WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.0K

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] 2 pts

it's war, of course they are going to throw everything they can to keep up their defensive line, if not take more land. 1 dude in a T-55 firing artillery, regardless of accuracy or efficiency, is more likely to survive than a mortar squad. not to mention the munitions are cheap as dirt since they built fuck-you levels of ammo during the cold war.

[–] 1 pt

Western militaries love to spend $50k on a guided munition to destroy the target in one shot. Russia's equally valid approach of "Have 50 archaic tanks blanket the entire field with HE from obsolete shells" is likely a tenth that price. And afterward Russia has 49 tanks left and Ukraine is out an irreplaceable $50k munition and their towed artillery is dead to boot.

[–] 0 pt

Russia has the Krasnopol guided artillery munition. Similar to the Excalibur, but it can hit a moving tank (up to 36km/h) and it's cheaper (30K).

[–] 1 pt

A tank with only 36 metric tons can pop up at surprising spots that are impossible to reach for the 46t tanks. The western tanks > 65t have to use the streets when it rains in the Ukraine.

They also build new T-80s because sometimes you need a very fast tank (gas turbine 1200hp 46t).

[–] 2 pts

Well put. Additionally, using older tanks as de facto self-propelled guns is a solid strategy. Russia has hordes of T-55s, so the marginal cost of using them is negligible. Though they're archaic as tanks, they're far more mobile and survivable than towed howitzers. Since Russia's strategy has always been artillery-centric, making a portion of your artillery immune to most counter battery fire is a big deal. It'd take a direct hit to take one out, unlike 95% of Russian artillery that's dead or mission-killed by HE airbursting anywhere nearby and turning Ivan into hamburger. T-55s dont care about shrapnel.