What is even the point of it?

>Firing range matched by any semi-modern ATGM
>Huge, easy to hit target on top
>Requires a special reloading vehicle (another easy target)
>Huge risk for any infantry or light armored vehicle

What is even the point of it? Seems like an easy target in a modern battlefield.

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    makes for good tiktoks

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Makes big explosion that looks cool

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    looked good on paper and the explosions are cool (either way)

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    When you have to shoot the big boss monster 24 times, duh.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Flattening fortifications and heavily entrenched troops like at Piskey where it was used to good effect.

    You wouldn't bring it forward if you were worried enemy fire.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what happens if the heavily entrenched troops in question also brought a Kornet or TOW 2B

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Those are line of sight weapons. You wouldn't put this or any artillery system in line of sight of those weapons.

        If you still had IFVs running around then it's too early for the heavy seige guns anyway.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          If your artillery only has line of sight range than it's pretty shit artillery than. Only good if we've suppressed infantry with real artillery and are basically on top of them seems like dogshit

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A single tos salvo is more destructive to entrenched infantry than days worth of artillery shelling. It's a trade-off and the risk is high, but so is reward.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine e.g. Fallujah but the invading force is Russians, that's where they would use this.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You mean like Allepo where the Russians fought and didn't use this? Idiot.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What is Allepo?
            I only know of Aleppo

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Mostly killing entrenched infantry.

        You move it through terrain to not be shot at by LOS ATGM.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Do Kornets or TOWs see through trees and hills?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >to good effect
      6 months to capture a destroyed town is not a good effect

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah you don't need seige guns for soft targets wanker.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >like at Piskey where it was used to good effect
      lolwut

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It worked exactly as advertized at Piskey. The Russians supressed the very well entrenched yukes enough that the TOS-1 could be brought forward, it was, they fired it, it cleared out the defenders in a single blow, the russians took the pile of rubble.
        They call it the 10-minute-walk-in. You fire it then ten minutes later you walk in.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But it took 6 months to take a small town?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So this is the weapon that broke the Pisky superfortress?

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because russian loves zerg rushing dumbfire missiles onto everything

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I never played starcraft, but this seems like an intelligent meme
      It isn't.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It can move along with other tanks (at a good safety distance) and level a city block on command before being sent off for reloading. Dumb stop-gap measure developed on experiences from Chechenya.

    Supposedly, they are extremely unpopular with the troops because of the massive detonation hazard when under fire

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Literally a terror weapon. Useful for saturating some fortified infantry and burning down city blocks and hospital complexes.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Literally a terror weapon
      What a stupid thing to say. Nothing survives thermobarics, so there's nothing to be terrorized. In fact there is no defeninition of terrorism, even the retard leftist ones, that fits the TOS-1.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >destroying civilian buildings, schools and hospitals is not terror because they don't survive
        The Russian mind is amazing

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          civilian buildings, schools and hospitals is not terror
          Correct.

          The current definition of terror is a non-state actor targeting civilians for political ends. ie. 9/11.
          The original definition of terror is bombing civilian populations to force surrender in war. ie. The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.

          This is perfectly useless for either of those things because of it's short range. It needs to be supported by a large contingent of ground forces which means it's an active battlefield and only military use.

          There it is not a weapon, and not everything is a fucking warcrime, sometimes it's just war, you dumb hysterical fucking idiots. If you knew anything about war this would be obvious to you, but you don't, you just spread your inane opinions on social media like a pack of nagging cunts and lower the general intelligence of the human race.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why are you confusing terror weapon with a legal definition of terrorism?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Why aren't you letting me make shit up because I hate Russians
              Because you're a fucking cancer of the human race.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >it's not terror because i invented a different meaning for terror
            This is your mind on vatnik nonsense. I hope the Ukies massacre every last one of you.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I didn't invent shit.
              Winston Churchill invented the definition of terror.
              And the FBI redefined it after 9/11

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >This is perfectly useless for either of those things because of it's short range.
            Except if the enemy consists only infantry with small arms, which was the expectation when developing this weapon based on experience from Chechnya. Also, Russians will regularly terrorize the population of cities and villages that have no enemy combatants. So go fuck yourself you Russky moron.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Except if the enemy consists only infantry with small arms
              No. Not in that case either. If you pick up a gun you're a legitimate target, winning is not a warcrime you fucking idiot.

              >Russians will regularly terrorize the population of cities and villages that have no enemy combatants
              No they fucking don't you fucking idiot. You're making shit up because you're leftist circlejerk never calls you on your bullshit as long as it's consistent with their bullshit. I wish you all just fucking have a nice day to stop climate change already.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No they fucking don't you fucking idiot.
                lol, lmao

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm a fuckin dumb fuck with nothing to actually contibute to the board.
                GO BACK TO TWITTER
                CHANGE YOUR FUCKING PROFILE PIC TO THE YUKE FLAG
                AND THE LEAVE THE DISCUSSION OF WEAPONS AND TACTICS TO THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                But you don't know what you're talking about. You compared the laser guided thermobarics bombs and hellfire missiles used by the US to inaccurate short ranged rocket artillery

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >laser guided thermobarics bombs
                The MOAB isn't laser guided you fucking idiot. Neither is the Hellfire which also isn't Thermobaric. There's no point putting precision guidance on thermobaric warheads, or ANY seige equipment for that matter. The point is to flatten the area.

                >the Vatnik cries out as he strikes you
                Got a bit rattled didn't we Sergei? What's the matter? Do we see through your obvious dindu nuffin Russky propaganda? You can cry all the way back to Telegram and wait for your draft order, gay.

                https://i.imgur.com/yQ3CHGG.jpg

                Did your jimmies get rustled, vova? If the russians in Ukraine are all manchildren like you then it's not surprising that they're routing. Did your husband mail you a laundry machine yet?

                rattled? Rustled? No fucking furious that once again society has to slow down to your pace while you desperately try to never learn anything at all.
                Your weapononized stupidity acting like your dumb fuck objectively idiot fucking garbage deserves equal fucking attention to intelligent analysis just because people who are just a dumb as you pat you on the back for being just as dumb as them.

                I cannot WAIT until the war kicks off against China and you dumb fucks all get drafted, coz I sure shit am not going. Then you'll get a proper education on the realities of war while you cry about "muh warcrimes" huddled in a trench filled with your own shit.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You talk like a fag and you're shit's all retarded.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The MOAB isn't laser guided you fucking idiot.
                It's GPS guided, a technology that is foreign to your "people".
                >Neither is the Hellfire
                Wrong.
                >also isn't Thermobaric
                Also wrong. What is the MAC hellfire warhead, you idiot?

                That's a lot of being wrong, for someone who rages about other people not knowing weapons you sure do seem a little "special", like your military operation.

                >I cannot WAIT until the war kicks off against China and you dumb fucks all get drafted, coz I sure shit am not going
                Your kind will be mostly dead by then, collecting what little supplies are left around the toilet cities of mosscow and pidersburg.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you sure do seem a little "special", like your military operation
                kek btfo

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You don't know about the BLU-118 or the AGM-114N and you act like you know anything about weapons. You're a fucking retard.

                The MOAB is GPS guided, you fucking communist.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ah, a tourist AND an ESL. Fuck off

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                guided thermobarics bombs
                >The MOAB
                The MOAB ain't even a thermobaric bomb, so why are you even bringing it up?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the Vatnik cries out as he strikes you
                Got a bit rattled didn't we Sergei? What's the matter? Do we see through your obvious dindu nuffin Russky propaganda? You can cry all the way back to Telegram and wait for your draft order, gay.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Did your jimmies get rustled, vova? If the russians in Ukraine are all manchildren like you then it's not surprising that they're routing. Did your husband mail you a laundry machine yet?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                garden gnome

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The current definition of terror is a non-state actor targeting civilians for political ends. ie. 9/11.
            >The original definition of terror is bombing civilian populations to force surrender in war. ie. The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.
            According to whom? Your made-up bullshit?
            Here are legit definitions
            https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terror

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >According to whom? Your made-up bullshit?
              See:

              I didn't invent shit.
              Winston Churchill invented the definition of terror.
              And the FBI redefined it after 9/11

              https://i.imgur.com/6ynfuhY.jpg

              >The MOAB isn't laser guided you fucking idiot.
              It's GPS guided, a technology that is foreign to your "people".
              >Neither is the Hellfire
              Wrong.
              >also isn't Thermobaric
              Also wrong. What is the MAC hellfire warhead, you idiot?

              That's a lot of being wrong, for someone who rages about other people not knowing weapons you sure do seem a little "special", like your military operation.

              >I cannot WAIT until the war kicks off against China and you dumb fucks all get drafted, coz I sure shit am not going
              Your kind will be mostly dead by then, collecting what little supplies are left around the toilet cities of mosscow and pidersburg.

              >It's GPS guided
              So you were wrong. Because you don't what you're talking about
              >The hellfire is laser guided
              The Hellfire is famously an aspect seeking "fire and forget" weapon, laser guided bombs require the laser to maintain line of sight to the target until impact, therefore not "fire and forget."
              So you're doubling down on being wrong.

              >Everyone who thinks I'm stupid is Russian
              That's a lot of Russians.

              You don't know about the BLU-118 or the AGM-114N and you act like you know anything about weapons. You're a fucking retard.

              The MOAB is GPS guided, you fucking communist.

              >The MOAB is not laser guided
              AS I SAID.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Winston Churchill invented the definition of terror
                Ah yes, he invented the definition of a word that has been widely used in English since the15th century.
                Shut the fuck up, retard.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Ah yes, he invented the definition of a word that has been widely used in English since the15th century.
                Are you fucking serious right now? You think "terror attacks" were part of the vernacular of middle english?
                Winston Churchill coined it specifically in reference to his plan to bomb the residential areas of Cologne in 1940 as the factories had all been hardened to resist bombing. That is the first use of the term in this context. Learn history.

                the BLU-118 can be laser guided you retard

                Why would it be tho? That's a waste of a guidance kit. The POINT to thermobaric weapons is massive destruction.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                the BLU-118 can be laser guided you retard

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >So you were wrong. Because you don't what you're talking about
                Wrong about what? You're the one who made the connection between MOAB and laser guidance. Nobody was talking about it before you.
                >The Hellfire is famously an aspect seeking "fire and forget" weapon
                No you fucking idiot, you're talking about a specific variant that uses radar guidance. The laser-guided variants need laser designation. Dumbass.
                >Most variants are laser-guided, laser guidance can be provided either from the launcher, such as the nose-mounted opto-electronics of the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter, other airborne target designators or from ground-based observers, the latter two options allowing the launcher to break line of sight with the target and seek cover.

                God, you're so moronic, no wonder you vatniks are getting your shit pushed in.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You're the one who made the connection between MOAB and laser guidance
                Because we are talking about SEIGE weaponry, and that's how America solves the problem the Russians solve with the TOS-1.
                Big booms.

                >you're talking about a specific variant that uses radar guidance
                No. I'm not. You fucking retard. It's an ASPECT SEEKING missile, which means it's got a camera in the front that knows what a tank looks like.
                It has a laser guidance mode, but that's now what it's famous for.

                >The original definition of terror is bombing civilian populations to force surrender in war. ie. The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.
                as opposed to the TOS-1, who just bombs things for funsies. You literally just made your own argument against your inane semantics bullshit in your own comment retard

                >Every target is a civilian target because I say so okay
                You're a fucking idiot.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >hellfire
                >aspect seeking
                you're a fucking retard, a mongoloid among genetic dead ends, a fucking disgrace to the concept of evolution and a strong case for post-natal euthanasia

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Here's the kicker, the Longbow variant is 15 years out of production while the laser-guided variants (K, N, R) are still being made

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Because we are talking about SEIGE weaponry, and that's how America solves the problem the Russians solve with the TOS-1.
                So you bring the MOAB into the discussion after laser-guided weapons were mentioned, and then say everyone else is wrong because MOAB is not laser guided? Do you realize how utterly retarded this is?

                >It's an ASPECT SEEKING missile, which means it's got a camera in the front that knows what a tank looks like.
                >It has a laser guidance mode, but that's now what it's famous for.
                lol, that's just wrong. Other than the Longbow radar variant that I already mentioned, Hellfire missiles are not "fire and forget" and are DEFINITELY not "aspect seeking with a camera". You're welcome to provide evidence of the contrary.

                But please, continue to embarrass yourself, "military expert".

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That bro played Cod and thought the predator missile is what Hellfire does.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >he original definition of terror is bombing civilian populations to force surrender in war. ie. The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.

            Try breathing in deeper on a regular basis. You need all the oxygen you can get.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The original definition of terror is bombing civilian populations to force surrender in war. ie. The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki.
            as opposed to the TOS-1, who just bombs things for funsies. You literally just made your own argument against your inane semantics bullshit in your own comment retard

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Useful for saturating some fortified infantry and burning down city blocks and hospital complexes.
      Those are noble goals.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't get why its so heavily armored, why not just mount it on a truck?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It doesn't look heavily armoured to me, and a truck wouldn't be able to carry that weight.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It doesn't look heavily armoured to me, and a truck wouldn't be able to carry that weight.

      It's basically just a rocket pod bolted on top top of a turretless T-72 MBT so it is quite heavily armored for artillery.
      Practical reason, it needs to get very close to the front line because the original rocket range was less than 3km, now it is up to 10 I believe.
      Probably reason, Russian industry can't produce shit and they had a bunch of T-72's from the Soviet Union sitting in storage.
      Everything about the Russian arms industry seems to come down refurbing shit from their pre-90's stockpile.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Probably reason
        Actual reason: big warhead plus small missile equals not a lot of space for fuel for the rocket motor.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What does that have to do with choosing a tank hull to carry them?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >What does that have to do with this completely different thing?
            Nothing.
            They do however need a tracked vehicle to carry that weight and a T-72 chassis is a tracked vehicle.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >>What does that have to do with this completely different thing?
              It's not different. The og post

              https://i.imgur.com/Ebuvtky.jpg

              [...]
              It's basically just a rocket pod bolted on top top of a turretless T-72 MBT so it is quite heavily armored for artillery.
              Practical reason, it needs to get very close to the front line because the original rocket range was less than 3km, now it is up to 10 I believe.
              Probably reason, Russian industry can't produce shit and they had a bunch of T-72's from the Soviet Union sitting in storage.
              Everything about the Russian arms industry seems to come down refurbing shit from their pre-90's stockpile.

              was about why it using a T-72 hull and why. Saying it was either because they wanted armored because of the short range rocket or because they had a lot of hulls. The reply was:
              >Actual reason: big warhead plus small missile equals not a lot of space for fuel for the rocket motor.
              That's a bit of a confusing reply to why it uses a tank hull.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >was about why it using a T-72 hull and why.
                Didn't need that extra "and why" there...

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Practical reason, it needs to get very close to the front line because the original rocket range was less than 3km, now it is up to 10 I believe.
                >Probably reason, Russian industry can't produce shit
                ACTUAL REASON: Small missle + big warhead = short range.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They had a lot of T-72 hulls.
      That's the sole reason.
      The vehicle itself is extremely volatile when loaded and should never be within LoS of an enemy, even one armed with a handgun.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >even one armed with a handgun.
        That's a bit of an exaggeration, but the general principle is correct. It's not a front line unit.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think it's basically a siege weapon designed to crush fortified positions with 24 heavy rockets packing thermobaric warheads.
    It's not really a battlefield weapon nor a practical artillery system. That is best left to other weapons.
    Basically a very niche use device.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good for destroying civilian villages that cannot defend themselves.

    Suck ass if enemy army has mortars, artillery, ATGM, aviation, missiles.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Such a stupid thing to say. I don't even know where to start.
      You know America and the UK use Thermobaric weapons too?

      What is Allepo?
      I only know of Aleppo

      >What is a leppo?
      Thanks Gary Johnson.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >You know America and the UK use Thermobaric weapons too?

        >Whatabolism

        God, I hate vatmorons so much.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Whataboutism
          Is not a logical fallacy it's you admitting I'm right and that you're a silly dumb hypocrite
          >It's okay when we do
          Go fuck yourself.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >You know America and the UK use Thermobaric weapons too?
        do they load them into anemic dumbfire rockets and strap a whole boatload of them on an obsolete tank chassis?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The US drops ours from an airplane, which makes sense when examined with US air dominance. Russia’s use seems retarded in comparison since a 2km ultra-vulnerable mlrs *is* retarded.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    spamming rockets

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kill civilians in a horrible way.

    That's the intent of every russian weapon system.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What is even the point of it?
    Levelling Grozny and similar targets

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Great for killing civilians who dont shoot back.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do we have footage of a fully loaded one going kaboom?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah there's a video from Syria. Try googling it.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how many of them still exist? 40?

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the idea is that it can ride along a tank army and lay waste on any large military formation it comes across. the cold war vision of huge tank armies engaging in an open field battle.

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    destructing kokhols

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Destroyed Vatniks

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >that jumpcut

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Michael Bay wishes he was as good at jump cuts as the rubwabwe propagandists

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why do they have such low range, from what I've heard? Can't they just put more propellant into the rocket?

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Like a lot of Russian hardware introduced in the wake of Afghanistan it's specialised in obliterating low-tech fortified positions.
    Why risk your armored vehicles and infantry trying to assault that village or valley if you can obltierate it instead?
    Sure, the slow speed, low accuracy and low range make it useless against a real army, but what are the chances of having to fight one?

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why does it looks like TF2 Sentry + MvM Tank?

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there's no point in hitting what you want. shitting bombs everywhere and missing the target is how a real military fights

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shame that vatnik shat up the TOS-1 with his retarded ideas.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ah a LRMs, can I get a Marauder soon?

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the thermobaric retard got real quiet after being outed as a mongoloid

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >requires a special reloading vehicle
    Are russians too stupid to build something like M270 or M142? Why do all of their MLRS systems use a special reload vehicle or are loaded by hand for fucks sake?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The late USSR spent 50%+ GDP on military needs. So design bureaus became desirable places for children of the nomenklatura. That's why they had 3 similar tanks t-64, t-72, and t-80, rocket artillery in various calibers, and small-scale production of wunderwaffe as TOS.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >So design bureaus became desirable places for children of the nomenklatura
        Nah. Engineering is for nerds. Jocks little heads hurt from all them mathematics, engineering drawings and notorious strength of materials.

        Soviet nomenclatura jocks head their own colleges and career paths that doesn't require learning engineering or learning in general.
        See as example
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Rogozin

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Ustinov
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1K17_Szhatie
          Also, Rogozin's son destroyed the project of a military transporter
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-112

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It has exactly 1 use.
    make huge explosions in propaganda videos to strike fear into civillians.
    the only battlefield it has any use left on is 3rd world tier shiet like ukraine and syria.

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What is even the point of it?
    flashy videos

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia judges how useful a weapons system is by the amount of ordnance it can drop on civilians and in that regard TOS is a really good ground vehicle

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    If you do not reply sleep tight Saddami your compound will be raided in your sleep tonight
    This post is immune to immunity dog

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    https://i.imgur.com/uJwFtw2.jpg

    [...]
    If you do not reply sleep tight Saddami your compound will be raided in your sleep tonight
    This post is immune to immunity dog

    Sleep tight Saddami

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is an easy target, but it's also the only weapon on the battlefield that can reliably destroy entrenched infantry

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Terror weapon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No, it's a specialized siege weapon

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Oh, it's special alright. Very much so.

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's basically just meant to level buildings in a besieged city that you can't easily take. Of course the only thing it offers over carpet bombing with an actual bomber is that it is relatively speaking harder to destroy but that's about it. If Russia had air superiority to any real degree with SEAD they could just fly in bombers and do the same thing with better results.

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I know this is a shitty plebbit link, but i think its mandatory for people to see what happens when these things get hit- https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/tb7msp/so_this_is_what_happens_when_a_russian_tos1/

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      jeez

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Don't try to view it like field artillery but rather like a weird mix of an assault gun and a siege cannon in spirit.
    It's a delete button for the garrisons of fortifications really.
    If you have some big soviet block apartment building, school or hospital with soldiers inside, a barrage with some direct hits will destroy most of their lungs.

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Dos anyone have that footage of one of these being hit in Syria and the whole horizon being blotted out by the explosion?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=yGHBHJbQLbU&feature=emb_logo

      Yeah, those things are moving deathtraps, wouldn't want to be anywhere near one.

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What is even the point of it?
    Is kino as fuck.
    Looks so manly and rugged.

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    These things have probably killed more civilians than active servicemen.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I guess its main task was to burn Afghanistan's villages.

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    looks badass

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This war has given us so much kino, but all I want is a video of a fully loaded TOS blowing up.

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's useless. Look up how fast a blast wave loses energy compared to fragmentation. Then watch some videos from the war and see for yourself how "accurate" this retarded catapult is. Also pay attention to how many rockets turn into burning debris instead of actually exploding. Russia has been using dozens of them and other thermobaric memes around the clock for 6 months against conscripts sitting in simple trenches and the best they can do is advance 50 meters a day.

Your email address will not be published.