British military convoy in France
 

I was driving up the A 5/A26 between Dijon and Reims on Wednesday April 20 and vaguely noted numerous military trucks heading South: after a little while it kicked in that they had British military number-plates and also a rather small Union-Jack sticker under the LHS headlight. These were all trucks carrying a container (except for a sole Land-Rover ), probably 20 or so in total.

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 ?

To transport French Aid?

Off BBC

:(

Which is a smart move. The moment, this area is "claimed" to be politically and state-wise part of the Russian state, it's forbidden ground to walk on, for Nato as a whole or any individual Nato state contributing with more than money and equipment. Until that joining, Nato or Nato states would be there on Ukraine invitation.

I don't comprehend ( attempted humour ? ) and don't see any relevance in the BBC quote. I'm sure that the French army isn't short of a few trucks, so the question remains. Why would the British military be hauling 20 or more containers South down a French autoroute ?

Somehow, I do have the impression, there has been a lot of inflation designating military ranks in Russia and those killed would have been ranked 1 or maybe 2 levels lower in Western military rankings. There are simply too many of them killed and/or "arrested" and still having enough left to show off and reorganize and command the army.

I suppose it’s too much to hope that one of the three was General Dvornikov….

I guess you have zero contact with the military as we (the UK in this case) exercise / work-up / trial / test / evaluate / develop / maintain / train with France as a matter of routine. Now, brace for it, we even do combat operations with France, sometimes on ops of their choosing.

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.

I guess you think people outside the military can't read/ follow current affairs . Whilst I read now and again about French military exercises in France, I have never (over a long period ) read about any joint exercises, other than the diminutive Franco-German Brigade.

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.

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.


​​​​​​…

Tartiflette,

Falcon Amarante ? Warfare.Today

Doesn't even have to be a NATO nation: British Challenger 2's are in Finland just this week on Arrow22 exercise.

I agree with you from the Western (or better, largely international) point of view. Though, I don't think, Russia (and some other Authoritarian states) do see this the same way. And as such, use the Nuke threat to bring Nato and/or individual Nato states in the same stalling doubt, they are in now.
Maybe, though it is walking on Eggs at the moment, so, I don't think, there is much interest in stolen ships with stolen grain. Not to say, these were stolen a long time ago, so probably sold off elsewhere (Middle East or so), or what ever. Not to speak about the aspect that the Bosporus is "closed off" for military, etc. (Which immediately brings the challenge, will a Russian military convoy respect such an administrative closure ? I don't think so. And a chain over the Bosporus for physical blocking, or Turkey (Nato) shooting at Russian military, hmmmm).
Yep, if it would be me, it would be a significantly more forceful Nato reaction. Though, let us realize, to organize a Nato party, without having to suffer another Duinkerke, it needs some time to build up sufficient forces. Not to say, given the leaking messages about large scale heavy Western equipment landing in Europe and subsequently transported eastwards, it could very well be, this force is secretly build up.
The drying up: Yep, though it could very well be, this is very well intentionally, to take care the forces can work, without Putin knowing, what is going on (and each time pulling the paralyzing Nuke threat). In the end, Zelensky did get the attention from the world and subsequent reaction with military support from the Western countries. Help is flowing, more and more, silently. And sanctions are increasingly build up, to the level, it is expected Russia to go broke in 2 weeks.

No way! If you don't believe me now why would you believe me with more detail? I've done all those things I detailed in France and quite a bit more; I just simply do not care if you want proof to soothe your needs!

👍

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

Russian General Retirement Plan
 

That is an interesting question.

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.

Starstreak is going to increase the discomfort level of the drivers down low. This strike was reportedly a SA-16/9K310-Igla-1, Starstreak has a greater range and is half the flight time roughly. The flares are 2 x 3 each release, which begs the question, as the loadout is reported to be 128 flares, are there 3flares per flare round? If not, then they have added more flares than the reported 128 which is good news, that would reduce the ordnance loadout.

or one could make somewhat more simplified assumptions. The Russians had approx 180000 troops to begin with and every lost general will be replaced so the total amount is constant. If there is a lieutenant general per 30k troops, a general per 100k troops and the general commander, it counts as 9 generals.
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.

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…..