The enemy always gets a sayHey, no plan survives contact with the enemy. For some reason is called enemy...
The enemy always gets a sayHey, no plan survives contact with the enemy. For some reason is called enemy...
Yep, war is a true democracy after all.The enemy always gets a say
That at least we can agree on.Yep, war is a true democracy after all.
Would not be so sure of that. The logistical footprint of even an old tank like this is still significant, yet the effectiveness in artillery role is considerably lower than even that of a crappy old dedicated SPG, probably worse than a WW2 105mm SPG even.T-55 are used (mostly) for direct fire support. They have plenty of ammo for them, and they are more armored than any arty piece, and plenty of these on stock, so is a logical use of resources.
Modern anti-tank weapons have killed Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2, T-90, etc. T-55 are in good company.
prove itAbrams just got pulled from the battlefield due to drone threat
yes, those weapons systems were designed to defeat them. However, a Bradley with HEAP will destroy a T55, not just wreck it's 'eyes'.Modern anti-tank weapons have killed Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2, T-90, etc. T-55 are in good company.
There are many countries up to and including the USA that are using Cold War relics. The issue is that Russia is reliant on early Cold War relics. There are few cases of anyone else doing this, and those exceptions generally speak for themselves (B-52).The fact they are having to use Cold War relics is deeply embarrassing for Russia. Modern anti-tank weapons will make mincemeat of T-55s.
I mean, they were using them ineffevtively.Ukraine pulls US-provided Abrams tanks from the front lines over Russian drone threats
Two U.S. officials say Ukraine has sidelined U.S.-provided Abrams M1A1 battle tanks for now in its fight against Russia.apnews.com
This is what people don't get, is the Abram's was designed to be used as part of a combined arms force, not the way the old Soviet school of thought treated armored warfare, and unfortunately a lot of Ukraine's older officer corp are still soviet stock.I mean, they were using them ineffevtively.
Compare how they used the leopard to the Abrams and it shows.
Near the frontline obviously it wouldn't work, but over the cities and industrial areas in the rear subject to Shahed's and such, it could be very useful.AC-130 is too big, and is going to be killed in seconds.
Maybe, if is equipped with sensors capable of tracking said drones in time.Near the frontline obviously it wouldn't work, but over the cities and industrial areas in the rear subject to Shahed's and such, it could be very useful.
You could plug a fair number of CWIS/Avenger style systems into the sides of a C130.Maybe, if is equipped with sensors capable of tracking said drones in time.
Armor will always be useful even in a drone environmentThis is what people don't get, is the Abram's was designed to be used as part of a combined arms force, not the way the old Soviet school of thought treated armored warfare, and unfortunately a lot of Ukraine's older officer corp are still soviet stock.
Ukraine's 2023 counteroffensive was a costly lesson on why you don't use equipment meant for combined arms warfare in a manner fitting of a soviet playbook.
However, until SHORAD catches up with the new drone threat environment, armor is not as useful as it once was in this fight.
Nit really useful for drones. Shaheed can be dealt with by MANPADS. Even non radar guided AA.Seeing Yak-52 with gunners in the back taking down drones is like the old bi-plane rear-seaters taking down blimps in WW1.
I think that maybe it's time to consider a high-low approach to Ukraine and warfare in the future. Prop-planes with turreted guns can do a lot of things it would be far more expensive to do for air defense, especially against near-ground drones, than with jet fighters.
Wonder what it would take to spin up a reproduction P-61 assembly line, or give Ukraine a bunch of air-to-air modified Super-Tacano's or AC-130's (FC-130?)?
Better to mount on ground equipment.You could plug a fair number of CWIS/Avenger style systems into the sides of a C130.
Red Effect actually had a video discussing the use of the Abrams by the Ukrainians. And keeping in mind, the Ukrainians only received 31 Abrams Tanks almost a year and a half ago and they weren't actually put into action until last February. They weren't deployed as part of the massive combined arms units that America envisioned, but in small units or singly to support the defenses after Avdiivka fell to hold back the Russian advances in far less fortified areas.