Is Ukraine about to have a war?
- There are Nazi's in Ukraine, they are in the employ of the Kremlin;
- There are terrorists, they wore the Russian force uniform, and have conducted nuclear threats, damaged nuclear power plants deliberately, and have attacked deliberately civilians, while supporting a criminal conspiracy;
- Every death in Ukraine and in Russia, and around the world consequent to Russia's crime is on Vlads shoulders;
- Vlad; don't expect a Christmas card anytime soon.
The following 3 users liked this post by fdr:
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
Tart
The target area will be quite large, the advantage of lobbing them into the area is to give them a greater range which then protects the jets / helicopters and crews from flying into the dangerous contested airspace from the likes of Russian manpads.
This one shows the area being hit which could be the Russian frontline trenches, build up of troops, vehicles etc
,
The target area will be quite large, the advantage of lobbing them into the area is to give them a greater range which then protects the jets / helicopters and crews from flying into the dangerous contested airspace from the likes of Russian manpads.
This one shows the area being hit which could be the Russian frontline trenches, build up of troops, vehicles etc
,
Last edited by NutLoose; 29th Mar 2023 at 00:11.
Tart
The target area will be quite large, the advantage of lobbing them into the area is to give them a greater range which then protects the jets / helicopters and crews from flying into the dangerous contested airspace from the likes of Russian manpads.
This one shows the area being hit which could be the Russian frontline trenches, build up of troops, vehicles etc
https://mobile.twitter.com/UkraineNe...80805970325506
,
The target area will be quite large, the advantage of lobbing them into the area is to give them a greater range which then protects the jets / helicopters and crews from flying into the dangerous contested airspace from the likes of Russian manpads.
This one shows the area being hit which could be the Russian frontline trenches, build up of troops, vehicles etc
https://mobile.twitter.com/UkraineNe...80805970325506
,
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
Yes, I've seen all that and (think ) I appreciate the risk/reward element, but it still seems heavily weighted against the attacker. Tossing relatively small explosives against people (probably ) in trenches seems a really stupid wager when weighed against a very expensive pilot and aircraft.
The same can be said for using a £100,0000 missile to take down a £200 UAV, why would you? But when that missile stops a drone targeting artillery onto your men or equipment, or even giving the enemy intelligence so they can bolster defences or arrange attacks accordingly, then it is 100,000 well spent regardless of the target cost.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,881
Received 1,321 Likes
on
598 Posts
AFAIS this is simply tossing unguided missiles in the direction of the enemy*, which isn't likely to have great success,
See: AGM-130A, Hellfire (AGM-114), HARM (AGM-88, etc.) missiles.
Thanks to massive developments in computing speed and size, and GPS technology, over the past decades. And a desire to avoid blowing up entire villages/cities to get one terrorist leader (see death of Al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri (Kabul, July 2022)).
Look up "fire and forget" technology for air-to-surface missiles (a.k.a "smart weapons"). Missiles that can steer themselves with fins, and track in on specific targets (e.g. a single tank or building - and on occasion, a specific balcony!) by various means including sensors/cameras in the nose (radar and IR emissions from the targets themselves, but also video images kept in the missile's cross hairs, or even, these days, GPS guidance).
See: AGM-130A, Hellfire (AGM-114), HARM (AGM-88, etc.) missiles.
Thanks to massive developments in computing speed and size, and GPS technology, over the past decades. And a desire to avoid blowing up entire villages/cities to get one terrorist leader (see death of Al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri (Kabul, July 2022)).
See: AGM-130A, Hellfire (AGM-114), HARM (AGM-88, etc.) missiles.
Thanks to massive developments in computing speed and size, and GPS technology, over the past decades. And a desire to avoid blowing up entire villages/cities to get one terrorist leader (see death of Al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri (Kabul, July 2022)).
That isn’t that PIF. Dunno what size the Ukrainians use, but that they’re rough equivalent of our 2.75 inch rockets as best I can tell. Hellfires are something completely different.
Only half a speed-brake
Agreed, the unguided salvos from Hinds / Frogfoots are late 50's technology.
No belittling UKR for tossing all they have, and only what they have.
No belittling UKR for tossing all they have, and only what they have.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...08fa1b55ea2b57
He told the journalists “We have great decisions about Patriots, but we don’t have them for real,” he said, referring to the US-made air defence system that has been promised.
Zelenskiy said that Ukraine needs 20 Patriot batteries to protect against Russian missiles, and even that may not be enough “as no country in the world was attacked with so many ballistic rockets.”
Zelenskiy added that a European nation sent another air defence system to Ukraine, but it didn’t work and they “had to change it again and again.” He did not name the country.
What is he referring to?
Zelenskiy: Ukraine had to return some air defence equipment from west that didn't work
Journalists from Associated Press accompanied Volodymyr Zelenskiy on part of his trip this week around frontline regions of Ukraine, and to the border region of Sumy. During that time, Ukraine’s president reiterated Ukraine’s requests for more modern weaponry, and also said that some elements that had been supplied by the west had not worked.He told the journalists “We have great decisions about Patriots, but we don’t have them for real,” he said, referring to the US-made air defence system that has been promised.
Zelenskiy said that Ukraine needs 20 Patriot batteries to protect against Russian missiles, and even that may not be enough “as no country in the world was attacked with so many ballistic rockets.”
Zelenskiy added that a European nation sent another air defence system to Ukraine, but it didn’t work and they “had to change it again and again.” He did not name the country.
This looks like the third complete failure in a row for the Patriot system: every time it's been called upon.
It couldn't protect Israel from Scuds.
It couldn't protect the Riyadh airport.
And they can't even get a working site to Ukraine.
It seems that the entire Patriot program from start to finish has been a complete failure and a gigantic waste of taxpayer's money.
People should probably be in prison over this boondoggle.
It couldn't protect Israel from Scuds.
It couldn't protect the Riyadh airport.
And they can't even get a working site to Ukraine.
It seems that the entire Patriot program from start to finish has been a complete failure and a gigantic waste of taxpayer's money.
People should probably be in prison over this boondoggle.
The following users liked this post:
Is the US a 'European nation'?
I suspect we all know to which country he was referring, but because he has received other goodies he diplomatically chose to suppress any criticism.
I suspect we all know to which country he was referring, but because he has received other goodies he diplomatically chose to suppress any criticism.
I was posting stand alone but I was triggered by the Zelensky quote: “We have great decisions about Patriots, but we don’t have them for real”.
Something that will stop Kalibr's is sorely needed.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Tossing relatively small explosives against people (probably ) in trenches seems a really stupid wager when weighed against a very expensive pilot and aircraft.
That may because your troops are either retreating or advancing in front of them or, with conscripts with low morale, to discourage them from following orders to advance as unprotected infantry across open land - as with the their last month of unsuccessful attacks to the south.
The following users liked this post:
Look up "fire and forget" technology for air-to-surface missiles (a.k.a "smart weapons"). Missiles that can steer themselves with fins, and track in on specific targets (e.g. a single tank or building - and on occasion, a specific balcony!) by various means including sensors/cameras in the nose (radar and IR emissions from the targets themselves, but also video images kept in the missile's cross hairs, or even, these days, GPS guidance).
See: AGM-130A, Hellfire (AGM-114), HARM (AGM-88, etc.) missiles.
Thanks to massive developments in computing speed and size, and GPS technology, over the past decades. And a desire to avoid blowing up entire villages/cities to get one terrorist leader (see death of Al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri (Kabul, July 2022)).
See: AGM-130A, Hellfire (AGM-114), HARM (AGM-88, etc.) missiles.
Thanks to massive developments in computing speed and size, and GPS technology, over the past decades. And a desire to avoid blowing up entire villages/cities to get one terrorist leader (see death of Al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri (Kabul, July 2022)).
* This may be the rocket in question.
" The S-5 (first designated ARS-57) is a rocket weapon developed by the Soviet Air Force and used by military aircraft against ground area targets. It is in service with the Russian Air Force and various export customers. It is based on a German design from World War 2.[1]It is produced in a variety of sub-types with different warheads, including HEAT anti-armour (S-5K), high-explosive fragmentation (S-5M/MO), smoke, and incendiary rounds. Each rocket is about 1.4 meters (4 feet 7 inches) long and weighs about 5 kg (11 lb), depending on warhead and fuze. Range is 3 to 4 kilometres (1.9 to 2.5 mi)"
Why introduce nonsensical, irrelevant comparisons ?
The other resin to do so is firing for effect - you’re not aiming to hit anything (lofting unguided rockets is wildly inaccurate) but to force the enemy to stay in his shelters and remain static.
That may because your troops are either retreating or advancing in front of them or, with conscripts with low morale, to discourage them from following orders to advance as unprotected infantry across open land - as with the their last month of unsuccessful attacks to the south.
That may because your troops are either retreating or advancing in front of them or, with conscripts with low morale, to discourage them from following orders to advance as unprotected infantry across open land - as with the their last month of unsuccessful attacks to the south.
Did you realise that the Chair of the UN Security Council rotates on a monthly basis between the fifteen permanent member nations, and next month in the chair is .... Ruzzia! Fat chance of them being excluded from anythng no matter what the rulebook says, and if Putain decides to do something particularly nasty in April he'll be able to either just write it out of the agenda or simply just veto any discussion of it in the UN.
It's a pretty revolting picture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
The other resin to do so is firing for effect - you’re not aiming to hit anything (lofting unguided rockets is wildly inaccurate) but to force the enemy to stay in his shelters and remain static.
That may because your troops are either retreating or advancing in front of them or, with conscripts with low morale, to discourage them from following orders to advance as unprotected infantry across open land - as with the their last month of unsuccessful attacks to the south.
Thanks for that. I've always wondered about that phrase.
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
The other resin to do so is firing for effect - you’re not aiming to hit anything (lofting unguided rockets is wildly inaccurate) but to force the enemy to stay in his shelters and remain static.
That may because your troops are either retreating or advancing in front of them or, with conscripts with low morale, to discourage them from following orders to advance as unprotected infantry across open land - as with the their last month of unsuccessful attacks to the south.
Thanks for that. I've always wondered about that phrase.
'...not aiming to hit anything (lofting unguided rockets is wildly inaccurate) but to force the enemy to stay in his shelters and remain static' is certainly an effect, but that's not what 'fire for effect' means.
The following users liked this post:
