Posted on 03/17/2018 4:41:28 PM PDT by BBell
Russia has unveiled a devious new battlefield tactic: use tanks as decoys in order to hunt down enemy artillery batteries.
It's a bait-and-switch con job that relies on relies on Russian tanks, drones, artillery—and an opponent that is just a tad gullible.
The technique works like this, according to Russia's Sputnik News: When facing an enemy that has artillery, Russia will attempt to locate the enemy batteries and destroy them through counterbattery fire. The problem, which dates back to the eighteenth century, is that the enemy batteries will attempt to remain concealed.
So how to lure them out? Russia intends to do it by having its tanks pretend to be artillery pieces. Normally, tanks use direct fire, in which they have a line of sight to the target. But on occasion, they have been used as artillery. During the Korean War—because the terrain was too rocky for armor to maneuver—the United States inclined tanks on ramps and had them fire indirectly with high, arcing shots that passed over hills and hit targets on the other side.
Presumably Russia will do something similar—but only as a ruse. The idea is that the enemy will think the Russian tanks are vulnerable artillery pieces and reply with counterbattery fire.
By the time enemy artillery fires, the tanks will be gone from the target zone and drones will be overhead. "Immediately after firing, the tanks leave their position in order to avoid enemy fire," explained Sputnik News. "As soon as the enemy fires in retaliation, Orlan drones pinpoint the enemy's location and transmit it to the tanks and allied artillery. The allied artillery opens fire immediately and the tanks, which posed as artillery earlier, appear out of nowhere to finish what remains of the enemy positions."
The technique was used during recent exercises near the Russian city of Voronezh. The tank/drone/artillery combo recently struck targets as far as eight miles away.
Significantly, Sputnik News also noted that "the interaction between various forces is streamlined and is conducted by bypassing the headquarters, which makes reaction time faster." That may raise a few eyebrows given that the Russian and Soviet military have a reputation for centralized control compared to Western armies. But the new tank/artillery technique is further evidence that the Russian military is continuing to move toward the decentralized, fast-paced style required for twenty-first-century warfare.
But will the trick work? The tactic presupposes that the enemy will not be able to distinguish between tanks and artillery: however, a sophisticated adversary like the United States, which has numerous drones and sensors of its own, might spot the difference. Russian tanks will have to ensure that they are detected, but leave themselves enough time to vacate the area before a smart bomb lands on them. Russian tanks would not need to fire as accurately as regular artillery, but they might have to carry special ammunition for indirect fire.
The U.S. Army did not respond to TNI's queries about Russian tactics or possible American responses by press time. But Christopher Wilbeck, a recently retired U.S. Army armor colonel, thinks the Russian approach is interesting:
They are using tanks to engage targets in Non Line of Sight engagements as part of the overall maneuver plan. I doubt they are doing precision NLOS engagements—which would be a big deal. But, it sounds like they’re linking sensor to shooter—UAVs to tanks—and then using the mobility of the tanks to displace. And only them are they using traditional cannon fire artillery in the counter-counterbattery fires, again linking sensors and shooters—UAV to artillery and to tanks—all the while maneuvering on the objective with the tanks that fired the first rounds.
Wilbeck seemed surprised that the Russians were willing to embrace such a flexible option:
[The tactic] is very easy to describe but it would also be very difficult to execute, and pushing the execution down to the lower levels would be a big leap, especially for a traditionally centralized military. Bottom line is that they are describing combined arms maneuver using mission command [a flexible goal-oriented system]. Deliberately using tanks in the indirect fire mode to facilitate maneuver, and fire and movement is new. I think previous historical examples of tanks in the indirect fire mode were due to exigencies or limitations on the use of armor.
How well could the U.S. military perform this? Wilbeck says the while the U.S. Army is theoretically capable of doing this, he hasn't seen it done in a long time. "I haven’t seen indirect fire firing tables since I was on an M-60 tank. Not to mention the tank rounds needed to do it – HEAT and APFSDS are not indirect fire rounds."
Michael Peck, a frequent contributor to TNI, is a defense and historical writer based in Oregon. His work has appeared in Foreign Policy, WarIsBoring and many other fine publications. He can be found on Twitter and Facebook.
Russia is always trying to win the last war. Counter-battery fire. LOL. What is this, 1812 and the retreat from Moscow?
In 1969, has a newly minted tank commander out of the NCOCC at the Armor School, we were familiarized with the use of the 90 mm main gun on the M48A3 in the indirect fire role, using a gunner’s quadrant and the gunner’s azimuth indicator. We had aiming stakes and took directions from an improvised Fire Direction Center, with firing tables for the 90 mm M17A1 HE round, the fuse of which could be set for point or delayed detonation.
I believe the maximum ordinate would yield a maximum effective range of 16,000 meters or so.
We were told that this was an inefficient use of tank guns, due to the relatively small bursting radius of the 90mm HE round and the accelerated wear on the gun tube, but could be employed in an emergency.
We actually used this technique one time on the DMZ, when responding to a request from a beseiged fire support base. Each tank in our company fired all 15 rounds of our HE load. Most of our main gun load was canister, beehive, WP, and HEAT.
Let me get this straight, use tanks as sacrificial lambs in place of mobile arty to draw fire so you can use your arty to counter fire because you have crap sigint.
Sucks to be you.
"We're gonna need a theme song."
Much like the Japanese lashed out before and during WWII because of their lack of raw materials, the Chinese are feeling the same.
Its proven coal reserves are about 1/2 those of the US, the Saudi Arabia of coal. And the reality is that there’s not exactly been any great incentive for private prospectors to go looking for new deposits, given that all natural resources are property of the Party, and the fact that the country has an unbroken record of gypping foreign firms with exploration contracts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_by_country
China’s problem historically has been bad leaders, not a lack of human or natural resources. Economically productive countries never need to invade anyone to obtain resources. That’s what trade is for. Japan’s leaders embarked on the quest for empire for the same reason as their counterparts everywhere else in time and space - everyone wants to be Alexander or Julius Caesar, with their names at the tip of every school child’s tongue, not just from history lessons, but from generation after generation of children named after these personages.
The sad reality is that the quest for personal glory requires war, in service of territorial gains, rather than peace. That is the reason Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin are likely to go to war. Both countries have long histories of territorial expansion, and leaders instrumental in that expansion are lionized in their official histories. Xi will act soon because he can, due to China’s burgeoning economy, and Putin must move forthwith because he’s running out of time, due to advancing age, to match Stalin’s record (not of ruthless repression, but of land grabs, e.g. by gaining Sakhalin and the Kuriles, Karelia, Poland’s eastern territories, Bessarabia, East Prussia, etc etc).
Leaders look at war in the same way that climbers look at their next trek up a mountain. For mountaineers, those icy slopes are a challenge to be overcome, partly for an adrenaline rush and partly so they can check off another item on their bucket list. Leaders add to that the possibility of immortality in the history books.
“Their biggest potential problem is running out of shells.”
And running out of satellites if we’re trying to fight Russia or China (the first thing they’ll do is deal with our satellites). But yes, with other countries, we’ll beat them to a pulp.
The Marines there all spoke perfect Japanese.
“Hey, can they do that?”
Lame. Wouldn’t work against US forces. Our counterbattery fire is just way too fast in response. And where is this land war between the USA and Russia supposed to happen?
It’d likely work on a Ukrainian militia though.
A lot of these articles are written by fanboys with what seems to be no real communication with actual, past or present, members of the military. It wouldn’t hurt for them to join a few military discussion forums. I can’t tell if it’s just laziness or the possibility that reality would be too boring to cover.
Spent a little time at C2.
298th Signal.
Rough place to be at.
Were you the driver for the M-48 in that excellent photo? If so, were you able to stay dry?
I wish Ivan was worried more about Iran instead of teaming up with them in Syria!
“Russia’s Devious New Battlefield Tactic: Use Tanks as Decoys to Kill Enemy Artillery”
Not a great plan, even if we only used artillery to kill tanks. Besides, does anyone think the Ruskies are going to tell us their real battle tactics?
I was doing split battery scoot and shoot with my M-106 SP 4.2” mortar plt in 1977. First fire mission was all 4 tubes, then 2 would leave with FDC and 2 would stay with me using a plotting board. We would fire the second mission then leave. Granted mortars are low priority counterbattery targets.
They are chess players.
"Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."
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.