Farmplinker said:

Ukrainian sources report on attacks on power plants, and this gets amplified in Western media. This despite the fact that YES KAREN, ENERGY GRIDS ARE LEGITIMATE TARGETS.

Well, it is not that easy. While theoretically you are right if powerplants are viewed as part of the industrial infrastructure they are legitemate targets. But if view as essential part of the civillian infrastructure for water supply and heating of housing for example they are not.
Its basically a judgement call and dependent on the details.
The heating problem for example is linked to the time of the year and the place. In Iraq not so much of a problem. In UA in winter it is a problem.
 

Farmplinker said:

2. Cluster munitions are great!

I agree.
Unfortunately in 2008 there have been several whiny non experts who decided they should be legally banned. Which of course found overwelming support in the press (also whiny far left winged non experts). So effectively cluster munitions are illegal in some places and not inothers. In UA they are not and for the RU and UA armed fores they are not... but such detailes stopped to matter for the press a long, long time ago.

gatnerd said:

Make DPICM Great Again

Fuck DPICM!

We want MW-1 back!

Best footage that is used to propagate ''targeting civilains'' narative are the Ukrainan Sams slamming into apartments.  I would bet money that more apartments were hit by stray SAMs than Russian missiles stray or intentional

''Russia has been reported to have converted the S-300 from its original use as a long-range antiaircraft weapon into a missile for ground attacks because of a shortage of other, more suitable weapons.'' 

When you see the exhaust vapor trail all the way to a target , its an Ukrainan SAM

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17777650/moment-russian-missile-smashes-kyiv-apartment/

Parhaps the most disturbing development of Ukraine propaganda war , besides the death porn sites like the Sun (folks mostly don't understand that Sun video posts are literaly paid advertising) but that is hardly unanticipated considering the same folks ran PR for ISIS and AQada by posting all those beheadings , generating consent is what this is called.  ,  is the extreme willingness of Ukrainan goverment to sell own casualties as Russian ones for clicks and donations. If you skip the whole indestructible paint (Z letters on burned out vehicles ) and edited pictures, shot down planes or helicopters ,on more personal level they were literally showing bodies of Ukrainan marines fallen on Snake island as Russian casualties, only tell was the British inflatable wests around their bodies and if things are not to obvious in terms of id , drone strikes on own are quite readily sold 

Interesting layout for 30mm grenade launcher magazine

Twitter

Tony on Twitter

Loading the 30mm auto grenade launcher of a Berezhok turret on a BMP-2M https://t.co/oic2XU2eQR

Read more from Twitter

schnuersi said:

We want MW-1 back!

YouTube

German Tornado with MW-1 munitions dispenser

The MW-1 (Mehrzweckwaffe 1, multipurpose weapon) is a German munitions dispenser designed to be carried on the Tornado IDS. The MW-1 started to be phased out...

Yes indeed.

I've thought a few times that a modern version, based either as a stealth drone or big cruise missile / glide munition, would be worth pursuing.

Something like a upsized version of the JSOW in the 2000-5000lb class, designed dispensing submunitions. It could fire them all at once, or glide over multiple targets dispensing partials.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Joint_Standoff_Weapon

A couple of those could have wiped out a large section of that infamous 40km convoy to Kiev in the early part of the war.

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

Interesting layout for 30mm grenade launcher magazine

Very. Also just a tremendous amount of linked 30mm. Impressive that the gun has enough energy to cycle a belt that large. 

Some rumint as to if/why T-54/55's may be used by Russia. Main takeaway is that there are supply bottlenecks with bearings and electronics for refurbinf modern tanks. And with a shortage of trained tank crews and very lethal anti tank weapons, all tanks are essentially disposable and there will be little difference in how long a modern vs old tank lasts.

gatnerd said:

Interesting thread on Russias shifting tactics and formation of 'Assault Units' and the weapons employed. Whole thread worth reading.

Nomeclature is weird. Their Platoons are suqad sized, their companies platoon-sized, if I read this correctly

Indeed T55 is actualy quite rare beast these days , supposedly sub 500 of them in total in storage. , while T72 (7000+ in storage)and T80 are in thousands even of t64 there are 1400 units in storage.

One important factor often overlooked by internet commentators is that T62M did not replace lost tanks but was replacing BMPs and BTRs ( you don't see any train loads of BMPs being reactivated ) , as mobile warfare ground to a near halt there is little use for IFVs and APCs when you can field tanks, sure the tank has a higher logistic footprint but is also much more resilient.T55 and T62 are indeed simple machines, my friend privately runs and maintains a T54 , M36 and ZSU57-2 all with same T54/55 powertrain.

When it comes to parts, costs and electronics, outfitting a T62 with thermals and upgraded electronics costs the same as adding that to BMP or BTR , so if we are talking lack of $$ parts and electronics, you would take T62M any day over BMP1 ,2 or BTR82 .  In any case we will see what will happen with the T55 as they might end up being modified into XYZ (particularly as shells for the T55 might be rarer than the bearings for T72)

But my bet for the T54/55 are to be used as parts donors for the T62M modernization contract. T55 and T62 share many parts production of which mostly ceased in 1974 !  

T54 have been taken from The 1295th and 111 Central Storage Bases, most likely end up at the 103rd repair armored plant. The one that received an order to upgrade 800 T-62 tanks to the T-62M level. The contract for 800 tanks stipulates 270+ Upgraded tanks per year , to upgrade 800 tanks and provide spares for them, they might need spare parts from well over a thousand T62,54,55 tanks . so it makes much more sense T54/55 are being cannibalised than sent to the front.

All in all 1500 tanks are supposed to be refurbished in 2023 , how realistic the goal is who knows ? but like previously mentioned UVZ is upgrading 2-3 per shift at 3 shifts per day. but still its only one tank factory that also ,makes new tanks , while there are over 20 repair plants that can handle refiting armored vehicles including tanks.

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

But my bet for the T54/55 are to be used as parts donors for the T62M modernization contract. T55 and T62 share many parts production of which mostly ceased in 1974 !

I disagree.
The T62 is quite a rare tank by comparison. It has not been widely exported. The T55 on the other hand is the most produced tank in history. Its in use all over the world. Production of spares and ammo is up and running. Maybe not in Russia but certainly in China.
The use of T55 is most likely because its possible to quickly get the needed spares and supplies. Which is not the case or if only to a much lower degree with the T62. Ironically the T72 is hard to support as well. Its out of production. Parts for the modernised versions are much harder to get and China neither uses nor supports this system.
In addition it makes little difference. If tanks are mostly used as long range fire support the advantages of a T62 or T72 over a T55 are limited.
Most likely a T55 with thermal imager would be more usefull than a T72 without.