Posted on 09/11/2022 9:23:13 PM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
There are always people who say that the Russian army is fighting offensively, why not carry out a large in-depth assault with tanks and quickly encircle and cut off the enemy? The Russian tank forces were supposed to form up an iron barrel array on the front and gradually smash into the Ukrainian lines with fire.
The Russian tank forces were supposed to form up an iron barrel array on the front and gradually smash into the Ukrainian lines with fire.
Can the Russian General Staff fight a war? Now to talk about the large-scale in-depth assault and encirclement of tank groups on the Ukrainian battlefield, that is, to take the theory of World War II and copy it to modern warfare. No matter what tanks are on the current Ukrainian battlefield, as long as they dare to make a frontal assault, they will become wreckage.
The Ukrainian side said it had destroyed more than 2,000 Russian tanks, and the open source website believed that the Russians had lost more than 900 tanks based on videos and photos. In fact, neither the T-72, nor the T-80, nor the Western M1 and Challenger tanks will be easy to reach the Ukrainian battlefield, and they will all suffer heavy losses.
Because modern warfare is completely different from the period of World War II. In World War II, the infantry had little way to get tanks. Anti-tank grenades can only be thrown more than 10 meters in actual combat, and the effective range of German bazookas during World War II does not exceed 100 meters.
During WW2 soldiers were unable to stop the tanks at all as they broke through at a pace of tens of kilometers per hour. Tanks may be fought with as little as 1 infantry division and 1 anti-tank artillery battalion, and the range is no greater than 1500 meters. As a result, during World War II, tank clusters could launch daring, quick penetration attacks.
The modern battlefield is completely different, and there are tens of thousands of Javelins and other anti-tank missiles on the front line of the Ukrainian army. West supplied thousand no of anti-tank missiles to Ukraine plus Ukraine homemade anti tank missiles so basically every unit of the Ukrainian Army is equipped with ATGM.
Tank troops lacking cover dared to attack the Ukrainian positions head-on, and basically, the end would be the wreckage of tanks everywhere. The Ukrainian infantry had a great defensive advantage in the trenches and in the bunkers. Russian tanks exposed to limited traffic routes in the field would be very dangerous.
At the same time, a large number of precision-guided artillery shells, UAV laser irradiation guidance, modern cannons, and other advanced weapons and equipment participated in the battle. There were even examples of 155 mm howitzers hitting and destroying Russian tanks in motion at a distance of 10 kilometers. This was not possible in the past.
Even before the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War, there had never been an instance of a 155 mm howitzer hitting and destroying a moving tank at a distance of 10 km. Now it can be said that a simple tank assault is actually a life-tired suicide.
The Ukrainian army lacked mobile troops, and as soon as they came up, they gave up the field battle and returned to the city to squat, and this main force lay corpses in the city. The gameplay of the light infantry attack is basically a posture of waiting for death. Therefore, the entire front line was full of Ukrainian defensive lines, and it was difficult for Russian tank units to find weak links that could be broken through.
In the early days of the war, in fact, the Russian army also carried out a rapid and large-depth assault of tanks, but it was not successful. At that time, the Russian army carried out long-range breakthroughs with insufficient troops, in the case of poor equipment support and insufficient logistical supplies. As a result, the Russian combat group encountered resistance and lacked firepower and infantry. Only the tanks were left to be beaten. Many tanks were abandoned because they were out of fuel.
At the same time, the depth of this two-line defense of the Ukrainian army is about 30 kilometers. The second-line defense can form effective fire support for the front-line defense, which is a standard Soviet-style campaign defense layout. According to the typical Soviet defensive terrain, the second line should also have a part of the powerful counter-shock troops.
According to the actual battlefield situation, the tactics of the Russian army became to assemble more than 1,000 artillery and rockets on the front line of the Donbas and shell them as soon as they came up, and bombarded them for a week or even a month. After the bombardment, the squad will send up to see if the fortifications and the people in the building were dead or not, if they were not dead, they continued to bombard.
Stop spamming your blog on threads.
He’s saying that tank warfare in an artillery war is suicide. the Russians do not practice combined arms. So it there case it would have been even worse with no troops to guard the tanks. In any case both would have been obliterated by artillery.
The article is from an Indian source.
I am most familiar with the typical syntactic idiosyncrasies of East Europeans (I'm married to one).
Regards,
German military theorists eschew the term "Blitzkrieg." Many prefer the term "Bewegungskrieg," which I think is indeed more descriptive.
The Russians tried to fight Ukraine using the tank army tactics of 1945. That no longer works. They really should have studied our two wars against Iraq more.
I wonder if they learned anything from our tumultuous withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Thanks for your thoughts on the subject!
Regards,
Quit spamming us with your blog.
Well, same thing we here learned... What a cluster F Joe Biden is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.