Ukraine
- Thread starter dogwatch
- Start date
Couple of selected quotes from the article:
First the author opines that russian airfield used to attack Ukrainian towns located elsewere (read inside russia) should be legit target for Ukraine while using US weapons.
Next the very same author argues that advanced US weapons should be given to Ukraine under legally binding agreement not to use them on airfields inside russia used to attack Ukrainian towns.
Go figure how that would work. There is no other possible interpretation of quoted text of that article, as the only airfields (for jets, not counting drones) used by russia for attacks on Ukraine that are not located in Crimea, are inside russia and there have already been strikes against them more than once, perhaps not proven to be made by Ukraine though.
About the SKIF Drone
It auto-translates for me but includes some photos and also this translated text:
The next step
In 2021, the ITEC company entered the TECHIIA holding and changed its name to Culver Aviation. The team grew to several dozen people. The SKIF unmanned complex went on serial production: designing the fuselage and electronics, manufacturing cases and boards, assembling, and programming. In addition to services, the company is developing an innovation that will be revealed at the leading international exhibition of commercial UAVs this September.Culver Aviation reacted to the Russian invasion in no time.
From the first days, a large part of the pilot team went to defend the country and joined the Armed Forces. The production was moved to the western part of the country, the SKIF production pace was maintained to provide the services on time. For social support, a free drone operator school was opened, which has already trained 70 people.
With my language skills as a foreigner, the correct answer is all of them. Because tanker crew in my uninformed opinion refers to ship crews, like those manning oil tankers, and none of them is forced to steer the ship into a war zone.
Tank crews would be another matter. No choice being given for them at least after they have been trained for that position, might be different before training.
I would assume it would depend with survival rate of the infantry, statistics varying far more (anything between 0% and 100%) than for the tank crew.
Bristol-Cruiser
Super Anarchist
So the Americans failed in Afghanistan, before them so did the Soviets and before them the Brits ... going back to Alexander. Afghanistan is a good place to find failure.
Kiwing
Super Anarchist
LeoV
Super Anarchist
Timing for one, ATACMS can be active next week, planes takes months at least.
So Russia will know what hit them.
Russia has send more then 4000 missiles into Ukraine, Himars to short in range for adapted logistics of Russia. Time for a longer distance capability.
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
No, Alexander succeeded in Afghanistan. His policy was to kill all men over 5 and under 60, unless they joined his army... which he then marched into India.
IIRC Timurlane also succeeded in Afghanistan, his policy was to kill everybody and make a mountain out of their skulls.
LeoV
Super Anarchist
No ATACMS but maybe this is coming;
The USAI funds would go toward the purchase of a new weapon, the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB) made by Boeing Co (BA.N), which have a range of 94 miles (150 km).
The USAI funds would go toward the purchase of a new weapon, the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB) made by Boeing Co (BA.N), which have a range of 94 miles (150 km).
Dervish
Anarchist
Read a book called “Tip Of The Spear” about front line fighters in WWII. This topic was of substantial interest to me at the time as despite being Airborne & Ranger Infantry qualified, I was branched into Armored Cavalry.
Don’t recall the exact numbers but armor crewmen casualties were substantial, although lower than Infantry. But the forces had little success in getting Infantrymen to volunteer to become tank crewmen due primarily to fire. An infantryman might get shot or (more likely) get artillery dropped on him. But any Infantryman who had heard trapped crewmen screaming while a tank burned considered himself lucky.
One reason tanks are successful on the battlefield is precisely because the team must work together. Tank crews, whenever possible, are put together with extraordinary care, so that they will work well as a team.
The way Russian forces deployed tanks was badly flawed. Without Infantry to protect their flanks and blind spots, they were highly susceptible to ATGM fire.
ATGM’s have their own limitations, notably rate of fire.
It remains to be seen if the speed of western MBT’s over terrain, their accuracy and fire power, and superior communications, and superior ISR, and deployment as part of a combined arms team will result in more breakthroughs.
Last edited:
Dervish
Anarchist
You a DAT?Never heard of HVAPDS rounds made of steel before, only depleted uranium or tungsten (also known as wolfram), both having more than double the density of steel, allowing less diameter for the same mass and length, thus focusing the impact for less target area for better penetration. Is steel for that kind of use something that belongs to the history rather than present time?
A shaped charge forms copper in a solid state by explosives to form a thin high velocity projectile. It's not even melted to liquid, not vaporized to gaseous form, and most certainly not even anywhere close to temperatures where a gaseous form of hot copper would become a plasma. Thus it does not melt through any armor, just penetrating through like any high velocity impact would. The change of shape of the copper during the penetration does heat it up more than the forming explosion in to liquid state, and melts the copper afterwards, leaving some marks of melted armor in to the hole it already created.
The problem with ceramics is it brakes up by the first impact, allowing second impact to penetrate if hit at the same damaged area before it is fixed. A metal armor would absorb the projectile making it part of the armor if it's thick enough to prevent a penetration. The advantage of using ceramics is significantly lighter weight than an all metal armor capable of the same protection level.
EDIT: added a link and a quote for well sourced facts.
Shaped charge - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Perhaps I should have said “metal arrow” to avoid internet snipers.
What was initially called “Chobham Armour” is a composite. The exact methodology and materials are secret, although the Russians stole a sample almost as soon as it was developed. It is used in the Challengers and Abrams. But export Abrams use Tungsten in lieu of Depleted Uranium.
Dervish
Anarchist
Sailbydate
Super Anarchist
Russia Expert Angela Stent: "As Long as Russia Has 6,000 Nuclear Warheads, It Will Remain a Threat"
How great is the risk for the West after the decision to send tanks to Ukraine? In an interview, Russia expert and former U.S. government adviser Angela Stent discusses German weapons deliveries to Kyiv and the mistakes made in dealing with Moscow.
www.spiegel.de
chesirecat
Super Anarchist
According to Budanov, head of the GUR, there are currently 326 thousand Russian troops fighting in Ukraine.
LeoV
Super Anarchist
Still the advance is so slow in the areas the are attacking. Same for Ukraine.
All depends on what the casualties are in man and material.
A year of advance near Bahkmut.
All depends on what the casualties are in man and material.
A year of advance near Bahkmut.
Keith
Super Anarchist
Found this to be a good listen
Robert M. Gates has served eight U.S. presidents in various capacities throughout his career, including as secretary of defense, director of the CIA and a member of the National Security Council. On Wednesday, Feb. 1 at 1:00 p.m. ET, Gates joins Washington Post foreign affairs columnist David Ignatius to discuss the path forward in Ukraine nearly one year after Russia’s invasion, the international order and the geopolitical dynamics of the U.S.-China relationship.
Robert M. Gates has served eight U.S. presidents in various capacities throughout his career, including as secretary of defense, director of the CIA and a member of the National Security Council. On Wednesday, Feb. 1 at 1:00 p.m. ET, Gates joins Washington Post foreign affairs columnist David Ignatius to discuss the path forward in Ukraine nearly one year after Russia’s invasion, the international order and the geopolitical dynamics of the U.S.-China relationship.
