The Soviet Seven | Backbone of the Red Army

Aight troops. A quick addendum to a mistake made in this video, specifically on the 9K33 Osa SAM system. The guidance type used for the 9M33 missiles is not semi-active radar homing, but radio command guidance, which is similar but not the same. Unfortunately the main source I was referring back to when writing this video; fm-100-2-3 (linked in the description) goes into very little detail on the Osa's guidance system and it is not a detail I thought to do further research on during research. The statement I made on Osa's missiles being better-equipped to engage manoeuvring fixed-wing aircraft than Roland's SACLOS guidance system still rings true, so I've elected to make this correction rather than reupload the video and bother you all with double-notifications. Additional info for anyone interested - "Land Roll" radar of the 9K33 Osa (SA-8 Gecko): - armyrecognition.com/military-products/army/air-def… www.armedforces.co.uk/Europeandefence/edequipment/… Radio-command guidance system: - www.britannica.com/technology/rocket-and-missile-s… - dbpedia.org/page/Command_guidance

There's kicking a dead horse and then there is reviving Koala's corpse every 7 months to make a new video

Its crazy reading about the Soviet army and seeing not just how big it was but how it was pretty much 100% mechanized and fielded so many vehicles

Aight troops we fucking back

I love how you turned a poster meant to be read whilst on the barracks' toilets into a 40 min video

Yay, our favourite Caledonian Marsupial has returned!

Fun fact, the Mi-28 still has a passenger compartment in it, though it can only seat maybe 2 or 3 people at best. It is there mainly to allow for the helicopter to be able to pick up downed friendly helicopter pilots. Also we recently had footage from Russians using a door gunner on an Mi-35 Hind to shoot up a Ukrainian unmanned surface vehicle (kamikaze boat) on the Black Sea.

As a Cold War USMC 0311 (infantry, rifleman) vet I will state for the record the imposing Soviet doctrine regarding the BMPs. If TSHTF we didn't plan on seeing one or two BMPs at a time. They weren't going to be scouting vehicles MBT, and they weren't going to be alone. If we hit T-64 or 72 w/anti-tank weaps like the M47 Dragon or TOW we would expect to see a half dozen BMPs roll up quickly puffing smoke screen and rattling away with whatever gun was attached while a small squad of Soviets barreled out the back. They were applied in numbers. NATO doctrine during the 80s against Fulda Gap scenarios will reflect my statements. Oh, and we'd all be in MOPP gear. NBC/CBRN bullshit.

Finaly Koala remembered the password to his account.

No one talks about the Shilka, 4 23mm autocannons that fire insanely fast, what’s not to love?

I had the "Big Seven" poster on my wall growing up. Loved it. Wish i still had it

T-80UD my beloved

Koala, slowly wakes up to the sound of The Man who sold the world, hears the doctor say: "Don't panic, you've been in a coma for nine years, it's time to get back and make another video"

In defense of T-72 ammunition storage in the carousel, it is protected by being located in the part of tank that was least likely to get hit... back when this tank was introduced.

It is so sick and tiring to read from a certain bunch of commentors that Soviet armament designs were not made for quality and only for quantity. Certainly not every Soviet fighting vehicle was a masterpiece of engineering but a lot indeed were. I.e. when the T54/55 was introduced in the 1950s, he was superior to almost anything tank in the West. His excellent 100mm main gun, his new inventive perfectly working two axis gyro stabilisation allowing to shoot in full motion and hitting with the first round, the capability to drive through deep rivers within one or two hours preparation, his powerful endless torque providing Diesel engine and his new ABC (NBC) protection system forced many Western armies to have their existing fighting vehicles redesigned, upgraded or replaced. The tank with a minimum of maintenance was very reliable and fuel efficient and was operating under any climate conditions. Same can be said for the Kalashnikov submachine gun and the BTR-series, the later Diesel-powered URAL trucks who managed to get through virtually any terrain, the prize-winning UAZ van and minibus series, as well as the GAZ/UAZ jeeps. Most of the Soviet designed military equipment designs were truly thought through, the average conscript must be able to operate, maintain and even field-repair his equipment. Stunning was also the level of standardisation and simplification among all of these vehicles, machinery and armament. I cannot judge about the latest Russian military designs lately but it is dangerous to believe that Russia only has half-drunk and non-inventive engineers to offer. They know about mechanical and electronic designs much as their Western counterparts, especially in military and space industries. I know it better; I served from 1983 to 1986 as a T-55 commander and I am a German engineer. I also travelled the USSR and (later) Russia quite a bit, as I travelled in my jobs as an engineer extensively all continents for 30 years, including the US. The idea that only the West knows how to make high-quality products is not only arrogant, but plain wrong. Peace! from Dresden / Germany

I think it would also be interesting to see the average Soviet army layout for different eras of the Soviet Union. The 50s for example would have T-54 and T-55s instead of T-72s and would have ZSU-57s instead of ZSU-23s. It could also have ASU-57s and ASU-85s instead of the 2S1. Both of which could also be airdropped from an AN-12. The ASU-85 served in the Soviet army in the Soviet-Afghan war. The closest thing i could see to replacing the Mi-24 would be the IL-10, a propeller driven aircraft instead of a helicopter as helicopters were only in their infancy back then. There also weren’t really any IFVs back then as the BMP was the vehicle that revolutionized APCs and introduced the whole concept of an infantry fighting vehicle to modern warfare.

While the OSA(SA-8) may have some issues with complexities, many of those issues are less of a problem than they are stated to be. The OSA(SA-8) would always operate in a battery system of around 4 complexes, so if one goes down for maintenance or enemy fire there are others to back it up, so your air defense picture is not entirely disabled. The Kub(SA-6) with its single dislocated radar is quite vulnerable here since if I take out the one radar vehicle then the entire battery is rendered inoperable. Putting a hole in the IADs. Additionally, the mobility of the SA-8 would make it quite survivable, as shown in Serbia, in contrast to a towed HAWK battery, which, once located, an enemy has more than enough time to direct long-range fires onto the battery location before it can move.

21:45 74 Mi-24s were lost during the Afghan war, if they lost several hundred that would have been every Mi-24 they sent to Afghanistan 3x over, the impact of the stinger was more psychological than physical

9:45 one thing to say about the lack of effective firepower of the BMP is how difficult it is to hit even a stationary target with a low velocity gun. The slower the projectile, the higher the arc that you have to aim it at. The higher the arc, the more precise you have to aim to actually hit anywhere near the target. So plunging fire generally relies on big explosive warheads to achieve an effect on target without needing to hit them bang on. But direct fire weapons with low velocity projectiles, such as the British Challenger tanks with their HESH, rely on a great fire control system to work. That's why this combination of low velocity gun, lacking fire control system, and small-ish warhead is so weak and can easily turn out completely useless in some engagements.

As a 19D4H scout trainer in the US Army reserve I have many books from the period that poster was printed. A lot of guess work on the intelligence side as the big Moscow parades would have the same vehicles passing by the review stands several times same with the flyovers. Sometimes different markings on the ground vehicles would be uncovered or covered to try to confuse the intelligence folks.