ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > Military Forums > The Field Mess
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
View Poll Results: Which superpower would have won a full scale far against each other?
U.S. 7 50.00%
U.S.S.R. 7 50.00%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 03-25-2008, 09:47 AM   #91 (permalink)
Stan187
WAB BOUNCER
Senior Contributor
 
Stan187's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-24-06
Posts: 2,152
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple C View Post
You better shut up now. Go to tanknet and do a search. More than a dozen M1s have been written off by IED attacks. Two 3ID tanks suffered catastrophic failure with crew loss after stumbling on IEDs and that's from the top of head.
Remember this advice for dealing with trolls my man, the ignore list is your friend.
__________________
In Iran people belive pepsi stands for pay each penny save israel. -urmomma158
The Russian Navy is still a threat, but only to those unlucky enough to be Russian sailors.-highsea
Stan187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2008, 10:44 AM   #92 (permalink)
Firral
Military Professional
 
Firral's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-11-06
Location: The Kola peninsula, Russia
Posts: 336
Country:
Send a message via ICQ to Firral
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple C View Post
Firral,

The Iraqi failure probably had more to do with tactics then their equipment, or the USMC M60A1s wouldn't have blasted through their T-72 ranks. Only seven or eight (!) 125mm hits on the M1 were recorded. That's pretty bad shooting.

I have no idea what are the actual penetrative power of the 105mm rifled gun is; nor am I quite convinced that 80s Russian tanks would be invulnerable to 105mm fire. Resistant, perhaps, but immune? The tankers I talked to seem to know what they are talking about, had served on three to four major types of US tanks (from M60A1 RISE to M1A1) and, as far as I can gather, knew the specs of Russian tanks pretty well.

That said, NATO would have had an easy going against the Red Army by no means.
You are right, however pay attention, that these seven or eight shells could not make anything! The reason: shells were too weak what to punch protection at a great distance. Your shells easily destroyed their tanks on this distance. You represent moral spirit of the Iraq tankmen (if they have remained are alive)?
On close distance you simply did not admit them. On your party there was an aircraft, satellites and excellent communication. This all speaks about your excellent tactics, but not that does not speak that all this was possible in the USSR.
Speaking that war in Iraq has shown opportunities of the USSR, you resemble the person who beats the teenager, and then speaks that it also is ready to beat any adult person.
About 105mm gun. This gun could struggle easily with Т-55, Т-62 and Т-72A. However to 1985 in the USSR have started to be made T-72B, T-80B, (and it is fast and T-72BV T-80BV T-80U), and against them on greater distances 105мм gun was weak. Therefore it has been replaced on 120мм gun.
__________________
Firral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2008, 21:55 PM   #93 (permalink)
Bella
Patron
 
Join Date: 09-03-07
Location: Chicago
Posts: 260
Country:
This is for the military pros!
Head-to-head, how would the Russian tank divisions, and artillery, deal with a American assault from UAV's armed with hellfire missiles, B-2 bombers, and A-10 Thunderbolts? Their combined use and effectiveness has showed to be devastating in the past with the Abrams to clean up.

Thanks!
Bella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2008, 22:48 PM   #94 (permalink)
T_igger_cs_30
Military Professional
 
T_igger_cs_30's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-04-07
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,943
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bella View Post
This is for the military pros!
Head-to-head, how would the Russian tank divisions, and artillery, deal with a American assault from UAV's armed with hellfire missiles, B-2 bombers, and A-10 Thunderbolts? Their combined use and effectiveness has showed to be devastating in the past with the Abrams to clean up.

Thanks!
oh ya an easy one to answer
__________________
<img src=http://C:\Documents and Settings\Wayne Smith\My Documents\002...My Pictures border=0 alt= />FEAR NAUGHT

I don't work here ...I am an analyst!
T_igger_cs_30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2008, 23:00 PM   #95 (permalink)
Stan187
WAB BOUNCER
Senior Contributor
 
Stan187's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-24-06
Posts: 2,152
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bella View Post
This is for the military pros!
Head-to-head, how would the Russian tank divisions, and artillery, deal with a American assault from UAV's armed with hellfire missiles, B-2 bombers, and A-10 Thunderbolts? Their combined use and effectiveness has showed to be devastating in the past with the Abrams to clean up.

Thanks!
What time period do you mean? I'm guessing today since you mention UCAVs, but where is the prospective battleground, since the US and Russia today aren't really projected to fight anytime soon.
Stan187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2008, 23:31 PM   #96 (permalink)
Bella
Patron
 
Join Date: 09-03-07
Location: Chicago
Posts: 260
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan187 View Post
What time period do you mean? I'm guessing today since you mention UCAVs, but where is the prospective battleground, since the US and Russia today aren't really projected to fight anytime soon.
Sorry! Yes, in today's period of time. The battleground would be a mixture of open field and forest. Cover would be open to very dense.
Also, the area would be neutral, with no home field advantage to each side.

Thanks!
Bella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 02:00 AM   #97 (permalink)
Stan187
WAB BOUNCER
Senior Contributor
 
Stan187's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-24-06
Posts: 2,152
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bella View Post
Sorry! Yes, in today's period of time. The battleground would be a mixture of open field and forest. Cover would be open to very dense.
Also, the area would be neutral, with no home field advantage to each side.

Thanks!
A good answer requires a better setup. The more you can flesh it out, the better someone can answer you. There is no homefield advantage? Then what are they fighing over. Someone is usually defending and someone attacking, it makes a bit of a difference. Think about it, for example if you're using A-10s to hit Russian armor... If Americans are defending, it is a lot easier to keep friendly casualties down by hitting Russian follow on forces. But if Americans are attacking and there are some brigade size groups well behind the front line and intermixed with Russian reserve elements, then it changes how the A-10 operates, its priorities, what it can and can't shoot at. Try to understand, if a question is not extremely specific, an answer can turn out to be a short essay, there are just THAT many factors involved, and we're not getting into the meat and potatoes, which is to say disputing my opinion with someone else's.
Stan187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 05:16 AM   #98 (permalink)
braindead
Lost in Translation
Senior Contributor
 
braindead's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-30-06
Location: estonia
Posts: 1,132
Country:
In today´s context - if US has currently what ~ 20 Predator -derivative UAV-s ? that can carry say 2 Hellfire-s each , then a Russian tank division would not even notice them .
Never ever is B-2 bomber (with it´s price tag) going to do tactical bombing in such situation . This is like using Keyhole satellite to take picture of your familiy picnic.
__________________
....
braindead is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 06:00 AM   #99 (permalink)
T_igger_cs_30
Military Professional
 
T_igger_cs_30's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-04-07
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,943
Country:
Interesting scenario...... far to many variables I feel.
T_igger_cs_30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 06:05 AM   #100 (permalink)
VarSity
Contributor
 
Join Date: 06-11-07
Location: Leicester
Posts: 397
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by braindead View Post
In today´s context - if US has currently what ~ 20 Predator -derivative UAV-s ? that can carry say 2 Hellfire-s each , then a Russian tank division would not even notice them .
Never ever is B-2 bomber (with it´s price tag) going to do tactical bombing in such situation . This is like using Keyhole satellite to take picture of your familiy picnic.
Wasnt the B2 only mega expensive because they built so few of them?

I though the idea was for there to be many hundreds and thus get the costs down.
VarSity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 09:02 AM   #101 (permalink)
Triple C
Contributor
 
Join Date: 04-10-06
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarSity View Post
Wasnt the B2 only mega expensive because they built so few of them?

I though the idea was for there to be many hundreds and thus get the costs down.
I suspect B2's primary mission was nuking. It definately makes a good first strike weapon.
__________________
What benefits the body is called medicine; what benefits the soul, discipline.
-Augustine of Hippo
Triple C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 10:25 AM   #102 (permalink)
Silent Hunter
Contributor
 
Silent Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: London, UK
Posts: 471
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Silent Hunter
The B-2 had c.135 planned, but only 21 were built, hence the big per-unit cost (much of the cost was R&D). It was originally designed for nuclear attack, yes. I believe crews still train for that.
Silent Hunter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 11:21 AM   #103 (permalink)
Bad Karma
Regular
 
Bad Karma's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-28-08
Location: Arizona
Posts: 49
Country:
Firral.

мой русский учитель был tankist.
Morale основан на он сказал.

I do not understand as you can compare these two armies!!! The army of Iraq has what similarity to army of the USSR???

- только, такие же оружия. ничего больше. я знаю его точно такие же, однако, я знаю ваши возможности вашей армии. вы только знаете ваше правительство сказало вам.
Bad Karma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 11:31 AM   #104 (permalink)
Silent Hunter
Contributor
 
Silent Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: London, UK
Posts: 471
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Silent Hunter
He's not comparing them. He's commenting that the Soviet military was far superior to that of the Iraq and that just because you beat a teenager, it doesn't mean that you can take on an adult.
Silent Hunter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2008, 12:05 PM   #105 (permalink)
Firral
Military Professional
 
Firral's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-11-06
Location: The Kola peninsula, Russia
Posts: 336
Country:
Send a message via ICQ to Firral
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bad Karma View Post
мой русский учитель был tankist.
Morale основан на он сказал.

I do not understand as you can compare these two armies!!! The army of Iraq has what similarity to army of the USSR???

- только, такие же оружия. ничего больше. я знаю его точно такие же, однако, я знаю ваши возможности вашей армии. вы только знаете ваше правительство сказало вам.
Give those nevertheless in English (though I probably very badly write).
I have already explained to you why the weapon was not that in the USSR. Besides, the army had absolutely other level of preparation and a moral spirit. And it is very important.
In occasion of that that you know, and that I know.
In the first (contrary to opinion in the West) - I have access to any resources on the Internet, any TV to programs and any books. I do not understand, why I know " only what has told to me, my government "? Times of the Iron Curtain has ended 18 years ago!!!
Secondly, I doubt of your knowledge because of your statement about the weapon of Iraq too as in the USSR that time. It more resembles propagation of your government, than on an objective estimation of a situation.

Last edited by Firral : 03-26-2008 at 12:08 PM.
Firral is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Random Thoughts on the Mighty Hog - Part 2 Shipwreck Military Aviation 102 05-10-2008 15:24 PM
Do G4 have a case. crooks Political Discussions 165 12-31-2006 06:58 AM
Soviet Air Power in Afghanistan IDonT Military Aviation 0 06-19-2006 16:50 PM
Israel to enhance range of Indian SLBM Sagarika to 2500 km Ray South Asian Defense Topics 61 12-13-2005 23:00 PM
Lies about the USSR agent09 The Western Alliance 47 05-30-2005 06:31 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:52 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8