Americans hand over Stryker armored personnel carrier to Ukraine: better than what was given before

Unfortunately, the times are gone when we seriously believed that there were some kind of uncrossable red lines that the West would be afraid to cross. Now the situation is such that NATO has dragged to Ukraine the widest range of weapons, especially armored vehicles. Deliveries of Leopard 2, British Challenger 2, Bradley and Marder infantry fighting vehicles are expected.

It is already known for sure that the Americans will bring up about 100 Stryker combat vehicles as military assistance to Kyiv. And, most likely, in the format of armored personnel carriers - gizmos that will compare favorably with other vehicles of this class that have already been delivered to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The only question is how they will be used.

From replenishing losses to creating new units

With the supply of armored vehicles to Ukraine, in general, an interesting story, which quite well illustrates the upcoming changes in the structure of the military units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including due to the delivery of Stryker armored personnel carriers to the special operation zone.

Previously, NATO literally scraped out the remaining stocks Tanks and Soviet-style infantry fighting vehicles, in order to somehow compensate for the losses of the Ukrainian troops, if possible, without straining their logistics, repair capabilities and personnel training. A simple scheme in the style: "the unit dropped out - they replaced it with a new one." However, very soon the equipment in the bins began to end and, although the situation is still far from a stalemate, once Western samples still had to go to the special operation zone.

But the upcoming deliveries of all these Leopards and Bradleys with other equipment are taking Western aid to Kyiv to a completely different level. Here, the rules for replacing retired units with new ones no longer work. They do not work simply because, for example, diluting a tank company, consisting mostly of T-64s of various modifications, with a certain number of German or British tanks is a big stupidity that no one in their right mind will do. The same is true of the Marder and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and the Stryker armored personnel carriers.

Far from complete synchronization in communication systems, the total lack of unification between Soviet and foreign equipment, ranging from the banality in the form of shells to spare parts with repair kits, the training of crews and repair teams is the minimum that will force either to form new units for Western vehicles, or reformat existing ones.

Of course, this will add a lot of headaches to the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but this will allow organizing - largely due to the characteristics of foreign equipment - quite effective groups.

"Cannon fodder" from armored personnel carriers

Before the start of the special military operation, Ukraine, according to The Military Balance 2022, had a fairly extensive fleet of infantry fighting vehicles - more than a thousand BMP-1/2/3 units, of which the "two" was the most numerous. Of course, taking into account the mistakes and completely understaffed and literally killed cars, from which only the skeleton remained, the number is somewhat smaller, but still impressive.

But with lighter means of delivery and support of infantry on the battlefield in the face of armored personnel carriers, there were some problems. In total, according to the data, again, of the same magazine, there were about 430 units. At the same time, there were about a hundred of the most modern BTR-4E and BTR-3DA. The rest is the "old men" in the face of the BTR-70/80 and piece copies of the BTR-60.

To recruit combat formations, provided that all armored personnel carriers were on the move, such an armada was enough, but the losses inflicted by Russian troops during a special military operation made us think about replenishment, which the Ukrainian defense industry cannot provide in sufficient quantities.

The M113 armored personnel carrier is one of the most massive foreign armored personnel carriers in the Armed Forces of Ukraine

The result of this is logical: hundreds of Western-made armored personnel carriers went to Ukraine.

More than three hundred M113s, Bushmasters, Mambas, VABs and others, as well as heaps of armored cars of various sizes - in general, everything that the Armed Forces of Ukraine could immediately put into battle without much preparation. Yes, there was no other expectation, since all these “gifts” from Western countries, with a systematic approach to their organization in the troops, could not bring anything radically new and were intended solely to make up for losses and attempts to stop the offensive of the RF Armed Forces with subsequent interception of the initiative. A plug for a hole, roughly speaking.

The Strikers, on the other hand, stand out slightly against this background.

The main advantages of the "Stryker": protection and electronics

When considering a particular type of military equipment, booking is often considered one of the most important parameters. It doesn't matter if you mean a tank, an infantry fighting vehicle or an armored personnel carrier. But, given the fact that the armored personnel carrier is not intended for a frontal attack on the positions of a well-armed enemy, it is not worth making especially high demands on it.

However, the Stryker runs the risk of becoming one of the most armored and at the same time massive armored personnel carriers in the Ukrainian forces.

Neither Soviet stocks in the form of the BTR-70/80, nor the lion's share of foreign armored personnel carriers, especially when it comes to the M113, can produce such high performance as the American. Namely: all-round protection against shelling from a 14,5-mm machine gun. However, what is there to hide - not all BMPs on the sides of our country can afford this.

This is achieved due to the fact that the Stryker's hull is made of high-hardness steel sheets, which are additionally covered with screw-on ceramic armor blocks. At the same time, the weight of the armored personnel carrier due to ceramic protection is 16,47 tons, which is only half a ton more than that of the same BTR-82A.

But such resistance to bullet fire from an American product in a special operation is also an increased protection against fragments of artillery shells. It seems that the nature of hostilities in the current conditions does not need to be explained - artillery rules the ball there, therefore, enemy units identified during reconnaissance are immediately covered with artillery in its reach. Here, unlike their classmates in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Stryker will look much more profitable. Especially with enhanced mine protection, which, coupled with the voiced facts, will drastically reduce losses among the infantry being transported.

As a bonus to this, anti-cumulative lattice screens can be installed on the American armored personnel carrier, working against anti-tank grenades of the PG-7 type with a probability of about 50%. Whether these kits will be delivered to Ukraine is a question, since this expands the range and affects the mass with cross-country ability. But the possibility must be taken into account.

Another advantage of the Stryker is the presence of a thermal imaging sight in its fire control complex.

Much has been said about how important thermal imaging systems are now. Unlike simple optics, through the “teplak” it is possible to detect and identify targets at a distance of several kilometers at any time of the day and in almost any weather conditions (very heavy snow or completely impenetrable fog reduces the range of vision), which is useful not only in a conditional open field , but also in buildings of different densities. And the "far-sighted" armored personnel carrier is automatically and more knowledgeable infantry squad, which it transports and supports in battle.

Considering that most of the armored personnel carriers in the Ukrainian troops do not have such a fruit of technical progress, the value of the American gift is obvious.

Added to this is the equipping of the Stryker with GPS navigation equipment, which not only facilitates combat work at the grassroots level in terms of navigating the terrain, but also coordinating actions with neighboring units. Of course, everyone has tablets and phones with Internet access, but the integrated equipment has somewhat greater opportunities in terms of interaction between the armored personnel carrier, its infantry and neighboring formations. However, with regard to working with "neighbors", the American car also has a "friend or foe" recognition system, which minimizes the likelihood of friendly fire.

Banality also intervenes: the infantry is much more comfortable to ride in the Stryker than in Soviet and many Western defense industry products, including such a mass "crocodile" as the M113. In addition, it is more reliable in operation and not very difficult to repair.

But there are also disadvantages

Among them, first of all, is the stable for all wheeled vehicles, regardless of the country of origin, low cross-country ability on soft soils, which will especially affect the Ukrainian black earth porridge. Of course, the Stryker has a tire pressure regulation system, but how it will behave in those conditions is a big question. Especially in the case of equipping machines with anti-cumulative gratings that increase the mass.

This also includes the low stability of the Stryker during sharp maneuvers and off-road driving due to its high center of gravity. Cases of capsizing of these American armored personnel carriers are not so rare, although this does not make a disaster.

Also a problem is the susceptibility of the Stryker systems and units to low temperatures, which, for example, he perfectly demonstrated in Alaska. So, already at -10 degrees Celsius, the number of failures of these machines increased so much that more time was spent on their repair than on combat work during military exercises.

Yes, and there is a lot of talk about weapons: most likely, the version of the machine with a 12,7-mm machine gun will be delivered to Kyiv. Despite the presence of a thermal imager in the fire control complex, in some cases the firepower of the Stryker will not be enough. Here 30-mm automatic guns BTR-82A look much more profitable.

But the minuses of the pluses for the Armed Forces of Ukraine will not outweigh. They have not seen anything better there since the beginning of the NWO.

Conclusions

There is a saying: to hammer nails with a microscope. This is the logic that the Ukrainians will follow if they decide to spray the Strykers on various military formations on the principle of plugging holes where there is not enough equipment. This is only to our advantage, since these changes will not bring anything significant - yes, there is a thermal imager, the security is a little better, but it will not give an obvious superiority.

Another thing is if the Ukrainian units line up around the Stryker without being diluted with other vehicles of a similar class.

Relatively high protection from bullets, fragments and explosive devices, good situational awareness due to thermal imaging, closer interaction between the vehicle and the landing force, the operation of the "friend or foe" system, as well as a synchronized communication and navigation system - something that can significantly increase the combat capabilities of motorized rifle formations or consolidated mobile groups with the Strykers, which our troops may soon encounter. So far, in separate sectors of the front, since less than a hundred of these machines will be delivered, and then? There is no reason that the US will be limited to only one party.

However, all organizational matters are a lengthy process.

In addition to introducing vehicles into the states of existing military units, or writing new ones, the Ukrainian command will have to solve a number of issues related to the training of crews, repair teams and infantry. It is necessary to adapt communications and control, as well as solve the difficulties with the repair of Western equipment - most likely, you will have to drag beaten and broken cars abroad to Poland or even Slovakia.

Well, the supply of spare parts, various kinds of repair kits and ammunition deserves special attention. One Western expert in his article on the Stryker gave an interesting and important idea that for the full functioning of Western equipment in Ukraine, it will be necessary to create an automatic system that will shorten the path for requesting certain spare parts “from the customer to the contractor” as much as possible.

All these things are not done quickly. This may take months, but the delay, of course, does not bring any encouragement. Procrastination on our part will eventually lead us to fight with an army fully or in most respects adjusted to NATO standards. The first loud bells have already sounded.

Comments

[Asad]

Thanks to the author for the article, everything is to the point and without a cap of quirks like some authors. Deserved plus.

[skeptick2]

Yes, the article is interesting.
True, the comparison of Ukraine with Alaska in terms of sub-zero temperatures was amused. Laughed.

[Falcon Buster]

You can laugh as much as you like, but to be honest, the climate of Alaska is much closer to our winter than the usual American climate, for which +40 is considered the norm in summer.

[skeptick2]

And what does our winter and Alaska have to do with the Ukrainian winter? Do you even know that these regions are at different latitudes with Ukraine?

[hydrox]

The latitude is here for the bullshit: you should first worry about peak temperatures and if 113 freezes to the ground at -10 degrees, then won’t Stryker freeze to the ground at -20, and there are such temperatures in Ukraine in winter - then the Russians will laugh ..

[Alarmist79]

Actually, in the school atlas for the seventh, or something, class, there is such a funny picture, called an isotherm map. So if you look at this picture, especially with your eyes, you can make a number of amazing discoveries. For example, to see that in an exotic country called Russia, the isotherms in the same European part do not go at all in latitude, but submeriodinally. That is, it gets colder not so much from south to north as from west to east. Because, DOWN, there is the Gulf Stream. In the Far East, in the phrase "Crimean latitude, Kolyma longitude" again, longitude is more important. Because the cold Kuril current, oga.
And if you look at the map of ocean circulation, then, DOWN, it turns out that in North America the currents are located in approximately the same way. There is a warm current off the coast of Alaska.
As a result, the average January temperature in the south of Alaska (Juneau) is 5.5 degrees, which is decently higher than in Donetsk. In Anchorage -8, that is, climatically it is somewhere on the border with Ukraine. Despite the fact that the latitude almost exactly corresponds to Yakutsk.
This is the consequence of the spiritless rotation of the Earth, which forms the very map of currents.

[YOUR]

Our winter is a very flexible concept. Other than in the USA. Those states that are closer to the equator there may even be +40 the norm, those that are closer to the North Pole to Canada, there it is quite comparable with the climate of the western part of Russia.
Well, Alaska with its Arctic climate may be closer to Chukotka, Kamchatka and Yakutia, partly the north of the Amur Region, Khabarovsk Territory ...

[TermNachTer]

In Ukraine, just now it was - 20. M - 113 froze to the ground, there was laughter))) this can also hook the strikers, the winter is not over yet. And in March it happened up to -15.

[skeptick2]

Yes Yes. There was also snow in May.
But there is such a thing as "average temperature". Will we compare Ukraine with Alaska by this parameter?

[TermNachTer]

And what difference does it make to the "striker" where he will be - 15, in Alaska or in Ukraine? I'm not talking about the weight of this burbukhayka, have you ever walked on the Ukrainian black soil, in April, after a heavy rain?

[hydrox]

Nothing, comrades, we only have to see all this in 3-4 months, but there will be a special charm after the winter rain when the ground is frozen, this happens at least once every winter - this will be fun!

[Alexey Lantukh]

The weather in Ukraine is different. In the Northern regions it happens up to -40, but rarely and not for long, and -15 almost every year and not for the 1st week. In the southern regions it is 10 degrees warmer, but even there it can be up to 30 degrees. Without Crimea, of course.

[hydrox]

There will be enough days without movement in the cold and our artillery will deprive the ukrovermacht of the ability to combat movements

[TermNachTer]

There may be no capping, but nothing new either. As for the "teplaks" - they have already been brought to Ukraine so much that their presence on the "striker" does not play a special role. As well as the assertions that he "in a circle" holds an armor-piercing 14,5 mm. I saw how such a bullet pierced the wall into "two bricks". Due to what is such strength achieved in the mattress unit?

[Arsen1]

do you seriously need to explain the difference between armor steel + ceramics and bricks ??))

[TermNachTer]

I seriously don’t need to tell fairy tales))) I myself served and I know what it is. Have you seen this KPVT theorist up close?

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: TermNachTER

I seriously don’t need to tell fairy tales))) I myself served and I know

Of course, after all, BMP 1,2,3 and BTR-82 are perfection itself and no one has made any progress in terms of increasing ballistic protection since the 60-70s of the 20th century. STANAG 4569 Lv 4 BTR Strykers after Iraq strengthened all-round protection to 10mm B155 and from RPG25 grenades. The design itself, the chassis, the dviglo allows the Stryker to be brought up to 14,6 tons, a large reserve for additional armor.

[TermNachTer]

I repeat, I don’t need to tell fairy tales for handicapped children))) I work at an aircraft engine building plant, by the nature of my activity I have to delve into production and technology. Metal casting, thermal and machining, etc. I don't need to tell you, the American "miracle steel" 20 mm thick, which "holds" armor-piercing 14,5. Regarding ceramics, the mattress covers themselves wrote that the tile holds only one hit, then it breaks. Therefore, I readily believe that the first hit from the KPVT will stop. All the rest - they will make holes, respectively, with the destruction of internal units and the death of l / s, because, wounded, after hitting 14,5 mm. can not be. Weight, you can wind up any, at least 30 tons. I'm talking about patency, off-road. In the Ukrainian mud, even a very good armored personnel carrier - 80, weighing 14 tons, gets stuck. This American hippo will drive off the asphalt for a maximum of 20 meters. And how beautifully they tip over, even without additional armor, there are a lot of pictures on the Internet.

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: TermNachTER

I don't need to tell you, the American "miracle steel" is 20 mm thick.

I'll tell you a secret, known to everyone, in Typhoons-K there are German armor plates. I don’t know if they managed to finish the tank simulator before 2014, but I know that they sawed it. Just take an interest in the STANAG 4569 standards. Everything is painted there in black and white, levels 1 to 6, sort of. To me what claims, I did not come up with. In general, the KPVT B32 is also not a monster, like the 2A42 30mm armor-piercing, there is less than 50mm whatever one may say, because there are no sub-caliber ones and I will reveal another well-known secret, when it comes to handles from 30mm armor-piercing muzzles in NATO vehicles, then we are always talking about BOPS, with similar guns and ammo, penetration of at least 110mm at 60% slope of the armor plate at 1000m. Bushmaster 25mm seems to also give out about 100mm, which is enough even for a T-72 tank on board, for example. The Puma, the MK-30 cannon even has a maneuver of hitting a tank on board with BOPS, it blows up the entire undercarriage, if there are screens and if the tank doesn’t even get pierced right away, such deformations on the turret put the tank out of action, and tank racks and so on, for example, MTO will burn, 110mm is not a ram sneezed, with a bath of 80mm in the T-72. Bofors has 40mm 140mm narrower. But this is achieved only by BOPS, tungsten darts the size of a felt-tip pen. But KPVT and 2A42 or 1A72 do not have them, and those that are, BZ, are far from effective against all armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles of NATO, whose 50mm ballistic protection of any steel and other materials has to dampen hits, and since all these layers are separated into different distances and angles, then they break Kumu up to 300mm. In the field of armor plates, new armor steels, alloys, puff joints, etc. over the past 20 years, starting with Afghanistan, then Iraq, a lot has happened, and thanks to the experience of the database and new materials, it was possible to significantly strengthen the old machines, and the new ones, all of which by the end of the 1,2s they began to design, if this is not a floating compromise, then all heavily armored initially and with an anti-mine bottom. In the Russian Federation, this topic after Afghanistan, then Chechnya, then further, everything rose, rose, they say, maybe, well, his swimming on an infantry fighting vehicle, maybe heavy, but cozy, during the shelling, the army will get a car? BMP 72, of course, are hung with screens, but only up to some limit due to the suspension and engine, and they didn’t want to do it on the basis of the tank in Jewish fashion, you don’t even need to invent it, it’s not clear at all why. They rolled Kurganets, Boomerang and Armata in parades, but they could have cut the Jewish armored personnel carrier on the sly, towards the T-3B6. This is where the problem is visible, the absence of heavily armored formations in the Russian army, there are tanks, but there are heavy armored personnel carriers capable of breaking through with tanks and landing 10-1,2 troops with ATGMs each, you can’t do such a trick with BMP 3, as with the same Marder, or Bradley, their art will unwind with fragments.

[TermNachTer]

If you know so well, write me the chemical formula, processing technologies, hardening, etc. - I will show the specialists from the department of the chief metallurgist (there are metallurgists and welders and other very competent guys). They will say it can be or fairy tales. Armor 20 mm thick cannot work like 50 mm thick, there are a lot of physical reasons for this. You want to say that in geyropa and mattressland they learned to bypass the laws of physics? "Stryker" is a lot of advertising and very little facts. Here's how they will start to make holes in Ukraine, then we'll see. On account of the fact that 30 - mm. you can break through the side of the T - 72 - it's generally ridiculous how far you need to drive up to break through 100 mm. armor? And what will 125 mm do. a shell from an infantry fighting vehicle, at such a distance?

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: TermNachTER

write me the chemical formula, processing technologies, hardening, etc. - I will show the specialists from the department of the chief metallurgist (there are metallurgists and welders and other very competent guys)

The chemical formula of steels from 600 Binels is not tricky, the problem is the manufacturing process and further processing. You can create a piece of such steel, but if you cannot bend and weld, then there will be little sense from it. Few people in the world make such steel grades, and few people make hulls and chassis from this steel. Everything depends on the intensity of research, financial investments, competitive environment, cooperation. The west has an advantage in this. It is obvious that modern armored steel is stronger than the one that appeared 50 years ago, and the last decades have not only been spent on studying steels, but also on applications. For example, we learned that two plates 25mm + 30mm installed with a distance of a couple of cm from each other and a small angle protect much better than one 60mm board. The modern Abrams, or Challenger 2, Leo2A7, Mk4 muzzle has a resistance of at least 1500mm from Kuma and more than 1000mm from BOPS, but there is no 1500mm armored steel, there are a lot of different materials, at different angles and distances and they do their job. Since already initially, the base machines, their chassis, hulls are made of modern armored steel a couple of cm thick, they are supplemented with internal Kevlar upholstery + lining, and on the outside they are surrounded in important places with several thin layers of a couple of mm, alternating with ceramics and other materials, to achieve desired STANAG level. You ask metallurgists where Lobaev gets rollers for his trunks and why not from them? Why, in general, only a few countries in the world can produce high-precision large-caliber rifles?

Quote: TermNachTER

On account of the fact that 30 - mm. you can break through the side of the T - 72 - it's generally ridiculous how far you need to drive up to break through 100 mm. armor?

Of course it's not funny, the crew from such a beating. 30mm BOPS for Puma and other NATO infantry fighting vehicles were created to destroy MBT like T-55, T-62 everywhere, and T-72 and its descendants on board and stern at distances of at least 1000m. All T-72, T-80, T-90 have approximately the same bath and the thickness of its sides is about 80mm. Boards with remote sensing do not have the same effect on BOPS as on kumu and will not stop much. These BOPSs were created precisely for the destruction, including the T-72, and therefore the crews, for example, Puma, are training to fire the T-72 and other M-60s on board, stern. MK-30 with its BOPS disassembles T-72 with several shells, rollers, goose and all that flies, 110mm is guaranteed to penetrate at an angle of 60%. The Swedes BOPSs of their Bofors 40mm brought to 140mm penetration, this, for any reason, sews not only the side, but also the back of the T-72B turret. Their pancake for this and created. By the way, a modern 30-40mm cannon with BOPS can also unpleasantly surprise more modern tanks, if not pierce, then disable, immobilize, or set fire to the MTO. By the way, these guns, Bofors 40, MK-30, Bushmaster 30, Oerlikon 35, have not only evil BOPS, but also programmable projectiles with a combat radius of up to 3 km. Each shell contains hundreds of tungsten balls, in addition to manpower, it is ideal against aircraft, or BTR-80, BMP 1 and 2. These are very unpleasant shells, you can’t hide from them in a trench or behind a parapet, balls sew helmets and armor easily. By the way, I recently saw something similar at the front, they shot from the BTR-82, a short video, but there were gaps over something, did they finish such a BC for 2A42 and SLA, respectively?

Quote: TermNachTER

And what will 125 mm do. a shell from an infantry fighting vehicle, at such a distance?

At any distance, a 125mm projectile will be a nuisance for any infantry fighting vehicle, although heavy infantry fighting vehicles and Mangoes, and even more so a cumulative 125mm projectile (of the same generation), will withstand in the forehead, but there the armor and weight are corresponding and they were created for such beatings. On board, of course, 125mm of both Kuma and BOPS Mango will pierce a heavy infantry fighting vehicle. But after all, this is the point of a modern infantry fighting vehicle, to hunt for MBTs, and not to receive shells. If you take Bradley, with his optics, then he is much more likely to calculate any Russian MBT first, since the FCS and optics are at a higher level. Moreover, far from all Russian tanks have Sosna-U, with which at night up to 3 km you can see a tank, or an infantry fighting vehicle, and everything else, without Sosna-U, has very direct night combat capabilities and, without prying eyes, the crews are essentially blind.

[Virus-free crown]

It is already known for sure that the Americans will bring up about 100 Stryker combat vehicles as military assistance to Kyiv.

I didn’t even read further, because, from experience, they’ll bring it up, and in any quantities ... and we’ll still shoot at transformer booths with calibers, instead of using the delivery route in the trash

[Just_Kvasha]

Until recently, "Military Review" favorably differed from, for example, "Russian Spring" in a wide range of opinions and a fairly objective attitude to each other's comments. But times are changing, the spirit of "RV" penetrates here too. Now only uryapatriotic comments are positively evaluated. Just patriotic comments that do not fit into the framework of uryapatriotism are met with hostility. My friend, do not pay attention to all these minusoids, write! Otherwise, the dominance of the uryapatriots, and, as a result, the absence of any criticism of the actions of our government will constantly lead to equalizations and maneuvers similar to those in Kharkov.

[Sergey39]

You have an erroneous opinion and it looks like you, a mishandled Cossack!
All urya patriots, minus here!
And you, instead of a technical assessment, in this article about the Strikers, are fussing politics here! (

[Just_Kvasha]

And who evaluates the fallacy of my opinion, you? Then justify, please, its fallacy, and prove my "zaslannost".
As for the technical assessment, it has already been given in the article. There remains politics, which, alas, is everywhere. If you do not understand this, then it is bad.

[Sergey39]

No one will prove anything to you!
Your pearls confirm my doubts! (

[Dmitry Trukhtanov]

B, your military talent is dying ... We urgently need to appoint you commander, wow, you would defeat this adversary right on the supply routes)

[Skeptic3]

Delivery routes are likely to be beyond their strength. Therefore, a decision was made not to waste ammunition. Do you remember how many missiles the Armed Forces spent on a couple of bridges near Kherson? That's it!
And the border between Ukraine and Poland is far from a couple of bridges.
Do not think that you are smart, but Gerasimov is not.

[Arsen1]

I will write a standard comment on the topic of uryakalok about the delivery routes. missiles cannot destroy them, only FABs during an attack. As long as the VKS does not have air supremacy, nothing will change. And taking into account the patriots and other air defense, I doubt what will happen. So the war will take place with the constant supply of Western equipment

[Alexey Lantukh]

Air defense is not easy to crush, as some people think, in conditions when our aircraft are detected from space and, most importantly, by American AWACS aircraft. Air defense batteries come into action at the last moment. So that it is difficult or long to expect domination, or one should act massively on one object. In short, aviation and the General Staff know better.

[NikolayDS]

Unfortunately, gone are the days when we seriously believed

We didn't think so. This is an expression from the lexicon of Western countries, which for some reason was borrowed and began to be used by our Foreign Ministry.
Remember Terrence Malick's The Thin Red Line. The expression means "defense of the last forces." William Russell from The Times came up with the expression after the Battle of Balaklava, when the 93rd Scottish Infantry Regiment repulsed the attacks of the 1st Ural Cossack Regiment of Colonel Khoroshkhin.

[Lech from Android.]

Procrastination on our part will eventually lead us to fight with an army fully or in most respects adjusted to NATO standards.

Things are moving towards this ... we are constantly one step behind in countering NATO.
We need to break this trend in the bud... we should have had an antidote for these Strykers yesterday... and now it is still unknown how the hostilities with the participation of this enemy armored vehicles will go.

[Raymond]

It's a way of thinking that gets results.
See comments here:

"Strikers, AMX 10s, Bradleys... can't take a shot from a T72, T80... even a T64."

This is true !

Except that the T72 can't take a shot from the T72...

Thus, over the past year, NATO has been coordinating the delivery of T-72s to Ukraine to destroy Russian T-72s.
Now that 3000 Russian tanks have been destroyed, the potential threat to these small infantry tanks is manageable.

And have you noticed that Putin, who dictates the strategy to be adopted, he, and not an infantryman, proposes to build more T90s ...

Can we predict the future?

I think NATO heavy tanks will not be needed.

Small helicopters will be supplied for the few T80-T90s and even a new T100 that Putin may announce to reassure the population.

This is dramaturgy in 4 acts and I mourn all the innocent people who pay for the stupidity of 3 crazy people.

[Igorash]

Well, about 3000 thousand destroyed Russian tanks, you got excited .. At the time the special operation began, there were only about 3000 thousand of them in service ... The decrease in the number of T-12 tanks of various modifications is not due to their destruction, but to a purposeful withdrawal for the purpose of modification, taking into account the experience gained combat use. Instead, the production of T-90 breakthrough tanks has been increased several times ... There are still few of them, something about 300, but they have begun to have a significant impact on the course of hostilities .. So far they have no equal ...

[Igorash]

Sorry, a typo. That's right - "reducing the number of T-72 tanks of various modifications" ...

[Alf]

Quote: Igorash

Sorry, a typo. That's right - "reducing the number of T-72 tanks of various modifications" ...

What about 3 million tanks?

Quote: Igorash

At the time of the start of the special operation, there were only about 3000 of them in service.

[TermNachTer]

And why is the number so "round" - 3000? Why not 4 or 700? Where is the information from? From the Bandera General Staff? So according to their data, they are storming Yekaterinburg)))) And what kind of T-5 are we talking about? About T - 100 A or about T - 72B72M? But, I agree with you that NATO tanks will not be needed in Ukraine, because there are very few bridges (except for railway ones) that can withstand a weight of 72 tons. Almost no new ones were built, you can count on the fingers. And the old Soviet ones, for such a weight, are simply not designed.

[Alexey Lantukh]

There are also not so many road bridges on small rivers weighing more than 40 tons. You can look at the topographic maps of the General Staff. So the technique should force the rivers along the fords. And this is provided for in heavy vehicles: tanks, launchers, and other special vehicles.

[TermNachTer]

These 60-ton behemoths get stuck even in ordinary mud. The river is 5 m wide - it has a layer of silt 1 - 2 m at the bottom. There are no options, it will "dive" up to the very tower, and maybe deeper. The German "tigers" had the same problem in 1943-44.

[Skeptic3]

NATO has absolute total superiority in economy, technology and military power.

With such a balance of resources, the course of the conflict is determined only by the willingness of Western politicians to help Ukraine.
And nothing more.

That's where the real decision-making centers are now. Only by influencing them can something change.

[TermNachTer]

What military force? Armed Forces of France, Germany and England, in the amount of 700 thousand snouts. And then, it won’t be typed, since this is a payroll, and no one will tell you the truth about the shortage.

[Skeptic3]

Do you count the military force in the number of soldiers? You are two hundred years behind.

[TermNachTer]

Yeah, tell this to Surovikin, he will be interested))) if he, in March last year, had an extra 200 thousand snouts, the war would have ended by now. The infantry, as it was, and will remain, the most important force on the battlefield. Tanks, artillery, aviation and air defense can help. The result is achieved when infantry enters the streets of enemy cities.

[hydrox]

Let's be more precise:
"Meanwhile, as reported by the Italian edition of Cuotidiano Nationale, Western countries will be able to supply Ukraine with much fewer Leopard tanks than Kyiv requests. 33 units, which is much less than the 73 vehicles requested by Ukraine.
According to the information available to the publication, about 22 Leopard 2 tanks and 88 Leopard 1 tanks can be added to this number directly from the manufacturer, but Kyiv will receive them only at the end of 2023 - the beginning of 2024. The head of the Rheinmetall concern, Armin Papperger, in an interview with Bild am Sonntag, which was published on January 15, claimed that it would take a year to prepare tanks for Kyiv.
In particular, according to the estimates of Kuotidiano Nationale, Kyiv could probably receive 19 Leopard 2 tanks from Germany, another 14 from Poland, ten from Finland, and the Netherlands can provide about 40 units. The publication admits that Denmark and Portugal can also send combat vehicles of this type.
https://vz.ru/news/2023/1/23/1196043.html
Well, what about two hundred years?
This number is good enough if for a month of an offensive operation - that's all, and what will the dill infantry do next?

[AAK]

A possible answer to the "striker" - "boomerang" with DBM "Derivation" (57mm + ATGM) has been procrastinating for 7 years after the official display and will procrastinate for the same amount, and then its adoption into service is recognized as "inappropriate", because much "better" BTR-82A, in which the gun shakes when fired, and the armored personnel carrier itself sways like a boat in a storm ...

[cold wind]

Here is our response to Stryker. It becomes not funny at all.

[hydrox]

There will be no such army, the EU members will not be able to assemble a combined army, because they will quarrel when dividing posts, and the Poles will always rush to command heights, especially since they will put up the largest army. However, the German contingent will be the most combat-ready, it will also be better equipped than others with equipment and training.

[andrewkor]

In the end, logistics and maintainability will finish this pack.
My comment is too short but clear!

[Skeptic3]

When the Hymars stop shooting, please let us know. And we don't know.
In six months, logistics and maintainability should already have finished the pack of Hymars or not yet?

[TermNachTer]

There were sects of "holy javelin", then "holy bayraktar", now there are sects of "holy patriot". But the sect of "Saint Hymars" - firmly stands its ground))) there is no perfect weapon, for any poison, there is always an antidote. Howitzer 777 is not a child prodigy. And after they hit the center of Kuev (Pechersky and Goloseevsky districts) with rockets, I generally laughed for a long time. There were so many texts about "cool" Western air defense systems, but they turned out to be even worse than the old Soviet ones)))

[Skeptic3]

You heard not what we talked about, but what you wanted to hear.
The conversation was not about the effectiveness of weapons, but about the impact of logistics on service.

[FoBoss_VM]

Unfortunately, we didn’t think that the top leadership of the country, in their inaction, brought the situation to such an extent that NATO openly supplies heavy armored vehicles without fear. Very little time will pass and there will be deliveries of modern air defense, aviation and combat helicopters, the crews have already been trained since the summer. And all because Putin's threat of total damage to those who try to intervene in the conflict remained a bunch in a puddle. It's not that they intervened, but openly and impudently take part. Simply put, impunity breeds permissiveness. And it will only get worse and we must be prepared for this.

[Dmitry Trukhtanov]

I think it's time for you to pack your chumadans, because you are absolutely sure that the Darkest One just farts into the water, but the Western coalition of 50 countries is the height of perfection

[Skeptic3]

Top or not top, but it has power. And applies.

[spirit]

Very little time will pass and there will be deliveries of modern air defense, aviation and combat helicopters, the crews have already been trained since the summer.

I am sure that the Abrams have been training for a long time. The fact that the Americans are carrying a blizzard that they will not put up this screen. Then they will allow it overnight and in a couple of days consider the Abrams on the front line.

[Grits]

Quote: spirit

I am sure that the Abrams have been training for a long time. The fact that the Americans are carrying a blizzard that they will not put up this screen. Then they will allow it overnight and in a couple of days consider the Abrams on the front line.

I am sure that Apaches and F-16s will be in abundance in the Armed Forces of Ukraine by the summer. And it will come to the OTRK by autumn.

[Zug]

Well said, straight to the root see ...

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

Modern air defense systems are already being delivered. IRIS are so new that the Germans themselves do not yet have them. NASAMS is also completely modern, these are not ancient Hawks, but systems operated by the US Army itself. The Patriots and the Italo-French SAMP-T have already been promised, this last one is generally the best ground air defense system in the West.

[TermNachTer]

Judging by how the hotel was destroyed, in the center of Kuev, when they announced the performance characteristics of these air defense systems, they lied about "the entire salary"))))

[Vic Vic]

"... Putin's threat of total damage to those who try to intervene in the conflict remained a fart in a puddle."
This situation can happen only once - total damage for everyone. You, and no one, most likely, will not be able to appreciate that what you write about was not a "bunch" at all.
The time has not come yet.
Or do you somehow imagine the possibility of causing total damage to NATO countries in some other way?

[Arsen1]

we can inflict "total damage" without nuclear weapons. We are not. worth considering

[Qas]

You put this question to Putin better! We didn’t say this to the whole ball!

[Just_Kvasha]

The US can only be weaned from sticking its nose everywhere by creating a constant threat to their territory. Latin American allies are, of course, good, but coups are easier to arrange there than in Ukraine. In this regard, the question arises: why is Alaska bad? The territory is still USAshkina (I wonder why), to Chukotka - 49 km. The garrison and air missile base should be close to Uelen! Moreover, the Americans are aiming at Wrangel Island. And the justification for such placement is excellent - the protection of navigation along the NSR. The main thing is that the number of troops should be sufficient for the occupation, if necessary, of Alaska.

[Skeptic3]

Threatening the US is sheer stupidity. Khrushchev already tried. Despite the fact that he had completely different resources.

[Alf]

Quote: Just_Kvasha

The US can only be weaned from sticking its nose everywhere by creating a constant threat to their territory.

Maybe to begin to untie the ruble from the dollar?
Raise YOUR industry?
Raise YOUR science?
Create YOUR State Bank?

[Dmitry Trukhtanov]

This is all wonderful, of course, but there is a huge BUT .... This hodgepodge needs to be repaired, maintained, plus a different range of weapons and, most importantly, experienced crews .. Without people, it's all just a pile of metal

[Vladimir80]

The thesis about the complexity of maintenance has already been heard about himars and m777. There is nothing particularly difficult - you can learn in 2 weeks, and the Czechs and Poles will help with repairs with pleasure (it’s not in vain that their factories are built)

[hydrox]

If you study, you can learn everything: it will be possible to put 5-7 Calibers on the night shift at the Rheinmetall plant, do the same at the Slovak refinery, Tatra and other weapons factories - just so as not to be unfounded ...

[Constantine N]

If the leadership of Russia before the start of the operation did not understand that Ukraine would be helped to victory, then by the summer they should have realized this. But they made more radical decisions about the adoption of new regions, mobilization. So there is some kind of plan to win. By the way, I think that tactical weapons are basically useless, there is simply nowhere to use them. For example, Japan, for example, did not stop fighting after being hit by nuclear bombs, but surrendered only after losing the armies in the field. With Ukraine the same way, there is no where to beat. Equipment, economy, and even a foreign army ... There is, of course, an option, to remove half of the troops from all borders and organize a full-fledged offensive in Ukraine, and if someone decides to open a second front, that's right there and strike tactical nuclear. But the West foresaw this as well, in Georgia and other states a lot of Russians were accepted after the start of the NMD and therefore you can’t hit tactically ...

[Vladimir80]

I think the leadership either continues to bluff, or exists in a parallel reality ... And more likely the second option - we know quite a few similar cases from history

[Dmitry Trukhtanov]

Definitely, I believe that Putin is not Putin either))) Zelensky will not let you lie

[Vladimir80]

Nikolai2 also did not take any decisive action until the last moment. Adik and in the spring of the 45th chatted about the victory over the USSR. Even before his death, Gorbachev did not repent for his betrayal and the collapse of the union.

[Alf]

Quote from Constantin N.

in Georgia and other states, a lot of Russians were accepted after the start of the NWO, and therefore you can’t hit tactically ...

And I do not consider these beloved deserters to be Russians ...

[Skeptic3]

I hope you are writing this from a trench right now.

[Alf]

Quote: Skeptik3

I hope you are writing this from a trench right now.

No. Now I am at home, and tomorrow I will go to the factory and do everything that is required of me so that the Tu-160 and Tu-95 have new engines. Where are you writing from?

[Negro]

Quote from Constantin N.

then by the summer all the same they should have realized it.

)))
He owes a lot.

Quote from Constantin N.

But they made more radical decisions about the adoption of new regions, mobilization. So there is some kind of plan to win.

There was only one plan, and it failed in March. There are no more plans.

Quote from Constantin N.

Japan, for example, did not stop fighting after being hit by nuclear bombs, but surrendered only after losing armies in the field

It's funny, but Japan adopted the Potsdam Declaration precisely after the nuclear strikes - more precisely, after about a year of bombing from Tinian. The events in Manchuria had nothing to do with the situation on the islands.
More precisely, they had. The entry of the USSR into the war put an end to the ideas of the Japanese Foreign Ministry about negotiations with the Americans through the mediation of a mustachioed friend Erdogan crossed out. I had to contact the Americans directly, and at that moment they were not inclined to negotiate at all.

Quote from Constantin N.

the West foresaw this, in Georgia and other states a lot of Russians were accepted after the start of the NWO and therefore you can’t hit tactically ...

I heard a lot of strange ideas, but a nuclear strike on Tbilisi as a sign of protest against the unsuccessful move of the NMD, so to speak, is a new level of insanity. Congratulations.

[Skeptic3]

They don't have any plan.
More precisely, the plan was, but failed. And there was no spare. Therefore, now everything is on a "live thread".

Accepting new regions was a bluff, an attempt to scare the enemy.

And mobilization is a step of desperation due to the loss of combat capability of the regular army.

[hydrox]

So after all, the Japen received nuclear weapons in peaceful cities, and the Kwantung Army, numbering about 1 million fighters, was at that time in mainland China and the Soviet Army dealt with it, not mattress covers.

[Leader_Barmaleev]

I will share my memories and observations... Once, on one of my business trips (exclusively in the specialty of medicine), I visited a southern country that was at war with varying success. So our fighters captured several strikers there and made ambulances out of two of them. In an armored personnel carrier (ours, I mean) you ride and feel like a mouse in a tin can that boys play football with, in a striker you ride like in a bus - it winds at the intersection, of course, but - a bunch of armrests, anatomical fixators, bars and fasteners - all with soft touch. Air conditioning and dust filters are a real thrill, but the carrier swore this cart, since the car was made to move along the roads - lie on its side at the intersection - it’s not good to do it, but it’s a very comfortable thing as a second-echelon transporter. To remove EVERYTHING superfluous from it and use it as an armored bus - that's it. This I mean that the guys are at the forefront - try to trophy them, and not blow them up - then you will be thrilled to ride them!

[Sergey39]

The silhouettes are different, it's easier to hit the Stryker!)

[Leader_Barmaleev]

You read inattentively - I suggested it only for transport functions in the second echelon - that is, in the rear and frontline without leaving the contact zone. This striker is very good as an ambulance.

[Simple]

It is still unknown in what variations this striker will be transferred. Ukrainian Wishlist will be taken into account, if only.
With such deliveries, NATO headquarters will steer themselves, and the Defense Ministry in Ukraine will act as advisers.
From Ukrainian there are only (and then conditionally) soldiers.
But these soldiers were trained on NATO territory, according to NATO standards, and will fight on NATO equipment for NATO soldiers and, by and large, are commanded by NATO headquarters.

[TermNachTer]

There are two fundamental concepts - "reasonable sufficiency" and "price-quality ratio". Let's start with the fact that impenetrable infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers are only in the United States "Bradley" / "Stryker", the rest of the world knows that there are no impenetrable infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers, the only question is what they will beat. The second point follows from this, one "striker" costs like four armored personnel carriers - 80. As long as the United States is fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan, there are enough of them. If a real war starts, when hundreds of cars are destroyed every day, will US industry pull such volumes?

[Eug]

To be honest - I would build battle groups based on the Strykers - in order to more fully use the "information awareness" of these machines and extend it to others that do not suffer from such "awareness". Those. I would use them as a kind of KShM. Well, several units are purely on Strykers in priority areas .... while they go to Ukraine, everything will already be thought out, then there will be a correction in the application, taking into account combat experience.

[Vladimir80]

. To be honest - I would build battle groups based on the Strikers

Excuse me, which side are you on?

[Arsen1]

because of this logic, we have an army in the ass. Command staff exercises exist in order to learn to think not only for oneself, but also for the enemy. Understand what he will do. And we have crowds of blockheads who have read Dragomirov

[cold wind]

The only right decision is the creation of a brigade on the same type of machines. ~90 Strikers is about half a brigade. But Stryker is a development of the Piranha armored personnel carrier / infantry fighting vehicle, they have also been supplied and will be supplied. It is logical to bring them into one brigade, to strengthen the wheel "tanks" and self-propelled guns.

[Sergey39]

It is strange, what source of the performance characteristics of the Strikers and the BTR 82A did the author use?
Yes, starting from the weight of Stryker 17,2t., BTR 82A 15,5t.
Although such a weight for an armored personnel carrier is not critical, given the power of the engine.
And, armament with a Stryker machine gun and Nashe BMP 2 (and appeared with the Berezhok module), BTR82A 30 mm cannon.
From our 30mm guns, only Bradbury is protected. Everything is for close combat, before close combat, our artillery and MLRS work on targets.
It seems that it is not bad, since Owls. The equipment of Ukraine and Eastern Europe was turned into scrap metal and purely NATO equipment went.
Yes! The clash between the Russian Federation and NATO, plus the Ukrainian military (as the NATO members themselves call them "meat"), is gaining momentum! (((

[cold wind]

All "Western" infantry fighting vehicles and most armored personnel carriers from the forehead are protected from our 30 mm guns. All of our armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles (except for the BMP-3) are not protected from ammunition similar to ours from 25-30 mm, that's just bad luck, their 25-30 mm crowbars pierce all our equipment except for tanks in the forehead. Naturally, I am talking about the actual distances of the fire.

Well, let's compare the BTR-80/82 and BMP-1/2
Who is holding our 30mm or NATO equivalent?
Only Stryker in full body kit
Who keeps 14,5 mm in the sides?
Strike
Who has protection against RPGs and ATGMs of the 60-80s?
Stryker only.
Who has modern anti-mine protection?
Only Stryker
Who has the comfort of landing in the car and disembarkation / landing better?
Definitely Stryker
Who has better situational awareness and means of communication?
Undoubtedly Stryker
Who has better weapons?
Again Stryker, though in the version of the BMP with a 30 mm bushmaster.

What is the conclusion? BTR-80/82, BMP-1/2 are completely outdated back in the 90s, but now we are lucky that the enemy is Ukraine, with the same cluttered army. In the last 20 years, they have been doing anything except the real defense of the country. Now the condition of the troops is worse than at the end of the 90s.

To understand what I'm talking about:

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

Well, we were not the only ones toiling with foolishness, I must admit. The French transferred the motorized infantry to VBCI, which in all respects are pure Stryker in terms of characteristics (except that the armor is a little better and the 25-mm cannon, but there is also a cannon Stryker). At the same time, the Frenchman weighs 32 tons. As?! Where?!

[Maxim Davydov]

Hypothesis: in fact, Striker does not protect against 14.5 in a circle, because. with a larger volume and the same mass as the BTR-82, why would? Is it diamond-titanium-uranium or what? And VCBI or Puma is protecting there, that's why they weigh.

[cold wind]

Quote: Maxim Davydov

Hypothesis: in fact, Striker does not protect against 14.5 in a circle, because. with a larger volume and the same mass as the BTR-82, why would? Is it diamond-titanium-uranium or what? And VCBI or Puma is protecting there, that's why they weigh.

Absolutely right, the forehead holds our 30 mm. The armor on the Stryker is really interesting. Kevlar, multi-layer armor steel, ceramic on top of it, around the grill (extremely well designed). It is this ceramic armor that gives such armor resistance with a low mass. It's really unique. There is indeed a limit on the number of hits, but if you stand still, any armor will be pierced.
By the way, ceramic body armor is extremely popular now.

[TermNachTer]

I would like to see the chemical analysis and physical properties of the "wonderful armor", I will show it to the familiar specialists from the Office of the Chief Metallurgist, we will laugh together)))

[TermNachTer]

And when the "Bushmaster" became 30 - mm., It was 25 all my life. Regarding the fact that the "striker" is holding an RPG - 7 grenade, I advise you to test it on your own skin, if you stay alive - tell me))) from the fairy tale of a mattress regiment from Iraq , about the fact that the "striker" withstood 115 direct hits from RPG grenades - 7. without a single penetration, everyone who read this nonsense was already upset. Because there are such concepts as statistics and probability theory))) although yes, in mattressland and banderland, these are "Muscovite pseudosciences"))) the only thing that is really good for the "striker" is an advertising company for suckers))) because You can't fool people who understand.

[hydrox]

Place an attack on the strikers against our MLRS in positions for battle - and let's see what remains of the strikers and the attacking infantry.

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

Bradbury? Good writer. Fahrenheit 451, The Martian Chronicles, Dandelion Wine. But I do not think that he would have withstood a hit from a 30 mm cannon.

[north 2]

Quote: Just_Kvasha

Until recently, "Military Review" favorably differed from, for example, "Russian Spring" in a wide range of opinions and a fairly objective attitude to each other's comments. But times are changing, the spirit of "RV" penetrates here too. Now only uryapatriotic comments are positively evaluated. Just patriotic comments that do not fit into the framework of uryapatriotism are met with hostility. My friend, do not pay attention to all these minusoids, write! Otherwise, the dominance of the uryapatriots, and, as a result, the absence of any criticism of the actions of our government will constantly lead to equalizations and maneuvers similar to those in Kharkov.

and you don’t tell people who is a patriot here and what grades to give, and then people won’t tell you where to go ...

[Just_Kvasha]

Name whom I pointed out, or gave an assessment of his patriotism. You show me exactly where to go. Admin, right?

[Rurikovich]

"Unfortunately, those times are gone when we seriously believed that there were some kind of uncrossable red lines that the West would be afraid to cross"
....and who's to blame?....drum roll sounds....bingo!!! - WE ARE!!!
Like little children, we sit in the sandbox and do not back up our words with anything, only with the regrets of the Foreign Ministry.
Tomorrow they will introduce a couple of personnel divisions of the Poles, and what will we do? That's right - we'll wipe the snot, say we're sorry and we'll sort of destroy them already ...

[kot711]

That's right - let's wipe the snot, say that we're sorry and we'll sort of destroy them already ...,,
You can sit and wipe, and the men do the work, destroy, including the Poles.

[air wolf]

The parties have one mistake, everyone does not understand that the T-55 and T-62M is still an attack unit, and tanks with tanks are rarely seen in battle, so the Bandera people can still collect a lot of equipment from the countries of Africa and Asia, we would like them to take a breather for this not to give

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

For the Stryker, a meeting with the T-62 does not bode well, except perhaps if the ATGM is ready, but not all Strykers have and will have it.

[Simple]

Western MBTs have not yet gone to Ukraine. So what, what, and the javelins will be sent to them for the Stryker kit.

[AdAstra]

Well, why do we buy more red pencils, maybe even in China, and draw the next lines?

[SaLaR]

Why spend money on red pencils .. Have been drawing for a long time brown lines, and there is no need to buy ... Everyone has their own Free dye....

[Negro]

There is a saying: to hammer nails with a microscope. This is the logic that the Ukrainians will follow if they decide to spray the Strykers on various military formations on the principle of plugging holes where there is not enough equipment. This is only to our advantage, since these changes will not bring anything significant.

The trouble is that Zaluzhny has been talking and writing for more than a month now that he doesn’t need to plug holes - he doesn’t have any holes at all after the reduction of the LBZ along the Dnieper border - but a western type corps, for starters, at least one. For action.

[Izotovp]

To combat the Stykers in these conditions, either 30-mm + guns, which are installed on many samples of our equipment, or strike UAVs.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

I dare to say that most of these vehicles, if they appear in the hands of the enemy, will be knocked out by ATGMs. And there are big doubts about how it was written above that this wagon will withstand a hit by the Fagot ATGM of the 80s and even a hit by an RPG-7, especially on board.

[cold wind]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

And there are big doubts about how it was written above that this wagon will withstand a hit by the Fagot ATGM of the 80s and even a hit by an RPG-7, especially on board.

With the right grilles (as in the photo above), these ATGMs / RPGs are useless from the word at all. Cornet 50 to 50.

[Simple]

......................
The wheels will cut to your liking.

[garri-lin]

RPG 7 and Bassoon 50/50. Cornet definitely yes.

[TermNachTer]

Based on what parameters, give numbers and percentages? It is desirable to refer to the type of steel from which the "striker" is made, its physical and chemical characteristics. Separately, ceramic components. Well, in the end, distances and angles of defeat. In Syria, "bassoons" burn Leopard 2 A 4, do you want to say that the "striker" protection is better?)))

[Negro]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

I dare to say that most of these vehicles, if they appear in the hands of the enemy, will be knocked out by ATGMs. And there are big doubts about how it was written above that this wagon will withstand a hit by the Fagot ATGM of the 80s

Apparently, this is news to you, but no equipment, except for a tank (and even then not always), can withstand ATGMs. What does not make armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles useless vehicles.
On the other hand, the situational awareness in the Striker is much better than with the T72BZ.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Well then read what's here cold wind states a little higher. Read carefully what he promotes. It was in his address and was a remark. You write to him and argue, a funny skirmish might come out. What other ATGMs and RPGs are there when there is an almost religious belief in perfection?

[Negro]

Coldwind correctly states that the striker's resistance to old RPGs and ATGMs is higher than any infantry fighting vehicle and at least no worse than tanks without an urban body kit. Americans have been driving it for twenty years in difficult places, and the experience is generally positive. Which of course does not make him invulnerable - the same Rapier will certainly break through him.

Unless, of course, he covers the Rapier first. There are already questions for the operators.

[cold wind]

The operating experience of the first versions of the Stryker was rather negative. After identifying the shortcomings, they were seriously modernized. And extremely quickly. The installed gratings (I don’t remember their name) showed themselves extremely well, the steel composition, the width of the bars and the distance between them were optimally selected. They were made specifically for Soviet RPGs and ATGMs, which led to a reduction in Striker losses from these weapons to 0.
Naturally, 100-125 armor-piercing shells will pierce the Stryker for takeoff.

[Negro]

Quote from cold wind

The operating experience of the first versions of the Stryker was rather negative. After identifying the shortcomings, they were seriously modernized.

Well, the wunderwaffe from the factory only happens at the Zvezda Canal. Real weapons take years to lick. We are talking about strikers in 2023, not 2003.

[Materialist]

On light armored vehicles, it seems, they fire with cumulatives, the striking effect of secondary fragments and an explosion is more

[Materialist]

Of course it doesn't, they become numerous consumables along with crews and infantry
Questions about fragmentation resistance will appear when all the ceramics crack, in the same respect the BTR-4 is "more reliable", all other things being equal
For situational awareness of tankers and gunners, UAV operators should work

[Negro]

Quote: Materialist

Of course it doesn't, they become numerous consumables along with crews and infantry

How would you say, l / s on the SVO, by definition, is a consumable. However, this does not mean that even the BTR-80 should be thrown away and driven in a KAMAZ.

Quote: Materialist

Questions about fragmentation resistance will appear when all the ceramics crack, in the same respect the BTR-4 is "more reliable", all other things being equal

Well, I know what you have there for other equals, but Stryker has a sandwich, and there is steel there too.

Quote: Materialist

For situational awareness of tankers and gunners, UAV operators should work

Who owes what - you can’t list everything. And we have what we have.

[Materialist]

Quote: Negro

How would you say, l / s on the SVO, by definition, is a consumable. However, this does not mean that even the BTR-80 should be thrown away and driven in a KAMAZ.

This is an appeal to the inability of the crew to protect, and not to specific machines from which creepy hybrids are made, for lack of either the means or the ability to produce and operate another

Quote: Negro

Well, I know what you have there for other equals, but Stryker has a sandwich, and there is steel there too.

The protection class in the presence and absence of ceramics will obviously not be the same, given that ceramics are extremely hard, significantly superior to steel, it will play, if not a similar, then a very significant role in protection, though not for long
Unlike the BTR-4, which is not an armored personnel carrier in terms of weight and armor, but a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle of a unique design, it has screens and load-bearing armor-steel (it weighs 22-25 tons at the maximum booking parameters)

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

I will say more, in general, most of the armored vehicles in this war on both sides have been and will be knocked out by ATGMs. But somehow they fight.

[Duncan]

APC is a tin can stuffed with meat. One hit with a heavy projectile and there is minced meat. To stop, damage to the wheels is enough - anything from a mine to a machine gun. And if the rubber burns well, then there is no need to finish it off.

[Negro]

Quote from dunkan

APC is a tin can stuffed with meat.

Did you attach the BTR-82 like that?

[Alf]

Quote from dunkan

APC is a tin can stuffed with meat. One hit with a heavy projectile and there is minced meat

So why are they released and still used today?

[Materialist]

How is the Stryker fundamentally different from the BTR-4? Were there precedents for firing at infantry fighting vehicles or armored personnel carriers from barrels with a caliber of less than 30 mm.? In the case when such vehicles are opposed by infantry, they are destroyed from ATGMs and RPGs, any armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles in the SVO are equally defenseless from them, if BMPTs or tanks work, tank cumulatives, armor-piercing 30mm will fly into them. and "Attack", in any of the cases they are again defenseless
Ceramic consumable armor, at the first shelling, it may lose its rigidity and protective properties
The only vehicle from Western deliveries that stands out from the rest is the Bradley, which can hold 30-mm shells, at least some progress in the security of the vehicles in use by the Armed Forces of Ukraine (regarding Marder's similar durability is a question)

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

How is the Stryker fundamentally different from the BTR-4?

In the most massive version - weapons. Stryker has a 12,7 mm machine gun, which can get on your nerves, but it is unlikely to penetrate the frontal armor of an infantry fighting vehicle. The BTR-4 has a 30-mm cannon and a surprisingly good (considering the country of origin) FCS. Let's just say that at the beginning of the SVO, the BTR-4 had many documented successes against Russian armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles.

[TermNachTer]

I talked to a man who operated an armored personnel carrier - 4. Good SLA, works very poorly on rough terrain, stabilizers do not have time to work out. Works well only from a place or on asphalt. The car is overloaded, two rear axles do not last long. At high speed over rough terrain, the shock absorbers of the two rear axles break.

[Amazoniy]

Quote: Just_Kvasha

As for the technical assessment, it has already been given in the article.

What does TTX mean in the article disclosed? And here it is not. Get out!
Where are the dimensions of the car? That's it. They are not here. Because this is a huge barn, a grenade launcher's dream. Anyone will burn it from any grenade launcher, from any distance.
Stryker has a thermal imager. But who needs it at all if the car can't swim. Modern means of communication? What is the use of them if the equipment cannot be dropped with a parachute? Rather, it is possible with a parachute, but it is possible without. The result is the same.
And yet, this armored personnel carrier is expensive, complex and will break. That's how they start the engine and it immediately breaks down. If you don't believe me, look at all Western technology. They don’t know how to do anything in their west but iPhones.
And in general: little, late and useless. Personally, my opinion, which is not subject to doubt and does not need arguments. And whoever does not think so is the enemy of Russia. Here!

[Arsen1]

Stryker has a thermal imager. But who needs it at all if the car can't swim.

And after all, there really are those who write similar things on serious cabbage soup)) I didn’t even buy humor at first

[Amazoniy]

In my message above, there is no common sense at all. This is a set of phrases from Yandex Zen regarding foreign weapons. Everything would be fine if my words would express the opinion of this Internet garbage dump. But no, even topwar.ru comes across such mantras. Don't believe? Read the comments on the article. Already there was one small-sized grenade launcher, an economist - a repairman and a sectarian who witnessed the uselessness of thermal imagers. But they fell in an unequal battle under a hail of minuses, without waiting for fire support from floating paratroopers. Apparently, the latter drowned, or maybe they finally realized that it was somewhat difficult to swim with a parachute.

[Pavel57]

Quote from: skeptick2

Yes, the article is interesting.
True, the comparison of Ukraine with Alaska in terms of sub-zero temperatures was amused. Laughed.

By the time they install it, winter will be over. And what will happen by next winter, no one will dare to say.

[unhappy]

The minus of all wheeled vehicles is not indicated - wheels
I saw a lot of videos from the front where armored vehicles with torn tires hobbled.

[AlexWar]

Let them break the bridges across the Dnieper, and finish off the entire group of troops
Bridges across the Dnieper, isn't it time to click them one by one?
https://dzen.ru/a/Y26O6V0bsQPuomwo

[MeVED]

I guess both sides are left to attack

[Dimax-nemo]

Yes, none of our serial infantry fighting vehicles are kept on board the KPVT. But I would be more careful in transferring the effectiveness of bulletproof armor to "anti-fragmentation". It's not exactly the same thing.

[Seal]

With the collapse of the USSR, the West in general and the United States in particular got the opportunity to test a lot of our weapons. We did not have such an opportunity with respect to Western technology. So, the fact that the United States began to supply Ukraine with newer types of weapons is, on the one hand, bad, but on the other hand, where else, if not in Ukraine, can we learn to deal with them?
The same goes for tanks: Abrams, Leopards, Challengers, etc. We must figure out how to deal with them in the most effective way. And it is better to do it in Ukraine. Where can we transfer our new equipment without any problems.

[scary]

The trouble with all lightly armored vehicles is that they work on it with the same means as against tanks.

[Dimax-nemo]

I have no confidence that ceramics will "work" as effectively against large and heavy fragments as against bullets. There the geometry is "slightly different". All-round protection against KPVT is certainly pleasant, but it is very unlikely that Stryker will often encounter heavy machine guns in Ukraine at all. As far as I understand, they are not in the staff of the Russian SMEs.
Anything can be scalded with grates. Though the Stryker, even the BTR-70. Additional armor was also installed on the BMP-2D.

[this]

The "Stryker" is much heavier than the BTR-80, the author made a big mistake here, because of this he suffered at first, the running gear could not cope, then there was already modernization.