Two stories - same day:
US-supplied Himars 'completely ineffective' as Russia jams skies with new tech.
4 Likes
I read today that Russia is electronically jamming some of our munitions, and it’s reducing their effectiveness drastically in some cases.
You can expect anything electronic to be interfered with in the future.
The old mark 1 eyeball and a reticle will always be tough to interfere with.
4 Likes
Dumb artillery rounds still work as advertised.
3 Likes
If the atmosphere is clear enough for you to see the target, it’s clear enough for a laser to napalm your retina. Even back in the '90s when I went plane spotting at Spadeadam someone would come round to tell us not to use cameras or binoculars on the occasions when airborne lasers were in use.
Regards,
M
1 Like
What have they done to my beloved Abrams!? 
3 Likes
Could be a preview to what the US will do.
I don’t think that the US will go passive in their attempts to counter FPV drones with just cages and additional slat armor for future next-generation tanks.
I think that the US Army will incorporate missiles and radars into MBTs in the future. The US Army currently believes that missiles are unnecessary because the primary weapon is the main cannon. Now drones are proving that false.
I incorporated three short-ranged surface-to-air missiles into my Sci-Fi hovertank design such as in the rear view (decals 1,2,3), and that was back in 2007. There can also be drone jammers installed on the uncrewed MBT’s remote turret.
https://www.starshipmodeler.org/gallery12/po_091507_peracno.htm
Furthermore, the technology exists for mini radars to slave to a 5.56mm Gatling gun on a RWS pedestal for CIWS protection against FPV drones, RPGs, ATGMs, etc. on the turret roof. Active Protection Systems might also work, but they’re limited in ammunition before they have to be reloaded. AI will help defend future MBTs and their uncrewed turrets like the AbramsX design where the crew sits in the forward hull.
5 Likes
Man, that cage is going to be a lot of PE bending.
3 Likes
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/29/europe/ukraine-war-us-tanks-intl/index.html
Soldiers in Ukraine say US-supplied tanks have made them targets for Russian strikes
Granted, NATO uses the M1 Abrams differently in Combined Arms actions along with air and artillery support.
2 Likes
I doubt that they use any tactics at all.
2 Likes
Agreed.
Russian FPV drones have made the Ukrainian M1 Abrams MBTs so precious that it’s often not moved, but hidden.
And then I think they have 120mm Sabot rounds and not HEAT-MP.
Having HMMWV “Avengers” cover the M1s would help against enemy FPV drones.
2 Likes
You can now build a realistic Abrams uparmoring diorama with this set:
【重坦侠】新品：1/35爆反小人儿套装 微雕树脂模型_静态模型爱好者–致力于打造最全的模型评测网站 (moxingfans.com)
At some point tactics must evolve to meet the threat. The Machine gun and artillery changed infantry warfare in WW1 and created the stalemate of trench warfare. Armor and speed changed WW2. If hundreds of drones can be up at a moment you could lose an armored column in a matter of minutes. That changes how armored units work and the type of armored unit you use. The Ukraine is an inflection point for armor and drones.
3 Likes
Don’t be daft, of course they do. Although, I expect that tactics are being adapted, scrapped or perfected on an almost daily basis. This war has changed the face of conflict and how it is conducted literally overnight (from Feb '22 anyway).
I’m willing to bet that NATO Forces are falling over themselves re-writing their doctrine at this very moment.
4 Likes
“improvise, adapt, overcome” …
2 Likes
Challenger II is faring better … only one of those has been lost to date (I think).
Using the tank’s superior gun range, accuracy and versatility in load-out (Challengers typically use HEAT/HESH rather than APFSDS) Ukraine is using them differently. Probably because it isn’t as mobile as its NATO counterparts (it has greater levels of protection, especially when compared to the Leopard).
1 Like
I’m not daft, I’ve seen videos of their army using armored vehicles and their are not tactics involved.
Are you sure? Have you talked to them? Familiar with their tactical doctrine are you? Fully aware of the geographic constraints on AFV movement in Ukraine? Aware of the need to constantly move, sometimes erratically to counter the drone threat?
I can assure you, even the RuZZians who look like the least likely of the two sides to be using tactics, are in fact, using tactics. Just because you don’t understand what you’re seeing, it doesn’t mean that tactics aren’t involved.
1 Like
The Russian tactic seems to be the same old stuff, drive straight ahead until the unit is expended.
Ukraine seems to be doing hit and run tactics.
Trying to stay alive on a battlefield under total surveillance by small drones poses new challenges.
I may be totally wrong, armchair general and all that, but I get the impression that most of the existing tactics need to be revised until there are effective countermeasures to the drone threat.
Shoot-and-scoot is good for artillery until the day comes when the guns are detected before they have fired
and then need to run like scared rabbits to avoid attack drones and counter battery fire.
Automated close-in defenses like Trophy should see an increase in demand. The Ukraine war should be an excellent testing/proving ground for such systems.
3 Likes