Jump to content

Hapless

Members
  • Posts

    417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Raptor341 in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    Now with first person view:
     
  2. Like
    Hapless reacted to Fenris in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    More sea drone attacks overnight apparently 
     
  3. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from CAZmaj in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    Now with first person view:
     
  4. Upvote
    Hapless got a reaction from Livdoc44 in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  5. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Raptor341 in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  6. Like
    Hapless reacted to A Canadian Cat - was IanL in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    Correct but I think the pessimist point is that it would prevent Mexico from joining the SATO alliance and since the is the main thing they want Mexico still looses.
    Personally I think the bit that @Butschi missed is that regime change is extremely likely if the the RA looses that much territory as is an RA collapse. This kid of frozen scenario is my big fear but I have had a lot less worry about that in recent weeks because the UA seems to be doing the right things and working towards eventual success.
  7. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  8. Upvote
    Hapless got a reaction from keas66 in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  9. Upvote
    Hapless got a reaction from dan/california in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  10. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from CAZmaj in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  11. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from paxromana in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  12. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from kluge in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  13. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from DesertFox in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  14. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Tux in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  15. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Monty's Mighty Moustache in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  16. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from LuckyDog in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  17. Upvote
    Hapless got a reaction from poesel in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  18. Upvote
    Hapless got a reaction from The_Capt in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  19. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Splinty in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    For a different perspective:

    If the USA invaded Mexcio to enact regime change and instead suffered a string of embarrassing defeats, lost an aircraft carrier, was forced to rely heavily on Blackwater only for them to attempt a coup and had lost it's military reputation along with international influence, narrative control and huge numbers of men and military hardware...

    I don't think anyone would think the US was winning because they were squatting in the northern half of Chihuahua. They've still lost, incurring significant all-spectrum damage in the process.

    Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
  20. Like
    Hapless reacted to Zveroboy1 in Baltic Mini Map Pack   
    --------------------------------------------------------------
    Mini map pack for Battlefront Combat Mission Red Thunder
    --------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Description:
     
    Three maps in Estonia one in Latvia.
    All the maps in this mini pack are based on google earth satellite images, photos and also street view when available, not historical maps. So obviously these locations were not identical during ww2. I however tried to downgrade the type of roads when I thought it made sense, on rare occasions removed a couple of houses or farms here and there but for the most part they're as accurate as I could make them.
    Some have attack or meeting engagement setups, some are raw (no deployment zones or objectives). The latter will require a little bit of work to be playable.
    I tried as much as possible to frame the maps so they're versatile and can be used in various ways: both for meeting engagements and attacks. But there are also usually several possible setups that you could use i.e different directions for the attack with potential objectives and road in all cardinal directions. There is often not just one single way to play them.
    It should be noted that most of these maps, except Talvikese which is fairly open with rural terrain, are basically dirt roads going through forests, marshy ground and lakes. So it can be very easy if played as attacks or assaults to block the roads with anti tank mines depending on the deployment zones. So you could just have infantry battles, have an agreement with your opponent to limit the usage of mines or even modify the terrain a little bit by replacing marshy ground with mud or something else where needed. Or just play them as is. It is up to you.
    Feel free to use them for whatever you want. Simply credit me and provide a link to this thread.

    The maps:
     
    1/ Estonia - Kapera (raw map)


    size: 1408 X 1072m
    type: forest/rural
    60km west of Pskov
    google earth coordinates: 57°46'12.40"N 27°19'33.80"E

    2/ Estonia - Kahri Koorvere road


    size: 1168 X 1184m
    type: forest and lakes
    35km south east of Tartu
    google earth coordinates: 58° 5'19.20"N 26°58'28.02"E
    Includes both a raw map and a version with a red attack setup. The map with the attack setup is slightly cropped on the northern edge for gameplay reasons so I decided to also include the original one.

    3/ Estonia - Talvikese (ME)


    size: 2688 X 2832m
    type: open/rural
    20km south of Tartu
    google earth coordinates:  58°12'3.76"N  26°49'7.02"E

    4/ Latvia - Courland - Lemzere (raw map)


    size: 1776 X 1008m
    type: marshy forest and lake
    55km south west of Tukums
    google earth coordinates: 56°36'15.63"N  22°34'36.97"E
     
    Download:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/8d4xsu2bbu1sbbe/CMRT Baltic mini map pack.rar?dl=0
     

    Installation:
     
    Extract the map in the following directory:
    Documents/Battlefront/Combat Mission/Red Thunder/Game Files/Scenarios
     
    Zveroboy
     
     
     
     
  21. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from FogForever in Tactical Lessons and Development through history   
    At this point, it's usually a worry that trigger happy soldiers will splurge all their ammunition if left unsupervised. Aside from the fire control element, some military rifles around the turn of the century had magazine cut-off devices, which mechanically prevented the use of the magazine and forced soldiers to load and fire one round at a time. The concept was that the cutoff could be disengaged on order when rapid fire was necessary.

    I can't find a link to the Brit's "Infantry Training, 1914" but a couple of interesting snippets about the attack (original bold):
    Immediately followed by (more original bold):
    Leading to the, surprisingly modern (my bold this time):

    A quick, generalised guide to infantry attacks in this period is that they consist of waves:
    1. The first wave advances and- at some point- is forced to stop by enemy fire. They go to ground, form a firing line and return fire.
    2. Following waves reinforce the firing line, increasing the number of rifles and thus weight of fire until the attack gains fire superiority.
    3. At this point, the line resumes the advance, this time by short rushes with supporting fire, until they reach the enemy position and can get stuck in with the bayonet.

    This is not a million miles away from something like a current section attack (right down to fixing bayonets and fighting through). The tricky part is how you mass and control firepower when all you have is riflemen. The more riflemen you have in the firing line- ie. the denser the firing line is- the more, better controlled firepower you can put out and the better chance you have of achieving fire superiority.
    Right until you get shelled or you can't win fire superiority, or you can't spot/engage the enemy riflemen effectively, at which point things start to go all Spion Kop.
  22. Like
    Hapless reacted to The_Capt in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    The question facing military professionals everywhere out of this war are:
    - "What is unique to this war?"
    - "What is universal to all future wars?"
    We had a whole thread going on the General Forum on development of warfare over the 19th century and I believe modern militaries are facing a similar conundrum.
    "How would NATO do in this war?"  Well it depends which side we are going to be.  As Ukraine against Russia we would likely have seen a shorter sharper war but the costs would have been a serious shock to the western world. [note: let's not get dragged into another nuclear equation discussion, we can just put that one to the side]  We are talking likely tens of thousands of casualties and a lot of expensive kit lost.  Why?
    - Air superiority.  I do not know what this means in a modern context.  A2AD capability is rapidly becoming distributed and highly portable.  We may have been able to gain air superiority over 20,000 feet but below that we would have been taking serious losses as there is not such thing as SEAD for MANPADs basically everywhere.  Modern MANPADs and IADs can operate independently all over the battlefield.  Further they can deny airspaces at much higher altitudes and higher ranges.  Why?  Because while we were stonking Iraq, Libya, Serbia and a bunch of dirt farmers in Afghanistan competing states were taking notes and investing heavily in the tech.  Take away our air supremacy and the western way of warfare is immediately in trouble.  And, shocker, places like Iran really don't like us and do not want to be invaded.
    Below 20,000 feet it is the freakin wild west right now.  I do not care how many lasers we strap on every tank, IFV or truck.  I do not care how much EM is pumped into space - birds f#ucked up for the next 20 years.  Unmanned systems are 1) cheap, 2) highly effective and 3) everywhere.  Whether they are doing ISR or strike they have changed the fabric of warfare between about 3 to 20,000 feet...and they are just getting started.  Air superiority below 20,000 feet does not exist as a concept right now.  Hell we lost it below 2000 feet in Iraq to freakin ISIL, who were basically the lowest bar one can get with respect to conventional warfare.   If we were fighting the RA the UAS problem would be extremely costly...as in freakin nations pulling out after losing too many people, costly.  Can anyone imagine if the Taliban got their hands on this tech and started dropping old cluster munitions right on our heads back in the COPs and FOBs?  I slept for weeks about 200m from a 50,000 gallon fuel bladder that was resting under an open sky ...let that sink in.
    So what?  Well "wither goest Air Superiority" is one of the biggest questions of this war, and as you can see it is a multi-dimensional one.
    - C4ISR.  Russia does not have a world class C4ISR architecture.  But even with what they do have the principle of "making them go dark" to establish C4ISR superiority - far more important in this day and age then any domain superiority - is also in question.  With everything being a sensor hooked into crazy comms and networks - hell with hotspotting everything can be a node in a comms network.  So I am not even sure how to make an opponent go dark anymore (see unmanned).  I am sure we got people working on it but the fact that an even poorly armed opponent can see me tens of kms out makes me nervous.  Worse, they can see my logistics train as well.  The fact they can record all this and stream it all over the planet in real time turns really concerns me.  A half decent opponent would be broadcasting every screw up and horror show, which makes sustainment of national will a big problem.
    - PGM.  Artillery, ATGM...insert whatever nightmare comes next.  No one is ready to face this.  I cannot begin to imagine trying to do an obstacle crossing when my opponent can hit me at 3-4kms with an 80% success rate with ATGM.  "Oh that is ok, we have APS"...fantastic, right up until someone comes up with workarounds like sub-munitions or EFP.  And even if we do magically put bubble wrap around ourselves, nothing on earth can stop artillery round that can land directly on my head.  Oh and this is while I am still trying to deal with old stuff like mines, and new stuff like UAS.
    All of that  adds up to some very disconcerting calculus.  As in "is combined arms dead as we know it?" type of calculus (someone is going to try and answer this, someone always does...just don't bother.  I do not post my mil quals for some very good reasons but trust me when I say no one has this figured out yet).
    Now here is the punchline: this is all if we were fighting Russia.  I, frankly, am far less concerned about fighting Russia - now more than ever.  I am very worried about fighting Ukraine.  If we get stuck on the wrong side of a proxy war and our opponent is armed with C4ISR, PGM and A2AD like Ukraine is right now, we are in very serious trouble. 
    "Well we just won't fight those wars."  Ya, that is not how it works.  We don't get to choose the wars we decide to fight, gawd that is a post-Cold War perception that needs to die, and fast.  This is the nightmare scenario and I do not know if you guys have been paying attention but we kinda been doing a lot of expeditionary operations in all sort of places to push the brand.  What happens when Chinese space based ISR start lighting us up?  We wind up in a hybrid fight with the other side armed with HJ-12s?
    I do not know.  This is a big reason when [insert talking head] says "Ukraine needs to do this"  "We need to give them that"...and the war will be over in a week.  My advice is to stop listening.  No one in the west has been in a war like this since Korea and the freakin needle has moved miles since Korea.  I say this without hyperbole, we are going to be spending the rest of this century trying to figure this all out as things like UGVs start coming online.  Tell your (grand) kids to get into the sciences of killing because it is a major growth industry.  For now, the best we can do is watch and learn.  Both the UA and RA are feeling their way through a war unlike any we have seen before.   
  23. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    It would make defence more complex for the Russians- for example:

    ATACMs flies on a ballistic trajectory while Storm Shadow is a cruise missile, so one of each fired at the same target presents two different air defence problems at the same time (fast but telegraphed ATACMs vs slower but stealthier Storm Shadow). Mix in decoys, Storm Shadows changing direction etc and things can get real confusing real fast.

    This might prompt the Russians to concentrate more air defence on more important targets, leaving other (still important) targets less well defended.

    There's also the EW game- the Russians are inevitably going to get their hands on some kind of salvageable internals from whatever weapons are used, at which point they can dig into the systems and figure out how they can jam or spoof them. They've already apparently gotten hold of a Storm Shadow, so from here on out there's a possibility that Storm Shadow strikes can be degraded by EW effects.

    Having more different types of weapons in the mix keeps things fresh (as it were), so there's always something up Ukraine's sleeve that the Russians haven't developed a counter to yet. At the same time, depending on the specifics, even if the Russians have worked out how to jam ATACMs and Storm Shadow, they might not be able to jam both at the same time because EW cna be finicky, or if they can, they might need more rare, expensive EW assets concentrated to do so.

    Stuff like that.
  24. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from CAZmaj in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    It would make defence more complex for the Russians- for example:

    ATACMs flies on a ballistic trajectory while Storm Shadow is a cruise missile, so one of each fired at the same target presents two different air defence problems at the same time (fast but telegraphed ATACMs vs slower but stealthier Storm Shadow). Mix in decoys, Storm Shadows changing direction etc and things can get real confusing real fast.

    This might prompt the Russians to concentrate more air defence on more important targets, leaving other (still important) targets less well defended.

    There's also the EW game- the Russians are inevitably going to get their hands on some kind of salvageable internals from whatever weapons are used, at which point they can dig into the systems and figure out how they can jam or spoof them. They've already apparently gotten hold of a Storm Shadow, so from here on out there's a possibility that Storm Shadow strikes can be degraded by EW effects.

    Having more different types of weapons in the mix keeps things fresh (as it were), so there's always something up Ukraine's sleeve that the Russians haven't developed a counter to yet. At the same time, depending on the specifics, even if the Russians have worked out how to jam ATACMs and Storm Shadow, they might not be able to jam both at the same time because EW cna be finicky, or if they can, they might need more rare, expensive EW assets concentrated to do so.

    Stuff like that.
  25. Like
    Hapless got a reaction from Lethaface in How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?   
    It would make defence more complex for the Russians- for example:

    ATACMs flies on a ballistic trajectory while Storm Shadow is a cruise missile, so one of each fired at the same target presents two different air defence problems at the same time (fast but telegraphed ATACMs vs slower but stealthier Storm Shadow). Mix in decoys, Storm Shadows changing direction etc and things can get real confusing real fast.

    This might prompt the Russians to concentrate more air defence on more important targets, leaving other (still important) targets less well defended.

    There's also the EW game- the Russians are inevitably going to get their hands on some kind of salvageable internals from whatever weapons are used, at which point they can dig into the systems and figure out how they can jam or spoof them. They've already apparently gotten hold of a Storm Shadow, so from here on out there's a possibility that Storm Shadow strikes can be degraded by EW effects.

    Having more different types of weapons in the mix keeps things fresh (as it were), so there's always something up Ukraine's sleeve that the Russians haven't developed a counter to yet. At the same time, depending on the specifics, even if the Russians have worked out how to jam ATACMs and Storm Shadow, they might not be able to jam both at the same time because EW cna be finicky, or if they can, they might need more rare, expensive EW assets concentrated to do so.

    Stuff like that.
×
×
  • Create New...