Quote:
Originally Posted by Tegyrius
Thought so. Just checkin'.
Hm. Speaking of ADA, does anyone remember reports from Chechnya that the Russians were deploying AAA assets in the infantry support role because tank and IFV guns didn't have the elevation to engage Chechen troops on the upper floors of buildings? Or am I imagining that?
|
Dates back to WWII, the Germans would deploy their AA guns as far forward as possible, not only provide ADA, but they use their guns in the anti infantry/anti tank role.
Remember the scene in Saving Private Ryan, when the SS deployed a 20mm gun against the rangers/paratroopers? That little snapshot happened on every front. If you ever get the chance to look over the combat logs of various US units, you will see numerous references to a kampfgruppe made up of a platoon or two of infantry, maybe a antitank gun and 2-3 AA guns that would hold up the advance and force troops to deploy, only to see them withdraw 5-6 miles and repeat, every time causing a few dozen personnel/vehicle losses.
Its a lesson that cost the Red Army dearly in WWII and its one that they took to heart. Every Soviet ADA has armor piercing and fragmentation rounds as part of their basic load. Their doctrine stresses not only engagement of aircraft and helicopters, but also direct fire against enemy positions.
The Chechyans (and Afghans) tell stories of platoons of ZSU-23-4s engaging their troops in buildings or in field fortifications.
There is even a report of a regiment of S-60s being deployed against a Afghan village.