Another time: weapons that were not useful in Ukraine
Helicopters are one of the few types of weapons that have fully confirmed their relevance
Is the Northern Military District the largest conflict since 1945 or not?
Reflections in the article “Death of ATGM in Ukraine” on the pages of Military Review caused a mixed reaction from both the expert community and readers. The topic is interesting and pressing, and it is not at all limited to anti-tank missile systems.
The SVO forced a new look at many weapons systems, both in NATO countries and in Russia. A considerable amount of criticism was received in the article about the scale of events in the Northern Military District, which is the largest armed conflict since the Second World War.
Let's try to understand this thesis in more detail.
The first and main difference from all previous conflicts is the front line. The Iran-Iraq war mentioned by commentators took place on the border of two states with a length of 1 km. In the Northern Military District, only the front line reaches 600 thousand kilometers. This does not take into account the borders of Ukraine with Belarus, where both sides are forced to maintain serious forces and equip a line of defense.
The second difference from previous events is the active use of the entire arsenal, from pistols to ballistic and hypersonic missiles. Not to mention cruise missiles. Iran and Iraq, if they used something similar (for example, ballistic R-17s), then on a completely different scale.
Come on.
In the Iran-Iraq war, only towards the end was it possible to seriously increase the number of troops - by the beginning of 1987, the enemy armies totaled 1,65 million people. Not all soldiers fought at the front, it should be noted. And the conflict between Iraq and Iran began with an army of 200 thousand and 290 thousand, respectively.
By the end of the second year of the Northern Military District, no less than 617 thousand military personnel participated on the Russian side alone. Of course, this number is constantly increasing - the flow of patriotic volunteers does not dry out. No less, if not more, is participating on the side of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. That is, in total, more than 1,2 million people are now fighting on the front of the Northern Military District. Taking into account the rotations and indirect involvement of military personnel in rear units, the number of troops involved on both sides can be safely increased to two million.
If we consider the Vietnam campaign of the United States as a guide, then it is necessary to understand the complete inequality of the opponents. Before the Yankee intervention, the North-South Vietnam War was, although bloody, a war of low intensity. When the United States entered the game, the battle between David and Goliath began. Even taking into account the support of the Soviet Union, North Vietnam was technically many times inferior to the American army, which could not but affect the ratio of losses between the parties. In the Northern Military District, Russia faced a fairly highly developed enemy, in many ways its equal. With a fundamental caveat: at the moment, the entire Ukrainian military machine is supported by Western assistance.
Based on the position that the Northern Military District is the largest armed conflict since 1945, the evolution of the weapons used is of particular interest. In particular, equipment that did not live up to expectations or was promptly replaced by other models weapons. This is also important because in the foreseeable future it is the air defense arsenal that defense departments around the world will focus on. As well as the tactics of using troops.
Minus weapon karma
The first candidates for departure are the high-altitude and relatively low-speed Bayraktar TB2.
The conflict in Ukraine clearly indicated the place of these persons. How well did the drums perform? drones in Nagorno-Karabakh, they turned out to be so unclear in the Northern Military District. With the exception, of course, of the very beginning of the special operation, when the parties to the conflict, so to speak, were getting used to each other.
The Bayraktar TB2 cannot be called a completely useless toy - the Turks can quite successfully fight with these drones, for example, against the Kurds. In general, a slow-moving unmanned target is more suitable for fighting partisans in slippers. But for a highly developed army with powerful air defense, such equipment is ineffective.
The only way out is to use Bayraktar TB2 at ultra-low altitudes, that is, work with the landing gear touching the tops of trees. But the machine, firstly, is completely unsuited for this, and secondly, the flight range in this case will tend to zero. Hanging a repeater somewhere nearby is a bad idea; it will be shot down, and as a result, the opponent will already lose two UAVs.
Working outside the enemy air defense zone has become the signature style of the special operation. The enemy is forced to work according to this algorithm; the Russian Aerospace Forces also fight in the same way. Perhaps, sometime in the future, the domestic Su-34 will have to take advantage of its unique maneuverability and attack aircraft skills, but for now the aircraft plays the role of a deliverer of long-range and high-precision weapons. It’s hard to call such “skills” superfluous, but they add a lot to the final cost of the aircraft.
The most interesting thing is that, without penetrating deep behind the front line, the Su-34’s onboard electronic warfare continues to improve. This suggests that the level of danger for aviation so high that simply to maintain the existing status quo one has to constantly improve.
If you rely on the experience of the SVO, the F-35 could become the most expensive weapons scam of the century
As a result, the famous maxim of air supremacy is now unattainable for any army in the world if it is fought against by an enemy of equal technical level. Russia has encountered this in Ukraine, most of whose territory is now under a no-access ban.
A seditious question arises: why create fifth-generation aircraft if they are doomed to be used as air launchers for gliding bombs and missiles?
As long as the ground is not under the boots of the allies, it is possible to work against partisans and backward armies from the air and with cheaper vehicles. Therefore, all 5th generation aircraft can so far be considered exclusively marketing toys - not one of them has proven its effectiveness in real combat. As long as electronic warfare and air defense reign on the battlefield, aircraft have little chance of survival.
There is an alternative opinion regarding the applicability of modern weapons in the Northern Military District. They say that as soon as the real mess with NATO begins, this is where all the super-expensive options will be needed.
But any conflict with conventional means with the NATO bloc is an extremely fleeting war. Aircraft of the 5th generation or Tanks limit parameters - the incident will inevitably and very quickly slide into an exchange of nuclear strikes. And it’s good if the parties stop at the tactical level and do not create a nuclear apocalypse.
In this regard, the concept of a tank with maximum parameters is questionable. In Soviet times, this was the T-64, now it is the T-14 Armata. As it turned out, none of them was adapted to the realities of wartime. The point, as always, is not about high performance characteristics, but about manufacturability and mass production.
You don't have to look far for an example. The T-34 was objectively inferior to German tanks at the end of the war in all respects except mobility. The Tiger was a kind of tank of extreme parameters for German industry, but it could not resist the tactics of using Soviet armored vehicles and their mass production.
Therefore, is a tank of limiting parameters necessary as a phenomenon at all?
Isn't it more efficient to ensure mass production of real warhorses - T-72, T-80 and T-90 of the latest modifications?
The question is rhetorical, and it has long been answered in Russia.
With stubbornness worthy of better use, the Americans continue to work on the KAZ. In the photo the latest modification of the Bradley M2A4E1 Iron Fist Light infantry fighting vehicle
Continuing about armored vehicles, one cannot help but recall the active protection systems that did not appear in the Northern Military District. It was also decided to skip Israeli aggression against the Gaza Strip.
KAZ is generally a unique product: everyone talks about it, but few have seen its work outside of testing grounds. Another purely marketing project and a dead-end branch of progress. Unless, of course, active tank defense finds an antidote to FPV drones.
Somewhere in the distant future, amphibious armored vehicles may be useful. The special operation, like many other conflicts before it, showed the inadequacy of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, which can move on water. Now, in the midst of the SVO, it is too late to change anything, but in the future this failure must be corrected. As well as the extremely risky idea of landing military equipment from airplanes.
Let us repeat, while electronic warfare and air defense reign on the battlefields, there can be no talk of any airborne equipment. This option should become an atavism and a museum exhibit.
But what are we all talking about domestic military equipment? It's time to talk about Western technologies, the situation with which is even more beautiful.
Firstly, the West is far behind in air defense. Having at one time chosen the concept of destroying cruise missiles and aircraft with other aircraft, NATO members drove themselves into a dead end. The North Atlantic bloc is unable to provide Ukraine with adequate defense against Russian drones and cruise missiles. Which, as you know, “ended up long ago.”
Attempts to intercept hypersonic missiles have been a real failure. At the moment, there is not a single proven case of a Kinzhal or Zircon being hit from the ground.
What does this mean?
About the fact that the Americans do not have an antidote to such weapons. All ten US combat aircraft carriers automatically come under attack - the targets are very fat and slow-moving. This is perhaps the biggest headache for Pentagon analysts right now. The Jewish brothers delivered a bitter pill when they announced that “the American systems that operated against Iranian ballistic missiles during the attack on Israel largely failed - out of eight Iranian missiles, only two were intercepted.” We are talking about the Patriot air defense system of the latest modifications.
GLSDB is the most promising failure of American precision weapons in Ukraine.
Secondly, the massive GPS spoofing that covered the entire front line of the Russian Army seriously undermined the accuracy of the Western "wonderwaffens" - HIMARS, GLSDB and M982 Excalibur. In the case of the latter, they declare a drop in accuracy from 70 to 6 percent, that is, a tenfold decrease. Such discrepancies have to be leveled out with classical shells, which is why there is a chronic artillery shortage. And as long as there is GPS spoofing, the situation will only get worse.
Next in line is ATACMS, to which “Russians will be able to adapt in a very short period of time.” This was stated by Ivan Stupak, Advisor to the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security Issues. Maybe another plaintive bleat for the West, or maybe a dry statement of facts.
The redistribution of weapons arsenals is in full swing and, if anyone in the world wants to get a truly combat-ready, and not a ceremonial, army, it’s time to start closely studying the SVO. After all, this is where it’s being written right now story future. In every sense of this concept.
Information