Challenger's 120mm is different from all other current MBT's 120's. It's rifled.I wonder if the praise of accuracy of Challanger cannon may be due to fact of being new/freshly refurbished. Whereas Ukranian barrels already have fired hundreds? thousands of shot and/shells and are in need of replacement (relining?)?
Ukrainian comments on NATO training in hindsight.
TL;DR it was useful in recon, navigation, infantry tactics. Lack of static defense, EOD, drone warfare training, also not enough focus on night driving.
Apparently Ukraine is up to action movie shit again:
Putin's general blown up by 'exploding phone' in assassination attempt
A RUSSIAN general was seriously wounded after being given an ‘exploding phone’ by Ukraine’s secret service. Yuri Afanasevskii, 64, is injured in hospital as is his son following t…www.thesun.co.uk
It would depend on which specific NATO country this training happened in, but some are mountains of bureaucracy away from giving proper consideration to the whole mass drone warfare game themselves.Fascinating resource, thanks for posting. There was one thing that stood out to me as particularly surprising; perhaps someone more in tune with military matters like @Zachowon could at least have a guess?
Lack of drone training could have a number of plausible causes, from politics to NATO training not having caught up to what is apparently the new reality of warfare. Lack of defensive training could plausibly be attributed to a misunderstanding of what the troops would need most from an abbreviated training period. However, lack of EOD seems nonsensical given that they were meant to be sent into an artillery-centered war in the world's biggest minefield, and I can't imagine what sort of politics would argue against such training.
Yeah, that's believable. On the one hand, just because you've banned land mines doesn't mean the guy you're fighting has; on the other hand, if your institutional memory is of an organization that didn't expect to fight any serious war other than the Big One and that one on the defensive (in your own non-mined territory) I can see it as a blind spot that the bureaucracy failed to identify.would not be surprised if, considering how many NATO countries are in the mine ban treaty, that's something left chiefly for specialist combat engineer units to deal with, while time and own training limited the line unit trainers from teaching much regarding that.
I received loads of mine-detection and avoidance training while I was in the Army 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't on the level of EOD though. For the average grunt it's all about detection and avoidance. If you need a lane cleared you call EOD, the combat engineers (with their MCLICs and other tools) or just your friendly artillery to 'aggressively clear' terrain.However, lack of EOD seems nonsensical given that they were meant to be sent into an artillery-centered war in the world's biggest minefield, and I can't imagine what sort of politics would argue against such training.
Drone is understandable from the aspect of conventional forces especially US and NATO. SF is more specialized in that regard so they would be the better ones to train that, which I think have been training Ukrainian SF which shows.Fascinating resource, thanks for posting. There was one thing that stood out to me as particularly surprising; perhaps someone more in tune with military matters like @Zachowon could at least have a guess?
Lack of drone training could have a number of plausible causes, from politics to NATO training not having caught up to what is apparently the new reality of warfare. Lack of defensive training could plausibly be attributed to a misunderstanding of what the troops would need most from an abbreviated training period. However, lack of EOD seems nonsensical given that they were meant to be sent into an artillery-centered war in the world's biggest minefield, and I can't imagine what sort of politics would argue against such training.
I have yet to get any myself but diffrent environment.I received loads of mine-detection and avoidance training while I was in the Army 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't on the level of EOD though. For the average grunt it's all about detection and avoidance. If you need a lane cleared you call EOD, the combat engineers (with their MCLICs and other tools) or just your friendly artillery to 'aggressively clear' terrain.
Fair enough; do you think the guy in the interview was being loose with words or actually sore about not getting for-real EOD training?I received loads of mine-detection and avoidance training while I was in the Army 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't on the level of EOD though. For the average grunt it's all about detection and avoidance. If you need a lane cleared you call EOD, the combat engineers (with their MCLICs and other tools) or just your friendly artillery to 'aggressively clear' terrain.
It's hard to say what he's looking for specifically. EOD would completely safe an area if given enough time. Key word is time.Fair enough; do you think the guy in the interview was being loose with words or actually sore about not getting for-real EOD training?
Obviously you have no way of knowing, just looking for a wild guess from the gut.
About mine disposal, I recall a comment, way before the current war(I think it was around 2017-8), that the Ukrainians were horrified by the EOD doctrine NATO instructors were teaching them. NATO doctrine, shaped by Iraq and Afghanistan experience, was to slowly and methodically clear a path(or zone).It's hard to say what he's looking for specifically. EOD would completely safe an area if given enough time. Key word is time.
I imagine it's really difficult for the Ukrainian forces to provide enough cover over a long enough period of time to allow that to happen.
My guess is that what they really need are the quick and dirty methods of mine removal. That's pretty much just detonate in place. Problem with this...it's not gonna catch all the mines all the time.
I'm betting the Ukrianian line 'engineers' are going to become some of the best Combat Engineers on the planet...assuming they live long enough to learn. The hardest trick is then passing that knowledge on so it's institutionalized.
The US did both.About mine disposal, I recall a comment, way before the current war(I think it was around 2017-8), that the Ukrainians were horrified by the EOD doctrine NATO instructors were teaching them. NATO doctrine, shaped by Iraq and Afghanistan experience, was to slowly and methodically clear a path(or zone).
Ukrainian experience was the Separatists and Russians usually had artillery zeroed in the mining field, waiting for the advancing unit to slow down to clear it. If the Ukrainians did what their instructors were teaching them, they would die - they would have less casualties from speeding up through the field than if they stopped and cleared it.
It does add up. Most of NATO mineclearing experience is in peacetime or COIN environment.About mine disposal, I recall a comment, way before the current war(I think it was around 2017-8), that the Ukrainians were horrified by the EOD doctrine NATO instructors were teaching them. NATO doctrine, shaped by Iraq and Afghanistan experience, was to slowly and methodically clear a path(or zone).
Ukrainian experience was the Separatists and Russians usually had artillery zeroed in the mining field, waiting for the advancing unit to slow down to clear it. If the Ukrainians did what their instructors were teaching them, they would die - they would have less casualties from speeding up through the field than if they stopped and cleared it.
It that's what the course entailed then it was a failure of the School's design not catering to the actual needs of a wide ranging battlefield.that the Ukrainians were horrified by the EOD doctrine NATO instructors were teaching them.