What is defense

45 002 48
What is defense


Any attack sooner or later goes on the defensive. Even if you - weapon offensive, group breakthrough, you have to consolidate on temporary frontiers. Any clash is just short pieces of attack and defense, alternating with each other.

This section is about building a defense.

Estimating the views of some modern generals not conducting local conflicts, one wonders at their stupidity. For example, recently the idea of ​​a “bunker psychology” in defense has been popular in spetsnaz circles. Allegedly, fortified defensive cells, pillboxes and billets connected between each other by trenches and passages of the message, lead to the demoralization of the fighters. There is a fear of “sticking your head out”, entrenched troops are afraid to leave the life-shelter shelter and, inactive, give the enemy a decisive initiative. If you happen to study this course, you will have the disadvantages of creating a defense as such. The advantage of a separate gap for each fighter without a connecting passage with another gap, ostensibly in the fact that the soldier will be forced to leave his gap, go to the surface, and therefore less afraid. That's bullshit.

Let us recall how not so long ago - in 1996 - Salman Raduyev's gang, after a daring raid on Kizlyar, fortified itself in the village of Pervomayskoye, dug many trenches there and, having only 250 fighters, held the settlement for a week. Our special forces, with a numerical advantage, stormed the village for a week, suffering catastrophic losses. Having captured up to 2/3 of the village in some attacks, with the onset of darkness, not having time to consolidate their position, the special forces received orders to retreat in order to attack the positions abandoned in the evening again at dawn. Pervomayskoye itself was surrounded by a dense ring of Internal Troops. The village was constantly shelled artillery, and was processed periodically aviation. A detachment of highlanders, the size of an infantry battalion, defended against the most elite special groups in Russia, and then broke through the breakthrough. So much for “bunker thinking.” Kulikov’s comment, then the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, is curious: “... well, bandits run away from prisons, there the wall has been built for years, and here it’s been in the field, it’s impossible to close in a week!” In the future, in the chapter ADVANCE we will analyze that any special forces for the assault on a fortified village with regular troops is not intended in principle.

Remember! It is very important to know from whom you are defending! If you are attacked by police units of enemy states, cause damage to the infantry. The police are very sensitive to the loss of manpower. The loss of the entire 5% of the fighters will cause their attacks to choke for the entire period of finding out the reasons and writing hundreds of reports. In the regular army, the percentage of tolerable losses comes to 25%. Even after losing a quarter, they can step back, regroup, and again after a few hours begin the assault.

The simplest trench will put you out of reach of a helicopter. Its uncontrollable missiles NURs have too small a caliber to cause harm to dug-in infantry. Helicopters are afraid to fly close to defensive positions, they shoot back from afar, at an acute angle to the dug trenches. At the same time, there is an order of magnitude more noise than effect. They are forced to keep a distance due to their high vulnerability to anti-aircraft systems, especially camouflaged ones that have a defensive position. DShK, the UTES system, the simplest NSVT, and even the Granik are a serious threat to a helicopter that flies out near the positions. The only protective factor for it is distance.
Remember! For ground forces, the turntable is dangerous only on the march! The entrenched infantry is stronger and he is afraid of you!


this is the defense of suckers


Dig trenches in height and without parapet. Take away all the dug earth if there is time. Do not be lazy, collect all the soil and take it to hell. Modern optics and shooting accuracy have grown so much that the methods of constructing trenches from the time of the Great Patriotic War are definitely not suitable for us. Why do we stick this chewed cake completely incomprehensibly ?! No sandbags, no mounds of turf, no concrete or logs! Everything should be perfect! Absolutely natural! I saw with my own eyes asphalt roads intersected by a narrow slit half a meter wide. And no dumps, so from a distance of 100 meters the trench is not visible at all! Trenches without a parapet, zigzagged like saw teeth, with built-in bunkers with perfect disguise as a terrain and covered burrows - a serious threat to the advancing troops. I repeat once again, no masketi, weed and stuck bushes, otherwise you will be shot Tanks. Their accuracy is amazing. With five kilometers, the tank direct fire hits the machine gun nest. Why mark it with a bag of sand or a conspicuous parapet ?!


Dot so they dug before so fight in world war.


Picture 1. A modern tank slams in this piece of iron from the first shot from 5000 meters. From this piece of iron you will shoot at 500 meters.
Picture 2. These well-visible parapet, you will not disguise under any circumstances, it will still be visible. 10 snipers with powerful rifles from a distance of 1000 meters will not allow to raise their heads.

Picture 3. Such a structure in modern wars will not be attacked by infantry. These excavations will be noticed by scouts, pilots, or satellites, then the enemy will deploy the battery and, with the 15000, will smash all the direct hits.

Where to build a defense? It can be any significant place, a bridge, a narrow passage, the dominant height, and of course the settlement.

300 Spartans defending themselves from King Xerxes I, blocked a narrow passage in the mountains. The width of the front was a few people. Fighting 20 on 20, Darius, the attacker of the Spartans, lost his main advantage - numerical superiority. The lack of opportunity for maneuver led to the fact that a huge army simply crowded behind the combatants, unable to make a contribution. The Spartans, having, moreover, better personal preparedness, could bring the tired front row of fighters out of the clash, replacing it with those who had rested from the back rows. Conducting such a rotation, the Spartans constantly had in the front row of more fresh and high-quality soldiers. This determined the success of the battle.

In modern conditions, the enemy can use the attack "waves" - throw into battle one after the other small units of one whole. Let's say a company of soldiers with a tank and an 5 BMP. Having started the battle and having fired out their own ammunition, the first company exhales and is ready to retreat, but because of their back the second flies out and with great tenacity and not shot by the ammunition goes for a breakthrough. Such "waves" can alternate several times. By the last wave, the first company will already be able to recharge and be ready for the second attempt. But such tricks can be thrown out only by a regular army, and only if your defense has already been unmasked. In the meantime, you have not noticed, sit quietly and maximize admit the enemy. If you have built a good defense, then from 100 meters the enemy will not see it.

If possible, be sure to stick mines in front of the line of defense. Any: self-made, anti-farm frogs, stretch marks, anti-tank land mines, MON - directed fragmentation mine, or a TV with legs. Stretching medium strength often explodes on its own. Very dangerous OZM-3 (frog stretching)! In common people - "flying meat grinder". Issues a double blast, necessarily - corpses. Hand stretch grenades, more for the demoralizing effect, the force of the explosion is very small, the characteristic click of the fuse is 3 seconds before the explosion. Help, if used in large quantities. Push action anti-tank bombs with sensitive antennae. Torn off pieces of the tank, carry all the infantry behind the tank. Very dangerous.

Any mines in front of the line of defense are very useful. Despite the effectiveness of this defense resource, the commanders of the attacking troops constantly ignore its power and drive subordinates to death. Use it! Mines terrify the enemy and protect you. Having tied up in a minefield, having fallen under heavy fire at close range, any opponent will roll back to the next day.

How many scouts fell in the mountains of the Caucasus from mines, only God knows.

Stage 2. The first assault attempt failed, however, your line of defense was opened by the enemy. Your actions are a maneuver!

In addition to passive defense, there is a “shunting defense”. The first onslaught snapped down, the enemy suffered losses, began to respect you, and now he is preparing plans for retribution. Send scouts to know the plans of the enemy. He attacks, and therefore poorly prepared for defense. You can easily penetrate and crawl through their positions. The purpose of intelligence is to find out what forces the enemy is pulling up.

In any case, they will start bombing you, but it is much worse if they start bombarding you with mortars. Range 6300 meters, calibers 80mm, 120 mm. Howitzers - up to 20 km and more. Tanks 120 mm - range 6000 m. Heavy flamethrowers.

If the enemy is going to destroy you at a distance, and your shooting range is not enough for a retaliatory strike, start maneuvering. Leave on the positions of snipers. Let the remaining forces move to spare, unknown to the enemy frontiers, with the possibility of returning back. Accuracy of modern weapons will play into your hands. Take the main body of the fighters literally 200 meters from the lighted position, and the enemy will plow through empty trenches. The infantry is very tenacious! Remember movies about the Great Patriotic. It seems everything is mixed up, baked and died from shelling and / or bombing, but no, the soldiers are in the dust, but ready to fight. It's true. A person withstands more pressure than concrete buildings. And when the building itself shatters into pieces, people die mostly from heavy debris, and not from the cause of the destruction of the house.

You need courage. From heavy land mines, spontaneous emissions of fecal masses can occur, and the soul fly off a couple of meters and is near, but not inside you. Very scary - 500 kg bombs, shelling by howitzers, heavy mortars. The trajectory of these charges is clearly on top, mounted, and, therefore, directly on the head. Shrapnel can be used - white smoke in the sky; isobaric, isothermal, vacuum charges - atomic mushroom in miniature. There is no salvation from this last one, and your entire defense will soar into the sky. But hope for the best.

fight in the city

If you need to move away, then move away. Do not sit stupidly on the spot, if you move away in the city, let the enemy get bogged down, believe, few people will guess to gain a foothold, they will push to the last. And then counterattack!



A swarm of defenses from the building to the building, from the basement to the basement, across the streets. All the sand covered with sand is hidden. Equip covered caches. Machine gun points set at ground level, even in remote yards. The lower the firing point, the better. By sacrificing the shelling sector - you get a surprise. Equip shooting positions in the depths of the premises, a sniper, shooting from the depths of the premises, from a distance of 2 meters and more from the window, gets a natural silencer. Such a sniper is very difficult to track down. We saw in the movie, as a sniper put a rifle on the window sill - it's fuckers. They did not participate in sniper duels. Shoot the darkness of the deep room! Explain to each subordinate the sector of fire, where the reserve position, and when to open fire.

If the enemy’s attack drowned, immediately activate, if an enemy sniper doesn’t shoot at you, send your own men to shoot at them. Bite the enemy at night, take off the sentry, mine the road. Break their initiative.
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    3 July 2014 09: 21
    The deeper you dig, the longer you live.
    1. +5
      3 July 2014 12: 59
      So my grandfather told me he survived because he dug, when he got to the front in 42, a fellow countryman who fought in the Finnish war told him if you want to live, dig, so he dug, he told me we walked all day, they came and immediately started digging, only dug up, an order comes to move on... it's a shame, it's a pity for the work, but he came to a new place and started digging again, he was at his full height, and those who were weaker, they dug a little and still had no strength... and they died first.
  2. +4
    3 July 2014 09: 50
    Dig trenches in height and without parapet. Take away all the dug earth if there is time. Do not be lazy, collect all the soil and take it to hell.
    The pack plus is clearly addressed to the fighters of New Russia. Cognitively, at one time we were taught the opposite, bulk paraphernalia and the arrangement of loopholes for shooting. hi
    1. +4
      3 July 2014 14: 58
      Quote: Gomunkul
      we were once taught the opposite, bulk paraphernalia and the arrangement of loopholes for shooting
      Well, if the inspector arrives with stripes, and there are no chalk lines around the main/spare positions - get a fresh cucumber in the ass. I won't say anything about the mandatory black and white columns...

      in general, the so-called "teachings" are always "demonstrative", on which people do not learn anything ... But to check the free performance. am
  3. mango68
    +2
    3 July 2014 10: 13
    Right. They used to teach: a parapet rash. And in life I had to clean it, or pour 10-20 meters ahead.
  4. Alexander.B
    +4
    3 July 2014 10: 17
    The article is a ton of pluses. I recommend reading the book "Vyacheslav Mironov. I was in this war (Chechnya-95)". A fiction book, but essentially a desk book, for homegrown mohair. Dig, dig anywhere, anytime.
  5. Roshchin
    +9
    3 July 2014 10: 20
    I do not know how the experience of the war in Afghanistan, the Caucasus, Yugoslavia and the Middle East is generalized and used. How quickly this is done and implemented in training practice. However, knowing the inertia of the military machine, as well as the dominance of armchair tacticians and pseudo-scientists who know how to "fight" well only for comfort and a place at the trough, jealously guarding this from real warriors, one can assume that real tactics have little in common with the dictates of the time. We need a public academy, if you like, with broad access for all interested people, a platform for communication between those who fought or are fighting with those who are preparing for war. In particular, there should be the possibility of publishing both processed materials and the opinions of direct participants.
  6. +3
    3 July 2014 10: 22
    Good article? I read it with interest! In the army I have such
    not taught !! Air defense.
  7. + 13
    3 July 2014 10: 26
    Regarding the breastwork being clearly visible (even camouflaged), I disagree. I knew where the trench was, what it looked like, how many soldiers were in it, but I didn't notice until I fell into it. The author probably has X-ray vision and a developed sixth sense. A simple soldier like me doesn't have very good eyesight. And he won't see a well-camouflaged position. From 6 meters or more, you'll hardly be able to tell the difference between natural turf and one that was skillfully laid.
    The article very poorly describes how the trench should look. If you reject the book technology of building defense, then describe in more detail how to organize it in a new way. All theses. I would like to read the instructions, not the theses.
    1. Alexander.B
      +1
      3 July 2014 10: 28
      I think that the author did not mean the technical side of building the defense, but the concept. And then it turns out the training manual. I don’t know if there is any responsibility for this.
  8. +1
    3 July 2014 10: 39
    Uv Comrade Roshchin, on the avatar 19zh6, if not mistaken?
    1. Roshchin
      0
      3 July 2014 11: 02
      Good old and my beloved "nine".
  9. Tyundey
    + 13
    3 July 2014 10: 45
    You were taught absolutely correctly, parapet is necessary. And better - two (reverse). Otherwise, on any background behind the back the defender will be visible very well. And the main function of the parapet is protection against fragments and ricochet. Ricochet from the asphalt allows you to disable infantry sheltering behind wheeled and tracked vehicles.
    The main thing that the author did not say is that defense should in no case be passive. You should always look for gaps between the advancing units, ambush and inflict short and quick flanking attacks. The weakest point in the organization of the advancing troops is interaction with neighbors. Everyone has always had problems with this same interaction. Someone on the right, someone on the left - hz, communication is poorly organized. If even a small combat troika-five is wedged in and an unexpected attack occurs on the flank or rear of the advancing unit, the offensive will at least be delayed.
    Defense cannot last forever, no matter how much the defenders change positions. Anyway with In the permanent pressure will have to turn the line. But to prevent this from happening and attacks on the starting positions and routes of advancement of the attackers are necessary. The further the enemy is moved away from the line of defense, the longer the defense will last.
    The territory is considered captured when the infantry passed through it. The infantryman - he is a living person (still alive), is afraid of a bullet, a fragment, rubble, smoke, mines, gets confused in a barbed wire, gets sand and dirt in his eyes. Nobody wants to die. To create maximum damage to the infantry and any attack will be drowned - this is the goal of defense. Equipment without infantry in the city is defenseless, and will be forced to retreat.
    The defenders (under conditions of sufficient preparation time) are OBLIGED to study the possible paths of the advancing and to organize ambushes on these routes, mined blockages, high-explosive and anti-tank multi-stage bookmarks.
    It is a pity that the militias do not have enough time and specialists. It’s good that the level of training and organization of management at Bendera is lower than the plinth.
  10. +6
    3 July 2014 10: 51
    I wonder who the author of the article? What is his military education, if any? Maybe this is another lover of military simulations?
    The parapet actually protects the fighter from shrapnel and bullets. In the parapet are loopholes for shooting. The author, judging by his drawing, has seen enough of the chronicles about the actions of amers in the desert. There is no rear parapet in our army. Read engineering instructions. If a fighter fires from the trench of an uncontested parapet, then in this case he will definitely be in full view of the enemy.
    The special forces in Pervomaisky managed only because the tactics of conducting a modern combined arms battle are rather superficially studied at the military training institute of the Special Forces troops.
    A modern tank will slam into this piece of iron from the first shot from 5000 meters. From this piece of iron you shoot accurately at 500 meters.

    Tankers! Respond, tell the author about firing from a tank gun !!! It happens that you can’t get to the 4 km ATGM the first time. At a distance of 5 km in a tank sight, a small-sized target is quite problematic to detect, not to mention striking from the first shot.
    In short, in a word, the article was written by an amateur, it does not carry a payload.
    1. +3
      3 July 2014 11: 55
      Everything is fine and without a parapet, dugouts and shelters, but the question is, if the regular army has outlined a breakthrough point, then it will scout everything thoroughly. With PS and scouts, everyone will see, and even if they use thermal imagers for reconnaissance. 3-4 batteries of the Smerch tin type will drive such a fortified area and comb it with square thermobaric ammunition. And this is a star, the trenches will not save and everything else, if not completely sealed. This will go against the dill, but for how long, they will be asked from the Eureka and ask for thermobaric ammunition, God forbid give.
    2. +3
      3 July 2014 12: 16
      Quote: piter-tank
      Tankers! Respond, tell the author about firing from a tank gun !!! It happens that you can’t get to the 4 km ATGM the first time. At a distance of 5 km in a tank sight, a small-sized target is quite problematic to detect, not to mention striking from the first shot.

      Presented photo bunker in a state of modern. In the composition of UR it is not a single tanker and for 500m. will not notice for it will be strewn with earth and carefully masked. Yes, and the sense of firing a tank at reinforced concrete bunker, the tank gun is only laying fire, and the vertical walls of the bunker are the strongest. Here howitzers are needed that the roof of the bunkers can be destroyed ...
  11. SIT
    + 22
    3 July 2014 11: 04
    Since the article is really relevant in connection with the events in New Russia, it is worth carefully discussing the author's proposal. IMHO his theses are not indisputable, although in some places they are interesting.
    Let's take some pictures. The first picture, if I'm not mistaken, is a photo of the 1th battery near Sevastopol. What was left after the assaults of 35 and 42. There's a museum there now. This is not a field fortification. In the field, such a pillbox would be covered with earth, turf, and the muzzle of the machine gun would not protrude beyond the plane of the embrasure, i.e. there would be no dust cloud from the shots. It's not very easy to see something like this even from 44 m, let alone 500 km. And who would build it so that it would be within direct visibility of 5 km? Tanks would have to approach at 5-1500 m, and it's impossible to detect a camouflaged ATGM from such a distance. The second picture shows field fortifications with dugouts. Where would we be without them? The author himself writes about mortars, and there are also MLRS. In the case of the Smerch MLRS without dugouts, it's simply a disaster for everyone and a 1000m retreat won't help much, since it's known that all MLRS have a greater dispersion in range than to the sides. Although of course, you'll have to drag concrete floors from the nearest factory workshops to the dugouts from the Smerch, otherwise it's all pointless. According to the 2rd picture, aerial reconnaissance by drones will detect trenches with or without parapets, especially since the author calls for ignoring camouflage nets. But with parapets, you can organize a defense so that two soldiers positioned nearby will shoot, one to the right from behind the parapet, and the other to the left, without sticking out over it. In this case, the commander only needs to calculate the distance between the pairs so that the sectors of fire overlap and minimize dead zones. In this case, enemy sniper fire will be effective only if the snipers are in attack formations, and this is very fraught for them, because a sniper rifle in the hands is the same as a target glued to the forehead - everyone will frantically shoot only at the sniper. Now about the battle in the city. How can you equip machine gun positions as low as possible!?!? In the city!! There are buildings and houses around. The same snipers, having taken positions on the upper floors of opposite buildings, will see everyone as if in the palm of their hand. At the moment of their attack, they will simply lay down all the machine gunners with the first salvo and ensure a breakthrough for their infantry. In the city, you need to occupy houses and make strong points out of them, connecting them with trenches. The first floor window openings and especially the entrance doors are mined with traps so that they can only be demined by detonation))). On the second and subsequent floors, the windows are covered with sandbags from bottom to top, so that Shmel does not fly in. The loopholes are made on the left and right so that the fighter stands behind the wall, and the sectors of fire of the pair at the window provide maximum coverage. For each fighter inside the room, fence off a corner with sandbags. This is at least some chance of survival if the attackers throw a grenade into the room from the corridor. The loophole for the machine gun in the window should be made in the middle, but under no circumstances stick the barrel out the window! Put a table, or put the same sandbags inside the room opposite the loophole and put a machine gun on bipods on them. Be sure to lay down some kind of wet rag, otherwise the shooting will raise dust and make everyone's eyes water. That's what came to mind off the top of my head.
    1. +2
      3 July 2014 11: 13
      I agree. Denying the disguise of defenses is pointless. By battle in the city. Common sense and the requirements of the combat manuals dictate that firepower (machine guns, grenade launchers, ATGM calculations) are located on the upper floors of buildings. In this case, the detection range and, accordingly, the destruction of enemy targets increases. From the lower floors you won’t get such an effect.
    2. +1
      3 July 2014 13: 59
      Your comment is more objective than the article.
    3. 0
      5 July 2014 00: 45
      Quote: SIT
      That’s what came to mind.

      SIT, good koment.
      hi

      According to the article: everything is somehow mixed in a bunch ...

      The author walked casually from the Spartans and the Second World War to the Czech Republic, and even for different types of combat ... so what?
      Nothing...
      The same battle in the city is a whole art, and there are NO identical battles.
      The same LNG-9 on the roof can sometimes crush attackers into noodles, and sometimes this is the greatest stupidity ... how can I advise it?

      Only the "parapet" is striking in the article ...
      IMHO.
  12. +3
    3 July 2014 11: 13
    Nice to read VO. And articles and comments of thinking people. Yesterday the link "accidentally" went to the page of YES Medvedev in the social network - a million stupid comments from ghouls. VO drives !!! Thanks to the authors.
    1. Larus
      0
      4 July 2014 11: 45
      what a writer, such and readers
  13. +6
    3 July 2014 11: 17
    what is it all about?
    What kind of sofa theory is this? rave...
    Dig trenches in height and without parapet ..
    Well, let him dig and sit in them, without parapet))
    but in general about the outdated experience of WWII, I was generally pleased, the author is clearly familiar with such experience from films.
  14. +5
    3 July 2014 11: 25
    some nonsense, the author in the army when he ever served in the fields on the exercises was? In our country, the anti-tank gun was masked in the trench so that you will not notice 20 m walk. You at 5 km direct fire in the trench still try arrows. The author has an idea that the surface of the earth is a flat board.
    1. +2
      3 July 2014 14: 22
      Well, it’s just possible to shoot, but notice? It seems to me that on a standard potato field in Ukraine, a normal trench and a bunker from 2 km can not be seen. Even a thermal imager will not help much.
      And if there are ruins, tall grass, construction rubbish, you can go point blank and not notice that a trench, but a soldier sitting on a stump openly and without movement.
    2. +1
      3 July 2014 14: 22
      Well, it’s just possible to shoot, but notice? It seems to me that on a standard potato field in Ukraine, a normal trench and a bunker from 2 km can not be seen. Even a thermal imager will not help much.
      And if there are ruins, tall grass, construction rubbish, you can go point blank and not notice that a trench, but a soldier sitting on a stump openly and without movement.
  15. Alexander.B
    +3
    3 July 2014 11: 29
    Quote: SIT
    Now about the battle in the city. How can I equip machine gun positions as low as possible!?!? In the town!! There are buildings and houses around. The same snipers, having taken up positions on the upper floors of opposing buildings, will see everyone in full view. At the time of their attack, they simply put in a single salvo all the machine gunners and provide a breakthrough for their infantry. In the city it is necessary to occupy houses and make strong points out of them, connecting them with trenches. The first floor has window openings and especially entrance doors that are mined by traps so that demining can only be done undermining))).



    1) Everything depends greatly on the types of buildings and the distance between houses. Somewhere the streets are narrow, like in Syria and Europe, and somewhere the avenues and machine guns from below not everyone will notice. But everyone will understand the advantageous positions in the high-rises and shoot them.
    2) Again, everything depends on the situation - if it was a peaceful settlement and it is not known who is in it, then of course, all fortifications must be hidden. But the mess in Syria shows that houses can be natural fortifications in a real war with an understanding of who and where "sits" - the only question is how to knock it out, and this is reflected in the article.
    3) Ground floor mining? Chop the branch on which you sit? Well, it's on the verge of fiction. Approaches to the house are still possible + anti-grenade networks. The first floor should be taken only after a complete failure. Not everywhere is such a development as in Marseille - building Yamakashi from oneself will not work everywhere. The same Syria shows that the first floor should defend well. There, just, you can use all the soil dug from the trenches - fortifications on the lower floors.
    1. SIT
      +6
      3 July 2014 12: 25
      Quote: Alexander.B
      Ground floor mining? Chop the branch on which you sit?

      Well, we can't mine it with land mines!!))) We're talking about booby traps and MONs in the entrance doors behind the barricades. If these are wild rebels or police special forces, they will immediately roll back when they see the explosions. If these are regular units trained in urban combat, then they won't climb through the windows and doors right away. A tank or self-propelled gun assigned to a company assault group will break through the wall with a high-explosive shell and while the dust hasn't settled and people inside haven't come to their senses, the assault subgroup will rush inside, and the fire support subgroup will pour fire into all the cracks in the walls. Here it's best to immediately extinguish this tank, or mine the place where it should come out to fire with a land mine in advance. Then everything will end in gunfire and no one will climb to storm. Otherwise, there will be a fight for the 1st floor. If they knock us out of some rooms, then we need to make sure that reinforcements don't get to them through the windows. To find and remove traps in such an environment you need to be a terminator.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  16. Tyundey
    +1
    3 July 2014 12: 03
    Spartans are cool, of course. But the example is unfortunate. If very relatively to apply the situation to our time, then the outcome of the battle would be decided by only one mortar. "Darius" would have smeared the Spartans with mines on the walls of the gorge. And calmly led his troops. Here the question is more about the preparation of hostilities and the correspondence of the existing weapons to the existing theater of operations.
    It's simple: the weight of Abrams does not allow to fully use it on the East European theater of operations - there are many rivers, many bridges, but the bridges have a small capacity for tonnage. Abrams will not pass. And the T-72 is easy.
    Conclusion: we destroy large bridges, take small ones under control and mine.

    And about "cram mines and stretch marks anywhere" - a very "competent" decision. Themselves then on them and will be undermined.
    Thanks to the author of the article for the work, but not always the results of the work are obtained
    1. +1
      3 July 2014 12: 16
      And about "cram mines and stretch marks anywhere" - a very "competent" decision. Themselves then on them and will be undermined.

      this is evil, I would even say criminal wrecking, the city is still full of civilians and a certain anarchy (civilians hang around anywhere), that's it mine the road. a bus with refugees can easily fly in, but I don’t even speak about such self-will.
      it's good that nobody even reads these "cleverness".
      1. +2
        3 July 2014 19: 42
        Quote: Stas57
        it’s evil, I’d even say criminal wrecking — the city is still full of civilians and a certain anarchy (civilians hang around anywhere) is the road to mine. a refugee bus can easily fly

        You tell it to the dill, which is planted with "Grads" on the civilian population. Plates with the inscription "Mines" and the designation of the passages have not been canceled. And they are removed quickly, sometimes they are not removed, by a specialist. And for those who are especially zealous, you can stick a signaling device.
        1. +2
          4 July 2014 10: 46
          You tell this to the dill, which is planted with "Grads" on the civilian population.

          what was it now?
          like they hail and we stumble mines to undermine the local?

          Plates with the inscription "Mines" and the designation of the passages have not been canceled. And they are removed quickly, sometimes they are not removed, by a specialist. And for those who are especially zealous, you can stick a signaling device.

          and the laws of physics do not apply to tablets, do they not fall from a blast wave? Do they need to be checked?
          don't they need to be covered? just throw them in, but should we set up ambushes, cover them, etc., disperse the reserves?
          mines that is? make work? who will draw up a mining plan? or so, go cram yourself as the author suggests? And this, I repeat again, in the area where the locals hang around in both directions, there is no solid front line and neutral line?
          considering that all entrances to Slavyansk were mined on May 25, and where does our armchair strategist suggest we poke them?
  17. +2
    3 July 2014 12: 15
    The article is not indisputable, however, there are interesting approaches, and the topic has been raised correctly. Each warrior has his own experience and conclusions from what he saw.
    Remember the movie "They Fought for the Motherland"? There, the tactics of those years and the principle of the engineering training of the infantry are well shown. There the chef digs an individual cell without communicating with his comrades.
    At that time it was considered more reliable and a person would not run away under fire feeling safe. However, time has shown that a soldier sitting in a solitary trench feels like he has been abandoned and is alone against the enemy, while the Germans in collective trenches sat and waited out the fire raids, quite well.
    The author talks a lot about disguise, but relies only on protection from looking into the optics of a tank, gun or rifle scope, but what about aerial reconnaissance? And I support the comments which say that the first floor should be the most protected. I have never seen fighters flying away from a skyscraper if the first floor is captured by the enemy. We'll have to storm from above and beat off the first floor and basements in order to move away or stay for a while. But I completely agree with the idea of ​​maneuver, after repulsing the attack, to move back and move to reserve positions is necessary. Even clowns such as dill, will still inflict a strong defeat if you stay in position. Intelligence is ongoing, even during the battle, observers report what is happening to the enemy. The commander makes decisions on maneuver based on observer data
  18. +3
    3 July 2014 12: 16
    In my opinion, this is hardly applicable in Ukraine. A trench without parapet is used for an ambush, if you look closely at the footage of the defeat of the Aidar, you can see such a camouflaged trench on the side of the road near a damaged APC with dill. Well, there is nothing new here - a well-organized ambush. Tank - from 5000 meters, well, this is from the field of tank biathlon. The militias have an ATGM. It all depends on the availability of heavy weapons, on the coordination and training of their soldiers, on the specific terrain and conditions, and of course on the enemy. And then a tank column was driving across the field, and we were in trenches with an AK and three horns. There is a harosh anecdote about the ingenuity of a Russian soldier.
    The corporal Ivanov’s guards were surrounded by five SS men - this is Pi .... Ts.
    Let’s better announce how the Ukrainians ’share - send SMS and support the militias, that would be real help. No one has canceled the money.
  19. -4
    3 July 2014 12: 29
    immediately propagate and distribute among the militias of the Donbass, this article is a reference book for the militia good maneuverable defense is a chance to thoroughly exhaust the enemy in street battles, and then systematically begin his actual extermination by all available means, even one small arms ... soldier
  20. +4
    3 July 2014 12: 33
    "Let's say a company of soldiers with a tank and 5 infantry fighting vehicles. Having struck up a battle and shooting your
    ammunition, the first company is exhausted and is ready to retreat,
    but because of their spin the second one flies out and with great tenacity and not
    shot by ammunition goes to the breakthrough "

    Some strange ideas about the offensive. ".. exhales, and is already ready to retreat"
    Our battalion consists of three linear companies and one fire support.
    One company attacks in bulk by groups, the second - on the way, the third - resting. Then first
    stops (lies) on rest and stuffing shops, the second - replaces it and continues
    attack, the third - is tightened after rest. And so in turn, continuously.
  21. padonok.71
    +5
    3 July 2014 13: 00
    They chewed about the parapet, but I’ll say it anyway. Digging up a trench of a full profile, from a prone position, BEGINS from the embankment of the parapet.
    Quote: piter-tank
    Special forces in Pervomaisky managed

    It is not necessary, politicians have managed, and in the wake of them, top military commanders, starting with the Minister of Defense.
    And the special forces did everything they could. You can do more - do it. Do it and then speak.
  22. +2
    3 July 2014 13: 26
    Special forces in Pervomaisky managed ?????
    Do you understand what special forces are and what specific tasks he performs?
    - special purpose squad "Vityaz",
    - Special Rapid Response Units (SOBR)
    - 22 separate special-purpose brigade of the GRU GSH (separate units)
    - the group of the anti-terrorist center "Alpha".

    Who of them is trained, equipped and prepared to conduct combined arms combat with an enemy entrenched in pillboxes, armed with heavy weapons up to and including an 82 mm mortar?
    The specialists did not have their own heavy weapons. there was no armored vehicles in their direct subordination.
    They didn’t give nufi blows, SZOs were used extremely limitedly, since 80 hostages were sitting there .....
    Judging by the author’s opinion, the specialists had to continuously swing the pendulum, shoot from two PCs at once and smash the optics of enemy snipers with spitting. Yes - and you must be in the hymn, otherwise ... what kind of special forces officer are you. But the baboons. those like Razi sat in the trenches without parapet and everything worked out for them.
    .........
  23. +2
    3 July 2014 13: 29
    Remember the films about the Great Patriotic War. It seems that everything was mixed up, baked and died from shelling and / or bombing, but no, the soldiers are in the dust, but they are ready to fight.


    Yes, a low-budget kintz with several explosive packages is equivalent to real fire training in a couple of hours and the next attack before the end of a numerically superior enemy. In general, the author imagines what a deafened soldier it is in a trenched trench, among the remnants of fortifications and corpses, trying to somehow fight off an avalanche of enemies, and even more so tanks?

    Artillery without any problems destroys anything, the only question is the expenditure of shells, but even this was no longer a problem in the WWII, there were breakouts there for a week, so there was nothing left in the trenches.

    And nonsense about petty dirty tricks with the inability to withstand heavy weapons, or pearls, about strong little men who are not afraid of tiny concrete explosions, I will not even comment.

    And do not talk about the first Chechen one, there is nothing but betrayal, the troops there would have done everything if they had been given such an opportunity.

    Regarding "will not think of a foothold." And he needs to consolidate it, if you abandoned equipped positions and you can be beaten in an open field without dragging in artillery again and calling for aviation? It's another matter if you ran to a neighboring building in the city, but there tasks are set simply, to capture a particular building, you will simply be methodically cleaned out. And in general, the boundaries where to be fixed, they seem to be stipulated in advance, as well as other aspects of interaction.
  24. Chainyc
    0
    3 July 2014 13: 51
    I especially liked the last phrase - "Break their initiative" smile
  25. +1
    3 July 2014 14: 00
    Supplement:

    any defense must be ELIMINATED

    In 50-250 m beyond the field position of the troops, even if there are 5-6 militias, there should be an observation or command and observation point - NP / KNP. They are built necessarily higher than the defense and carefully disguised. Observers monitor the situation and report to it on the radio, wired connection or through liaisons. It is permissible to use optics at the NP / KNP ONLY if the Sun is up to 70 ° behind your back (or from 4 to 8 hours, if 12 h to the front).

    One NP / KNP can provide up to 2-3 field positions. The positions themselves are built into a common system that allows you to support each other and lead along the upcoming crossfire.

    Prepare in advance:

    1. reserve positions where it is relatively safe to wait out the bombing or artillery raid, as well as evacuate the wounded and provide them with primary medical care. In the Republic of Poland there should always be small reserves of water, ammunition and ammunition;

    2. unshootable escape routes to RP

    3. Impervious "tunnels" up to 200-500 m ahead along the front, if the enemy penetrates the defense, they will surround him and destroy him. Tunnels must be well camouflaged and secured so that the enemy does not use them against the defenders.

    options for the action of subdivision and signals to them are discussed in advance

    "Purga-8" - move to RP

    "Purga-9" - cut off the enemy's flank along the northern tunnel

    etc.

    timely determined "dead" - unprotected and invisible zones in their defense and on the field in front of it

    If the enemy attacked and retreated, but the NP did not record his withdrawal from the battlefield, then the enemy must have hidden in one of these zones - you need to give coordinates for shelling at her.

    In their "dead" zones, field kitchens, points of combat food and evacuation, etc. are organized.
    1. 0
      3 July 2014 17: 33
      There is no mention of fox holes anywhere. The dugout is good, but it is calculated. And when each fighter has an individual cell with shelter from flamethrowers / cluster munitions / volumetric explosive ordnance, then you just have to return to the amount of ammunition for 900 pieces per platoon stronghold and no high-precision weapons will help.
      I'm all trying to find a mention. but again no one writes because it is possible to establish industrial production of collapsible armored capsules and remote monitoring systems. Then the infantry will simply not be knocked out.
  26. +1
    3 July 2014 14: 13
    Quote: piter-tank
    I wonder who the author of the article? What is his military education, if any? Maybe this is another lover of military simulations?

    I agree with you, the author of mushrooms went over on the couch.
    Tanks do not fall into the indicated piece of iron for 5 km, I doubt that they will generally consider from a distance, if they do not shoot from there.
    About the trenches on the reverse slope of the hills, the author did not hear at all, and about the military guard the same.
    If the parapet is not freshly excavated, then after 2 days it will not be noticeable against the background of grass and earth around.
    Mines are not placed "in front of the trenches," but only in the most dangerous places, for there will not be enough mines to throw them everywhere.
    And most importantly: the author forgot to say about the mortar. The trenches dig mainly from tanks, snipers and machine guns, but from mortars. The thing is scary and effective when there is no trench. Therefore, the coasts are equipped in several layers, so that there is where to hide, because just a 2 meter trench doesn’t always help.
    1. 0
      3 July 2014 17: 34
      Bunkers from World War II are made with a flanking fire system. They are not visible to the front. But this is not the main thing. The author, taking into account Ukraine, reminded that one cannot build like that
  27. +1
    3 July 2014 19: 06
    Which is stronger: air-ground attack or ground-underground defense?
    (From the experience of the war in Korea)
    http://www.plam.ru/transportavi/tehnika_i_vooruzhenie_2002_08/p9.php
    1. 0
      3 July 2014 21: 20
      Too shy to ask, what’s the minus?
  28. +4
    3 July 2014 19: 29
    For example, recently in the spetsnaz circles the idea of ​​a “bunker psychology” in defense has been popular.
    This crap, was sent by the forest, even during World War II. Remind me how to bury infantry? First, the cells come off, for shooting lying down, from the knee, finally standing (especially zealous commanders do not stop there, and demand to continue, right up to the trench of the full profile, for shooting standing, with the horse, a joke lol ), then they (cells) are connected by message paths, deepening, in the same way, up to the full profile. Then dugouts are built. During the entire construction, everything is masked, both from the front and flanks, and from the air. Then, behind the main positions, they make substitutes, providing for the safest possible departure for them, by the same communications. Disguise do not forget. A third line is possible, and it is imperative to provide for the evacuation of the wounded and supplies. And so, when you prepared for an invincible defense and seemed to have settled down, an order came from the headquarters to change the place of deployment Yes There is only one plus, you are surprised to learn that you can not swear at all, and you begin to greedily replenish your vocabulary of the Great and the Mighty!
    ps Perhaps you are lucky, and they will bring you to where the straws lay for you, in the sense where you worked PZM, or BTM, but you still have to dig what .
    ss By the way, it is not a fact that changing the place of deployment, you will not come back. Moving and designating movement are two big differences, but only for those who command you. Your legs will be umtams, in both cases.
  29. Leshka
    -2
    3 July 2014 19: 43
    read this article to the commanders of New Russia
    1. -1
      4 July 2014 10: 48
      Quote: Leshka
      read this article to the commanders of New Russia

      people are fighting there, and not bad, they have no time to read any couch nonsense
  30. +3
    3 July 2014 19: 44
    In fact, the parapet is not only designed to protect against fragments, but also disguises the fighter’s head. Without a parapet, the helmet will stick out like a mushroom in a clearing. A buried fighter flush with the ground will not see anything.
    The trenches and trenches must be properly dug, especially since aviation will reveal their outlines in every way, just disguise cannot be neglected.
  31. +2
    3 July 2014 21: 53
    - But it’s not always possible to dig in correctly ... Even on the "urgent", not far from Yaroslavl, just as they did not try to dig into a dry, sandy hill, it turned out to be a big funnel. smile
    - In our places, in 80% of cases, digging trenches is equivalent to digging wells: a bayonet and a half ... and here it is, some water.
  32. Ofa
    Ofa
    0
    4 July 2014 17: 28
    Comments are much better than articles. According to the author, there is a sectional dugout, there is clearly a fighter with m-16 sitting there. And there is no back parapet in our engineer. Cossack not sent? )))