What Do We Think We've Learned Militarily From The Russian Invasion Of Ukraine?

Well, if it doesn't fit the way things are now then I guess it's just downright impossible!
The title of the thread is "What Do We Think We've Learned Militarily From The Russian Invasion Of Ukraine". It says nothing about the MoD learning anything.

Poland are buying Brimstone as a ground vehicle launched anti-tank weapon. This was announced just over a month ago.
Polish pick MBDA’s Brimstone missile for their new fleet of tank-busting vehicles

LONDON — The British arm of pan-European missile maker MBDA has struck an agreement with the Polish military to provide its Brimstone missile for a new fleet of tank busters being developed by a local industrial consortium led by PGZ.

The deal comes just weeks after MBDA UK concluded a separate deal with Warsaw to accelerate the delivery of a new ground-based air defense system.

Here's another story on it.
Poland to Equip Tank Destroyers With Brimstone Missiles
The Polish Armaments Group (PGZ) has signed an agreement with arms manufacturer MBDA UK to equip its tank-busting vehicles with Brimstone anti-tank guided missiles.

The deal is a continuation of the 2019 pact between the companies to design and develop the Ottokar-Brzoza tank destroyer.

Here's one of the options they're looking at in terms of vehicles. Some of the other options are tracked.
mbda-brimstone-zubr-render-925x610.jpg


I suspect that Poland will be deploying them while the UK are still arguing about whether letting the army have any would endanger any RAF squadron badges.
 
Last edited:
No that was one of his objectives

He was also concerned with “righting the wrongs” of the Treaty of Versailles and uniting “Germanic” peoples and recreating the German Reich
Actually the 'stab in the back' was a widely held viewpoint and not just attributed to AH. All people are really doing is playing Six Degrees of Separation(see: Kevin Bacon), with whichever leader we are encouraged to hate and guided towards an AH comparison, which is the simple narrative the media like best.

In terms of this thread; the reality is Russia doesn't have the military capacity, or the ideological underpinning to be a serious threat to NATO and if Ukraine has proven anything its that point. So what's really going on, is we have used the Baltics and now the Ukrainian War in power political terms to boot up new missions and promote the purchase of new fancy kit, to replace all the lost hopes of the previous forever wars.

Summary:-
The ugly truth is everyone knows what the problem is with our Armed Forces and its the numbers are simply too small and the missions/roles required by the politicians and service chiefs are simply too great. To me the biggest flaw in our military is without any kind of large territorial defense embedded in the local communities, the military has become a distant and largely hollow thing, that is mostly overseas and as such it will always be at the back of the queue for a handout.
 

Slime

LE
The title of the thread is "What Do We Think We've Learned Militarily From The Russian Invasion Of Ukraine". It says nothing about the MoD learning anything.

Poland are buying Brimstone as a ground vehicle launched anti-tank weapon. This was announced just over a month ago.
Polish pick MBDA’s Brimstone missile for their new fleet of tank-busting vehicles



Here's another story on it.
Poland to Equip Tank Destroyers With Brimstone Missiles


Here's one of the options they're looking at in terms of vehicles. Some of the other options are tracked.
mbda-brimstone-zubr-render-925x610.jpg


I suspect that Poland will be deploying them while the UK are still arguing about whether letting the army have any would endanger any RAF squadron badges.

Bear with me until the end :)
Ignoring the completely obvious fact that the vehicle in your pic would cost more than a ‘regular truck’ with 30 minutes welding, plus: the cost of trained crews, plus the cost of missiles, plus the cost of a training budget for ongoing training, plus a spares budget, plus the cost of whatever would be used for targeting info………..

And, ignoring the fact that any such vehicle couldn’t be used to any effect in Ukraine from a U.K. base……….

And ignoring the fact the U.K. already have a bought and paid for system that could be used today…….

Ignoring all of the above, and returning to my earlier comment that there is nothing wrong with firing Brimstone from a stationary vehicle, when I initially saw pics of the possible Polish set up I couldn’t help thinking that the concept was very similar to a former British army weapon system, and that someone somewhere within the army might want to reform a long since gone ‘write off’ unit with a modern Brimstone vehicle.

Brimstone would be far better than the old Malkara missile, and I could see various units being very eager to operate them. Combined with modern forward observers to designate for them the combination could be very effective.
 

Slime

LE
FFS don't expect them to follow through the DLODs to bring this about on a programmatic basis it's far better monking about Crab Air having shiny kit.

On seeing the initial proposals, my first reaction was that some people would see this as an opportunity to revive a lost capability. :)

While the unit in question was little known at the time, it does seem to get nothing but praise about the quality and work attitude of its soldiers.
 
Bear with me until the end :)
Ignoring the completely obvious fact that the vehicle in your pic would cost more than a ‘regular truck’ with 30 minutes welding, plus: the cost of trained crews, plus the cost of missiles, plus the cost of a training budget for ongoing training, plus a spares budget, plus the cost of whatever would be used for targeting info………..
According to press reports the "regular truck" was being proposed for anti-landing craft defence in the Odessa area. That may possibly be adequate in those sorts of applications.

And, ignoring the fact that any such vehicle couldn’t be used to any effect in Ukraine from a U.K. base……….
Since the thread is about what the UK may learn from the war in Ukraine rather than about getting directly involved in the Ukraine war today, that point isn't particularly relevant.

And ignoring the fact the U.K. already have a bought and paid for system that could be used today…….
Again, the thread is about what might be learned from the Ukraine war for use in the future rather than about whether the UK may have failed to make the correct decisions in the past.

Ignoring all of the above, and returning to my earlier comment that there is nothing wrong with firing Brimstone from a stationary vehicle, when I initially saw pics of the possible Polish set up I couldn’t help thinking that the concept was very similar to a former British army weapon system, and that someone somewhere within the army might want to reform a long since gone ‘write off’ unit with a modern Brimstone vehicle.

Brimstone would be far better than the old Malkara missile, and I could see various units being very eager to operate them. Combined with modern forward observers to designate for them the combination could be very effective.
Swingfire on Striker might be a more recent analogy than Malkara on Hornet.
800px-Swingfire_launch_from_Striker.jpg



However, both have much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter I suspect would be used in a different way.

A more comparable missile would be Spike-NLOS, which as you can see can be launched from the back of a bog standard military 4x4.

south_korean_spike_nlos.jpg


Or in the case of the UK, from a trailer, where it is known as Exactor. I suppose you are now going to tell me how such trailers are far more expensive than an F-35.
Spike-NLOS-Exactor.jpg


So, the proposal basically is to replace Spike-NLOS with Brimstone, the latter being a missile the UK already make themselves and already use on other platforms, and mount it on the back of a vehicle of some sort for long range anti-tank defence. The choice of vehicles would probably be best decided on the basis of being compatible with the other vehicles it is working closely with for reasons of ease of maintenance and training.

As for why Brimstone instead of just buying more Spike-NLOS, well one of the lessons of the Ukraine war is that when the time of extreme need actually comes, your may not be able to just buy critical weapon systems and ammunition on the commercial market but may have to make do with what your allies are willing to let you have, if they have any to spare that is.
 

Slime

LE
According to press reports the "regular truck" was being proposed for anti-landing craft defence in the Odessa area. That may possibly be adequate in those sorts of applications.


Since the thread is about what the UK may learn from the war in Ukraine rather than about getting directly involved in the Ukraine war today, that point isn't particularly relevant.


Again, the thread is about what might be learned from the Ukraine war for use in the future rather than about whether the UK may have failed to make the correct decisions in the past.


Swingfire on Striker might be a more recent analogy than Malkara on Hornet.
800px-Swingfire_launch_from_Striker.jpg



However, both have much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter I suspect would be used in a different way.

A more comparable missile would be Spike-NLOS, which as you can see can be launched from the back of a bog standard military 4x4.

south_korean_spike_nlos.jpg


Or in the case of the UK, from a trailer, where it is known as Exactor. I suppose you are now going to tell me how such trailers are far more expensive than an F-35.
Spike-NLOS-Exactor.jpg


So, the proposal basically is to replace Spike-NLOS with Brimstone, the latter being a missile the UK already make themselves and already use on other platforms, and mount it on the back of a vehicle of some sort for long range anti-tank defence. The choice of vehicles would probably be best decided on the basis of being compatible with the other vehicles it is working closely with for reasons of ease of maintenance and training.

As for why Brimstone instead of just buying more Spike-NLOS, well one of the lessons of the Ukraine war is that when the time of extreme need actually comes, your may not be able to just buy critical weapon systems and ammunition on the commercial market but may have to make do with what your allies are willing to let you have, if they have any to spare that is.

With regard to Swingfire on Striker.
You are no doubt aware that Striker has been in service, but WASN’T used for the role I mentioned, so basically isn’t relevant at all………..Perhaps for obvious reasons. :)
 
In terms of this thread; the reality is Russia doesn't have the military capacity, or the ideological underpinning to be a serious threat to NATO

Correct. It has always been like that.

and if Ukraine has proven anything its that point. So what's really going on, is we have used the Baltics and now the Ukrainian War in power political terms to boot up new missions and promote the purchase of new fancy kit, to replace all the lost hopes of the previous forever wars.

Utter, utter drivel. Drivel lifted from the Kremlin false narrative to (somehow) justify their barbarism.

Try joining the dots yourself rather than regurgitating Kremlin lies.

First dot, your own words: "the reality is Russia doesn't have the military capacity, or the ideological underpinning to be a serious threat to NATO". No it doesn't. A Nato country is effectively off-limits.

Second dot. Ask yourself, what is currently the Kremlin's (a Kremlin under Muskovy stewardship) policy towards the region politically? I suggest reading two essays to have a really good understanding of the answer to that:
(a) Solzhenitsyn's 1990 essay КАК НАМ ОБУСТРОИТЬ РОССИЮ? (endorsed and promoted by Putin) and
(b) Putin's 2021 essay Об историческом единстве русских и украинцев.

Third dot. Ask yourself, if the Kremlin wants Ukraine is it rational to wait until after it becomes a Nato member to try and take it?

Yes, the spectre of Nato is part of the explanation but not the prime issue. The Kremlin (Muskovy & the Russian nationalist) wants to control Ukraine and assimilate Ukrainians into their collective. Nato is not a threat to Russia or Russian citizens of Russia; Nato is a block to their empire building.

Russia's barbarism in Ukraine and against Ukrainian's is not a reaction to Nato being a security threat to Russia and Russia citizens of the Russian Federation, it is choice taken by the Kremlin to try and grab what it wants before it falls beyond their grasp completely.
 
Last edited:
With regard to Swingfire on Striker.
You are no doubt aware that Striker has been in service, but WASN’T used for the role I mentioned, so basically isn’t relevant at all………..Perhaps for obvious reasons. :)
I brought up Swingfire because you brought up Malkara. I then said that neither Malkara nor Swingfire were relevant to the original discussion as both were much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter would not be used in the same way.
However, both have much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter I suspect would be used in a different way.

Swingfire on Striker however does show how missiles can be mounted on vehicles which are compatible with others that they are operating with.

As I also said, the closest comparable missile today is probably Spike-NLOS. However, the trailer mount the UK have is probably best suited to static applications, which is what it was designed for. A vehicle mount compatible with the other vehicles in the same formation would be more useful in the proposed application.
 

Slime

LE
I brought up Swingfire because you brought up Malkara. I then said that neither Malkara nor Swingfire were relevant to the original discussion as both were much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter would not be used in the same way.


Swingfire on Striker however does show how missiles can be mounted on vehicles which are compatible with others that they are operating with.

As I also said, the closest comparable missile today is probably Spike-NLOS. However, the trailer mount the UK have is probably best suited to static applications, which is what it was designed for. A vehicle mount compatible with the other vehicles in the same formation would be more useful in the proposed application.

Don't worry about it, as my post was mainly about a potential brand new unit using a vehicle mounted Brimstone, that was why Malkara was relevant.

As for Brimstone, or any other missiles mentioned above, nothing new might ‘be learned’ as some are out of use, some well established and static fired Brimstone has been around/tested already.
Similarly, as already said, the use of Brimstone is already known, and has been tested in many ways.
It was already known that weapons such as static launched Brimstone or any other of the Uk’s conventional artillery were already overmatched in range by Russian artillery.
 

What Do We Think We've Learned Militarily From The Russian Invasion Of Ukraine?

That waxed Victorian style moustaches will be the new ally.

May go well with a peaked cap or side cap, not so sure if with the Andy Capp para look though.
 
As I also said, the closest comparable missile today is probably Spike-NLOS. However, the trailer mount the UK have is probably best suited to static applications, which is what it was designed for. A vehicle mount compatible with the other vehicles in the same formation would be more useful in the proposed application.

Is the Exactor trailer (which is Exactor-2?) still in service? I seem to recall it went out of service. Plus Exactor-2 isn't anti-armour, or fire and forget/Self-targetting. It's also a lot shorter ranged than Brimstone.

Essentially Brimstone is a new class of weapon, that slots in between conventional DF ATGM's (Malkara, Orange William, Swignfire etc) and indirect missiles like FOIL and M270.
 
Don't worry about it, as my post was mainly about a potential brand new unit using a vehicle mounted Brimstone, that was why Malkara was relevant.

As for Brimstone, or any other missiles mentioned above, nothing new might ‘be learned’ as some are out of use, some well established and static fired Brimstone has been around/tested already.
Similarly, as already said, the use of Brimstone is already known, and has been tested in many ways.
It was already known that weapons such as static launched Brimstone or any other of the Uk’s conventional artillery were already overmatched in range by Russian artillery.
A static mounted Brimstone isn't all that useful in a European type of war for reasons other than being in artillery range. The main issue is that it needs to keep up with the advance or retreat in order to do its job of providing a reserve anti-tank defence. That means being mounted on a vehicle similar to the other vehicles which are also operating in the same area.
 
Is the Exactor trailer (which is Exactor-2?) still in service? I seem to recall it went out of service. Plus Exactor-2 isn't anti-armour, or fire and forget/Self-targetting. It's also a lot shorter ranged than Brimstone.

Essentially Brimstone is a new class of weapon, that slots in between conventional DF ATGM's (Malkara, Orange William, Swignfire etc) and indirect missiles like FOIL and M270.

The UK MOD list Exactor 2 as being currently in service. If their web page is simply out of date, it doesn't make much difference to the argument.
26 Regiment Royal Artillery
26th Regiment Royal Artillery is the Army’s Divisional Fires Regiment. Equipped with the Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) and EXACTOR 2, the new Regiment delivers precision strike munitions out to 84km in support of the Iron Division.

Exactor 2 is an improved version of Spike NLOS. "Spike" isn't a single missile, it's an umbrella brand for a group of different missiles with different ranges and capabilities. The NLOS (Non-Line Of Sight) model has a range of up to 25 km.

As for warheads, I believe there are different types.
 

Yokel

LE
I brought up Swingfire because you brought up Malkara. I then said that neither Malkara nor Swingfire were relevant to the original discussion as both were much shorter range than Brimstone and the latter would not be used in the same way.


Swingfire on Striker however does show how missiles can be mounted on vehicles which are compatible with others that they are operating with.

As I also said, the closest comparable missile today is probably Spike-NLOS. However, the trailer mount the UK have is probably best suited to static applications, which is what it was designed for. A vehicle mount compatible with the other vehicles in the same formation would be more useful in the proposed application.

Just out of interest, when a threat from Soviet missile boats materialised in the early 1970s, experiments were conducted using anti tank missiles, presumably SS11 fired from Scouts - Army Air Corps or 3CBAS. These experiments led to the AS12 being carried by the Wasp.

During the Argentine invasion of the Falklands, and anti tank weapon fired by the Bootnecks of NP8901 sank a landing craft. When South Georgia was invaded an Argentine corvette was damaged by 66mm and 84mm weapons fired by the defending Bootnecks. There must be other occasions of anti armour weapons causing damage to small vessels.

Anti armour weapons can sink or disable vessels, but compared to purpose designed anti ship missiles they lack range.
 
Just out of interest, when a threat from Soviet missile boats materialised in the early 1970s, experiments were conducted using anti tank missiles, presumably SS11 fired from Scouts - Army Air Corps or 3CBAS. These experiments led to the AS12 being carried by the Wasp.

During the Argentine invasion of the Falklands, and anti tank weapon fired by the Bootnecks of NP8901 sank a landing craft. When South Georgia was invaded an Argentine corvette was damaged by 66mm and 84mm weapons fired by the defending Bootnecks. There must be other occasions of anti armour weapons causing damage to small vessels.

Anti armour weapons can sink or disable vessels, but compared to purpose designed anti ship missiles they lack range.
The Ukrainians were apparently looking to use Brimstone missiles against landing craft as part of the defence system for Odessa. This doesn't preclude having larger and longer ranged missiles used for anti-shipping purposes as well, but it does beef up their defences in a critical area relatively quickly and at low cost.

Brimstone will have a much longer range than a typical anti-tank missile, so they're not directly comparable.
 
The Ukrainians were apparently looking to use Brimstone missiles against landing craft as part of the defence system for Odessa. This doesn't preclude having larger and longer ranged missiles used for anti-shipping purposes as well, but it does beef up their defences in a critical area relatively quickly and at low cost.

Brimstone will have a much longer range than a typical anti-tank missile, so they're not directly comparable.

They may have been looking at it, and it was supplied with that intent, but there's reports it's been used against Soviet armour.
 
They may have been looking at it, and it was supplied with that intent, but there's reports it's been used against Soviet armour.
I expect the Ukrainians will use whatever they can get their hands on against Russian tanks. That means however that we may need to be careful about what we extrapolate from that with regards to our own peacetime procurement.
 

Latest Threads

Top