Military Review

One person error or system failure?

123
One person error or system failure?Recently, a number of Russian departmental publications, such as the magazines "Army Collection" and "Bulletin of the Academy of Military Sciences," published articles by Viktor Alekseevich Svateev on increasing the effectiveness of automatic firing. According to the materials of publications, which caused a lively interest, very hot discussions were held among the experts. The article contains a brief analysis of the proposal by V.A. Svateeva.


ALL BUSINESS IN THE DETAILS

We begin our analysis with the fact that, in accordance with the proposals of V.A. Svateev increase the effectiveness of firing from a machine gun should be achieved by correcting the value of the sight "P". In his opinion, the AK74 machine gun’s “P” sight should provide a direct shot not at the target height of 0,5 m, but at the target height of 0,3. Moreover, as the author of the publications points out, these are the smallest targets that need to be fired in combat and the height of which is necessary and to assign the sight "P".

In support of his proposals, Viktor Alekseevich cites calculations in which he proves that shooting at a head piece with an existing “P” sight and with a target point under the lower edge of the target is ineffective. But with the proposed "P" sight with the height of the 0,3 trajectory and the shooting will be effective. So by simply changing the value of the “P” sight, in his opinion, it is possible to significantly increase the effectiveness of automatic firing.

At first glance, the author started a really good thing - to increase the efficiency of its use. weapons and lower costs to defeat the enemy! Such suggestions are welcome. Where was the whole military science before? Why no one thought of such a simple solution? But not everything is as simple as it may seem at first.

Let's start with the sight “P” of the AK74. According to V.A. Svateev, the value of the “P” sight of the AK74 submachine gun corresponds to the 440 distance m and provides a “direct” shot at the chest figure.

Sight "P" - the constant installation of the sight. This is the extreme rear position of the bite of the sight, in which it must reside until combat. Such a sight is convenient to use when the enemy suddenly appears at close range. The “P” sight is a relatively universal sight for shooting at short distances. It is convenient to use them in tense moments of the battle, since there is no need to be distracted and lose time on changing the sight.

It should be noted that the "P" sight is not always correctly interpreted as a sight with a range of a direct shot at the chest figure. So, for example, for the AKM assault rifle, the direct shot range at the target with a height of 0,5 m (chest figure) is 350 m, and the height of the trajectory with an “3” or “P” sight is 0,34 m. This is 16 cm lower than target No. 6, but 4 cm higher than the target number 5.

For AK74 and AK74M, the direct shot at the chest figure is 440 m, and the trajectory height with an “4” or “P” sight is 0,4 m. This is 10 cm lower than target No. 6, but 10 cm higher than the target No. 5. But there is one nuance. The AK74 manual says: “Art. The 13 ... "P" is a constant sight setting, roughly corresponding to the 4 sight (440 m firing range). " The appeal of the author of this article to the manufacturer of the machine gun clarified this question: at the AK74, the “P” sight corresponds to the “4” sight.

Thus, you can make the first conclusion. In the AK74 machine gun, the “P” sight, contrary to the statement of V.A. Svateev does not correspond to a direct shot range, but to an 4 sight. The height of the trajectory when shooting with the "P" sight from AKM and AK74 assault rifles allows you to confidently hit various, including small-sized targets. The only question is how to choose the right aiming point.

The variety of types and types of targets on the battlefield, their size and visibility, depending on the composition and weapons of the enemy, the method of his actions, as well as the relief, vegetation and climatic conditions, is very large. That is, the size of real targets can be both smaller and larger than the head figure, especially when conducting combat in special conditions. The size and shape of targets that mimic different goals and are used for training cannot exactly correspond to the enormous diversity that can exist on the battlefield. That is why the types and sizes of targets indicated in the Course of Shooting approximately correspond to real targets on the battlefield.

Special studies are conducted to determine the most characteristic targets, their size and visibility, as well as the firing range, the frequency of appearance in various types of combat, in various theaters of military operations. Their results are reflected in the tactical and technical requirements for weapons.

In support of their proposals on the need to shoot precisely on the main goal V.A. Svateev cites several shooter drawings in a trench and behind various shelters taken from the field manual of the US Army on the M16А1 automatic rifle, and some arguments about the size of targets on the battlefield. I believe that considering two or three pictures from manuals and manuals as “scientific evidence” to substantiate weapon requirements seems “slightly superficial”, and choosing the head figure as the main one is unreasonable.

AUTOMATIC NOT AUTOMATED

An assault rifle is a universal type of small arms that provides for the destruction of quite specific targets at certain ranges. Nevertheless, the machine can not ensure the performance of all tasks assigned to small arms in battle. From the machine gunner can not be required to perform the tasks of the machine gunner, and the more so the performance of sniper tasks. To solve the entire set of fire tasks in any subdivision, a system of samples of small arms is created. In turn, the practice of training shows that the existing targets of the Course of Shooting are quite sufficient for training, and the size of the target number 6 fully corresponds to the basic course of training with automatic shooting.

Having decided on some fundamentals, one can proceed to the consideration of the method of proof chosen by V.A. Svateev on changing the sight “P” of the AK74 assault rifle. As mentioned above, he proposes to assign a new “P” sight based on the height of the 0,3 m trajectory, justifying his proposals with the results of calculations of the probability of hitting the head figure. The calculations were carried out when shooting at different ranges for the values ​​of the 3, 4 sight, with the imaginary sight P, which has the height of the trajectory 0,5 m, in comparison with the shooting with the proposed sight P, with the height of the trajectory 0,3 m .

It is quite natural that when shooting a head figure with a “P” sight at distances where the average trajectory passes in the upper part of the target or higher than the target, the probability of hitting was lower than when shooting with the proposed “P” sight with a trajectory height 0,3 m. But exactly the way it should be. To prove the obvious truth, it was not necessary not only to carry out calculations or experimental firing, it was not even necessary to think about it.

What you need to pay attention to. In the calculations, Viktor Alekseevich considers only one aiming point, namely, in the middle of the lower edge of the target, while ignoring other options for aiming the weapon. In addition, the shooting options with precise sight settings are not considered at all. Moreover, the calculations were carried out only for the best shooters. And, judging by the presented results, the calculations were carried out in relation to the position for firing "lying with the stop" and without taking into account the errors of the preparation of firing. That is, such results were deliberately selected that worked for the version of V.A. Svateeva. From a scientific point of view, such a selective approach in proving one’s case is completely unacceptable. And then, what kind of combat situation did the author of the proposal consider, simulating shooting at the head target at a distance of about 300 m from the “prone to stop” shooting position?

EMPTY DISCUSSIONS

The most remarkable thing is that as a result of the calculations carried out by the author of the "rationalization offer" it has been convincingly proven that shooting with a scope that exceeds the range to the target is ineffective. But this is an axiom! This does not even require elementary reasoning. Moreover, the cited evidence completely ignored the requirement of Art. 155 Manuals AK74: "... the sight and aiming point are chosen so that when firing the average trajectory passes in the middle of the target." In other words, as applied to the case under consideration, the aiming point was chosen incorrectly and cannot be used for guaranteed target destruction.

However, V.A. Svateev does not pay attention to this requirement and cites the second paragraph of Art. 155 Manuals: “When firing at a distance of up to 400 m, fire should be fired, as a rule (highlighted by me. - VK), with an 4 or“ R ”sight, aiming at the lower edge of the target ...” And further he claims that he is taught to shoot soldiers today, this is how he was once taught to shoot at the Kurgan military-political school, just so he taught to shoot his soldiers, being the commander of the aerodrome guard company. And this is done ostensibly because this is exactly what the AK74 Automatic Manual requires to shoot.

But the second paragraph of Art. The 155 Guidelines merely expand the guidelines listed in the first paragraph, but do not cancel them. All those who are familiar with the methods of fire training, with the arguments of V.A. Svateeva can not agree. Documents regulating fire training, clearly require commanders to conduct classes with subordinates on the rules of firing in specific conditions of the situation. During these sessions, trainees must be taught to determine the distance to the target and select the required sight. Also, depending on the distance to the target, the movement of the target, the direction and speed of the wind and the surrounding temperature, the aiming point is chosen. At the same time, depending on the shooting conditions, the aiming point can be located outside the contour of the target. Shooting with a “point of sight removal” that takes into account shooting conditions is a common practice in shooting training.

Firm conviction V.A. Svateev in that shooting in the army, including a small-sized target, is taught only with the “P” sight with aiming only at the edge, is either intentional forgery in evidence, or complete ignorance of the fundamentals of the methodology and practice of fire preparation. Thus, the time has come to draw the following and, perhaps, the main conclusion: for effective firing from a machine gun, one should not carry out experiments with a sight, but teach people to shoot!

What, then, can the proposed V.A. In Swateev, the change of the value of sight “P” for the AK74 assault rifle from the height of the 0,4 trajectory to the height of the 0,3 trajectory of m? First, to completely unnecessary costs of finance and time. Secondly, to the elementary confusion in the knowledge by the servicemen of the significance of the “P” sight for various types of weapons. And this is despite the fact that there will be no increase in the effectiveness of shooting! I believe that after the above arguments, the conclusion about the proposal of V.A. Svateeva can be unambiguous: it is not necessary to do so.

What do they think about in the ministry

In trying to improve something, a person may honestly be mistaken, may be mistaken because of ignorance, may show elementary stubbornness in defending his point of view, may even commit a certain forgery in order to prove his rightness. All this is human error. But can publishers review our proposals publishing houses that position themselves as magazines for military professionals? I believe that the editors of such publications were simply obliged to receive reviews of the publications planned for publication. Even if this is an article to start a discussion.

By the way, reviews of their publications V.A. Svateev wanted to get in various organizations, but after the publication of articles. The answer was negative. However, V.A. Svateev, showing perseverance in achieving this goal, demanded that everyone who gave a negative review on his proposals change it to a positive one.

At one time, an article in the journal of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR was regarded as a guide to action. Even today, according to rumors, there were “experts” who found rational in the proposals of V.A. Svateev. So the publications under discussion have had an effect on the fragile minds of some "young military scientists."

But there is another question that does not want to get round. Articles published. Amateurs expressed their opinions on forums on the Internet and specialists of organizations in the written answers of V.A. Swateev. And where is the printed word of professionals? As if having collected water in their mouths, they are persistently silent. The Main Directorate of Combat Training of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the Directorate of Combat Training of the Ground Forces, the Main Rocket and Artillery Directorate, the Combined Arms Academy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the Department of Fire Training of Universities power departments. Silence is a sign of agreement with what VA declares. Svateev and publishes in magazines of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation?

Or maybe everything is much simpler? As you know, in the course of the relatively recent reform of military education, the “Shot” courses were eliminated, the department of combat effectiveness of weapons in the Combined-Arms Academy was destroyed, the management of combat training and the management of military education underwent reorganization and optimization, and the military training department of the Army where there were also fire training specialists. Are there any firemen in our fatherland? What is the current state of fire in the Armed Forces of Russia?
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2018-01-26/1_981_error.html
123 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Herculesic
    Herculesic 27 January 2018 07: 35 New
    +2
    And what are the conclusions - to prohibit machines? What can I say, really, not verbally, can be changed, and how quickly can this be done?
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 27 January 2018 16: 21 New
      +5
      Thus, the time has come to make the following, and perhaps the main conclusion: for effective firing from an automatic rifle, it is not necessary to conduct experiments with an aim, but to teach people how to shoot!
      1. tracer
        tracer 27 January 2018 16: 51 New
        +7
        That’s for sure, I’ll say more, we need to introduce shooting simulators as the most important stage in the preparation of shooters. I am observing and participating in this issue on the issue of the USA. Huge changes are going on in the quality training of the shooter .... unfortunately not in the Russian army.
        1. Shurik70
          Shurik70 27 January 2018 22: 05 New
          0
          Arabs, for example, prefer to shoot while standing, holding their weapons in weight. And we often have to fight with the Arabs. So a goal with a height of 0,5m is still not enough.
          In addition, the AN-94 (Abakan) is now being introduced into the army to replace Kalash. And there the sight is somewhat different.
      2. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum 27 January 2018 17: 53 New
        +5
        All these calculations, “with a scientific approach and formulas” are good at a shooting range when shooting weapons, or in positional shootings. And, here the author (s) of the AK shooting system was initially calculated primarily on mobility and intensity of battles. It’s still very good that you know your weapon and are able to move the aiming bar automatically, but as a rule, not many are able to do this under the adrenaline and speed of what is happening. That is why the provision "P" exists.
        This is, of course, if you are preparing / organizing ambush actions, then you can also prepare to move the bar ... Or you know the battle distance in advance ...
        But, in general ... The best is the enemy of the good.
      3. Moon rover xnumx
        Moon rover xnumx 13 February 2018 11: 22 New
        +1
        Enchanting paragraph! With a professional army it’s clear - it is necessary! But after all, we know that in the case of mobilization, such a large contingent will not work and there will be no time to train! Well? Again "cannon fodder" ????
    2. tracer
      tracer 27 January 2018 16: 47 New
      +2
      There is a direction of believers in the omnipotence of glass on the machine.
      1. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum 27 January 2018 17: 39 New
        +2
        You underestimate them, these "glass". Or in practice did not apply.
    3. Pax tecum
      Pax tecum 27 January 2018 16: 59 New
      +2
      And where is the description of the ammunition in the article, the caliber and weight of the bullets, the length of the barrel, etc.? Those. of what external ballistics depends on. Somehow not professionally.
      And when shooting in the mountains?
      Yes, and targeting a weapon and bringing it to a normal battle is a purely individual thing.
      Many, many words in a clever language and it is not clear why. There are a couple of pages in the manual and ready-made tables.
      But, in general, you must admit, the Kalimator sight is a cool thing.
      1. Dooplet11
        Dooplet11 27 January 2018 17: 12 New
        +3
        caliber sight
        right "collimator"
        1. Pax tecum
          Pax tecum 27 January 2018 17: 29 New
          0
          Yes, okay, don’t find fault. With one finger and in motion ... I could be wrong in a hurry. The main thing is that the meaning is clear.
          1. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 27 January 2018 20: 38 New
            +3
            Okay I will not. In motion excusable. That's when the PAK-1 sight was signed as "KаPAK-1 Dimple Sight "ashamed of both the museum and the Air Force. sad
            1. Michael HORNET
              Michael HORNET 23 February 2018 22: 06 New
              0
              The collimator sight is good for short range and special forces. The machine needs optics
      2. tracer
        tracer 27 January 2018 17: 18 New
        +3
        Dear "office" colleague. As a former rifleman, former sniper of "mountain places", a developer of systems directly related to the training of a shooter, I’ll tell you .. What you are wrong. Rather, they are right, but in part. The collimator scope works well at a direct shot distance. The highlands are already making significant deviations even on a direct shot. There are collimator sights such as ACOG from TRIGICON
        1. Pax tecum
          Pax tecum 27 January 2018 17: 27 New
          +1
          How was the "office" calculated? But suddenly did not guess?
          1. tracer
            tracer 27 January 2018 19: 23 New
            +4
            Perhaps not guessed. But the service person is very simple to determine. Sailor of a sailor ... The collimator sight was never used in practice only optical. But he is familiar with the new and old generation of these sights as an active athlete shooter. On a pistol, he is completely unnecessary, at close distances up to a hundred meters, too. That is why the arrows on the gangway and the monastery (skeet) never use any glass. Over 100 meters, even with automatic brightness control, the point begins to block small targets. On all AK shnomu weapons to put except a dovetail it nowhere. Everything else is from the evil one. SIGHTS go loose and give unacceptable deviations.
            1. Rader
              Rader 28 January 2018 01: 08 New
              +2
              On all AK shnomu weapons to put except a dovetail it nowhere. Everything else is from the evil one. SIGHTS go loose and give unacceptable deviations.

              Well, this is if you put on the ikpikatininnoy cover ... There is an option to install in the area of ​​the gas outlet pipe (replacing the tube on ikpikatininuyu). Yes, this solution has the same many drawbacks, but the problem with backlash is solved. Well, in modern copies, all the same problems with sighting markers are not so pronounced. hi
        2. gross kaput
          gross kaput 28 January 2018 21: 10 New
          0
          Quote: tracer
          collimator type e.g. ACOG from TRIGICON

          Akogis do not belong to the Kaliki sideways, these are optical sights of magnification from 1,5 to 6, the most common 4X. They relate to the so-called "assault" OP - small multiplicity, simplified amendment mechanisms that do not allow for prompt corrections, but a sufficiently large field of view, low weight and dimensions, akog modifications have different meshes originally sharpened for the ballistics of a specific weapon and a specific cartridge. .
          And the one that is collimating - so this is an airsoft replica - because optics are not very popular in airsoft, and entourage is valued, so the Chinese have launched the release of airsoft collimators that externally copy ACOG 4X32
    4. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 11: 30 New
      0
      I gave the answer to this article of Korablin in my article on the same site "The system corrects the error. TSNIITOCHMASH against?" Therefore, I will not answer in the comments.
      Here is the link: https://topwar.ru/135696-sistema-ispravlyaet-oshi
      bku-cniitochmash-protiv.html
  2. Lopatov
    Lopatov 27 January 2018 08: 36 New
    13
    Somehow completely unconvincing. There is scatter data from the shooting tables. There is a dispersion grid. Why did the author not corny calculate the probability of hitting a target with the existing permanent sight for the conditions under which, in his opinion, the approval of Comrade. Svateeva does not work? For example, standing shooting for “medium machine gunners”?
    However, the author of the article preferred to pour water instead of specific figures. Probably so that the reader drowned in it 8)))
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 27 January 2018 09: 01 New
      +1
      Quote: Spade
      Somehow completely unconvincing. There is scatter data from the shooting tables. There is a dispersion grid. Why did the author not corny calculate the probability of hitting a target with the existing permanent sight for the conditions under which, in his opinion, the approval of Comrade. Svateeva does not work? For example, standing shooting for “medium machine gunners”?
      However, the author of the article preferred to pour water instead of specific figures. Probably so that the reader drowned in it 8)))

      There is no dispersion in the counter. smile
    2. Mik13
      Mik13 27 January 2018 10: 26 New
      16
      Quote: Spade
      Why did the author not corny calculate the probability of hitting the target with the existing permanent sight for the conditions under which, in his opinion, the approval of Comrade. Svateeva does not work? For example, standing shooting for "medium machine gunners"?

      In fact, it would be quite enough to give an example of the sighting of the head target through the AK-74 sight at a distance of 300 meters. After that, the discussion of the legendary Svateev loses all meaning.
      By the way, if an ordinary shooter with the naked eye is able to notice the enemy’s head at a distance of 300 meters - he needs to be given an SVD or machine gun. It will be more useful.
      1. sabakina
        sabakina 27 January 2018 11: 27 New
        +7
        Quote: Mik13
        By the way, if an ordinary shooter with the naked eye is able to notice the enemy’s head at a distance of 300 meters - he needs to be given an SVD or machine gun. It will be more useful.

        Today I’m not a shooter, driver. Traffic cop I notice at a distance of 500 meters. What weapons do you suggest?
        1. CTABEP
          CTABEP 28 January 2018 16: 08 New
          +1
          Traffic cops usually lie in camouflage along the road?
      2. aws4
        aws4 27 January 2018 19: 15 New
        +3
        and why exactly the heads and exactly 300 meters ???? By the way, I always set sight 3 instead of P from personal experience, a more adequate and universal setting of the bar ...
        1. Svateev
          Svateev 13 February 2018 12: 24 New
          +1
          Quote: aws4
          By the way, I always put the 3 sight instead of P from personal experience, a more adequate and universal setting of the bar ...

          Right! because a direct shot must be counted on the lowest target, because we get into higher goals without any problems. But when P is not for the lowest pectoral target. then over the lower head in the middle part of the trajectory there are flights.
          It was 3 that I recommended for a direct shot from AK74 in my first article, "A submachine gun must and can hit a head figure." This article also posted on this site: https://topwar.ru/34890-avtomatchik-dolzhen-i-moz
          het-porazhat-golovnuyu-figuru.html
          1. aws4
            aws4 13 February 2018 18: 28 New
            0
            I somehow intuitively trial and error, plus the comrades experimented, and most of them came to this conclusion ..... I don’t remember whether I read your article or not, but anyway thanks I will definitely read it now ..
      3. haron
        haron 1 February 2018 12: 30 New
        +1
        Quote: Mik13
        By the way, if an ordinary shooter with the naked eye is able to notice the enemy’s head at a distance of 300 meters - he needs to be given an SVD or machine gun. It will be more useful.

        Well said.
        In the article, it was a little rezultant how the author easily operates distances of 400-300-200 meters, in the sense that the shooter will quickly determine the distance + - 50 meters and make corrections to the aiming point (using sight P). The complexity of the mountains was mentioned above, but the city and the forest also do not shine with the presence of clear guidelines for a 10-second aim.
        1. Svateev
          Svateev 13 February 2018 12: 46 New
          0
          Quote: haron
          it cuts how the author easily operates distances in 400-300-200 meters, in the sense that the shooter will quickly determine the distance + - 50 meters

          You're right. Range error is the largest of all shooting errors. especially when you have to determine with your eye, not from a standing position, but lying down, when the entire range to the target is compressed to the “thread” state.
      4. Svateev
        Svateev 13 February 2018 11: 48 New
        0
        Quote: Mik13
        it is enough to give an example of the sighting of the head target through the AK-74 sight at a distance of 300 meters.

        I myself doubted that the submachine gunners would be able to aim at No. 5 at such ranges. Could!
        By the way, in the GRAU firing tables, the number of rounds required to defeat No.5 is completely indicated to 800m (!). So they saw No. 5 and shot at it and at such ranges with a sector (full-time mechanical) sight.
        This is the first. And secondly, the topic also applies to optical automatic sights. Because ALL optics for the machine are still made with a minimum 4 scope, there are simply less marks on the sights. It turns out that you see the target with an increase in x4 (on 400m as well as with the naked eye on 100m), but it’s impossible to aim precisely - NOTHING.
    3. tchoni
      tchoni 27 January 2018 11: 05 New
      +7
      Quote: Spade
      Why did the author not corny calculate the probability of hitting the target with the existing permanent sight for the conditions under which, in his opinion, the approval of Comrade. Svateeva does not work? For example, standing shooting for "medium machine gunners"?

      Here! The author and hero Svateev profess a different approach to shooting. The first believes that every soldier has passed at least a course of niper training. The second one knows that the rifle training of the bulk of Russian soldiers is reduced to "three single shots at the chest target before the oath." That's the difference in views.
      1. Moon rover xnumx
        Moon rover xnumx 13 February 2018 11: 27 New
        +1
        This is a typical example of the dispute between "practice" and "theorist" ...
    4. Dzungar
      Dzungar 27 January 2018 15: 55 New
      0
      What is a "diffusion grid" ....?
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 27 January 2018 16: 19 New
        +6
        Quote: Dzungar
        What is a "diffusion grid" ....?

      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 27 January 2018 16: 25 New
        +3
        And so it looks entirely
  3. bunta
    bunta 27 January 2018 08: 49 New
    +4
    Are there still firemen in our country?

    Judging by the author still remained. That's just not working there.
  4. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 27 January 2018 09: 01 New
    35
    Let the rookie shoot at targets from various positions and distances at 100 rounds per day for 3 months - there will be a good soldier. Do not give - will not. At least Pe, at least put He ... laughing
    1. RUSOIVAN
      RUSOIVAN 27 January 2018 09: 30 New
      11
      There will be a good shooter. Soldier, I don’t know!
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 27 January 2018 09: 53 New
      27
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Let the rookie shoot at targets from various positions and distances at 100 rounds per day for 3 months - there will be a good soldier. Do not give - will not. At least Pe, at least put He ...

      He will be sure that he is a mega-cool soldier.
      And then he, frozen and sleepy, will be put in the BMP assault, he will travel N tens of kilometers in it, experiencing bouts of seasickness. However, fear will supplant them later, because the last kilometers the car will be significantly shaken from the close explosions of 155-mm shells. Then the BMP will slow down, and the sergeant will yell, "Shake it out, b..b." He will jump out of the car and find himself in a completely unfamiliar place. And run forward. In its robust weight "body kit". Due to the load, his field of view will begin to narrow with each step. And then from a funnel his "colleague" suddenly pops out from the opposite side. The same "mega cool", stunned, with trembling hands and eyes, like a mouse that sends natural needs ... seeing that something is moving there, grunting towards our "will be a good soldier (s)" line to the store floor .
      And the last thought of a "great shooter" will be "Yes .... it's not a shooting gallery"
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 27 January 2018 11: 09 New
        +1
        Well, my friend, these points should also be taken into account during the preparation.
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 27 January 2018 23: 07 New
        10
        They’re shooting not at the shooting range at targets, but at the firing range. With dashes, crawling and all the set of charms. At the end of the training: twice “height assault”, each with four target strips. Twice 7 shops shoot back. Not a single blank cartridge, of course. Marshbrokes - always night and also with firing, and all sorts of armored personnel carriers - separately.
        And we were always sleepy. And always M-16 with you. Even in a sleeping bag and toilet. yes
      3. would
        would 28 January 2018 03: 57 New
        +3
        You wrote that the apocalyptic opus, that only one conclusion can be drawn from it: "Any preparation is meaningless, so you just need to send the meat for slaughter without preparing it, maybe someone will survive." That's just the fact and the opus that he has nothing to do with reality.

        put in the BMP landing, it will travel N tens of kilometers in it, experiencing bouts of seasickness.


        Perhaps you are not in the know, but on constant exercises he will ride in a BMP of the same model. Perhaps even with an even more killed chassis. And gradually his vestibular apparatus will get used to it, and if the motion sickness doesn’t completely disappear, it will become much easier and more tolerable than it was originally.

        his robust weight "body kit". Due to the load, his field of view will begin to narrow with each step.


        Physical training in the army canceled? As well as proceeding from this opus, the tactical one is because your soldier is "running forward", and not at least following the order of the squad leader. Least.

        Well, like a cherry on a cake

        He will be sure that he is a mega-cool soldier.


        It is visible to you as a person unfamiliar with critical situations that it is not known that it is internal confidence in oneself and one's strength that is the decisive factor in any action within this situation. You can be just a terrible fighter, but when you are “met” in the street to get scared and not even try to fight back, you may not be a fighter, but inner confidence in exactly the same situation will allow you to fight back despite the lack of physical preparation.

        The same thing in battle, the soldier’s confidence in himself and his skills will allow him to act actively and aggressively, not to tremble like he didn’t understand what, but to shoot efficiently, not be the target, but to impose the initiative on the enemy himself.

        The absence of such, with any training, will lead to the non-use of this training itself.

        Needless to say, as elsewhere, a measure is needed and one must not confuse inner confidence with anything unsupported by bravado turning into idiocy.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 January 2018 09: 43 New
          +3
          Quote: rait
          Maybe you aren’t in the know, but on constant exercises he will ride in a BMP

          Perhaps you aren’t in the know, but he will ride very, very little in the BMP "landing" on constant exercises. Have you gone through the army in absentia?
          Quote: rait
          Physical training in the army canceled? As well as proceeding from this opus, the tactical one is because your soldier is "running forward", and not at least following the order of the squad leader. Least.

          Apparently, you never went for a long time in the BMP landing.
          Quote: rait
          It seems to you as a person unfamiliar with critical situations that you don’t know what exactly is internal confidence in yourself and your strengths

          You, apparently, as a person unfamiliar with sports and martial arts in particular, are unaware that there is a much worse thing than self-doubt. It is called "exercise". Reassessment of their strength. Guaranteed loss, and often also injury.
          No, of course, if you need to prepare a simple one-time “meat”, you can psychologically pump it up to the state of “winner of everything and everything” and send it into battle, into the frontal machine guns. Well, if you need someone who not only wins, but also survives, then such a fighter should soberly assess his capabilities.
          1. would
            would 28 January 2018 11: 39 New
            +1
            Perhaps you aren’t in the know, but he will ride very, very little in the BMP "landing" on constant exercises. Have you gone through the army in absentia?


            For continuous exercises, the BMP unit should travel frequently in these BMPs. And it was there that the fighters first met with seasickness, which by the way is not found in everyone. It should drive often, in fact, we know how it often turns out. Have you gone through the army in absentia? Otherwise, I can’t find another reason why you don’t even know what the BMP unit should teach (and what it does during exercises).

            You, apparently, as a person unfamiliar with sports and martial arts in particular, are unaware that there is a much worse thing than self-doubt. It is called "exercise". Reassessment of their strength. Guaranteed loss, and often also injury.


            You apparently didn’t read my message without any reason because I wrote there

            Needless to say, as elsewhere, a measure is needed and one must not confuse inner confidence with anything unsupported by bravado turning into idiocy.


            So your further fantasies are off topic and it is unclear who you are contacting. But this is a frequent polemic trick: “assign some kind of nonsense to your opponent, and then start fighting with him”, but you need to be more careful. Reading messages, or ascribing to an opponent what he just denied, you look very stupid ... well, like now. lol
            1. would
              would 28 January 2018 11: 57 New
              +1
              And it was there that the fighters first met with seasickness, which by the way is not found in everyone.


              To be more precise, I personally did not encounter sea sickness on the BMP-2 and personally did not hear from anyone that they would only hear about what happens, but it is not personalized. It is difficult to point to the BMP-2 because of the stiff suspension, probably only people with a weak vestibular apparatus suffer.

              But the BTR-80 is another matter, I didn’t suffer from seasickness there, but ... a motion sickness if you travel for a long time. On it, this is much more likely.

              I asked a friend who had gone to his school for more than one year on BMP-2, often a lot. This is a specialty. He generally told me that he had never heard of such a thing, had never felt it, did not know who would have suffered from sea sickness in the BMP-2, and stated bluntly that this was quoting "fabrications." I have no reason not to believe him; on the BMP-2 he drove ten times more than me and certainly more than you.
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 January 2018 12: 27 New
              +3
              Quote: rait
              For continuous exercises, the BMP unit should travel frequently in these BMPs.

              By a little. On the one hand, saving resources and fuel, on the other, the intensification of combat training. Instead of riding infantry on the BMP for many hours, it’s better to work out its actions a dozen times from the moment it arrives at the dismounting line. And so it is for everyone. Not only in Russia.
              No, of course it is possible and necessary to train motorized rifles. Loping, trampoline, gymnastic wheels ... But for some strange reason, the infantry were not puzzled by the training of the vestibular apparatus of the infantry. Only flyers, marines, paratroopers, and, of course, sailors, and, oddly enough, tankers should be led through "increasing resistance to motion sickness." Open any NFP and see "special fitness tasks"
              And since there is no task, there is no equipment for this. Even for tankers.
              Quote: rait
              You apparently didn’t read my message without any

              Without any a priori, you apparently consider yourself smarter than your opponent. And therefore, do not even try to think about what he wrote.
              "Cherry on the cake" (c), damn it ...
              Quote: rait
              "assign some kind of nonsense to your opponent, and then start fighting with him"

              Namely, my friend, im-but ... Purely your method.

              I write that a person who has just learned to shoot well is not a very, very “good soldier” (c)
              You accuse me of a certain underestimation of "self-confidence", and you begin with a direct transition to the personality: "as a person unfamiliar with critical situations." Are you psychic? By avatar do you calculate a biography?
              I would understand if this happened in the midst of an argument, when there are no more arguments. But starting right away with a change in personality ... is not good.

              Well, about the "self-confidence." The simplest example. The southwestern outskirts of Urus-Martan. The infantry is arranged in a ravine, the militants tried to spit out of town towards the mountains. They fired at the car, they unscrewed it, and, retreating, left the sniper pair to cover. They shot the sergeant. One fighter climbed to save him. The platoon yells at him, "stop, now the smokes will drag." But the soldier’s self-confidence whips straight from his ears, which is why the team of some kind of "jackal" came to him. Rypnil forward, as a result of two corpses. And the savior and the wounded. Whose sniper finished off, because that is exactly what he was waiting for.
              1. would
                would 28 January 2018 12: 40 New
                +1
                Well, as it always happens there are no arguments left

                . Only flyers, marines, paratroopers, and, of course, sailors, and, oddly enough, tankers should be led through "increasing resistance to motion sickness." Open any NFP and see "special fitness tasks"
                And since there is no task, there is no equipment for this. Even for tankers.


                Write as if I had somewhere stated that motorized riflemen should be trained separately on the stability of the vestibular apparatus.

                By a little. On the one hand, saving resources and fuel, on the other, the intensification of combat training. Instead of riding infantry on the BMP for many hours, it’s better to work out its actions a dozen times from the moment it arrives at the dismounting line. And so it is for everyone. Not only in Russia.


                And how do they get to the point of dismount? On separate specially prepared machines? Or maybe no polygon is needed anymore and you can work out everything directly in part? laughing

                I don’t know how you had it, but we didn’t keep separate vehicles for the armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles and moved these offices on our armored vehicles because we believed that the airborne compartment of the armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles did not exist for no reason.

                Without any a priori, you apparently consider yourself smarter than your opponent. And therefore, do not even try to think about what he wrote.


                Naturally, when you look bad and understand that you are very mistaken, pretend that you should, but your opponent is mistaken. But "manuscripts do not burn" and our posts will remain, including the one where I directly write that "empty bravado is id and about tism", and you reply to it "you don’t know that empty bravado is a lot worse thing."

                So write-write, the paper will endure.

                You accuse me of a certain underestimation of "self-confidence", and you begin with a direct transition to the personality: "as a person unfamiliar with critical situations." Are you psychic? By avatar do you calculate a biography?


                The argument to the personality is an argument in which only the opponent’s personality is criticized. But as we can see, there was no argument for the individual, we see both of them, therefore you did not completely quote the message, but took it out of context. Because in its entirety this part of the message is not an Ad hominem because it criticizes not the personality, but the thesis. At the same time, so in essence you have nothing to answer and you continue to look stupid arguing with a thesis that you yourself have launched into the discussion.

                Particularly funny outrage is the imaginary argument to the person after your ad hominem

                Perhaps you aren’t in the know, but he will ride very, very little in the BMP "landing" on constant exercises. Have you gone through the army in absentia?


                As we can see, the whole message is built on an empty statement and an argument to the individual.

                How do I know that you have not been in critical situations? Do I determine by avatar? "But hell ... how?" No, everything is much smarter. I determine this based on what you wrote. And if a person belittles self-confidence and sarcasts about it, then this means that the person simply does not know what it is, and therefore has not been in situations when she showed herself. Elementary Watson!
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 28 January 2018 13: 58 New
                  +3
                  Quote: rait
                  Write as if I had somewhere stated that motorized riflemen should be trained separately on the stability of the vestibular apparatus.

                  Exactly. Must train separately. And the fact that you did not state this is a consequence of ignorance of the subject of discussion.

                  Quote: rait
                  And how do they get to the point of dismount?

                  On trolleybus 11 ... 8)))
                  Dear, I have to ask the question one more time: is the army in absentia? Never to see how the infantry trains on foot after dismounting ... They are advancing, retreating, advancing, retreating. And so until the company is tired. And BMPs, if they exist, are simply at the turn of dismounting.

                  Quote: rait
                  I don’t know how you had it, but we didn’t keep separate vehicles for the armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles and moved these offices on our armored vehicles because we believed that the airborne compartment of the armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles did not exist for no reason.

                  I have great doubts about your phrase "with us" ...

                  Quote: rait
                  Naturally, when you look bad and understand that you are very mistaken, pretend that you should, and your opponent is mistaken. But "manuscripts do not burn"

                  Exactly. You were the first to switch personalities, moreover, in your first post. "Manuscripts do not burn" (c)

                  Quote: rait
                  Particularly funny indignation with an imaginary argument to the person

                  Blah blah blah...
                  You state that the following phrase "You probably don’t know how to a person unfamiliar with critical situations"Didn’t you write? Or are you trying to say that this is not really a personalization? Dear, why are you like a snake in a frying pan ... it's time to grow up and start to answer for your words ...

                  Quote: rait
                  I determine this based on what you wrote. And if a person belittles self-confidence and sarcasts about it, then this means that the person simply does not know what it is, and therefore has not been in situations when she showed herself.

                  Or maybe the other way around? I have been in such situations, and therefore am not inclined to exaggerate the significance of this "self-confidence"?
                  If you really were in such situations, you would know that the main thing is reflexes. Then, brains. Well, only then "confidence." Moreover, it should be firmly tied to critical self-esteem. Otherwise, it will end in a corpse. And it’s good if only “self-confident” without any reason for it.

                  Another real case. Komsomolskoye has already been cleared, and a group of especially gifted climbed into the ravines in the south of the village to mash. They are self-confident to the impossibility, they themselves have put dozens of stretch marks from grenades and consider themselves supersapers ... The result is four corpses, including a lieutenant and three cripples.
                  They put stretch marks there at night. The area a little less than a football field then the sappers from the Ministry of Emergency Situations cleaned for more than a week, on tiptoe ....
                  1. would
                    would 28 January 2018 14: 53 New
                    +1
                    Dear, I have to ask the question one more time: is the army in absentia? Never to see how the infantry trains on foot after dismounting ... They are advancing, retreating, advancing, retreating. And so until the company is tired. And BMPs, if they exist, are simply at the turn of dismounting.


                    Once again, look very stupid, apparently it's your habit. The question was absolutely concrete: "How will they get to the point of dismount?" And it directly followed that the question was about the means of transporting the departments to the venue of the exercises. But instead of answering it, you started to write something on a pedestrian workout, to which there were no questions at all. That is, "moved off topic." Well, of course, once again turned to the individual.

                    You say that the following phrase, “You don’t know how to a person unfamiliar with critical situations,” was not written by you? Or are you trying to say that this is actually not a transition to the individual? Dear, why are you like a snake in a pan ... it's time to grow up and start to answer for your words ...


                    Wow, how I hurt you! You can already see how you blaze from anger, as many as twice in one place on the person crossed. You are still afraid to quote that part of the message in full, well, then I will. Shake in horror

                    It is visible to you as a person unfamiliar with critical situations that it is not known that it is internal confidence in oneself and one's strength that is the decisive factor in any action within this situation. You can be just a terrible fighter, but when you are “met” in the street to get scared and not even try to fight back, you may not be a fighter, but inner confidence in exactly the same situation will allow you to fight back despite the lack of physical preparation.

                    The same thing in battle, the soldier’s confidence in himself and his skills will allow him to act actively and aggressively, not to tremble like he didn’t understand what, but to shoot efficiently, not be the target, but to impose the initiative on the enemy himself.


                    Unlike you, I’m not afraid of my words and not just responsible for them, but I am happy to quote them. Just something tells me that you again “like God's dew” will pretend that you did not see all this, did not see any specific arguments and reduce everything to an argument to the person (supposedly the rest of the message was not) that you still continue to pour. What else remains for you? In essence, you can’t answer, you do not have enough strength to admit that you are wrong. As a result, you simply deny the existence of an uncomfortable fragment for you. And again, it slides down to the beloved and at the same time criticized by you arguments to the personality that you only used for this message 5 times. lol

                    That's just "manuscripts do not burn" and that you would not write past messages it will not change and it is absolutely clear from them who is who, who wrote what and so on. I understand you are horrified by this, but such is the reality.

                    maybe vice versa? I have been in such situations, and therefore am not inclined to exaggerate the significance of this "self-confidence"?
                    If you really were in such situations, you would know that the main thing is reflexes. Then, brains. Well, only then "confidence."


                    Immediately "goodbye" and now I am 100% sure that you are a theorist who has never been in such situations.

                    1. Reflexes are brains. Reflex is nothing more than a consequence of the central nervous system, so you are now putting the cart in front of the horse.
                    2. If by "brains" the mind was meant, then again a mess. Any person who has not been alone in difficult situations when the mind simply does not have time to work, notices that this is only a subjective sensation. In fact, the mind works, just at the very moment of action it is unconscious (later you can realize why you made certain decisions) and all personality traits still appear. And a cowardly man remains cowardly, all fears as they remain remain fears, the opposite is also true. By the way, they study the corresponding specialties.

                    3. So the brain is ahead of everything. Self-confidence as unconscious precedes the action and directly determines it, and only after the action follows.

                    As a person who has repeatedly been in difficult situations, I was forced to notice this. Because no matter how many times I trained, how good I would not execute punches and throws during training, how reflexively they would not work, I was constrained in the street and everything went completely differently and I could not do anything. And only after I realized that this is the simplest fear that turns me from a young and quite promising fighter into a punching bag. Yeah, unlike you, I am honest and I have enough strength to admit that what I described was experienced in a contented, humiliating and despised role. I do not theorize how from inner uncertainty you turn into a coward who cannot do anything, I was this powerless coward into whom you turned from inner uncertainty. Well, after my specialty, I studied this at a scientific level, consciousness and the unconscious, unconscious complexes and their consequences (I was particularly struck by changes in the person’s personality after growth growth surgeries), self-esteem, a person’s reaction to stress, psychosomatic disorders, PTSD and BPT and etc. All this has long been known and chewed.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 28 January 2018 21: 14 New
                      +1
                      Quote: rait
                      The question was absolutely concrete: "How will they get to the point of dismount?"

                      And I answered you specifically: on the 11th trolleybus. I’ll translate for idioms Russian idioms. On foot.

                      Quote: rait
                      I, unlike you .......................... reality.

                      Very, very many words. Mostly boastful. But there is no simple answer to a simple question.
                      Didn’t you write the phrase “You see how a person unfamiliar with critical situations is unknown”?

                      Quote: rait
                      1. Reflexes are brains.

                      For a man, apparently, far from the army, I will show you simple, everyday examples. You are washing the dishes. An awkward movement, they waved the glass off the table with a hand. Managed to catch before he fell and crashed. Is the situation familiar?
                      And if you know, then tell me how much you needed to “gain confidence” to do this?


                      Quote: rait
                      If by "brains" the mind was meant, then again a mess. Any person who has not been alone in difficult situations when the mind simply does not have time to work

                      I sympathize ... Usually he is a little faster. And therefore, in combat conditions, most people manage to use their minds. True, there really are individuals for whom commanders and colleagues use their minds.

                      Again, a simple example from real life. The assault of the Pioneer. The floor of the village (northern part) is ours. A very early morning. A couple of soldiers of the first year of service decided to go through the cellars for "additional food" for breakfast. And for some reason they fled south to the Czechs. The notorious "self-confidence" worked. They decided that in the rear everything had already been erased. They climbed into the basement of the house, in the attic of which a couple of militants sat, who overslept them corny. Hearing an incomprehensible rustling below, one decided to check. And again the notorious "self-confidence" worked. The gunman went down the stairs from a bright place to a dark basement without any safety net. And one of the fighters worked a reflex, in a long burst of half a horn, he stopped the life of an overly confident person.
                      And after that, the brains started to work. And not reflexes. Both sides of the clash ran to their own. Just don’t say that the decision of two soldiers to report on the incident to the company was a “reflex” 8)))
                      After which the company had already worked with brains, his mind managed to work in this difficult situation, as it is not strange for you. We managed to advance to this house, managed to organize an ambush. They even managed to prepare artillery fire to cut off the enemy, if there are too many of them, and they will have to retreat. Well, that side turned out to be "confident", and did not use brains. They were late, slipped insolently, lost at least three, two of which they were able to drag away. When leaving, mortars ran into the fire. Then they looked, there was blood, so at least there were also wounded. They threw a dozen 152 per ridge, but there, apparently, there was no result.

                      Here is a real case of the superiority of brains and reflexes (or as VPiP teaches, “skills, abilities and knowledge”) over your “self-confidence”, which only interfered, and led some to death.
                      1. would
                        would 28 January 2018 23: 07 New
                        +1
                        And I answered you specifically: on the 11th trolleybus. I’ll translate for idioms Russian idioms. On foot.


                        That is, the equipment is advanced to the landfill from the unit, that is, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. The technique has landing squads. And instead of putting branches attached to the cars there, as I understand it, they are allowed to go empty, and the branches follow ... on foot. So if the test site is 50 km away, then they go 50 km. Epic laughing

                        If you even served somewhere, then in one part where the authorities had no brains and they did such nonsense. And as a result, you measure service with nonsense.

                        Very, very many words. Mostly boastful. But there is no simple answer to a simple question.
                        Didn’t you write the phrase “You see how a person unfamiliar with critical situations is unknown”?


                        And as expected, citizen Lopatov denies the whole message and reduces it to one sentence. Because you have nothing to reply to the message.

                        For a man, apparently, far from the army, I will show you simple, everyday examples. You are washing the dishes. An awkward movement, they waved the glass off the table with a hand. Managed to catch before he fell and crashed. Is the situation familiar?
                        And if you know, then tell me how much you needed to “gain confidence” to do this?


                        And again, another argument to the individual lol

                        But you never seem to have dropped the dishes. Like so much more.

                        If you are afraid to cut yourself with this dish you will not even reach for it. If you drop a very hot cake with the heat of heat and are afraid to get burned you will not even reach for it. At the moment when you will not be aware of your own thoughts, they will be, and an unconscious thought about the danger of catching an object will not allow you to grab it.

                        I sympathize ... Usually he is a little faster. And therefore, in combat conditions, most people manage to use their minds. True, there really are individuals for whom commanders and colleagues use their minds.


                        Another argument to the person and now 200% you have never been in critical situations and are not familiar with the failure of the mind to act. Because in real critical situations, with extreme stress, the mind for a person just shuts down, conscious thoughts and mental activity disappear, it turns out "eyes are afraid, hands are doing." A man does not think what to do, he does. Or falls into a stupor. Perhaps even the phenomenon of depersonalization during this. Anyone who has even been attacked in the gateway knows this, he knows this feeling of emptiness in his head. Some during him managed to do terrible things, lift cars, break the skull with attackers, inflict 20 stab wounds, etc. This is called an affect that is closely related to stress.

                        That is why all martial arts and shooting training classes devote so much time to practicing. All receptions should become intuitive, reflexive. And why? And because in a real stressful situation the fighter will not be able to think, “yeah, the situation is like that, then I need to ... yeah, that means putting my foot here and putting it like that”, he can only perform actions “sewn into the subcortex”.

                        A person can begin to realize mental activity only after the termination of a stressful situation or when it continues to adapt to it.

                        And if you didn’t read your stories with which you argue with yourself, with your thesis, but would be in them, then you would not write

                        Just don’t say that the decision of two soldiers to report on the incident to the company was a “reflex” 8)))


                        Because you would know that after the end of the stress factor, the mind begins to work. And the one who “worked the reflex” at that moment did not think, he just did.

                        But you are not even a theorist (in theory, much attention is paid to the stress reaction and its examples), this is unknown. And this is even written on Wikipedia ...
                    2. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 29 January 2018 09: 39 New
                      +2
                      Quote: rait
                      That is, the equipment is advanced to the landfill from the unit, that is, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. The technique has landing squads. And instead of putting branches attached to the cars there, as I understand it, they are allowed to go empty, and the branches follow ... on foot.

                      And the offices are sent by car. Together with the property. Deploy a field camp and other features. And then train, train, train. We ride on horseback. At this time, BMPs go on the "goose", get up in the field park and are served
                      Only now, in the process of "sudden checks", the infantry began to move in standard equipment. If she, verification, does not provide for the transfer of railway. the road.

                      Quote: rait
                      And as expected, citizen Lopatov denies the whole message and reduces it to one sentence. Because you have nothing to reply to the message.

                      Will there be no answer to a simple question?


                      Quote: rait
                      If you are afraid to cut yourself with this dish

                      Again verbiage in response to a simple question.
                      Once again, how much do you need to “gain confidence” to accomplish reflective actions?
                      Okay, at the last moment you never caught the dishes.
                      Have you ever been shocked? They accidentally touched a bare wire, shook it, and pulled their hand away. How much “confidence” is needed to do this, and not leave your hand in place so that it shakes further?

                      Quote: rait
                      Another argument to the person and now 200% you have never been in critical situations and are not familiar with the failure of the mind to act. Because in real critical situations, ....
                      That is why in all martial arts and shooting training classes

                      Damn it ... I give you examples from absolutely real military operations, which, apparently, you do not refer to as "critical situations" ..... And you tell me some bullshit about "martial arts" ...


                      Quote: rait
                      Because you would know that after the end of the stress factor, the mind begins to work.

                      That is, this is no longer stress. For the first time in his life, he killed a man, and releasing the floor of the store at point blank range. The corpse was then rolled onto a raincoat so that it would not fall apart. And calm as a boa constrictor. No stress. He calmly ran, calmly reported to his father-commander.
                      The next "no stress" in the company. They woke up and in the forehead the report that his fighters made a serious jamb and that they had to very quickly advance and organize an ambush in order to get ahead of the militants who would definitely follow the corpse. At the same time, report back to the battalion commander, get lule for lack of control over personnel, pull out the battery commander, who works for the spotter, to get home, given that the militants could advance earlier ....
                      And all this time the company was calm, like a boa constrictor. No stress. Therefore, in your opinion, he is able to think.

                      I'm afraid your phrase about "now 200% you've never been in critical situations"not about me ... And so forth. 8))))))


                      Quote: rait
                      Because in real critical situations, with extreme stress, the mind for a person just shuts down, conscious thoughts and mental activity disappear, it turns out "eyes are afraid, hands are doing."

                      It’s interesting how I, “with the brain turned off”, would steer artillery fire in critical situations ... That would be a circus ...
                      You are able, without thinking, to perform arithmetic in your mind, to imagine, without thinking, your relative position, purpose and artillery battery, as well as the location of your infantry, without thinking to take into account many factors such as wind direction (when shooting, it is better that the dust carries side of the target, not away from it), the location of local objects and buildings, the possible trajectory of the shells so that they do not stick into the ridge or high-rise building in the rear instead of falling into the target area?
                      I was prepared for a long time and hard to think in a critical situation, and not to allow "a blackout of consciousness." Consistently, step by step, increasing stress resistance. Why do you think that all their efforts should have been in vain?
                      Probably, you proceed from your sad experience. Let me guess. They knocked on a punching bag in the gym, learned a very beautiful swing with the foot in the area of ​​the head of the opponent, ur-mawashi, and self-confident to the point of being impossible to rake from the yard bully? Guessed? 8))))
                      And they made a strange conclusion "must stop thinking" from this? 8)))))
                      1. would
                        would 29 January 2018 10: 32 New
                        +2
                        And again we see the shoes in the air lol

                        А branches are sent by car. Together with the property. Deploy a field camp and other features. And then train, train, train.

                        Only now, in the process of "sudden checks", infantry began to move in standard equipment. If she, verification, does not provide for the transfer of railway. the road.


                        Earlier you beat yourself in the chest and declared

                        I’ll translate for idioms Russian idioms. Пешком.


                        And even to my objections they asked the rhetorical question "Have you gone through the army in absentia?" And now repeat my words!

                        You apparently googled and when you learned that you were mistaken from your lack of experience in army service, they turned sharply 180 degrees. The main thing is to pretend that there was no previously written one, well, as you are doing now. And to believe that there were no past messages and no one will read them.

                        Will there be no answer to a simple question?

                        Again verbiage in response to a simple question.
                        Once again, how much do you need to “gain confidence” to accomplish reflective actions?
                        Okay, at the last moment you never caught the dishes.


                        And again, in horror, they are forced to deny what is written. "Manuscripts do not burn," everyone sees the answers I have written, everyone sees the arguments, but you are so scared to admit that at the beginning you generally threw out the uncomfortable words from the quote by replacing them with dots, but at least you got the courage and simply deny them. Like "there was nothing."

                        And the most important thing is to kick the opponent once again, to show how worthless he is, at least in his own eyes. Because in them you fell below the plinth without being able to argue reasonably. And all these mocking tones, tons of brackets, arguments for the person, are nothing more than the consequences of your self-doubt and anger from being unable to answer. It is always so, aggression is a sign of cowardice.

                        Damn it ... I give you examples from absolutely real military operations, which, apparently, you do not refer to as "critical situations" ..... And you tell me some bullshit about "martial arts" ...


                        Self-critical, I'm glad that you are able to call your unsuccessful arguments bullshit. Remind you

                        You, apparently, as a person unfamiliar with sports and martial arts in particular, are unaware that there is a much worse thing than self-doubt. It is called "exercise". Reassessment of their strength. Guaranteed loss, and often also injury.


                        That is, this is no longer stress. For the first time in his life, he killed a man, and releasing the floor of the store at point blank range. The corpse was then rolled onto a raincoat so that it would not fall apart. And calm as a boa constrictor. No stress. He calmly ran, calmly reported to his father-commander.


                        And once again show that you never knew with stress. And you equalize the suddenly arisen threat and the “fight or run” reaction to it and the subsequent stress of a different kind. Well, it’s understandable, you didn’t have any experience. Even theoretical. So you do not distinguish between acute stress response (OCP) and stress per se. So preludeously declare that the direct killing of a person in fear for his life and the subsequent realization of this, the subsequent transportation of the body is the same stress with the same symptoms. It remains only to guess how you explain the affect, it does not correspond to your fantasies, because stress is one in any situation. And thus, either people in affect should always be in it, or it does not exist.

                        But most importantly, in addition to full confidence coming from our own complete ignorance of the issue and lack of experience, you kick the opponent again

                        I'm afraid your phrase about "now 200% you've never been in critical situations" is not about me ... And pr you. 8))))))


                        Just put the brackets more, they say they replace arguments and knowledge and allow you to look not so stupid.

                        It’s interesting how I, “with the brain turned off”, would steer artillery fire in critical situations ... That would be a circus ...


                        No way. I didn’t test it myself, but they told me (and it’s described in the scientific literature) that the typical “look at two thousand yards” database doesn’t even say, it doesn’t allow you to use your face muscle. But you do not know what it is therefore and again sarcasm on a very serious topic from not knowing that the topic is serious.

                        I was prepared for a long time and hard to think in a critical situation, and not to allow "a blackout of consciousness."


                        Once again, it’s clear that you weren’t taught anything and this is nothing more than typical fantasies of a white-ticketer or from a military department. In reality, they are taught taking into account stress reactions, and therefore such a frequent repetition is required, therefore, they are taught to recharge with rough motility. You can’t just not think, the fingers will stop listening to you from a stressful reaction.

                        Probably, you proceed from your sad experience. Let me guess. They knocked on a punching bag in the gym, learned a very beautiful swing with the foot in the area of ​​the head of the opponent, ur-mawashi, and self-confident to the point of being impossible to rake from the yard bully? Guessed? 8))))


                        Unlike you, I have the courage to admit that it was so. Even with the mocking tone of your message, because you look pathetic using it.

                        More precisely, I have been engaged in contact martial art for more than a year, won city competitions, threw some at trainings so that it flew from the trainer, and sparring partners went to complain to him because they did not understand that it was normal for me. He didn’t own the legs;;)

                        Just when I met gopniks and other bullshit on the street, I somehow noticed that I wasn’t even trying to do something like that, on the tatami I even managed to do it in sparring elegantly, but here I can’t even grab it, my hands don’t listen, my legs don’t listen nothing happens. Generally.

                        And then I began to understand that the problem is in my fear, in the absence of that same inner confidence. I myself, without realizing it, am afraid of the attackers and as a result I can’t do anything. After that, I began to notice that about the same thing was happening to me in competitions, just where to a lesser extent.

                        We all went through this, I don’t know people who wouldn’t experience this in fights, only I have the power to admit it, but you don’t.

                        And they made a strange conclusion "must stop thinking" from this? 8)))))


                        Naturally, realizing that your business was really really bad, they decided to invent and throw in another thesis. And now, just as with the past, you yourself will fight with him trying to convince at least yourself that he is mine.

                        Summing up

                        1. The army did not serve even one year. Either a white ticket or a seedy military department. This in itself is not bad, I do not blame (especially white-ticketers), it is bad when a person begins to consider himself knowledgeable in that which he has never even come into contact with. As a result of this, you have complete ignorance of military training, changing shoes on the fly as it happened with the "squads walk" and "squads drive cars" (at least you can believe the second, although it’s also nonsense to send empty armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles).
                        2. Considers that any preparation is useless as a whole opus wrote.
                        3. Not able to answer arguments and in denying it has come to the point of replacing them with dots. Prefers to pretend that they have not seen.
                        4. When it became straight, I started to think out theses quite badly, throw them in as if they were an opponent, and he himself began to fight with them. Moreover, the fact that I did not fall for such a simple polemical reception caused wild anger and mountains of text.
                        5. At the same time, he began to constantly use ad hominem and himself blamed me for this.

                        As a result: It is incapable of discussion, ignorant, overly self-confident, which allows us to talk about what he did not encounter, cowardly that manifests itself in the discussion and is easily unbalanced.

                        I think others, having read our discussion, will draw the appropriate conclusions because you threw out the arguments only at home, they did not disappear from the page no matter how much you wanted to.
                    3. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 29 January 2018 12: 57 New
                      +3
                      Quote: rait
                      And again we see the shoes in the air

                      No, it’s just you who, having gone through the army apparently, in absentia, don’t understand that we are talking about different things. 8)))))))
                      From PDP to field camp, by car. Although there is an option when part of the path is on foot. We went to school in Seltsy since the third year. The last 12 km we were put off cars and we stomped 11th. route
                      From the field camp to the venue, on foot. (For reference, the field camp is where the tents are. 8 live in them))))))
                      From the line of dismounting to the position of a conditional adversary, the “attack”, respectively, is on its own feet. From the enemy’s positions to the line of dismounting, practicing the “withdrawal”, again on foot. And so many times until the commander gets tired. Or once, if it is BTU, RTU, BSV or BSO. It’s possible to drive a kilometer from the conditional line of transition to the attack to the line of dismounting. Once.
                      Likbez finished. It’s not me “changing shoes,” you have a very distant understanding of what is happening.


                      Quote: rait
                      And again in horror ..... a sign of cowardice.

                      Water, boasting, insults. But there is no answer.
                      You state that the following phrase "You probably don’t know how to a person unfamiliar with critical situations"didn’t you write?

                      Quote: rait
                      And once again show that you never knew with stress. .... proceeding from their own complete ignorance of the issue and lack of experience, once again kick the opponent

                      Water, insults, empty theorizing. The theme of "self-confidence", without which "live in vain" is not disclosed.
                      Not interested.
                      Trying to chat topic?




                      Quote: rait
                      No way. I myself did not experience it, but they told me (and it is described in the scientific literature)

                      Here, in fact, the quintessence of your "knowledge" about what really happens in battle. 8)))))))))))))))
                      And you know, this is not particularly interesting to me ...
                      You know, in general it’s even funny when some theorist begins to tell a person who has real experience what he really felt, they say he knows better. But even humor should be in moderation.

                      You have just theoretically "proved" that artillery officers are useless in battle, because they cannot fulfill their duties because I quote from them "the mind for a person just turns off, conscious thoughts and mental activity disappear“I hope you will not refuse these words of yours? And a lot of military specialties are also useless, which provide for“ mental activity ”, which, in your opinion,“ disappears ”by default.

                      In short, I will end this strange discussion. Moreover, when insults become the main "argument".
                      This is not interesting to me.

                      Finally, think at your leisure about one thing.
                      When we first reached Pionersky, we stood two kilometers from the northern outskirts, we were regularly bombarded with mortars. At the same time, almost all gunners tried to calculate the place of the spotter of the militants, very, very professional.
                      Question to you. Do you think mortar shelling with a constant threat to life does not apply to a stressful or “difficult” situation? Or in reality, unlike your theoretical philosophies, the mind does not even think of disconnecting?
                      1. would
                        would 29 January 2018 13: 23 New
                        +1
                        And once again, Lopatov runs away in horror from his own words

                        No, it’s just you who, having gone through the army apparently, in absentia, don’t understand that we are talking about different things. 8)))))))


                        You already decide! Either the army was finished in absentia by those who feel like they are driving exercises in the airborne squad of the BMP and don’t always go on foot to the line of dismounting, or those who say the opposite. You have now stated both this and that, and in both cases, as you repeat the mantra about the absenteeism of the army lol

                        Likbez finished. It’s not me “changing shoes,” you have a very distant understanding of what is happening.


                        And once again we’ll terrify Lopatov with his own words, otherwise he is not able to answer for them and denies them when he realizes that he wrote nonsense

                        On trolleybus 11 ... 8)))
                        Dear, I have to ask the question one more time: is the army in absentia?


                        And I answered you specifically: on the 11th trolleybus. I’ll translate for idioms Russian idioms. On foot.


                        So you decide: Either in one of the options you wrote nonsense, or you, as it turns out, you twice said about yourself that you twice said "graduated from the army in absentia." wink

                        And put more brackets, they say it helps. And try to belittle the opponent more in your eyes, they say replaces the arguments.

                        Water, boasting, insults. But there is no answer.


                        Once again, Lopatov, shaking with fear, replaced the weighty piece of the message with dots in the quote, he is so unpleasant to him. Well, again in a circle I went to deny what was written. Here are just "manuscripts do not burn" and replacing uncomfortable words in a quote you do not at all replace them in my messages as if you were trying not to notice them.

                        Water, insults, empty theorizing. The theme of "self-confidence", without which "live in vain" is not disclosed.


                        And once again, Lopatov, in even greater horror, simply took and did not quote a huge part of the message. He didn’t answer her at all, ignores inconvenient facts with all his might and runs away in horror from them. I wonderfully understand that I am writing arguments and facts not for Lopatov, he does not even have the strength to recognize the fact of their existence, but for those who read all this afterwards.

                        Here, in fact, the quintessence of your "knowledge" about what really happens in battle. 8)))))))))))))))


                        Of course, this was said only by a veteran of all wars since the First World War. With great ambition and authority. And what is written in some books, by some psychiatrists, is all garbage. That’s Lopatov’s authority ... only it’s still not clear where he fought and served and why he changes his shoes in flight on such a simple question.

                        You have just theoretically "proved" that artillery officers are useless in battle, because they cannot fulfill their duties because, I quote, "the mind for a person is shut off, conscious thoughts and mental activity disappear." I hope you don’t will you refuse these words? And a lot of military specialties are also useless, which provide for "mental activity", which, in your opinion, "disappears" by default.


                        Lopatov in horror, realizing that he couldn’t apply the next typical trick (often used for example ukro-media), pulled it out of context and after inventing its context, stated that it belonged to the author. However, I will once again plunge him into horror by quoting in full, keeping the context

                        Another argument to the individual and now 200% you've never been in critical situations and not familiar with the failure of the mind to act. Because in real critical situations, with extreme stress, the mind for a person is turned off, conscious thoughts and mental activity disappear, it turns out "eyes are afraid, hands are doing."


                        I, unlike Lopatov, who did not serve, answer for my words and am not at all afraid to quote them completely. Because it is scary only for someone who takes it out of context, because a full quote makes such a technique void and turns it against the one who applied it.

                        But Lopatov once again either abandons his words or ignores such a painful failure. He will pretend that this was not, he will not even quote. That's what real veterans with real combat experience do! This is the result of their vast experience, merits to the Motherland and they share this with us like this and argue like this lol

                        Moreover, when insults become the main "argument".


                        Very self-critical, then I agree with you.

                        Question to you. Do you think mortar shelling with a constant threat to life does not apply to a stressful or “difficult” situation?


                        It applies to stressful and just to a difficult situation. You didn’t just ask just such a question, again taking it out of context. So I will continue to terrify you and will answer it in full, keeping the context.

                        But stress and reactions to it are different and mortar shelling alone is rarely able to cause OCR. But the sight of the corpse of your close friend, probably torn to pieces, probably dying in your arms very much. Anyone.

                        I quote the corresponding manual

                        OCP is a pronounced transient disorder that develops in mentally healthy individuals as a reaction to the catastrophic (i.e. exceptional in strength physical or psychological) stress and which, as a rule, is reduced within a few hours (maximum days). Such stressful events include situations of threat to the life of an individual or persons close to him (for example, natural disaster, accident, military operations, criminal behavior, rape)

                        The nature of reactions to stress largely determined by the degree of individual stability and adaptive abilities of the individual; so, with systematic preparation for a certain type of stressful event (in certain categories of military personnel, rescuers) The disorder develops extremely rarely.

                        B. At the time or immediately after the end of the traumatic event, the patient had three (or more) dissociative symptoms:

                        1) a subjective feeling of numbness, detachment (estrangement) or lack of a lively emotional response;

                        2) misunderstanding of the environment or your personality (“state of amazement”);

                        3) symptoms of derealization;

                        4) symptoms of depersonalization;


                        5) dissociative amnesia (i.e. inability to recall important aspects of the traumatic situation).

                        Source study guide "Psychiatry of wars and disasters." There are many “my theoretical philosophies,” about depersonalization, about OCR, about the criteria and types of stress, and so on. But why is this all to Lopatov? These war veterans do not read any special literature; they know best without knowledge what they will not fail to mention. Yes, and some psychiatrists, some research that has been going on for as long as a hundred years (minimum), absolutely do not match the knowledge of the terrible war veteran ... who for some reason can’t decide whether they go on foot to the training site, to the training ground or still get to cars. But Lopatov says that all this is nonsense and nonsense, which means all this is nonsense and nonsense.
                      2. would
                        would 31 January 2018 09: 00 New
                        +1
                        Well, of course, citizen Lopatov was silent, after such a wild change of shoes and terrible shame, it simply does not make sense to talk about anything. This is a shame, or rather its highest point. And not because citizen Lopatov was very mistaken, but because he couldn’t admit it and rejected inconvenient arguments over and over again, and afterwards he changed his shoes and pretended not to answer for his words written earlier. As if they weren’t at all.

                        As a verdict I leave here evidence of his change of shoes in the air

                        Quote: rait
                        Once again, look very stupid, apparently it's your habit. The question was absolutely concrete: "How will they get to the point of dismount?" And it directly followed that the question was about the means of transporting the departments to the venue of the exercises. But instead of answering it, you started to write something on a pedestrian workout, to which there were no questions at all.


                        Quote: Spade
                        And I answered you specifically: on the 11th trolleybus. I’ll translate for idioms Russian idioms. On foot.


                        And then like thunder from a clear sky!

                        Quote: Spade
                        А branches are sent by car. Together with the property. Deploy a field camp and other features. And then train, train, train. We ride on horseback. At this time, BMPs go on the "goose", get up in the field park and are served
                        Only now, in the process of "sudden checks", infantry began to move in standard equipment. If she, verification, does not provide for the transfer of railway. the road.

                        Quote: Spade
                        From PDP to field camp, by car. Although there is an option when part of the path is on foot.



                        Earlier, Lopatov vehemently denied my words

                        Quote: rait
                        but on constant exercises he will ride in a BMP of the same model. Perhaps even with an even more killed chassis.


                        But now he repeated them almost identically.

                        These are the pies, guys. These are the words I quote "a person with real experience" who is confused about how the departments move to the landfill. He also allegedly fought in Chechnya (in my own words, I’m not inventing anything), but never hearing anything about the OCR and denying the fact of such a thing. Real veterans of the Chechen wars are forced to go to psychiatrists, to special centers, even to lie in PND. And all the veterans of the Chechen wars (and Donbass) personally familiar to me more than heard about stress reactions, and distinguished (unlike Lopatov who equalizes) stress directly in the battle and outside it, they also distinguished stress in battle and stress from how you see that your friend’s guts are wound around the fence, and you’ve heard about how they went crazy, many even visited their friends in the appropriate institutions to whom the war “hit on the head”. Everyone heard, very many personally met, if not almost everyone who participated in direct hostilities.

                        But not Shovels. Maybe he fought in another Chechnya? Yes, like one she is not the other. And the described is not specific to Chechnya, but exists in any military conflict. Or maybe the only place where he fought this Internet and therefore did not even hear anything about it? This is closer to reality for me.

                        For this I stop because it was a pity to watch this beating of infants 3 more messages back.
                      3. Svateev
                        Svateev 13 February 2018 12: 54 New
                        0
                        Quote: Spade
                        We went to school in Seltsy since the third year. The last 12 km we were put off cars and we stomped 11-m. route

                        And the whole third year we ran 6km every morning on physical exercises. At the same time, almost every day there is also regular physical training according to the curriculum. Preparing for the ministerial inspection.
                        Great as it was! fellow
                  2. CTABEP
                    CTABEP 28 January 2018 16: 14 New
                    +2
                    If you really were in such situations, you would know that the main thing is reflexes. Then, brains. Well, only then "confidence." Moreover, it should be firmly tied to critical self-esteem.


                    Well, it was the reflexes that suggested training in the original post of your argument :). About self-confidence and a super-soldier, only then the dialogue went, somewhere to the side.
                  3. Svateev
                    Svateev 13 February 2018 12: 14 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Spade
                    in such situations ... mainly reflexes. Then, brains. Well, only then "confidence." Moreover, it should be firmly tied to critical self-esteem. Otherwise, it will end in a corpse.

                    +++++! When realizing the reality of the situation (the enemy is real and WANTS to kill you), a person for the first time acts "on autopilot", on those reflexes that were laid down by the previous TEACHING. Later, if left alive, the brains begin to gradually connect.
              2. RF man
                RF man 5 February 2018 11: 48 New
                0
                Quote: Spade
                They shot the sergeant. One fighter climbed to save him.

                I know the case when a sniper removed a fighter from the armor when passing the village. The guys jumped to pick up. The mechvod slowed down the BMP and began to take back and then "flew" from the RPG. The driver died. The hero of Russia was then given.
            3. Moon rover xnumx
              Moon rover xnumx 13 February 2018 11: 35 New
              0
              Your keyword is "must."
              1. would
                would 13 February 2018 13: 16 New
                0
                Naturally! Because for example, to build a situation where the officer himself (!!!) says "It would be better if the conscripts went to the janitors, would do the same thing, and would earn more in a year," I can’t understand. Therefore, as a standard I use how it should be for effective combat training.
        2. Sverdlov
          Sverdlov 29 January 2018 20: 06 New
          0
          Shooting a hundred rounds is cool, (per day). Duc, who will give him?
          And we shot in the Uralmash dash from small ones. And it worked out well. (Dad) was the champion of the Uralmash many times. Several shouting "Change".
          And in his childhood (he) shot from the “Decter” at the ducks with his hands at the training ground. I didn’t get to the war, there were 17 in the forty-fifth.
          And on the subject, the fighter’s confidence in himself, in his weapons and commander - this is the guarantee of victory!
          And "... Everything needs skill, training, training ..."
    3. andrewkor
      andrewkor 27 January 2018 11: 08 New
      +2
      Just do not leave this rookie alone with the target, is the instructor a priori implied?
      1. jjj
        jjj 27 January 2018 15: 02 New
        +4
        If you shoot at 100 rounds per day for a month, then you will aim intuitively. And it is the dispersion of bullets in real mobile close combat that makes the Kalashnikov assault rifle a more winning "gadget." But, for some reason, it seems that soon we will see the second mass coming of submachine guns. So far, as I think, it is restrained by the lack of a massive powerful pistol cartridge
    4. Moon rover xnumx
      Moon rover xnumx 13 February 2018 11: 28 New
      0
      Absolutely right! Weapons need to be felt. And when mobilizing, who can do it!
    5. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 11: 54 New
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Let the rookie shoot at targets from various poses and distances at 100 rounds per day for 3 months - there will be a good soldier.

      Especially for our "friends" I repeat:
      To shoot gave a positive result, you need to shoot from the right sight.
    6. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 12: 07 New
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Let the rookie shoot at targets from various poses and distances at 100 rounds per day for 3 months - there will be a good soldier.

      It will not be if it shoots with P. Checked.
      I tell: AK74, sight P, target number 5, range 200m. The first stage - did not hit, The second - did not hit. He very carefully (for a long time) aimed, the third turn - did not hit. I thought about it. He stares at the target for a long time, thinking something. He carefully aimed, the fourth turn - did not hit. I ask: "Where did you aim for the fourth time?" He replies: “To the center of the target. Probably at such a range it is already necessary to the center, because when aiming, I don’t get into the lower edge!” In fact, with such an excess of STP over the target (about 17cm) in terms of calculation, only one queue from SIX-SEVEN queues will hit the target. It was necessary to stubbornly aim at the lower edge, but with such a low probability of hitting a person begins to panic and shift the aiming point. And he misplaced it: aiming at the center will never get at all.
  5. Earnest
    Earnest 27 January 2018 10: 50 New
    12
    Svateev’s ideas with a group of comrades were tested by practice in 1999, not even knowing the author’s name, but according to rumors and experience. They shot a lot of cartridges from AK-74 and RPK-74 and made such a conclusion - his idea reduces the error in choosing the aiming point. Our calculation is that the main goal will be the chest figure, and at battle distances there are still more situations when you either need to water it from the hose, firing to suppress it, or get almost to the edge of the ear, because if you and the enemy are 100 m apart, both of you HID, clinging to anything, and do not stick around the waist. If you understand this, then a situation is much less common when STPs at distances 150-300 m are higher than the target. It’s wrong when they shoot at the main target with the “P” division - this is our main aiming error. It can be corrected by setting the division "3" - the range of a direct shot at the head target. This is where the whole dance comes from. I personally prepared (and organized the training) more than one hundred fighters, taking into account his ideas, and it is not interesting for me to re-read that I should be called a specialist exclusively in quotation marks. Because my fighters learned to shoot, and they worked normally on control exercises and in a plasticine country
    1. jjj
      jjj 27 January 2018 15: 05 New
      +1
      The gunners do not always aim for the target. They can also on an aloof object as amended
      1. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum 27 January 2018 17: 16 New
        +1
        The 200 meters artifact is not a mistake. Almost officially! yes
        1. Sverdlov
          Sverdlov 29 January 2018 20: 13 New
          0
          Nifiga. D-30 hits from three kilometers like a sniper rifle. According to the profile of the tank falls at a time. (If he doesn’t move :)
      2. Svateev
        Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 19 New
        0
        Quote: jjj
        Gunners won’t always aim for the target

        Do you propose to introduce indirect guidance for machine gunners? So that instead of one 155 article, submachine gunners master a whole "tolmud" of the rules of such shooting ?!
        If it was a joke, then a credit! laughing
    2. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 12 New
      0
      Quote: Earnest
      if you and the enemy are 100 m apart, you both HIDE, clinging to anything, and do not stick around the waist.

      It is this obvious fact that they don’t want to admit to TsNIITOCHMASH and to the Combined Arms Academy of the RF Armed Forces.
      Can you draw up your tests and conclusions in writing and send them to the military scientific committee of the Ground Forces and / or to me? Are you already "retired" or still in service?
  6. MahsusNazar
    MahsusNazar 27 January 2018 14: 39 New
    +2
    And I saw in the description exactly what happened during the training - the "P" sight, just barely enough, and no one explains to the new recruit how to fire at different ranges. Give me the queue, lift the barrel, and you’ll get there! And only with time and with interest it becomes clear how to shoot. I taught immediately and clearly, as they taught me, because both myself and my fighters, having the opportunity, fired accurately from machine guns at different distances. Changed the scope if possible
    1. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 34 New
      0
      Quote: MahsusNazar
      Sight "P", just barely enough, and no one explains to a rookie soldier how to fire at different ranges. Give me the queue, lift the barrel, and you’ll get there!

      Thank you, you have illustrated the level of shooting training of our machine gunners. That is why I insist on the right sight P. so that even without knowing any basics of ballistics, but stupidly memorizing in half an hour "With the sight P in the lower edge of the target" any machine gun nevertheless got!
      Please do not be offended, but your comment is an example of our shooting "literacy."
      In your opinion, we aim at the lower edge of the target because the machine throws up during firing ?! It is not right.
      Firstly, the vending machine has a MINUS 4 minutes departure angle. That is, with each shot, the barrel does not go up, but down for 4 minutes. And the barrel is thrown after the bullet takes off due to the work of reloading automation. Yes, the second bullet of each line lies to the right, above the first bullet. But all subsequent bullets in the queue (from the third onwards) lie around the first bullet. For the sake of one second bullet, no one would aim specifically below.
      We aim at the lower edge in order to hit the target throughout the entire direct shot, because the trajectory of its first half rises. Look carefully in my article Figure 2
      https://topwar.ru/135696-sistema-ispravlyaet-oshi
      bku-cniitochmash-protiv.html
  7. Dzungar
    Dzungar 27 January 2018 15: 53 New
    +1
    Set your scope at 200 and use it constantly. And all
    1. beeper
      beeper 27 January 2018 18: 58 New
      +1
      I liked your "Ratsukha" yes Something about this is “getting along with your machine gun”, knowing for sure all its trajectory “jambs”, and operating only with an aiming point is also a good solution at direct shot distances.
      hi
    2. aws4
      aws4 27 January 2018 19: 26 New
      +2
      it makes no sense ... if 5 45 then the very thing is sight 3.
      1. beeper
        beeper 27 January 2018 21: 31 New
        +5
        I also think that the “3” is the same for the AK-74, but Djungaru is somewhat closer to the “2” sight. Not fundamentally. If a fighter sees this and is accustomed to such an installation, if he hits it well, then why not, because shooting is, in many ways, both individual passions of a shooter and features of ammunition ?! The end result is important ....
        hi
        1. aws4
          aws4 28 January 2018 00: 55 New
          +1
          Yes, you are probably right !!! my mistake is that I myself judge from personal experience)))) thanks !!!!
    3. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 43 New
      0
      Quote: Dzungar
      Set your sights on the 200 and use it constantly.

      But if you aim at the bottom edge of the target with 2, you can only shoot up to 200m. And with P_0,3 you can also effectively shoot up to 357m. Why give the enemy as many 157m of effective fire?
  8. Doliva63
    Doliva63 27 January 2018 17: 36 New
    +6
    Yes, they normally taught in the army to shoot (where they taught, of course). In the UKS there were both “head” targets (150-200 m), and growth targets on the aisle (something about 350 m) - normally people shot at P.'s sight. I think nothing needs to be invented.
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 27 January 2018 21: 18 New
      +3
      In the UKS there were also “head” targets (on 150-200 m)

      The problem is that the main targets in the shooting course are only for special forces. For simple infantry, only chest. And in real combat, as a rule, there is only a headache. That is, it turns out that the infantry is not taught to shoot in the main form of the target.
      The second problem is that basically training takes place with the “P” sight. Both soldiers and conscripts of military institutes. And in real hostilities it is necessary to correct this. For example, in the first company in the city, the soldiers were forced to put the "2" sight in the "1" forest.
      And since then this dispute has been going on. And the MO is silent ........
      1. CTABEP
        CTABEP 28 January 2018 16: 16 New
        0
        Oh, but what about the recumbent machine gunner? Without any special forces personally shot at him three times%).
        1. Doliva63
          Doliva63 28 January 2018 19: 36 New
          +4
          I always thought that the target was called "machine-gun crew in the trench" and refers to the chest. But if you shoot lying down, then it’s similar to the “head” one, yeah laughing
          1. Svateev
            Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 53 New
            0
            Quote: Doliva63
            "machine gun crew in the trench" and referred to breast

            Yes, for some reason the machine gun in the course of shooting has a height of the chest target, even a little higher. But in reality, only that machine gun has such a height. which installed out of the blue. If the machine gunner is a little friendly with his head, then he also takes a position behind the parapet and becomes almost the head target, maybe a little higher, but not chest.
        2. Glory1974
          Glory1974 29 January 2018 13: 10 New
          +1
          Oh, but what about the recumbent machine gunner? Without any special forces, he personally shot three times.

          height 50 cm. and head figure 30 cm. Here in these 20 cm and all the salt
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 28 January 2018 19: 30 New
        +3
        Fortunately, I did not find military institutes, but, from memory, soldiers must be taught to change the aim setting depending on the range of the likely opening of fire, regardless of the military academy. drinks And when there were no "head" targets, they simply put the helmet anywhere - on the parapet, in the bushes, in the "window" - and please, I don’t want to shoot. Creative approach to BP was welcome drinks My extreme perversion is "passing training" when we run to the training ground, "to battle!" - and shoot separately lying bricks, for example. What is your head for? laughing Well, with PBS, of course. In a word, service in the army is an unlimited creativity that no artist or artist has ever dreamed of! laughing
        Well, for her! For the army! drinks
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 29 January 2018 13: 09 New
          0
          Creative approach to BP was welcome

          It’s impossible without creativity in BP. drinks
          It would only be necessary if without initiative in its worst manifestations. And for this I would like guiding documents sensible.
        2. Svateev
          Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 58 New
          0
          Quote: Doliva63
          And when there were no "head" targets, they simply put the helmet anywhere - on the parapet, in the bushes, in the "window" - and please, I don’t want to shoot.

          Better not come up.
          But still, from what sight did you hit the helmets? Did they set the scope accordingly?
          On the run? lol And not even on the run, how was the range measured? Eye meter? To 400? And it turned out for sure ?! No.
    2. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 13: 48 New
      0
      Quote: Doliva63
      In the UKS there were also “head” targets (on 150-200 m),

      This is in which UKS? Give me a link please. I ask not out of harm, but for business.
      I found the last shooting course, in which all the shooters shot at the head (then from the three-line and SCS) - this is the 1947 course of the year. At current courses, the submachine gunner only shoots at the chest. The head appears only in the sniper.
  9. beeper
    beeper 27 January 2018 18: 44 New
    +2
    So, it turns out which “graters” to pull are “the struggle of opinions” around the “P” installation on AK’s sight winked ?!
    I carefully read the Article and read everything at the moment, the comments of Readers-comments seem more sensible to me than the Article that prompted them, so there is a positive effect from the publication, and this is an undoubted Plus, disturbing, near-weapons thoughts, Article and sensible Comments! smile
    PS I always believed that there is nothing to rely on the quasi "universalism" of the "P" installation, but you need to learn how to correctly determine the firing distance and use the appropriate settings of the sight, because there are many other, no less important, factors that need to be taken into account in order to produce a well-aimed shot in real conditions of this or that locality, sorry for the banality wink
    Of course, figuratively, “three shots before the oath” is absolutely not enough for confident possession of your weapon, well, perhaps, you can try to somehow compensate for the lack of “shot” with intensive “blank training” on high-quality simulators, which is also a considerable military expense budget .... but preparing a good shooter is worth fighting for, not sparing money and time, this is the way to educate a warrior who is confident in his fighting efficiency (even if his physical data are below average smile), as a "side effect" is very persistent in defense ... IMHO
    hi
    1. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 14: 02 New
      0
      Quote: pishchak
      there are many other equally important factors to consider

      That's it! And when we give the submachine gun the correct P and thereby remove from the submachine gun the need for 1) to determine the distance to the target, 2) to reset the sight, then the submachine gun will begin to have time to take into account the wind and the movement of the target.
  10. Captain Nemo
    Captain Nemo 27 January 2018 18: 56 New
    0
    Question to the Afghans, Chechens and other "hot spots". There were cases of real use of machine guns when they were shooting with a completely different “P” in a real battle? It seems to me that all these disputes are good for a positional war, when you sit in a trench and all the landmarks in front are shot
  11. Severok
    Severok 27 January 2018 19: 00 New
    +2
    And the state of fire training in most parts is depressing. In addition to an extremely small training shot, we have a systematic CONTROL shooting, showing the maximum minimum positive result of firing personnel. That is, people do not know how to shoot and they give weapons to them on the basis of the principle "no matter what happens."
    1. tracer
      tracer 27 January 2018 20: 35 New
      +1
      Not sure what has changed since not very long ago. But your remark is correct.
  12. Glory1974
    Glory1974 27 January 2018 21: 27 New
    +2
    An article on an interesting and burning topic, but in my opinion, the topic is not disclosed.
    Personally, I agree with V.A. Svateev. In the internal troops, the combat training department raised the issue of improving fire training, including for cadets of military higher educational institutions. According to the experience of warfare in the North Caucasus region, weak skills were noted in determining ranges to the target, determining the aiming point. At the shooting range, you can easily calculate everything, bring the settings to the personnel. The method proposed by Svateev allows you to reduce errors when shooting in real conditions, which is necessary precisely in stressful situations in battle. Which of course does not negate that "you need to teach people to shoot."
    1. tracer
      tracer 27 January 2018 21: 59 New
      +4
      With the current draft of 1 year, the commanders are placed in heavy lodging. There is simply not enough time for EVERYTHING! Including fire. By profession, the VUS turns out to be dropouts like today everywhere. Today's Russian army is kept at the will and strength of the commanders of the Soviet army, but there are fewer and fewer of them. I believe that it is necessary to revive the basic criteria for training and retraining and the terms of service of soldiers and officers of the times of the Soviet army.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 28 January 2018 10: 43 New
        +2
        When they switched to a year of service, the generals cheerfully reported as usual that there were no problems, the quality of training would not suffer.
        In principle, if you do business, and not trample on the parade ground for hours, you can prepare a fighter in a year. The question is that for some specialties the year is not enough, for example, signalmen, air defense officers, sailors, etc. And for the machine gunner of the year, it’s higher than the roof. But the existing practice of the fire training technique in the troops is of course lame on both legs.
      2. CTABEP
        CTABEP 28 January 2018 16: 17 New
        +2
        If you teach a soldier, he can be well trained in six months, experience, including that we have. If you suffer from garbage - then 3 years is not enough.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 29 January 2018 13: 12 New
          +1
          If you teach a soldier, he can be well trained in six months

          Can. But for some reason, it doesn’t work out. It means the matter is in the system, and not in man.
  13. Earnest
    Earnest 28 January 2018 09: 40 New
    +2
    Quote: Captain Nemo
    Question to the Afghans, Chechens and other "hot spots". There were cases of real use of machine guns when they were shooting with a completely different “P” in a real battle? It seems to me that all these disputes are good for a positional war, when you sit in a trench and all the landmarks in front are shot

    When setting objectives for defeat, junior commanders were always required to indicate both the installation of the rear sight and the aiming point. For example, like this: "Landmark 1 to the right 15 group of infantry, sight 3, at the feet - fire!" Also in the fire boxes made notes with the settings of the sight, and not just the distance to the landmarks.
    1. Svateev
      Svateev 13 February 2018 14: 09 New
      0
      Quote: Earnest
      3 sight, fire at your feet! "

      Sorry, colleague, I’ll correct a little: if the goal is on legs (growth, running across), then it is better to aim at the center of the goal, as indicated by Art. 155. Otherwise, the trajectory will pass the highest - at the level of the knees and can simply slip through between your legs. In the lower edge we direct all other figures - from the head to the waist.
  14. gross kaput
    gross kaput 28 January 2018 20: 59 New
    0
    Quote: rait
    "And how do they get to the point of dismount?"

    Dear respected, at least in the mid-90s it was so, in 90% of cases the company made a march on foot to the training ground with a passing training of actions, usually back to the Urals. Because it’s more reasonable in that way, to take a company to an infantry fighting vehicle in a circle to understand what it is and why it doesn’t take a lot of time, and every week it’s expensive to drive 11 km to an infantry fighting vehicle, secondly it’s pointless, and when making a walking march it’s good (legs swing laughing ) and savings, and in full growth and in adults on the BMP and armored personnel carriers are driven only during serious exercises.
    1. would
      would 29 January 2018 12: 15 New
      +1
      and for an adult on an infantry fighting vehicle and armored personnel carriers they drive only during serious exercises.




      That is, as we see even in the mid-90s (a terrible time for the army, we did not pay a salary of 6 months each, of course, fuel and lubricants for armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles were also unlikely to be in abundance) absolutely not legs.

      As I wrote to Lopatov

      Maybe you don’t knowbut on ongoing exercises he will ride in a BMP of the same model. Perhaps even with an even more killed chassis.


      So it turns out that my words were true for the mid-90s, at least those treble that you saw.

      Plus, I hardly imagine even the contract soldiers (we are silent about conscripts, they will die for example) who will walk with their feet for example 50 km (normal distance), but if they don’t die, they won’t be able to do anything after all. They will not go naked.

      As it was with us: A walking march at insignificant distances naturally took place to be (but was not strictly required) and was used as an element of preparation. But not at significant distances. The significant ones who climb into the airborne squad, those who are not on trucks. Such that the airborne squads would be specially left empty, and everyone was seated on trucks, of course, there wasn’t.

      In the same way, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles never drove empty, people used to go there, and often they loaded the necessary equipment. The airborne squad was not empty for obvious reasons; there was no excess in the vehicles.

      They even traveled very seriously at those very serious exercises, including at very small distances. That's why they are teachings. And there riding inside the standard armored vehicles was included in the training, was one of the elements of the exercise.

      But never, nowhere, in any part where have I been, nowhere have I heard such nonsense that Lopatov first tried to prove to me (after he changed his shoes in the air and started saying that they really never walk on foot), that the department never goes inside BMP and armored personnel carriers, as well as always walk to the line of dismounting, and those who say that this is not so "finished the army in absentia."

      In the same way, I have never met seasickness on the BMP-2, and not just me.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 29 January 2018 13: 14 New
        +1
        I have never met seasickness on BMP-2, and not just me.

        And I met. After 100-150 km sometimes begins. BMP is going very softly.
        1. would
          would 29 January 2018 23: 32 New
          +1
          Soft? Which BMP did you go to? We (and not only) in BMP-2, the situation was exactly the opposite, very hard driving, every bump is felt, and the biggest problem is vibration, you are constantly shaking.
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 30 January 2018 19: 53 New
            0
            We had BMP-1 and BMD-1. I did not go to BMP-2, but I don’t think that they are very different.
            1. would
              would 31 January 2018 00: 48 New
              +1
              It turns out that it is different (it’s clear in BMP-1 the suspension type is different). Because how many BMP-2 did not go all as I described.

              I separately asked about a seasick illness from my friend with the specialty of “an engineer for the operation of wheeled and tracked vehicles,” who, to put it mildly, not only traveled ten times more than me. In addition to hearing the same thing about shaking and hard driving, he told me, "I have never met seasickness or motion sickness, these are all tales, there simply can not physically rock anyone."
  15. Blue fox
    Blue fox 29 January 2018 11: 58 New
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    If you really were in such situations, you would know that the main thing is reflexes. Then, brains. Well, only then "confidence." Moreover, it should be firmly tied to critical self-esteem. Otherwise, it will end in a corpse. And it’s good if only “self-confident” without any reason for it.

    Another real case. Komsomolskoye has already been cleared, and a group of especially gifted climbed into the ravines in the south of the village to mash. They are self-confident to the impossibility, they themselves have put dozens of stretch marks from grenades and consider themselves supersapers ... The result is four corpses, including a lieutenant and three cripples.
    They put stretch marks there at night. The area a little less than a football field then the sappers from the Ministry of Emergency Situations cleaned for more than a week, on tiptoe ....

    It was like this, it was subsequently customary for us to instruct fighters from attached units using this example.
    I agree with Lopatov from and to.
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 29 January 2018 13: 18 New
      +1
      Here are just some things confusing. Firstly, as it was allowed to make a mistake, and even with the officer. Secondly, so many losses that they ran into a crowd of landmines or landmines. And thirdly. What kind of sappers MES ???? there were no engineering divisions, n or dowries ????? what kind of gon.stretching in a clean field can only a deer install. yes and after that the story raises more questions. Something it seems that the author either from the words in the retelling of 7 persons knows about it, or he invented it on the go.
      1. brn521
        brn521 29 January 2018 17: 18 New
        +1
        Quote: Korax71
        firstly, as it was allowed to mess up, and even with the officer

        Centralized supply cannot always provide even the bare minimum for survival.
        Quote: Korax71
        they that the whole crowd ran into an OSM or a land mine

        It is theoretically possible to throw a net from ordinary lemons so that the breakdown of one of the stretch marks will produce several grenades located at different points to undermine at once. For example, along the trail.
        Quote: Korax71
        stretching in the open field only a deer can set

        In the sense that then they themselves will have to shoot. But the First Chechen thought of this the least. Mines were set by anyone who wanted, where he wanted and how he wanted. Data was transmitted only in verbal descriptions or not transmitted at all. Perhaps the Second Chechen this mess caught.
        Quote: Korax71
        what kind of sappers of the Ministry of Emergency Situations ???? there were no engineering units, for example, or dowries

        Yes, it’s not clear. Emergencies Ministry in those days was something exotic.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 29 January 2018 18: 36 New
        +2
        Quote: Korax71
        Here are just some of the things that confuse. First, as it was allowed to make a mess, and even with the officer

        Radio stations, unloading and more. Some militants were powerfully packed.

        Quote: Korax71
        They are that the whole crowd ran into an OSM or a land mine.

        OZM.
        There they set up all this at night to block a convenient exit from the village towards the mountains.

        Quote: Korax71
        What kind of sappers of the Ministry of Emergencies ???? didn’t have their engineering units, but did they have dowries ?????

        The corpses. The main task of the Ministry of Emergencies was to clean them so that epidemics would not form out of the blue. Sappers et so, concomitant with this task.

        Quote: Korax71
        what kind of gon.stretching in a clean field only a deer can install.

        Ravine. Read, damn it, more carefully.
        1. Korax71
          Korax71 30 January 2018 14: 32 New
          +1
          So what? But I’m embarrassed to ask the perfume to be charged to the motor scooters with me, what have I been dragging around with? Or someone will be unloading it with giblets from the ghost, or were they hoping to find a crypt? most likely either for food, or for some other goodies. yes, and in general this campaign raises more questions than answers. What kind of discipline is in the unit, if, roughly speaking, the department voluntarily managed to break somewhere for some kind of action. it’s very similar to VoVanov. so it’s not a lot of confidence, but from chronic drinking ... and, as regards mining, then when carrying out an engineer all the detonated detonators and other detox devices by means of trawling or if it is possible to drive armored vehicles. in the case of installing a guided minefield. and again describes Stalingrad. the feeling that you had corpses in three rows there, and the number of personnel after fighting for Pavlov’s house did not allow you to do this on your own. it looks like a retold story. But as with the fighter who climbed for 200 m. is there an order from the commander for him is not a decree?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 30 January 2018 16: 28 New
            +2
            Quote: Korax71
            most likely either for food

            In the pockets of corpses?
            Quote: Korax71
            what kind of discipline in the unit

            Change of one unit to another. 1 battalion 503 changed 3rd 693
            Quote: Korax71
            again describes Stalingrad. the feeling that the corpses you lay there in three rows

            There was a ravine through which, in principle, it was possible to break out of the blocked village into the mountains. So the attempts were constant. And there were a lot of corpses.

            Quote: Korax71
            not allowed to do it on their own

            Surround yourself. Opening up littered cellars and pulling out corpses (the main part was in this form) was simply not enough for the infantry.
  16. would
    would 29 January 2018 12: 05 New
    +1
    would,

    Anyone interested in issues of stress in a combat environment, its differences, etc. I recommend the manual "Psychiatry of wars and disasters." The book is not for a third grader, an extensive, even a little complicated, but even with an average mind, most of it is quite understood without special education. But it describes stress as such in great detail, is divided into types, describes the reaction to it divided by phases, describes the symptoms of stress disorders, etc. That is, everything is described from emergency situations to PTSD treatment.
  17. Recoil
    Recoil 29 January 2018 14: 37 New
    +1
    And the author walked over the political instructors)))
  18. Blue fox
    Blue fox 30 January 2018 09: 11 New
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    Quote: Korax71
    What kind of sappers of the Ministry of Emergencies ???? didn’t have their engineering units, but did they have dowries ?????

    The corpses. The main task of the Ministry of Emergencies was to clean them so that epidemics would not form out of the blue. Sappers et so, concomitant with this task.

    Among the units of the Ministry of Emergency Situations there were demining groups that were already engaged in humanitarian demining in the controlled territory, especially of socially significant facilities, again they worked along the lines of contacts with the local administration being established (for example, a shepherd blew up in the mountains, this pasture was cleared by the Ministry of Emergency Situations), yes, this it’s not everywhere, but the army’s engineering units were primarily engaged in ensuring the combat and daily activities of the troops; they had only one task of engineering intelligence to put it mildly. It was also with the medical support of the civilian population, doctors from the Ministry of Emergencies treated or tried to treat them.
    By the way, as regards the provision of sappers to the Ministry of Emergencies, in my experience in communicating with them, they were equipped at times better than army colleagues.
    1. Korax71
      Korax71 30 January 2018 14: 36 New
      0
      Perhaps, but not directly in the zone of contact with the enemy.
  19. beeper
    beeper 31 January 2018 22: 19 New
    +1
    Of the sensible comments on the Article, I really liked the ones written by the respected Lopatov, a particularly-concrete example of the successful work of the commander in organizing the battle in super-tight deadlines ... I’m delighted!
    hi
  20. trahterist
    trahterist 2 February 2018 16: 22 New
    0
    Quote: pishchak
    Of the sensible comments on the Article, I really liked the ones written by the respected Lopatov, a particularly-concrete example of the successful work of the commander in organizing the battle in super-tight deadlines ... I’m delighted!
    hi

    Than? The fact that in the discussion with rait is epic, as it is now said on the Web, has merged, and even with an unreasonable transition to personalities?
    There was a much better opinion of him before. But after this branch, the price as an expert is worthless ...
  21. RF man
    RF man 5 February 2018 21: 23 New
    +2
    would,
    I will not argue, but for Mr. Lopatov I would like to say a few words. NOT in defense of his specific statements.
    Sam is a rare guest here. I regretted it 3 times already and then quickly got bored, but I remember Lopatov, and although I have NO evidence, BUT for another 3 years I have confidence that he is a career officer and took part in the database.
    And his sarcasm and so on .. Yes, I personally have NOT one such acquaintance .. A year or two in the same Chechnya they destroy many illusions .. Without "sarcasm" and to some extent "crucify @ ..." the tower will move out ..
    What he describes is “dandelions” .. I’m sure that he knows MUCH worse than that, but it’s as if not for “Internet” ...