You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Technical Reflections on Russia’s Armoured Fighting Vehicles
2022-05-11
The following is a technical analysis of Russian tanks by a British military think tank
[RUSI] The war in Ukraine does not reveal anything fundamentally new about the tank. It confirms old lessons and reflects the challenges of armoured warfare.

Some of the very first images to emerge from the war in Ukraine, apart from the devastation caused by Russia’s long-range missile strikes, were of burning Russian armoured vehicles. As the conflict has progressed, these images have come to include some of the more advanced tanks in Russia’s arsenal: the T-80BVM and T-72B3M. Images of these tanks left as nothing more than burnt hulls, their turrets separated from the rest of the vehicle and thrown violently into a nearby ditch, may appear shocking. They give the impression that Ukraine has found the antidote to tank warfare. However, if we consider the design of Russian main battle tanks – and this also applies to the Ukrainian, Polish, Chinese, Indian and many other tank fleets – these images are both less shocking, and less useful in analysing Russian armour.
Read the rest at the link
Posted by:badanov

#3  /\ Yes, obviously 'side shot' vulnerability is greatly decreased when the mass attack (on line assault) is employed. Channeling armor, single-file through city streets (urban warfare) or down paved highways thus exposing sides is deadly. Adding to this vulnerability are new families of highly effective Anti Tank Missiles such as the Lockheed Martin Javelin and British NLAW Anti-tank weapon.

The Ukraine army has also used anti-tank mines very effectively to enforce the channeling of tanks and trucks into established Anti-tank missile kill zones.

While this vintage Russian T-34 tank on-line attack graphic does not depict screening infantry, dismounted infantry would have likely been used to destroy or expose anti-tank teams. The extended ranges and accuracy of the newer anti-armor weapons makes screening by infantry very costly and labor intense.

As magpie stated in #2, weapons systems and tactics have changes since WWII. It would appear Russian systems and tactics have not kept up with current warfighting tactics and technologies.

Supporting Bus Insider story and video follows:

Business Insider - Downed Russian fighter jets are being found with basic GPS 'taped to the dashboards,' UK defense minister says
Posted by: Besoeker   2022-05-11 05:13  

#2  It is a nice "layman's first overview" article. A thing to consider is that the Soviet perspective from WW2 was that armor is massed for the attack and engagement ranges typically were 250 meters or less. Many of the T-72's design features exemplify this focus.
Posted by: magpie   2022-05-11 01:51  

#1  A fine readable commentary for layman such as myself. T-72s etc not deathtraps if used properly.
Posted by: borgboy   2022-05-11 00:55  

00:00