9 ms·

It's just incredible how people who are seeing pictures and lack the imagination to understand what purpose they serve then assume it must be no real purpose an

It's just incredible how people who are seeing pictures and lack the imagination to understand what purpose they serve then assume it must be no real purpose and that the folks who are doing it are just absolute morons. Perhaps it's not there for when you're out and about and actively being seen by the enemy. Perhaps it's there for when you're hiding in the woods and you want to hold a tarp off of the top of your tank so that you can get in and out easily. Perhaps it's there to hold up camo netting for hiding the tank better while stopped in the woods. Perhaps the mesh on top is to hold up branches that you cut down to try and better hide your tank while you're in the woods, not moving. I'm not saying that any of these reasons are THE reason. I'm suggesting that if some idiot on the internet (me) can come up with some reasons that aren't entirely moronic it's too bad that better informed folks aren't trying a little harder to imagine what they might be used for.

snek_case 5y ago
Camo netting support seems like a probable explanation. This video makes it look like the US does something similar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kY4Xygh9DQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kY4Xygh9DQ
- treeman79 5y ago
  There’s an excellent YouTube video that I can’t find because it keeps thinking I want tank top t-shirts. Anyway anti-tank rounds have two levels to them the first is a charge that explodes to weaken the armor and the second one goes through that to penetrate. If the first part explodes prematurely in theory it will have a lot less penetrating force.
- tyingq 5y ago
  That's an Oshkosh M-ATV, and if it has camo netting on top, it's a much lighter/simpler structure than the big cage on the pictured tank. There are some versions of the Oshkosh with light armor on top, but just regular old armor plate...probably for overhead snipers.
orbifold 5y ago
It is almost as if most of western media just actively engages in propaganda, or reporting "objectively" on propaganda by citing "cope cages" ...
- hidudeurcool 5y ago
- snek_case 5y ago
  Everyone has a tendency to engage in confirmation bias. Many of us (myself included) really want to see the Ukrainians win, so it's tempting to pick and interpret news in a way that makes the Ukrainians look smart and effective and the Russians look dumb. If you want to try and be somewhat objective, you have to be critical and fight against your own confirmation bias. It's something a lot of people are incapable or unwilling to do. That being said, people (and organizations) make bad decisions all the time. It's possible that those cages are not a net win, but they're probably not the worst idea ever either. If they're a bad idea, ideally the troops on the ground tell you that and the cages stop being installed. Where that might fail though is that Russia has a much more authoritarian culture... Will your supervisors listen if you tell them something isn't working out?
  - Markoff 5y ago
    > Many of us (myself included) really want to see the Ukrainians win, so it's tempting to pick and interpret news in a way that makes the Ukrainians look smart and effective and the Russians look dumb. There are no winners in the war. Personally I am not siding with any side, I understand UA's right to defend themself (though it seems kinda pointless just wasting human lives and resources for some pride and borders on paper) and I would be their huge fan, if it weren't for their obvious propaganda uncritically parroted by western MSM calling anyone doubting it Putin sympathizer. With such propaganda it's difficult to side with any party. I can also see last 8 years and don't think the attack came out of nowhere without reason as they try to push.
    - readthenotes1 5y ago
bstar77 5y ago
Would you be comfortable operating a Russian tank in this war? These things are getting destroyed almost indiscriminately by drone attacks and javelins. I can only speculate the true reason for this augmentation, but my hunch is, indeed, primarily for psychological reassurance... the logic being bombs from above hit the cage and explode several feet away from the hull, sparing the occupants from a direct hit. We've seen incredible evidence that the charges plastered all over these tanks are doing nothing to protect the occupants, so another strategy is needed. Maybe there's other uses like you described, but I'm not convinced they are the impetus for the cages.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Nobody who's the least bit well informed should want to be in a tank in any sort of war where the people you're fighting have rich western backers. Look at Syria. It was ATGM city. And that's a "budget" conflict compared to the kind of stops that are being pulled out to get that kind of hardware into Ukrainian hands.
  - bstar77 5y ago
    I completely agree, but solders have to follow orders whether they like it or not. Russian commanders may have a problem reassuring them that they are not going to the slaughter, so efforts like this may give some level of encouragement. Who knows for sure, but I'm pretty confident it's not to make covering with a tarp easier.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
NelsonMinar 5y ago
It's also incredible how this discussion is entirely uninformed by the posted article. The reading presents several thoughtful explanations for the armor, along with reasons they don't quite make sense. Many comments here are from folks who clearly didn't read that but have Very Valuable Opinions to share. As if being a software engineer also makes you an expert in military armor.
- tyingq 5y ago
  >entirely uninformed by the posted article It is paywalled.
  - NelsonMinar 5y ago
    Yes, but the Economist paywall is quite generous. Also the top link here is an archive link to circumvent the paywall. Also extensions like Bypass Paywalls Clean work if for some reason you don't want to pay for the journalism you read. The alternative we have here is a completely uninformed, speculative discussion.
    - tyingq 5y ago
      >The alternative we have here is a completely uninformed, speculative discussion. If you're talking about my other comments, they were paraphrasing similar articles I've read, rather than pure speculation. Keeping in mind that that any article is going to have speculation, as the Russians haven't said why they are doing it. That "generous paywall" is showing me ~120 words.
      - katcher 5y ago
        And the archive link someone posted has invalid certs.
    - choko 5y ago
      Or perhaps we can just not post pay-walled BS? Someone was generous to post a mirror, and I was reminded WHY I don't pay for "journalistic" content.

snek_case 5y ago

Camo netting support seems like a probable explanation. This video makes it look like the US does something similar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kY4Xygh9DQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kY4Xygh9DQ

treeman79 5y ago
There’s an excellent YouTube video that I can’t find because it keeps thinking I want tank top t-shirts. Anyway anti-tank rounds have two levels to them the first is a charge that explodes to weaken the armor and the second one goes through that to penetrate. If the first part explodes prematurely in theory it will have a lot less penetrating force.
tyingq 5y ago
That's an Oshkosh M-ATV, and if it has camo netting on top, it's a much lighter/simpler structure than the big cage on the pictured tank. There are some versions of the Oshkosh with light armor on top, but just regular old armor plate...probably for overhead snipers.

orbifold 5y ago

It is almost as if most of western media just actively engages in propaganda, or reporting "objectively" on propaganda by citing "cope cages" ...

hidudeurcool 5y ago
snek_case 5y ago
Everyone has a tendency to engage in confirmation bias. Many of us (myself included) really want to see the Ukrainians win, so it's tempting to pick and interpret news in a way that makes the Ukrainians look smart and effective and the Russians look dumb. If you want to try and be somewhat objective, you have to be critical and fight against your own confirmation bias. It's something a lot of people are incapable or unwilling to do. That being said, people (and organizations) make bad decisions all the time. It's possible that those cages are not a net win, but they're probably not the worst idea ever either. If they're a bad idea, ideally the troops on the ground tell you that and the cages stop being installed. Where that might fail though is that Russia has a much more authoritarian culture... Will your supervisors listen if you tell them something isn't working out?
- Markoff 5y ago
  > Many of us (myself included) really want to see the Ukrainians win, so it's tempting to pick and interpret news in a way that makes the Ukrainians look smart and effective and the Russians look dumb. There are no winners in the war. Personally I am not siding with any side, I understand UA's right to defend themself (though it seems kinda pointless just wasting human lives and resources for some pride and borders on paper) and I would be their huge fan, if it weren't for their obvious propaganda uncritically parroted by western MSM calling anyone doubting it Putin sympathizer. With such propaganda it's difficult to side with any party. I can also see last 8 years and don't think the attack came out of nowhere without reason as they try to push.
  - readthenotes1 5y ago

bstar77 5y ago

Would you be comfortable operating a Russian tank in this war? These things are getting destroyed almost indiscriminately by drone attacks and javelins. I can only speculate the true reason for this augmentation, but my hunch is, indeed, primarily for psychological reassurance... the logic being bombs from above hit the cage and explode several feet away from the hull, sparing the occupants from a direct hit. We've seen incredible evidence that the charges plastered all over these tanks are doing nothing to protect the occupants, so another strategy is needed. Maybe there's other uses like you described, but I'm not convinced they are the impetus for the cages.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Nobody who's the least bit well informed should want to be in a tank in any sort of war where the people you're fighting have rich western backers. Look at Syria. It was ATGM city. And that's a "budget" conflict compared to the kind of stops that are being pulled out to get that kind of hardware into Ukrainian hands.
- bstar77 5y ago
  I completely agree, but solders have to follow orders whether they like it or not. Russian commanders may have a problem reassuring them that they are not going to the slaughter, so efforts like this may give some level of encouragement. Who knows for sure, but I'm pretty confident it's not to make covering with a tarp easier.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

NelsonMinar 5y ago

It's also incredible how this discussion is entirely uninformed by the posted article. The reading presents several thoughtful explanations for the armor, along with reasons they don't quite make sense. Many comments here are from folks who clearly didn't read that but have Very Valuable Opinions to share. As if being a software engineer also makes you an expert in military armor.

tyingq 5y ago
>entirely uninformed by the posted article It is paywalled.
- NelsonMinar 5y ago
  Yes, but the Economist paywall is quite generous. Also the top link here is an archive link to circumvent the paywall. Also extensions like Bypass Paywalls Clean work if for some reason you don't want to pay for the journalism you read. The alternative we have here is a completely uninformed, speculative discussion.
  - tyingq 5y ago
    >The alternative we have here is a completely uninformed, speculative discussion. If you're talking about my other comments, they were paraphrasing similar articles I've read, rather than pure speculation. Keeping in mind that that any article is going to have speculation, as the Russians haven't said why they are doing it. That "generous paywall" is showing me ~120 words.
    - katcher 5y ago
      And the archive link someone posted has invalid certs.
  - choko 5y ago
    Or perhaps we can just not post pay-walled BS? Someone was generous to post a mirror, and I was reminded WHY I don't pay for "journalistic" content.