fireship4

The scheme is not new, judging by the fact that it was in-game around February 2015 thanks to @Kieme(ITA):

That's a different Mykolayivka... er Mykhailivka than the one in 'The War in Ukraine' Live map:

You learn something new every day. Two things today in fact, the second being that Sir MacDonald was no poet: 'The pretty colors of the trees reflect our burning desire...', Sheesh. As to your earlier imputation - if you have visited our grey land, you will understand why we went abroad. And if during your stay you heard a lot of words referring to genetalia then I would suggest it was more down to your presence than any obsession of ours.

Good overview of Russia's war goals by John Ridge via Trent Telenko: https://nitter.net/John_A_Ridge/status/1529262545521020928#m EDIT: Also, a nice thread on MLRS by ThinkDefence, also via Mr. Telenko: https://nitter.net/thinkdefence/status/1374770387632988162#m

This was a few pages ago but I think you mean 'taking the piss': To my intended subject, for a change of pace, a funny video has emerged from Ukraine via OSINTTechnical. How many times can a hat be blown off one man's head by outgoing artillery... let's watch shall we? https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1529952654570422273#m

Source: https://nitter.net/J_JHelin/status/1529448270803746816#m Pre placed image for Google Earth Desktop: John Helin 2022.05.25 3.kmz

Oh this is an interesting note - The T-62 has a crew of 4 as opposed to the T-72 which has a crew of 3. This means that the Russians will either have to run them with 3 (or 2 as you say!) men per tank or devote 1/3 extra man-power per tank. How feasible it is for these units to do either is something I don't know, but I imagine switching seats during battle or having the commander take on other duties is not optimal.

One can toggle 'reader view' (or the equivalent formatting removal mode in your browser) a couple of times and it'll show the whole thing, a byproduct of making the whole article indexable by search engines I believe.

Source: https://nitter.net/J_JHelin/status/1529191316088815616#m via @DefMon3 EDIT: Links with the images overlaid on the terrain for loading into Google Earth (the Desktop version, they won't show in the web version for some reason): John Helin 2022.05.25 1.kmzJohn Helin 2022.05.25 2.kmz

So we have writers at home adding nothing to the information they recieve, and reporters on the ground with no useful information in the pieces they send. The answer seems to be 'journalism'. You can make plenty out of decently sourced material, and find out a lot from direct access to a country or the right people, if your intention is to inform. Confused business sense is obviously a driver behind many problems: 'paper 'x' already provides good analysis, we need to provide something different and eye-catching if we are going to get people switching subscriptions.' And as always, stupid people.

A potential new RU attack toward the Zaporizhzhia area: Source: https://nitter.net/DefMon3/status/1528833764083879947#m

We have an image here of fire detection data on a normal satellite map of Lyman Lake: Source: https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1528858228649791488#m

I'll have to leave my refutation of your earlier Malthusian comments for another thread... I'll just say that 'overpopulation' is not the cause of any of today's problems. Could you tell from the video that it was definatively tank launched smoke grenades? I did read that the Russians had set obscurative fires at one of the crossings. Nope (not if you mean the TacAI/user activated smoke grenade launchers), I have a hazy memory from the demo scenario 'Monster Mash' of one of my Panther tanks reversing out of a depression or something, leaving a long trail of white smoke behind it, and failing to get them to do it again.

I am aware (I swear one of my Panthers did it once in the Red Thunder demo), what I am saying is why have we never seen the smoke dischargers in use: is it just uncommon, some statistical effect of the type of video coverage, or something else? You would have thought we would have seen them in use given the number of times we've seen 'tanks in distress'. Furthermore, smoke injection is more defensive compared to dischargers which I suppose can be either - and at least in some cases for the Russians they are designed to be used offensively (during the attack) as I understand.

Three can be seen escaping in the same shot as the burning tank, but at 1:33 two approach two standing and an apparent third sitting. We have no conclusive proof, but the video suggests these 5 are at least from the same engagement.

I agree with Mr. Telenko here: https://nitter.net/TrentTelenko/status/1528521329275768832#m The video was posted here some pages back (it's the video of a T72B3 on the run being hit in the rear for those that don't follow the link) and it's the first time I've seen an RU tank use smoke - not pop smoke, since it's apparently using diesel injection. Why? Are all the RU smoke launchers broken? No grenades? Poisonous? There is a miraculous escape for the crew - Trent seems to think there were tank riders who may have blocked the smoke launchers and my count of 5 survivors at the end of the video (standard crew should be 3) seems to confirm their presence (perhaps rescued from the wrecked vehicle at the beginning), from the grainy footage of the tank in motion I couldn't make out anything that couldn't be standard crew turned out. EDIT: Oh and by the way, thanks @Battlefront.com Steve for the link to the prisoner interview (how legal are those by the way?), it seems the channel has some content from https://www.youtube.com/c/VolodymyrZolkin/videos which I had put on the back burner as it rarely had human translated subtitles. EDIT 2: I think you have this wrong. He said they had two tanks driving ahead, then the 2IC said the way ahead was clear and gave the order to shoot. Spotters called artillery on the tanks, resulting in one destroyed and one with an injured crew. The 2IC was seemingly later the one discouraging surrender.

Thanks for letting me know - my attempt at using links to dropbox image previews seems to have only shown up for me (a security feature I guess), direct links having unsuccessful. I have uploaded them elsewhere and beg your collective indulgence (you'll bloody like it and say so) as I repost both parts below. Mods feel free to delete my previous two posts (when has that ever happened). "Looks like (before the thread hurtles past it) we are touching upon a fundamental of warfare: hills! How should they be considered in modern war? An amateur's thoughts: They are hard to get up. You can see the surrounding land. You can be seen from the surrounding land. That's it. That's all I can think of. These broadly mean: Being hard to get up makes them harder to take with infantry and vehicles, and easier to defend. They are harder to supply and harder to place heavy weapons upon. Once under your control, you can use them (as in the past) to control the surrounding area, through spotting and direct fire. Every bastard in the area around you can see the hill. And since the hill is always smaller than it's surroundings, all other things being equal, this means more people will be able to see and hit the hill than are able to see and hit from it. So we have some nuance. You can say a drone with FLIR negates the benefits of a hill, but how many pairs of eyes are on the hill and how many are staring at the monitor? Who or what are you going to put on the hill? Who or what is in the surrounding area? Anyway, having my mind on the subject led me to starting up Google Earth. It's amazing what we can do at home with modern tools:" "More Google Earth extravagance further to my previous post:" "Alas the flight ends there. I had in fact imported the whole BMU-E into Google Earth, about 180 images, and was positioning for a shot when the whole thing crashed, losing almost all the work I had done over the previous hours. Bastard. I will do it again if I feel it serves enough purpose (I did wonder if it was worth it as I realised how long it was taking), and can perhaps provide for requests should the posts not prove instructional, time allowing."

More Google Earth extravagance further to my previous post: Alas the flight ends there. I had in fact imported the whole BMU-E into Google Earth, about 180 images, and was positioning for a shot when the whole thing crashed, losing almost all the work I had done over the previous hours. Bastard. I will do it again if I feel it serves enough purpose (I did wonder if it was worth it as I realised how long it was taking), and can perhaps provide for requests should the posts not prove instructional, time allowing.

Looks like (before the thread hurtles past it) we are touching upon a fundamental of warfare: hills! How should they be considered in modern war? An amateur's thoughts: They are hard to get up. You can see the surrounding land. You can be seen from the surrounding land. That's it. That's all I can think of. These broadly mean: Being hard to get up makes them harder to take with infantry and vehicles, and easier to defend. They are harder to supply and harder to place heavy weapons upon. Once under your control, you can use them (as in the past) to control the surrounding area, through spotting and direct fire. Every bastard in the area around you can see the hill. And since the hill is always smaller than it's surroundings, all other things being equal, this means more people will be able to see and hit the hill than are able to see and hit from it. So we have some nuance. You can say a drone with FLIR negates the benefits of a hill, but how many pairs of eyes are on the hill and how many are staring at the monitor? Who or what are you going to put on the hill? Who or what is in the surrounding area? Anyway, having my mind on the subject led me to starting up Google Earth. It's amazing what we can do at home with modern tools:

Created for nazis?

It may be old news by now, but someone made the effort to simulate the sinking of the Moskva in Command: Modern Operations: https://weaponsrelease.com/2022/04/18/simulating-the-sinking-of-the-moska/

The link you provided does not substantiate the accusation of being a Russian propaganda mouthpiece. The accusation mentioned in the link came by way of PropOrNot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PropOrNot: An event mentioned in your link may have contributed to the accusation, however the outcome should be noted: [EDIT: The practise of dismissing leftists or those critical of Western actions for those reasons alone, often as 'useful idiots'] does more damage to our system then it does to Russia.

In his most recent post (and posted on the previous page by another user), Kamil Galeev linked a video where one Mikhail Khordaryonok attends that Russian current affairs show: 'The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov', and makes a speech, interrupted every so often by the co-host and wife of the host Olga Skabeeva, who I demand from now on be referred to as 'Revanchist Rita' in reference to 'Bitchin' Betty', or 'Rita Repulsova' in reference to the Power Rangers. In the thread Galeev notes that Kodaryonok wrote a report entitled 'The Forecasts of Bloodthirsty Pundits', on February 3rd which he considered very prescient, and called for it's translation. That translation has been provided by one Dmitry Grozoubinksi: https://nitter.net/DmitryOpines/status/1526477859799408640#m

I think I was a bit harsh on journalists, there is some good stuff mixed in there with the 'oh dearism' - stuff that just makes you say 'oh dear' without really understanding anything better (there's an Adam Curtis mini-doc about it online, to reveal one of my influences). However, I question to what extent it is useful for journalists to be at the front, if the point is to inform the public (not entertain or propagandise to them). Surely that is the place where they know the least about what is going on overall, and rumours are probably rife. In addition, being embedded with people with whom you share risks and rely on for protection and see the struggle and sacrifice of, you are hard-pressed to remain objective. At least you're in with people who are deeply engaged with the war, so you get a better perspective than sitting in a coffee shop, but a large amount of what you can communicate is 'it's bad' and how people feel about stuff. And video of things blowing up. I am also not watching TV, and I think us 'online savvy' folks really should thank our lucky stars we can pick and choose our media. It requires a discerning eye of course, plenty of rubbish out there if you go looking for it, from the things I hear at work, it might be a good thing. The general population has been overworked to the detriment of their critical thinking and other skills a model member of society/renaissance man should value, either that or those ideas just aren't as widely shared as an intellectual bubble would have you believe. The penetration of illogical conspiracy theories is deeper than I would have believed.