Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

[Bacle]

Those were most effective against badly underequipped in AT weapons forces in Syria, not a common scenario against proper armies.

In guerilla warfare it is great.
In a LSCO fight? Ha... that's a joke

Eh, the problem is if the VBIED gets close enough, blowing it up will still give the troops blast injuries, even in trenches.

I know it's not a 'major' threat compared to the likes of Shahed's or Lancet's, however you can pack a hell of a lot more boom into a BMP or the like than on a flying drone, and it means Russia has some use for even their most clapped out armor, so long as they can get it moving.

 

[Jormungandr]

Eh, the problem is if the VBIED gets close enough, blowing it up will still give the troops blast injuries, even in trenches.

I know it's not a 'major' threat compared to the likes of Shahed's or Lancet's, however you can pack a hell of a lot more boom into a BMP or the like than on a flying drone, and it means Russia has some use for even their most clapped out armor, so long as they can get it moving.

So, more chance of Lizard Lady Hillary ripping off her human mask live on TV, then?

 

[Bacle]

So, more chance of Lizard Lady Hillary ripping off her human mask live on TV, then?

No, more like if something will still move, but the gun/armor/other systems mean it's more valuable as a VBIED than as a normal armored vehicle.

 

[lloyd007]

Eh, the problem is if the VBIED gets close enough, blowing it up will still give the troops blast injuries, even in trenches.

I know it's not a 'major' threat compared to the likes of Shahed's or Lancet's, however you can pack a hell of a lot more boom into a BMP or the like than on a flying drone, and it means Russia has some use for even their most clapped out armor, so long as they can get it moving.

With the trench networks and minefields both sides have put up on all the major front lines and the complete and utter disregard for civilians because either they've been evacuated or it's Russia and their TOS-1A's and such DNGAF?... There is little to no place for VBIEDs.

And all involved have tons of anti vehicle weapons.

There's also the fact that Pvt. Conscriptovich is of a very different mindset than some Al-Q / ISIL Jihadi who is all ready and raring to die and get his 72 virgins.

 

[Bacle]

With the trench networks and minefields both sides have put up on all the major front lines and the complete and utter disregard for civilians because either they've been evacuated or it's Russia and their TOS-1A's and such DNGAF?... There is little to no place for VBIEDs.

And all involved have tons of anti vehicle weapons.

There's also the fact that Pvt. Conscriptovich is of a very different mindset than some Al-Q / ISIL Jihadi who is all ready and raring to die and get his 72 virgins.

As I said, most of the ones I've seen are they just jam the track in the forward position on a tank/BMP and then the mobik's bail out; they aren't martyring themselves, they've just sending the VBIEDs forward to try to clear trenches and UA positions easier.

 

[Marduk]

Eh, the problem is if the VBIED gets close enough, blowing it up will still give the troops blast injuries, even in trenches.

I know it's not a 'major' threat compared to the likes of Shahed's or Lancet's, however you can pack a hell of a lot more boom into a BMP or the like than on a flying drone, and it means Russia has some use for even their most clapped out armor, so long as they can get it moving.

>if
The good AT weapons have ranges measured in kilometers.
Think about it logically. If a rusty BMP controlled by a remote or worse, outright uncontrolled, can get within 50-100m of your infantry positions unharmed, so could the same vehicle when operated by a trained crew, at least if you don't care much about the risk. And once it did, it could do plenty of damage too. And either way, it makes a statement about the quality of your anti tank defenses, a pretty damning one by modern standards of infantry AT weapons.

And to add insult to injury, as i think some users already found out, these big booms know no friend or foe, and will also explode before being deployed if hit with a drone or long range anti tank missile, when still near own troops.

No, more like if something will still move, but the gun/armor/other systems mean it's more valuable as a VBIED than as a normal armored vehicle.

If it can move, it's still useful for mechanized infantry.
If they run out of those, they say bye to having mechanized infantry.
See the problem?
It's not like their infantry is swimming in better armored vehicles.
Even months ago there were already mobiks complaining that their whole company has just one working MT-LB as command, supply and evacuation vehicle, all in one, obviously never there when needed.

 

[Zachowon]

Eh, the problem is if the VBIED gets close enough, blowing it up will still give the troops blast injuries, even in trenches.

I know it's not a 'major' threat compared to the likes of Shahed's or Lancet's, however you can pack a hell of a lot more boom into a BMP or the like than on a flying drone, and it means Russia has some use for even their most clapped out armor, so long as they can get it moving.

You are acting like the enemy will just let a BMP get close enough to go boom....

As I said, most of the ones I've seen are they just jam the track in the forward position on a tank/BMP and then the mobik's bail out; they aren't martyring themselves, they've just sending the VBIEDs forward to try to clear trenches and UA positions easier.

And then it goes boom before it gets anywhere close and then you have a wasted BMP that could have been more effective as mobile cover

 

[Bacle]

>if
The good AT weapons have ranges measured in kilometers.
Think about it logically. If a rusty BMP controlled by a remote or worse, outright uncontrolled, can get within 50-100m of your infantry positions unharmed, so could the same vehicle when operated by a trained crew, at least if you don't care much about the risk. And once it did, it could do plenty of damage too. And either way, it makes a statement about the quality of your anti tank defenses, a pretty damning one by modern standards of infantry AT weapons.

And to add insult to injury, as i think some users already found out, these big booms know no friend or foe, and will also explode before being deployed if hit with a drone or long range anti tank missile, when still near own troops.

If it can move, it's still useful for mechanized infantry.
If they run out of those, they say bye to having mechanized infantry.
See the problem?
It's not like their infantry is swimming in better armored vehicles.
Even months ago there were already mobiks complaining that their whole company has just one working MT-LB as command, supply and evacuation vehicle, all in one, obviously never there when needed.

You are acting like the enemy will just let a BMP get close enough to go boom....

And then it goes boom before it gets anywhere close and then you have a wasted BMP that could have been more effective as mobile cover

I don't know what to tell you two, except that I've seen vids of the Russian's using this method for couple months now, and the trend seems to not be decreasing.

AT weapons with kilo's of range are great, but I've been seeing these things get with 100 yards of a trench and be explosive enough that an AT hit near a trench seems to create a boom big enough to give sods in the trench blast-lung, without ever making it to the trench.

 

[Marduk]

I don't know what to tell you two, except that I've seen vids of the Russian's using this method for couple months now, and the trend seems to not be decreasing.

AT weapons with kilo's of range are great, but I've been seeing these things get with 100 yards of a trench and be explosive enough that an AT hit near a trench seems to create a boom big enough to give sods in the trench blast-lung, without ever making it to the trench.

When did it happen, and did it actually do much?
There's a reason it gets filmed so easily and eagerly - it's a tactic of the desperate and the ill equipped.
Also the all the infantry that has to attack with no armor cover surely loves seeing perfectly good armored personnel carriers get blown up like this.
There are reasons why serious armies don't do it.
Where are the tactical missiles? Where's the air force? Where's heavy artillery? Where are all of these things that a normal military would use instead of stealing tactics from the Islamic State?

 

[Bacle]

When did it happen, and did it actually do much?
There's a reason it gets filmed so easily and eagerly - it's a tactic of the desperate and the ill equipped.
Also the all the infantry that has to attack with no armor cover surely loves seeing perfectly good armored personnel carriers get blown up like this.
There are reasons why serious armies don't do it.
Where are the tactical missiles? Where's the air force? Where's heavy artillery? Where are all of these things that a normal military would use instead of stealing tactics from the Islamic State?

I've seen several video's of the tactic, seems like mostly in the pushes near Bakhmut and north of it, maybe some down in Zapp.

Blast lung injuries don't much care how 'slap-dash' the explosive that caused it was, and some of the blasts I've seen have been close enough to UA trench lines that the people in them were probably concussed, if not dealing with blast lung, even if the VBIED only got within 100 yards of the trench.

Also, Russia is more careful about aviation near the front line than they used to be, and a FAB-500 or two inside a BMP or MT-LB isn't much less dangerous than one dropped from a plane, once it's inside a certain radius of it's target.

 

[Zachowon]

I have seen a single video.
A T54 was being used as a VBIED.
It got disabled and then destroyed well before it got close to Ukrainian lines to do damage.
It was also a brick put om the gas to keep it going type of thing.

 

[Bacle]

I have seen a single video.
A T54 was being used as a VBIED.
It got disabled and then destroyed well before it got close to Ukrainian lines to do damage.
It was also a brick put om the gas to keep it going type of thing.

They try to drive the VBIEDs within 300 yards of the target, before doing the 'brick on pedal' action.

 

[Marduk]

I've seen several video's of the tactic, seems like mostly in the pushes near Bakhmut and north of it, maybe some down in Zapp.

Blast lung injuries don't much care how 'slap-dash' the explosive that caused it was, and some of the blasts I've seen have been close enough to UA trench lines that the people in them were probably concussed, if not dealing with blast lung, even if the VBIED only got within 100 yards of the trench.

Also, Russia is more careful about aviation near the front line than they used to be, and a FAB-500 or two inside a BMP or MT-LB isn't much less dangerous than one dropped from a plane, once it's inside a certain radius of it's target.

They were soldiers in a trench, so any such blast injuries taken would massively depend even on such autistic details as the depth of the trench, their body position and shape of their helmets.
You are exaggerating the blast effects, there are reasons why hardly anyone uses such massive bombs for open area targets, remember, explosive's effects at ground burst have really bad distance scaling, especially against trenches, as most of the energy goes up into the sky.
Putting 0.01 kiloton groundburst into a nuke calculater gives me 5 psi at 100m and 15 psi (minimum threshold for lung damage) at 50m, further reduced by trench structure (calculator assumes flat ground), so, it may look scary, the actual damage done is much less than it looks.

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/archive/pdfs/NIOSH-125/125-ExplosionsandRefugeChambers.pdf

The human body can survive relatively high blast overpressure without experiencing
barotrauma. A 5 psi blast overpressure will rupture eardrums in about 1% of subjects,
and a 45 psi overpressure will cause eardrum rupture in about 99% of all subjects. The
threshold for lung damage occurs at about 15 psi blast overpressure. A 35-45 psi
overpressure may cause 1% fatalities, and 55 to 65 psi overpressure may cause 99%
fatalities. (Glasstone and Dolan, 1977; TM 5-1300, 1990)

On second thought, this is great for the way Russian military works. They did something, they have an impressive attack to show, they can claim ridiculous losses on enemy side...
Life moves on, and the frontline doesn't.

 

[Bacle]

They were soldiers in a trench, so any such blast injuries taken would massively depend even on such autistic details as the depth of the trench, their body position and shape of their helmets.
You are exaggerating the blast effects, there are reasons why hardly anyone uses such massive bombs for open area targets, remember, explosive's effects at ground burst have really bad distance scaling, especially against trenches, as most of the energy goes up into the sky.
Putting 0.01 kiloton groundburst into a nuke calculater gives me 5 PSI at 100m and 15 PSI (minimum threshold for lung damage) at 50m, further reduced by trench structure, so, it may look scary, the actual damage done is much less than it looks.
On second thought, this is great for the way Russian military works. They did something, they have an impressive attack to show, they can claim ridiculous losses on enemy side...
Life moves on, and the frontline doesn't.

I mean that's fair that the injury level is rather hard to sort as a hypothetical because of multiple independent factors to the soldier in question.

And yes, it does look *uncomfortable in the extreme* when what may be a FAB-500 or two in a tractor goes of within 100m of your position/tench, while still dealing with the other things Russia throws at them. The on of first ones I saw happened so fast I not sure the missile crew, if it was shoulder fired and not tripod, had time to duck before the blast wave hit them.

Though Lancelets in particular seem a real pain in the ass, at least in areas without Gepards or such.

Too bad the US retired and scrapped all those WW2 era quad .50 cal half-tracks/guntrucks, they'd be really useful against this sort of drone warfare if they had the gear to get que'd onto them.

 

[Zachowon]

You would need faster firing then 50.

But I will need it to he known that trenches are very good at stopping explosive blasts.
Unless it happens in the trench most in a trench can survive.

 

[Marduk]

I mean that's fair that the injury level is rather hard to sort as a hypothetical because of multiple independent factors to the soldier in question.

And yes, it does look *uncomfortable in the extreme* when what may be a FAB-500 or two in a tractor goes of within 100m of your position/tench, while still dealing with the other things Russia throws at them. The on of first ones I saw happened so fast I not sure the missile crew, if it was shoulder fired and not tripod, had time to duck before the blast wave hit them.

Though Lancelets in particular seem a real pain in the ass, at least in areas without Gepards or such.

Yup, Lancets are a much bigger issue than VBIEDs for sure.
1000kg TNT 100m from proper trench is an annoyance, not a threat. By calc the really big VBIEDs with around 7-10 tons can be a threat if they get closer than 50m (and do real damage if they get below 30m away), but that's it.

Too bad the US retired and scrapped all those WW2 era quad .50 cal half-tracks/guntrucks, they'd be really useful against this sort of drone warfare if they had the gear to get que'd onto them.

And do what with them? You know how effective those were against much easier to see and target WW2 fighters (not very, and mostly psychological).
Also as i linked above in that Czech example, it can be done relatively cheaply with any kind of vehicle chassis and HMG or autocannon. The sensors that allow it to be effective against drones at all are the most bottlenecked in production and expensive part of the system.

If you want to be mad about retirement of something, make it this.

MIM-72 Chaparral

www.weaponsystems.net

Built in thousands, used modified Sidewinder as ammo.
Late model M163's would be nice too but USA didn't build many of those to begin with.

You would need faster firing then 50.

But I will need it to he known that trenches are very good at stopping explosive blasts.
Unless it happens in the trench most in a trench can survive.

Not really, Czechs do it with twin 14.5mm KPVs.

 

[AmosTrask]

Hahaha! Moscow airspace has been closed for the foreseeable future. All air traffic is being redirected to Belarus, St. Petersburg and surrounding Oblasts. All aircraft already in Moscow have been grounded. Good! I hope they experience even a tenth of horror the people of Bahkmut endured.

VBIED are only effective against poorly equipped enemies. Ukraine have an abundance of AT weapons for their troops. Each squad usually have at least four tubes, with every soldier carrying extra rockets.

 

[Marduk]

Hahaha! Moscow airspace has been closed for the foreseeable future. All air traffic is being redirected to Belarus, St. Petersburg and surrounding Oblasts. All aircraft already in Moscow have been grounded. Good! I hope they experience even a tenth of horror the people of Bahkmut endured.

They don't need airports to go where they are going anyway...
New mobilization style, even in Moscow:

 

[Cherico]

So basically the Russians are using this war to purge restive ethic groups? Yeah that checks out it's a very old Russian tactic

 

[AmosTrask]

So basically the Russians are using this war to purge restive ethic groups? Yeah that checks out it's a very old Russian tactic

Every non-Moscow Slavic and non-Slavic ethnic group are being drafted. Entire republics with their men gone. While the Russians flood the streets with Muscovite police. Police who take liberties with the women and children suddenly without their fathers and brothers to protect them.