chris talpas

Ok, but doesn’t your second example invalidate your thesis?  A naval artillery shell does not appear to have a flat energy-time curve but of all your examples it is likely the hardest to defend against. In fact ballistic weapons appear to be the hardest to counter and none of them have what I think you are describing as a flat curve.
Energy is definitely part of all this but I think how that energy is translated into effect is the core idea you appear to be driving at (we should leave aside effects for now as that is a pretty complicated concept in its own right).

Actual, actual....

FSRU Marshal Portovyy out of Kaliningrad (whose pipeline has not been cut off) offloads its cargo at sea to LNG tanker Cool Rover. Which ships the contraband gas to buyers who care less about its provenance than its price.
If [unnnamed Formites] want to act 'wised up' (woke?) about 'strategic global resources', perhaps focus on the stuff that actually moves the needle on balance of trade today.
That would (still) be stuff the belligerents can put in a pipe or a ship or a train and send where it gets the highest price.
Los!

UKR FPVs are hunting for Russian infantrymen near abandoned Russian tank. After one soldier was hit other try to hide under the tank, but the drone reaches them even there. Finally other drone makes lucky shot and cooks off the tank. I suppose, families of these soldiers will not get any compensations or LADAs - no the body, no money.
 

Very timely in light of recent discussion on drone technology 
 

Very timely in light of recent discussion on drone technology 
 

The rate  drone warfare is evolving is astounding.  Who was seriously envisioning the variety of offensive capabilities that exist today?
And it continues to evolve…
 

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.

And the lead tank was basically screaming "shoot me first! shoot me first!" on every frequency.  Anything using its radio for target homing instead of communication will make a beeline toward it.  So if it wasn't an optical/AI drone, it could have been an anti-radiation drone.

First combat usage of haeavy octocopter with mounted machine-gun. Before we could see experiments, but lookls like more than year was need to complete works and test the system in real combat
 

Interesting episode of repelling of Russian armored attack on Terny on 2nd of April. I posted this video and you may pay attantion on the tank with pile of boxes on the turret. As became knowingly this was Tsar-EW-tank, inteded to supress all possible frequencies of UKR FPVs.
 

Next the story about this:
It's Russian armored column has came. Our FPVs were falling down like flies on all frequencies, because on leading tank the EW-monster drove. Mad Max is relaxing here. On the pallet Russians assembled monsterous construction from everything equipment that they had. Three panels of patch-antennas 800/900/2.4/5.8 around and to all this were added blocks on 700-1000 ranges. Upper on some planks and around. All this was tied with ropes. On the armor also was mounted generator and batteries. There was too hard for our pilots, but quess if it kept EW the tank? No. Our brave pilots from the row of units hit them. Further with other armor became much easier.

 
And describing of the same episode from DeepState.
Before the column moved at 14:00, Russian TOS-1A has driven forward for preliminary bombarding of our positions, but was timely spotted and hit. 
At 16:00 we spotted th ecolumn of 6 tanks, coming from Zhytlivka direction. It's interesting that Tsar-EW tank moved in the head of column. It was destroyed later, you can see photos in Flash's TG. This Frankenstain was destroyed by the drone of 60th mech.brigade with additional homing (meant "machine eye"?). Two more tanks were hit by FPVs of 63rd mech.brigade. 
The moment of Tsar-EW was hit bt drone
In parallel way, the movement of column turned out in shooting range. 12th NGU regiment "Azov", 95th air-assault brigade, 21st mech.brigade, 60th mech.brigade, 63rd mech.brigade started to heap on Russians with everything what was possible. As result from 6 armors only 1 could flee. 
Since some time katsap box arrived to embark scattered infantrym bvut was destroyed too. 
Next day, 3rd of April next TOS-1A came forward, but again was destroyed by "Azov"
On 4th of April one more tank was destroyed here. 
 
 

Oh for principled leaders like this today… certainly not a loser in my opinion 
 

Oh for principled leaders like this today… certainly not a loser in my opinion 
 

Oh for principled leaders like this today… certainly not a loser in my opinion 
 

Oh for principled leaders like this today… certainly not a loser in my opinion 
 

Oh for principled leaders like this today… certainly not a loser in my opinion 
 

When the unified right wing National Corps slate only manages to get something like 2.5% of the total vote in Ukraine while rightest parties dominate Russia then this discussion gets very silly. 

But isn’t a “domestic” enemy someone whose position is forbidden?  There weren’t a lot of protections granted communists in the US back during the Cold War.  For example, if one was a firm communist they were not going to be employed within the defence department.  Roll forward to modern era, devoted fundamentalist Muslims did not fare much better.  This “freedom” concept really appears to be selective when viewed through a historic lens.  Sure, a US citizen can be free to express whatever they wish, but to do so without consequences from both private and public sectors has clearly been demonstrated as false.  Once a society allows for negative consequences as a result of free speech or association, it is no longer “free”.  This inconsistency appears migratory and frankly unfairly applied historically.  Try being a black civil rights movement in the 1930s in the South.  Not a whole lot of freedom of speech and association in that period for that demographic. LGBTQ in the 50s?
So what, as it relates to this war and situation?  Within the US, and other modern democracies, I do not think this is a case of “autocratic control” but you are very correct in calling it out as a slippery slope.  I think it is a case of “when does speech and association become a threat to national security?”  When is it honest political discourse in an open and fair democracy, and when does it become too dangerous to tolerate?  Obviously sharing information on how to build and deploy a WMD should not be covered in “freedom of speech”.  Nor should sharing of classified information.  But when does political discourse cross that line?
The US currently has elected officials who are pretty actively supporting a foreign powers agenda.  To the point that they are blocking military aid to an ally in the middle of an existential war.  At what point does this stop being “open and free political discourse” and become “paid foreign lies by a domestic enemy?”
I honestly do not know.  I have watched my country wrestle with this.  I think our “hate speech” laws are in fact dangerous.  But clearly there is a point, even within free democracies where we cannot tolerate free expression.  For this war, where that line is drawn could very well impact its outcome and what the region looks like. 

Given that every attempt at a real attack seems to take thirty or forty percent casualties, if not more, the obvious answer would be about three. But that is probably to low, because they use tanks for things besides armored banzai charges. The casualty rate for low commitment shoot and scoot missions is probably quite a bit lower. Still, even if my numbers are off by quite bit the odds living to spend the money they may or may not actually be paying you seem rather low.
At a minimum it seems worse than either the Eighth Air Force B-17 crew, or the German U-boat fleet, and both of those were horrible.

Year 3 of the US operation to save the English speaking minority of northern Mexico from ethnic cleansing by the drug cartel regime of Mexico City. 
After dismantling the McDonalds PMC and mobilizing 30.000 men every month, President Biden orders to relocate the American weapons industry to the east of the Appalachean mountains to save them from Mexican long range drones.
"Everything is going according to plan" defense Minister Lloyd Austin proclaimed in a recent press conference. "In fact, things never looked better for the American cause. Rumors of losing 10.000 Abrams tanks and M2 Bradleys are actually sign that victory is just a question of time."

And also “absolutely”.  We should track loses, terrain etc as exactly that, indicators.  In sums they can signal trends, which are extremely important for telling wind directions.
Where things get weird is when people take these trends as actually metrics of victory and/or defeat.  Adiivka was a long brutal tactical offensive that really has not yielded an operational consequence, at least not yet.  It is a data point within the war.  Not a fundamental sign any one side is “winning or losing”.  Ironically, those using Russian advances over the winter as an indicator that “The Hot Thread Has No Clothes” are using “heuristics”.  Which we have been all schooled upon as our own original “sin.”
The reality is that we need to see operational level decisions that change strategic options before we can say the tide is shifting.  If Russia could have translated Adiivka into an operational manoeuvre and was at the gates of Kharkiv right now, with a view to splitting Ukraine in half…well then we are definitely into “uh, ok something has really shifted here” territory.  Ukraines strategic options would be collapsing in this scenario, which to my eyes is a real metric.
Taking Adiivka or Bakhmut as signs of Russian winning, resolve or invincibility, only demonstrates a serious lack of understanding how war actually works.  And strangely, where were these people when Ukraine was making similar small limited tactical gains last summer?  Oh wait, they were here crowing about how “Ukraine is done!”
There is a clear double standard in some western political circles.  And this part really makes me angry.  Real people are suffering and dying in the largest conventional war we have seen in a long time.  And the first thing some people are doing is viewing it through the “I will do the opposite of what the other political party is doing because they cannot win.”  Not what is morally right or wrong.  What is best for their personal political calculus.  That is what really makes me react to these trolls.  They do not have the best interests of anyone at heart, but their own.  It is an extremely selfish way to approach something as brutal and unjust as this war.

Dormitories and factory are part os single "special economical zone "Alabuga" - students involved into works on the factory. And reportedly this is not "forced labor" - they gain experience in high-techology branch, get reservation from conscription and get payment. So, most of theese young people willing to work there. And the srike on dormitories, as write some our sources was deliberate - to make panic and "uncertainity" among young enginners, IT, managers etc.
Of course, many of them may tell "I am for peace and I don't do anything bad - just write a code"
Russians claimed refinery didn't get serious damages, because drone "hit the fence", Well, we can see what a "fence" was really hit, but likely about results we will know later. Reportedly rectifical column on 8 mln.tons/year was hit
Today Russian sources reported "Severstal" company officially claimed the halted biggest blast furnace in Russian afetr drone attack about months ago. Investigations showed it will need several months of repair with 37 billion rubles cost.

On victory and defeat - because it is the basis of so much “proof” on the opposing sides of this thing.  In warfare victory and defeat are very slippery concepts.  One can win a war by all metrics and wind up losing in the long run (see European Allies after WW1 and 2).  The vice versa is also possible (see Japan).  So whenever someone jumps in with the “Ukraine is obviously losing, Russia is winning” or vice versa, without clearly defining what that means, I get suspicious.
For now the best way to try and determine what victory/defeat means in this war, one needs to come to a common understanding of what the initial political and strategic goals of this war for each side were and were not.
When I am looking at the “winning/losing” equation I am using the following objectives.
For Ukraine:
- the survival of the state as independent and sovereign.
- the creation of a narrative of effective resolve and resistance that draws in international support.
- shape and set the conditions for enduring security integrity at wars end (this one is key to effective reconstruction and recovery).
For Russia:
- the complete political absorption control of Ukraine as a vassal state or sub-state.
- a clear demonstration of Russian power within its Near Abroad designed to push back on Western encroachment and reinforce the notion that other states within this region need to “stay in line”.  This one plays to both external and internal audiences.
- any and all erosion of NATO unity and resolve, as well as a draw back of US influence in the region.
For the West (we often forget we have a win/lose calculus here as well):
- A clear demonstration of the western rules based international order.  Russia must be forced to get back in line and face punitive measures for an illegal invasion that violates the rules we constructed.  To this end we support Ukraines objectives; however, we do not need all of them in full to achieve ours. We do need a clear demonstration of western unity and resolve as a foundational underpinning for that western rules based order.
- Any opportunities to expand western influence and control - see Sweden and Finland.
- the reduction of Russia as a security threat to Europe and globally.
- Avoid a catastrophic collapse of Russia at all costs as it would make the overall regional situation, and possibly global one much worse.
You will note that for me none of these are tied directly to lines on the ground.  I do not believe that where this war ends drive those strategic objectives (within reason of course - if Russia takes Kyiv the viability of Ukrainian state is greatly diminished).  
By my metrics, Russia has already pretty much “lost” this thing.  They can hold onto to what they have now but none of their strategic objectives are accomplished.  They end the war in worse position than when they started it.  Their only Hail Mary is that western support and attention dries up over time and they can exploit that to try and pull this one out of the dumpster.  The odds of full Russian control over Ukraine by this point are pretty damn low.  Much worse than at wars beginning.
Ukraine has two out of three, that last one of setting conditions for enduring security has not been accomplished. Ukraines long game is to enter into western economic and security mechanisms.  They definitely have earned that but we have the thorny issue of Russia still able to make trouble and project that into Ukraine.  We can live with a level of this a la South Korea, but I suspect we will need this thing to hold more water to work.
The West is doing well but we are not there yet, and things could still go bad quickly.  We definitely have shored up influence, control and unity. And we have managed to reduce Russian threats pretty significantly as the Russian military has been shattered. What we do not have are the conditions for long term stabilization. Russia is neither a zero-threat nor stable in the long term.
So to summarize…on victory/defeat so far:
Russia - nope.
Ukraine - OK, but not there yet.
West - meh, so long as we don’t blow the whole thing up.
I hope this is useful for the next time someone rolls through here with “well obviously Russia is winning” due to some headline about a tactical twitch somewhere.  They likely are not using the same metrics I do and in many cases have ulterior motives for painting this war in a certain light.

People, people, please.
It is perfectly reasonable important to ask ourselves sometimes: how do we know the world is actually a spheroid?
We all assume it is, but have you experienced it yourself? Humans are wrong with their assumptions about the world more often than they are right, did you consider this?
Now, you might have a thread full of possible hints towards a spheroid planet, and you have discussed it amongst yourself, to the best of your ability determining it does a lot look like it might be spheroid - with some people hoping that it turns out spheroid and others open that it isn't qhen things go wrong. But what if all of you are just subject to a well-known phenomenon of mass hallucinations, which especially affects those of low IQ, such like the people who are not myself?
And it gets worse when people are in a group for anlong time. They tell to each other that the world must be round, but what do they use? Physics? Optics? Geometry?
Do you know how many times these fields have been re-written again and again? By people in authority no less, who are well-known to be conspiratorial liars whenever you don't watch their fingers closely.
You might now wonder where my questions are going, but really, where would all you people end up if not someone like me, with one year of high-school philosophy under my belt, didn't engage you with aimless sophistry?
This is my last and only post. Have a good night everyone.
(You expected me to wish you a good day? Expectations subverted again sheeple! I will now leave to look at Hunter Biden's leaked nudes.)

Just can’t stay away.  I think you secretly like us and want to be on this thread.  But maybe someone hurt you?  C’Mon, admit it - this thread is far more fun than that other one.
To answer you question:
Find a wide array of open source beacons.  Internet is full of them.  Our real strength here is we have people in-country who can access the RUS sphere and translate.
Filter out the clearly partisan ones.  Objectivity is out there, you just have to work. ISW, RUSI, War on the Rocks, Oryx to name a few, all have pretty solid reputations for presenting either raw data, or good professional analysis by people actually in the business.
Cross check, a lot. We usually get an X video or somesuch but one needs to get a bunch of eyes on it.  Weigh opinions and merits of actual arguments as they relate to observed phenomenon.
Find some experts. You are not an expert. An internet account does not make you one.  I am an expert.  But…and here is the main point, you don’t have to agree with me.  Instead you should weigh my assessment against other experts…somewhere in the middle is likely the best guess for a truth.
Spend some time on “what we are not seeing but should”.  A lot of clues and details in the negatives.  

Roll that all up, take notes, do the work, ask real questions.  Then keep your eyes open because this whole thing is likely going to change…and fast.
The whole point of this thread is to try and make sense of the first real conventional peer war of the 21st century.  Its aim is to try and cut through the noise and find signals.  Big muscle movements in thought at this point need big proof.  If you think Russia is winning and going to win, you need more than “well let me tell you”.
Most importantly at this point you need to shush.  Type less, read more.  Come back with some good questions in a bit and you might get some civil answers.

Seriously what do they teach kids these days?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology
How hard is it to do a google search and go on a personal learning journey?  But instead I will go troll a forum?  Next he will come back and declare that it was an “honest question” and we are all “sheeple”.  “Jesus was not actually born on 25 Dec!  Thalidomide!  United Fruit Company!  C’mon man, it was the ‘global elitist’ who started this war to distract from fluoride in the water!!”