The military commissar analyzed the rearmament of the infantry units of the US Armed Forces based on Ukrainian experience

The American army draws certain conclusions from the peculiarities of the armed conflict in Ukraine and studies the specifics of the use of various weapons on the battlefield. Such a conclusion in the next material is made by war correspondent Alexander Sladkov.

One of the most important advantages of the American army is the large number of infantry. Thus, infantry units in the US Army are in many cases larger in number than Russian ones. In addition, an infantry platoon may have not three, but four squads.

As noted in his Telegram channel military commander, not so long ago, a new automatic rifle and machine gun under the NGSW program were adopted by the infantry units of the US Army. This allows the US military to penetrate any existing and promising bulletproof vests of Russian and Chinese production. Accordingly, the risks for our military are increasing.

After analyzing the Ukrainian "lessons", the US Armed Forces were puzzled by the modernization of heavy weapons of infantry units. For example, the Armed Forces of Ukraine used the AT4 anti-tank grenade launcher and its modification M141.

However, it is difficult to understand what kind of goal lies ahead for the military. Therefore, in the United States, it was decided to return to a universal disposable grenade launcher. Such a grenade launcher could integrate the capabilities of both anti-tank and anti-bunker weapons.

Another interesting nuance that Sladkov draws attention to is the shortcomings of underbarrel grenade launchers. Thus, it is difficult to hit targets in cover, especially if you need to do it quickly. Therefore, the Americans are returning to a grenade launcher with a controlled detonation of a grenade by a laser rangefinder.

In addition, the United States is going to increase the mobility of mortars for mechanized, airborne and assault units. Now the US Army uses mobile mortars on Humvee vehicles, but it is planned to move them to another universal vehicle platform. It is based on the principle of "three minutes" - this is precisely the reaction of the counter-battery fight in terms of speed. Consequently, the mortars need to quickly shoot back and leave the battlefield.

Comments

[svp67]

The American army draws certain conclusions from the peculiarities of the armed conflict in Ukraine and studies the specifics of the use of various weapons on the battlefield. Such a conclusion in the next material is made by war correspondent Alexander Sladkov.

You might think that the Chinese army does not do this either?

[Myths]

So they are in Ukraine and work out ways to wage war. Ukrainians are voluntary test subjects for them, but this is their choice, even with it ....

[topol717]

Quote from Mitos

how they are in Ukraine and work out ways to wage war. Ukrainians are voluntary test subjects for them, but this is their choice, even with it ....

No, the Ukrainians were dragged into this, the corrupt political leadership of the country.
Although every nation deserves its ruler.
But I am more than sure that the vast majority does not want and did not want this war. And they are ready to sit down at the negotiating table right now. But Zelensky and co. are kept in one place, and he, having power, clearly executes the commands of the West.

[SaLaR]

And what conclusions does the Russian command make? And does it?

[Nyrobsky]

Quote: SaLaR

And what conclusions does the Russian command make? And does it?

I think that everyone draws their own conclusions. War is becoming more technologically advanced every year, which entails a change in battle tactics and in general in military strategy. It is generally not possible to compare what was 20-15 years ago and now due to the active use of drones and UAVs, which, compared to a car, let’s say, are generally on the initial path of their development. It is difficult to imagine how it will look like in another 25-50 years, but something tells us that success on the ground will be completely subordinate to the means that will be involved in the air. There is something for everyone to learn and think about how to counteract this.

[Blackgrifon]

Quote: SaLaR

And what conclusions does the Russian command make? And does it?

Everyone does. It is not necessary to consider our entire military leadership as mossy retrogrades. The same marker goes to the front for a reason, BMPTs are built for a reason, ak-12s, albeit not in the best way, but are being finalized, a mobilization version of the T-72b was made, armored armored vehicles (Spartak and Akhmat) are riveted. Conclusions are being drawn, but MO is a huge machine, which, like any similar structure, does not react very quickly. If you think that somewhere on the same scale is fundamentally better, then no - somewhere a little better, and somewhere worse. Better there - where there is feedback.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: svp67

You might think that the Chinese army does not do this either?

Everyone does. Today, in any self-respecting General Staff, there is an analytical group to study all the nuances of the war.

[lis-ik]

One official military commander left? Too many Sladkov became.

[Oleg Ogorod]

Others are different and worse. Sladkov and Poddubny.
But they can only say what they are allowed to say.
Well, of course, there is also a journalist Rogozin ...

[Lt. Air Force stock]

In general, automatic counter-battery fire is needed, relatively speaking, the operator of Orlan-10 or the counter-battery radar marks the target, then the Coalition-SV automatically corrects the fire. There should be seconds from detection to defeat.

[cold wind]

What are the implications of the war for modern armies:
1. Drones are the most important element of war
2. Artillery and missile weapons are the main means of destruction
3. Tanks finally go to the second role. The line between the self-propelled guns and the tank is blurred
4. Infantry fighting vehicles occupy a major role
5. Air defense capabilities must be available in every platoon. See item 1

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote from cold wind

5. Air defense capabilities must be available in every platoon. See item 1

+ Short-range air defense needs multi-channel to fight off loitering ammunition, ARGSN or IK. And not a radio command for 4 channels. Yes, and the role of tanks depends on the situation, there may be a stage when they will be in the first roles.

[Arsen1]

It has long been necessary to develop a heavy assault self-propelled guns. Tanks are an anachronism in modern warfare. We need the ability to fire non-direct fire, including guided projectiles at external target designation. Not a turret, good armor, a large number of machine guns to suppress ATGM and border crews. Then it will be possible to use it both in assault operations and in supporting the offensive with fire from closed positions. And then in this war, tanks only do what they shoot with indirect fire.

[Oleg Ogorod]

Tanks are melee weapons. SPG is a weapon in the rear.
Here the line between tanks and various infantry fighting vehicles is now beginning to blur. Tank guns are already being installed on light vehicles, for example, Octopus. There are other fairly powerful guns on a light non-tank platform with automatic modules.
It has long been said that one is not a warrior in the field.
But now they are trying to fight with such monsters that carry everything for all occasions.
But a unit must fight, each unit of which has its own specific roles and goals. Some cover from the threat from the sky, others suppress enemy artillery and armored vehicles, and others determine the coordinates of targets. And it’s not at all necessary that every tank / infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier has a crew. The most dangerous in terms of defeat should be unmanned, controlled remotely.
Only here we have a problem with this. Starting from the 46th Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, ending with military-industrial complex enterprises.
Military-industrial complex enterprises have long been turned into feeding troughs for various kinds of oligarchs.
Well, the management system of these enterprises is so complicated that a huge number of support workers, suppliers, accountants, economists, and security services are required. Among which half are thieves attached, the rest are forced to work for themselves and for that guy. With overload. And the work is not in the literal sense necessary, but they produce a huge amount of paper for the regulatory authorities. Internal and external. And the system is so intricate and complex that even it takes more than one month to study it. At the same time, the system is constantly changing. And instead of working, it is necessary to analyze changes in the invented rules all the time. Procurement regulations, separate accounting ... A special song is OBS.
And this is in the conditions of SVO. When you need to sharply increase production volumes, and reduce the price by reducing costs. To issue to the front as many weapons and ammunition as possible for a speedy victory.
Only nobody thinks about it. Everyone has forgotten such a clever phrase: victory is forged in the rear. Without an effective rear, one cannot win a war.

[Mikhail Maslov]

You did not understand the most important thing. And the main thing is flexibility from the unit on the front line, to the weapons accepted and delivered to the troops for this unit. Here we are lagging behind and this is a strategic lagging behind.

[Skeptic3]

In the armies of developed countries, the main means of destruction are aviation and missiles.

[pogis]

Quote: SaLaR

And what conclusions does the Russian command make? And does it?

Shave beards.

[Vasyan1971]

The photo is strange - the first number, albeit with a stiff back, but still lying down, and the second number is definitely a suicide bomber (why, by the way, is it not an Afronegr in this case?).

[Storog dvornik]

It’s not tolerant, now berets are kissing blacks and appointing US defense ministers ... One problem is who now puts loaders in Abrams? ...

[Ohsetin]

He treated Sladkov with a certain amount of respect, but he completely went berserk.

[stankow]

Sladkov is doing a good job - to pass from the front line. But with analysis and conclusions, he is not very good.

[Normann]

Quote: Nyrobsky

What will it look like in another 25-50 years?

And you, I see, an optimist.))

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Why would this 6,8 cartridge pierce promising armor when even the existing ones hold 7,62 * 51 / 54

[the same doctor]

Ours are all fantasizing about reducing the caliber of the rifleman. Bourgeois increase the caliber, as they increase the power of grenade launchers and mortars.