Long lost tactical manual

[Marek_Tucan]

Originally Posted by shilka77

The last armed conflict with Hezbollah (2006) however proved the new RPG rounds deadliness against the Merkava Mk 4 really was at short ranges. They cracked them opened like rotten sardine canisters, it didn’t help the IDF that Hezbollah also had gotten their hands on the Kornet ATGM system either.

Just a quick question, how many Merk IV's were destroyed and by what means? How many were penetrated? To my knowledge most of casaulties were commanders and loaders hit by shrapnel from exploding warheads while out of the hatches and there were very few penetrations, let alone total kills - for all Merkava variants, not just IV's.

They still run around with vintage 60s RPG-7s That is madness.

But they mostly do. Many armies do. I bet even Russians themselves still have hefty loads of PG-7VM grenades and use them. Czech army uses 60's level RPG's (technology, not actual date of manufacture) for sure and many countries still use 60's-level M72LAW. Given the state North Korea is in, I seriously doubt they have too much funds for massive rearming with new RPG's and run around with old but proven PG-7VM equivalents.

As for hardness of fighting against Abrams in desert, well, real world sucks. Advancing with inferior tanks against enemy with superior targeting, spotting and most likely crew experience is never cheap - it can be costly even with superior equipment if your enemy knows what is he doing, have a look at Israeli defense on Golans in 1973, they were able to pull out a night battle with only old passive IR binoculars for tank commanders, against tanks with "full" active IR night vision.
So... If you are to assault US Army in 1991 with T-72 in desert, you¨re screwed. That¨s the way it is, all you can do is reduce losses - by any means neccessary. If you smoke densely enough, ti would be severely limited. If you shell long enough, enemy is gonna be in bad shape.
and outside flat desert, use cover. I was able to pull off balanced (numerically) running skirmishes between T-34/85's and T-55's, and between baseline T-72's and T-55A's vs. Leopard 2A4. It was not cheap but enemy lost more than me.

[shilka77]

There are no official tank losses reported from the 2006 clashes but one can only speculate that it was enough to get IDF to turn back home. I have here a movie that speaks a bit about the 2006 conflict. As back in 1982 conflict no official records about lost Merkava tanks are to be found as Israelis has kept this secret, as the mighty Merkava has been a great deterrent on the modern battlefield.

I noticed new things with WIN SPMBT that defends the RPG-7 theory of still being effective as a anti-tank weapon. There is of course not many official sources for the RPG-7 development but I have a Soldiers of Fortune magazine from 2000 or 2001 that explains this development is southeast asia in particular.

I will try to scan the pages and upload it for your display.

The 125mm gun that is used on the T-72s is due to ballistic reports capable to penetrate all our armoured vehicles and main battle tanks with the right round issued. A lot of 125mm equipped tanks fielded by today’s armies in the game still use steelhead propellant ammunition in the game. This is not true on the modern battlefield today.

The 125mm gun used by countries not under the embargo that Iraq was under for 15 years did a lot to re-armament as clearly the old ammunition was amongst the smallest adjustments you could do to make even a basic T-72A deadly in ambushes.

North Korea got one of the worlds best ATGMs and is competing with several European systems such as the Eurospike and the French MILAN that failed to penetrate Russian T-72s in the Chechen conflict a few years back. The MILAN was also drawn back by several nations after this had been made public and as such above questions is hard to handle over solid facts and documents and sources from otherwise restricted areas of the arms trade. No one wants to loose his or her face. The public may easily panic.

To quote former Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld:
"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

The Georgian crisis I think reflects the most worrying development up to this date, the Russians effectively smashed a NATO and US trained and backed army within a matter of days. The Georgians had about the same equipment as the Russian border forces that went in from South Ossetia so this with training is I think history by now.

The 1991 Gulf War was won because there was so much new technology involved that it completely crushed the battle harden Iraqi soldiers it encountered. Though the best forces was still found in close proximity of Baghdad and only special units of the Republican Guard saw any real battle with the US forces head to head. The most vicious battle in that war took place a few days after that Bush Senior had declared that the war was over and aggression defeated.

I will try to dig up some stuff for you guys if it will change anything is not my department but it might get all up to date for what has happened after the 1991 Gulf War at least.

Video about the 2006 war

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7s5l...eature=related

[shilka77]

RPGs Combat& Survival Vol 14 Issue 09 Dec 2002

I knew I had read about it somewhere it was not in Soldiers of Fortune as I first thought.

Anyway here the entire article for you lads to go through.

http://img366.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle1mz5.jpg
Article part 1

http://img151.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle2hx4.jpg
Article part 2

http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle3ee9.jpg
Article part 3

http://img397.imageshack.us/my.php?i...rticle4wq7.jpg
Article part 4

Break a legg

[EJ]

shilka 77,

Nice posting of information updating everyone on improved antitank shoulder fired weapons. It may be time for the oobs with these weapons get updated??

[shilka77]

I can at least help out and not only whine all the time. *Chuckles* Hezbollah in Syrian OBB got RPGs worth the name it was a detail that didn't slip my attention as that OBB have gotten a great work over since I roamed around in SPMBT.

[Marek_Tucan]

Originally Posted by shilka77

There are no official tank losses reported from the 2006 clashes but one can only speculate that it was enough to get IDF to turn back home. I have here a movie that speaks a bit about the 2006 conflict. As back in 1982 conflict no official records about lost Merkava tanks are to be found as Israelis has kept this secret, as the mighty Merkava has been a great deterrent on the modern battlefield.

Somewhere on Tank-Net the official figures for tank and crew losses from 2006 war floated, I will try to dig them up. Anyway, most of Merkavas hit were older types and most casaulties seemed to be Commander or Loader, and hit while unbuttoned.
Here is an article by Defense Update: http://www.defense-update.com/analys...anon_war_3.htm
Another article:
http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk/diar...non%202006.htm
AFAIK only two Merk 4's were total losses (and with all hands) but those fell victim to extremely large IED's - there is no tank that can survive a 250kg of explosives going off right under its belly.

I noticed new things with WIN SPMBT that defends the RPG-7 theory of still being effective as a anti-tank weapon. There is of course not many official sources for the RPG-7 development but I have a Soldiers of Fortune magazine from 2000 or 2001 that explains this development is southeast asia in particular.

I will try to scan the pages and upload it for your display.

I am pretty well aware of RPG development. However even Russian troops are still being issued large quantities of the "classic" PG-7M and similar older warheads. Stockpiles and costs have a lot to do with that. Just that a new warhead is available does not mean it gets into widespread use or that it gets exported just into the correct country. And despite few "silver bullets" in Lebanon 2006, most weapons were old Malutkas for ATGM's and PG-7/PG-7M/Type 69 for RPG-7.And even these "silver bullets" generally failed to penetrate the front armor.

The 125mm gun that is used on the T-72s is due to ballistic reports capable to penetrate all our armoured vehicles and main battle tanks with the right round issued. A lot of 125mm equipped tanks fielded by today’s armies in the game still use steelhead propellant ammunition in the game. This is not true on the modern battlefield today.

The 125mm gun used by countries not under the embargo that Iraq was under for 15 years did a lot to re-armament as clearly the old ammunition was amongst the smallest adjustments you could do to make even a basic T-72A deadly in ambushes.

Perhaps you missed all the 2A46 with improved ammo in-game? Anyway, export of modern munitions is pretty recent thing and pretty limited as well. Despite being in WarPac, Czechoslovakia got BM-15 rounds at best from USSR, and had to develop own 125mm APFSDS after the end of the cold war, based on Israeli designs. BM-15 was also the best Iraq had access to. Dunno about other countries but if you'd check OOBs you'd find that most of them have much better than basic ammo for 125mm weapons. As for ambushes, you can in-game pretty well ambush Abrams SEP with T-34/85.
Most mentions I caught appear to report that BM-42 is usually exported for 125mm weapons (atleast to those users shopping in Russia or Ukraine), that is in-game roughly "125mm Gun 88".

North Korea got one of the worlds best ATGMs and is competing with several European systems such as the Eurospike and the French MILAN that failed to penetrate Russian T-72s in the Chechen conflict a few years back. The MILAN was also drawn back by several nations after this had been made public and as such above questions is hard to handle over solid facts and documents and sources from otherwise restricted areas of the arms trade. No one wants to loose his or her face. The public may easily panic.

Me thinks that pulling Milan out of service has more to do with newer alternatives being available. As for North Korea, what missile that would be?

To quote former Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld:
"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

Buit that's just the matter. You may have option to buy tons of gold-plated super RPG's or BM-44 APFSDSDU, but if you didn't, you cannot expect to use them in-game.

The Georgian crisis I think reflects the most worrying development up to this date, the Russians effectively smashed a NATO and US trained and backed army within a matter of days.

US trained just the light infantry going to Iraq, not much use in mech warfae esp. if most of the force is away, but reportedly it was those guys who managed local counterattacks even pretty late in the war.

The Georgians had about the same equipment as the Russian border forces that went in from South Ossetia so this with training is I think history by now.

58th army being "border force"? And even Russian observers noted that the performance of Russian troops was quite sloppy - only the Georgians were even sloppier, but I heard quite a lot of voices saying that discipline, OPSEC etc. shown in Georgia was significantly lower compared to 1980's.

The 1991 Gulf War was won because there was so much new technology involved that it completely crushed the battle harden Iraqi soldiers it encountered.

Battle-hardened troops do not always equal competent troops. Iraq was engaged in a war that consisted mostly of trench warfare with tanks serving as mobile pillboxes - for that neither great skill or proper maintenance are critical.

Though the best forces was still found in close proximity of Baghdad and only special units of the Republican Guard saw any real battle with the US forces head to head. The most vicious battle in that war took place a few days after that Bush Senior had declared that the war was over and aggression defeated.

What battle would that be? Given that ground ops lasted for 100 hours. 73rd Easting happened during those 100 hours.

[shilka77]

Somewhere on Tank-Net the official figures for tank and crew losses from 2006 war floated, I will try to dig them up. Anyway, most of Merkavas hit were older types and most casaulties seemed to be Commander or Loader, and hit while unbuttoned.
Here is an article by Defense Update: http://www.defense-update.com/analys...anon_war_3.htm
Another article:
http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk/diar...non%202006.htm
AFAIK only two Merk 4's were total losses (and with all hands) but those fell victim to extremely large IED's - there is no tank that can survive a 250kg of explosives going off right under its belly.

I have no answer to this as I apparently was not on the ground to confirm what was taken out and of what or by what, remember all official reports are to be considered sugared, as it would not be healthy to display actual numbers. From what I have seen the IEDs was no major factor in the 2006 war what so ever as it was a highly mobile war with ambushing Hezbollah Commando units and Hamas units firing their RPGs and Kornet ATGMs with great skill and from short distances (hills) down on the tanks in the valleys and the few roads available to the IDF.The movie shows attacks on Merkava tanks using this tactics. Getting up close and fire away.

Perhaps you missed all the 2A46 with improved ammo in-game? Anyway, export of modern munitions is pretty recent thing and pretty limited as well. Despite being in WarPac, Czechoslovakia got BM-15 rounds at best from USSR, and had to develop own 125mm APFSDS after the end of the cold war, based on Israeli designs. BM-15 was also the best Iraq had access to. Dunno about other countries but if you'd check OOBs you'd find that most of them have much better than basic ammo for 125mm weapons. As for ambushes, you can in-game pretty well ambush Abrams SEP with T-34/85.
Most mentions I caught appear to report that BM-42 is usually exported for 125mm weapons (atleast to those users shopping in Russia or Ukraine), that is in-game roughly "125mm Gun 88".

I have noticed this good work.

I am pretty well aware of RPG development. However even Russian troops are still being issued large quantities of the "classic" PG-7M and similar older warheads. Stockpiles and costs have a lot to do with that. Just that a new warhead is available does not mean it gets into widespread use or that it gets exported just into the correct country. And despite few "silver bullets" in Lebanon 2006, most weapons were old Malutkas for ATGM's and PG-7/PG-7M/Type 69 for RPG-7.And even these "silver bullets" generally failed to penetrate the front armor.

Now this was not the reaction I was looking for, as if you have a game what would be most likely to use if you went to war, would you take out the training PG-7M or would you equip your forces with a more effective warhead? The issue stockpiles vs the need when going to war I think all silver bullets available would be pulled out to be honest. Defense budgets all over the globe is tight but the cost to actually go out and build a brand new T-90 vs equipping your soldiers with the inexpensive improved rocket-propelled grenades is by all means the most likely a nation would do if it was pulled into a war.

Me thinks that pulling Milan out of service has more to do with newer alternatives being available. As for North Korea, what missile that would be?

Han Ho Suk at Director Center for Korean affairs mentions it in his paper 4-23-3 I send the link exact designation of ATGM not in my vocabulary.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

US trained just the light infantry going to Iraq, not much use in mech warfae esp. if most of the force is away, but reportedly it was those guys who managed local counterattacks even pretty late in the war.

Hahaha yes well I wish I could agree with you here mate but I can't of obvious reasons this is Geopolitics and we (the west) had a clear picture of exactly what happened the moment the Russian Federation went in to stop the killings of South Ossetians in this particular conflict. The friendly Georgian fairy tale is all but inept at its best.

58th army being "border force"? And even Russian observers noted that the performance of Russian troops was quite sloppy - only the Georgians were even sloppier, but I heard quite a lot of voices saying that discipline, OPSEC etc. shown in Georgia was significantly lower compared to 1980's.

A smashing victory a complete defeat of Georgian forces tells another story as if we the west would not had intervened (political) Georgia would had looked a bit different today.

Battle-hardened troops do not always equal competent troops. Iraq was engaged in a war that consisted mostly of trench warfare with tanks serving as mobile pillboxes - for that neither great skill or proper maintenance are critical.

True I have not stated anything about the skills of the Iraqi soldiers in the game either, what could be fixed is perhaps that Iraq in 2003 had T-62s within the ranks of their Republican Guard. Wikipedia says something about that.

Wikipedia Iraqi Republican Guard

The Republican Guard then consisted of between 50,000 and 60,000 men (although some sources indicate up to 80,000), all volunteers, and some 400 Soviet tanks T-72 and T-62 along with other mechanized vehicles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Republican_Guard

What battle would that be? Given that ground ops lasted for 100 hours. 73rd Easting happened during those 100 hours.

Feb 27 1991 Bush Senior declares aggression have been defeated it didn’t include the rest of the war that didn’t end until 1995. March 1991 a Republican Guard unit got smashed when on retreat by American forces. The battle has no name as it become a controversy due to the violence used in the attack on the retreating forces.

I am still looking when I have time for more of above stuff but as a responsible father I write at lended time.

[Marek_Tucan]

Originally Posted by shilka77

I have no answer to this as I apparently was not on the ground to confirm what was taken out and of what or by what, remember all official reports are to be considered sugared, as it would not be healthy to display actual numbers.

There is a problem, just as the US in Iraq, it would be pretty difficult for the Israelis to mask up the casaulties and number of destroyed equipment, esp. as they left no destroyed or damaged tank behind. And the same goes for cause of loss.

From what I have seen the IEDs was no major factor in the 2006 war what so ever as it was a highly mobile war with ambushing Hezbollah Commando units and Hamas units firing their RPGs and Kornet ATGMs with great skill and from short distances (hills) down on the tanks in the valleys and the few roads available to the IDF.The movie shows attacks on Merkava tanks using this tactics. Getting up close and fire away.

Sorry, I would not call it highly mobile. It got highly mobile in last two days when IDF was given the order it should have been given right at the beginning - to advance to the Litani river, crushing any resistance on the way. THAT was mobile war and that was also a war where Hamas was unable to do a thing.
Up until then, it was rather statical war with IDF operating in relatively small area with predictable routes, IE ideal for IED operations. Sort of like with those few large IED's that got Merkavas in Gaza and West Bank.
As for the movie, of course Hezbollah likes more to present its fighters running around with RPGs and ATGMs than with shovels and wheelbarrows

Now this was not the reaction I was looking for, as if you have a game what would be most likely to use if you went to war, would you take out the training PG-7M or would you equip your forces with a more effective warhead?
The issue stockpiles vs the need when going to war I think all silver bullets available would be pulled out to be honest. Defense budgets all over the globe is tight but the cost to actually go out and build a brand new T-90 vs equipping your soldiers with the inexpensive improved rocket-propelled grenades is by all means the most likely a nation would do if it was pulled into a war.

They were not for sure in Georgia, most pics I saw (and where I bothered to ID)showed Russian troops sporting excessive amounts of old RPG-18's. The same went for example for Chechnya, AFAIR in the region of LAW's/RPG's Chechen fighters got often better stuff than the line troops opposing them. The question whether you pull out your silver bullets is also a question whether you need them and whether you do not have to ship them across half the country - after all (again Georgia) the VDV units deployed there (which had to be moved in-theatre) got older variants of BMD's while there already are units with BMD-3/3M/4's. Not to mention that almost half of 58th army's BMP fleet consisted of BMP-1, the other half of BMP-2 and it operated T-72B tanks of both 1986 and 1989 patterns. And 42nd army that sent in some units after the end of major operations operated T-62's without even BDD armour. Definitely no "silver bullets" there. This is what that Rumsfeld's quote with "army as you have" was about. You can take luxury of handing out new toys to the troops if you have enough time to teach them how to use them (the different RPG warheads would have atleast different ranges and ballistics which the operator must take into account). You do not have that luxury when actually fighting in a higher-intensity op.

Han Ho Suk at Director Center for Korean affairs mentions it in his paper 4-23-3 I send the link exact designation of ATGM not in my vocabulary.

http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

Sorry, but things as "70 KH-11 satellites hovering over Korea" or "American tanks are made for open terrain" or "T-62 have 155mm guns" do not lend the author much credibility and lead not to trust him too much at the very least on technical matters. And claiming superiority of MiG-21 over F-15?

Hahaha yes well I wish I could agree with you here mate but I can't of obvious reasons this is Geopolitics and we (the west) had a clear picture of exactly what happened the moment the Russian Federation went in to stop the killings of South Ossetians in this particular conflict. The friendly Georgian fairy tale is all but inept at its best.

Sorry, where did I write anything about friendly Georgia there? I was just commenting on the "US trained" by showing which parts of the Georgian army were US trained.

A smashing victory a complete defeat of Georgian forces tells another story as if we the west would not had intervened (political) Georgia would had looked a bit different today.

Well, Japanese and German armies also had many shortcomings that didn't show up in rapid battles again disorganised and inept enemy but which surfaced when being opposed by atleast half-competent foe. Point I saw often cited was for example bunching up of Russian columns and other sins against basic air raid precautions - if only the Georgian Su--25 pilots were able to hit their target, such basic faults would prove very costly, as the Georgian AF managed to mount few (if inaccurate) strikes aven pretty late in the war.

Feb 27 1991 Bush Senior declares aggression have been defeated it didn’t include the rest of the war that didn’t end until 1995. March 1991 a Republican Guard unit got smashed when on retreat by American forces. The battle has no name as it become a controversy due to the violence used in the attack on the retreating forces.

Except that the "highway of death" happened between 26th and 27th February, 1991, ie before "end of major military operations" and it definitely was not a ground battle and it was intensive just for one side. It would be as if I claimed proficiency of Wehrmacht based on intesive fights in Dresden in February 1945.

Best health to your kids and strong nerves to you, have no kids myself but done enough babysitting for my brothers

[shilka77]

Yes it is a time consuming operation indeed kids that is. 17 years ago and my memory failed me on top of that. I'm getting old. Forgive my slight senility. March 2nd 1991.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...56C0A9669C8B63

I think Mr. Suk was refering to the tactics used by the North Koreans. If not he got to sniffed a lot of jet fuel I give him that. lol

Back to the Game:

I been playing against the AI Aug 1990-1991 March with Iraqis and in my hands they seems to do pretty well, at least against the AI. I've been fighting against Saudi Arabia, Gulf States and the French. The only thing that is a bit annoying is that Saudi and Gulf States both got Apache Gunships in Aug 1990. This was something both nations acquired 1992 after the main war the pilots using them in Aug 1990 would had been Americans so here I am fighting a mixture of American pilots and Saudi National Guard Units along with Gulf State Tiger II’s, it isn’t a walk in the park and it is desert and there is few places to hide.I manoeuvre a lot.

This seems to keep me alive, leaving some APCs and Tanks from time to time to dig in and cover my advances. I love to play with the Iraqi Republican Guard and I absolutely love that WINSPMBT finally got them with armour, artillery, and ground forces. I will try to evolve with the Iraqi OBB and figure some new stuff out, (there got to be someone that can play these “stinky OBBs”) I wonder is there any way to make AA batteries or AAA vehicles not open up on APCs and tanks in the game?

Even my French built (Rep Guard) AUF-1 GCT Artillery has opened up on advancing units!

They blow my cover all the time and that is annoying! All help is appreciated.

I pop a lot of smoke to lower the chances of the TOWs and the Milans and the other fun things that is fired at me. And is using my mortars and artillery whenever I can (Rep Guard Art Obs) to supress their fire. I am blinded most of the time but it makes the AI to run into me or they turn it against me with their modified M60A3TTS Patton tanks = my Assad Babyl nemesis!.

I put most of my ranges to 1½ to assure first hits and switches off the heavy machineguns on my tanks so that those does not blow my cover and that works most of the time. I could wish there was some kind of option to make them still work but only when approached by Helicopters or Air Sorties. The MAN Roland system is a great saviour of my armour and a great addition to the OBB.

Another well done job!

I would love to see more Iraqi maps in the future with more terrain added for what IF scenarios (Left Hook failed) and perhaps a bigger Kafji map for what IF the air superiority failed with Iraq having a functional ground-to-air network. Maybe even a function added to refuse the AI Air Sorties and Attack Helicopters, Transport Helicopters in Generated Campaign Modes?

Maybe it is too much work with the original code but one can only hope.

Ps: If ever possible more Units to play with then the 201 would be awesome as there is so BIG maps now days.

[Marek_Tucan]

Small anti-TI hint: If you drop really LOTS of smoke, you will effectively limit TI units as well.
As for the machineguns, you may turn them on, limit any opfire to just "danger close" and shoot at enemy tanks just in your turn and just using "W" and "1" to fire only the main gun. That way you have a close-in defense against helicopters and reserve your shots. And I believe in the enhanced op-fire filter in the CD variant of the game it is possible to even limit opfire to aerial threats.
If you want to deny the enemy his air support in campaign, jus go to "Preferences" and set Air Sorties to 0 for his side, or you may input any number to force a limit on him.
As for playing against hi-tech foes, especially well trained ones, as I said, you are pretty screwed, esp. in open terrain. Try to get cities or mountains or whatever. Or try to get worse opponent
(and if you want a real challenge, try pulling off the Golan night battles from 1973, with Shermans or Centurions without any night vision equipment against T-54/55's with NVG )