Is Ukraine about to have a war?
I have never read of any joint Franco-British military exercises taking place in France so that's probably out, and yet I can't think of any reason that Britain would be sending any aid to Ukraine on trucks through France either.
Can anyone think of a good explanation for such a convoy ?
Can anyone think of a good explanation for such a convoy ?
You can pretty much insert any NATO nation in place of France before listing all the other countries where we have direct bilateral military relationships. The sun will rise tomorrow and UK military convoys, maritime movements and air deployments will be happening all over the place.
If you really believe this to be the case, please give examples of France-British training exercises that have taken place in France in recent years.in large-scale, and not at EDG- T or similar.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Widescreen,
As most countries including the UN do not recognise any of Russias claims over the lands and that they still are Ukrainian tin law then I do not see who they can legally claim them and hence there is no basis for it being forbidden ground.
I do wonder if NATO could possibly blockade the the Black Sea seizing any vessels carrying stolen grain etc?
I still am disappointed in the wests response, yes we are pumping aid in, but it often feels to late to make a meaningful result, artillery that is needed now possibly weeks from arriving where desperately needed.
And in the meantime the population is being exterminated as the west watches on.
What I do fear is the longer it goes on, the less newsworthy it will become and the help for them will start to dry up.
…
As most countries including the UN do not recognise any of Russias claims over the lands and that they still are Ukrainian tin law then I do not see who they can legally claim them and hence there is no basis for it being forbidden ground.
I do wonder if NATO could possibly blockade the the Black Sea seizing any vessels carrying stolen grain etc?
I still am disappointed in the wests response, yes we are pumping aid in, but it often feels to late to make a meaningful result, artillery that is needed now possibly weeks from arriving where desperately needed.
And in the meantime the population is being exterminated as the west watches on.
What I do fear is the longer it goes on, the less newsworthy it will become and the help for them will start to dry up.
…
Last edited by NutLoose; 23rd Apr 2022 at 17:47.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
You can pretty much insert any NATO nation in place of France before listing all the other countries where we have direct bilateral military relationships. The sun will rise tomorrow and UK military convoys, maritime movements and air deployments will be happening all over the place.
Full version of the drone video showing the downing of a Russian helicopter with better context
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota...eb2x&context=3
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still am disappointed in the wests response, yes we are pumping aid in, but it often feels to late to make a meaningful result, artillery that is needed now possibly weeks from arriving where desperately needed.
And in the meantime the population is being exterminated as the west watches on.
And in the meantime the population is being exterminated as the west watches on.
👍
Interesting how stories are reported or not . The Turks after letting Chinese fly military planes delivering arms to Serbia, have now closed their airspace to Russian aircraft , civilian and military . Should be some cheap holidays availability soon in Turkey with all those empty hotels that used to sell cheap vodka . I wonder if they will still allow Chinese military to deliver weapons through Turkish airspace ?
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota...eb2x&context=3
sometimes, I guess there just aren't enough Flares
sometimes, I guess there just aren't enough Flares
Russian General Retirement Plan
There are a couple of ways of looking at it, and they give different answers.
There are X Generals in the operations area. Y generals reported deceased. Assuming a simple spread of the population, you get about a 3-5% probability. The figure on generals in the area have a spread of numbers quoted, and those are without source attribution.
A Bayesian analysis would add the likelihood that a HQ with a minimum of 3 General rank officers in one location would have the General of interest, "the butcher of Aleppo" in attendance. (Same probability question for say Wolfsschanze when you have a bucketful of generals at the same place, (and one Colonel...) Doing that, it depends on the assumption of what is the probability of 3 or more generals sitting around in a TOC drinking tea and chatting about genocide or being present for a conflab with the boss. That would give a likelihood that could run from 3% (no correlation, Russian generals like holding hands around the campfire) to 20%, where it is highly probable that the boss is there for a gathering of the generals (its not going to be 10%, there is a very low probability that every general in the area was at the one place), it is possible that 25% would be... 20%, if it is a coin toss the boss is there for a modest meeting. The more generals were there the higher the probability the boss was there, If it is assumed that even the Russian military is not stupid enough to have every general at the same place, then the top end would be say 50% of all generals in-theatre genuflecting to the boss at one location, that would increase the certainty that the boss is there, so that runs to.... 20%. Neglecting a chair leg or two.....
The likelihood is not zero and is not certain, but would seem to be between 1:20 and 1:5. We can only hope for the memory of those murdered in Aleppo, and in Ukraine, that it was a fortuitous strike. You could also add a probability that a strike was actively targeting the butcher, and what the probability of an OPSEC slip would be by the Russians. Those both run close to 100% on recent observations.
(The search for K-128 (1968), the Palomares 4 x B-28 nukes (1966), and the USS Scorpion, SSN-589 (also 1968) used a bayesian search function reportedly. It was certainly used to refine the search area of the bombs, there is anecdotal evidence that the K-129 position was reasonably well known by a satellite contact, as well as a couple of PACSOSUS acoustic lines, one civil and two military, and the same for the Scorpion, a SOSUS and a university project acoustic signature. The maths was interesting, and all 3 were still major searches). The Russian search for K-129 was nowhere near where she was reportedly found. There remain some interesting inconsistencies in the story of the K-129 and the Scorpion. some of the acoustic data was purportedly shown on the Project Azorian film, and the signal timings did not gel with the reported recovery location. The radio officer of the cargo ship (Bel Hudson, doing a run from Yokohama to Long beach along 34.30N, well below the great circle route...) that was helped by the medical team of the Hughes Glomar Explorer gave information on the track they had been on that voyage, which was definitely nowhere near the location that the more sensational stories on the sinking indicated. (Requested the ship's log of the Bel Hudson but never got that released from the archives in the UK, where they are preserved. IIRC, the cook has a suspected heart attack, which says something). J.P. Craven was an approachable guy, on marine engineering, and bayesian search functions, but was quiet on the actual location of K-129. He didn't consider 3rd party involvement in Scorpion to be likely, Found a report years later from a research vessel, MV Teritsu that found a radioactive oil slick way away around Necker Reef, the K-129 location is curious.
Last edited by fdr; 24th Apr 2022 at 06:04.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFoota...eb2x&context=3
sometimes, I guess there just aren't enough Flares
sometimes, I guess there just aren't enough Flares
If three of them are taken out the probability of a given general taken out is 1:3. However the total amount of generals is unknown.
Now to complicate things we could add the OPSEC issues and targeting an individual which then makes the probability of a certain individual taken out a bit higher.
Then again in the real world, if the syrian butcher would've be taken out I reckon the Ukrainians would've let the world know.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon...o-arm-ukraine/
Calling all weapons makers: Pentagon seeks new ideas to arm Ukraine
WASHINGTON ― In its effort to quickly arm Ukraine against Russia, the Pentagon has announced the equivalent of an open casting call for companies to offer weapons and commercial systems that can be rushed to the fight.
The Defense Department on Friday posted a broad request for information from industry on the federal contracting website sam.gov. The move is part of a stepped-up dialogue between the Pentagon and industry, and a sign of the challenge of boosting arms production in response to the ongoing conflict.
The RFI, on behalf of the new undersecretary of defense for acquisitions and sustainment, Bill LaPlante, is seeking input “from across industry” about air defense, anti-armor, anti-personnel, coastal defense, counter battery, unmanned aerial systems, and communications equipment, such as secure radios and satellite internet gear.
To that end, the DoD asks that responding companies describe their weapon, product or system in 100 words or less, and ― in the case of munitions ― check off “appropriate target type(s),” such as area, fixed, airborne/missile, maritime, mine, moving, hard or soft. The RFI says information received will be used to develop requirements for an actual solicitation at a later date……
The cutoff for submissions is May 6, and the DoD is evaluating proposals on a rolling basis…..
Calling all weapons makers: Pentagon seeks new ideas to arm Ukraine
WASHINGTON ― In its effort to quickly arm Ukraine against Russia, the Pentagon has announced the equivalent of an open casting call for companies to offer weapons and commercial systems that can be rushed to the fight.
The Defense Department on Friday posted a broad request for information from industry on the federal contracting website sam.gov. The move is part of a stepped-up dialogue between the Pentagon and industry, and a sign of the challenge of boosting arms production in response to the ongoing conflict.
The RFI, on behalf of the new undersecretary of defense for acquisitions and sustainment, Bill LaPlante, is seeking input “from across industry” about air defense, anti-armor, anti-personnel, coastal defense, counter battery, unmanned aerial systems, and communications equipment, such as secure radios and satellite internet gear.
To that end, the DoD asks that responding companies describe their weapon, product or system in 100 words or less, and ― in the case of munitions ― check off “appropriate target type(s),” such as area, fixed, airborne/missile, maritime, mine, moving, hard or soft. The RFI says information received will be used to develop requirements for an actual solicitation at a later date……
The cutoff for submissions is May 6, and the DoD is evaluating proposals on a rolling basis…..
NATO response
I share the frustration expressed by Nutloose & others and wonder if there is not another point to be considrered. Will NATO have to get sucked in eventuially anyway? What if the Russians Do succeed in cutting Ukrain's access to the Black Sea and press on into Moldova does the, "west," still stand by, feeding in help too little too late? If not and NATO has to get stuck in, better done before that happens surely?
More than one eminent General said that NATO should put 50,000 troops into Ukraine prior to the invasion. Now, that looks like a cheap solution but it was ignored. ALso the mixed messages on Russian capability. A huge army of 1 million, then they are running out of manpower, which is it?
A lot of questions, sorry but I imagine many here are better qualified than me to answer them.
More than one eminent General said that NATO should put 50,000 troops into Ukraine prior to the invasion. Now, that looks like a cheap solution but it was ignored. ALso the mixed messages on Russian capability. A huge army of 1 million, then they are running out of manpower, which is it?
A lot of questions, sorry but I imagine many here are better qualified than me to answer them.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
NATO won’t get involved because it would need a unanimous vote - and at least two members would vote against it.
However, as with many other involvements, such as Bosnia and Afghanistan, it does allow members to cooperate and participate nationally in such operations.
Whilst I can’t see any major ground force participation (logistic nightmare if nothing else, there might be naval operations to keep international waters and shipping free of mines and safe (Turkey being willing) and air operations.
However, as with many other involvements, such as Bosnia and Afghanistan, it does allow members to cooperate and participate nationally in such operations.
Whilst I can’t see any major ground force participation (logistic nightmare if nothing else, there might be naval operations to keep international waters and shipping free of mines and safe (Turkey being willing) and air operations.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I share the frustration expressed by Nutloose & others and wonder if there is not another point to be considrered. Will NATO have to get sucked in eventuially anyway? What if the Russians Do succeed in cutting Ukrain's access to the Black Sea and press on into Moldova does the, "west," still stand by, feeding in help too little too late? If not and NATO has to get stuck in, better done before that happens surely?
More than one eminent General said that NATO should put 50,000 troops into Ukraine prior to the invasion. Now, that looks like a cheap solution but it was ignored. ALso the mixed messages on Russian capability. A huge army of 1 million, then they are running out of manpower, which is it?
A lot of questions, sorry but I imagine many here are better qualified than me to answer them.
More than one eminent General said that NATO should put 50,000 troops into Ukraine prior to the invasion. Now, that looks like a cheap solution but it was ignored. ALso the mixed messages on Russian capability. A huge army of 1 million, then they are running out of manpower, which is it?
A lot of questions, sorry but I imagine many here are better qualified than me to answer them.
Yeah, though, I think, it is far from too late to let the Nato "visit" Ukraine on Zelensky's invitation. Tell the Ruskies, don't hurt these Nato people/Materials, otherwise we will kill you. And, once that kill happens, first roll-up the resources that deliberately/targeted destroy Ukraine's' civil infrastructure and then kick the Russians out of Ukraine.
However, to do something meaningful, you need to be with "a lot". So first build up a strong Nato force, let them go on trainings in the countries along the Russian border, continuously stating to Putin "They are on training, don't worry, we won't invade Russia or Ukraine". And by the time, you have enough (trained) forces, after some plausible excuse, just move into Ukraine, and be publicly welcomed there as friends. Nato forces are obviously much better equipped/trained than the Russian, so a victory can realistically be expected, and this time indeed in a limited time span.
Needs some guts, which will be difficult for leaders who face an election every 4 years.
The Russian annexation of Moldova is a serious aspect to be aware off. So, get the Nato already in there as "friendly" invited visitors.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
The UN and NATO should offer Moldova troops to aid with the vacation of refugees.
In the meantime Russia is now targeting western aid
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,047
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Although we see all the maps showing the invasion, I feel ones like this are probably more accurate showing how little area of the supposed captured zones is actually taken, it tends to be mainly road and village oriented and the immediate vicinity..
The strike on the supply chain seems to be a foreseeable event and needs to be responded to. The misfortune of the AN-26 pylon impact and crash is tough on the crew, but the cargo seems to have a chance to be recoverable.
On supply chains, and related to the Kalibr strikes, the figures of inventory of Russian missiles up to 2020 and the number used to date seem to suggest that the barrel is getting empty of short/intermediate-range cruise and ballistic rounds. I doubt that Russian corruptocrats were spending much time looking at logistics other than where to stash their loot pillaged from the Russian economy; they appear to have been far more interested in what other superyacht could be purchased to float funds out of the Russian economy. Either way, the production of additional rounds would not have been at a high rate, considering the lack of precision munitions.
Question: does anyone have any good data on the munitions status approaching February, and a good count of the expenditure of cruise and SRBM/IRBMs so far? The value of that information is that it gives an idea of where to allocate resources for the defense and what may well be a pushback of Russia to their own territory. Now if I appear to have a bias, I do, I am definitely biased against genocidal, criminal sociopaths.
At the moment, the rough figures look like there has been a majority expenditure of cruise missiles and short/intermediate-range missiles. If that is the case, then that alters the manner by which interdiction can occur.
The most recent suggestion that UKR may have parity or better with fielded MBTs in the area of operations, which is pretty amazing if correct, Russia had somewhere around 3000-3500 available MBTs to draw from, and while they have not moved the bulk of the units to the SW, it may be their losses have been higher than suggested by ORYX. Wrecked MBTs litter the depots inside Russia now and were not accounted for in ORYX beyond "damaged".
So, any good idea of starting numbers of missiles would be interesting. Anecdotally, the attack rates support the conjecture that Russia has a big, immediate supply problem with projected force capability. That leaves dumb bombs for interdiction, and that increases the opportunity to raise the insurance policy on Russian attack aircraft and pilots.
Ukraine has the capability to strike over into the W & SW Sea of Azov areas, while a chunk of the Black Sea fleet has become various marine parks, so the amphibious landings options are reduced a bit; that puts the MLAs into reasonably predictable primary options, which are expensive on attackers. The Russian supply chain would be a pretty darn interesting target, the Ukrainians can maintain a moral high ground with careful targeting, and in comparison to Russia, Atilla the Hun held the high ground as being a friendly neighbor. Russia has made it pretty simple to be despised.
USA's decision to ban Russian ships from US harbors is a move that was overdue, and all UN signatory states would improve their standing if they followed suit. I would prefer to see a few Ukrainian privateers taking a page out of the economics of littoral transit of Somalia, and start plinking Russian freighters to disable them in various parts of the world. Would seem to be fair to disrupt Russian shipping as Russia has disrupted Ukrainian shipping. If just the thought of that increases the hull insurance of the Russian ships, then that would be a fair outcome for Ukraine. They can of course get the same point to the ships that are still passing into the Sea of Azov, going up to Rostov-on-Don, or plying across to Novo; That is one busy little bit of the Black Sea. Appears that Russia is at least nervous about the Sea of Azov, which is good, the ships in the sea appear to have their AIS turned off once they have entered the sea.
On supply chains, and related to the Kalibr strikes, the figures of inventory of Russian missiles up to 2020 and the number used to date seem to suggest that the barrel is getting empty of short/intermediate-range cruise and ballistic rounds. I doubt that Russian corruptocrats were spending much time looking at logistics other than where to stash their loot pillaged from the Russian economy; they appear to have been far more interested in what other superyacht could be purchased to float funds out of the Russian economy. Either way, the production of additional rounds would not have been at a high rate, considering the lack of precision munitions.
Question: does anyone have any good data on the munitions status approaching February, and a good count of the expenditure of cruise and SRBM/IRBMs so far? The value of that information is that it gives an idea of where to allocate resources for the defense and what may well be a pushback of Russia to their own territory. Now if I appear to have a bias, I do, I am definitely biased against genocidal, criminal sociopaths.
At the moment, the rough figures look like there has been a majority expenditure of cruise missiles and short/intermediate-range missiles. If that is the case, then that alters the manner by which interdiction can occur.
The most recent suggestion that UKR may have parity or better with fielded MBTs in the area of operations, which is pretty amazing if correct, Russia had somewhere around 3000-3500 available MBTs to draw from, and while they have not moved the bulk of the units to the SW, it may be their losses have been higher than suggested by ORYX. Wrecked MBTs litter the depots inside Russia now and were not accounted for in ORYX beyond "damaged".
So, any good idea of starting numbers of missiles would be interesting. Anecdotally, the attack rates support the conjecture that Russia has a big, immediate supply problem with projected force capability. That leaves dumb bombs for interdiction, and that increases the opportunity to raise the insurance policy on Russian attack aircraft and pilots.
Ukraine has the capability to strike over into the W & SW Sea of Azov areas, while a chunk of the Black Sea fleet has become various marine parks, so the amphibious landings options are reduced a bit; that puts the MLAs into reasonably predictable primary options, which are expensive on attackers. The Russian supply chain would be a pretty darn interesting target, the Ukrainians can maintain a moral high ground with careful targeting, and in comparison to Russia, Atilla the Hun held the high ground as being a friendly neighbor. Russia has made it pretty simple to be despised.
USA's decision to ban Russian ships from US harbors is a move that was overdue, and all UN signatory states would improve their standing if they followed suit. I would prefer to see a few Ukrainian privateers taking a page out of the economics of littoral transit of Somalia, and start plinking Russian freighters to disable them in various parts of the world. Would seem to be fair to disrupt Russian shipping as Russia has disrupted Ukrainian shipping. If just the thought of that increases the hull insurance of the Russian ships, then that would be a fair outcome for Ukraine. They can of course get the same point to the ships that are still passing into the Sea of Azov, going up to Rostov-on-Don, or plying across to Novo; That is one busy little bit of the Black Sea. Appears that Russia is at least nervous about the Sea of Azov, which is good, the ships in the sea appear to have their AIS turned off once they have entered the sea.