Out of Mothballs: Obsolescent Weaponry on the T2k Battlefield

[Ckosacranoid]

In my 4th ed game so far the party has found a Russia group with mossians and a different group with garandes.

[Raellus]

To continue the theme of edged weapons (see the MPL-50P in post 210), here are two antique weapons that could make an appearance on the battlefield c. 2000.

The 1927 pattern Shashka (a hiltless cavalry sabre of Caucasian/Cossack origin).

The 1940 general pattern sword.

I wonder if there are stockpiles of the 1927 pattern Shashka somewhere in the former USSR. I could see the Soviets restarting production in the T2kU, to issue to their new and converted horse cavalry formations (reasoning: it'll save ammo). The latter was issued to officers only, so would probably be considerably more rare.

-

[Raellus]

Dummies have been used to draw enemy fire since the Middle Ages, at the latest. Anti-sniper decoys, a prominent feature of WWI, are making a combat in the trenches of Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...hes-of-ukraine

-

[Raellus]

This Vice piece has links to a Twitter video showing a UAF soldier firing a Maxim modified with a stock, modern optics, and suppressor.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxjq...against-russia

-

[Ursus Maior]

Trench warfare with larger assaults occurring weekly. Water-cooled machine-guns are having a blast - so to speak - in these conditions. It's really, what they were made for. With larger assaults seemingly happening only weekly, barrels should last months, if not longer.

Meanwhile, the Russians are moving T-54 and T-55 to the front. Right on time, I expected them in spring, when I saw their losses of T-72s mounting last year in April.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Ursus Maior

Meanwhile, the Russians are moving T-54 and T-55 to the front. Right on time, I expected them in spring, when I saw their losses of T-72s mounting last year in April.

It looks that way. This article suggested the alternative possibility that the T-54/55s might be on their way to Syria, or to backfill more modern types being sent to the front. Either way, this is not a good sign for the Russians.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...nks-to-ukraine

-

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Raellus

It looks that way. This article suggested the alternative possibility that the T-54/55s might be on their way to Syria, or to backfill more modern types being sent to the front. Either way, this is not a good sign for the Russians.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...nks-to-ukraine

-

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by kato13

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

I don't think they'll be able to fill that role for long. Barrel lives when they were made were <500 rounds (the T-62 had a 450 round barrel life, for example) and they'll have had some of that life used up before they were mothballed. A few days of shooting 100+ rounds and their rifling will be worn out and the barrel warping from heat cycling.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by kato13

I have seen it suggested that they will be used for SP indirect fire as Russian artillery tubes are getting worn out. Iran also produces HE shells for them so that might assist vis-a-vis the ammo shortages we have been hearing about.

I've seen rumors that they are intended for infantry support.

[Bestbrian]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

I don't think they'll be able to fill that role for long. Barrel lives when they were made were <500 rounds (the T-62 had a 450 round barrel life, for example) and they'll have had some of that life used up before they were mothballed. A few days of shooting 100+ rounds and their rifling will be worn out and the barrel warping from heat cycling.

Never mind what condition the ammunition is in. On paper, the Russkis think they have a gazillion rounds of legacy 100mm gun ammo, so getting those tubes up to the front isn't really a bad idea, but...who believes any of this stuff was properly stored, maintained, or not secretly sold off? If it's stupid and it works then it's not that stupid, but the fact that they're in the position of being one year into this thing and already digging into the Class C/Mobilization Only division supply pool is really piss poor. However this thing ends, the after action reports of this war are going to be brutal.

What's next? T-34s by Christmas?

[Raellus]

This article outlines the pros and cons of using T-54/55s as SP artillery. Fortunately, there are a few more cons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=7dd32c39472e

-

[bash]

Originally Posted by Raellus

This article outlines the pros and cons of using T-54/55s as SP artillery. Fortunately, there are a few more cons.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=7dd32c39472e

-

The 18° elevation isn't so much a problem if they park them on inclined ramps. A 52° ramp would give them up to the 70° elevation needed to match a Howitzer. It leaves a lot of problems but could maximize their range.

The bigger problem (in my estimation) is just getting those tanks and their ammo to the front. We've seen nothing but terrible logistics from the Russians since they started the war and zero improvement since then. Keeping a bunch of old T-55s running to actually use as SPGs will further strain their terrible logistics.

If they were to use ramps/dugouts to properly angle the guns they won't be able to shoot and scoot like real SPGs and will get a salvo off before counterbattery liquifies them. Even those salvos might not hit anything if the ammo they pull from storage has been taken care of as well as the rest of their depot munitions and vehicles.

It'll end up being a lot of logistical effort for low rewards unless the Russian army gets real competent real fast.

[.45cultist]

When the T55's rolled off the line, they were parked running for 5-6 hours. Then the oil was drained and a couple of kilos of metal shavings removed!

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by .45cultist

When the T55's rolled off the line, they were parked running for 5-6 hours. Then the oil was drained and a couple of kilos of metal shavings removed!

Yikes! What's Russian for "quality control"?

I'm not sure how to do screen caps but from OSINT Uri on Twitter,

"The AFU has been using modified WWII-era PTAB (2.5 kg) anti-tank bombs dropped from UAV's against Russian armor and personnel. They were used as a cluster munition against German armor and troops dropped from cassettes most often mounted on IL-2's. The version shown has both a shaped charge at the nose and anti-personnel fragmentation casing for dual use."

The tweet includes photos. Drones wouldn't really feature in T2k v1-4, but those PTAB bomblets would still be around. I wonder if they could be used (with a few mods) as AT grenades?

-

[Raellus]

More from Twitter:

"the ���� Ukraine Weapons Tracker
@UAWeapons
·
4h
#Ukraine: The Ukrainian army started to use ancient KS-19 100mm anti-aircraft guns. Though initially designed to be used against air targets, now they will be used against ground targets- in indirect and possibly direct mode.

The first KS-19 guns entered service in 1947.

"We can see Soviet UOF-412 rounds with OF-412 projectiles, which weigh 15.6KG and pack ~1.5KG of TNT. They have a maximum range when fired from the KS-19 of 19,950 meters.

These particular rounds are rather old too- they were manufactured back in 1962."

-

[Vespers War]

As Ukraine redirects old anti-aircraft guns to the field artillery, they've also started mounting PM1910 machine guns on pickup trucks as anti-aircraft weapons. The one I saw had three of them on a pedestal mount in the middle of the truck bed, which appeared to have enough space for the gunner to completely rotate the mount. As ancient as those guns are, it does make sense as an anti-drone SPAAG - the chief disadvantage of the PM1910 is it's heavy. Its chief advantages are being able to sustain fire and being nearly indestructible. As a vehicle-mounted light SPAAG it negates its disadvantage and fills a needed role in attacking drones with cheap ammunition. And, as mentioned either earlier in this thread or in another thread, Ukraine had 35,000 of them in storage. Even if only a few percent are fully operational, that's hundreds if not thousands of guns that can re-enter service.

[Raellus]

So, in addition to employing them as ersatz self-propelled artillery, and fixed field fortifications, it appears that the Russians are now using T-54s as vehicle-borne IEDs in Ukraine.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...sive-shockwave

In the video clip included with the article, one can see the T-54 being immobilized by a mine or RPG. A follow-up RPG hit produces a massive explosion producing multiple, clearly visible shockwaves.

-

[micromachine]

This seems like a waste of a fair fire support platform, unless it has the main gun damaged. There are plenty of soft skin and light armoured vehicles in the Ukrainian arsenal that would suffer greatly from the D10T.
It would be far more effective if employed in groups, smoke laid to cover the advance, or there was a feint attack on the left/right or there was suppressive fire applied to the enemy position.
Seems like Russia is using ISIL's playbook and poorly at that.

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by micromachine

This seems like a waste of a fair fire support platform, unless it has the main gun damaged. There are plenty of soft skin and light armoured vehicles in the Ukrainian arsenal that would suffer greatly from the D10T.
It would be far more effective if employed in groups, smoke laid to cover the advance, or there was a feint attack on the left/right or there was suppressive fire applied to the enemy position.
Seems like Russia is using ISIL's playbook and poorly at that.

To play devil's advocate, they might not want to use the T-54/55 very much because it requires a fourth crewman that normally isn't part of Russian tank crews and trained crews are better used on the newer tanks. Semi-trained crews can probably handle them adequately in the artillery role that the T-54/55 and T-62 are allegedly being used in, but not in the armored assault role.

IIRC, the D-10T also had a barrel life of just a few hundred rounds, so this one may have already been worn out by use as ad hoc artillery.

[Ursus Maior]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

To play devil's advocate, they might not want to use the T-54/55 very much because it requires a fourth crewman that normally isn't part of Russian tank crews and trained crews are better used on the newer tanks. Semi-trained crews can probably handle them adequately in the artillery role that the T-54/55 and T-62 are allegedly being used in, but not in the armored assault role.

The Russian armored corps has already been shattered and almost all instances of using tanks since mid-2022 has been in the form of an assault gun or armored field gun.

The problem of the fourth crew man is something I already predicted when the Russians began using T-62s about a year ago. It will put additional strain on the Russian recruiting and training systems. Although it's just the loader, the lowliest and least training demanding position in the tank, the training system of the Russian Armed Forces is already overburdened.

However, other options are lacking, T-72 production is simply not high enough to keep up with losses. And training crews on newly built or repaired T-72s takes much longer time than training conscripts on T-62s and T-55s. So, Russia will retain a very small number of T-72 crews, but the majority of drafted conscripts will end up in these iron-age coffins.

[Heffe]

Some Mosins found in a reserve trench in Zaporizhia recently. Unclear if they're reserve issue, or sporting rifles taken as trophies from locals.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Heffe

Some Mosins found in a reserve trench in Zaporizhia recently. Unclear if they're reserve issue, or sporting rifles taken as trophies from locals.

The long barrels on those Mosins suggest that those things are ancient indeed.

The photo below, left shows Norwegian territorial reservists firing an MG34 (rechambered in 7.62x51mm) in 1987. It wasn't officially removed from service until 1993 IRL, so it would probably still be in use in the T2kU. In the photo below, right, a Norwegian soldier armed with an MP40 SMG stands guard over a bridge during an exercise in 1983.

https://smallarmsreview.com/mg34-and...rway-post-ww2/

The Romanian Revolutionary Guards also used the M34, but in the original 8mm Mauser.

[Raellus]

From The_War_Zone (7/14/23):

"The war in Ukraine continues to be a military memorabilia lover's dream come true. Mobilized troops have been supplied by the Russian Defense Ministry with a host of weapons that would make most collectors smile, like these PPS submachine guns, PPSh-41s, SKS Karabins and other guns that debuted during WWII."

Video of the bemused "unboxing" below:

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/stat...basting-shoigu

-

[Raellus]

The title says it all:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...rtillery-apcs/

As stocks of ATGMs started running low, D44 85mm divisional guns would appear on European battlefields of the Twilight War. Developed during WW2, the D44 was produced between 1944-1953. Clearly, given its use in 2023 Ukraine, 85mm ammo for it is still available from reserve stockpiles.

And, of course, the Ukrainians have mounted some D44s on MTLB armored tractors. According to the Popular Mechanics article, the BTR50 was actually designed with the capability of mounting a D44 field gun in mind.

-

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The title says it all:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...rtillery-apcs/

As stocks of ATGMs started running low, D44 85mm divisional guns would appear on European battlefields of the Twilight War. Developed during WW2, the D44 was produced between 1944-1953. Clearly, given its use in 2023 Ukraine, 85mm ammo for it is still available from reserve stockpiles.

And, of course, the Ukrainians have mounted some D44s on MTLB armored tractors. According to the Popular Mechanics article, the BTR50 was actually designed with the capability of mounting a D44 field gun in mind.

-

They would have appeared well before the stocks of ATGMs started running low. When reunification happened in our timeline, the National People's Army (East Germany) had around 400 D-44/SD-44 as part of their artillery park. Those were somewhat modern for them, given that they also had M-1931 and M-1937 122mm guns and M-1938 howitzers (there was some newer kit as well, like the "M-1974" self-propelled howitzer [2S1 Gvozdika], but there was a lot of old stuff).

Edit: as far as ammunition still being available, Pakistan has a couple hundred of the Chinese clone in service, Armenia and Azerbaijan both have smaller numbers in service, and Bulgaria had over a hundred in storage a few years ago.

[Vespers War]

I read an interesting anecdote tonight that illustrates how oddball weapons could show up somewhere in the Twilight War.

Back in the 1950s, Austria received 26,385 M1 carbines from the United States and bought more from France as the French removed them from service. They were apparently extremely popular, with Austria acquiring almost $1.5 million of ammunition. They remained in frontline service until 1959 when the FN FAL replaced them and the M1 Garand, and were used by the reserves and the customs and tax police in the 1960s. It was thought they had all left service in 1970.

In 1993, workers discovered a stockpile of guns that had been stored in Vienna's government quarter as last-ditch weapons in case of an invasion. There were 1,900 M1 carbines still in factory grease that had been stored for almost 40 years and forgotten about. These kind of forgotten Cold War caches could turn up pretty much anywhere with just about any type of weapon that was being discarded by the major powers after WW2, particularly in countries that were maintaining large reserves relative to their active military and were hardware-rich in a way that storing guns for use by reserves made sense.

[Vespers War]

A vehicle that got mentioned earlier but (AFAIK) hasn't been statted is Brazil's X1 Pioneiro. It's a massively upgraded Stuart tank. Brazil had received over 400 Stuart tanks after World War II, and by the 1960s they were pretty obsolete. Brazil decided to upgrade the Stuarts rather than try to buy something entirely new.

The tanks chosen for the upgrade package were torn down so completely that the armor was cut off the vehicles and replaced. They were lengthened slightly and an enlarged engine compartment took advantage of that extra space. The suspension from an M4 artillery tractor was copied to give the new tank more modern running gear. The turret ring was enlarged and the tanks received a French low-pressure 90mm gun as their main armament, with a pair of M1919 machine-guns (one in the forward hull, one coaxial), and a pintle-mounted M2HB. New radios were also included. The new tank weighed 17 tonnes, and was extremely fragile but capable of resisting light autocannon fire. A total production run of 52 tanks were upgraded with delivery of 17 in 1977 and 35 in 1978.

Mass: 17 tonnes
4 crew (driver, co-driver, gunner, commander/loader)
HF 14 - HS 5 - HR 5
TF 6 - TS 6 - TR 4
260 HP Scania D223L V6 diesel
Tr Mov 154/92
Com Mov 25/15
Fuel capacity unknown, probably more than the Stuart's original 340 liters
520 km road range
90mm CN90F3 (no APFSDS) (18 rounds in turret, 10 in hull)
2x M1919 machine gun (1 forward, 1 coaxial, 1250 rounds each)
M2HB machine gun (commander's pintle mount, 750 rounds)



The X1A1 was supposed to be a more lengthened X1 to give additional room for ammunition. That stretch ended up ruining the tank's maneuverability because it was too long for its width. Instead, a new-build light tank was made to similar specifications, the X1A2 Carcara. 24 of the X1A2 were built before Brazil decided to shift focus to upgrades on its M41 Walker Bulldogs.

Changes:
21 tonnes
3 crew (eliminate co-driver)
Change 90mm ammunition to 24 rounds in turret, 44 in hull (still no APFSDS)
Eliminate forward M1919
Engine horsepower increased to 280
Tr Mov 157/94
Com Mov 26/16
Increase fuel to 600 liters
Increase road range to 600 km



Variant: the XM3D1 was an X1 that replaced the turret with a Maxson quad .50 AA mount. Remove the 90mm gun, the coaxial M1919, and the M2HB and replace them with 4 M2HB in a turreted mount. Only one of these was built in real life, but they'd make a useful supplement to an X1 or X1A2 formation and likely be very popular with PC groups. Allegedly it was also fitted with the TCM-20 variant of the Maxson, but I haven't seen photographic confirmation of this.

The X1 tank family started being phased out in 1988 and appear to have left service completely in 1994, making them a good candidate for oddball vehicles appearing in the Twilight War.

[pmulcahy11b]

I statted those out:

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm
I didn't know it was called the Pioneiro, but I have it.

There are some engineer vehicle variants here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_engi...zilian_tev.htm

A mortar carrier version here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortar_carri...r_carriers.htm

Just sayin...

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I statted those out:

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm
I didn't know it was called the Pioneiro, but I have it.

There are some engineer vehicle variants here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_engi...zilian_tev.htm

A mortar carrier version here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortar_carri...r_carriers.htm

Just sayin...

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

Thanks for getting me looking at that page again. I'm working on an update now. I don't completely agree with you on some points, but I have some new and updated information to work with. I haven't looked at my page on the X1 in years -- it's nice to take another look.