Kinophile
-
Posts
4,359 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Posts posted by Kinophile
-
-
Hopefully my dream of a FPV video with this sh*tbag's face at the end of it can still come through....
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-girkin-strelkov-ukraine-invasion-prison/32899197.html
-
46 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Russia isn't taking over much of anything these days, so there's that
What they are taking over is through brute force and, ironically, not much of that has been artillery. The battle for Avdiivka was a combination of endless meat waves, massive amounts of armored vehicles, lots of drones, and huge numbers of glide bombs. Artillery was hardly mentioned by anybody on either side, at least not as much as it had been in previous battles.
Steve
Well no, AIUI it (lack of readily available ammunition) was a major factor in the craking of the Ukrainian lines. The sheer number, duration and dimensions of RUS infantry assaults required far more arty than was provided.
There were at least two major positions on the northern "shoulders" in lost because of lack of fires support.
This didn't get better and eventually was a significant factor. Ukraine just couldn't kill and suppress the Rus infantry in sufficient numbers.
-
Cmon, you can't gave your cake and eat it too. Or whatever that stupid phrase means. There's a narrative growing that drones are the future be-all and end-all. That feels very binary and overwhelmed by the excitement of a new weapons system coming into its own.
Sure 155 arty relies on radio coms (degradable) - and so do drones. Arty will always have the grid square fires advantage.
Autonomous drones are not flying witches - and for sure there will be counters. I read articles several years ago about encoding lasers to hack the system behind optical sensors. These were simple brute force attacks, scrambling the input to DDOS the system. It required LOS to the hostile lenses but not 90*. It's not a stretch to extrapolate this idea to be effective against autonomous drones.
Sure Trucks etc etc don't like mud - so what? Ukraine has had Caesars for at minimum 1.5 years now, and two winters later I havent seen any videos of bogged down Caesars. Or HIMARS. Or Archers. And even if someone can find such videos, again - so what? It certainly won't be at the occurrence rate to signify Crap Don't Use Caesars Coz Mud. I've seen plenty of MBTs and BMPs turning into land submarines, though...
Sure the trucks weigh 4.5 tons, so what? It's disengenuos to say it's only there so the shell will survive launch. Its there to move the shell, aim the shell, fire the shell, track the shell and fire the next one in rapid succession in relation and correlation to the first shell.
With firing on the move either just around the corner or already being implemented the mobility, the utility and effectiveness increases yet further, and that's because of the 4.5 ton truck.
Sometimes you don't need precision or can't guarantee/achieve it - you need area suppression, denial. Even a dumb western 155 is reasonably accurate (Eg front line accounts thatvcompare Soviet 152 from Msta v US 155 from M777) and can suppress/scatter any human formation very quickly. It doesn't need to be perfectly aimed to do the job. But a drone not perfectly aimed, either autonomously or directed, is pretty useless.
There will always be a need for rapid effects at long distances, using large scale area effect munitions that can ignore weather, strip terrain cover, ruin trenches, suppress infantry and generally **** things up over a wide area for days.
Every single destruction of RUS's armored columns has used artillery. There's some examplrs of drones alone picking apart a column, but also plenty of Artillery doing the same with nary a FPV drone in sight.
I'm very suspicious of using a new tech's promises to blanket kill/dismiss existing capabilities because they don't share the same characteristics. We haven't seen much counter-drone systems at scale - yet. But there is already work being done and it will only accelerate.
We have seen zero instances of successful interception of plunging 155 HE, guided or not.
-
54 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Sorry Mr. Cannoncocker, I thought of artillery pretty much straight away and it fails all four.
1. Massive production scale practicality (cost, size, resources, etc.)
Artillery is expensive to produce and not easy to build. Plus, we just saw that Ukrainians are concluding that towed artillery is not survivable with the threat of drones, so SP artillery is what they're looking for. That's even more expensive. Something like a PzH 2000 is €1.7m each. How many drones could you purchase with that money? Lots. And you'd have them faster than a single PzH 2000 I bet.
It's far more than that. Try 10 times more. €14-17m /pzh.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerhaubitze_2000
By contrast the truck mounted Caesar / Archers are €3-4m / €4.5m. That's a far more useful price, lead-in times and replacability. This would put artillery back into the argument. The current price of 155mm is more a factor of ****ty policies and economic opportunism (demand >supply) than reflective of the actual cost of materials and labour. A proper wartime economy could absolutely churn out dumb 155 at a far lower cost, and probably guided shells too (through sheer scale of production).
The all weather factor for artillery is definitely a plus over FPV and no matter what, the kinetic and explosive effect of a 155mm plunging from a big F-off height will never be matched by an FPV, cos physics. Modern Caesar and Archers can deliver very accurate salvos from just one gun at about 40km distance, within a few minutes, EW and weather be damned.
The twilight of the MBT is upon us, but big guns will always have a singular use - massive effect on target in a very short time frame from really far away.
But they must be mobile, relatively light (weight & logistics) and probably need their own organic drone spotting squad.
-
12 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
So what the f is going to happen to warfare when these things get far better at doing what they are already doing so well at?
Steve
-
57 minutes ago, Tux said:
Ju-87s were militarily next-to-useless but their psychological impact on the enemy was out of all proportion to the actual threat they posed, almost entirely due to the sirens that sounded as the early models attacked.
V1s were militarily next-to-useless but people feared them far more than they needed to because you could hear them coming and you could hear when the motor stopped. That was what people feared.
There are two issues here.
Ju-87 were not military next-to-useless. This is not me being contrary - its well established and researched that in the initial years of the war, and when the Luftwaffe in general was dominant, that the Stuka was highly effective and useful in its intended role - striking enemy strong points and armor formations. They were very effective in France, Greece and the 1st-2nd years of Barbarossa. As the war went on conditions changed and pilot attrition, increased enemy AA and better Allied planes, tactics and numbers all forced the Stuka out as a viable platform. Even so, the weaker skilled Soviet Airforce meant that Stukas were viable for longer than in the West.
This wasn't just an Axis issue - dive bombers in the Pacific gradually faded back as surface warships increased their AA weaponry, specialist AA Cruisers came into being, as the Japanese surface navy was attritted into a glorified armed coast guard and as better weapons came online.
Secondly, V1s (but really V2s later) were never intended as battlefield weapons, so we cant don't an apples-to-apples comparison here. They were a long range strategic terror weapon, intended to flatten London, terrorize the British into negotiations and thereby buy Hitler time. He personally held the idea that the UK might actually cease fire but AIUI I don't think anyone else shared that as a real possibility.
Just some nitpicky stuff to keep us accurate
-
-
Ukraine USV lessons are being absorbed worldwide...
-
36 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
And even if a drone did not get it the EW beast is going to be the prime target for ATGMs. I see no way to wrap enough around or on tanks to really get what we need out of them anymore. Sniping, glorified infantry guns and indirect fire seem to be how they are being employed in this war. No one has been able to mass them and use them for manoeuvre, breakout or breakthrough. This means that one of the pillars of the combat arms is essentially been broken. Air denial means air-land is also out.
I simply cannot see how a US or western ground force is going to far any better against an opponent armed with thousands of drones. Especially if they have fully autonomous capabilities. I suspect we will create drone swarms to kill their drone swarms so our mech and armor can do their thing. Until someone figures out that if we have defeated their drone swarms, why not just send in more swarms to kill them too. I don’t think heavy is going to die because they can die or war is lethal. I think it will die because we are seeing the beginnings of something that can get the job done faster and better.
Within reason there are only two players in this fight who are actually implementing battlefield developments.
Even Western weapons are only provided as-is, with the ZSU doing the additional original work in implementation.
WRT Drones Russia is really only a copycat of UKR cutting edge TTP.
-
1 hour ago, Ts4EVER said:
I mean obviously NATO can easily outspend and outproduce Russia, at least long term, but is this actually going to happen? It seems the political will to do that is not that secure.
However it certainly seems to be hardening.
-
Possibly 4 airfields
-
6 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:
Rybar and Fighterbomber dismiss the claims of loss to aircraft from the Ukrainian drone strike:
Yup, the they shot down 44...and what happened to the other c. 50? Ran away?
-
31 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:
I think the "joke" becomes more apparent in the context of the Soviet Union, when huge part of books, films and art was specifically about Wehrmacht being the worst enemy of the Russian man. And in order to underline the heroism of the Russian man, sometimes (particularly at the beginning of those films/books) the German soldiers were portrayed as extremely well trained killing machines, while the Soviets as victims and well meaning, self-sacrificing amateurs with basic weapons. And of course the atrocities of the Werhmacht and Waffen SS were played up.
So the symbolic message of painting a Waffen SS divisional symbol on a tank or a helmet I would read like a combination of <<Russians, I hate you, I am your worst nightmare, I am a superior soldier and a human being in general, your weapons are no match for mine, and I will take revenge on you with horrible deeds straight out of "Go and See">>. I have no doubts it may be an attractive message for a soldier in this war. Obviously, a hard sell to someone watching news in the West.
Thats exactly my understanding also. I did not read it as a "jokey" joke but a bitter sarcasm - Oh you say we're Nazis? FINE. They killed millions of you bastards so yeah We're Going To Be Nazis to you." Enemy of my enemy vibes.
-
Major (c. 90) drone strike against Russian Su-34 airfield.
Possibly more than 1 airfield, there's mention of 3, but not confident.
-
3 hours ago, hcrof said:
No suprise that he is on the run from US law enforcement...
Pedophiles and Russia. The beauty of it is that they flee incarceration in the US (pretty tough, but has toilets and you'll likely live) for Russia (awful and not enough toilets), and then join the Russian Army to fight on the Ukraine front (toilets are now literally a hole in the ground) and, because Russia does not give a flying damn about them, they are sent in the next sheep assault and die in confused agony.
Its wonderful.
-
-
-
-
Literally proves the point yet again, "Where there's the Will, there's a Way".
-
-
Shahed plant go boom. 1000km from front.
-
Always nice to see javelin kicking ***.
-
Oh for God's sake, are we still engaging with this guy?
Cmon, that last post ("rigged elections in the US") pretty much seals the political troll label.
-
Just now, sfhand said:
I reject wholeheartedly your mischaracterization of my one and only question. Yes, it was a question as follows, in this age of misinformation, How do you know what you know about the war? Initially you did acknowledge that, see your first reply. But since then you have been spinning a false story about what I said and what my motives are.
You do what you need to do, I will not be slandered so disingenuously by the guy with the ban stick. And yes, part of me thinks you are purposefully lying about what I wrote to get your desired result. A ban at this point, after I said I am bowing out, will make that point clear.
And everything here is predictable, your actions and statements included. You don't need to be Nostradamus to to see it.
Seriously, I hope you have a great day.
Second promise broken. Stilllll here...
What they are taking over is through brute force and, ironically, not much of that has been artillery. The battle for Avdiivka was a combination of endless meat waves, massive amounts of armored vehicles, lots of drones, and huge numbers of glide bombs. Artillery was hardly mentioned by anybody on either side, at least not as much as it had been in previous battles.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Very Baldrik-ian if so...