Updates in light of Ukraine war

[wulfir]

Originally Posted by DRG

Everything went well up to January 1945 when the AI unleashed an air attack like I had never seen before or since that devastated most of my armour.

That happened to me too. SP1, German "Long Campaign". I think I made it to April 45 and there was this battle vs the US Army with plane after plane coming in (IIRC Marauders)...

[DRG]

Originally Posted by wulfir

That happened to me too. SP1, German "Long Campaign". I think I made it to April 45 and there was this battle vs the US Army with plane after plane coming in (IIRC Marauders)...

Yes that sounds exactly like what happened to me and it was single and double engines aircraft as well. I recall B-25s but it may have been Marauders

[blazejos]

Also I d'like to rapport a come back of Tachanka in Ukrainian war we discuss this this in some post of SPWWII as a horse cart with HMG something like war chariot which predates technical vehicles used by cavalry during civil war in Russia on early XX century and then widespread in cavalry units in eastern Europe and central Asia. But now we can see here new incarnation of this famous vehicle on some sort of wagon mounted by motorcycle with canonical Maxim 10/30 from museum (storage ?)



here famous Tachanka song from Soviet revolutionary times
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGofoatz-20
so after a little more than a 100 years all goes back to roots

[DRG]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxLT81wMzEU

...the Taliban were better fighters than the Russians.......

and that could very well be because a lot of Russian troops may not really want to be there and the Ukrainians really want them to not be there as well

[MarkSheppard]

From this, you have to be at point blank range with a rapid fire autocannon to be able to kill a T-72/T-90 with it.

(The T-90 is actually a rebadged T-72 with a new turret in later marks).

Essentially, as DRG found out:

the armour of the side of the hull is 80mm thick. The armour on the sides of the engine compartment is 70mm thick.

War Thunder (I know, I know); lists the 30mm 2A42 Autocannon as having at 100m the following penetration:

HE/AP: 63~mm
APDS: 81~mm

The penetration of HE/AP is deep enough that there would be scabbing off the inside of the armor; especially in the rear 70mm thick armor around the engine.

So you can see that in order for a BMP-3/BTR-4 to stand a chance of defeating a T-72/90; the following must occur:

1.) It must be within 100m or less.
2.) The enemy T-72/90 must not have side skirt armor (or be missing pieces of it).
3.) The gunner has to recognize the missing side armor as a weak spot.
4.) The gunner then has to place 20~ rounds into that area.

That's a lot of conditionals that have to occur for a "one in a million" shot.

People need to remember the scope of Steel Panthers -- it's not a "down in the weeds semi accurate penetration simulator" like War Thunder is; but more of an abstraction of armored fighting; i.e. the game already abstractly accounts for weak spots; just load MBT_APCalc and look at Russian Weapon 77 - 30mm 2A42 A/C:

100m Range:
AP: 6 typical penetration, 7 best possible penetration
Sabot 8 typical penetration, 11 best possible penetration

[MarkSheppard]

Continuing my own thread of thought:

Look in MOBHack, Russian OBAT:

Unit 031 T-72 -- 9 Side, 6 rear Steel armor for hull (c.1975)
Unit 035 T-72B -- 13 Side, 8 rear Steel Armor for hull (c.1985)

You can see how the game is trying to abstractly simulate the differences between a 1975 T-72 with no side armor schurzen and the later 1985 model T-72 with side armor schurzen + ERA.

Because remember, Schurzen still helps; even in the year 2000+ against APDS rounds, because a solid Schurzen plate is typically 1cm thick, and can induce yaw onto an incoming projectile; causing it to fail after passing through.

I think a lot of misunderstanding is occurring due to games like War Thunder -- it's done a lot to help the AFV community, but it's also hurt in some ways.

This is because War Thunder can hyper model individual armor plate thicknesses across an entire 3D model, whereas games like Steel Panthers have to take an entire aspect (frontal, side, rear) and abstract it down to a single number that then represents that entire aspect; while in War Thunder, you can aim for weak spots (i.e. no ERA or schurzen protection) and see that represented in real time.

[MarkSheppard]

Another aspect people are missing is that this mass ATGM/MANPAD spam is...abnormal.

Thousands of MANPADs and ATGMs have flooded into Ukraine; while the Ukrainians have asked (per CNN) for 500~ Javelin and 500~ Stingers...PER DAY.

To put that all into context, in 2014 Finland spent EUR 90 million (about $123 million) for the FIM-92 RMP Block I Stinger to replace their existing pile of Soviet era MANPADs.

The original contract "Wish List" was $330 million for 600 RMP Block I Stingers, 110 Firing Units, and 110 night vision sights.

So we can guesstimate that Finland actually bought only about:

200 x Stinger RMP Blk I
40 x Firing Units + IR Sights

That's not a lot for a modern battlefield; especially if you might use 3 or more Stingers in an ambush pocket -- one guy fires a Stinger at a Ka-52 Alligator; the pilot sees it and flares go out and it evades....

...only to find out that the Ukrainians have carefully positioned several more stingers to the sides of the main shooter; so that no matter which way the helicopter evades, it's turning towards a Stinger Shooter.

[Aeraaa]

Well, I'd argue that the Taliban are probably better fighters than the majority of NATO countries' troops. Nothing extraordinary with that, they basically know war since their very birth by now.

[Wdll]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

Well, I'd argue that the Taliban are probably better fighters than the majority of NATO countries' troops. Nothing extraordinary with that, they basically know war since their very birth by now.

How many wars have the Taliban won against NATO countries?

Even when there were only a couple thousand NATO troops in Afghanistan they didn't dare do much against them.
They succeeded in not losing, but having constant support and reinforcements from Pakistan. All they had to do was to bully a local population which had no desire to fight and from the looks of it bribe state officials so that when NATO troops left the country they could just walk in.
I am not saying they were the worst or that they don't deserve credit for surviving at least in part due to skill, but pound for pound I wouldn't say they are as good as the majority of NATO countries' troops. Not even close.

[DRG]

So much depends on Context. The Ukrainians are doing well. They were also invaded. Chances are if you changed the circumstances and it was Ukrainian troops "on manoeuvres" on the Belarus border and they woke up one morning and were ordered to advance into Belarus they might not fight with the same determination as they are now

I would not say the Taliban was better than NATO. They waited until it was only the Afgan army to stop them before they made a serious move to return but yes they have generations of experience