Vanir Ausf B
-
Posts
9,581 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Vanir Ausf B
-
-
Zelenskiy says the Trypilska thermal power plant was destroyed because there were more missiles incoming than interceptors outgoing.
"There were 11 missiles flying. We destroyed the first seven, and four (remaining) destroyed Trypillia. Why? Because there were zero missiles. We ran out of missiles to defend Trypillial"
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-says-ran-missiles-stop-103157624.html
-
Mick Ryan's take on the war after returning from Ukraine.
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/ukraine-war-how-check-russia-s-momentum
Russia is now a more dangerous adversary than it was two years ago. This calls for change in how the war is fought.
There is a compelling and urgent need for NATO to change from a “defend Ukraine” policy to one of “defeat Russia in Ukraine”. At the same time, Ukraine needs to develop and share with its supporters its theory of victory. One official in Kyiv told me there is no clear vision of how Ukraine will win. A new Ukrainian theory of victory must be a foundational element of any revised Western strategy.
-
I don't know if anyone has posted this yet, but RUSI just published a paper on the present and near future state of drone warfare.
Mass Precision Strike: Designing UAV Complexes for Land Forces
by Justin Bronk and Jack Watling
Excerpt:
Swarming capabilities are commonly touted as the most significant area of capability development in the small UAV defence sector. However, the requirement to swarm introduces significant hardware and software complexity, which in turn drives cost growth and reduces the number of individual assets that can be fielded for any given budget. Massed UAV groupings, as seen regularly in light shows at civilian displays, rely on a ground control station tracking the position of all UAVs in a formation at all times and a central mission computer sending commands to each one to coordinate their movements. This allows large numbers of very simple small UAVs to fly in a coordinated fashion, but it is not a practical approach for military UAVs and weapons in a contested battlespace, due to terrain masking, EW, signal range and emissions control challenges – the ground control station would be struck, decapitating the whole swarm. Instead, for a mass precision strike complex to be capable of swarming tactics, the individual assets involved must have onboard sensors and low-latency datalinks that are resistant to hostile EW disruption. In addition, each asset must carry a mission computer powerful enough, and software complex enough, to fuse the information about terrain, threats and targets received from its own sensors and those of other UAVs in the formation through datalinks, and to react to that information dynamically in real time. These capabilities are not inherently new, nor are they reliant on advances in AI or complex machine learning models. However, what the requirements for sensors, datalinks and advanced software do is raise component costs, even if used with an inherently cheap airframe/engine combination.
Furthermore, if a mass precision strike system is premised on swarming tactics for its effectiveness against its core target sets, then the number of assets required to use it in a sustained fashion will be increased, due to the need to consistently project sufficient assets into the target area to swarm. In conjunction with the increased hardware and software complexity required, this requirement to sustainably field swarming UAVs in large quantities over time means that fielding this sort of system as more than a ‘Night One’ theatre entry tool is likely to be uneconomical.
In terms of where swarming capabilities are likely to add value commensurate with the additional cost implied by their inclusion as part of a precision strike complex, the primary application will be to improve the capability to overwhelm air defence systems... Other advantages of swarming capabilities are that they can help reduce wasted warheads by deconflicting target selection so that multiple assets do not hit the same target. However, doing so in a way that can differentiate between a target having been hit and successfully disabled versus a target having been hit ineffectively and thus requiring a repeat strike with another asset requires significantly more advanced sensor and processing capabilities than simple deconfliction. Ultimately, for target deconfliction and strike optimisation, the value added question will come down to whether the additional efficiency against defended and undefended target sets gained from functional swarming capabilities outweighs the strike weight foregone by the increase in individual asset cost and the resultant reduction in quantity.
-
I'm not sure this is the way for China to take back Siberia.
QuoteAntony Blinken, US secretary of state, used meetings with EU and Nato foreign ministers this week to warn Beijing was assisting Moscow “at a concerning scale”, and providing “tools, inputs and technical expertise”, according to three people familiar with the discussions.
“The warnings were explicit,” the person said. “There has been a shift and it was felt in the room . . . this was a new development. It was very striking.”
Speaking before the call, a senior US official said Washington had seen China “start to help to rebuild Russia’s defence industrial base, essentially backfilling the trade from European partners”. One person familiar with the situation said the Biden administration was particularly concerned about the provision of propellant for missiles.
https://www.ft.com/content/ba524406-ee6c-4c39-9ac2-110a2549569a
-
19 minutes ago, White2Golf said:
I'm just curious what this audience thinks of the analysis, by itself.
He references Cannae and Marathon, but the front was IIRC something like 2700 km long. Pocketing some fraction of the Russian army (he never explains exactly how or where) while allowing them to advance in other areas doesn't sound like a war-winning strategy to me given the Russian ability to reconstitute formations.
-
On-map self propelled guns and howitzers are not allowed indirect fire in CM. IIRC the rationale is that ranges for on-map fire would typically be too short for their trajectory to hit.
-
14 minutes ago, Bannon said:
One I live by is to not call artillery or air into what may be my opponent's setup area during the first turn.
Except for the attacker in attack/defend-type battles. Some people also allow it in meeting engagements but I prefer not to. As always, prior communication is the key.
-
More RUSI analysis from Justin Bronk.
QuoteThe immediate lesson is that Russia’s failure and Ukraine’s inability to conduct successful suppression and/or destruction of enemy air defences (SEAD/DEAD) operations has crippled the battlefield effectiveness of both air forces. This is vital to understand because at present no Western air force other than the US Air Force has any serious SEAD/DEAD capability – despite, in many cases, having access to aircraft and weapons designed expressly for the task.
-
1 hour ago, chrisl said:
We really haven't seen much in the way of standoff EFPs dropped-from/carried-on drones yet, have we?
There is an EFP version of the Lancet.
-
3 hours ago, Brille said:
It has a commanders sight via persicope that has a magnification on it. Though it is verry narrow in the field of view. Same goes for the gunners sight but I believe he has an additional rotatable persicope with a narrow view also. Here are some gunners and commanders sights of soviet style vehicles and their charakteristics https://crib-blog.blogspot.com/p/soviet-t01-k0x-sight-family.html
I believe the TKN 3 are the ones that were mounted in the T64 but I don´t know about it that much so feel free to correct me.
I think that is correct for the commander's sight. The gunner's daylight sight on the T-64B is the 1g42. It's magnification and field of view are variable from 3.9x/20° to 9x/8.5°. By comparison the TZF 9 gunner's sight on the Tiger is 2.5x/25° and 5x/14°, so the T-64 has stronger magnification at the cost of a narrower field of view. Which of these would be better at spotting a machine gun team 450 meters away is anyone's guess. If we were talking about nighttime spotting or first shot accuracy the T-64 should be much better but I don't know that there would be a dramatic difference in daytime spotting. I agree with other posters that the OPs test is worthless for demonstrating anything at all.
-
-
24 minutes ago, Anon052 said:
Macron can't be re-lected. He is in his second term and in France there is a two-term limit.....so this makes the rest of this analysis questionable.
It's the EU elections in June. Macron isn't a candidate but his party has candidates and they are trailing in the polls.
-
Pretty sure it's for realz.
-
Quote
granting the right to military service during mobilization to individuals convicted to serve a sentence with probation (except for those convicted of military crimes and crimes against the foundations of national security)
https://www.asterslaw.com/press_center/legal_alerts/draft_law_on_mobilization_and_military_record/
-
-
Apropos the above, the new US weapons package will include ATACMs
The White House is expected to announce as soon as Tuesday that it will send a new package of weapons worth $300 million to Ukraine, and it will include a number of Army Tactical Missile Systems, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the discussions.
The package will include a number of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel, or APAM, an older version of the long-range ATACMS, which travels 100 miles and carries warheads containing hundreds of cluster bomblets, according to one of the officials.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/12/white-house-aid-package-ukraine-00146487
-
9 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
I think he means that technically speaking, Russia will probably never exactly run out of war material,
That's what I interpreted him as saying. Asking when Russia will run out is like asking when the world will run out of oil. The answer is never, it just becomes more scarce. In fact the IISS estimate I posted above does not actually predict a run dry date, but rather how long Russia will be "able to sustain its assault on Ukraine at current attrition rates".
-
33 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
The right conversation is "when will Russia run out?"
-
4 hours ago, Haiduk said:
Russians in mass became to use here many ATVs - own domestic AM1, Chineese "Desertcross" and donated civilians. Despite some of UKR militaries jokingly called these vehicles GFV (Golfcar Fighting Vehicle), a serviceman from Robotyne in own tweet say this is veryu hard target - ATVs are very fast and maneuver - artillery and mortars can't target them, even for MGs and FPVs they are hard targets to aim. ATVs even not always blow up by mines, so this guy told UKR forces lost two small positions, because Russians rapidly came close on ATVs and bursted in the trenches.
Russians are reading the forum.
On 9/24/2023 at 5:38 AM, The_Capt said:Take a look at this war. Infantry walking is exactly what we are seeing. Ya think there might be good reasons for this? How we can mount and move infantry is another really big question. Right now I would invest in quad bikes/ATVs over any heavy metal.
-
LOL, true.
-
5 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
Still a mystery that no Lancet caught a Himars off guard and the first kill is from a GMLRS. (Although I recall unconfirmed russian claims of destroyed himars in the past )
Lancet range is about 40 km so Ukraine could be holding them just out of range. This HIMARS was 50 km behind the front line so that tracks.
-
31 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:
What is a time on target for ballistic missile? I would intuitively expect them to be quite slow, so this destroyed HIMARS sounds like Ukraine making a mistake and reusing a hiding place, instead of Russian ISR getting faster. But I dunno.
If reporting is accurate this was not a ballistic missile, but rather the Russian analog to GMLRS. The Russians claim a three minute "launch-ready" time for the system, but who knows.
-
28 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:
Rybar says 50 km from the front line instead of 40. Either way, that's quite a distance.
Last month it was a NASAMS. If Russia starts using Tornado-S in larger numbers it could become a serious problem.
-
A (probably paywalled) WaPo article about Ukrainian recruitment efforts. It largely echoes @Haiduk's comments from yesterday.
_____
Syrsky has been tasked with auditing the existing armed forces to find more combat-eligible troops, after Zelensky’s office recently announced that of the 1 million people who have been mobilized, only about 300,000 have fought at the front lines. But nearly a month after his promotion, no one in the military leadership or the presidential administration has explained where those 700,000 are — or what they have been doing.
More than 4,000 amendments have been made to the mobilization bill, and some lawmakers see the measure as an attempt by Zelensky to pass off responsibility to parliament for inevitably unpopular decisions.
“It’s time to start an adult conversation with society and not to be afraid of it, ” Bobrovska said. “It’s not 2022, when emotions took over.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/04/ukraine-mobilization-zelensky-russia/
-
1 hour ago, Harmon Rabb said:
Now that is the kind of statement I would like to hear from more countries.
Honestly getting tired of seeing Ukrainian civilians be killed and Ukrainians not even being able to strike legitimate military targets inside Russia, with some of the weapons that they are provided.
You go Finland!
Has Finland provided weaponry that realistically could be used to strike inside Russia? I tried to look it up but it seems Finland is coy about what they send, exactly.
-
1 hour ago, poesel said:
Why Ukraine hasn't cleared Transnistria is something I don't understand.
Even if they wanted to it's unlikely Ukraine has the forces to spare.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I'm curious to see if there will be any more M1 tanks in this package. 5 of the original 31 have been lost.