:12 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Zivo wrote:
    TR1 wrote:

    Also comes in 4x4 now apparently.

    I never liked the idea of putting so much weight on just four wheels. Especially on a vehicle expected to operate in areas were road conditions are less than desirable.

    What would you say if they were double wheeled, 2 tires per space to increase traction area?

    Better. That configuration should be the bare minimum for a vehicle of this size.

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:10 am

    TR1 wrote:

    Maybe UR Bulat is a missile for an APS (active armor) system.

    Can somebody tell me what the first word of the second line of the text is? I am assuming the text is related (dunno).

    The first word of the first line seems to be "Управления", which makes sense as being the "U" part of "UR Bulat".

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  TR1 on Wed Apr 16, 2014 7:53 am

    Range, Penetration, that kind of thing.

    The shot cuts off RIGHT before the specification display. Damn!

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15450
    Points : 16157
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:45 am

    Maybe UR Bulat is a missile for an APS (active armor) system.

    Interesting guess, but an APS interceptor munition would never use a shaped charge as a payload... a flat ball bearing covered claymore mine type configuration would make more sense...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:50 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Maybe UR Bulat is a missile for an APS (active armor) system.

    Interesting guess, but an APS interceptor munition would never use a shaped charge as a payload... a flat ball bearing covered claymore mine type configuration would make more sense...

    There is no major feature in the picture that would categorically indicate that the warhead is a shaped charge; I know about the probe, but it could be something else. Actually, for a conventional shaped charge with conventional contact fusing, the shaped charge has to be way too far back in the missile body to operate optimally at all.

    The missile can also be a dual-purpose missile (APS and anti-light-armor) or a triple-purpose missile (APS, anti-light-armor, and anti-personal), with the following characteristics.

    1- The missile may have a warhead that includes a wide-angle shaped charge, with or without a fragmentation liner. A wide-angle shaped charge is de-optimized for depth of armor penetration but, with or without a fragmentation liner, would be optimized as an APS and also against light armor of the type shown in the picture. Many Russian active protection systems seem to have exactly these type of warheads or other warheads that are highly directional. Also many high-performance directional mines (e.g., MON-200) essentially have wide-angle shaped charges with a fragmentation liner.

    An EFP with a fragmentation liner would also achieve the same thing (e.g., a GSh-7VT with its optional modular fragmentation add-on).

    2- It may also have a precursor shaped charge warhead to defeat reactive armors.

    3- It has a probe, which can be a contact and proximity probe.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Viktor on Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:44 pm

    Nice  thumbsup 

    Mobile shock reconnaissance robotokompleks

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:14 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

    There is no major feature in the picture that would categorically indicate that the warhead is a shaped charge; I know about the probe, but it could be something else. Actually, for a conventional shaped charge with conventional contact fusing, the shaped charge has to be way too far back in the missile body to operate optimally at all.
    yeah, maybe an APS too. something much destructive than large fragments, and a bit contained blast plus with a lot more reach would be necessary to protect lightly armored vehicles against hybrid HE/HEAT missiles like Kornet.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:47 am

    If you all talk about this Bulat missile which TR1 has posted than i personally highly doubt that this should be an APS.
    The point of an APS is to be effective against incoming threats and this Missile like shape is unpractical and unconventional in terms of waste of space. APS use usually either Casettes shaped charges like in Arena or cylindric shaped grenades like in Drozd and others. The point is having several of such APS countermeasures, because where one AT weapon comes from there are plenty more. And this missile shaped "APS" would also had only a very narrow directional blast or needed a much higher amount of Fragmentation and explosive than older APS systems already used shotgun like blasts.

    I think it is HEAT/HE-Frag or even likely mentioned by Morpheus a Bunkerfaust like grenade which would explain that only light armored targets are shown on the table and not a single hard armored target.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:00 am

    no, the future of APS would be smaller warheads with moar concentrated blast/fragmentation effects. To be effective they must be as acccurate as possible- they would be able to steer a path towards the incoming projectile, not unlike current APS that 'waits' for the target to close in and open up with a shotgun barrage of fragments.

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:01 am

    Werewolf wrote:If you all talk about this Bulat missile which TR1 has posted than i personally highly doubt that this should be an APS.
    The point of an APS is to be effective against incoming threats and this Missile like shape is unpractical and unconventional in terms of waste of space. APS use usually either Casettes shaped charges like in Arena or cylindric shaped grenades like in Drozd and others. The point is having several of such APS countermeasures, because where one AT weapon comes from there are plenty more. And this missile shaped "APS" would also had only a very narrow directional blast or needed a much higher amount of Fragmentation and explosive than older APS systems already used shotgun like blasts.

    I think it is HEAT/HE-Frag or even likely mentioned by Morpheus a Bunkerfaust like grenade which would explain that only light armored targets are shown on the table and not a single hard armored target.

    If the diameter of Bulat turns out to be 107 mm, then the missile's dimensions would be the same as those of the Drozd-2 projectiles that have been publicly displayed; that means each Bulat can fit in a Drozd-2 launch tube. Also, in TR1's picture, Bulat is shown next to a Kurganets-25 type APS launcher.

    As I have been referring to GSh-7VT in several of my post about Bulat, I have started a thread on GSh-7VT at

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3095-gsh-7vt-7


    Last edited by Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:47 am; edited 1 time in total

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:42 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    If the diameter of Bulat turns out to be 107 mm, then the missile's dimensions would be the same as those of the Drozd-2 projectiles that have been publicly displayed; that means each Bulat can fit in a Drozd-2 launch tube. Also, in TR1's picture, Bulat is shown next to a Kurganets-25 type APS launcher.

    Maybe, but i doubt it has 107mm diameter seems smaller than 100mm.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15450
    Points : 16157
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:29 am

    There is no major feature in the picture that would categorically indicate that the warhead is a shaped charge; I know about the probe, but it could be something else. Actually, for a conventional shaped charge with conventional contact fusing, the shaped charge has to be way too far back in the missile body to operate optimally at all.

    A HEAT charge forms a plasma beam of vaporised metal... it requires a standoff distance for that beam to form properly... the sole purpose of the probe is to ensure the correct distance from the HEAT charge and the armour it is to penetrate to ensure the best possible penetration performance.

    To my knowledge the only other use of standoff probes for fuses is with bombs where the ground is soft or deep snow to ensure the bombs explode well above ground rather than burying themselves before exploding... not really relevant in this case...

    Also, in TR1's picture, Bulat is shown next to a Kurganets-25 type APS launcher.

    Is that an APS launcher on Kurganets-25 or is it an ATGM launcher?

    Drozd-2 has two twin launchers with the angles slightly offset to increase the horizontal coverage...

    BTW +1 for other thread...

    Nice

    ED209 for patrolling strategic missile forces bases... very nice...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:25 am

    GarryB wrote:
    There is no major feature in the picture that would categorically indicate that the warhead is a shaped charge; I know about the probe, but it could be something else. Actually, for a conventional shaped charge with conventional contact fusing, the shaped charge has to be way too far back in the missile body to operate optimally at all.

    A HEAT charge forms a plasma beam of vaporised metal... it requires a standoff distance for that beam to form properly... the sole purpose of the probe is to ensure the correct distance from the HEAT charge and the armour it is to penetrate to ensure the best possible penetration performance.

    To my knowledge the only other use of standoff probes for fuses is with bombs where the ground is soft or deep snow to ensure the bombs explode well above ground rather than burying themselves before exploding... not really relevant in this case...

    According to my conjecture, the probe would be for the precursor shaped charge not for the main warhead; the precursor benefits from a probe too, and the probe geometry matches that of a small precursor shaped charge well.

    GarryB wrote:
    Also, in TR1's picture, Bulat is shown next to a Kurganets-25 type APS launcher.

    Is that an APS launcher on Kurganets-25 or is it an ATGM launcher?

    Drozd-2 has two twin launchers with the angles slightly offset to increase the horizontal coverage...

    I am not really certain, but two tiers of launchers of the same type can be seen in the Bulat picture. Also the launchers are too short for a normally sized ATGM. Additionally, the launchers resemble the launchers to the rear of the turret in the following picture.


    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:29 pm

    They seem indeed to small to be anykind of an effective ATGM and seem to big and to small in numbers for directional APS countermeasures.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:07 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    To be fair it was an export version of the Abrams tank bought by the Iraqi army (I think it's the same kind that the Egyptians have) which doesn't include depleted uranium slabs in th

    Sorry... Abrams strong crew wont accept that the T-90s and T-80s they faced in Desert Storm might have been downgraded export models so we can't make the same allowances for the Abrams here either.

    Looks to me like there is a strong orange plume coming out of the turret after the hit which says to me there was an ammo fire.

    Not all Abrams ammo is stored in the turret bustle... 8 rounds are carried in the crew compartment near the driver...

    Crew survival outside the tank is generally pretty good... lots of tank crews made it back to their lines during WWII and lived to fight another day.

    T-90's and T-80's in Desert Storm??? Did you mean T-54/55's, T-62's, and T-72's/Asad Babil's? I agree that the "America Strong!!!1!" crew can't wrap their heads around the fact that when they actually fight weapon systems that are modern and of their generation than all of a sudden their armor doesn't look nearly as invincible, and are in fact quite vulnerable. Downgraded export models of RPG-29's, Kornet's have proven themselves extremely effective against NATO heavy armor:

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/at-14.htm

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-450477/Defence-chiefs-knew-invincible-tank-armour-breached.html

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 2:40 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:40 pm