US advisor to the Ukrainian army says to just use non Western vehicles to detonate minefields.
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-russia-counteroffensive-t64-tanks-leopard-2-challenger-mines-1821617
>The older, less sophisticated tanks like the Soviet-era T-64 are "more expendable," Rice said, adding that Leopard and Abrams tanks will be more effective for exploiting the initiative if Ukraine is able to break through heavily mined territory.
Come on western tanks deserve the glory of killing vatniks
Why not just use drone controlled technicals to do the same job? Serious question
That seems like a good question. I don't understand why you'd waste armor unless they thought that a lighter vehicle wouldn't trigger an AT mine or something retarded like that. I feel like I kept seeing that even older armor was still basically effective if you strap quality thermals to it. It honestly seems smarter to send all those god damn surplus MRAPs we have and use those instead, frankly. One really cynical explanation might be that the US wants the Ukes to burn up all their older armor to get them to need to buy more shit from western defense manufacturers later (gotta feed the MIC).
So you don’t kill your troops in kamikazee missions. We all know bmps are vatmoron death traps
Might get stuck in the terrain, or be too light to set off AT mines.
That said, if you read the actual article instead of trusting OP's bullshit you'll find that it doesn't actually say the tanks should be used to detonate mines, rather that the western tanks would be the best for a sweeping advance after the front has been breached, while the more expendable old USSR ones are better used in the slow grind through the minefields and fortifications. Ie cheap stuff when it mostly just matters that you have something and losses will be heavy, expensive stuff when using over the cheap stuff it will actually make a difference.
Yeah I understand the sentiment but I think he's underestimating that despite western vehicles being lost while advancing the level of protection they can give the ukies has given them such a boost and has led to way less casualties than if they'd jump back into their soviet pieces of shit armor.
i thought about this so much.
you literally only need 2 wide wheels with spikes on it a bent steel beam and a 3rd wheel and an electronic engine.
it would cost literally less than $50k. just build 2000 pieces
picrel
Do NATO countries still have fucktons of obsolete tanks lying around? Seems like it'd be a good use for old M60s/Leo 1s/AMX-30s/Chieftains (assuming you can get the latter to move).
Greece and Turkey have collectively a couple thousand Leopard 2s and M60s but they're pointed at each other
>use one (1) perfectly good tank to destroy one (1) 500-dollar landmine
>use one (1) perfectly good tank to destroy one (1) 500-dollar landmine
this
>So you don’t kill your troops in kamikazee missions. We all know bmps are vatmoron death traps
so why not find used fucking cars, and put quick -crete in the trunk and a cinder block on the gas pedal, and just send it into the field instead?
what the absolute fuck have ~~*nato*~~ tactics come to, suggesting using perfectly good tanks that could be perfectly viable, with upgraded fire-control optics/NV etc?
it sounds sociopathically insane
That's not what they mean, with a plow or some other variation they could absolutely use them for clearing mines. A significantly lower cost and relatively safe if they're empied of ammuniton.
Most losses are from clearing under artillery suppression, but if you used enough tanks with enough plows it just wouldn't matter how many mines you placed.
Man, the behaviour of the western military establishment during this war has been so baffling. Like aren't they paid to acknowledge reality instead of talking themselves into believing some alternate version of it like the rest of westerners do?
Where did these idiots get the brilliant idea of a large-scale mech assault into zeroed-in minefields without air or artillery supremacy and with horrendously understrength engineers? How did they convince themselves it would succeed and quickly finish the whole thing? How do the most casualty-averse people in the world demand that somebody just suicide into minefields instead of playing the attrition game?
Just what the fuck is up with them?
The MIC's job is to not make Ukraine win, it's to bleed Russia using Ukraine.
Keep Ukraine armed to ensure that they don't collapse but not give everything they need to ensure a swift or total victory.
I understand why the governments and MIC companies would do that, that's not the problem.
Why do actual officers attach their name to forecasts that range from being obviously wrong to being so batshit insane that in a just society the author would get hospitalized?
Like I come from a russian/soviet military family, and I am pretty certain that my ancestors would have preferred to shoot themselves than say the kind of shit we've been hearing from all these retired generals and colonels. It's just so weird. Do they not have any self-respect or what?
I'm looking for sources to support this point of view. Do you have any, anon?
sure it's called "this war has been going on for 1.5 years and the US still won't send 50 year old jets"
This.
If the inexplicably slow pace of the US on this doesn't make it clear; they want Russia to lose. And lose badly.
But they want them to do it slowly. They want them to be capable of denial every step of the way. They don't want Russia to bargain for peace until they have fuck-all to bargain with.
At which point they get a choice; get the versaille treatment, violently balkanize and make sure no Russian in the next 3 generations has anything resembling a good future, or hand over their nuclear arsenal and be moved under China's nuclear umbrella instead.
And then balkanize anyway but hey at least you don't have a 5 generation long war debt pinned to you.
>balkanize anyway
If there's anyone with half a brain they'd want to slow boil Russia to exhaust itself militarily, so they can't pull out after a strong blow and do a well prepared round two. But IMHO economically it should retain well being and should be completely put on the needle of western economics. Because shit conditions is what made all previous conquests possible - when life's so bad you might as well go to war.
What we want is life so good you don't wan't to loose it, but bad enough you can't spare a single rouble for military that's left in shambles.
Balkanization favors the west. You bribe the local strongman to develop his industries, employ a token number of locals to prevent chimpout, and profit immensely since a small, weak, poor state surrounded with race and faith enemies has little leverage.
You did not read the OP and got stuck on the headline. Classic blunder.
Don't feed him. He same replies anyways.
Look it's manic when question fag.
>Grrrr why can't I just state my opinion in non question form? RREE RREE REEE
The western planers were right. They told them to stomach the first losses and go for a large force concentration until the breakthrough.
The Ukrainians mainly fucked things up because of their generally low quality troops, unwillingness to do anything more than piecemeal attacks, and poor choice of where to attack.
>The Ukrainians mainly fucked things up because of their generally low quality troops, unwillingness to do anything more than piecemeal attacks, and poor choice of where to attack.
Accounting for the quality of the troops and commanders is essential for military planning. Just about every mid-level Ukie officer I've spoken to or whose posts I've read during the preparation phase was pretty pessimistic in their assesment of Ukrainian capabilities. Do the US advisors get their information exclusively from the general staff or what? Surely they know better than to trust that.
Also I'm not sure that "unwilling to commit to more anything more than piecemeal attacks" is a fair characterization - with the proliferation of UAVs any kind of buildup is very quickly discovered by the enemy and countered by bringing in a shitton of artillery from the reserves and other parts of the frontline. Attacking in such conditions is impossible.
How well Ukrainian troops can pull off something new (a large scale offensive) was still relatively unknown. There was a lot of hopium and differing opinions probably.
>Also I'm not sure that "unwilling to commit to more anything more than piecemeal attacks" is a fair characterization - with the proliferation of UAVs any kind of buildup is very quickly discovered by the enemy and countered by bringing in a shitton of artillery from the reserves and other parts of the frontline.
Is there any other alternative? I imagine actually a proper continued attack that just brings more and more reserves into the fight would strain the logistics when it comes to how many sorties the air forces can fly and how many shells can be shot before meeting a counter battery.
In addition every delay is likely to let the enemy mine areas that previously served for troop movement, and re-mine whatever front areas were previously cleared.
>was still relatively unknown
It was very well known in the parts of the Ukrainian military that one should listen to - the failure to discover and make use of this knowledge shows either hubris or a staggering lack of understanding of the region.
>There was a lot of hopium
This is what I'm talking about. What hopium? I guess the lesson that any infantry LT who's seen combat knows by heart - that you must not get high on hopium or you and everyone under your command will die - is lost on the staff officers and advisors. I don't understand why. An officer has to have a plan for the pessimistic scenario. Why did they plan for an extremely optimistic one and then get disappointed when the enemy didn't cooperate?
>Is there any other alternative?
There isn't. It's gonna be a slow slugfest and a game of reserves until one of the sides breaks. My friends are right in the middle of it too so it all hurts a lot.
Genuinely wonder if they got too cocky after seeing earlier Russian performance. Even if it was my ass on the line I would probably take some dumber risks if I saw how retarded my enemies had been all throughout the war previously. But even a retard is dangerous if he can just shit mines absolutely everywhere for a few months.
>earlier Russian performance
It took months to retake Kherson even without russian defending it and there were still losses because russians mined everything to hell. Wouldn't be surprised if this is the same advisor that told nytimes Ukraine has to bumrush south ignoring casualties.
>It was very well known in the parts of the Ukrainian military that one should listen to -
Retarded moron
Mid level staff always complains and the grass is always greener. Shut the fuck up and stop pretending you have any idea what you're talking about in regards to sorting through troop feedback.
You're the kind of brainlet who would have tried copying the T34 in WWII.
Unironically the HOI4 strategy of pinning. You launch a general offensive in order to pin down an enemy's frontline troops and utilize your reserves in a very precise location. This also has the benefit of carrying out massed force recon, as during the general offensive you can gauge which areas are weakest.
>you can't attack Russian territory
>air support will have to wait until next year
>we can't send Abrams yet
>Russia is building fortifications so we'll wait another 6 months to start training your troops
>this shortened program will do just fine
>you'll have to fill the ranks with slavshit we can't send you that much Western equipment
>the south is the best place to attack
>we know Russia built tons of fortifications but you'll just smash through
>wow why won't you just send everything in the killling field at once it would've worked
>we'll send cluster munitions in a month teehee
It's insane that Ukraine is expected to fight with their hands tied while westoids keep blaming them for not doing miracles on the battlefield.
>It's insane that Ukraine is expected to fight with their hands tied
Nobody is tying their hands or owes them anything.
Where the fuck did the morongarden gnome levels of entitlement come from?
Next time try reading the post you're replying to, retard.
How about you learn English instead, subhuman slavshit?
Who is tying their hands?
I can only see a what, which is their own incompetence.
>How about you learn English
Everyone should be speaking pig latin french
>trickle weapons in over 2 years with promises of not using them on Russian territory because "muh escalation"
>nooo you can't prove they have their hands tied
>Western weapons are perfect it's just Ukrainians not using them right
Calling someone slavshit while using vatnik mental gymnastics really is ironic. Let me guess, your reply will also show a total lack of self awareness?
Shouldn't have reoccupied kharkov so quickly, hohol *~~))
I wish God would give people like you cancer
If one had no ideological presuppositions, one would obviously conclude that this is two allies destroying a common enemy.
The idea is if the ukies hold back and wait instead of taking the initiative, russia's just going to keep rebuilding its strength. They have to strike now, or there'll be no hope to ever regain their lost territory. But it's really already too late as it is. However on the other hand, russia will just get -even more- dug in if the ukies don't press an offensive, so better late than never.
>give everything they need to ensure a swift or total victory
Much easier said than done.
>But it's really already too late as it is
Yeah, that's what I'm complaining about. Why are they being disappointed by the pace of the offensive after giving the Russians a year to prepare and fortify? Was that year used wisely? Are the frontlines flooded with "bleed the enemy but don't acquire decisive offensive capabilities" kind of gear? FPVs, loitering munitions, basic recon quadcopters? No, they aren't, it's all running on volunteer-built FPVs and Mavics with nothing western in sight. Armour is cool, but it's the wrong tool if you want to make the Russians bleed.
yup. every hour you're leaving the russian forces alone, 10+ more mines get planted.
It's almost like western militaries are led by officers so far removed from the battlefield they may as well be politicians; and we only ever win due to overwhelming technological advantage thanks to billions pumped into R&D, autistic analysts, and extremely competent NCO's thanks who frequently ignore orders.
>the behaviour of the western military establishment during this war has been so baffling
They're just falling in line with the political goals.
The main goal of the Western political establishment is to protect Putin's regime at all costs because they're scared of muh civil war with muh nooks in case it collapses. What they're doing is almost the same as what the Chinese are doing, support Russian military effort in every way that isn't direct military aid so you can keep plausible deniability.
>Give Ukraine 1/10 of what they need to win and 1/100 of what you can actually give.
>Drag your feet on sending it so that Russia has months to dig trenches and replenish its weapon stocks.
>Give "helpful" advice to suicide their army and freeze the conflict.
That's not something I came up with on my own, by the way, that's the consensus of the Ukrainian mainstream media and political pundits. Or at least half of them, the other half just thinks that Western leadership is Russia-tier corrupt and retarded. Either way, when the war ends, Ukrainians will "paradoxically" hate America more than Russia and the general public in America will have idea why.
its highly probable that they would run out of vehicles a long way before any breakthrough...
>take metal
>fill it with cement for weight (and a vatnik for fun)
>roll it over the field
y/n?
>take metal *barrel
Why not make vatnik roll the barrel?
I don't know what the yield of the landmines would be, but it's likely you'd need a metal tube for each, maybe 44gal drums would work, but how to propel them?
Either way the landmines are still doing their job, they can't really be cleared in a contested area
>mine roller but moron-rigged
Why not use an actual mine roller?
What if we just carpet bombed the fields to blow up mines?
better to just drop the bombs on the Russians, no?
>What is MICLIC?
>garden gnomesweek.com
Are they suggesting using vehicles with soldiers inside them to intercept mines until the minefield runs out of mines?
So given all the negatives in the build-up to and first phase of the offensive, what is the meta now that is allowing these small, slow, but continuing advances? I've been hearing
>plaster vatnik positions with cluster muntions
>send infantry probe to bait russian counterattack/arty response
>hit that with more DPICM or HIMARS STHEL REIGN
>rinse and repeat.
anything to add on?
NATO is incredibly lucky that Russia invaded the only competent military on the continent and not them. If clowns like the one from the OP were to fight them, Russian troops would've been in Portugal at this point.
50 more meters and the breakthrough happens!
Clearing minefields is easy, when you aren't under fire.
Removing the artillery and air support, then cross the field, is working for them now.
I don't understand the logic here
>Western tanks throw a track when driven over a mine, so let's use old tanks that throw a turret and kill everyone inside instead
>just use your own tanks, they're easily expendable
>no you can't get the 300 tanks you're asking for
It's like when you're sick and every dumbass wants to offer his retarded solution.
>have you tried keeping a potato in your pocket?
>when I'm sick I put an onion under my bed
>try some vitamin C, I'm never sick thanks to it
>maybe it's the gluten, have you tried cutting it out?
Why don't they just use a big spatula to scoop up the mines from below, earth and all? They could turn it into a catapult too and just throw the mines back at the russians.
>russia is winning
The warning was because you're too retarded even for PrepHole.
>Develop a bunch of remote controlled tractors with tracks
>Fill them up with stones to increase weight
>Send them off towards the minefield
I mean it can't be that difficult?
try to imagine why demining tanks use ploughs - maybe because wheel or track is not good as demining equipment as its relatively narrow and will miss 90% mines in vicinity? idea itself is retarded as even if tank gets trough next one might be destroyed by mines that first one missed...
Just get a load of old ladas, direct them at the path you want to take and put a brick in the accelerator.
I have no idea if this would actually work
Why not built hovercraft to go over the mines? Would work on muddy terrain too
and be wrecked by anti-personnel mines instead
Brilliant!
>AP mines react to wind
Sure thing, retard
maybe us should honor their word and send abraams in
we need to see it against leopard 2a6