Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Share
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 491
    Points : 495
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    UAZ “Patriot” combat vehicles

    Post  Benya on Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:42 pm

    A bit more detailed article about the concept of the "superlight brigade".


    Russian armed forces have created a new superlight infantry battalion equipped with UAZ Patriot

    A superlight infantry battalion has been formed in the Samara Region. It is unique as far as the Russian Armed Forces are concerned. The unit shall operate UAZ Patriot wheeled vehicles mounting Kalashnikov machineguns, the press office of the Central Military District told journalists.


    Russian-made UAZ-3163 Patriot 4x4 light tactical vehicle

    "Building on the lessons learnt from the fighting of recent years, a superlight infantry battalion has been stood up. It is the first unit of the kind ever in the Russian Armed Forces," the press office said.

    The UAZ Patriots in the battalion’s inventory will be equipped with 7.62-mm Kalashnikov machineguns and other weapons as required. Around 90 Patriots are due to the brigade the battalion reports to before the end of the year.

    The activation of the battalion will boost the brigade’s mobility by several times on military operations in urbanized terrain and enable it to raid the enemy’s flanks and unprotected positions with lightning speed. The unit’s personnel are receiving tactical training and conducting range practice at the Roshchinsky Training Area in the Samara Region while waiting for the arrival of their new materiel.

    The newly infantry brigade of the Central Military District was formed in the Samara Region on November 30. It comprises infantry, field artillery, scout, combat engineer and other units. Its manning with enlisted personnel is under way.

    Source: Arrow http://www.armyrecognition.com/december_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/russian_armed_forces_has_created_a_new_superlight_infantry_battalion_equipped_with_uaz_patriot_tass_11412161.html



    Well, those support units of the brigade (field artillery, combat engineer), would need heavier equipment no matter what. These UAZ Patriots are indeed looking like technicals (no armor, no heavy weapons (except ATGMs maybe), so I totally agree with VladimirSahin's statement. In my opinion, the only viable task for this type of units would be COIN (counter-insurgency), but only with a bit heavier vehicles like the Typhoon-series, since these UAZ Patriots do not offer adequate mine/IED and projectile protection.

    par far

    Posts : 1404
    Points : 1561
    Join date : 2014-06-26

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  par far on Fri Dec 16, 2016 6:55 pm

    "RUSSIA EXPANDS GROUND FORCES."



    https://southfront.org/russia-expands-ground-forces/


    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5533
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Ground Forces

    Post  Militarov on Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:28 pm

    Benya wrote:A bit more detailed article about the concept of the "superlight brigade".


    Russian armed forces have created a new superlight infantry battalion equipped with UAZ Patriot

    A superlight infantry battalion has been formed in the Samara Region. It is unique as far as the Russian Armed Forces are concerned. The unit shall operate UAZ Patriot wheeled vehicles mounting Kalashnikov machineguns, the press office of the Central Military District told journalists.


    Russian-made UAZ-3163 Patriot 4x4 light tactical vehicle

    "Building on the lessons learnt from the fighting of recent years, a superlight infantry battalion has been stood up. It is the first unit of the kind ever in the Russian Armed Forces," the press office said.

    The UAZ Patriots in the battalion’s inventory will be equipped with 7.62-mm Kalashnikov machineguns and other weapons as required. Around 90 Patriots are due to the brigade the battalion reports to before the end of the year.

    The activation of the battalion will boost the brigade’s mobility by several times on military operations in urbanized terrain and enable it to raid the enemy’s flanks and unprotected positions with lightning speed. The unit’s personnel are receiving tactical training and conducting range practice at the Roshchinsky Training Area in the Samara Region while waiting for the arrival of their new materiel.

    The newly infantry brigade of the Central Military District was formed in the Samara Region on November 30. It comprises infantry, field artillery, scout, combat engineer and other units. Its manning with enlisted personnel is under way.

    Source: Arrow http://www.armyrecognition.com/december_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/russian_armed_forces_has_created_a_new_superlight_infantry_battalion_equipped_with_uaz_patriot_tass_11412161.html



    Well, those support units of the brigade (field artillery, combat engineer), would need heavier equipment no matter what. These UAZ Patriots are indeed looking like technicals (no armor, no heavy weapons (except ATGMs maybe), so I totally agree with VladimirSahin's statement. In my opinion, the only viable task for this type of units would be COIN (counter-insurgency), but only with a bit heavier vehicles like the Typhoon-series, since these UAZ Patriots do not offer adequate mine/IED and projectile protection.

    Its what we call light mobility vehicle for the army. Every army has some type of such vehicle. Here we atm use mix of Mercedes G class (Puch), Land Rover Defenders and Pinzgauers.

    UK is using thousands of Land Rover Wolfs. French have Peugeot P4s and Land Rovers. This is kinda retaking spot UAZ 469 had basically.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10246
    Points : 10734
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  George1 on Wed Dec 21, 2016 10:49 pm

    Russian defense contractor puts new types of armament into production this year

    The corporation has fully complied with the state defense order in 2016, supplying over 1,200 pieces of armament and military hardware to the Defense Ministry

    YEKATERINBURG, December 21. /TASS/. The Urals-based civil and defense contractor Uralvagonzavod has put seven new armament types into production this year, the corporation’s press office reported on Wednesday.

    "In 2016, the corporation has arranged the production of seven types of armament. First of all, this is the T-72B3 more profoundly upgraded tank with a more powerful engine and an improved fire control system," the press office said.

    "The enterprise has also started for the first time to serially produce the BMR-3MA armored mine-clearing vehicle, the modernized IMR-3M engineering vehicle, the upgraded DT-10PM two-unit prime mover and the SPM special fire-fighting vehicle of unique design that has no rivals in the world. Uralvagonzavod has also assimilated the modernization of the TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system," the enterprise’s press office said.

    According to Uralvagonzavod’s data, the corporation has fully complied with the state defense order in 2016, supplying over 1,200 pieces of armament and military hardware to the Defense Ministry.

    As part of the state defense order for this year, Uralvagonzavod has fulfilled over 90 state contracts, 70% of which are long-term agreements.

    The BMR-3M is a Russian armored mine-clearing vehicle designated to conduct reconnaissance, negotiate and clear minefields, ways of troop columns’ movement and create minefield lanes amid the enemy’s resistance by fire. The BMR-3M has been designed with the use of the chassis of the T-90 tank whose armor has been reinforced.

    The TOC-1A heavy flamethrower "Solntsepyok" (Sunheat) is a multiple launch rocket system. The TOS-1A comprises a BM-1 combat vehicle, a T3M-T transporter-loader vehicle and an ammunition set of multiple launch rockets. The TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system is unique by its technical solutions, combat assignments and combat efficiency and has no rivals in the world.

    Uralvagonzavod is a Russian R&D Corporation that develops and produces military hardware: T-72, T-90 tanks, BMR-3M mine-clearing combat vehicles, TOS-1A heavy flamethrower systems, Msta-S self-propelled howitzers and other weapons.

    The Corporation integrates R&D institutes, design bureaus and production facilities. Uralvagonzavod is wholly owned by the state.


    More:
    http://tass.com/defense/921184


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2397
    Points : 2435
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  franco on Tue Jan 17, 2017 1:55 am

    Making the best out of a bad situation, living out of tents;

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2378892.html
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10246
    Points : 10734
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:00 am

    franco wrote:Making the best out of a bad situation, living out of tents;

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2378892.html

    Τhis is Russian Army. The best in winter conditions!


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10246
    Points : 10734
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:08 pm

    80th separate motorized rifle brigade Arctic













    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2394940.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    nomadski

    Posts : 93
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2017-01-02

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  nomadski on Mon Feb 06, 2017 6:44 pm

    I think it best to have one size barrel for new tanks . Say 125 mm . But use this size to make different rounds . Many different types . We all know : sabot round , HE round , guided missile . But how about launching a laser guided round in high trajectory like howitzer round . Infantry or uav can illuminate target tank . Range can be 15 km . But need to design tank barrel to be capable of high elevation . Design problem . Also like howitzer . Shells can be stored in towed armored trailer behind tank . And fed into tank by small reciprocating conveyor . Many round can be carried . This trailor discarded when tank closes with enemy . I like the coaxial cannon on Armata . It can possibly fire new RF controlled timed air burst against ground or low flying target .
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:00 pm

    nomadski wrote:I think it best to have one size barrel for new tanks . Say 125 mm . But use this size to make different rounds . Many different types . We all know : sabot round , HE round , guided missile . But how about launching a laser guided round in high trajectory like howitzer round . Infantry or uav can illuminate target tank . Range can be 15 km . But need to design tank barrel to be capable of high elevation . Design problem . Also like howitzer . Shells can be stored in towed armored trailer behind tank . And fed into tank by small reciprocating conveyor . Many round can be carried . This trailor discarded when tank closes with enemy . I like the coaxial cannon on Armata . It can possibly fire new RF controlled timed air burst against ground or low flying target .

    I also think it is better. And the time is running in favor of the 152mm caliber for the new armata platform tanks.

    For the 125mm caliber, that will continue being useful long time, I'm expecting some rocket assisted projectile, to make these tanks able to operate again also from outside of the range of the portable/man-portable weapons.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:04 am

    But how about launching a laser guided round in high trajectory like howitzer round .

    But why?

    Surely it makes more sense to leave hitting targets behind the enemy front line to actual artillery vehicles where heavier calibres like 152mm shells can hit targets 70km distant.

    Infantry or uav can illuminate target tank . Range can be 15 km . But need to design tank barrel to be capable of high elevation . Design problem .

    Why bother when artillery can already do this?

    Also like howitzer . Shells can be stored in towed armored trailer behind tank . And fed into tank by small reciprocating conveyor . Many round can be carried . This trailor discarded when tank closes with enemy .

    During the Soviet conflict in Afghanistan vehicles often had trailers... though not armoured trailers, that carried extra HE shells for the use of the vehicles against unarmoured targets... they basically used them as heavily protected artillery vehicles. I suspect it would make more sense to use artillery vehicles or indeed IFVs in that role with either high velocity 57mm main guns or medium pressure larger calibre weapons like 100mm rifled guns like the 100mm gun from the BMP-3 or a 120mm gun/mortar or the Vena or other mortar carrier.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5533
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Militarov on Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:59 pm

    nomadski wrote:I think it best to have one size barrel for new tanks . Say 125 mm . But use this size to make different rounds . Many different types . We all know : sabot round , HE round , guided missile . But how about launching a laser guided round in high trajectory like howitzer round . Infantry or uav can illuminate target tank . Range can be 15 km . But need to design tank barrel to be capable of high elevation . Design problem . Also like howitzer . Shells can be stored in towed armored trailer behind tank . And fed into tank by small reciprocating conveyor . Many round can be carried . This trailor discarded when tank closes with enemy . I like the coaxial cannon on Armata . It can possibly fire new RF controlled timed air burst against ground or low flying target .

    You mean something like this http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/New-logistics-trailers-set-to-enhance-IDF-ground-offensives-449157 Smile?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10246
    Points : 10734
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  George1 on Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:18 am

    Research Institute of Applied Chemistry is developing new aerosol grenades



    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2425662.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:26 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    But how about launching a laser guided round in high trajectory like howitzer round .

    But why?

    Surely it makes more sense to leave hitting targets behind the enemy front line to actual artillery vehicles where heavier calibres like 152mm shells can hit targets 70km distant.

    Infantry or uav can illuminate target tank . Range can be 15 km . But need to design tank barrel to be capable of high elevation . Design problem .

    Why bother when artillery can already do this?

    Also like howitzer . Shells can be stored in towed armored trailer behind tank . And fed into tank by small reciprocating conveyor . Many round can be carried . This trailor discarded when tank closes with enemy .

    During the Soviet conflict in Afghanistan vehicles often had trailers... though not armoured trailers, that carried extra HE shells for the use of the vehicles against unarmoured targets... they basically used them as heavily protected artillery vehicles. I suspect it would make more sense to use artillery vehicles or indeed IFVs in that role with either high velocity 57mm main guns or medium pressure larger calibre weapons like 100mm rifled guns like the 100mm gun from the BMP-3 or a 120mm gun/mortar or the Vena or other mortar carrier.

    I see very interesting for tanks to have ammunition that allows them to fight outside the range of the portable/man-portable weapons, which limit is marked by 120mm light mortars with rocket assisted ammunition.

    Why? Because it would allow to the tanks to attack infantry formations without support of heavy weapons from outside the range of every weapon that they have, without risk, and would reinforce very significantly the action of the artillery and the Surface-Surface weapons (both habitually present in much lower amounts).

    While I tend to think that the 152mm caliber is very interesting for the tanks in the armata platform and will succeed, I expect also rocket assisted ammunition for the 125mm caliber and the current tanks. 125mm ammunition always should have bigger range than the 120mm ammunition of the same type (also of other countries), and this would mean a range of around 17-18 Km.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:21 am

    I see very interesting for tanks to have ammunition that allows them to fight outside the range of the portable/man-portable weapons, which limit is marked by 120mm light mortars with rocket assisted ammunition.

    Why? Because it would allow to the tanks to attack infantry formations without support of heavy weapons from outside the range of every weapon that they have, without risk, and would reinforce very significantly the action of the artillery and the Surface-Surface weapons (both habitually present in much lower amounts).

    Dude... when a tank is facing portable anti tank weapons it wont be firing DU rounds... it will be firing HE rounds... a T-72 can fire HE shells to about 9km based on elevation limitations of the main gun... park on a hill and you could probably fire rounds three or four times further.

    While I tend to think that the 152mm caliber is very interesting for the tanks in the armata platform and will succeed, I expect also rocket assisted ammunition for the 125mm caliber and the current tanks. 125mm ammunition always should have bigger range than the 120mm ammunition of the same type (also of other countries), and this would mean a range of around 17-18 Km.

    In theory a 125mm gun should be more powerful than a 120mm gun, but then the difference wont actually have that much practical difference.

    It is like 7.62 x 54mm ammo compared with 7.62 x 51mm. When loading for hunting you can load heavier bullets in the Soviet round because its case is bigger but in terms of effect on target I very much doubt the target would actually notice the difference in bullet weight or speed.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:40 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I see very interesting for tanks to have ammunition that allows them to fight outside the range of the portable/man-portable weapons, which limit is marked by 120mm light mortars with rocket assisted ammunition.

    Why? Because it would allow to the tanks to attack infantry formations without support of heavy weapons from outside the range of every weapon that they have, without risk, and would reinforce very significantly the action of the artillery and the Surface-Surface weapons (both habitually present in much lower amounts).

    Dude... when a tank is facing portable anti tank weapons it wont be firing DU rounds... it will be firing HE rounds... a T-72 can fire HE shells to about 9km based on elevation limitations of the main gun... park on a hill and you could probably fire rounds three or four times further.

    While I tend to think that the 152mm caliber is very interesting for the tanks in the armata platform and will succeed, I expect also rocket assisted ammunition for the 125mm caliber and the current tanks. 125mm ammunition always should have bigger range than the 120mm ammunition of the same type (also of other countries), and this would mean a range of around 17-18 Km.

    In theory a 125mm gun should be more powerful than a 120mm gun, but then the difference wont actually have that much practical difference.

    It is like 7.62 x 54mm ammo compared with 7.62 x 51mm. When loading for hunting you can load heavier bullets in the Soviet round because its case is bigger but in terms of effect on target I very much doubt the target would actually notice the difference in bullet weight or speed.

    In overall terms a rocket assisted system would be compatible with every type of ammunition. Here little problem.

    Also, on land, the maximum limit of the portable/man-portable weapons is done by light mortars, portable 120mm mortars, that have also rocket assisted projectiles and guided ammunition that can be used vs tanks, from outside of the range of the tanks, and the tank would not be able to answer except if the tank is provided with 125mm rocket assisted ammunition.

    In the game of ranges the tanks must be winner at every range over infantry weapons. No excuses.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 01, 2017 11:01 am

    In the game of ranges the tanks must be winner at every range over infantry weapons. No excuses.

    It really is not a question of range... park a T-90 on a slope and it could fire its 125mm HE Frag rounds to 25-30knm or so... with rocket assistance it could probably go even further.

    The problem for the tank crew is that threats are not always direct line of sight threats... a UAV directly above at 5km altitude and point a laser target marker laser beam directly down on the top of the turret of that tank and 6km away behind a line of hills several hundred metres high a mortar crew can fire off a 120mm Gran mortar bomb that will fly in the general direction of that tank and then as it starts falling pop the optical cap from its nose and fly to hit the tank turret roof and there is nothing the tank crew can do to either the UAV or the Mortar crew.

    What it can do of course is direct a laser jammer at the UAV and pass its coordinates to the air defence units supporting the tank force. It can also use SHTORA to pop smoke so the laser dot is hovering 200m away from the actual position of the tank on the surface of the smoke cloud the system generated and also the ARENA-2 system can deploy and try to intercept the incoming 120mm round.

    The artillery radars of course would have detected the incoming 120mm round and a volley of 122mm rockets would be on their way to the general area the 120mm guided round was fired from... and man portable 120mm team would be in trouble...

    To quote from one of the articles you linked to:

    Military experts took this ambiguous information, there are opinions that the weapons "Terminator 3" is redundant and one 57-mm cannon on the combat module type "Baikal" is enough. In any case, the new version of the combat vehicle fire support firepower will have no equal.

    If the rate of fire is only 120 rounds per minute then having two barrels might be needed to get the fire rate up to a higher level for ground targets... against aerial targets guided shells would be used so a low rate of fire would not be a problem.



    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:16 pm

    When we talk about positions hidden to direct fire is necessary to think in the tanks as formations of multiple units, not in a single one. What is hidden for one, maybe not for other. In fact in the distribution of the formations of tanks it is necessary to take this into account, to leave not safe positions for the adversary. To have 125mm with rocket assisted projectiles would be cheap and easy, and would put the 125mm tanks above the 120mm caliber weapons making the infantry formations lose its alone advantage of the tanks today.

    The use of drones is also positive, but must be rational. Drones are expensive and vulnerable. Sometimes to expose a drone to destroy a 120mm light mortar can make at the end that the loses in the side of the drone become bigger than in the side of the mortar in economical terms. If the drone is destroyed, the drone is likely more expensive than the 120mm light mortar.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5533
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Militarov on Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:53 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    I see very interesting for tanks to have ammunition that allows them to fight outside the range of the portable/man-portable weapons, which limit is marked by 120mm light mortars with rocket assisted ammunition.

    Why? Because it would allow to the tanks to attack infantry formations without support of heavy weapons from outside the range of every weapon that they have, without risk, and would reinforce very significantly the action of the artillery and the Surface-Surface weapons (both habitually present in much lower amounts).

    Dude... when a tank is facing portable anti tank weapons it wont be firing DU rounds... it will be firing HE rounds... a T-72 can fire HE shells to about 9km based on elevation limitations of the main gun... park on a hill and you could probably fire rounds three or four times further.

    While I tend to think that the 152mm caliber is very interesting for the tanks in the armata platform and will succeed, I expect also rocket assisted ammunition for the 125mm caliber and the current tanks. 125mm ammunition always should have bigger range than the 120mm ammunition of the same type (also of other countries), and this would mean a range of around 17-18 Km.

    In theory a 125mm gun should be more powerful than a 120mm gun, but then the difference wont actually have that much practical difference.

    It is like 7.62 x 54mm ammo compared with 7.62 x 51mm. When loading for hunting you can load heavier bullets in the Soviet round because its case is bigger but in terms of effect on target I very much doubt the target would actually notice the difference in bullet weight or speed.

    In overall terms a rocket assisted system would be compatible with every type of ammunition. Here little problem.

    Also, on land, the maximum limit of the portable/man-portable weapons is done by light mortars, portable 120mm mortars, that have also rocket assisted projectiles and guided ammunition that can be used vs tanks, from outside of the range of the tanks, and the tank would not be able to answer except if the tank is provided with 125mm rocket assisted ammunition.

    In the game of ranges the tanks must be winner at every range over infantry weapons. No excuses.


    120mm mortar is not "portable". They require to be towed by motor vehicle. 60 and 81/2mm mortars are carried by infantry, 120mm no.

    Tanks lack awareness for the most part to be able to explot advantages of long range munitions, even with support of UAVs and various BMS platforms it will keep being so for long time.

    These days there are ATGMs that are reaching ranges of 10km, even more, however 95% of the time in combat its out of the question that ATGM team will be able to exploit all of its range. Battlefield is almost never, if ever plain field.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5533
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Militarov on Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:24 pm

    eehnie wrote:When we talk about positions hidden to direct fire is necessary to think in the tanks as formations of multiple units, not in a single one. What is hidden for one, maybe not for other. In fact in the distribution of the formations of tanks it is necessary to take this into account, to leave not safe positions for the adversary. To have 125mm with rocket assisted projectiles would be cheap and easy, and would put the 125mm tanks above the 120mm caliber weapons making the infantry formations lose its alone advantage of the tanks today.

    The use of drones is also positive, but must be rational. Drones are expensive and vulnerable. Sometimes to expose a drone to destroy a 120mm light mortar can make at the end that the loses in the side of the drone become bigger than in the side of the mortar in economical terms. If the drone is destroyed, the drone is likely more expensive than the 120mm light mortar.

    Rocket assisted 125mm would wear out barrel even more than GLATGM-s, and they are already called "bore destroyers". Its simply not worth the trouble and cost.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Sat Apr 01, 2017 11:21 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:When we talk about positions hidden to direct fire is necessary to think in the tanks as formations of multiple units, not in a single one. What is hidden for one, maybe not for other. In fact in the distribution of the formations of tanks it is necessary to take this into account, to leave not safe positions for the adversary. To have 125mm with rocket assisted projectiles would be cheap and easy, and would put the 125mm tanks above the 120mm caliber weapons making the infantry formations lose its alone advantage of the tanks today.

    The use of drones is also positive, but must be rational. Drones are expensive and vulnerable. Sometimes to expose a drone to destroy a 120mm light mortar can make at the end that the loses in the side of the drone become bigger than in the side of the mortar in economical terms. If the drone is destroyed, the drone is likely more expensive than the 120mm light mortar.

    Rocket assisted 125mm would wear out barrel even more than GLATGM-s, and they are already called "bore destroyers". Its simply not worth the trouble and cost.

    For many types of rockets and missiles, the aditional autopropulsion begins when the projectile is out of the launcher.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 775
    Points : 777
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Isos on Sat Apr 01, 2017 11:53 pm

    These days there are ATGMs that are reaching ranges of 10km, even more, however 95% of the time in combat its out of the question that ATGM team will be able to exploit all of its range. Battlefield is almost never, if ever plain field.

    It's better to increase the warhead size and reduce the range. The best advantage of infantry anti tank team is that they can hide between houses or in the forest while the shooting won't last more than 30 sec. 3-4 km is more than enough even for a lonely guy. Equiped with a motorbike he can leave the area in 1 min.

    The thing is that for destroying a modern tank from any side you need a very big HEAT warhead. Shooting at 10km without destroying it is useless. While destroying it from 3km is much more interesting.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5533
    Points : 5578
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Militarov on Sun Apr 02, 2017 12:10 am

    Isos wrote:
    These days there are ATGMs that are reaching ranges of 10km, even more, however 95% of the time in combat its out of the question that ATGM team will be able to exploit all of its range. Battlefield is almost never, if ever plain field.

    It's better to increase the warhead size and reduce the range. The best advantage of infantry anti tank team is that they can hide between houses or in the forest while the shooting won't last more than 30 sec. 3-4 km is more than enough even for a lonely guy. Equiped with a motorbike he can leave the area in 1 min.

    The thing is that for destroying a modern tank from any side you need a very big HEAT warhead. Shooting at 10km without destroying it is useless. While destroying it from 3km is much more interesting.

    Heavier warheads with shorter ranges are better idea for infantry platforms, yes. Lighter warheads with longer ranges are seemingly taking place in aerial platforms due to far easier top-attack mode implementation compared to land launchers.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1307
    Points : 1332
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  eehnie on Sun Apr 02, 2017 12:41 am

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    I see very interesting for tanks to have ammunition that allows them to fight outside the range of the portable/man-portable weapons, which limit is marked by 120mm light mortars with rocket assisted ammunition.

    Why? Because it would allow to the tanks to attack infantry formations without support of heavy weapons from outside the range of every weapon that they have, without risk, and would reinforce very significantly the action of the artillery and the Surface-Surface weapons (both habitually present in much lower amounts).

    Dude... when a tank is facing portable anti tank weapons it wont be firing DU rounds... it will be firing HE rounds... a T-72 can fire HE shells to about 9km based on elevation limitations of the main gun... park on a hill and you could probably fire rounds three or four times further.

    While I tend to think that the 152mm caliber is very interesting for the tanks in the armata platform and will succeed, I expect also rocket assisted ammunition for the 125mm caliber and the current tanks. 125mm ammunition always should have bigger range than the 120mm ammunition of the same type (also of other countries), and this would mean a range of around 17-18 Km.

    In theory a 125mm gun should be more powerful than a 120mm gun, but then the difference wont actually have that much practical difference.

    It is like 7.62 x 54mm ammo compared with 7.62 x 51mm. When loading for hunting you can load heavier bullets in the Soviet round because its case is bigger but in terms of effect on target I very much doubt the target would actually notice the difference in bullet weight or speed.

    In overall terms a rocket assisted system would be compatible with every type of ammunition. Here little problem.

    Also, on land, the maximum limit of the portable/man-portable weapons is done by light mortars, portable 120mm mortars, that have also rocket assisted projectiles and guided ammunition that can be used vs tanks, from outside of the range of the tanks, and the tank would not be able to answer except if the tank is provided with 125mm rocket assisted ammunition.

    In the game of ranges the tanks must be winner at every range over infantry weapons. No excuses.


    120mm mortar is not "portable". They require to be towed by motor vehicle. 60 and 81/2mm mortars are carried by infantry, 120mm no.

    Tanks lack awareness for the most part to be able to explot advantages of long range munitions, even with support of UAVs and various BMS platforms it will keep being so for long time.

    These days there are ATGMs that are reaching ranges of 10km, even more, however 95% of the time in combat its out of the question that ATGM team will be able to exploit all of its range. Battlefield is almost never, if ever plain field.

    Yes they are carried by infantry.

    Even the 2B23 120mm mortar was designed to be man-portable, divided in 4 or 5 parts. It is man-portable.

    But also other 120mm mortars are "portable" in the sense that can be transported inside vehicles without limitations or need of special designs (even in a civil car), in the same way that other infantry weapon or ammunition. "Portable" mortars, like the 2B11 and the PM-38, require not a tractor element like the heavy artillery, despite can have them in some cases.

    They are weapons of small relative size and weight. Today the portable/man-portable weapons of Russia would be the weapons under 500 Kg, taking into account that between 300 and 500 Kg Russia only has the 2B23 (man-portable in parts).

    Finally, the commented for formations of multiple units and its deployment is valid for both sides. Both sides want to leave not hidden places for the adversary. The terrain is not plain but a good positioning of the own units try to avoid to leavy positions where the adversary can be covered by the terrain.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 775
    Points : 777
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Isos on Sun Apr 02, 2017 12:48 am

    Militarov wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    These days there are ATGMs that are reaching ranges of 10km, even more, however 95% of the time in combat its out of the question that ATGM team will be able to exploit all of its range. Battlefield is almost never, if ever plain field.

    It's better to increase the warhead size and reduce the range. The best advantage of infantry anti tank team is that they can hide between houses or in the forest while the shooting won't last more than 30 sec. 3-4 km is more than enough even for a lonely guy. Equiped with a motorbike he can leave the area in 1 min.

    The thing is that for destroying a modern tank from any side you need a very big HEAT warhead. Shooting at 10km without destroying it is useless. While destroying it from 3km is much more interesting.

    Heavier warheads with shorter ranges are better idea for infantry platforms, yes. Lighter warheads with longer ranges are seemingly taking place in aerial platforms due to far easier top-attack mode implementation compared to land launchers.

    Even air lunched missiles are not totaly "top Attack" like Javlin. They still hit on the side or on the top but not at 90 degrees. But they can be heavy and long range as they are carried by a an heli. They are an other class than infantry missiles. Vikhr is a long range and very powerfull missile andcan be used by infantry.

    A nice cheaper solution would be guided S-2/8/13/24 rockets mounted on the small and cheap Ansat 2RC. French gazelle which is as small and as armoured  as the 2RC did very well anywhere when it was employed.


    120mm mortar is not "portable". They require to be towed by motor vehicle. 60 and 81/2mm mortars are carried by infantry, 120mm no.

    Tanks lack awareness for the most part to be able to explot advantages of long range munitions, even with support of UAVs and various BMS platforms it will keep being so for long time.

    Put a small mortar in the tank like on Merkava. When you detect the lunch with afghanit system it gives you the position of the guys and you fired at them with the mortar. But Russian tank will be assisted by salvos of BM-21 grad when they suspect presence of enemy troops. so no need for that.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 02, 2017 9:11 am

    Vikhr is a long range and very powerfull missile andcan be used by infantry.

    There is no ground launched version of Vikhr in service AFAIK.

    Kornet is man portable and there are ground launched ATAKA and Shturm missiles, but that is about it for Russian missiles.

    A tank has very limited ability to detect enemy ground forces at more than 2-3kms or so most of the time... as you increase the distance you greatly increase the volume of space an enemy can hide.

    Next gen tanks will have tethered UAVs with radar and EO systems to search for targets but they still wont see everything.

    The smoke and noise and natural and unnatural cover on a modern battlefield means it is unlikely a tank crew will even know it is under attack most of the time.

    Automatic systems like Afghantsi and battlefield radar and acoustic systems to determine enemy fire and the location of the threat will help but the advantage is always with the enemy in that regard.


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Ground Forces: News #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:34 am