|
Apparently the projectile was just going too drat fast to do anything other than punch a tiny hole, since there was almost nothing offering resistance.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Seriously loving this thread, thanks to everyone who has contributed thus far. I'm really interested in the differences between national infantry/armor/etc. doctrines. Can anyone please explain a few examples of various doctrines, and how they impacted combat/history? Any suggestions of internet articles I might read? [The time period isn't particularly important, but I was pretty impressed by that post (from way back) about how the Soviets basically viewed nukes as Artillery, size XL, rather than Ultimate Game Over.]
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 22:48
|
|
|
Here's that thread with the back and forth action on Iran and nukes/power, in case anyone is curious. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3208011&userid=64257 Take off the &userid=64257 for the whole thing. On the Abrams friendly fire thing, I would have figured the whole targeting system could paint friendlies all green and bad guys red, how fast can a Bradley get in the line of fire? I know really oversimplified but still.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Apparently the projectile was just going too drat fast to do anything other than punch a tiny hole, since there was almost nothing offering resistance. I dunno, I'm pretty sure a KE penetrator hitting a lightly armoured APC is gonna gently caress it up. It may go straight through, but there are the effects of the round, the pyrophoric effects of the DU spontaneously igniting, white hot spalling of the armour flying about the interior and eviscerating the crew comes to mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 22:59
|
|
|
Herv posted:On the Abrams friendly fire thing, I would have figured the whole targeting system could paint friendlies all green and bad guys red, how fast can a Bradley get in the line of fire? I know really oversimplified but still. Hahahaha. You figured wrong, especially for 1991. What gave you this impression? How reliable is any information we, the public, actually have about the Iranian military? They seem awfully opaque on equipment and force structure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:00
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Apparently the projectile was just going too drat fast to do anything other than punch a tiny hole, since there was almost nothing offering resistance. Are you referring to any specific situation? I'm pretty sure that the original writer didn't mean it in a literal sense. You most likely would notice if a high energy round fully penetrated your vehicle, it just wouldn't be as destructive as if it were HEAT (or if it penetrated a vehicle with thicker walls) - unless it hit ammo or a crew member/passenger.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:04
|
|
|
I'm referring to what Delivery McGee posted on the last page.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:10
|
|
|
I don't know the physics of it, but I imagine the shell has so much energy it punches straight through without spalling. IIRC something similar happened in the Pacific theater, where Shermans shot right through inferior japanese tanks without doing much damage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:12
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Hahahaha. You figured wrong, especially for 1991. What gave you this impression? Apparently this type of system was in F15's in 1991: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identification_friend_or_foe Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Abrams networked toward the start so that one tank could fire at another friendly tanks' target? Even an 8 bit mario brothers type of painting system seems to me not that over the top, but hey that's just my armchair computer guy guessing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:31
|
|
|
meatbag posted:I don't know the physics of it, but I imagine the shell has so much energy it punches straight through without spalling. IIRC something similar happened in the Pacific theater, where Shermans shot right through inferior japanese tanks without doing much damage. This isn't so much a function of the kinetic energy, but the thin armour that just doesn't produce much spalling inside when penetrated. Like, if you shoot a bullet through paper it's just going to rip, but if you should through a tree it will send some wooden splinters flying. So an APFSDS going through a BMP or Bradley is not going to be as destructive as if it went through a T-72. Another factor is the type of shells, many WW2 penetrators had explosive fillers and of course a HEAT shell is going to produce a lot more damage anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2011 23:41
|
|
Herv posted:On the Abrams friendly fire thing, I would have figured the whole targeting system could paint friendlies all green and bad guys red, how fast can a Bradley get in the line of fire? I know really oversimplified but still. No, the IFF is the gunner's/commander's knowledge of armor ID and their situational awareness. Such a system is even less realistic now because our allies use combloc vehicles. In either case, it would have to be some robust software to look at an object in thermal sights, filter out the noise in the image, and tell you what you're looking at while the target vehicle is hulldown or maneuvering or otherwise obscured. There was a system developed in response to the friendly fire incidents of the Gulf War where all friendly units receive a GPS transponder and a computer screen that plots their location and the location of all other friendly units in the AO. You can also plot/transmit useful information(such as bridges, mine fields, enemy units etc), navigate or send pseudo-emails to other vehicle commanders. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBCB2
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:18
|
|
|
What's the issue with Afghanistan? Currently, about 38,000 Taliban have died in the fighting. The vast majority of the fighters aren't hardcore Taliban but random 20-year olds whom have been brought up to "hate American" and earn some extra cash. My issue is wouldn't most people by not simply not want to join the Taliban after this many dying or is it really a cultural thing were you don't care about this life but the next? Is that manpower of the Taliban that significant?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:26
|
|
|
When your brain-washed mud-farming father got shipped off by the Taliban and shot by Americans, you would grow up to hate Americans, go off and get shot by them, and then your brothers would join up to get shot up as well. It's basically one big tragic chain fueled by ignorance and propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:37
|
|
|
You could alternatively ask yourself, why should they succumb to the central government rule enforced by foreign heathens? What does Karzai or Obama have to offer them? They already successfully fought off the Soviets, for them NATO is just another name for infidels. But mostly it's a matter of local issues. Most Taleban members come from the countryside, and in Afghanistan the country means small settlements in mountain valleys. They don't read Kabul Post or watch Al Jazeera. They react to local events, like if the army burns their poppy fields.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:43
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What's the issue with Afghanistan? This is just really quite offensively ignorant. The only cash crop in Afghanistan is the poppy, America dislikes them growing poppies because it is used to harvest opium. War on drugs and all that. Living in poverty while a foreign power stops them from selling what can feed their family makes people angry. Having friends and relatives killed while going about their daily business makes people angry. Having homes and property destroyed because some foreigners have moved into town and want sterile areas makes people angry. Being invaded by foreigners makes people angry. Fighting for the Taliban earns some money to feed your family, and a chance at revenge against the people who are making you angry. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Sep 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:53
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:When your brain-washed mud-farming father got shipped off by the Taliban and shot by Americans, you would grow up to hate Americans, go off and get shot by them, and then your brothers would join up to get shot up as well. It's basically one big tragic chain fueled by ignorance and propaganda. One big tragic chain of one brain-washed father getting shipped off by the Taliban and shot by a foreign brain-washed father. The second brain washed guys possible death is way more tragic because he's from the 1st world and very likely white.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 00:57
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:The only cash crop in Afghanistan is the poppy, America dislikes them growing poppies because it is used to harvest opium. War on drugs and all that. This requires the qualifier that prior to the 2001 invasion, the Taleban had actually agreed to put a stop on poppy production, and this was reflected in opium prices worldwide. But we must remember that the Taleban could enforce policies that Hamid Karzai or NATO never could. The primary reason behind this is the clergy, I think. I'm not saying that all the priests are Taleban sympathizers, but they probably were more at home when Mullah Omar was in charge. In contrast, nobody likes Hamid Karzai. Not even the western ambassadors in Kabul.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 01:02
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:The only cash crop in Afghanistan is the poppy, America dislikes them growing poppies because it is used to harvest opium. War on drugs and all that. They don't stop them from growing poppies/drugs for precisely this reason.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 01:04
|
|
|
Herv posted:Apparently this type of system was in F15's in 1991: Planes have IFF systems but vehicles do not. The most obvious reason for this is that planes do not have to deal with the terrain and other types of physical obscurement that vehicles do. What's more such a system still could not reliably paint foe vehicles unless they too were transmitting information to tell you who they were fighting for. All it could really offer is an identification of 'unknown'. quote:Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Abrams networked toward the start so that one tank could fire at another friendly tanks' target? Even an 8 bit mario brothers type of painting system seems to me not that over the top, but hey that's just my armchair computer guy guessing. The Abrams were not networked for target acquisition. The closest thing to that I can think of is the PLRS system, but that was for command and control at the unit level and had problems of its own that made it unsuitable for tactical situational awareness. Also, why would you want to obscure your view to the target with some pixel bullshit when you've already got to deal with the issues Veins mentioned?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 01:07
|
|
|
Hydrogen Oxide posted:They don't stop them from growing poppies/drugs for precisely this reason. They have in the past, and as I understand it they try to limit how much the farmers can sell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 01:16
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:This is just really quite offensively ignorant. It's just a little more complex than that. For one thing, Afghanistan is not ethnically homogenous and doesn't have a very strong history of central rule. They don't have any sort of democratic tradition and Karzai's government is a corrupt nepotistic mess. The police and army do not reflect the ethnic makeup of Afghanistan very well so you end up having Tajiks/Uzbekis enforcing laws, made by a central government that isn't viable, on Pashtuns in the south. Besides that, there isn't much poppy-eradication going on. You can walk up to a guard tower on many FOBs and look out at a sea of poppy fields. American forces are hesitant to act against poppy field for precisely the reasons you noted. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but poppy eradication is low on the list of things to do because it pisses them off. edit: Besides, all it takes is some economic analysis to realize that opium eradication is a failure from the get-go. Opium products are probably pretty loving price inelastic. Unless you can destroy a significant portion of the opium/heroin being grown, produced or stored in Afghanistan the Taliban is going to make as much or more money than if you just left it alone. Now, the flipside of this is the corrosive effect of openly flaunting the authority of the central government. Allowing farmers to grow something that the central government doesn't like and supports the operation of Taliban forces is bad for Kabul. The central government should give farmers 2 seasons to switch crops and then commence with sweeps through the Helmand River valley destroying all poppy farms. That is more of a question for people who have really researched the issue. The reasons people in remote mountain valleys fight are largely distinct from the reasons that Pashtuns in Helmand and Khandahar fight. Commanders have realized this and that's why you see US troops pulling out of some of the more remote mountain COPs. The guys that live in those valleys would fight us regardless so long as we're in those valleys. Their fight draws Pashtuns and foreign fighters into the area who ratchet up the attacks until you see COPs being overrun and so on. News flash: Afghanistan isn't solely composed of mountains. Rapey Joe Stalin posted:They have in the past, and as I understand it they try to limit how much the farmers can sell. I don't think, but don't honestly know, that they try and limit the amount of opium a farmer can sell. There are some guys in GIP who do know but I haven't seen them post in a while. I do know that the government has deemed it illegal to be in possession of opium>x, heroin>y and marijuana>z quantities. I would assume that this is an effort to curb the transport of drugs or to allow US/IROA forces to easily arrest drug traffickers. These drug traffickers tend to be low level dudes who don't know poo poo and aren't worth arresting. edit3: If any of you really want to get more than an inch-deep mile-wide assessment I would suggest you start reading on your own. http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/recent http://www.lineofdeparture.com/ vains fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Sep 13, 2011 |
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 01:19
|
|
|
Even if an AP shell goes through a APC's armor without much spall, there would still be a ton of shrapnel from the round itself that would spray all over. Plus, the overpressure from the impact would still be absolutely massive, if the round hit anywhere near the crew compartment everyone would be dead or incapacitated by it. I suppose it might be possible that a round could go through the engine compartment or something and the infantry in the back might not be immediately aware, but if a crew compartment or anything else gets penetrated everyone on the vehicle is going to be in a world of hurt. Also vehicles sort of have an IFF system, they're those slotted panels you see on the side of everything. bewbies fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Sep 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 04:06
|
|
bewbies posted:Even if an AP shell goes through a APC's armor without much spall, there would still be a ton of shrapnel from the round itself that would spray all over. Plus, the overpressure from the impact would still be absolutely massive, if the round hit anywhere near the crew compartment everyone would be dead or incapacitated by it. Yeah, I forgot about those. They're part of some upgrade that I forgot the name of and have only seen when I was doing some armor id program. The primary means is knowing armor ID and the commanders situational awareness.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 04:14
|
|
|
Most of the anti-narcotics campaign against Afghan drugs have involved efforts to confiscate it once it leaves the country rather than within Afghanistan, but this is straying into D&D territory and we really should go back to the military history side of things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Even if an AP shell goes through a APC's armor without much spall, there would still be a ton of shrapnel from the round itself that would spray all over. Plus, the overpressure from the impact would still be absolutely massive, if the round hit anywhere near the crew compartment everyone would be dead or incapacitated by it. On this subject I got a good account (with all the pitfalls that come with oral history) of a bus that got hit by an APFSDS round in the 2003 war. For reference, 2nd LAR Battalion had just pushed through An Nasiriyah and coiled as evening came on. During the night the battalion wound up in a firefight, and two large vehicles emerged from the town. After warning shots were fired one of the tanks that had been attached to the battalion shot the lead vehicle, a truck, which disintegrated in a powerful explosion. A bus was following it by a few hundred metres. Col. Eddie Ray posted:After that truck blew up I didn't hesitate to engage the bus ... I had a tank take a shot at it. The tank shot it. The round went clean through the middle of the vehicle. I saw a flash, but it didn't blow up. Then we could see dismounts getting out of this thing ... [in the morning] we went to that bus. That's where we could see how that tank round went right through the middle of the bus, and I mean literally went down the middle aisle of the bus. They had people still sitting in the bus with black smoke on their face. They were just pretty much frozen in place, didn't move. Most of them were alive. We only killed a couple of people with that shot. The weird part was they had bags, like trash bags full of money, Iraqi money, just full, in that bus. We collected the people that were pretty much sitting there dazed. Rodrigo Diaz fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Sep 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 12:24
|
|
|
How would you describe the outbreak of WW1? Comical? A complete and utter dogmatized officercorp?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 13:41
|
|
|
A severe case of keeeping up with the Joneses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 14:54
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:How would you describe the outbreak of WW1? Comical? A complete and utter dogmatized officercorp? A bunch of blokes getting into a fight at a pub. Said blokes are all Emperors and Statesmen of the Entente and Central Powers.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 15:09
|
|
|
A roll of the dice by a German Government which was aware that within two years it's only plan to win the next war would be rendered obselete and which needed a war to assert it's status as a great power.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 15:26
|
|
|
My question about military doctrines will probably end up being overlooked, but if anyone is curious about it, I've found an article that looks very promising: http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/House/House.asp#Chapter%20Two. Toward Combined Arms Warfare: A Survey of 20th-Century Tactics, Doctrine, and Organization by Captain Jonathan M. House, U.S. Army August 1984 From the article: [The author seeks to] trace some recurring themes or problems in the recent conduct of combined arms warfare in the British, French, German, Soviet, and United States armies. At various times, each of these armies has led the world in the development of tactics and doctrine. For the period since 1948, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) must be added to this list, because the Israeli experience has had a major influence on weapons and doctrine elsewhere. In particular, this paper will identify general trends in the development of tactical and organizational concepts for integrating the different arms and weapons systems at division level and below. This does not mean describing the thousands of minute changes that have occurred in divisional structure in these armies since the division became a fixed table of organization. Yet, the trends in terms of proportions of different arms and levels at which those arms were integrated can be illustrated with a limited number of line and block charts. Such trends should provide an historical framework and background for readers who are developing their own more detailed concepts of how to organize and employ the combined arms today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:This is just really quite offensively ignorant. How so? quote:The only cash crop in Afghanistan is the poppy, America dislikes them growing poppies because it is used to harvest opium. War on drugs and all that. Opium has, as far as I know, originally ignored by coalition forces.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 21:01
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:How so? Your question was literally "Why are these people fighting a foreign occupying army in their country? Are they brainwashed or something?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:How would you describe the outbreak of WW1? Comical? A complete and utter dogmatized officercorp? Alchenar posted:A roll of the dice by a German Government which was aware that within two years it's only plan to win the next war would be rendered obselete and which needed a war to assert it's status as a great power.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:04
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Your question was literally "Why are these people fighting a foreign occupying army in their country? Are they brainwashed or something?" Uh, no. My question was why are still continuing to fight when nearly 10 of them died for each single opposition solider. And the Taliban aren't exactly enjoyed even in their own Country. You know?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
IIRC it would go obsolete because Russia would have completed a reform of its armed forces.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Your question was literally "Why are these people fighting a foreign occupying army in their country? Are they brainwashed or something?" It's also difficult to even speak of the resistance fighters as a single unified force. It's a tangled mix of local tribes, criminal gangs, foreign jihadists and "native" Taliban. Some fight to drive out the occupiers, some because they are paid to fight, some because it is their holy duty to take the war to the infidels, some because they hate the Kabul government. As an aside, when my brother fought in Afghanistan last year he claims they ran into people up in the mountain villages who thought the ISAF soldiers where Soviets. They were simply so isolated that they didn't know (or care) that there was any difference between the two different invaders. DJ Dizzy posted:How would you describe the outbreak of WW1? Comical? A complete and utter dogmatized officercorp? An entire continent convincing themselves that those silly foreigners would fold after tasting some cold steel, since they were silly foreigners. Mr. Sunshine fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Sep 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
Ograbme posted:How would their plan go obsolete? The Russian rail network was not as advanced as that of Germany or France. German planning hinged on using the bulk of their army to knock France out of the war then re-deploying east to deal with the Russians. However, the Russians were modernizing their network at a fairly quick pace. I can't remember the exact year but I'm assuming it was by 1916 that the German general staff assumed that the Russians would be able to mobilize their forces quicker than they could knock France out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Hiridion posted:The Russian rail network was not as advanced as that of Germany or France. German planning hinged on using the bulk of their army to knock France out of the war then re-deploying east to deal with the Russians. However, the Russians were modernizing their network at a fairly quick pace. I can't remember the exact year but I'm assuming it was by 1916 that the German general staff assumed that the Russians would be able to mobilize their forces quicker than they could knock France out. Yup. Essentially the German Government had a choice between a war in 1914 that might be winnable and not being able to have a war. They chose to have a war in Europe. The two problems were a) The Russians still mobilised faster than expected and b) Britain entered the war when it had been assumed they would stay out. It's a popular notion that the war stated almost by accident as a network of treaties and alliances activated and by the time anyone realised what was happening it was too late, but that simply isn't true. Germany knew very well that it was provoking a European war when it gave Austria-Hungary the blank cheque and was banking on the calculation that it would win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2011 23:31
|
|