Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Videos

  • 646130283.mp4

Downloads

Content

A very quick turnaround on this one: scripted, recorded and cut yesterday, got the footage this morning. It helps that I don't exactly have to do a lot of research for these guys and they're really very straightforward.

I did start off including the Republican Guard as well- they're almost the same- but although there's only one minor difference with the dismounts, the BMP-2 is a very different beast than the BMP-1Ps, so I cut it out.

I am... not confident in their chances on the Platoon Patrol.

Files

Comments

Ben Kerry

Was reading DePuy's army oral history interviews, he believes that mechanized infantry must operate inside the fire envelope of their IFVs at all time and leverage massive amount of fire to suppress. That and avoid fighting on the enemy's term. DePuy said to use "indirect approach", to quote Liddel Hart.

GLG

I think UH is right in that BMP's are a vehicle specifically designed to complement Soviet tactical doctrine as dictated from the Cold War era. Engagements were expected to be in Europe against NATO during the 60s & 70s. This was at a time when the US and UK still used APCs, and only the Germans had an actual IFV(the problematic HS.30) which was used along with trucks and M-113s--at least until the 70s when the Marder became operational.

Ray L

An army equipped with Big Commie Army hand-me-downs can’t exactly expect to have equipment optimized for their own doctrine or mission. Besides, the last thing the Syrian government wants is to have troops of possibly questionable loyalty armed better than the loyal Republican Guard are.

Ben Kerry

And back then a 73mm recoilless gun could knock out any NATO MBT from the front.