Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 3

[rdjohn]

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

[TopTrump]

jimmyjimjim said:

This deserves more praise.

Very limited target demographic I would think. Allo Allo ref?

[Cheib]

rdjohn said:

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

I know bugger all about this except what I’ve read in the past six months online. From what I have read the intention is for Ukraine to operate a “combined arms” manoeuvre…..so artillery, IFV’s, MBT, air defence and some sort of air support too,….as well as mine clearing, obstacle breaching equipment. I assume that would include whatever tech they have to provide some sort of defence against drones.

[sisu]

rdjohn said:

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

The Russian anti tank guided missiles fired from infantry or Helicopters are a danger to a MBT but they are about 20 years out of date. These are not fire and forget ATGMs like the Javelin, Spike, Akeron and the Russians don't have a top down ATGM. Smoke grenades can defeat these and the Western MBTs have these in pods on the side of the turret. They go off like the Helicopter flares you see. In Finland we built only 7 of these self propelled anti aircraft gun on a Leopard 2 chassis, a SPAAG is used for drones and helicopters.
Everyone else uses the Stinger. The Americans Bradley linebacker in this role with 4 on each pod, however stingers are expensive. Ukraine has received 37 Gepard SPAAGs. Sweden has a Lufvärnskanonvagn 9040 CV90 SPAAG as well, 340 of them if anyone wants them.

[sisu]

But all of these Tanks do a job and normally there are specific support vehicles rather than just tanks. As well as a SPAAG Ukraine has been sent from Germany a Bergpanzer, these are the older Leopard 1 but this allows repairs in the field or heavy recovery.


As well as that there are URDAN rollers which bolt on to the Leopard2 to use roads which might be mined.

This is what you use when you just want a path regardless over a man made anti tank obstical.

[mondeoman]

sisu said:

This is what you use when you just want a path regardless over a man made anti tank obstical.

Run, just run away !!!!

[wolfracesonic]

mondeoman said:

sisu said:

This is what you use when you just want a path regardless over a man made anti tank obstical.

Run, just run away !!!!

Are BMW’s design team responsible for the front end of that?

[sisu]

mondeoman said:

sisu said:

This is what you use when you just want a path regardless over a man made anti tank obstical.

Run, just run away !!!!

This is how you use the Armoured engineering vehicle, the Leopard Kodiak is like a JCB but its a tank. Very useful for making strategic firing positions, trenches and breaching stuff in your way.

[mko9]

sisu said:

Good job with the camouflage from those pine boughs. You would never even see that thing coming!

[TCX]

NRS said:

IroningMan said:

TCX said:

Think they'll do deals with anyone,quite interesting though Taliban previous incarnation were heavily backed by the yanks,until being dropped like a stone once USSR pulled out of Afghanistan,Iraq was left in tatters by the coalition,Libya,wonder if Ukranians look to the past to see their future?

If Ukrainians look to the past then up to the early 1990s they'll see a more or less unbroken history of occupation, subjugation and abuse at the hands of various previous incarnations of the Russian Empire.

Any comment TCX? You appear to have done your usual of post some tripe and not reply to what’s actually the big issue. The irony in this example is complaining about the US invading other countries, yet you don’t seem to worry about Russia doing the same.

Was it worthy of comment, obviously triggered you with your 'tripe'' comment,unable to deal with a different point of view?The big issue? Isn't that sold on the streets?Big issue on here seems to be the constant reveling in googling info to celebrate the latest armaments being supplied to continue a conflict which politicians,had they been doing any kind of job could've tried to prevent in the years after '14?
The actual irony is your unable or unwilling to recognise that the west as a whole hardly has the 'high ground', Russia bad,West....just as bad, Ukraine being used up to deplete Russian resource,keep the military complex/ contractors topped up in funds

[HM-2]

TCX said:

continue a conflict which politicians,had they been doing any kind of job could've tried to prevent in the years after '14?

How? Please explain what you think could have been done post 2014 in terms of political negotiation to settle the conflict on terms mutually agreeable to all sides.

The notion that Ukraine should be expected to capitulate anything to a Russian war of imperialist aggression is laughable.

TCX said:

The actual irony is your unable or unwilling to recognise that the west as a whole hardly has the 'high ground'

Whataboutism isn't an argument, you know.

TCX said:

Ukraine being used up to deplete Russian resources

Ukraine seem pretty happy, broadly speaking, to be the anvil on which Russian military power is broken. Certainly moreso than being overrun by a genocidal army of rapists, torturers and murderers at least.

For someone who spends so long decrying...well, everything - usually from a place of astounding ignorance- you seem to be very lacking in the "viable alternatives" department. Which suggests your basic understanding of what you decide to speak on is a long way from either where you think it is, or where it should be to avoid you looking like a buffoon.

Edited by HM-2 on Saturday 28th January 12:13

[CharlesdeGaulle]

TCX said:

Was it worthy of comment, obviously triggered you with your 'tripe'' comment,unable to deal with a different point of view?The big issue? Isn't that sold on the streets?Big issue on here seems to be the constant reveling in googling info to celebrate the latest armaments being supplied to continue a conflict which politicians,had they been doing any kind of job could've tried to prevent in the years after '14?
The actual irony is your unable or unwilling to recognise that the west as a whole hardly has the 'high ground', Russia bad,West....just as bad, Ukraine being used up to deplete Russian resource,keep the military complex/ contractors topped up in funds

By 'politicians trying to prevent' one assumes you mean let the Russians do whatever they want. People like you will never understand the desire for self-determination and a refusal to be bullied by a kleptocratic regime.

[Tango13]

Cheib said:

rdjohn said:

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

I know bugger all about this except what I’ve read in the past six months online. From what I have read the intention is for Ukraine to operate a “combined arms” manoeuvre…..so artillery, IFV’s, MBT, air defence and some sort of air support too,….as well as mine clearing, obstacle breaching equipment. I assume that would include whatever tech they have to provide some sort of defence against drones.

As I understand it the Ukrainian army have been training with NATO forces to use NATO tactics since 2014(?) so now they have the tools hopefully they can finish the job

I stand to be corrected on the date...

[BikeBikeBIke]

TCX said:

The actual irony is your unable or unwilling to recognise that the west as a whole hardly has the 'high ground', Russia bad,West....just as bad,

Apart from WW2 I can't think of a single time where the high ground was so blatantly obvious and we were so blatantly on it.

[ecsrobin]

Tango13 said:

Cheib said:

rdjohn said:

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

I know bugger all about this except what I’ve read in the past six months online. From what I have read the intention is for Ukraine to operate a “combined arms” manoeuvre…..so artillery, IFV’s, MBT, air defence and some sort of air support too,….as well as mine clearing, obstacle breaching equipment. I assume that would include whatever tech they have to provide some sort of defence against drones.

As I understand it the Ukrainian army have been training with NATO forces to use NATO tactics since 2014(?) so now they have the tools hopefully they can finish the job

I stand to be corrected on the date...

Weren’t the Russian tanks vulnerable from this drone attacks because they have to stop to fire? Modern western tanks don’t.

Thought some might find this interesting.

[BikeBikeBIke]

Tango13 said:

As I understand it the Ukrainian army have been training with NATO forces to use NATO tactics since 2014(?) so now they have the tools hopefully they can finish the job

I stand to be corrected on the date...

Well yeah, but NATO's entire OP assumes air supremacy. Ukraine won't have air supremacy.

[spookly]

ecsrobin said:

Weren’t the Russian tanks vulnerable from this drone attacks because they have to stop to fire? Modern western tanks don’t.

I think the vulnerability of russian tanks to drops of small grenades is a bit of a surprise.
All tanks are more vulnerable from above, hence the invention of top attack ATGMs. But.... the russian tanks don't seem to be performing very well, as even they would have been expected to survive small grenades from above.

[TheJimi]

ecsrobin said:

Tango13 said:

Cheib said:

rdjohn said:

Genuine question, at the start of this war Russian Tanks proved to be extremely vulnerable to aerial drone attacks.

Do these Western tanks have some sort of drone defeating technology onboard, or does their armour alone guarantee protection?

I know bugger all about this except what I’ve read in the past six months online. From what I have read the intention is for Ukraine to operate a “combined arms” manoeuvre…..so artillery, IFV’s, MBT, air defence and some sort of air support too,….as well as mine clearing, obstacle breaching equipment. I assume that would include whatever tech they have to provide some sort of defence against drones.

As I understand it the Ukrainian army have been training with NATO forces to use NATO tactics since 2014(?) so now they have the tools hopefully they can finish the job

I stand to be corrected on the date...

Weren’t the Russian tanks vulnerable from this drone attacks because they have to stop to fire? Modern western tanks don’t.

Thought some might find this interesting.

In any other circumstances, you'd swear there was some fakery involved in that.

Deeply impressive.

[Cheib]

BikeBikeBIke said:

Tango13 said:

As I understand it the Ukrainian army have been training with NATO forces to use NATO tactics since 2014(?) so now they have the tools hopefully they can finish the job

I stand to be corrected on the date...

Well yeah, but NATO's entire OP assumes air supremacy. Ukraine won't have air supremacy.

I remember a member of UAF begging interviewed a few months ago…he made the point that the training Ukraine had been getting pre-invasion was all about defending their territory not about re-taking it/offensive actions. I think that is part of the pint of the training that is going on in the Uk and elsewhere. Teaching the UAF how to take back towns/cities and obviously more widely how to fight in a true “combined arms” way….except without air superiority as stated above !

[BikeBikeBIke]

spookly said:

I think the vulnerability of russian tanks to drops of small grenades is a bit of a surprise.
All tanks are more vulnerable from above, hence the invention of top attack ATGMs. But.... the russian tanks don't seem to be performing very well, as even they would have been expected to survive small grenades from above.

Also we don't see a representative sample - maybe one in 300 grenade drops on tanks actually work but those are the ones we see.