Russia Ukraine Update Thread - part 2

a reply to: Grimpachi


Wanna start a pool on how many days it takes Ukraine to find them with Javelins.

Or how high the turrets fly?




I got dibbs on the 5 and 7 day squares for the first, and 100 feet for the second.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u
a reply to: Grimpachi


Wanna start a pool on how many days it takes Ukraine to find them with Javelins.

Or how high the turrets fly?




I got dibbs on the 5 and 7 day squares for the first, and 100 feet for the second.

The turret reached 250 feet.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

When I post a video from Lancaster I state it is from Lancaster. You are too cowardly to address the content that he presents even when a man is there with a lhis leg blown off. You are essentially labeling the victims he interviews as actors. Lancaster lives rent-free in your head and you have stated repeatedly that you don't watch the videos I post so either you are lying about watching the other videos I post and yelling Lancaster/propaganda or you are lying outright about what is in them without even checking. Either way, you are a liar and one of the most trollish people I have seen on these boards in years.

I have caught you in lies and you lie trying to cover up your lies. Rinse and repeat. You bring nothing to further conversation.

a reply to: alldaylong


This variant has less ammunition, or rather, an ammo load with less total explosive potential.

a reply to: Grimpachi



Why would anyone want to discuss a fake video?

lancaster videos are all fake.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

iran IS the 'aggressive neighbor' in that region.

Saudi Arabia.
The biggest exporter and funder of Islamic extremism in the world.

I have no desire to go into this in detail here and derail this very important thread, maybe best saved for another time and place.

But the point is that it has been made abundantly clear that the possession of nuclear weapons deters attacks from other nations.
As such I think we will see more and more countries trying to develop their own nuclear arms capability.

In some ways I could hardly blame them, but what are the wider implications with more and more countries - some of whom are 'unstable' - having nuclear capability?
MAD has served us well, till now.

Just another consequence of Putin's invasion of Ukraine and his reckless threats to use first strike nuclear weapons.

a reply to: Freeborn


Is Saudi Arabia building nukes and invading several countries?

iran is.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Is Saudi Arabia building nukes and invading several countries?

Yes, to both.

And they are the single, largest exporter of Islamic extremism and terrorism in the world, bar none.

Start a thread on Saudi/Iran etc and I'll gladly contribute.....this thread is about Putin's invasion of Ukraine etc.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Lousy Russian logistics will ensure units equipped with BMPT Terminators will run short on fuel and ammo. Any vehicle built upon the T-72 tank design lacks battlefield protection for the crew. Cold War era, Soviet tank designers, failed to compartmentalise the ammo storage from the rest of the tank. So that is why the T72s are mobile coffins turned into scrap metal in combat.

Unlike German armour after D-day, none of the Soviet tanks, vehicles and artillery platforms instils a sense of fear of dread or fear in Ukrainian forces.

Major L, who oversees specialist platform training at the Australian Army School of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, which is part of the ALTC, said every effort could help Ukraine.

“We might think we’re a long way from Ukraine, but providing training packages to go with the Bushmasters is our bit to help,” Major L said.

It was his task to fast-track a maintenance and familiarisation guide to be used by the Ukrainian military for the vehicles.

“We basically had to strip back our existing maintenance guides so the Ukrainian operators would be able to get the Bushmasters operational within a few hours after they arrive,” Major L said.

Article
Article

Australia dispatching another 20 Bushmaster vehicles with 14 M113 Armoured Personnel Carriers is unsurprising. The M113s can receive maintenance and logistical support with the vehicles supplied by the U.S.

But in Ukraine, Bushmasters are orphans, so providing training is necessary to ensure those vehicles remain in service and aren't employed as infantry fighting vehicles. Perhaps a small number of Dutch and Australian Afghanistan veterans are acting as instructors in Ukraine. In that case, those veterans are training the trainers on the Bushmasters.

Also, the result of Saturday's Australian Federal election won't impact military aid to Ukraine. There is bipartisan support for Ukraine among the Australian Labor and Liberal parties.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Is Saudi Arabia building nukes and invading several countries?

Yes, to both.

And they are the single, largest exporter of Islamic extremism and terrorism in the world, bar none.

Start a thread on Saudi/Iran etc and I'll gladly contribute.....this thread is about Putin's invasion of Ukraine etc.

I'm not interested in Saudi right now either, someone else brought it up as a false Whataboutism.

a reply to: xpert11


Based on the early successes everywhere Bushmasters have been spotted, I think your best case training assumptions are probably on target.

Another 20 is fantastic news!

No actual sightings yet, but I have reason to believe that 5 Bushmasters towed 10 M777s into the forest near Izyum a few days ago. These were probably the ones spotted near Kharkiv a couple weeks ago with the same guns.

Another 5 Bushmasters were responsible for the largest of the river crossing massacres, and possibly some of the smaller ones as well. These were probably the ones spotted driving near Popasna last week.

No reports on the location of the other 10 yet, but based on what little is known I'd guess that they are deployed in two groups of 5 vehicles, and that at least one of those groups is or soon will be near Severodonetsk somewhere, probably in the river area East of the city.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

The Ukrainian soldiers may receive a crash course (pun intended) on the Bushmaster before they are assigned with the vehicles to front line units. Since they are vulnerable to Russian tanks and artillery, the Ukrainians rely on concealment, operating the vehicles in rear areas and destroying enemy armour and artillery in advance. Also, those vehicles might serve with a howitzer unit.

But moving away from my speculation: How many Bushmasters does the Ukrainian Army require to go from operating a niche vehicle to a standard troop carrier?

It took a month for the first complete batch of Bushmasters to arrive in Ukraine from Australia. So to dispatch 100 Bushmasters would take approx five months, not including any delays caused by the airlifting of other equipment.

originally posted by: xpert11
a reply to: Grimpachi

Lousy Russian logistics will ensure units equipped with BMPT Terminators will run short on fuel and ammo. Any vehicle built upon the T-72 tank design lacks battlefield protection for the crew. Cold War era, Soviet tank designers, failed to compartmentalise the ammo storage from the rest of the tank. So that is why the T72s are mobile coffins turned into scrap metal in combat.

Unlike German armour after D-day, none of the Soviet tanks, vehicles and artillery platforms instils a sense of fear of dread or fear in Ukrainian forces.

You are right about the T72 compartmentalization problem but I disagree with you on the armor. This is a t72 chasi but the turrent module has been replaced on the BMPT. On the M1 the ammo is compartmentalized in the turrent. Why do you think they haven't done the same on the BMPT?

I have looked but haven't found a schematic of the internals on the BMPT. If you have would you post a link? Such a schematic would make it easy to spot if the Terminators are prone to cookoff like the T72s.

a reply to: xpert11


I'm not sure that Ukraine has an urgent need to use them as troop carriers, and not sure there would be enough time to train them how to use them properly in that way.

Though it's far from what it's designers probably intended, they perfectly fit Ukraine's most urgent need as a component of the fast reacting mobile M777 teams, and filling this need is what could easily win the war and retake all Ukrainian territory except Crimea. They still need more tools to retake Crimea.

As for the rest of russian occupied areas, the more Bushmasters that can be delivered, the sooner the russians will be going home.

As the ground dries up, and more Ukrainians get trained on M777, it becomes much more feasible to support fast reaction forces with fewer Bushmasters leading/managing and using M113s to add M777 numbers. The key is using the M777s as intended, and that means always keeping both the guns and the Bushmasters well out of russian artillery range, and always either on the move or well hidden.

As long as they stay out of russian artillery range, and stick to using the Bushmasters for their unique capabilities (using things like M113s to do the rest), 50 Bushmasters and 100 M777s are probably enough to retake everything except Crimea.

With a little luck (ok, a lot of luck), 20 Bushmasters might even be enough for the above. Being able to go to areas on a battlefield that are completely unreachable for your opponent is an extremely powerful advantage, add that to the same kind of advantage that Ukrainians just got with the M777's range and accuracy, and russia just doesn't have anything conventional left in it's toolbox to prevent the Ukrainian Army from going wherever it pleases (except Crimea).



This matter of urgent need, combined with the lack of immediately available Bushmasters, along with the above, will likely prevent Bushmasters from being used as originally intended during this war, with the possible exception of Crimea if that part is delayed a bit.

I think they are a perfect fit for Ukraine's long term needs though, and it wouldn't surprise me a bit to see them rebuild their army with 1000+ Bushmasters being used exactly as intended after the war. They don't need troop carriers that fight alongside tanks like we do, they need troop carriers that can bring modern weapons and systems anywhere. Nothing is even close to the Bushmasters in that role IMO.

I'd also like to see a slightly modified version used in significant numbers by the U.S. and NATO countries, they could fill a decades old gap in our tools for certain roles after multiple U.S. disappointments.

I don't think Bushmasters are in the right weight class for our primary troop carrier requirements though.







ETA: If you think they've been impressive already, as I do, just wait until Ukraine can deploy 20 Bushmasters, 80 M113s, and 100 M777s to a single battlefield, or better yet, 100 Bushmaster/100 M777 fast reaction and assault forces.

Will make russia's ww1 artillery war plans look more like Desert Storm, russia just doesn't have any defense against this combination when used properly right now.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

YouTube video from British historian Dr Mark Felton on WWII era weapons used in Ukraine war

youtu.be...

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

I have heard various commentators refer to the M777 as " American " when in fact it's British.

Maybe they mean some have been supplied by The U.S.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

I have heard various commentators refer to the M777 as " American " when in fact it's British.

Maybe they mean some have been supplied by The U.S.

M777 was highly based on an original British design, but that British model didn't have many of the unique features that make an M777 an M777. Pretty much all NATO guns have those features and capabilities now, and Brits are still leading most of NATO's artillery production.

You are correct that I've been using the M777 term generically to mean all NATO artillery with similar or even more advanced capabilities than M777. I've been doing this for readability, and because the M777s were provided in much greater number so far, but all of the European Howitzers provided are at least as good and fire the same rounds.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

The M777 was originally designed by Vickers, which became part of BAE Systems ( another British Arms Manufacturer ). All the design upgrades where developed by BAE Systems.

Hope that helps.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

The M777 was originally designed by Vickers, which became part of BAE Systems ( another British Arms Manufacturer ). All the design upgrades where developed by BAE Systems.

Hope that helps.

I was trying not to name actual companies here, but that is correct.

BAE is the prime NATO supplier for most NATO artillery related items, and has that role because they earned it.



It should be noted though, that what is now known as the NATO artillery platform (generically referred to as M777) along with it's unique satellite guided munitions, had major components redesigned by quite a few western companies, and at least two others (besides BAE) are not American companies.