I could see them maybe having utility for entrenched positions where the damn thing is buried in to ground and exists as a fixed gun emplacement. Maybe from within its own concrete bunker. This could work to guard the approaches of Crimea where any Ukrainian push would have to follow a predictable and narrow route.
If they actually intend to use them as a maneuver unit then lol, good luck.
The problem is if the Ukranian’s get to where they can see the approaches to Crimea, then anybody stationed on Crimea is already fucked as their food and water supply has been severed.
The problem is if the Ukranian’s get to where they can see the approaches to Crimea, then anybody stationed on Crimea is already fucked as their food and water supply has been severed.
Maybe. Realistically though the only way Ukraine gets into Crimea is if they somehow manage to blast so fast through the Russian Army they don't have time to rally a defense line. Russia would see every civilian in Crimea starve to death before they concede it in a siege scenario.
The Ukrainians are rigging buildings up with explosives like they would for demolition. They evacuate the people inside if there are any and then they rig it up with explosives. They wait fir the Russians to go inside and then blow it up. This means the building comes crashing down on them. This is pretty crazy. I have heard they have managed to get rid of a lot of Wagner soldiers this way.
Funny, this idea popped up in my mind a few times now, but I'm just some idiot, surprised they're actually doing it. Thing is, all of that is going to be ruined in the fighting later anyway, might as well spare your solders and just cut to the chase so to speak.
Though when I say I had an idea like this, I was thinking more like Beirut explosion, but Bakhmut. Letting wagnings move in after carefully retreating, making them think they won. Meanwhile there's an ungodly amount of fertilizer buried underneath the town, whatever remains of it. Boom.
Funny, this idea popped up in my mind a few times now, but I'm just some idiot, surprised they're actually doing it. Thing is, all of that is going to be ruined in the fighting later anyway, might as well spare your solders and just cut to the chase so to speak.
Though when I say I had an idea like this, I was thinking more like Beirut explosion, but Bakhmut. Letting wagnings move in after carefully retreating, making them think they won. Meanwhile there's an ungodly amount of fertilizer buried underneath the town, whatever remains of it. Boom.
The British kind of did this in WW1. During the trench warfare they brought in sappers who dug 19 long mine tunnels underneath the German Lines outside Messines. They then stuffed the tunnels with every ounce of explosives they could find. Several thousand tons. When they lit it off 10,000 German Troops died almost instantly. It's a Lake today
And yes I know the Dark channels are hot garbage but it was the shortest video I could find.
As far as "blow up the building with the enemy in or near it", yes, basically.
That being said, they are probably also demo'ing a few behind the first line of contact, as buildings can get in the way of overlapping fields of fire, and give the enemy cover on their way in. Removing a few select buildings also allows pre-planned firing positions to better support each other's blind spots.
The question becomes why would they feel the need to use T-55’s that way? Are they actually running low on artillery tubes or ammo? Because the T-55 is going to be a huge problem on the modern battlefield. Even the absolute oldest shit running around out there was still designed to at a minimum kill a T-55. If you’re using the T-55 for direct fire artillery rounds it’s great. if maybe you’re planning on stopping a Polish Cavalry charge? But Man Portable ATGM’s still out range the T-55‘s gun. Modern artillery and drones are shredding T-72’s from above. How long does anyone think a T-55 would last? Deploying T-55’s reeks more of “being seen to be doing something” rather than actually serving any practical or effective combat purpose.
From what I heard the Russians are running low on ammo for their artillery the barrels and the actual vehicles. People seem to forget about all that ammo the Ukrainians blew up with the HIMARS launchers last year. That really hurt the Russians. So much they are going to Iran and North Korea for ammo and supplies. Putin has asked China for help but so far China doesn't offer them much more than lip service. China won't give them any weapons or anything like that. Iran probably wants some Su-37's and Su-57's for their help. So, it's not like they are doing out of the kindness of their hearts. They expect something for anything they have given to Russia. Iran better be careful because the Russians might burn them. I heard there was some T-72's that were supposed to be sent to some third world country and Russia redirected them to Ukraine.
I think so. But it could be any building. From what I understand they are intentionally setting traps for the Russians. Bakhmut is basically useless. The Ukrainians are just using it to bleed the Russians out more. Bakhmut has no strategic value at all. If the Russians take it nothing will change. I know the vatniggers seem to think it's some big victory, but it wouldn't be. Kind of like how they made a big deal out of the Russians taking Chernobyl.
Funny, this idea popped up in my mind a few times now, but I'm just some idiot, surprised they're actually doing it. Thing is, all of that is going to be ruined in the fighting later anyway, might as well spare your solders and just cut to the chase so to speak.
Though when I say I had an idea like this, I was thinking more like Beirut explosion, but Bakhmut. Letting wagnings move in after carefully retreating, making them think they won. Meanwhile there's an ungodly amount of fertilizer buried underneath the town, whatever remains of it. Boom.
It will definitely kill some Russians. But the Russians will probably turn around and do it to the Ukrainians. The buildings offer cover in firefights. If everyone is scared to use the buildings because they might fall down on top of them, they will have to fight out in the open and it will just make things harder. It's already done. The Ukrainians are doing it.
All they do is rig the building up like a demolition team would for taking down an old building. They put explosives on the support points. You don't even need really big explosions. It's not the explosions that will kill the Russians. It's being crushed under the debris or laying under the debris till they bleed to death or some other slow horrible way to go. Imagine you have a side arm, and you can't even get to it so you can blow your brains out. If the Russians send rescue teams they could attack them.
Attacking properly-identified rescue teams who are searching for wounded hors de combat soldiers is probably against international law. See rules 25 and 109 and related practice, especially Ukraine's IHL manual. But the Russians probably wouldn't try to rescue anyone--they are dulce et decorum to a fault--so the question is purely theoretical.
Attacking properly-identified rescue teams who are searching for wounded hors de combat soldiers is probably against international law. See rules 25 and 109 and related practice, especially Ukraine's IHL manual. But the Russians probably wouldn't try to rescue anyone--they are dulce et decorum to a fault--so the question is purely theoretical.
For those who don't know, "Igor Ivanovich Strelkov" is Igor Girkin. Girkin may be a piece of shit, but for the last several months, the things he's been saying about the war and its failures and about leadership incompetence have been pretty much on point. And his connections have kept him out of prison for his criticisms. So far.
For those who don't know, "Igor Ivanovich Strelkov" is Igor Girkin. Girkin may be a piece of shit, but for the last several months, the things he's been saying about the war and its failures and about leadership incompetence have been pretty much on point. And his connections have kept him out of prison for his criticisms. So far.
I could see them maybe having utility for entrenched positions where the damn thing is buried in to ground and exists as a fixed gun emplacement. Maybe from within its own concrete bunker. This could work to guard the approaches of Crimea where any Ukrainian push would have to follow a predictable and narrow route.
If drones weren't a thing & it was 1960, then I could see T-55s kinda working as fixed gun emplacements; but they are & it's not, so they won't.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainians have had months to study & watch the Russian defensive lines, and likely have every bunker, pillbox, checkpoint, and buried T-55 already spotted. They've been building a huge stockpile of various drones (like the Switchblade we have at home) for coming assaults. There's not exactly a lot of concealment north of Sevastopol either, and the Russians have helpfully made their preparations visible from space.
When the time comes, we'll see storms of drones before an artillery barrage, targeting every strongpoint & piece of armor visible; suddenly the air will be filled with the hum of drones, and things will start exploding. And they likely won't have any advance warning, since even whole flights of drones won't be picked up by counter-battery or battlefield radars; especially given their general lack of specialized anti-drone detection capabilities.
Giving them the benefit of smarts, I figured they'd be used as mobile 2nd line reinforcements; to be held back in concealed areas out of range of drones, missiles, & short-range artillery, then sent in when Ukrainian forces have expended a bunch of ATGMs and drones during the initial assaults. The most maneuvering they'd be doing is driving straight ahead & going hull-down into unspotted, prepared positions. In that case I could see T-55s causing problems in some areas, but it won't take long before Ukrainians adapt their tactics & mitigate the threat. The Russians might surprise a few elements, but then they'll get isolated & murdered in their semi-mobile metal bunkers just the same.
I've also noticed that the Russians don't have any strategic depth to their units behind the line of contact, and they probably hope to do like they did with Kherson; pull the units in contact back to those defensive lines, and stop the Ukrainians there. But if the AFU breaks through anywhere (except near Bakhmut, Avdiivka, etc), Russia doesn't have much to slow them down except blocking troops, depleted units, mobiks who haven't been sent in yet, logistical troops, and artillery/AD brigades. Once breakthroughs start to happen, well....
ISW have release a new assesment report about the russian offensive:
snippet:
Putin’s demonstrative meetings with Teplinsky, Makarevich, and Lapin likely confirm another change in military command and possibly within the Kremlin’s inner circle. A Kremlin-affiliated milblogger observed that the Chief of the Russian General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov and Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu did not attend Putin’s meetings in occupied Ukraine.[9] The milblogger claimed that Teplinsky and Lapin – both of whom had reportedly been placed on a leave – returned to the Russian military command likely against the wishes of Gerasimov and Shoigu. Russian sources previously claimed that the Kremlin replaced Wagner-affiliated Teplinsky with Makarevich as the VDV commander on January 13, likely after the Russian MoD and Gerasimov regained Putin’s favor in the lead up of Russia’s unsuccessful winter-spring offensive operation in Donbas.
Russian President Vladimir Putin continued to portray himself as a wartime leader in anticipation of a planned Ukrainian counteroffensive during his visit to occupied Kherson and Luhansk oblasts. The Kremlin announced on April 18 that Putin visited the