.
No smartassery from me today, I've been too busy the last days, and too distracted.
There's plenty to write about due to the Ukraine War, but many things were easily condensed into such short texts that I wrote on Twitter about it.
I hope Putin doesn't pull a Goebbels on 9th May Parade.
The most peaceful scenario is he gets a Mariupol/Azov National Guard formation surrender in time and declares a success of his special military operation and seeks a UN-backed ceasefire that freezes the conflict for years to come.
S O
.
How are all these camera drones just floating lazily around targets? Can they not see them or can they not bring them down?
ReplyDeleteAnd the other important question is of course why the Russians cannot reproduce their good results of 2014 - I mean the combination of artillery and drones.
DeleteBayraktar TB-2 appears to be used with electronic warfare and ELINT support to avoid capable air defences. Smaller drones may be difficult to see at their altitudes and the weapon systems are not suitable to shoot them down anyway.
DeleteThe 2014 use of drones was not impressive. I never understood how '15 minutes ago a drone was overhead and now they hit us with artillery' was ever supposed to sound impressive.
https://7969.home.blog/tag/zelenopillya/
DeleteEdit.. the hypervelocity antitank missile will require a minimum 300-500 meters to reach the armour piercing capabilities,while a gun shell will reach this speed instantly. Not a big problem, except on poor visibility (like bad weather),when the enemy could be at a closer distance than 300meters. A big advantage could be that u can fire up to 6-8 160mm missiles at the same time, against one or many targets.
ReplyDeleteMore complicated is the gun missile,a missile that approach a target and than shoot a sabot from a single use gun.
You appear to have commented on the wrong topic, but I'll play along.
DeleteThat "gun missile " doesn't work for physics reasons; actio = reactio; a counterweight would need to be ejected aft for further acceleration in flight. A rocket is more efficient than such a gunshot from a projectile (excluding the shaped charge principle).
The AT-HVM minimum range issue is not so bad because
1) 76 mm main gun can penetrate some targets at some places and angles and destroy sensors
2) the other rocket type would also be able to mess up a MBT, even without penetration of the crew compartment
3) pop multispectral smoke and run
4) MBTs suck when alone anyway. Allies will usually be able to shoot from a different position.
1..76mm can damage anything, except the frontal armor of the MBT. Lucky shots can disable the gun,tracks,optics. It is also at the upper limit for a possible automatic rapid fire .
Delete4..a prof army would not let that mbt alone,but will follow the tank 100 meter behind or sideways
I meant to write a blog text about how tanks should not be looked at as individual vehicles. It would be quite timeless and is kinda overdue.
Delete