Article

2023-08-10 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia

Putin's junkyard war machines: Russia 'deploys 1,500 rusting mothballed tanks from Siberian dump' after suffering huge losses in Ukraine

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Skidmark 2023-08-10 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11 views ] Top

#1 Daily mail missed hundreds of thousands of Russian troop standees.

Posted by Dale 2023-08-10 03:35|| 2023-08-10 03:35|| Front Page Top

#2 Maybe it shows that they don't need their best equipment to defeat the fascist Ukrainians, lol.

Posted by DooDahMan 2023-08-10 05:41|| 2023-08-10 05:41|| Front Page Top

#3 The Past is new again. In WW2 the Germans and Russians were users of 'Assault Guns' for different reasons. The Germans believed in giving lower units access to 'direct fire support' at the lowest levels because it was more efficient than trying to coordinate with higher and higher levels before doing anything, yes? The Soviets had such a lousy communication system (telephone wires don't lay themselves very quickly on the attack) that giving their assault troops timely artillery support necessitated these turretless AFV with large bore cannon to follow the spearheads forward. The US spent a lot of effort on their radio communications net and junked the whole idea of assault guns.

The ~~Soviets~~ Russians wants some of that direct fire HE and the older tanks can supply it just fine for their infantry. Another reason is that when you have declining quality in your infantry every bit of *Boom!* you can add helps cover that lack.

Posted by magpie 2023-08-10 09:55|| 2023-08-10 09:55|| Front Page Top

#4 The ~~Soviets~~ Russians wants some of that direct fire HE and the older tanks can supply it just fine for their infantry.

The more, the merrier!
Plus if you have an observation drone spotting for you, you can use them for indirect fire out to the limit of their range. Like the man said, sometimes quantity has a quality all its own.

Posted by SteveS 2023-08-10 10:51|| 2023-08-10 10:51|| Front Page Top

#5 magpie = actual analysis

Dale, DDM = Putin parrots

Posted by Nero 2023-08-10 10:54|| 2023-08-10 10:54|| Front Page Top

#6 There was an interesting video of 53 T-80Ms being railroaded to the front. These were the older ones with the old Soviet sight that is very obsolete nowdays.

Posted by DarthVader 2023-08-10 11:04|| 2023-08-10 11:04|| Front Page Top

#7 Why let it rust in Siberia when they can use Ukraine as a dump?

Posted by Abu Uluque 2023-08-10 12:38|| 2023-08-10 12:38|| Front Page Top

#8 I would think that:

Infantry who has access to armor tanks, no matter the age, is a stronger unit than infantry without tanks.

Posted by mossomo 2023-08-10 12:46|| 2023-08-10 12:46|| Front Page Top

#9 Infantry who has access to armor tanks, no matter the age, is a stronger unit than infantry without tanks.

With a basic combat loadout, yes. But most infantry has a lot of anti-armor assets and an AT-4 can easily punch through T-62/4 frontal armor. While the AT-4 only has a real range of 400-450 meters and the tanks can launch shots from 1km and beyond a bit, that is why there are a lot of guided missile assets that reach out to 1.5km and beyond sprinkled everywhere in the world.

Posted by DarthVader 2023-08-10 14:22|| 2023-08-10 14:22|| Front Page Top

23:38 trailing wife
22:31 Spaiter Darling of the Pixies4165
22:29 DooDahMan
22:23 DooDahMan
22:23 Spaiter Darling of the Pixies4165
22:09 Xyz
21:20 trailing wife
21:20 trailing wife
20:50 badanov
20:42 Thing From Snowy Mountain
20:23 trailing wife
20:18 Spaiter Darling of the Pixies4165
20:14 trailing wife
20:10 Rambler in Virginia
20:08 trailing wife
19:39 Super Hose
19:35 Super Hose
19:32 Super Hose
19:17 Super Hose
18:19 Besoeker
18:13 jpal
18:00 SteveS
17:33 Rambler in Virginia
17:27 Delphi