They are very deadly for sure,if you get a side shot or rear shot,from the front most western tanks will be immune,except for maybe leopard2a4.
Only thing is its weight,64 kg combat weight,so its not very mobile,it will be more like the US TOW system or Ukrainan stugna P.
US Javelin and NLAW are more mobile
Its range however outranges most western atgms,even TOW2b with its 5.5 km,and Kornet E with 8 km
So artillery combined with drone surveillance and using smoke screens will be the only cure i guess in manuever warfare.
Then again with Ukraines and Donbas regions hills and forests,i guess they wont get the max range anyway to their advantage.
Why does Russia waste so much ammunition shelling Kherson? Would this not be better off used in the Donbass?
The Russian ATGM are a two man unit. Neither are fire and forget, they have to be guided onto the target. This is a much more dangerous task that using a Javelin where it's a one man operation you aim it at the target and fires it. Now two things first as the operator can drop the empty tube and get out of there, secondly the Javelin targets the top of the tank where it is most vulnerable as the armour is lightest. As well Russian tanks were vulnerable to LAWS which would bounce off modern NATO tanks NATO tanks while not completely invulnerable to ATGM would still stay going even after a few hits unless the tracks were damaged
I read somewhere that 1000 Russians died in Afghanistan from accidents. What's the number for Ukraine, I wonder?
Russian Army Headed by 'Totally Incompetent People,' Ex-Russian VP Warns (newsweek.com)
The kornet family of anti tank weapons are extremely effective, just ask the Israelis who faced them during the last war with hamas over a few days , they have twice the effective range of a javelin
They do have modern anti tank weapons unfortunately
Cant you say that same thing about western tanks then? What good is 30 or 40 leopard 2s if a man with ATGM can block a road?
nonsense argument
Who is 'they'? Germany?! Your post makes no sense. It is a rant against Russia even though I was talking about German production in WW2.
What about my post makes me a Russophile? I don't mention the word orc? That I don't say Russia is doomed and has no chance?
As it went completely over your head let me try again.
Wartime economies can produce vast quantities of arms. I used Germany in WW2 as an example as Russia is in a similar position today. Isolated and needing to do it on it's own(and run by a bunch of Nazis - anti Russian enough for you?).
Given time a wartime Russia will be able to produce huge amounts munitions and arms. Will the Russian people support such action? Hopefully not, but only time will tell.
🤪🤪🤪
Meh, I wouldn’t give him that much credit, to think he’s a stupid useful idiot - he’s not, he’s a snide first-class narcissist. This thing is about the internal politics more than anything else. He will say and do just about anything to put up an opposition to the PM, has done from day one whatever the topic, up to the point you’d think it’s personal, and their rivalry is now starting to get embarrassing for the whole country. Of course, an element in this is also the fact that he comes from the political left.
The PM has also lost the recent parliamentary vote he wanted to get passed, to help train Ukrainian soldiers in Croatia, by a narrow margin. This shows the old, and bitter, ideological rivalries of left vs. right are still rather alive, much more so than for example right after the war of independence etc. It’s very disappointing, considering the parallels between these two countries.
Only a matter of time before the likes of these are sent into orbit to loiter until needed. By the millions.
Some good logic and explanation to this update from Ukraine,to why the offensive have slowed down
Smaller,stealthier,cheaper,accurate to 1 meter ,can hit moving targets,have a programmable fuse,can penetrate 1 meter of steel reinforced concrete,perfect for bridges.
Can also be used for surveillance and hit many targets at the same time,or many at one single target at the same time,like a bridge.
It will no matter give the russians a bad day
Apparently, this conflict has caused the Moldovans to not want anything to do with Transnistria, according to an opinion poll. The only way it gets dealt with is if Orcs there attack Ukraine and they go in and deal with every last one of them and the top echelon of their supporters. 15 % of Moldovans are pro Orc/Transnistria.
They're an order of magnitude cheaper. 40k'ish vs 1mil a shot. So you can literally have 25 of the things to every ATACMS.
They're only inferior in terms of firepower(which isn't needed for ammo dumps or vehicles) and range to the ATACMS. They are accurate to 1m up to 150kms. So in a sense they are less advanced.
They're so cheap you could also use them to hit individual tanks. They can also course correct mid flight to hit moving vehicles.
In addition to this they're small so they'll slip past radar and most other anti air detection systems(which they can also be used to attack).
I've said it before but i believe these will be the real gamechangers in Ukraine. A few thousand of these rockets will spell a very bad day for the Russians.
Seems like US refused to send Ukraine DPICM 155 artillery shells to Ukraine,but it found the way trough Turkey instead,because of legal issues,Washington is barred from exporting DPICM “because of its high dud rate”.
The DPICM round is basically a multipurpose round that can either explode on impact or it can release 88 submunitions from a certain height,so it comes under cluster bombs.
US have millions of these rounds in stock
They have a devastating effect on both armoured vehicles and personell,even in trenches,and Russia have used cluster bombs since the beginning of the war and every conflict they have been in,so why shouldnt Ukraine use them too.
Definitely less advanced than ATACMs and Smaller,but they can launch multiples at the same time, where the ATACMs is a single strike,Melitopol , Mariupol and parts of Crimea will now be in range
Apparently they are less advanced than ATACMs but for cheaper and available in large numbers. Might be a better fit.
Some assembly required !
Who knows how many russian mobilized troops have suffered from the cold in their bunkers (there have been a number of social media reports of their troops complaining about what they have to cope with) but the most recent material I read on their accomodation in occupied Ukraine stated that many are staying in houses that have been abandoned by Ukrainians who have fled their homes fearing getting killed by the invading troops or have been rounded up and forcibly "evacuated" by the russian troops. I think I read somewhere as well that it has been one of the mildest recorded winter seasons in Ukraine so mud is still a major factor reducing the capacity for rapid movement when in other years more ground would have been frozen. It is only the russians who have ignored the conditions and got thousands of troops killed for very little territorial gain. The russians are pushing forward at huge cost and very little gain from what I see reported.
What use is 20 thousand tanks when a single man with a rocket launcher can kill one and block a road for a few hours.
Russia can win battles but won't win the war.
Ukraine cant win battles, but will win this war eventually, since NATO won't allow Ukraine to lose.
No nobody said that,
But Ukrainians are better equipped to the point the Russians are stealing clothes off dead Ukrainians
They wouldn't have produced jack shít if the Americans weren't supplying them with the means to do so. A point conveniently forgotten by all you russophiles, is that anything Russia achieved in WWII would not have been possible without Lend Lease. And in typical Russian fashion they then make the country that saved them from the nazis their primary enemy. Only a nation as stupid as the Russians could come to that conclusion. It says alot about those who support them.
It was mentioned before that everyone expected a pretty much stalemate over winter and didn't expect the frontline to move much. We have seen frozen Russian soldiers in foxholes. Even after a drone dropped a grenade the Russian soldiers barely moved.
Anyways, is that your definition of pushing forward?
9 months to advance the Frontline 15kms.
What would you call the counter offensive by Ukraine that took Kherson and Kharkiv?
They have managed so far when we were told they would freeze in bunkers and the Russian army would collapse while Ukraine pushed forward all snug in the best NATO winter gear.
Yet it’s Russia who are pushing forward.
Latest US package to Ukraine will include the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb which will give the Ukrainans the ability to hit targets out to 150km from HiMars launcher's.
Another poster claimed that they were already in Ukraine if I remember correctly,
Now it's been confirmed they are part of the next support package
@Homelander
They could mass produce a low-spec tank, but that wouldn't be of any real use.
The Russian apologist thing right now is that while Russia may be at a deficit regarding modern weaponry, they have the edge in numbers and will simply swamp Ukraine like a zombie horde. Putin will mobilise every able-bodied citizen if need be and somehow that won't be politically untenable. So, low-spec tanks by the bucketload and low-spec men in and alongside them until Ukraine either gives up or runs out of bullets.
Assuming that Russia could mobilise another million men, say (a number I've heard bandied about) - there still remains the small detail of how to keep that many men fed and kitted, not to mention motivated. If someone could give an analysis on the logistics needed to make that number of men effective and where Russia stands in these terms, it would be interesting reading, I think.
It's not a valid comparison.
Mainstream tanks back then were far simpler in design relatively speaking. Also, most of the "tanks" Germany produced were assault guns, not actual tanks.
Russia cannot pump out anything remotely near that level of modern, high-tech tanks.
There's lots they can scale up dramatically, including some vehicles, but high-tech tanks and other war-winning weapons is not one of them.
If you want to make comparisons with WW2 Germany, a more apt one would be the total German inability to produce enough of every kind of weapon that might have helped stemmed the tide, like the 262, V2's, Tiger IIs, Stg44 assault rifles, etc.
But they couldn't, because producing high-tech stuff requires enormous scarce resources which they didn't have free access to. Hence why they focused on stuff that they could produce in mass numbers, but wasn't ever going to do anything other than slightly prolong the war at best.
Russia is not really any different, if you think 20,000 T-90's (or even T-72s) are going to start rolling off the assembly lines, you are very much mistaken.
For sure. I was questioning their assertion that Russia would do better than England. I don't think so. Like the fellow that went bankrupt: "At first slowly, then suddenly"
Break the piggy bank open-
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
