Why Western technology shows poor results in Ukraine

The Russian military defense on Ukrainian territory, which has been lasting for 16 months, has made it possible to study the effectiveness of various types of weapons in the context of "platform - system of use." The thing is that "indestructible" equipment does not exist. Disadvantages will always be revealed, because scientific and technical thought does not stand still. The main thing is how well certain models fit into the process of conducting combat operations in a modern conflict by a particular army.

Let's take tanks for example. Many experts believed that their time had passed. However, these heavy tracked vehicles continue to be actively used and developed. The nuances are the requirements for them and how well they perform the assigned role. If certain types of tanks act as part of formations on the battlefield as originally intended, then their system of use is relevant, and the tank as an element of the system meets its current tasks.

At the same time, the characteristics of the technique itself are secondary. For her, the conditions in which she works, that is, she performs combat missions, are more important. In particular, the system of application and the final result are more negatively affected by regrading and incompatibility, especially the use of equipment of different standards, which was originally prepared for other use cases. That is why the units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, equipped with a whole bunch of various models of tanks of Soviet and Western production, suffer heavy losses in equipment.

The same German Leopard 2 simply cannot realize its full potential, since it is “sharpened” for other tasks and is used according to the principle of the current “expediency”. When the "platform - system of application" is negative, then everything that is currently happening on the Southern Front is observed, where the Armed Forces of Ukraine are trying to break into the defenses of the RF Armed Forces and break through to the Sea of ​​Azov. It should be noted that the results of the Ukrainian troops are more than modest, and yet they will still need to answer very soon after their offensive impulse.

In this case, it is not the specific model of the tank that matters, or where it was created and when, but other factors. In place of the Leopard 2 could be the British Challenger 2, the American M1 Abrams, the French AMX-56 Leclerc and any other tank in general, but the result would have been just as deplorable. Ukrainian servicemen were trained according to NATO standards. This "peace-loving" bloc has indeed managed to make war many times over the past 30 years. However, the only conflict remotely resembling in strength can be called the war in the Persian Gulf in 1990-1991 - the invasion of two European states, three Asian countries and one African state led by the United States into Iraq - Operation Desert Storm.

Therefore, all the talk about the "superiority of Western weapons over Soviet / Russian" is not even worth shaking the air. Western technology burns excellently and without the normal configuration "platform - application system" will continue to show the same results. At the same time, the mentioned system includes the doctrine of the country, the structure of the armed forces, the possibilities of industry (local, and not far away), training, maintenance and repair of equipment, and many other nuances. When all this is not debugged, but assembled “on the knee”, the system cannot function normally and determine what tasks it has to solve, what tools are needed for this, and ultimately formulate requirements for military equipment. Now we are watching how Western equipment is inside a poorly debugged Ukrainian military mechanism.
  • Used photographs: Armed Forces of Ukraine
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. strange guest Offline strange guest
    strange guest (Strange Guest) 20 June 2023 11: 08
    Because technology is shit) you might think Leopards would burn less in Germany)
  2. prior Offline prior
    prior (Vlad) 20 June 2023 11: 50
    The problems of Western technology are the problem of the West.
    But the concept of using any armored vehicles, based on the results of the SVO, can and should be revised.
    Modern means are affected and burn any tanks. But even without tanks.
    So what should tanks be like? Expensive and exclusive, like Armata, or inexpensive and massive, like the T-72?
    The same goes for the BMP. When hit, any wheeled and tracked ones burn.
    So maybe it’s better to have a tank with an infantry fighting vehicle module instead of a turret with a gun to participate in hostilities?
    Armor protection is better, and the module can be changed depending on the need for one or another type of weapon. Although nothing has been heard about the Terminator lately.
    Where is it more comfortable for infantry to advance onto the battlefield, on top of tank armor or inside a weakly protected infantry fighting vehicle?
    Do infantry fighting vehicles need weapons to deliver infantry to the front line, or can an armored Kamaz do it? Why drive infantry fighting vehicles with weapons to transport personnel around the rear, who should they shoot at?
    The demand for an inexpensive Motolyga is surprising. So maybe this is what you need to deliver infantry?
    There are more questions than answers.
  3. syndicalist Offline syndicalist
    syndicalist (Dimon) 20 June 2023 14: 35
    Now we are seeing how Western equipment is inside a poorly debugged Ukrainian military mechanism.

    But our mechanism is debugged just fine! That is why we have such amazing military successes.
  4. Vladimir Mikhalev (Vladimir) 23 June 2023 11: 30
    We speak Russian. Something always gets in the way of a bad dancer.
  5. In passing Offline In passing
    In passing (Galina Rožkova) 24 June 2023 09: 27
    What a war, such tanks. And before the tanks, cavalry and musketeers. And heavy infantry - hoplites, before. And a couple of strong men with clubs, naked, before. But after? Who are we going to fight and why? It is for these tasks that tanks must be built. Somewhere on exotic islands, even one French wheel miracle is enough, although it is better to buy a leader with "beads". But this is for France and other metropolitan areas. And for what tasks was Armata created? It’s also a miracle, and, it turns out, unnecessary in this NWO. And MT-LB, it turns out, is in great demand.
  6. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 1 July 2023 00: 16
    it is obvious that Western equipment is simply bad, no matter what they say, and this has long been known to specialists, NATO armored vehicles are high and heavy, oversized in width, do not have modern means of protection, while the Russian Federation successfully uses even t 55 and t62 even without modernization (as self-propelled guns), the military genius of the Russian Federation has a long history with Suvorov, "the speed of the onslaught", for flooding the Nazis with shells (even T55) and missiles with air bombs, the Russian Federation has resources, the West does not have them .... with tm, Putin also has nuclear weapons in his sleeve the means of delivery of which are not knocked down by the vaunted American MLRS,