WarPac vs. NATO Tank and Armored Vehicle Designs/Doctrine

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Russia like adversaries have plenty of redundant, multi-layered systems including AWAC type ones. They are also well trained and have a capable doctrine. With these types of systems, the invader is detected at longer distances than by the Iraquis for sure. And after you are detected the probabilities of penetrating enemy territory diminish considerably. Again, is a completely different game than going against the Iraqui Army. Add that they have EW systems that degrade considerably your capabilities - also a thing that USAF and Cº don't have played against for a long time. A modern army can completely fuck up your gps guided weapons for example. I don't say is not possible, just that cost a lot more - probably more than you are prepared to pay. Also that kind of adversary has weapons with range and precision to hit your bases / ships in return - another thing you are not used to deal.
Oh I know what they can do to GPS guided munitions. Which is why we have dumb munitions and the like. You underestimate what the US Military (Army and AF as that is where my work experience is) are actually capable of in a force on force war. We know exactly what are enemies are capable of, and just how useful it will be. I also know where I am currently is in a horrible spot should we go to war with China. Our command knows this, but our placement is important for another reason.

EW and the like are said RADARs, and are generally used to give the SAM and AAA time to get their systems up and running to allow for the ability to engage should the enemy enter their range. EW and radars also generally have a larger range then the weapon systems attached to it.

Standard practice is to locate and destroy AAA and then use that to destroy the enemy air force followed by providing ground fire. Like we did in Iraq. I know how we would deal with a Iraqi like foe very in depth recently, I also learned about both what China and Russia are capable of. Thier capabilities rely on everything going perfect as well.

Triple checked to make sure all this info is allowed.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
The truth is that while Russia and China don't know the true capabilities of US forces, US forces also don't know the full capabilities of they forces. Only in a war, you are confronted with these. Hope to never know then.
Ehh, Because China and Russia export a lot of their stuff to nK and Iran, and countries that are not at best terms, and even some of our allies, we know more about their stuff then they do ours.
 

PsihoKekec

Swashbuckling Accountant
The stuff they export is not the same as the stuff they themselves use.
As I recall USA knew full capabilities of Yugoslav AA defenses in 1999, yet they failed to destroy single SAM launcher despite 15000 AA suppression missions. Though, due to being terribly outdated, the SAMs only managed to shoot down two jets and two dozen UAVs.
 

paulobrito

Well-known member
Also after the end of the Cold War is discovered that the estimates of the capabilities of WP hardware are meh - sometimes in one direction sometimes in the other. And a lesson taught countless times by war that many forgotten time and time again - the quality of the training of the people of the other side counts much more than the hardware.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
If you truly believe they sell the full capabilities of they systems you are for a very rude awakening.
You think i don't know this? It still lets us get the minimum it can do.
The stuff they export is not the same as the stuff they themselves use.
As I recall USA knew full capabilities of Yugoslav AA defenses in 1999, yet they failed to destroy single SAM launcher despite 15000 AA suppression missions. Though, due to being terribly outdated, the SAMs only managed to shoot down two jets and two dozen UAVs.
I never said our missions are the best at destroying them. Just what the plan is.
I also need to read up on thay
Also after the end of the Cold War is discovered that the estimates of the capabilities of WP hardware are meh - sometimes in one direction sometimes in the other. And a lesson taught countless times by war that many forgotten time and time again - the quality of the training of the people of the other side counts much more than the hardware.
Why do you think the US Army has so many exercises, most force com units are going into the field on a every other month basis.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I think,that soviet model was last succesful use of conscsprit army.Now,even if they had money and people for that,technology become to compicated to use for consprits.
It seems,that we come back from Napoleon style to proffesional armies.
 

wellis

Active member
I think,that soviet model was last succesful use of conscsprit army.Now,even if they had money and people for that,technology become to compicated to use for consprits.
It seems,that we come back from Napoleon style to proffesional armies.
Both the Israelis & South Koreans use conscript armies. Same with the Singaporeans as well. The Israelis have fought multiple times with a conscripted military.

Not all conscripts are unmotivated druggies or whatever people like to think of them.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Both the Israelis & South Koreans use conscript armies. Same with the Singaporeans as well. The Israelis have fought multiple times with a conscripted military.

Not all conscripts are unmotivated druggies or whatever people like to think of them.

They fought another conscript armies ,which used soviet tactics.Of course they win.And good motivated conscript could hold territory - which is precisely what Switzerland planned to do.
They simply would not be good attacking force on modern battlefield against modern armies.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top