Comments by "hedgehog3180" (@hedgehog3180) on "How Russian Tanks Are Being Destroyed" video.

The fact that Russia isn't sending in their best tanks really only suggests that said tanks aren't actually ready to fight yet or that Russia simply can't afford them. Like obviously the T-14 is completely off the table but it's also weird that we haven't seen any never T-90 and T-80 variants like the T-90MS which on paper should be perfect for this environment, it comes equipped with the Afgansky hard kill APS which should be perfect against the munitions being used by Ukraine. But the newest we've seen is the T-90A and that's really quite telling, there's really only a few possible explanation for that and it's the cost, or the leadership thinks this war is too dangerous to send them in or they don't trust their capabilities and they have perhaps been significantly overstated. Really all of these are possible given that we've seen every single thing be true, the Russians clearly are having trouble affording this war, it has also been incredibly deadly for Russia, and we've also seen a lot of Russian equipment perform significantly below expectations. There's also other equipment that's strangely absent like the urban fighting modification of the T-72 called the Terminator. That again should be perfect for this war because it's literally made for this type of urban combat scenario and yet we haven't seen a single one which is weird.
4
Visit Ukraine in the spring to watch the T-72s popping!
4
@Работаем, брат! Usually tip toeing doesn't involve losing 15000 men and having just as many wounded but idk if that means something different in Russia. Maybe there it's an expression for failing to make any progress and then getting shot while you shit yourself.
4
If you're just talking about how would a western tank stand up if you fired an ATGM at it the current answer is not very good unless it's Isreali because Merkava Mk 4s have Trophy APS. However new upgrades for current tanks are introducing hard kill APS, the M1A2C will have Trophy APS and there are also projects underway to introduce APS to other western tanks. Hard kill APS should be a very effective defense against ATGMs and unless they carry some type of EW, which to this day no ATGMs do, it should be a total defense against them. Also with that being said NATO tanks tend to be designed in much safer ways and so are not as likely to go completely boom if an ATGM does hit them. It might still be a kill but due to features like blow out panels and very robust fire suppression systems and other forms of safety it's very likely that most of the crew could survive and evacuate. A top attack ATGM would kill the tank but not the crew and that's the most important part. If you're asking how they'd stand up in a war the answer is that western doctrine would not allow the tank to get into range of an ATGM, and neither should Russian doctrine but they aren't following their own doctrine. Tanks always fight with infantry support because infantry borne AT weapons have existed since before WWII and as a result you'd have the infantry go in before the tank to clear out any potential hiding spots. The tanks would then sit back being able to provide fire support to the infantry but being out of the range of ATGMs since modern tanks can easily fire at up to 4 kms. At the same time extensive use of surveillance drones, artillery support and air support would mean that enemy strong points could be flushed out and destroyed before the tank ever came close to them, and it's very easy to spot someone with an ATGM on a drone. American Armored units for example often have attack helicopters attached to them which can directly engage ATGM crews and modern NATO artillery has a time on target that's down to 10 seconds in some cases, they can fire the instant they get the fire mission and will coordinate the fires so every shell lands at the same time. So essentially only in very extreme circumstances should it even be possible for a NATO tank to be fired on with an ATGM. The basic philosophy of NATO tank doctrine and design in this regard is called the safety onion and it goes like this "don't get seen, if you do get seen don't get shot at, if you do get shot at don't get hit, if you do get hit don't get penetrated, if you do get penetrated don't get killed." and it's according to this that crews are trained. NATO tank crews are going to be very well trained in making sure they never put the tank in a position where an ATGM even has a chance to fire on them, including by using the very advanced infrared cameras on NATO tanks to make sure they see the infantry before they're seen, and using concealment and camofluage to make sure the tank is hard to spot. At the same time NATO armored units very regularly train exactly these kinds of scenarios against their own infantry, giving the experience in facing the best trained and best equipped ATGM units in the world meaning that they should be more than well trained for any actual conflict. There is a reason why in the 21st century NATO has literally only lost armored vehicles to friendly fire. There has not been a single loss of a 4th gen NATO tank to enemy fire.
3
I imagine that the CIA HQ is just a constant party right now because literally every advanced piece of Russian equipment is being delivered right to their doorstep. Like those fuckers pulled off heist movie level bullshit to get their hands of this kind of stuff back in the day and now the Russians are just leaving it around for them.
2
Hello Fresh delivering ready made meal kits straight to your door to cook such delicious meals as "Flame broiled tank crew" with the new handy Javelin gas stove, or who can forget "Mashed and Deepfried VDV" with the Stinger. With Hello Fresh you can have your meal ready in under half an hour by using our innovative tools, why not try out the new "Starstruck Helicopter Crew" which is sure to be a classic!
2
@ArchOfficial 30 mm AP could penetrate a lot of modern tanks from the back. That's why y'know you're not fucking supposed to let a fucking APC drive up 10 meters behind your tanks, not only that but also your tankers shouldn't panic and pop smoke and run and should return fire against what is obviously not a tank.
2
@universaldouche I tried to explain that in my comment but I can expand on it a bit more. NATO trains very regularly in combined arms warfare, more so than any other force in the world. That means that NATO armored units are gonna be able to work together with an effectiveness that is really unmatched. At the same time NATO doctrine has for decades watched and developed tactics specifically for these kinds of situation. Yes there will be opposing infantry but NATO units would use combined arms warfare in order to drive them out. Effectively with a mix of other supporting assets like artillery, surveillance drones, CAS and so on, all of which NATO leads the world in. NATO tanks should also generally have the advantage in such a situation because unlike Russian tanks equipment like advanced infrared cameras are standard which means that the tankers will have greater situational awareness than the enemy and can very easily avoid detection. In the past this has actually resulted in situations where NATO tanks hid so well that they had to make the enemy aware of themselves. For example during the Yugoslavian war Danish tanks on peacekeeping missions often ran into the situation where Serbian fighters walked right up in front of their tank during the night and didn't see it, thinking that they were totally hidden meanwhile the crews inside of the tank were watching them the entire time on their night vision cameras. So because they were peacekeeping and not meant to open fire they'd have to turn on their floodlights just to make the Serbians aware that they had been seen, usually having a tank you didn't even know was there suddenly turn on a floodlight right in your face scared them off. All of this is essentially a question of, training, doctrine and equipment and in general while Russia has been fighting amateurishly and not following even WWII tank doctrine NATO does not suddenly forget it's doctrine during war. With the amount of training, equipment and actual experience that NATO armies have it should be very easy for them to avoid these situations, NATO has been doing city fighting successfully for decades now. And of course it's not just that, NATO also has the luxury of not having to face their own ATGMs since NATO ATGMs are also by far the most advanced. There's not really much comparable to the Javelin produced by anyone else and even the NLAW, Russia and China haven't been building top attack ATGMs for decades and they also don't give theirs infrared scopes.
2
Just because you're not actually keeping up with events doesn't mean that shit isn't happening. Like your own laziness and resulting ignorance is not an argument, just because you haven't seen something doesn't mean it hasn't happened. If you'd actually kept up you'd know that not only are there videos of Ukrainian tanks successfully engaging Russian ones, the Ukrainian General Staff has been literally releasing daily updates where they'll often say whenever an armored offensive happened. From those we know that most of their tanks are in the Donbass region and Ukraine has taken very few loses, almost entirely among their old T-64s. And as the other guy mentioned Ukraine has actually made a net gain of tanks though obviously a newly captured tank can't just instantly be put back into service. Also they have not taken significant losses to Russian air forces because the Russian air force appears to actually be incapable of conducting such missions, I mean for one they don't have any precision guided weapons that you need to attack armored forces and the Ukrainian air defense network is kinda shredding them to pieces.
2
A lot of analysts agree that either Putin has become surrounded by yes men or the entire Russian general staff is just flat out incompetent and didn't realize all the issues of this war. I mean fuck I didn't think they'd invade because it looked like such a stupid and insane idea and then they did it. This entire war has just been me repeatedly having the Russians break even my lowest expectations.
2
@thickboi4304 It also doesn't work against RPGs though.
1
@daniels0376 Yeah but they aren't being absolute idiots about how to use them, the Ukrainians seem to actually follow their own doctrine and like not do dumb shit like drive tanks into cities with no infantry support or have the infantry just run away when a fire fight starts.
1
@NeuroScientician The kind of temperature ranges that actually happen on Earth should have literally no impact on how fast ERA detonates, like there's no explosive which has significant differences in detonation time based on temperatures that aren't like 0K. I have no idea where you got that from because it's chemical nonsense to say it.
1
@JagdgeschwaderX Do you like not know how to read or is there some other reason you believe that military analysts are predicting Russia's imminent victory? Because they definitely haven't written that since I've been keeping up with them since the beginning of the war. More so it has been a constant wave of disbelief at how incompetent Russia has been.
1
@thickboi4304 Well no the T-72B3 is a 2014 version and there's even some that received a further upgrade package in 2016. These are the most modern tanks of the Russian army.
1
@gleb3460 Which Ukrainian tanks are the Russian destroying? Because so far the confirmed losses are 97, which is less than the tanks Ukraine is confirmed to have captured. Actually a few Ukrainian losses seem to be of tanks they had captured from Russia.
1
@praneel4741 Ukraine has already pushed Russia back in some areas in Donbass and are at the gates of Kherson I don't think that "taking" as you call it with your shitty English is gonna happen. I mean Russia according to themselves can't even defend their airspace against two shitty old helicopters from the 80s, I don't think they really know how to fight a war.
1
They literally didn't in Crimea what are you even talking about, like not even Russian state propaganda claimed there was an armed conflict over it.
1
@NeuroScientician The proxy I use for both losses is essentially the vehicle loses x5. It's not perfect but throughout this war I've only been a little behind estimates from US intelligence on Russian losses. If we use this measure then currently Ukraine has taken about 4000 losses. It's obviously not perfect because we have less information about Ukrainian vehicle losses as well but it's not that far from expectations in a defensive war. This method nets us about 13000 for Russia which puts us close to a roughly 1:3 casualty ratio in favor of Ukraine. And that is actually basically what conventional wisdom would tell you to expect in a defensive war. US intelligence estimates right now are at about 15000 for Russian losses so this is probably very true to accurate, it at least gives us something to work from that makes sense. This of course is not counting civilian deaths which are probably in the thousands right now. Also the US probably won't actually ever reveal such a number mostly because it seems like Russia itself doesn't really have a very clear idea of it and so keeping this secret is actually important. While Russia can obviously use something similar to my method the issue isn't so much the general count but where the losses are, if the US released a count that is very close to the Russian number then they can extrapolate that they are probably mostly right about where those loses were taken.
1
@JagdgeschwaderX Dude at this rate Ukraine is gonna be in Moscow by this time next year. At that point the Russian army will announce that it was never their intention to hold Moscow and now that the Ukrainian army has been destroyed they can start their real goal of reconquering Volgograd.
1
Oh man and I bet you have a ton of video evidence of this right?
1
You can't laser guide artillery but also they likely aren't since you don't really need to with modern fire control. But I mean maybe NATO is gonna give them some Paladins with GPS guided rounds just to really kick in the Russians.
1
Ah yes the "non western side of the story" y'know the one that repeatedly contradicts observed reality. Like dude you a reaching so hard that you are fucking trying to make people fleeing a genocidal war machine suspect. I hope you are paid well to say this.
1
The T-90 was based on the same chasis as the T-72 but had significant upgrades to it's engine, turret armor and scheme, it has a basically completely different turret, and also had many upgrades to the sensor package. IR cameras are fairly common on T-90s but still very rare on T-72s.
1
I feel like this either ends with Putin's overthrow or Russia collapsing, unless Putin finally realizes just how much he fucked up but dictators don't tend to admit to mistakes.
1
@ArchOfficial Yeah I mentioned that but the damning part is that the T-90MS was supposed to be a cheaper upgrade to act as a stop gap until the T-14 could be mass produced. Not being able to send that in is not a good sign.
1
It's funny how you guys have been saying that Ukraine is gonna collapse any day now for a month as the Russian army continues to take devastating loses and has actually fucking retreated on an entire front.
1
@jimcameron9848 In general it's actually incredibly easy to repair rail lines during war time. That's why we've for example seen Ukrainians target fuel trains, because while a rail is important to repair a destroyed train can take weeks to remove. But a cut rail line can be repaired in as little as an hour so it's not much of a threat.
1