CrashbotUS

I also am not particularly familiar with the details of ERA. 
 
Couple questions;
 
1. How effective would DPICM be in setting off ERA? One of the tactics we trained on as forward artillery observers was to shower tanks with DPICM to damage external components such as optics, antenna, gun tubes, and ERA. However, I never had the opportunity to do this and never actually had an real confirmation that it would work. 
 
2. What is the impact of the ERA detonation on the crew? 

I got the book being PDF'd by my brother in law. He found it in the UNLV library. Keep in mind that  I am more concerned with actual doctrine as written in operations manuals rather than academic interpretations.  

I am still reading through the Russian field manuals but you can compare some of the differences in the US FM 6-20, FM 6-20-20 through 40 and the Russian Artillery Field Manual of Ground Forces. 

A good example is fire support for the brigade element and below. Cold war NATO doctrine is concerned with precision artillery fires at the brigade level and batteries are assigned support tasks to individual maneuver BCT that are controlled by a maneuver BCT fire support officer, who in turn takes fire support requests from company fire support elements, who are enlisted members and attached directly to the maneuver combat elements.  From what I am reading in the Russian manual, the majority of artillery is controlled by a field grade officer (Major or above) who is in charge of all fire support in his divisions sector. Fire support planning seems to surround a strategy of massed fires along specific fronts prior to tank/infantry assaults and deep rocket strikes into the rear areas.

I am just now getting into the more detailed battalion and company level support, defensive fires and such. 

Gunnery and gun emplacement, camouflage, tactical movement, and other standard artillery SOP  is pretty much the same. 

 
Here are some of the links to the manuals. 
 
http://militera.lib.ru/tw/kirillov-gubetsky/03.html http://militera.lib.ru/tw/nikolaev_av/index.html http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/Active_FM.html http://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/fm6-20(88).pdf https://fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm100-2-1.pdf http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/doctrine/CDM%20resources/manuals/fm/fm6_30.pdf   and the one from EE   http://knigi.tor2.net/index.php?id=2965327

T-34s in RB in warthunder is the most fun thing since the BL-10
 
ammoracking half the enemy team is a blast

Current 93 is badass:

I want to put all of Ohio Express' members heads into the T-72 auto loader. 
 
 
 

Grind shortrib, chuck roast, chorizo, and brisket.
 
Season with minced garlic, minced onion, bourbon, salt and pepper.
 
Cook to medium
 
Brioche bun,  smoked gouda, roasted poblano, crispy pork belly, onion strings, and habanero aioli. 

Original IFV

Here are a few more images of my most of my 10th century fighting kit. I didn't include the clothing/camping/campaign gear.  Needs polished up but I got all the rust off for now. 


 
 

 

It looks vaguely like one of the vehicles you'd get in a knock-off brand of green army men from a more down-in-the-heels discount store.

You guys wanna know how we used to do it in my day?
 
Well each motor-rifle section has a strength of eleven. One man acts as assistant to the rocket launcher and is jokingly referred to as the missile transporter. He does indeed carry three rockets, in a satchel. Each of these has a warhead capable of penetrating the armor of any modern tank (the earlier warheads could probably go through an M-60 frontally no problem, and the newer rounds reguralery were issued such as the commonly know RPG-7v designations), booster and sustainer engines, a spin stabilizer, a turbine, a fin assembly and a tracer compound.
 
His are not the only rockets in the section. Motor infantry is also equipped with anti-aircraft rockets with seeker heads, which enable them to distinguish hostile aircraft from friendly ones and to destroy them. In addition, the section has four 9-M-14 `Malyutka' rockets which have an automatic guidance system. All this in one infantry section.
 
The section's BMP-1 combat vehicle has an automatic 73mm gun and three machine guns and has sufficient fire-power, maneuverability and protection to take on any modern light tank. The BMP-1's 'Malyutka-P' could still very easily kill a number of modern western MBTs.  The section also has three radio sets, sensors for the detection of radioactivity and gas and other complex devices in addition to its ordinary infantry equipment.
 
Even at the lowest level we find not a true infantry formation but a hybrid of tank, anti-tank, SAM, chemical, sapper and other sub-units.
 
The infantry is the oldest of the arms of service. All the remainder originated later and were developed as additions or reinforcements to the infantry. From our examination of the infantry section we see that the modern infantry is an arm of service which, even at its lowest level, has absorbed elements of many others. The concept of the infantry, not as cannon fodder, but as the framework of the entire Armed Forces, the skeleton on which the whole of the remainder develops, has been held for a long time by Soviet generals. After the last war, all Soviet infantry officer training schools were renamed Officer Cadet Academies, and began to turn out, not run-of-the-mill platoon commanders, but commanders with a wide range of knowledge, able to organize cooperation between all arms of service in the battlefield, in order to ensure joint success.
 
Probably the reason that today's officers are not called either infantry or motor-rifle commanders, but all-arms commanders.

All of the plates have leather trim sewn onto the outward facing edges of the plates to keep from cutting or catching. 
Here is a better picture of some similar armor from the same guy in Poland that makes mine. 

 
I'll post a better picture of my armor and weapons when I finish cleaning them. 

Tangential, but the US has so far been the best imperial power and replacing a known decent hegemon with an unknown or worse known awful one is dumb. Just because the US is bad at state building (actually, I can't think of an Imperial power that was good at it, the Achaemenid Empire doesn't count nerds) doesn't mean you need to destroy it. I have no interest in the potential successor Imperial powers of China or Russia and I highly doubt they'll be as capable or as forgiving.

Yeah, pretty much agree with all of this. As infantry support vehicles, IFVs are fine, I guess. I'm not qualified to scrutinize them beyond that.
For recon, the M3 is obviously poorly suited.
I wasn't sticking up for the M113, actually I've heard they sucked, but the Bradley is too expensive and complex to replace them. Period. You need something that's more like an actual M113 replacement (which the Bradley was originally supposed to be!).

Me on the left with the spear waiting to take the field. This was at our last competitive fight, had around 60 people from all over the southwest. 
 


 

Me on the left with the spear waiting to take the field. This was at our last competitive fight, had around 60 people from all over the southwest. 
 


 

At least in the US Army, we did it like this. 
 
Vehicle lost, get in another vehicle in the platoon. 
Squad lost and vehicle serviceable, squads from platoons in the  reserve company move up.
Significant vehicle losses operate as standard leg infantry and be folded into remaining sections. 

IFV work fine if they shuttle infantry to their location near the battle space and provide over watch/anti-tank capabilities from concealment.  They also work well for rapidly exploiting holes in lines, rapid counter attacks, passage of lines, and rapidly moving infantry up and down the line. The problem comes when commanders start using them as spear points rather than portable fire support platforms and battlefield shuttle buses. 

The M3 is OK in the armored cavalry role. I've always thought it was a little too big but it does the job it needs to. There are probably better options for this role, however. 
 
I recall going from the M981 which was a terrible vehicle to the M7 BFIST and having commanders of the units we are supposed to be providing fire support for moving us down off our OP and filling gaps in the line with our "extra 25mm", basically rendering our superior visual range and laser designation capabilities useless. 

Picked this up from a family member recently and added to the collection. 1946 Marlin 336C 30-30. Going to go shoot things later. Lots of space and not a lot of neighbors. 
 

This was here in Texas. Apparently it was at Mullins Jeep Parts (company the restored WII vehicles) in College Station for some WWII reenactment a few years back. 
 
 

Welcome to the forum, Crashbot!

You can get some (sadly not all) field manuals here: http://militera.lib.ru/regulations/1/new/old.html
 
There are some here too, I think they have all the levels that the previous link doesn't have: http://knigi.tor2.net/index.php?id=2965327

You can try to ask EE and Zinegata about that. IIRC Zinegata knew something about Soviet WW2 artillery.

Jesus H Christ
 
I can get you REAL Soviet artillery for that price