dan/california

The stated purpose of the fifty caliber was AA, and a lot of them were mounted in ways that mage it very inconvenient to even fire them the forward direction. It mounted a thirty caliber coax, AND a thirty caliber in the front hull. The standard ammo load out was 6,000 rounds. That would be a lot of ranging. The idea was recon by fire in quantity near as I can tell. The U.S. still thinks this is a good idea, an Abrams carries about 11,000 rounds for its coax machine gun.

I can't post it directly because twitter hates me even more than usual, but there is video in the Daily Kos article above that show a drone diving into the rear deck of a tank, from behind, at a an angle of seventy five to eighty degrees. Assuming the warhead was at least an RPG-7 equivalent, because the the tank went super nova.

Can I throw out one more possibility? The Restrictions on U.S. supplied weapons may be such that Ukraine finds it too difficult to defend the areas that are immediately adjacent to the border. They have to let the Russians advance far enough that the critical support nodes are on Ukrainian territory. Just guess, but not the worst one I ever made, JonS keeps an annotated lists of those. Edit: And I still think high tech ghillies suits will be a thing....

I am saying that almost all the tech trends are leaning into defensive primacy So much so that offensive action against anyone who is competent and prepared gets exponentially more expensive, to the extent that is might be practically impossible There is an awful lot of video to the effect that the Russians have fewer of them every day.

It all comes back to the same set of cost curves. When computing power is dirt cheap defense costs a LOT less than offense, and the problem is only going to get worse. The platforms that let the U.S. air force do this today are already costing fifty million dollars and up. Can their possibly enough of the next generation of exquisite platforms to defeat a large opponent that isn't utterly incompetent? Keep in mind everybody else has watched what happened in Ukraine too, We are not the only people taking notes.

This is where the defense department has to commit long term. They need to build specialized fabs that can do the specialized semiconductors the civilian market won't support, IN QUANTITY. Buying five hand built systems per year, produced by the modern equivalent medieval master craftsmen has to stop.

This is the fundamental thing. Cheap computing power has fundamentally changed the relative value of few, expensive and special. It isn't worth it, and you never have even ten percent of them that you actually need.

And I think a slightly larger series of trucks will carry, or more accurately distribute, rockets that have the approximate range and throw weight of 155 L52 guns. So instead of a SPG gun that has to spend 3/4 of its time running for it life, the only thing left for counter battery to hit will be some disposable rocket tubes. The truck that delivered them will have left minutes or hours before the rockets are fired, to go get more rockets. Now this concept might not replace guns completely, but I will bet a gross of donuts that it is going to be an important part of the mix going forward.

The question is can air supremacy be achieved by anybody, ever again. All of the issues that tanks are having have direct correlates with the challenges facing manned aircraft. And the whole world has watched Ukraines air defense system essentially stop the Russian Air Force cold, and Israel's system knock down essentially the entirety of a big missile strike. I think a LOT of countries are going to draw the lesson that a many layered integrated air defense system is a LOT more useful than actual aircraft. And those integrated air defense systems are going impose denial, or at least REALLY heavy casualties on even first tier air forces. We will certainly learn more when Ukraine finally gets F-16s into the fight. But I am not expecting them to change the game all that much. I would love to be wrong.

Yes, exactly. We will see this in Ukraine in twelve months or less from hacked together civilian components. And stuff that is designed from the ground up for the job is not going to be very far behind.

Yes but when it is routinely targeted by drone based ISR that lets the gunners drop it a hundred yards in front of an advancing column, and adjust in real time to KEEP doing that, it becomes just wee bit more effective. War under the gaze of the all seeing eye is hard. It also does not favor things that weigh tens of tons and whose infrared signature can be seen from the moon.

The artillery delivered mines are several more nails tank is dead coffin. The Russians stacked so much armor and EW equipment on the top of a tank that is can barely move, see, or shoot. And then they die like the little ducks at a carnival game. A few kilograms of explosive can wreck an an armored vehicle that weighs many tens of tons, and costs many millions of dollars, and there simply too many ways to deliver that bang.

A very informative podcasts on software defined radio. It a good rundown of how it actually works. The even more interesting part though an extensive discussion about how the biggest roadblocks to fully employing it are regulatory issues. A massive piece of the cost of a new system is certifying that it won't screw up civilian systems. This is obviously a good thing in peacetime. I understand Verizon likes to actually use the spectrum it is paying for. I am really hoping that someone has plan for. real war though, because it is laughable to think the that the Russians, the Chinese, or any of their proxies care about any interference issues.

Three different stories in Defense One that indicate the army is learning from the Ukraine war.

The Bradley is pretty close to the only AFV in this war getting decent press. Do we think this is reflective of its actual effectiveness, or is it that Ukraine finds it useful maximize its exposure. And if the effectiveness differential is real, why?

I am in sort of in awe of the quality of the school system in question.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/defense-aerospace-report/id1228868129?i=1000654796384 This is a great podcast, and not just about Ukraine. The really interesting part about Ukraine ,though, is a really good description of how technological advantages come, get countered, and then superseded, by one side or the other in literally a matter of weeks.

apologies if I cut and pasted that wrong...

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-lawfare-podcast/id498897343?i=1000654849166 An entire episode on war gaming for policy and academic analysis.

I think you meant the last ten months. There already a 10k zone to either side of the line that is all but vehicle free, unless you count the burned out wrecks.

It is truly excellent that the Scranton plat is up to 36,000 shells a month, and I am sure there are people there who have worked seven days a week for a year to make that happen. But Ukraine needs 36,000 shells a WEEK, a lot of work yet to do.

Who would have thought trying to press gang Ukrainian prisoners was a bad idea...?

Now that they have had to make their tanks practically blind, and VERY slow, it is time for UGVs to make a real appearance. Put a set of treads under this thing, and send it out to say hello. Someone is going to have to work VERY hard to explain to me why this hasn't been revived as a max priority project for Ukraine. I mean 90% or better of the engineering is just sitting in drawer somewhere.