Gomig-21
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2016
- Messages
- 7,901
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
I've observed the same trend based on the videos from the Russian side. The Lancet loitering munition has probably been the most effective weapon the Russians have used in terms of tactics. But that is extremely damning for them. Theoretically, this shouldn't be the case given the size and capability of their armed forces, but if there were any more clearer demonstration of how lack of training, weak command and control, and poor tactics can nullify even the most capable of militaries, this would be it.
Looks like the Ukraine is trying to match the lancet's performance by launching their own kamikaze drone.
The hardest part is mastering the data linkage between operator and munition and having more standoff control capabilities. EW countermeasures are also critical because of the enemy being able to hack into and take control of these highly susceptible drones. Mastering that closed-circuit control and having good EW countermeasures are what seemed to have made the biggest difference for the Russians so far IMO. I also noticed that the payload isn't really that great from the info we have on the warhead size and weight as well as the videos of the impact hits vs munitions exploding in tanks etc. It can only pack so much punch. I think the next upgraded lancet will most likely be a bigger unit to pack a bigger payload, making the logistical aspect a bit harder.
I'm probably going to get flack from you for saying this, but it reminds me of the poor performance of the Arabs against the Israelis - another example of where a smaller, better trained and led force can defeat a much larger, arguably better equipped opponent.
No flak from me, ma man. You are 100% in your right to make that correlation.
But I don't think the Russian performance is anywhere nearly as bad as the Arabs' performance in 1967. The latter was a decisive, few days blowout defeat that changed the course of history in the ME forever. The former (or Russian performance here in this war) is not even close to that Arab debacle of 1967.
But yes, I'm with you as far as the preconceived notion of a Russian performance. I think most of us expected them to be much more dominating in the battlefield than what has happened so far. Is that fair for the Russians? Of course not, it's just the impression one gets from looking at the grand scheme of things, along with all the hype we've been shown of Russian power through the decades of the cold war until today. Goes to show that war realities on the ground are unpredictable.
I also think there is a huge difference in the way Russia has planned to fight NATO through the cold war (just like NATO took a certain military approach to fighting Russia). I don't think either planned on long, drawn out wars. Approached plans were more along the lines of a combination of WWII tactics & cold war tactics along with the ever so possibility of nukes being introduced into huge, stalemate fighting. At least the fear of nukes being brought in by either losing side.