[shilka77]

Somewhere on Tank-Net the official figures for tank and crew losses from 2006 war floated, I will try to dig them up. Anyway, most of Merkavas hit were older types and most casaulties seemed to be Commander or Loader, and hit while unbuttoned.
Here is an article by Defense Update: http://www.defense-update.com/analys...anon_war_3.htm
Another article:
http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk/diar...non%202006.htm
AFAIK only two Merk 4's were total losses (and with all hands) but those fell victim to extremely large IED's - there is no tank that can survive a 250kg of explosives going off right under its belly.

I have no answer to this as I apparently was not on the ground to confirm what was taken out and of what or by what, remember all official reports are to be considered sugared, as it would not be healthy to display actual numbers. From what I have seen the IEDs was no major factor in the 2006 war what so ever as it was a highly mobile war with ambushing Hezbollah Commando units and Hamas units firing their RPGs and Kornet ATGMs with great skill and from short distances (hills) down on the tanks in the valleys and the few roads available to the IDF.The movie shows attacks on Merkava tanks using this tactics. Getting up close and fire away.

Perhaps you missed all the 2A46 with improved ammo in-game? Anyway, export of modern munitions is pretty recent thing and pretty limited as well. Despite being in WarPac, Czechoslovakia got BM-15 rounds at best from USSR, and had to develop own 125mm APFSDS after the end of the cold war, based on Israeli designs. BM-15 was also the best Iraq had access to. Dunno about other countries but if you'd check OOBs you'd find that most of them have much better than basic ammo for 125mm weapons. As for ambushes, you can in-game pretty well ambush Abrams SEP with T-34/85.
Most mentions I caught appear to report that BM-42 is usually exported for 125mm weapons (atleast to those users shopping in Russia or Ukraine), that is in-game roughly "125mm Gun 88".

I have noticed this good work.

I am pretty well aware of RPG development. However even Russian troops are still being issued large quantities of the "classic" PG-7M and similar older warheads. Stockpiles and costs have a lot to do with that. Just that a new warhead is available does not mean it gets into widespread use or that it gets exported just into the correct country. And despite few "silver bullets" in Lebanon 2006, most weapons were old Malutkas for ATGM's and PG-7/PG-7M/Type 69 for RPG-7.And even these "silver bullets" generally failed to penetrate the front armor.

Now this was not the reaction I was looking for, as if you have a game what would be most likely to use if you went to war, would you take out the training PG-7M or would you equip your forces with a more effective warhead? The issue stockpiles vs the need when going to war I think all silver bullets available would be pulled out to be honest. Defense budgets all over the globe is tight but the cost to actually go out and build a brand new T-90 vs equipping your soldiers with the inexpensive improved rocket-propelled grenades is by all means the most likely a nation would do if it was pulled into a war.

Me thinks that pulling Milan out of service has more to do with newer alternatives being available. As for North Korea, what missile that would be?

Han Ho Suk at Director Center for Korean affairs mentions it in his paper 4-23-3 I send the link exact designation of ATGM not in my vocabulary.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

US trained just the light infantry going to Iraq, not much use in mech warfae esp. if most of the force is away, but reportedly it was those guys who managed local counterattacks even pretty late in the war.

Hahaha yes well I wish I could agree with you here mate but I can't of obvious reasons this is Geopolitics and we (the west) had a clear picture of exactly what happened the moment the Russian Federation went in to stop the killings of South Ossetians in this particular conflict. The friendly Georgian fairy tale is all but inept at its best.

58th army being "border force"? And even Russian observers noted that the performance of Russian troops was quite sloppy - only the Georgians were even sloppier, but I heard quite a lot of voices saying that discipline, OPSEC etc. shown in Georgia was significantly lower compared to 1980's.

A smashing victory a complete defeat of Georgian forces tells another story as if we the west would not had intervened (political) Georgia would had looked a bit different today.

Battle-hardened troops do not always equal competent troops. Iraq was engaged in a war that consisted mostly of trench warfare with tanks serving as mobile pillboxes - for that neither great skill or proper maintenance are critical.

True I have not stated anything about the skills of the Iraqi soldiers in the game either, what could be fixed is perhaps that Iraq in 2003 had T-62s within the ranks of their Republican Guard. Wikipedia says something about that.

Wikipedia Iraqi Republican Guard

The Republican Guard then consisted of between 50,000 and 60,000 men (although some sources indicate up to 80,000), all volunteers, and some 400 Soviet tanks T-72 and T-62 along with other mechanized vehicles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Republican_Guard

What battle would that be? Given that ground ops lasted for 100 hours. 73rd Easting happened during those 100 hours.

Feb 27 1991 Bush Senior declares aggression have been defeated it didn’t include the rest of the war that didn’t end until 1995. March 1991 a Republican Guard unit got smashed when on retreat by American forces. The battle has no name as it become a controversy due to the violence used in the attack on the retreating forces.

I am still looking when I have time for more of above stuff but as a responsible father I write at lended time.