Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
Western armor generally has composite armor, which means layers of different materials, functioning so that the different layers eat up the kinetic or explosive force of the projectile, thus denying penetration.
Eastern (Russian) armor is usually solid steel, but has nova days ERA, which is very interesting approach. It is basically lot of shaped charges placed on top the steel armor. It´s function is to defeat the incoming projectile by counter energy.
That's not entirely true as the Soviet T-64 was the first tank in the world to deploy composite armor and was later developed into the T-80, which is still in use today. I'm not sure to what extent the T-72 and T-90 family uses composite or whether they just rely on ERA as you say.
The Leopard 2 A5 and A6 also uses a clever system of spaced armor on the turret.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
Of course as armor develops, so will the means to defeat armor. The most modern AT missiles have tandem HEAT warheads where two warheads hit one after another the same spot in the armor, thus defeating both classic Western and Eastern countermeasures many times. In Finnish inventory such AT missile is PSTOHJ 2000M (aka Eurospike) our lighter AT system is NLAW, which is a one man portable fire and forget AT missile which missile has double sensor for defeating systems like SHTORA. It is interesting indeed if countermeasure like ARENA can still defeat both. But i bet there is little it can do about multiple incoming projectiles. Like said earlier. It is endless race and there are lot of very deadly stuff around.
Indeed, but I suppose having ARENA is still better than not having ARENA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
Of course portable AT missiles are not at all only ways to effectively destroy armor. With enough HE you can destroy anything and the classic approach of large caliber kinetic projectiles like modern tank guns and autocannons for example GAU- 8 of US A-10 attack aircraft can defeat tanks.
Well, I often hear the tank that hits first with a shot from the cannon is the tank that wins. On the other hand Russian tanks extend their range and accuracy by a large margin by deploying anti tank missiles fired from their guns. the autocannons usually just work because they're on a plane and can hit from above or other unsuitable angles, at the same time the airplane is a nice target for anti air assets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
All in all we can never be sure what works and what not to most modern designs, unless there would be a war between two sides with latest equipments, which i think in the end we really dont want to witness.
I thought we're all looking forward to US vs. Russia on the Crimean peninsula. I could swear some Janes' flight sim or so was situated there. We could also reeneact it in Operation Flashpoint or maybe ArmA 2. :sweatdrop:
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Husar
That's not entirely true as the Soviet T-64 was the first tank in the world to deploy composite armor and was later developed into the T-80, which is still in use today. I'm not sure to what extent the T-72 and T-90 family uses composite or whether they just rely on ERA as you say.
The Leopard 2 A5 and A6 also uses a clever system of spaced armor on the turret.
Thank you for the information. ~:) Like i said there are many people far more knowledgeable concerning tanks then i am as im no tanker. I know just some basic things. If it helps anyway. I have at least been driven over by T-55M.We were lined in the ground with my squad in basic training. Apparently to get "familiar" with tanks. All i was wishing was that the driver could drive straight with that old modified colossus.:shrug:
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
Thank you for the information. ~:) Like i said there are many people far more knowledgeable concerning tanks then i am as im no tanker. I know just some basic things. If it helps anyway. I have at least been driven over by T-55M.We were lined in the ground with my squad in basic training. Apparently to get "familiar" with tanks. All i was wishing was that the driver could drive straight with that old modified colossus.:shrug:
I can't believe your troops still do that!?
So did the Swedes, when we still expected trench warfare...
No big flame on your defensive capabilities though, compared to Sweden. You even have an army and stuff....
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
I think that is a big mistake. Talk about bang for a buck when one talks about A-10. Maybe we can buy some of them dirt cheap like the Dutch Leopard 2a6 fleet? Petty, pretty please..?:rolleyes:
Again? They "retired" the A10 shortly after Desert Storm, twenty years ago. That retirement didn't work out. Does anybody believe it will be permanent and total this round?
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Last I heard they were keeping it until 2028 or so. It's just too damn good.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kadagar_AV
I can't believe your troops still do that!?
So did the Swedes, when we still expected trench warfare...
No big flame on your defensive capabilities though, compared to Sweden. You even have an army and stuff....
At least back in 1999 it was basic stuff.:yes:
Regarding Swedish stuff.I think you are manufacturing lot of exellent material, like things we are already using, namely NLAW, CV-90 IFV and if i recall right also AMOS advanced mortar system is a joint effort of Finland and Sweden. One thing ive never figured out as an old infantryman is that why on earth our retards at the defense ministry have not bought these from you as our army has mortars like now tomorrow and they arent exactly very expensive AT material:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strix_mortar_round
Yesterday i read from our news papers that there is now actually talk in Sweden also, if you guys should increase your defense spending a bit. Am i right?
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kagemusha
At least back in 1999 it was basic stuff.:yes:
Regarding Swedish stuff.I think you are manufacturing lot of exellent material, like things we are already using, namely NLAW, CV-90 IFV and if i recall right also AMOS advanced mortar system is a joint effort of Finland and Sweden. One thing ive never figured out as an old infantryman is that why on earth our retards at the defense ministry have not bought these from you as our army has mortars like now tomorrow and they arent exactly very expensive AT material:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strix_mortar_round
Yesterday i read from our news papers that there is now actually talk in Sweden also, if you guys should increase your defense spending a bit. Am i right?
Yeah, Sweden have great military toys. We just don't have the manpower to operate it.
You are right, Sweden just decided to raise our budget for the military. We have also stationed as many as 2 fighter jets on Gotland, I am sure that will keep the Russian Bear at bay.
Honestly speaking, I give it a 50/50 chance that the raised military budget goes straight to supporting transexual personel in the field with a gender neutral toilet.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kadagar_AV
Yeah, Sweden have great military toys. We just don't have the manpower to operate it.
You are right, Sweden just decided to raise our budget for the military. We have also stationed as many as 2 fighter jets on Gotland, I am sure that will keep the Russian Bear at bay.
Honestly speaking, I give it a 50/50 chance that the raised military budget goes straight to supporting transexual personel in the field with a gender neutral toilet.
LOL http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/02/face-...ir-force-base/
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fisherking
LOL
Quote:
While Russia invades Ukraine, as Islamic terrorist factions plot the West’s destruction, [...]
Because the war on terror and the future of Ukraine depend entirely on troops stationed in Japan who have no orders to mobilize...
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fisherking
It's okay. As long as they're good at killing people.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fisherking
Hardly new news that military entertainers may have a higher percentage of alternative lifestyles then the norm.
Heck the Brits used to have a TV sitcom that had that range of characters made in the seventies and set in WWII. "It Ain't Half Hot Mum"
BBC wins again.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fisherking
Most countries have too many of these people and depleat their conventional forces. The US may be the worst for this.
They use special ops for jobs that should be using cavalry scouts or a tank-infantry team.
Tell me why the navy needs 2,000 seals when they have marine divisions. Special Ops are support troops not the battle fighters.
The army cuts whole divisions and expands rangers and special forces
Even the Air Force has thousands of them. For what?
They train their infantry to act like special ops when they should be learning basic tactics. Everybody wants to be a ranger.
They blow more money on a ranger company than an armored brigade. I won’t even go to what they do with the more classified organizations.
Elite formations don’t equate to a strong war winning military. The mind set has pretty much been losing the war on terror or any other operations they have tried.
They interest Hollywood and the public and glorify war.
Surgical strikes don’t win guerrilla wars. Denying the fighters a hiding place does. Occupy and pacify. They don’t commit the troops to occupy and they had rectal-cranial-insertion when it came to hearts and minds.
They need to get rid of about 90% of these forces and get back to occupying ground and denying the enemy a place and opportunity to operate.
They fight short sharp actions against poorly defended objectives. If it is heavily defended they get help, except they are getting rid of the help to by more gadgets that still won’t get the job done.
They use police SWAT tactics where one grenade or an RPG would take out the whole damned unit.
The people behind this need theirs heads examined, preferably in a jar.:whip:
"Why" questions relating to human affairs are almost always answered in the same way: money.
The air force needs those specialists so that the air force does not appear to be inadequate and insure that it's percentage of the funding is not diminished. Remember, our military is paid to confront the opponents of the USA, but our military knows that the REAL enemy is the competing services in other offices at the Pentagon. Hackworth called it "perfumed prince" logic.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
One thing not mentioned...
The best special forces is the ones trained for the battle they get.
I am about 100% sure that Austrian Gebirgsjäger would kick behinds in a defensive battle in mountaineous terrain. I am equally sure they would be rather worthless storming beaches.
SAS will beat most others in jungle warfare, as they train for it... Whereas the French Foreign Legion excell in the desert.
There really is no way to say who is "the best", as it depends on the battleground, and how well various trainings corresponds to it.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kadagar_AV
One thing not mentioned...
The best special forces is the ones trained for the battle they get.
I am about 100% sure that Austrian Gebirgsjäger would kick behinds in a defensive battle in mountaineous terrain. I am equally sure they would be rather worthless storming beaches.
Only until the Spetsnaz arrive. Don't fall for their propaganda, vodka > training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kadagar_AV
SAS will beat most others in jungle warfare, as they train for it... Whereas the French Foreign Legion excell in the desert.
What have you been smoking?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m17ROteNP3E
The FFL gets very tough jungle training and they also work a lot in the jungle.
Spetsnaz are sent into the jungle at age five and may only return home after they have wrestled and domesticated a siberian tiger.
Re: Special Forces - who is the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Husar
Only until the Spetsnaz arrive. Don't fall for their propaganda, vodka > training.
What have you been smoking?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m17ROteNP3E
The FFL gets very tough jungle training and they also work a lot in the jungle.
Spetsnaz are sent into the jungle at age five and may only return home after they have wrestled and domesticated a siberian tiger.
My bad, I should have known that. Read up on it and stuff even, oh well, shows what pot will do to your memory :)
