kevinkin
-
Posts
3,208 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by kevinkin
-
-
More coverage of this emerging procurement:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/laser-rocket-firing-humvees-spotted-in-service-with-ukraine
Again, seems suited to help attacking units forward. Maybe with the tactical impact the HIMARS now displays operationally.
Armored Humvees with four-shot laser-guided rocket pods offer Ukraine a quick moving precision attack capability against a wide variety of targets.
AE Systems, says that these munitions have a maximum range when launched from the ground of around 3.7 miles (6 kilometers). It's also a low-cost weapon, with each complete APKWS II round costing approximately $27,500.
Chase and lase; shoot and scoot. Float like a butterfly; sting like a bee.
-
And with extra emphasis on bloody.
-
Bit of an update on the M1s slated for Ukraine:
"There is no silver bullet in this case, Miley said. "But I do think the M1 tank, when it's delivered and it reaches its operational capability, that it will be very effective on the battlefield."
Nothing like a can do attitude.
-
15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
nobody
I agree.
-
in your face ..
-
3 minutes ago, Kinophile said:
How does MAD tie into a discussion on trench digging?
NATO going all in to stop the war and save as many Ukrainian lives as possible.
-
1 minute ago, chrisl said:
digging far enough
That's the point. Those positions should never have been allowed to be in place.
-
2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
long range weapons
Better to overrun the enemy in close combat than to allow them to dig in. Reliance on long range weapons is only prolonging the Ukrainian agony. God forbid, how many are they suppose to lose? At what point does the west just see Ukraine as road kill? Get this war over with .. period. Ukraine will never survive unless nuclear black mail is taken off the table.
-
8 minutes ago, chrisl said:
Why would you spend long range precision weapons on single guys in holes?
Maneuver warfare would not strike at single guys, but the means to dig the trenches with tractors that need fuel. We are at this point in military history because Russian was allowed to dig in. My point is if the west had balls, this conversation would be mute point.
-
10 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Simply put... it's too easy to create dispersed positions like this because it simply is impractical to find, fix, and destroy them while in progress. Especially the ones that are 100s of KMs behind the lines, such as the ones in Crimea.
You agree that that positions were built out of range of UA capabilities and the west screwed up. Those positions should have been destroyed or overrun months ago. They are easily found and fixed. I thought the UA had an ISR advantage? If they do, destruction is simple. unless the Bomb gets in the way ... oh that freaking problem rises again.
-
But that asks the question: why? Outside of the Bomb, Russia has nothing other than attrition warfare. Maneuver warfare would never allowed them to dig in anywhere. The west took their eyes off the ball by not giving the UA the mean to strike the Russian groundhogs setting up positions. But I am open to the theory that Russia was allowed to create an irrelevant MAGINOT LINE to be defeated at a letter date. But the cost in Ukrainian lives does not merit that strategy.
It's not about how easy it is ... is about taking out the capability to do so.
-
1 hour ago, chrisl said:
You can learn enough to operate a small excavator enough to dig a trench in about 5 minutes of "training" and with about an hour of practice. Ask me how I know.
Try it under fire with an enemy wanting to cut you up. The Russians must have understood the range of available UA firepower so as to make their entrenching ops manageable and out of range.
-
46 minutes ago, Artkin said:
have a few diggers.
Grave diggers for sure. But I wonder if the Russian TO&E ever considered trench warfare a possibility in 2023-2022? Wouldn't backhoes be prime and easy targets for drones? Maneuver warfare would say yes. Unless the UA wanted the RA to dig in and enter into attrition over the past winter. Without those trenches, where would the RA be now? Short answer - not in Ukraine. They say a determined enemy can dig in anywhere at anytime. Is the Russian troop that determined to slog the mud perhaps wishing to find a dishwasher from 1975? All under the threat instant drone sniper attacks. This indicates the trenches were prepared outside drone range. Which means longer ranged arty was need to be in place last year. Or give us a few flights USAF bombers. No one in the west has poked this little bully Putin in the eye. Called his nuclear bluff. And because of that 10's of thousands have died since he attacked a newly forming country.
-
2 minutes ago, Artkin said:
hand dug
That's something you reminded me to ask: all the Russian trenches that can be observed from space - they were dug by hand or machine? Either way, how could the UA disrupt the effort?
-
27 minutes ago, CAZmaj said:
and team handball
I have a distant cousin in Germany who plays pro handball. Interesting game that I wish I tried in my youth. I remember when indoor soccer was all the rage in the 90's for middle aged men. They were hockey fans that could not skate. Then they all starting blowing their knees out. Not pretty. Sort of like riding a motorcycle in NJ. It's not IF you fall, it's WHEN.
-
They say there are two ways to lead: you either divide and conquer, or you build and unite. We know Putin's tactics. Masters can artfully use smoke and mirrors to mask and confuse the two. Not sure if I would call Putin a master, but he does have staying power within Russia.
-
13 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:
Noted political philosopher Douglas Adams
Didn't he also say a broken clock is right twice a day.
-
2 minutes ago, Kinophile said:
India will just muddle on, like the rest of us.
Sure, but the India has a better relative upside in its muddling then the rest. The have challenges and could backtrack. That's why I'm writing from my gut. Having the bomb and not being China puts them in a pretty good place with the west.
It does with me away. -
16 minutes ago, womble said:
"India will weather the storm better than other nations." Which is vastly different from "coming out on top".
Six of one, half a dozen of the other. See ya in 7 years and we can compare notes.
-
5 hours ago, womble said:
Love the detail. Thanks for enlightening me. Were you marked out of half in all your maths tests?[/sarcasm]
It's obvious that Russia is in the toilet, demographics wise, and China will certainly have problems. India's demographics problem is more that they're just going to have more poor people. Yay! They win the population game! Are you saying this will instantly (7 years is an eyeblink) turn India into the largest world economy? The strongest military force? What are you saying India will parlay its young potential workforce into? Other than malcontents being played off against each other in religious and ethnic power games so that (like everywhere else) the 1% can live like rajahs?
I think relative to the rest of world as it was when we entered 2022, India will come out stronger (not the strongest). It will benefit the most from the changes coming about because of this God awful war. This has nothing to do with largest or strongest. Just which country, in relative terms, becomes the winner over the next decade. That outcome is not certain. That's why I said gun to my head - a gut feeling.
-
1 hour ago, billbindc said:
Demographically, India passed China this year.
At least by raw numbers anyway. I think if you look into the numbers, India has advantages even without having just more people. And depending on other factors, more people can poise challenges too.
-
Demographics.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Let's also say that the West can donate half of that to Ukraine, but a significant amount of the artillery is PGMs and all of the rest of the stuff is superior to Russia's. Which side would you bet on given the course of this war so far?
That's just math and not geostrategy or geopolitics. Are we treating the landscape of this war as if if were a checker board? This war will not be decided by incoming and outgoing bombs; but by fallible humans at the top who decide where best to place their resources. The destiny of Ukraine and Russa is outside their own control. They are not checker pieces, but pawns in what has developed into a global proxy war that involves so much more than kinetic warfare. Realignment of supply chains; feeding the southern hemisphere; keeping the US military complex fed. Its amazing what societies will do when sanctions get in the way. And your Georgetown rent goes up. Gun to my head; India comes out on top if we could fast forward 7 years.
-
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Given the number of dead, fertilizer not needed. A bit of lime might help after the soil pH is analyzed.