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.
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.
(post is archived)