kevinkin
-
Posts
3,208 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by kevinkin
-
-
3 minutes ago, Ithikial_AU said:
It got the logistics chains more or less right.
Nice to see you back. Maybe I missed some of your posts.
The US nationalized and thereby concentrated their supply chain. Namely, the railroads and shipping. Shipping was critical in the Pacific early after Pearl Harbor. The US also sent it's blood and treasure to foreign lands to wage global warfare. So the US supply chain had a vested interest in getting it right 24/7. No time off, no holidays, women in factories etc.. And the US had it good. The US effort was focused and not so dependent on a spider web of interdependencies. In house manufacturing.
In this war, the US has not committed blood and treasure and the supply chain is full of interdependencies. Platitudes "a war to save ... " fill in the blank are just going result is stagnation. The west has to do something dramatic. The UA will have the ability to break the RA lines tactically, but what then? I remain hopeful that the "western" brigades can exploit those painful gains. But at some point their intended direction will narrow because of losses and allow the the RA to concentrate on and stop it. The west has to understand that at current level of support the territory of Ukraine might be regained, but leaving the nation a no mans land of constant warfare and drain on the west's economy. My word, will this become a fight over those grain fields. Or was that the point anyway.
-
1 hour ago, Chibot Mk IX said:
As a Wargamer, one of the greatest joy we have is using various tools (even if they are amateur and used for entertainment purposes) to check if our crazy ideas are feasible. Here, we have a set of tools called CMO. I have created a few scenarios in the editor. Overall, I agree with your perspective that using an F-16 fighter jet to attack a low-flying Ka-52 helicopter within Russian-controlled territory is not an efficient approach.
In the scenario, I assumed that Ukraine is using the F-16A MLU donated by the Netherlands, while the Russian military has a Ka-52 helicopter hovering at a low altitude 10 kilometers behind their first defensive line. The F-16's radar can generally detect the Ka-52 at a range of 16nm. If the F-16 is at high altitude, there is only one opportunity for an attack because the Ka-52 will quickly enter the radar's blind zone. If the F-16 decides to dive into low altitude or initiates the attack from low altitude, it must consider the threat from short-range air defenses. However, considering the threat posed by the Russian S-300 system, a low-level penetration might be a more viable option.
Subsequently, I added more elements to the scenario, including A-50 and a full suite of short-range and long-range SAM systems for the Russian. The Ukrainian F-16 takes off near Vinnytsia, flies at high altitude over Zaporizhzhia, transitions to low altitude, and turns southeast towards Orikhiv. This brings an additional issue: after flying over 200 nm, the low-flying F-16 only has around 20 minutes of fuel remaining before Bingo Fuel, meaning it can only perform one attack before disengaging.
Similar to before, the F-16's radar detects the Ka-52 at 16 nm, but both aircraft are in low altitude, significantly reducing the effective range of the AIM-120B missile due to air resistance (and yes, max range =/= effective range). The F-16 must close in to approximately 7 nm for the Ka-52 to be within the missile's Dynamic Launch Zone (DLZ). However, before reaching this distance, the F-16 pilot receives multiple SAM radar warning alerts.
In summary, after conducting a single AMRAAM attack, the F-16 must turn and disengage. The success rate is not high, with a small probability of the F-16 being shot down by SAMs, and the chance of the AIM-120B hitting the Ka-52 at the extreme edge of its effective range is also low. According to the PoH calculation formula in CMO, this probability is only 29%.
Please note that this simulation only considers the Russian ground-based SAM systems, and if a group of Su-35s are added to provide CAP, the F-16's chances of a successful attack would be extremely low.
The conclusion drawn from this simulation is that the Ukrainian F-16 should focus on its main tasks, such as gaining air superiority and conducting SEAD, plus attacking Russian airfields and ground support. The mission of hunting down the airborne Ka-52 within Russian-controlled territory should be assigned to other weapons and equipment.
I used CMO last night and came to the same conclusion. I never got around to posting since this thread moves at light speed. Thanks for posting in detail. I think this is a finding that we just have place in the back of our minds for now. Send me PM, I would enjoy looking at your CMO sandbox. There are a lot factors in play. But they are easy to adjust with that software. BTW, did you give the Ka-62 ground targets to engage?
-
35 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Well, I think one of the big lessons we've seen in this war so far is that the West is completely unprepared for this sort of war and the sorts of problems encountered are not easily waived away.
I understand and agree with everything you said in the post. But if this is a war for western survival, we can't just strive for Bs and Cs. We have to demand As and Bs. Is it a pipe dream to expect better? NATO is confronting the piss poor Russians. If NATO gave just a bit of air power all the bureaucratic SNAFUs would not matter. But because the west is not, we have to excel elsewhere - like the supply chain. Pages back, I voiced concern on how dispersed Ukrainian support has been. The current model just confuses things. There is a term use in warfare called synchronization. Right now the west is playing out of tune. Not like grade schoolers, but not like the NY Philharmonic either.
-
15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
So I for one am not surprised
No, it's not surprising. That's the point. Status quo. What would be surprising is if the west untangles the mess and saves Ukrainian lives in the process. If the west is reluctant to provide war winning firepower now, at least get the nuts and bolts straight. Put western maintenance crews on the ground. Yet another asymmetry to attack Russian with. (dismounting my high horse).
-
Almost makes you want to puke:
If the west is selling that Ukraine is the pillar of hope for all freedom loving people, the status quo way of doing business has to stop. There is a lot SNAFU in war and waste of time and money and lives.
As much of 30 percent of Kyiv’s arsenal is under repair at any given time — a high rate, defense experts said, for a military that needs every weapon it can get for its developing counteroffensive.
“If I was the head of an army that has gifted kit to Ukraine, I’d be professionally very embarrassed if I turned stuff around in bad order,” said Ben Barry, a land warfare expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.Ok, in the scheme of things these episodes may not matter. But they are sad nevertheless. High profile systems will do fine. F-16s won't fall out of the skies. HIMARs will work. Storm Shadows will be accurate. However, the guts of the day to day systems have to be numerous and high quality too. The west has to stop patting itself on the back and start breaking its back, and Russia's neck.
-
Channeling Russia, China uses its people as Frisbees:
US vaccine developers told investigators that it would have been impossible to have generated the data cited in the patent so swiftly – it would have taken about three months' work, meaning that scientists at the Wuhan Institute for Virology were secretly working on a Covid vaccine in November, two months before Beijing told the world about the pandemic.
This is only important here in the context that Russia and China are in bed together. And China might try a lot of mischief bailing out their proxy.
-
32 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:
Not sure about Tarantino
Another director in the news. Brilliant to some; dumb as stump to others.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/us-news/platoon-director-oliver-stone-slammed-30266999
-
ISW:
Head of the Estonian Defense Forces Intelligence Center Colonel Margo Grosberg stated on June 16 that he assesses "we won't see an offensive over the next seven days.”[7]The Wall Street Journal similarly reported on June 17 that Ukrainian forces “have mostly paused their advances in recent days” as Ukrainian command reexamines tactics.
This was brought up this morning or last night. Is this an attempt to head off any Russian propaganda related to "stopping" the UA? Seems it would somewhat secret even if western organizations like ISW observe the pause via open sources explain to the public it's normal.
-
18 minutes ago, dan/california said:
All the evidence n this war is if the missile gets a lock, the helicopter dies.
That goes without saying. The devil is in the details. Fixed wing altitude vs finding the chopper in the clutter long enough to get a lock. Plus all the other things you mentioned like EW and setting up a SAM safe corridor for the choppers to work in. Using the fixed wings to strike bases would be more efficient. There is not a lot (any) new information on this. Maybe the USAF gave up on the idea. But the UA could come up with their own tactics when they receive F16s
-
14 minutes ago, womble said:
AMRAAMs by look-down radar from 50km is more the speed we're talking. Beyond Visual Range. Do Ka-52 (or any AH) have the avionics to compete in that field?
Can that radar find a chopper among the ground clutter while saying safe from enemy SAMs? I don't know but it will be interesting to find out. Wouldn't available fighters be put to better use anyway. I think their use against the Ka-52 would be born out of extreme necessity.
-
Fixed winged vs Choppers:
I remember this article from a few years ago:
In 1978/79 US Army and US Air Force conducted a joint experiment called Joint Countering Attack Helicopter (J-CATCH). J-CATCH focused on dissimilar air combat between jet fighters and attack helicopters. To the surprise of many involved in the program, the helicopters proved extremely dangerous to the fighters when they were properly employed, racking up a 5-to-1 kill ratio over the fighters when fighting at close ranges with guns.
Typical helicopter turn rates are 30 to 40 degrees per second, three times that of the fighter, even at high g, so the fighter will find the helicopters weapons always engaging it during any serious contest. If the helicopter gun and missiles were selected for anti-aircraft (like the 30mm guns on the Mi-24 and KA-50/51), the results are that the attack helicopter becomes like a rapidly mobile SAM site, a very dangerous target.’
-
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tattered-and-bandaged-russian-pows-describe-ukraines-offensive-3ee8c7e3
Was able to view the article:
But the Russian infantry tasked with holding up the initial attacks in trenches and tree lines are taking heavier losses, according to men fighting on both sides.
Many are facing Ukrainian brigades armed with more potent Western weaponry than at any time since Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the full-scale invasion of Ukraine early last year.
Several prisoners who spoke to The Wall Street Journal described morale on the Russian side as poor. The POWs quoted in this article described their voluntary surrender, which is a crime in Russia.
Lots of LARGE images.
-
29 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Taking of villages and ground is good evidence that Ukraine's making progress, but there's a lot more going on that is far more important.
I agree. Another question is whether the UA will use the "western" mechanized brigades in mass at the same time, or commit them piecemeal. If they use them at the same time in the about the same location, that will be pretty easy to pick up. Given their value, that would be great news. Meaning a break through has been made. If they are used piecemeal to expand advances to a few more villages, then that's trouble. I think the UA wants to use them in an exploitation role ideally. But along more than one axis. I guess given the coverage of the war, their use will present itself when it happens.
-
22 minutes ago, JonS said:
Well, the rest of the world *is* at peace. Sort of. Also, from what I've been able to discern, the training provided to Ukraine soldiers is not just the regular lessons run through Google translate. They appear to be really cut down and focussed on what they can use right now. So, not a lot on interoperability with the navy, for example, or on operations in mountains, jungles, or desert
I don't think we are training 100 odd UA trainees in Timbuktu to fire and maintain small arms. Given networks I suppose the US can claim all those bases for more specialized high value stuff. Maybe that's point and it's just semantics. 30+ bases sounds good in the press. But maybe it's the only way to get it done. No need to go further on this one.
-
25 minutes ago, chrisl said:
Hang a sidewinder from one of the big drones.
I agree, if fixed wing multi-roles need to be used near the deck to keep choppers at bay, then they are being misused. But they could go after their forward bases. But even that is just a bit better. I don't think HIMARS has the range to hit mobile bases whereby they forced those choppers far enough away from the front given the KH-52 combat radius. But it's pretty darn close. Interesting to look into further. It really is another rendition of Shoot-and-scoot. You would think the HIMARS would have a mobility advantage.
-
I read Afghans had a pretty good record using MANPADS vs Soviet choppers. Could the RA learned from that debacle? Probably not. The terrain is very different or perhaps the UA is holding back MANPADs and other AD assets for the big push. UA ammo storages might play a role right now. Or maybe the UR is operating from small hard to fire and mobile assembly and refueling areas close behind the line but out of most artillery fire. I am confident that the choppers will not become a operational problem but remain a tactical one. They need fuel and rockets etc.. Those can in interdicted. But I have not seen much on the state of the ISR capabilities Ukraine has access to and if they are less effective now than a year ago.
-
As if they don't have other things on their mind:
-
8 hours ago, JonS said:
I'll also note that even the US has training facilities for it's own use spread right across CONUS and across the world
All good points. Do you think the immediate needs of Ukraine still fit a peace time training model? The effort is probably more concentrated compared the the number of bases and countries cited in the news conference. But maybe not.
-
From the war zone:
But to give Ukraine its best fighting chance, Milley said that tens of thousands of its troops have been trained by the U.S. and partners.
“More than 6,000 Ukrainians are being trained right now at 40 different training locations, training locations, in 65 courses in 33 nations on three continents. That is all happening right now. Today,.”
This begs the question: Is this the correct way to train troops for battle? I bet he is bean counting and the training is not that dispersed at all. Given all the donated equipment of various types, it would mean an armed force starting to be based on the Golden Coral concept. 33 nations is great, but a more concentrated effort is probably more efficient. You know, don't send a gift, send a gift card.
-
-
1 hour ago, Vet 0369 said:
Zelenskyy is a politician, but I’d judge him to be smarter than and more able to avoid putting his foot in his mouth than about 90% of Western politicians and about 99.99% of posters on this forum.
He hasn't put his foot in his mouth. But the more he weighs into US politics the chance of a misunderstood statement increases. More risk than reward. Just hold serve and let the the back channels work the details as the offensive unfolds. Ukraine can't afford unforced errors and any arena.
-
1 hour ago, kevinkin said:
Reading over at the war zone that the RA might be having some success with attack choppers. (Ka-52) Any thoughts on if this a real and or major issue for the the ongoing offensive? If real counter measure have to be in progress and made a priority.
Another somewhat concerning thing is all the mention (ISW) of RA "counterattacks". This does not seem to be the behavior of a demoralized / defeated armed force. Sure, the attacks might just be hit and run spoiling shots. But the RA is to some degree is leaving their protection to engage the UA at times. Too early to tell if this is out of desperation, just blind doctrine or the result of on the spot planning. I am betting it's blind doctrine.
-
Reading over at the war zone that the RA might be having some success with attack choppers. (Ka-52) Any thoughts on if this a real and or major issue for the the ongoing offensive? If real counter measure have to be in progress and made a priority.
-
24 minutes ago, dan/california said:
Some good maps here, especially of the minor water ways.
Thanks for posting that. My take away is that tank country is not "tank country" since any delay to an advance can get quickly nailed by various sources of firepower under the observation of expendable UAVs. I still think the single axis of attack will become a fait accompli once the RA is worn down by alteration can can't parry the killing thrust. We might be entering a new war of attrition where the attrition is not physical but wears down the ability of the RA to react.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/19/moscow-claims-us-plans-to-drop-mosquitos-with-malaria-onto-troops-18975240/
What a metaphor, both mosquitos and the RA suck.