Seems the Russians have organized quite an exhibition of captured weapons during the Army Expo 2022
The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Generally agree with your line of thinking. The Chinese will get involve if NATO sends troops and the Russians are losing. The Chinese will not allow Russia to fall, so at some threshold of Russian losses, the Chinese will step in, with both equipment and "volunteer" forces that happened to be trained to use the equipment. But all that is hypothetical since Russia is winning on its own.
I suppose you mean the casualties of officers and soldiers... Yes, the Russians have had greater losses than NATO and the US in 20 years, quite an achievement
As for the Russian gains in the Ukraine, at first they were great due to the element of surprise, then when their logistics began to show their flaws, they began their "goodwill" withdrawals, the advances have been minimal, in fact since March, the Russians they have gone back more than they have been able to advance... I guess that is also a reason for "hahaha", assuming that Russia was the "second best army in the world"
It seems that someone forgot to mention, how some Russian bases in Syria were real sieve "saboteurs" with drones that forced them to build bunkers and combine their aircraft next... At that time the "saboteurs" were barefoot militants with practically handmade drones .... When they face moderately modern systems (moderate) the results are even worse... Also to mention that when they faced moderately professional troops they ended up losing, like that battle of Khasham
Interesting analysis, and how could you evaluate the Russian ari defence systems compared to the USA Iraq systems, that protected it during the Operation Martyr Soleimani ?
When the USA faced Iran, they was completly helpless. It is quite hard to spin anythinig by a way that doesn't make the Russian performance magnitude better than the USA one.
I have never published an opinion regarding the performance of Russian weapons, basically they are quite reliable weapons, it is simply a matter of doctrine and lack of training... Russian/Soviet weapons used by well-trained operators usually work well and achieve objectives
This post explains it very well:
Finally, a decent take from you. It definitely explains the discrepancy between paper and actual performance of Russian weapons and why PLA moved away from Soviet/Russian standard. It also explains why Ukrainians fail to use the Western weapons they received to their full potential.
But it's evident that the guy is biased by claiming that Ukrainians miraculously operate the same weapons better than Russians, despite all the real life evidence to the contrary.
PLA has its own doctrine which is unique from both western and Russian doctrine. Weapons are built for a particular style of warfare to meet specific objectives.
I would say Russia tries to practice a type of industrial warfare doctrine, but while that suited the USSR, it doesn't suit Russia.
US on the other hand has networked warfare with focus on high destruction power. While China uses networked warfare with less power but hard focused on destroying enemy networks.
The weapons Americans build around is something like F35 and B52, cheap, mass producable with ability to ferry a lot of ordinance, able to become more than the sum of their parts in a group. On the contrary, China builds around items like DF26 and WZ8, highly costly but with the right conditions can penetrate any defense and destroy any one platform, which is devastating when the enemy has just a few well defended high value targets, but weak in conflicts such as Libya or Afghanistan, where the enemy doesn't have any one very high value target but a lot of inexpensive targets spread around with no defenses for them except numbers.
Are you saying American weapons go for the "high explosive" doctrine while Chinese weapons are follow an "armor piercing" doctrine?
Guys. This is the Ukraine War thread, not the Chinese vs US /Western vs Russian doctrines thread.