Russia and it’s missing 1.5 million uniforms… 1.5 million!
https://novayagazeta.eu/amp/articles...e-missing-news |
- 1M109A3GN 155mm SPG; What does that jumble of numbers and letters before 155mm mean? One M109A3GN or a Million 109A3GN - whatever that is ...???? Or...??? Are we expected to know what SPG is...? Please, try not to be too clever with obscure mlitary acronyms, we aren't all that- er - 'knowlegeable"... |
It's an American Self-Propelled 155mm Howitzer. It's REALLY NOT that difficult!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M109_howitzer |
Trench warfare 2022 - footage circulating online of apparently Russian Thermal Imaging quadcopters operating with impunity over the trenches, dropping grenades on the poor soldiers huddled below. Probably Ukranians on the receiving end.
As if it wasnt miserable enough in those conditions. Spare a thought. |
Originally Posted by meleagertoo
(Post 11338387)
Could you please convert that into something meaningful?
|
|
Originally Posted by Low average
(Post 11338409)
Trench warfare 2022 - footage circulating online of apparently Russian Thermal Imaging quadcopters operating with impunity over the trenches, dropping grenades on the poor soldiers huddled below. Probably Ukranians on the receiving end.
As if it wasnt miserable enough in those conditions. Spare a thought. |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11338359)
Norway is sending a new military aid package to Ukraine. It contains:
- 1M109A3GN 155mm SPG; - 20,000 spare parts for M109A3GN howitzers |
Originally Posted by NutLoose
(Post 11338424)
If that was the group that hardly moved when hit it was Russians
As much as I hope it wasnt the Ukranians getting hit, I think it's likely. As a general point, we should face realities rather than focussing entirely on the other side's defeats. |
The endless cold.
The endless glutinous mud. The endless Russian shells. The endless death. The endless Russian attacks. These pics give a visual sense of what Ukrainian troops defending the town of Bakhmut are enduring. |
That’s not mud, this Is mud… note they say NATO gear does not cope was well with it, something NATO will have to look at. It looks like the gun barrel failed too.
|
Originally Posted by jolihokistix
(Post 11338426)
So just for clarity, that’s one gun and 20,000 spare parts for it and similar guns, correct?
|
To contrast the PBI in the trenches and mud to the sterility and high tech in the HQ - was ever so..
Footage of a Ukrainian command center near Bakhmut, showing a pretty good look at the information-sharing capabilities on the front, including drone footage livestreamed over Google Meet. |
Originally Posted by rattman
(Post 11338439)
Guess so, they have donated about 20 previously so imagine this is another they managed to get running + 20K assorted spare parts they have had stocked
|
There have been reports of guns wearing out their barrels etc due to the amount of ammunition that is being put through them, I seem to remember reading the US is to set up a repair base in Poland for some of their equipment. Plus they will need parts to repair those weapons damaged.
With all of this mud, out of interest do they have track extensions for the type of stuff in use? |
|
One comment says, flowers in November?
|
I don't see any flowers, just very dead Sunflower seed heads.
|
That should have been harvested :(
Note the dead and cruise missiles! https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2226c21828.png |
https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...es-2022-11-28/
Exclusive: U.S. weighs sending 100-mile strike weapon to Ukraine WASHINGTON, Nov 28 (Reuters) - The Pentagon is considering a Boeing proposal to supply Ukraine with cheap, small precision bombs fitted onto abundantly available rockets, allowing Kyiv to strike far behind Russian lines as the West struggles to meet demand for more arms. U.S. and allied military inventories are shrinking, and Ukraine faces an increasing need for more sophisticated weapons as the war drags on. Boeing's proposed system, dubbed Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), is one of about a half-dozen plans for getting new munitions into production for Ukraine and America's Eastern European allies, industry sources said. GLSDB could be delivered as early as spring 2023, according to a document reviewed by Reuters and three people familiar with the plan. It combines the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) with the M26 rocket motor, both of which are common in U.S. inventories. Doug Bush, the U.S. Army's chief weapons buyer, told reporters at the Pentagon last week the Army was also looking at accelerating production of 155 millimeter artillery shells - currently only manufactured at government facilities - by allowing defense contractors to build them….. Although a handful of GLSDB units have already been made, there are many logistical obstacles to formal procurement. The Boeing plan requires a price discovery waiver, exempting the contractor from an in-depth review that ensures the Pentagon is getting the best deal possible. Any arrangement would also require at least six suppliers to expedite shipments of their parts and services to produce the weapon quickly. A Boeing spokesperson declined to comment. Pentagon spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Tim Gorman declined to comment on providing any "specific capability" to Ukraine, but said the U.S. and its allies "identify and consider the most appropriate systems" that would help Kyiv. Although the United States has rebuffed requests for the 185-mile (297km) range ATACMS missile, the GLSDB's 94-mile (150km) range would allow Ukraine to hit valuable military targets that have been out of reach and help it continue pressing its counterattacks by disrupting Russian rear areas. GLSDB is made jointly by SAAB and Boeing and has been in development since 2019, well before the invasion, which Russia calls a "special operation". In October, SAAB chief executive Micael Johansson said of the GLSDB: "We are imminently shortly expecting contracts on that." According to the document - a Boeing proposal to U.S. European Command (EUCOM), which is overseeing weapons headed to Ukraine - the main components of the GLSDB would come from current U.S. stores. The M26 rocket motor is relatively abundant, and the GBU-39 costs about $40,000 each, making the completed GLSDB inexpensive and its main components readily available. Although arms manufacturers are struggling with demand, those factors make it possible to yield weapons by early 2023, albeit at a low rate of production. GLSDB is GPS-guided, can defeat some electronic jamming, is usable in all weather conditions, and can be used against armored vehicles, according to SAAB's website. The GBU-39 - which would function as the GLSDB's warhead - has small, folding wings that allow it to glide more than 100km if dropped from an aircraft and targets as small as 3 feet in diameter….. |
While US and western supplies are being depleted, surely Russian supplies are being depleted at a far greater rate..
|
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11338613)
https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...es-2022-11-28/
Exclusive: U.S. weighs sending 100-mile strike weapon to Ukraine WASHINGTON, Nov 28 (Reuters) - The Pentagon is considering a Boeing proposal to supply Ukraine with cheap, small precision bombs fitted onto abundantly available rockets, allowing Kyiv to strike far behind Russian lines .. |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 11338652)
I wonder if this is a good idea if behind Russian lines means inside Russia borders?
I think the Ukrainians have shown they can be trusted with their targeting, and to not strike centres of population. The first target should be Putin's dacha on the Black Sea, followed by every Russian air base and military installation within range. At the same time as providing this capability, the West should remind Russia that it is not the only nuclear power in the region should it think about escalating the conflict. |
This is what Russia tried to trigger several times, this almost WW3 like scenario. "We" against "NATO". I'd try to keep the cool. Don't support the "Russia is under threat" narrative. Let them face their inner chaos and power struggles instead. Then the long wait works against them.
Ukraine must be supplied as needed and everybody must be ready for a long war, WW1 style. Whatever Russia comes up with by spring must be met with the right responses. |
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 11338657)
I think the West has to provide Ukraine with the means to strike inside Russia, otherwise Russia is safe in the knowledge it can 'stand back' and launch unending waves of cruise missiles/suicide drones into Ukraine without fear of any comeback.
I think the Ukrainians have shown they can be trusted with their targeting, and to not strike centres of population. The first target should be Putin's dacha on the Black Sea, followed by every Russian air base and military installation within range. At the same time as providing this capability, the West should remind Russia that it is not the only nuclear power in the region should it think about escalating the conflict. |
Originally Posted by Less Hair
(Post 11338660)
This is what Russia tried to trigger several times, this almost WW3 like scenario. "We" against "NATO". I'd try to keep the cool. Don't support the "Russia is under threat" narrative. Let them face their inner chaos and power struggles instead. Then the long wait works against them.
Ukraine must be supplied as needed and everybody must be ready for a long war, WW1 style. Whatever Russia comes up with by spring must be met with the right responses. |
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 11338657)
I think the West has to provide Ukraine with the means to strike inside Russia, otherwise Russia is safe in the knowledge it can 'stand back' and launch unending waves of cruise missiles/suicide drones into Ukraine without fear of any comeback.
I think the Ukrainians have shown they can be trusted with their targeting, and to not strike centres of population. The first target should be Putin's dacha on the Black Sea, followed by every Russian air base and military installation within range. At the same time as providing this capability, the West should remind Russia that it is not the only nuclear power in the region should it think about escalating the conflict. |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 11338686)
We must not forget for all the success the Ukrainians have had Russia is a much larger country and as such has greater resources and, in a war of attrition, they will come out on top. Historically in wars Russia starts badly but in the long term they get better. However tempting a deep strike into Russia would be an escalation and the reluctance of the West to provide the appropriate weapons is probably a reflection of that concern.
I would target those bases launching missiles and the aircraft that are launching them, all the bridges and rail infrastructure heading into Ukraine, then I would start by knocking the TV channels off the air spreading their bile, drop a few masts should do, redesign Putins palace for him and personally I would let Moscow feel how it is to freeze, a few gas distribution nodes and power ones should do, that would bring it home to those Russians who think it is all one sided... I think Ukraine has already shown it can be trusted with the weapons they have been given that they will not use them on targets that part of the deal forbids, so I cannot see what is preventing giving them longer range ones. . |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 11338686)
We must not forget for all the success the Ukrainians have had Russia is a much larger country and as such has greater resources and, in a war of attrition, they will come out on top. Historically in wars Russia starts badly but in the long term they get better.
However tempting a deep strike into Russia would be an escalation and the reluctance of the West to provide the appropriate weapons is probably a reflection of that concern |
A deep strike into Russia could be counter-productive by giving the Russian People cause to support the illegal War kicked off by Putin and his cronies.
They did not care much for the Russian affair in Afghanistan....so why risk alienating any popular opinion for little military gain? Mothers are seeing their Sons head off to Ukraine and coming home in Caskets....or not coming home at all. Learn a lesson from other Nations that have conducted unpopular Wars....say.....like maybe the Falklands were the Argies thought they could do something similar to what is going on in the Ukraine. How did that turnout for that Regime? |
Deep strikes damaging Ukrainian infrastructure do not seem to be damaging the nation's resolve and I have no reason to believe that deep strikes into Russia would be any different. I cannot recall of a campaign where anything other than wholesale destruction, or the demonstrated prospect of wholesale destruction, has had a significant effect on the willingness of a people to continue a war.
In terms of effect, bleeding a nation of its young men and material, is more likely to bring on war weariness than direct attacks, which will only give a reason for resentment and a feeling that perhaps the losses were somehow justified after all. |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 11338710)
A deep strike into Russia could be counter-productive by giving the Russian People cause to support the illegal War kicked off by Putin and his cronies.
They did not care much for the Russian affair in Afghanistan....so why risk alienating any popular opinion for little military gain? Mothers are seeing their Sons head off to Ukraine and coming home in Caskets....or not coming home at all. Learn a lesson from other Nations that have conducted unpopular Wars....say.....like maybe the Falklands were the Argies thought they could do something similar to what is going on in the Ukraine. How did that turnout for that Regime? I'm not sure that the Falklands analogy really holds up to Ukraine, but in terms of how that turned out the Argentineans still claim the islands to be theirs, 40 years after the end of the war. We can't allow that to happen with Ukraine - the Russians must be militarily defeated, and seen to be militarily defeated. If not, this conflict could last for generations. |
Originally Posted by Ninthace
(Post 11338715)
Deep strikes damaging Ukrainian infrastructure do not seem to be damaging the nation's resolve and I have no reason to believe that deep strikes into Russia would be any different. I cannot recall of a campaign where anything other than wholesale destruction, or the demonstrated prospect of wholesale destruction, has had a significant effect on the willingness of a people to continue a war.
In terms of effect, bleeding a nation of its young men and material, is more likely to bring on war weariness than direct attacks, which will only give a reason for resentment and a feeling that perhaps the losses were somehow justified after all. |
Originally Posted by Ninthace
(Post 11338715)
Deep strikes damaging Ukrainian infrastructure do not seem to be damaging the nation's resolve and I have no reason to believe that deep strikes into Russia would be any different. I cannot recall of a campaign where anything other than wholesale destruction, or the demonstrated prospect of wholesale destruction, has had a significant effect on the willingness of a people to continue a war.
In terms of effect, bleeding a nation of its young men and material, is more likely to bring on war weariness than direct attacks, which will only give a reason for resentment and a feeling that perhaps the losses were somehow justified after all. However I suspect that Putin would hold defensive postions during the winter and attempt a full offensive in the spring with aim of the destroying the Ukrainian army. |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 11338729)
I agree.....and isn't this the reason Russia had to quit Afghanistan though it took some years to get that point. In Afghanistan Russian casualities are believed to be 15,000 deaths; a figure probably exceeded in Ukraine so maybe it happen sooner.
However I suspect that Putin would hold defensive postions during the winter and attempt a full offensive in the spring with aim of the destroying the Ukrainian army. The only way this can end favourably for Ukraine and the West, is to give Ukrainians the tools to end the war decisively on their terms, and that means long-range weapons. Let Putin talk about 'escalation' - he's being doing that since before the war started. He's bad but he's not (yet) mad, and he knows as well as anyone what the West can inflict on Russia if it oversteps the mark. |
Ask yourselves this: Did The Blitz weaken, or strengthen our resolve?
Did the part of The Troubles than took place on the UK mainland make anyone in the UK say "Well they have a point"? Did constant bombing the NVA cause them to stop etc etc What actually ended The Troubles? Was it in large part that people just got exhausted by it? |
Russia will implode by itself after they realise that they are unable to violently keep the occupied territories. Let them fight each other.
|
Originally Posted by Sue Vêtements
(Post 11338735)
Ask yourselves this: Did The Blitz weaken, or strengthen our resolve?
Did the part of The Troubles than took place on the UK mainland make anyone in the UK say "Well they have a point"? Did constant bombing the NVA cause them to stop etc etc What actually ended The Troubles? Was it in large part that people just got exhausted by it? What actually ended The Troubles? Was it in large part that people just got exhausted by it? |
Originally Posted by Less Hair
(Post 11338738)
Russia will implode by itself after they realise that they are unable to violently keep the occupied territories. Let them fight each other.
|
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 11338740)
I do suspect that the loss of Crimea will have a profound effect on the Russian psyche, and and when it happens.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:41. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.