Tank Tactics: How to get not hit by ATGMs?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- How to get not engaged and/or hit by Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ground and air-based) within a tank, for this I interviewed a former Leopard 2 gunner. We discuss various aspects like movement, formations, spacing, engaging, smoke, etc.
Cover design by vonKickass.
Image used: Ukrainian Stugna-P anti-tank guided missile firing from a concealed position by remote control during a winter maneuver., armyinform.com.ua, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
»» GET BOOKS & VIDEOS ««
» Stukabook - Doctrine of the German Dive-Bomber - stukabook.com
» The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com
» Tank Assault - Combat Manual of the Soviet Tank Forces 1944 - stm44.com
» IS-2 Stalin's Warhammer - www.is-2tank.com
» StuG: Ausbildung, Einsatz und Führung der StuG Batterie - stug-hdv.de
» Achtung Panzer? Zur Panzerwaffe der Wehrmacht - panzerkonferenz.de
» Panzerkonferenz Video - pzkonf.de
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon, see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
our brains
00:00 Intro
00:23 Keep Distances & Communication
03:39 Drive like Water flows (Tank Zen)
05:24 Mines & Obstacles
06:52 Hit by a mine, what to do?
07:53 Firing at the ATGM Launcher
09:56 ATGM
10:13 Air Based ATGMs
12:22 Thermal vs Helis?
14:16 Dealing with Planes?
16:07 Hearing a SU-25…
16:43 You can’t save everyone…
#atgm #tanktactics #leopard2
A favorite channel. "If you hear the plane it's already too late."
One of the biggest lessons of the current Ukraine war is the continuous drones observing the battlefield. No target can move without being targeted. When a cheap commercially available drone with a small shaped charge (not an expensive ATGM) can immobilise a modern expensive tank additional counter measures beyond smoke are needed.
EW and different kinds of APS for ground-ground threats/air-ground threats
I imagine these will become more valuable than unnecessary amounts of frontal armour
@@chost-059 you can intercept a drone or missile, but taking down an APFSDS is something currently no APS does/does reliably. And thats why you need the armor.
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 who cares about KE protection against apfsds, you cant protect a tank from those anyways and the cases where that even happens is so rare outside warthunder
@@chost-059 it happens often enough, that you have to consider it.
And yes you can protect yourself.
Modern western MBT´s like M1A2, Leo2A6 etc can take hits from their russian/sovjet counterparts (T-62´s, T-64, T-72, T-80, T-90 etc) and survive them, while the russian tanks dont have enough armor to protect from the 120mm APFSDS rounds.
This is due to 115mm and 125mm russian APFSDS and guns lagg behind and are limited due to their design.
But even vs NATO 120mm rounds, leo2A6 etc would be protected.
And we just dont see much tank vs tank combat, due to the distances. its not warthunder like knife fighting distance of 5-500m but 3-5km
Tanks might need to prioritize close range protection against drones with machine guns and EW. FPV drones have slaughtered russian tanks by hitting their weakspots in the top armor on the hull around the turret. And the result is a big KABOOM!
However old western tanks were not built to deal with this threat either. So I guess that future tank design will have to prioritize front armor and top armor in the future. Side armor will probably get slaughtered as a result in order to save weight. It is also possible that tanks will become more like drones and with new tank guns that are becoming to big that manual loading takes too much time and becomes inpractical.. so perhaps will tank guns have auto-loaders firing 130mm or 150mm rounds.
Old Soviet tanks have nothing to do on a modern battlefield anymore.
Basically you need to do terrain analysis and conduct an appreciation in a safe location (last bound) before you start moving and then move as part of a combined arms team.
Then if detected, use weapons and your Multi Barreled Smoke Grenade Dischargers (MBSGD) to suppress the firer and obscure their view (if optically tracked).
Naklar den Quatsch hat man schon in der NVA Zeit als Übung verwendet.
Du ungedienter Feldmarschall!
- "Encounter with a helicopter is basically the most dangerous situation you can find yourself it"
- Airplane loaded with guided munitions: Am I a joke to you?
I think the difference is that he sees the encounter with a helicopter as an engagement where there is a chance to defeat or evade the enemy.
Whereas with fixed wing you're a target, there's nothing you can really do - you have to rely on other units to stop them getting to you in the first place.
Yeah, see how airplanes are considered a greater threat in overall, yet something they can't deal themselves.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized we can all talk, laugh. Until u see a hypersonic Shovel piercing through the clouds...With a washing machine chip.
@@nemiw4429 This, then, means PutinHuilo has to throw everything up to and including the kitchen sink at Ukraine…
@@enysuntra1347 Any military has their reserves of ammunition and ordinances well as spare parts, manpower and other supplies including fuel, lubricants etc etc. War has been going for years and some of those resources need to be reserved to forces protecting rest of the boarder, so they can only use reserves that have ear marked to that operational field and supply new materials witch sourcing the materials for them takes time and effort, specially during war time, hell it might be impossible even, so they need to adapt the designs on what they can get, if that particular chip previously designed to be used is not available. When it comes to military, if you loose 40% of your total manpower and military assets, you are practically already lost. Looking the Ukrainian claims of destroyed and captured vehicles well as loss of Russian forces, its around 70% they are claiming if you add them all up, witch is impossible really.
In short, Russia has not run out of anything, but new chips for smart weapons like missiles and are required to adapt the designs to fit the another type of chips they can procure for instance from mainly China, well as buy back some of the weapons from North Korea as they have apple supply of artillery rounds and unguided rockets, well as other bit older stuff that still works fine for conflict like this, where Ukraine is supplied with greatest and latest of several countries manpad weapons and tanks. Thing people miss is how much each country manages to produce said weapons in a year. Normally military procures only the amount required to life fire exercises, but for instance Ukraine uses number of AT4's that is US yearly production rate... in a day and you cant just whip the production into warmode just like that. Its same for Russia. They thought it would be easy walk in the park to just roll in, so no major preparations were made before hand even just for the secrecy alone, hence why troops didnt even know they left the Russian soil.
So Russia invaded bit unprepared due secrecy and now is trouble finding ideally suited components to keep the production of weapons going to resupply ones used, while they really cant take everything from their reserves from other area and general unallocated supplies have already been used, so those troops on rest of the boarder can manage if anyone else things this is good opportunity to come knocking Russian boarder with tanks and air support. Its similar issue to any other country, though many have increased their production capacity from total peace time to preparing for war level.
In the end its all about how many men each has. Russia has far more men and lots of material even with limited production so Russia will win in attrition. Ukraine is getting countless billions in war aid from the west, but large part of that gets lost in corruption and even with foreign volunteers and weapons they will run out of men eventually, probably with in two years if this rate keeps going. NATO countries could send troops but that point it becomes WW3 and not beneficial to anyone. Best possible result is to sue for peace, so Ukraine gets most of their land back, while Russia gets to keep the blacksea ports. Faster this cluster fuck stops, faster the world economy can start healing.... but its not like that happens when same group who kicked off the proxy war in Ukraine also makes killer profits from it and its only time when next war kicks in.. ou right they started the gaza conflict hot again, so thats next one to increase fuel prices while pushing climate crisis bullshit to keep everything expensive and pushing their agenda to force populous into mega cities where we have even less freedoms and more burdens.
The reality is that you always expect to lose so many tanks a day, soldiers a day, etc. It is sad, but it is also true. People are so impressed by the number of tanks the USA and USSR built in WW2, but rarely does anyone discuss how many were still running at the end of the war. My understanding is that on the eastern front both Wehrmacht and Red Army constantly put tank chassis on trains, sent them back, refitted them, and returned them to the front. Some tanks must have been put out of action multiple times. Think, if there are unacceptable losses that implies there are acceptable losses.
I would think a better situation is to have anti-aircraft vehicles accompanying the others for detection and countermeasures. Better yet control of the skies, but Ukraine does not have that.
Not trying to defeat Russia in a land war is also a good way of avoiding high tank losses
@@TheCrapOnYourStrapOnthen how should they defend themselves?
@@TheCrapOnYourStrapOn Seems to me that it's Russia that's having higher tank losses by far.
@@thurbine2411ever heard of this thing called negotiation?
@@IamOutOfNamesif you factor in how many tanks both sides deploy then that’s wrong
Great video. Good format as a straight to the point interview. Plenty of new content.
These videos are great. A tank vs drone video in this same style would be a good addition
all war thunder players paying close attention to this video
Yeah, I'm an experienced tanker who made it to top-tier Germany on warthunder as my credentials. Helicopters are indeed the worst, and the SU25s are almost as bad. However, these days, those are just the side show compared to fpv quads operating in theater in the real world.
I think increasing prevalence of active defence systems especially Hard-kill ones might led to a bit of resurgence of heavy armoured vehicles.
"Resurgence" implies that they went away in the first place. Armchair tacticians have been saying the tank is obsolete for decades, but the one thing that Ukraine has desperately requested over and over is more tanks.
@@panzermk8 No, they are requesting artillery shells. The tank is a dead fish.
Will be watching later as i have no time right now but its mostly about terrain use and combined arms.
However i think that for 2024 that is simply not enough, modern armies simply have no peer on peer land warfare experinece and are still relying on 1980s tactis.
All tanks should have multiple active protection systems including detection of incomign threats, jamming, and hard kill systems, similar logic to modern combat aircraft, armor should be there to defeat "dumb ammo" and HE shells.
INTERESTING!
Tobias tells us how the helicopter threat was most serious and training was crucial. During his time in service drones were not a thing. I wonder what Tobias thinks the training in case of drones is currently.
basicly a more maneuverable version of ATGM but in most cases easier to jam and they dont carry payloads that are comparable (meaning most FPV Drones carry a RPG-7VL or VN warhead, wich is only capable of penetrating around 500mm RHAe, so unless you get hit on the top or a vulnerable rear area, they wont do much against your base armor -> modern ATGM have around 1000-1300mm RHAe Penetration and as we have seen with the Leo2A6 in Ukraine, they struggle to do damage to a leo2A6 forward turred side)
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 ''so unless you get hit on the top or a vulnerable rear area'' Bingo Einstein
@@joek600 something you can prevent by Cage Armor and Screens.
And also Active Protection Systems.
Jamming doesn’t always stop the drone if they include a basic image-based guidance or just have it maintain flight direction upon being jammed. Also you don’t need to penetrate a tanks armor to kill it, just break it’s tracks and call in artillery, or sensors and it’s operationally useless. Those tend to be rather vulnerable
17:10 I really hope nato will invest in Laserwarning recivers more
or similar system that might just give the first guy that is being targeted to alert everyone early and maybe even do something
its a cheap system that can be added to any vehicle and I am suprised that it isnt Standard equipment on MBTs and IFVs
ATGM operators have been trained to not put the laser on target until about 2-3 seconds out, basically, even if you get a warning for getting lased, by then it's too late. Anti tank weapons today are simply superior than tank protection, it's is what it is
@@bingbong6127 APS is superior to ATGMs, but not all tanks have APS yet.
You would think that each tank would have a drone attached to scout out a possible path or to see infantry movements in the area? Could someone in the tank have communication with it and if he had another immediate duty the drone could go autonimous to maintain a set distance to the tank? It would be nice if it had radio contact to warn of aircraft in the area, if possible.Communications is key.
The next-gen German tank prototype is designed to have a drone section in every tank
Gotta be careful with that too tho, drone controllers emit frequencies that the enemy can pick up and use to target the vehicle
For those not aware of it, another tankers view of the use of missiles, ATGM.
ruclips.net/video/Mv85yPV57Ag/видео.html
Though it's perhaps more generalised, still more info.
As for the final point, well, yeah. If the point of an ambush is not to be seen, detected before?
I wonder why tank-fired anti-air missiles aren't common. I'd think that something like a 10 km range missile that could track a helicopter (or possibly a larger drone) would be extremely useful, even if it only has a rudimentary guidance system.
I think perhaps one tool that might prove useful is lasers? Iirc the US armed forces have the tech for lasers, not sure about mass production, those could be used against drones perhaps
Without watching the video, lemme guess...
Don't be detected in the first place
Yep the whole protection "onion".
This type of thing: preview.redd.it/khd2f6hf4ry71.png?auto=webp&s=c0264474130b16cba867517675052cefa9244b84
When you're invading that's pretty hard to do 😢
Or better: Don’t be there.
@@shaider1982 Well I mentioned the "protection onion" is a different response.
azunyan pfp 🥺
10:13. So tanks or their escorting infantry need an anti-aircraft missile with a 10km range? Or infantry or drones with anti-helicopter capability operating in front of the tanks.
How to avoid lancet or atgm please
As a saying we have goes ''the one who is out of the dance, knows many songs''
You will not get hit from atgm, because you will be destroyed by fpv drone.
western globalists have been used to going up against farmers/goat herders in the countries that they have decided to invade in the last 40 years. the awakening must only be described as 'RUDE' (fun fact: they even lost to the farmers/goat herders)
Drones are dangerous but overhyped. They are good ways for providing better situational awareness and increasing the lethality of the battlefield for a low cost but they are not better at killing tanks than ATGMs are.
@@herptek you probably didn't follow the recent war, otherwise you would know that fpv on Arduino with 5kg of thermobaric explosive is enough to destroy or disable any tank. It's main weapon at war against vehicles and infantry for last year. And yeah, maybe atgm is better when you need to hit once, but in real war it's about quantity and the price, Lockheed Martin will never be available produce enough atgms for real war at reasonable price, war is math.
@@evabraun8 I have been following the war closely enough to know that much of the drone hype is hot air. Tanks, artillery, helicopters, ATGMs, even infantry and just about everything else that cost anything have been said to be obsolete because there are drones out there now, but nevertheless the old ways re-impose themselves time and time again.
Drones are also easily and cheaply jammed and it is easy to develop other technical countermeasures against them.
RAD!
Tanks are needed, but definitely overated in importance. Tanks are one of the essentials - not the Essential.
Let me just rename this video... and answer the question it asks:
"Tanktics: How to not get hit by ATGMs?"
Stay in the motor pool.
i dont know why germans havent developed any atgm type of ammunition for their leopards, even if it does little effect if being outranged, i wouldnt imagine any helicopter would stay at their position if they'd hear a laser warning coming from a tanks position while they see a atgm flying towards them
18:25 this is exactly what im talking about, russians are being trained to shoot down helos with their 9M119M 😭
Tank on Tank engagement is still rare in this conflict. So is spotting and hitting helicopter
Some western tank crews are taught to fire sabot (APFSDS) rounds at hovering helicopters. They travel at Mach 5+ compared to most ATGM's which are subsonic. If the helicopter is within 3km then it stands a good chance of getting hit before the missile it fired arrives.
The biggest problem is detecting the helicopter and maintaining a target lock on it with an optical sight. You can hit a hovering helicopter with an ATGM (the Ukrainian's have done it on video using Stugna-P) but they had the element of surprise and were firing from a concealed position.
I doubt the viability of hitting a helicopter with a barrel launched ATGM unless the helicopter is completely unaware it is near the enemy. The flight time of most ATGM's to a distant target is more than ten seconds and an alerted helicopter can easily move away.
I think a future option could be borrowing from a current U.S Army project. It is developing a anti-aircraft/anti-ballistic missile projectile/missile that can be launched from a 155mm artillery piece. The projectile has an onboard seeker and a ramjet engine built into its base. The 155mm propellant charge accelerates the projectile to the point that a ramjet sustainer motor can ignite and give the guided projectile an extended range and terminal stage manoeuvrability.
So what I am proposing is not a ATGM but a 120mm barrel launched ramjet powered surface to air missile probably fitted with lock-on after launch wideband IR seeker of the type used in the AIM-9X Sidewinder.
idk smoke (if they are less advanced) aps, jamming.....
Once upon a time I was walking down a forest path when suddenly 3 low flying helicopters appeared. I didn't notice them until they were within 300m.
Probably stealthy shovelcopter. * with 2 instead of only 1 washing machine chips for better calculation of shovel missiles.
The good old swiss cheese model, three layers with 50% protection can always defeat one with 98% protection.
well said
87.5% > 98% ?
Small thing: title isn't a question, so mustn't have a question mark.
Javelin goes zooooom
RL Warno tips? 👀 👀
That recent Armor nerf was so uncalled for...
First of all, you need to know there is an ATGM coming your way. Which is possible in case it uses laser guidance and you have laser warning receiver. And even then, do you have time to react? Yes, there is a video from Syria where ISIS sets up a TOW launcher, turns on the laser and then drop everything and run seconds before their position is blown; T-90 received warning and turned its gun towards the source. But even that is not a guarantee.
An Israeli column was caught in some conflict in a narrow space (gorge, I think) and got decimated by ATGMs and some "experts" say none of them used smoke discharges... Sure, it would help against ATGMs, but it works both ways; they couldn't see anything and they would ram each other...
As for other types of guidance (like SACLOS), there is no warning unless you see the launch. Yes, smb else might warn you, but you lose valuable seconds to receive the warning and react...
Overall, the best way of not being hit by an ATGM is not to be fired upon by one... Only tank armor and ERA can save you, but even that is not a guarantee today.
The TOW does not use laser guidance. It is optically tracked. There is a small IR beacon on the tail of the missile. The daysight transmits the difference between the where the missile is and where the sight is pointed to the missile guidance set. The MGS corrects missile flight. No lasers are involved.
Why does NATO not use similar systems like Tor or Pantsir since 1980's? Last such system was franco/german Croatle, but it is quite dated now.
because they have no capability to create such systems
I don’t think they know how. Russia has trained moving brigades of s400 with two Pantsir for years now
NATO doctrine relies purely upon air dominance they have to basically draft a new doctrine build new systems and they’ll still be behind in tech
@@95valero NATO does have the capabilities to build similar systems if they wanted to, but there is no reason for it. Russia is losing Tor and Pantsir systems in Ukraine right now, which proves that these systems are useless anyway.
@@AquaNomad34 *NATO does have the capabilities to build similar systems*
you're right. Just during Jan 2024, Russia produced more shells 152 mm than ALL NATO countries produced 155 mm combine during 2023..
@@AquaNomad34
*Russia is losing Tor and Pantsir systems in Ukraine right now*
Could you tell me where soviet, american, german, swedish, italian and other systems?,,
Cabut lari secepat yang anda boleh 😅
You know when a tank colin gets pined down for exsample in a mind field or on a cliff face, or in urban setting and the lead and rear tank is shot,
What could the tank column do?
And you might notice im no longer spamming my list of ideas.....
Deploy smoke and move into safety
@@yarnickgoovaerts but your only 2 ways to move have been blocked? Mabey you could swerve each tank to a side and mabey get a 2 in a row in the path in some of these situations,
But thanks for replying and useing your brain
Push the knocked out vehicles out of the way?
@@chrisblack6258 anything else other then that or return fire you can think of?
@@theromanorder well, crews bail out and move on foot would hurt them much
Shouldn't you be worrying about drones like the Lancet not missiles?
How will modern tank's cope with AGI armed Drones?
It seems you guys need to make another video for Abrams like "how to not get hit by a fpv drone"...
Get your drones up...
We already got the answer, you build a house on top of the tank. That's how you don't get hit.
blyatmobile
How about Russian bathtub armour?
if it works, it works
The Leopard 2A4 is considered vulnerable to ATGMs due to the square turret shape and hydraulic turret drive and poor visibility and protection of main sight
Why would the visibility be poor? Compared to what?
*Why would the old turret shape be inferior, considering it has a considerably smaller profile than i.e. Abrams or Challenger?
the Leopard 2 was put forth as a 'Wünderwaffe' in Ukraine by the emotional western 'media'. turns out, the tank burned just as well as everyone else. EMOTIONAL DAMAGE. that being said: all the other western tanks have had a rude awakening going up against competent adversaries (not the farmers/goat herders that NATO decided to invade)
@@JK-dv3qe Data from Ukraine suggests that at least the more modern variants are quite survivable. Far more so than legacy Soviet or modernized Russian T-series tanks. Doesn’t mean they‘re invincible, but superior at keeping the crewmen alive.
@@RichelieuUnlimited so this means that ukieland is ' winning'? like our western teenage girl media is telling us?
@@RichelieuUnlimited ach so! those crewmembers will be taken out a later date most likely (when they are fed into the trecnhes as 'infantry' trying to 'hold the line' for western globalist old guys)
Simple: don’t be anywhere near anything war related
don't be near anything 'hyped' up by western teenage girl emotional 'media' 👍
Throw some sugar in the reservoir, call in an unknown malfunction, make sure to look really sad that you cant fight
"Drive backwards in zig-zag"... Yeah, good luck with that.
Moving them from battlefield 😅
Avoid being hit
*don't get in a tank*
Arthur C Clarke predicted this stuff in his book 20 July 2019, in 1986 (with quite good timing, but in a NATO-WP scenario).
So as an antitank missile man your zigzag tactic will do nothing. The smoke from the tanks isn’t enough either. It’s not enough smoke to conceal a massive tank and it takes way too long to deploy. I’ve also not seen anyone ever detect and react to a atgm … ever. The only way you can survive is some kind of reactive armor that shoots the weapon down
My thinking too.
He didnt explain how to defend a coordinated shovel attack by Shovelty-5 Tanks, Shovel-Drone Swarms, Shovel-Mines, HE Shovels.
I'd rather have four Wiesels then one Leopard 2.
Just dodge bro
Why haven't fast moving, lightly armed land based hovercraft being developed and used to transport troops and equipment en-mass across the mine fields to undermine defensive trench-line fortification and facilitate maneuver warfare of heavier equipment?
You can probably mess a hovercraft up with something like those barb wire rolls or tank barriers. I think they need fairly flat ground also.
Because theres no equipment that can counter a Shovel with a washing machine chip. An anti aie shovel once burned so hot I saw it fom Switzerland. It hit the moon, the exit hole of the backsside of the moon is said to be so big, only a RU ballistic shovel "R-Shovel-9" could dig to close it.
@@Morkvonorkbut what does ground really mean these days with Russian Shovels around?
How would a hovercraft help with a minefield?
@@JoelGuelPad There is a Mythbusters episode where they drive over a selfmade minefield with a hovercraft. They tested if it would trigger the mines. They were pressure triggered mines and it worked. No mines exploded. Modern mines could have other trigger mechanisms anyway so I dont think it works.
Yea & remember strats from zeh book "Panzers vs Shovels" & then dont forget if...BOOOM MINE-SHOVEL sh.. we hit a...BOOM MINE-SHOVEL NR.2, LANCET-SHOVEL, "looks through telescopes, sees SHOVEL-DRONE-SWARM".
With today's surveillance technology, for a tank not to be seen would require something no less than a Star Trek cloaking device. And if the shoulder mounted ATGM won't get you then the Helo fired ATGM may. After that mines, and if you survive the minefield then FPV drones will come buzzing inn. If you're still there congrats, now you have artillery and planes dropping bombs right on top of you. There is two ways I see tanks headed. Super heavy tanks, maybe mechs. In the 300-500 ton range, maybe more. Or more likely cheap remote or autonomous drones in the 10-20 ton range that just spam the battlefield. With automated anti projectile systems to neutralize drones and some slower ATGM/artillery rounds. Possibly energy based.
500 ton tanks lol on what planet do you live dude 😂
@@AquaNomad34 The 797F caterpillar mining truck can carry 400 tons. Farming tractors had tracks long before tanks. And OG tanks were basically a caterpillar tractor with an armored carriage and a gun. I'm sure at the time some people also thought that a tank weighing in at 70 tons (weight of an Abrams tank) was outside the scope of possibility. The problem isn't one off, can it be done? But is it worth it? That's why I said small drone tanks are more likely. However it's also possible to jam those drones, making them useless. And so if you had to have an un jammable crewed vehicle that could breakthrough such defenses. It would need to have a lot of armor. And even using advanced materials the range is between 300-500 tons. If you want it to survive direct hits from something as big as 203mm artillery or 300mm rockets. If the survivability factor is 155mm artillery then 150-200 tons.
@@robertalaverdov8147 calm down dude, chill. You wasted your time writing that long wall of text comment for nothing.
Tanks are not mining trucks, you're talking about completely different topics lol
@@AquaNomad34 You're right Tanks aren't mining trucks, they're agricultural equipment. And you're also on the wrong end of youtube if you don't want a wall text explanation. That's what this channel is known for. If you want to be asinine go find a gaming channel or log into twitch.
Tanks need upgrading, AI counter Protection systems for Air targets, Humans soon get bored/🧠 tired Scanning for Air Threats, Human 🧠 Can't work 24/7 , humans are are are good for tactics, Machine intelligence for swift response to income threat response
I have to question the practicality of popping smoke, stopping, going into reverse and zig zagging.
If the tank is cruising forwards at 40 kph you aren't going to be able to brake into a full stop and reverse fast enough to get a meaningful amount of deflection with 6-7 seconds.
It is also entirely unusable from a tank in a mechanized column or mine ridden area.
It seems to only be useful for a slow crawl or stationary tank.
1. a tank probably wont be cruising at 40, i imagine creeping forward at 15 is more likely to maintain awareness and stealth
2. what do you mean about deflection? the point is to hide behind the smoke, also you can pop smoke while decelerating and still have it pop infront of you
Another point on why they probably don’t smoke much
Artillery and loitering drone beacon
Mines more mines and even more mines. Drones more drones and even more drones. There will need to be a lot of training manuals rewritten. As a German trainer said to a trainee Ukrainian. Just go around the mine field. In a real war as we have seen this advice is as useful as tits on a bull.
I really question the veracity of that story because I'm quite certain anyone that knew an ounce of military history can recall many contiguous lines of fortifications that you can't just bypass. Bypassing them is your first option but it's not always available. It is why breaching operations is practiced in NATO armies. And while probing for enemy weaknesses is useful, when launching the main assault, manuals recommend decisiveness and commitment instead of wasting resources attacking on a broad front hoping to find a weakness. NATO militaries are under no illusion that they might run into a wall, and they need to breakthrough. It just might be a remark by a single individual out of context, but severely doubt that is the best advice that could be provided.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 your in for a big shock.......
@@neurofiedyamato8763it’s said by a Ukrainian soldier, so it must be true
Context, context, context, because if you're anything short of a brigade commander "just go around the minefield" IS your course of action. Breaching isn't something an infantryman or tanker or mech inf company does on their own initiative, that requires engineers to be brought up, support assets concentrated, and a lot of prep time, their job is to advance, find alternate routes of advance if blocked, and, if none exist, inform their superiors so that new orders can be given or a solution drawn from higher echelon assets.
I think Ukraine is a special case and the "drive around" part still applies - if Ukraine can attack into Russia and drive around the minefield.
The best way to avoid missiles is to stay out of what is left of Ukraine.
Best way to avoid getting hit with an ATGM is: don't drive a T-72 invading Ukraine.
this means that the ukies are winning? right? right?.........
Or a T-80, or a T-64, or any Russian tank/armored vehicle for that matter.
@@stewm1267Well to be fair any tanks in general. It's literally in the word "anti-tank"...
t64bv ukranian tank@@stewm1267
@@stewm1267debil
Don't be in a vehicle ;)
Don't be in a western vehicle (that have only gone up against farmers/goat herders in the past)
the best way to avoid getting hit is not to go to war, its got a 100% survival rate
Wrong on both accounts. One, life is a finite and terminal condition and in the end everyone dies, so that's a zero percent survival rate. Two, not going to war takes at least two parties and you cannot always control the other party.
Don't get involved in war ?
That's a rather stupid remark once you realize that wars involve at least two parties and the other party can decide to involve you in their war. Really. Don't be stupid.
Best tactic, stay in your own country and dont invade your neighbour...works every time
Screw ATGMs, defense the silly little FPV drones that have outdated RPG warheads that I thought tanks could laugh off like mosquito stings... but can't. Is this misdirection, because the ATGMs have warheads way larger and more effective than 1950s RPGs... but for some reason tanks are being eliminated from all sides, (all NATO tanks and all Russian tanks) on the battlefield. Not to mention defeating every "active defense" systems of all sides too. Wtf?
In defense of one Russian tank the t80bvm I can show you videos of them shrugging fpv hits
That extra bit of top armor seems to help Abrams and Leopard have as little as 40mm on top
@@off6848 I hope your right, cause all I see is MBTs getting creamed by little bullshite RPG strikes in various military summary channels
The problem with "it's about the training of the crew" attitude is as if they're talking about the discipline and drill of the infantry in 1860s when the commanders were still applying Napoleonic tactics, not realizing against new technology those were all obsolete. Today Western understanding is still limited to 1970s since they haven't fought a serious peer to peer war for over half a century. Surveillance, targeting and munition far surpassed all those. The reality is that all thinking revolves around bombing everything from air and advancing. When the air component gets taken out, there isn't a self-sufficient ground doctrine right now. We're witnessing that in real-time by the clueless advice from NATO-trained commanders. People have forgot that it took millions of infantry charging across barbed wires getting cut down for commanders to finally adapt and update their formulas. Current commanders are as ignorant as those back in 1914, they're half a century behind the tech employed on the battlefield.
I think it’s the sunk cost fallacy at this point
Sucks to know a random behind a keyboard knows more than a military lifer
I’d trust proper military tactics created by professional strategists rather than an online comment 😅
@@boblol691 They always need such people in the millions to experiment with.
@@boblol691 Thats on you. NATO commanders steady look like clowns this whole conflict.
I could link hundreds of predictions made by generals and col.'s that have been astonishingly stupid and wrong and it seemed everyone knew it but them.
There's even a CIA war institute channel that was pushing the idea that Ukraines counter offensive was a success and that all they need is more tanks and ATACAMS
Pure lunacy what don't think understand about not having air supremacy a kid who plays Red Alert 2 could've told you it would be a failure. They continue believing in wunderwaffe and pushing nonsense.
Maybe they don't actually believe it and its all a psyop but either way its a bad look
the "expert" has actually never been shoot at by a real ATGM, all he says is just a theory...you need to interview a real Ukraine tank crew who has been lucky enough to survive ATGM hit.
This might sound crazy, but the best way to keep your tanks from getting blown up is by not invading a sovereign Nation. I know it's wild, right?
Or defending a non allied nation
That is crazy because the defending sovereign nation also has tanks that can be blown up by an invading forces ATGMs. 🙄
Sorry, guys, I hear a lot of stupid stuff here. In a modern battelfield MBTs and IFV just need activ protection systems like trophy. Otherwise they will be scrap matel very soon. Its as simple as that.
ruclips.net/video/dXcqdB8i_c4/видео.html
HOT TIP: don't think that your 'results' fighting goat herders/farmers (no disrespect towards them) in far-away lands will translate to 'similar' success when you go up against near-peer opponents. (even if your emotional teenage girl 'media' tells you otherwise)
Wow you're all over the comments here. Moar potatoes for you!
@@keepyourbilsteinsso are you lol you guys are cute together
@@EvilSmonker kiss kiss. I'll top you and have you begging for more.
russian tanks toss their turrets really far. Whats up with that?
@@KeckegenkaiChallenger holds the record for
70% of tanks are destroyed by FPV drones now. So unfortunately it's a bit of of date.