Interview with a Russian Tanker (Russian) | Hacker News Reader

Interview with a Russian Tanker (Russian)

mk.ru

3 pointswrp4 comments

The duration of the war speaks volumes. The commentary may well be true, as personal observations go. But it isn't a winning strategy for Russia, as it stands. They aren't in a commanding position and they obviously didn't achieve initial war aims.

I do think most "but it didn't work" stories are survivor bias, but against that a lot of wartime mistrust of the Sherman was founded on misunderstood survival. They weren't actually worthy of the ronson nickname, and Patton was probably right to rail against homemade armor additions. Postwar analysis showed Sherman tanks had higher survival rate than people said at the time. It's because crews got out alive, we know crews didn't die.

That said, I think there's an awfully large number of ruined supply chain, light armoured vehicle, and other vehicle videos. They do not look like dud javelin outcomes. Maybe this "half are duds" is like scarecrow shells in the bombing raids on germany: you tell your own guys half the missiles fail to make them feel better. (There were no scarecrow shells: the shells exploding looking like US and British bombers being hit, were indeed bombers being hit, according to Len Deighton)

This article caught my attention because of the Javelin reference. There is a huge disparity between number of missiles sent over and the number of vehicles seemingly destroyed by missiles. If the Javelins really have a 10% kill rate, the numbers make better sense, even more so if there are plentiful battery failures.

I don't think we'll know exactly until after the war ends (and hopefully the russians are pushed back to the '91 borders). There is a huge disparity indeed, but not all of them are concentrated in the areas of conflict right now (I bet a large chunk of them are still in western Ukraine) and the russians were indeed able to target and destroy a couple of weapons transports, so who knows how many of them never even made it to the Ukrainian armed forces.

Of course it's wartime propaganda, but the tone is mild and it gives some details about battlefield technology. It would be nice to get some detailed reporting like this from the Ukrainian side. Some quotes below translated with Bing.

About Intelligence

The Armed Forces of Ukraine has a well-established work with the civilian population. Civilians shoot everything on their phones - the movement of our equipment, location - and throw them into groups in social networks. This data is then analyzed. And they react.

On the other hand, they have intelligence from American satellites. When they attacked us near Balakliya, they had all the information: where who was standing, what was the state of the equipment, the number of people, where was who was ... Suppose we crossed the border, there were (Ukrainian) towers with video cameras, fully autonomous: electric units, batteries ... Everything is American. That is, all the videos with our equipment immediately went to their headquarters. We drove up with border guards and shot this equipment with machine guns.

They're clear. Drones are mandatory. First, they identify targets, then make all the necessary calculations using programs that are downloaded to tablets or smartphones. Coordinates are entered automatically - by the mark from the target. The program gives a directional angle for the mortar. Whatever the shot goes to the target.

Suppose an observer or spotter equipped with a thermal imager, a tablet, where (electronic) maps are loaded, can transmit coordinates. That is, not on paper maps, but on an electronic tablet, he indicated a point, and the coordinates automatically left. We didn't have that.

About Javelins

The Ukrainians use American Javelin anti-tank systems, Swedish-British NLAW, Ukrainian Stugna-P against us. Of the Javelin's ten hits, only one case I saw was when the turret flew away and when there was a complete destruction of the tank. And so basically - shell-shocked everyone (in the crew), and the equipment can be restored after hitting. We had one Javelin hit the tank. A cumulative jet pierced the turret and the breech of the gun. The crew received only burns to his face and hands.

Half of the Javelins are non-working because they run on batteries. Without it, it won't work. And the batteries are already half non-working. That is, the West is dumping them with junk...

...Then I saw a man running out of MT-LB. I ran along the forest plantation for 20-30 meters. He disappeared into a trench. And from there (the last thing I saw) was the Javelin. Up the rocket went up - I shout to the driver mechanic: come back! To move away from that position... That's it. The missile hit the tank – the turret, next to the hat of the Pine sight. The dynamic protection worked. That is, the gap was outside, the tank was combat-ready - after me they still rode on it, fought...

About Tactics

All battles are conducted at a distance of no closer than four kilometers. That is, there are no contact fights as such. Contact battles are conducted by special forces, which at night move into the forest plantations and with the help of thermal imagers destroy the infantry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com