chrisl

The latest models of the AH-64 also have a radar mounted above the rotor. So if they are having to do their own spotting that is literally all they have to expose. Of course that emits so it has positives and negatives. With drones to do the spotting/target designation I think it makes more sense for the choppers to be a much cheaper missile hauler than ~30-50 million dollar wonder weapons various countries have been building lately, and or are considering.

CAL FIRE takes the drone threat seriously. When prosecuting a wildfire they pull out their air assets if a drone is spotted in the area.

Bleep me, they just INVITED NATO's air force to join the war. How can such an invitation be refused? Three thousand sorties days will wrap thus thing up by the fourth of July

No no no! Fake news!! Great Britain is the REAL puppet master. And they are of course giant lizards disguised by alien tech. Everyone knows that. 
https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/768800/David-Icke-queen-shape-shifting-lizard

Apparently there is one design, created of by an enterprising Ukrainian farmer. Who else?
 

I design and build both for a living .

You can look through both.  
And they actually both do the same thing - they take something that fills a small angle of your unaided view and make it fill a large angle.

Civil aerospace, which is why most of my longer posts relate to space based ISR or photosensors and the related.  And trying to spin some stuff into biomedical.  There are companies that sell to both - if you go to bio conferences and space conferences it's the same people selling AO systems, but one is to look at the sky and the other into biological spaces like your eyeball.

You can look through both.  
And they actually both do the same thing - they take something that fills a small angle of your unaided view and make it fill a large angle.

I design and build both for a living .

Civil aerospace, which is why most of my longer posts relate to space based ISR or photosensors and the related.  And trying to spin some stuff into biomedical.  There are companies that sell to both - if you go to bio conferences and space conferences it's the same people selling AO systems, but one is to look at the sky and the other into biological spaces like your eyeball.

I design and build both for a living .

Civil aerospace, which is why most of my longer posts relate to space based ISR or photosensors and the related.  And trying to spin some stuff into biomedical.  There are companies that sell to both - if you go to bio conferences and space conferences it's the same people selling AO systems, but one is to look at the sky and the other into biological spaces like your eyeball.

In order to explain why the combat team of 47 Mech was not clobbered with RUS artilllery you would still have to understand the above in reverse of what the RUS was saying. I.e. not his artillery firing CB on the Ukrainians, but Ukrainians firing CB on Russian guns could be a plausible reason for the team in the minefield to be spared

This. 
We've talked about corrosive warfare. We've talked about lack of traditional air cover. We've talked about ubiquitous ISR. 
This isn't going to be Desert Storm or Al Alamein. Relax everybody.

The_Capt's little shop of horrors is moving right along.

Tangling is probably going to turn into one of the more reliable and cost effective anti drone mechanisms, particularly once anti drone EW pushes everybody to a lot of autonomy.  Like submarine nets, but hanging from the sky.  And able to chase you.

Ok, you are going to have to post some proof of this - I have not seen effective massed fires on an obstacle yet.  The craters in the videos/pics I have seen are not fresh, nor concentrated.  Most of those vehicles are showing clear signs of minestrike (blown tracks) and relatively few casualties.   I watched a 4 min video of UA troops in the middle of a minefield that they took ATGM hits - so RA overwatch - as they de-bused and were extracting and not a single RA indirect fire round came in.  That is way too long.
This is not "copium" it is professional assessment that I am not seeing effective RA concentration of fires on an obstacle, which is pretty fundamental.  This on top of continuous reports of dwindling artillery rounds per day during the winter offensive, along with gun losses and reports from the Russian side of lacking fire support and dwindling ammo.
If "copium" means "seeing what is in front of you and not what you are afraid of" then guilty as charged.

They should launch bottles with parachutes into the RU lines.

Or ultimately immobilized...

So are there any updated estimates of RU force density?  
A quick search puts the last estimate at April 23 with an average of 250 men/km.  I didn't trace it all the way back, but from the discussion I'm assuming that's combat-capable and doesn't include support personnel.  That's two companies per km of front.  Maybe a little lighter where there are (or were) water obstacles, and heavier where there's a logistics hub in the path.  But if it's two companies per km, then the forward positions are/were maybe two platoons per km with a third in reserve near the front, and the same at the "main" line ~10 km back.  So the first "main" line of defense is possibly not manned any better than the first line, and may just be dug in better.  And can there be much between the main line and the Sea of Azov once the main line breaks?  Possibly in some areas, but RU just doesn't have enough forces overall, and they can't concentrate them without getting HIMARSed/Storm Shadowed.  

Another good "silence" ad:
 

Or ultimately immobilized...

So are there any updated estimates of RU force density?  
A quick search puts the last estimate at April 23 with an average of 250 men/km.  I didn't trace it all the way back, but from the discussion I'm assuming that's combat-capable and doesn't include support personnel.  That's two companies per km of front.  Maybe a little lighter where there are (or were) water obstacles, and heavier where there's a logistics hub in the path.  But if it's two companies per km, then the forward positions are/were maybe two platoons per km with a third in reserve near the front, and the same at the "main" line ~10 km back.  So the first "main" line of defense is possibly not manned any better than the first line, and may just be dug in better.  And can there be much between the main line and the Sea of Azov once the main line breaks?  Possibly in some areas, but RU just doesn't have enough forces overall, and they can't concentrate them without getting HIMARSed/Storm Shadowed.  

Blowing that dam surely makes the water obstacle smaller upstream with time. Also, watering canals are going to dry up. That "river" also runs pretty west-east, a good obstacle. Might make things easier for Ukrainians later on.
But sort term, sure. And that is how the Russians seem to think. And also brake everything they cannot have...