>>64243694
>motorbikes are sacrificial units to draw fire while APCs and tanks actually make the gains
nope
according to the experts, the Russian playbook is this: motorbike and foot infantry infiltrate forward as far as they can, which is further than tanks and IFVs can make it
then they charge forward and take cover wherever they can, which is easier for small numbers of infantry than for large armoured vehicles
the process continues until a large infantry force is built up near the Ukrainian lines because the AFU doesn't have enough fire support assets to kill them all fast enough
in addition, the infantry can find weak spots in the front line, which is thinly-held; and call in their own drones, artillery, and airstrikes
Russian glide bombs in particular are very useful in taking out Ukrainian infantry strongpoints
once the Ukrainian defences are cleared in this manner, Russian tanks, APCs, EW and SAM support units advance to consolidate the position and defend it against Ukrainian counter-attacks
in essence, a modern Russian version of WW1 bite-and-hold tactics, or WW2 IJA infantry tactics
>small-scale encirclements using armored units
nope
>motorbikes have attracted massive artillery barrages everytime they show up
yes, but not enough
and they attract less fire than tanks, which is why Russian tanks aren't being used for the breakthrough
>you really cant hide motorbikes
they can be hidden better than tanks can; they're smaller and can make better use of less cover and concealment, they're quieter, they kick up less dust