I've seen some people complain about both sides using old ass weaponry, but I do kind of wonder about whether that old weaponry doesn't have some advantages in certain contexts.
- Mosin Nagant (mostly DPR forces)
While in urban warfare more modern weapons like the M4 would have a huge advantage over the Mosin Nagant, if you look at satellite images of Ukraine, there are a lot of massive farmers' fields with hedgerows around them.
Besides RPGs or a PK, anything firing that round got my immediate attention. My experience is limited to running a crew-served weapon on guntrucks in Iraq; when there's enough AKs & other small arms firing it all kind of blends together, and only when it's close did it demand special attention (it doesn't take long to figure out you're being shot
at), but hearing any full-power rifle rounds somewhere nearby always made me nervous.
The reason being is that AP is a lot more common outside of the US, and even an old Mosin loaded with that can punch through lightly armored vehicles or thick cover. And being on a crew-served system pretty much guarantees any 54R is going to be aimed at the gunner or soft part of the vehicle. Not until we got M1113s loaded with uparmor door & turret kits, did things like PKs (or whatever) stop immediately ruining our day. And as mechanic during normal business hours, I hated fixing the shit that got shot up by it.
- Maxim machine gun (mostly Ukraine)
This one is likely the most out of place on a modern battlefield, but on the flip side of that point, it's entirely expendable. A lot of the conscripts Ukraine is sending to the front have very little to no training and there's no assurance they won't just surrender as soon as they start taking fire.
No MG is expendable; and the crews designated to run them aren't going to be fresh conscripts or green volunteers, except for possibly the guy who humps the spare barrels and/or tripod/mount.
And even then, no section NCO is going to want a fumblefingered fuckass feeding their gun ammo, forgetting spare barrels, dropping T&E's, or just plain not knowing how to unfuck themselves.
While having little utility outside of guarding interior checkpoints or FOBs, as part of a layered defense, any old MG that runs & has ammo like the Maxim would still be invaluable as a training aid for "gifted" trainees & troops.
- PPSh 41 (militia on both sides)
This is one I think has the most use on a modern battlefield despite there being better (which means more expensive) alternatives. If we compare it to other open bolt weapons which are designed to be able to perform suppression within the context of a line squad like the more modern M249, no it's not nearly as good.
Ah, the slavic meme machine. The only reason I'd want one is if I was in a vehicle crew (more spacious than a T72) & wanted to be an individual. They're heavy & awkward, compared to any modern crewman's carbine or PDW. And then I'd only carry one if I had a ready supply of
good 7.62x25, and didn't have to carry any of it.
Edit: I've fired them in both calibers; 9mm was boring, but 7.62 Tokarev was
hilarious. If I was looking at being shoved into vicious room-to-room fighting, I wouldn't kick a 7.62 PPSH out of bed as a side piece. But I'd still rather carry something like a 249 (or something similar), sad as that is. Maybe it'd be different for doorkickers, but I dunno why something like a PDW or shotgun wouldn't be better.