How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[FancyCat]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

and chips are attached to specialized circuit boards w specialized circuits.  And there's the firmware embedded in the systems so they talk to the software the russians put into the system.  It's a whole big chain of stuff. 

Even once they get all this stuff made, it would be rushed and insanely unreliable. 

and a ton of their high-tech workers are fleeing to better pastures.....

[Probus]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, the fantasy talk about quickly switching over to Chinese chips is just that... divorced from reality.  Even if China decided this was worth the economic retaliation by their best customers (US and Europe), they don't have the capabilities to do it any time soon if at all

And for those of you who may wonder, the USA's military chips are in no way linked with production from China. This is due to ITAR regulations. That goes for many more items than just integrated circuits. 

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, Probus said:

And for those of you who may wonder, the USA's military chips are in no way linked with production from China. This is due to ITAR regulations. That goes for many more items than just integrated circuits. 

There's a reason so many of Russia's chips are made in the US and UK.  The production capabilities are there, not China.

Some people seem to think computer chips are made on lathes or CNC machines.  You know, just feed the design specs into one end and out pops a chip on the other end.  Could be for a HARM missile, could be for a pacemaker, could be for an LED light bulb.  Since China can make LED light bulb chips, surely making something for a missile system is a piece of cake, right?

Steve

[dan/california]

8 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

There's a reason so many of Russia's chips are made in the US and UK.  The production capabilities are there, not China.

Some people seem to think computer chips are made on lathes or CNC machines.  You know, just feed the design specs into one end and out pops a chip on the other end.  Could be for a HARM missile, could be for a pacemaker, could be for an LED light bulb.  Since China can make LED light bulb chips, surely making something for a missile system is a piece of cake, right?

Steve

Now that Russia is desperately searching for parts through boot leg channels there is also a real chance to feed them things that fail in interesting way. It would be a shame if Iskanders just starting blowing up on the launch vehicle, or a they flew as far they could get towards Moscow, endless possibilities.

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, sburke said:

man the Russians must have vests covering their feet as many times as they are shooting themselves in the foot.

Gazprom ‘blackmail’ backfires as EU vows to end energy dependence on Russia (msn.com)

Note that much of the fantasy talk about Russia being able to fight a "long war" is based on the presumption that oil/gas revenue will be sufficient to cover all economic expenses and those directly tied to the war.  Which is crazy talk right there, since it wasn't able to afford its military before the war and sanctions.  But even if we go with that divorced-from-reality concept, how does the "long war" look if just under half (42%) of their oil/gas revenue is eliminated?   And what happens when Russia's oil/gas machinery starts to break down without repair parts?

The response from the "long war" crowd is that China will buy from Russia to make up for the loss of the EU and Chinese banks will lend the rest of what it needs.  More nonsense.

First, China is not going to purchase energy resources from Russia that it doesn't need or can get from its own sources (which are vastly more stable, mind you).  So unless it needs the same volume as Europe cuts off buying, then Russia will be worse off than when the war started.  More importantly, do you think China is going to pay market rate or will it force Russia into selling cheap?  Selling cheap, of course.  That means China would have to important proportionally MORE oil/gas than the EU did.

How is all this oil and gas going to get to China?  There is no existing infrastructure to make that happen.  Previous attempts at it failed due to horrible geographical conditions and expenses.  And China required that Russia foot the bill for the projects too.  Even if these issues are suddenly fixed, how many years will it take to get it up and running?  Put another way, how many years will Russia have to spend billions it doesn't have while at the same time not receiving any revenue until the project is complete?

As for financing... Chinese are very careful with their money.  Russia is a horribly risky investment without much direct benefit, and actually significant risk, to the Chinese state.  I for one don't expect Chinese banks to flood Russia with money.  And even if they did, any guess as to what the interest rate might be given the risk factors?  Yeah, pretty high.

So the "long war" folks need to figure out how all of these things just melt away, as if by magic, in order to keep up the fantasy that Russia can fight a "long war".

Steve

[panzermartin]

It's crazy though that Russia who was always preparing for war against NATO (or not?) didn't take into account that it can't manufacture its own advanced systems in case of a prolonged war and total embargo. Waging a national war in a multinational universe. 

[TheVulture]

Here's an article with a 'view from 30,000ft' on how the USA's strategy in supporting Ukraine has evolved since the start of the war. Nothing new in terms of information, just another voice affirming the view that the US / NATO countries have switched to seeing a straight-up Ukrainian victory as a viable outcome, not merely outlasting the Russians. or making it too costly for them to bother continuing.

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/the-ukraine-war-redefined/

 

[domfluff]

The Russian Federation was (presumably) not preparing for a war against NATO, at least not an overt one.

The Soviet Union was, but the point where they would have struggled with "advanced systems" only really starts to take hold in the eighties, where semi-conductor technology became more important, and the Soviet deficiencies there really started to bite.

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Couldn't have the plane gone down into the Dnipro?

Too far from Vasylkiv. Maybe it fell in some forest, but anyway this terrain is enough populated. Locals would have already found this alluminium Klondike )  

Edited April 27, 2022 by Haiduk

[Cederic]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The difference here is that if a NATO force were to go into another country, for real, they would not go in clueless about their mission.

See also: https://www.forces.net/services/tri-service/battle-speech-defined-war

[Haiduk]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Progress in the Kherson region.

Posad-Pokrovske was alredy liberated long time ago. Real progress is libarating of three willages 9 km east from imporatnt Snihurivka settlement, Mykolaiv oblast.

Today Russians conducted attempt to advance on Tavriyske and Nova Zoria villages on the boundary of Kherson and Mykolaiv oblast in 12 km north from Olexandrivka (several days ago this village again crossed to Russian hands), but were repelled.

 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Haiduk

[womble]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

There are a whole host of highly specialized bits and pieces that go into anything high tech. 

A slightly relevant personal experience:

The assembly plant where I work used to get a large number of the HDPE mouldings we attach to the units from one factory. But then it burned down. All of it. It took three months before we started getting any more mouldings that hadn't already been en route. That's simple plastic mouldings. Imagine how long it would take to find a supplier for precision or high tech parts and get them ramped up to standards and volume for large war-scale production.

[danfrodo]

28 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Note that much of the fantasy talk about Russia being able to fight a "long war" is based on the presumption that oil/gas revenue will be sufficient to cover all economic expenses and those directly tied to the war.  Which is crazy talk right there, since it wasn't able to afford its military before the war and sanctions.  But even if we go with that divorced-from-reality concept, how does the "long war" look if just under half (42%) of their oil/gas revenue is eliminated?   And what happens when Russia's oil/gas machinery starts to break down without repair parts?

The response from the "long war" crowd is that China will buy from Russia to make up for the loss of the EU and Chinese banks will lend the rest of what it needs.  More nonsense.

First, China is not going to purchase energy resources from Russia that it doesn't need or can get from its own sources (which are vastly more stable, mind you).  So unless it needs the same volume as Europe cuts off buying, then Russia will be worse off than when the war started.  More importantly, do you think China is going to pay market rate or will it force Russia into selling cheap?  Selling cheap, of course.  That means China would have to important proportionally MORE oil/gas than the EU did.

How is all this oil and gas going to get to China?  There is no existing infrastructure to make that happen.  Previous attempts at it failed due to horrible geographical conditions and expenses.  And China required that Russia foot the bill for the projects too.  Even if these issues are suddenly fixed, how many years will it take to get it up and running?  Put another way, how many years will Russia have to spend billions it doesn't have while at the same time not receiving any revenue until the project is complete?

As for financing... Chinese are very careful with their money.  Russia is a horribly risky investment without much direct benefit, and actually significant risk, to the Chinese state.  I for one don't expect Chinese banks to flood Russia with money.  And even if they did, any guess as to what the interest rate might be given the risk factors?  Yeah, pretty high.

So the "long war" folks need to figure out how all of these things just melt away, as if by magic, in order to keep up the fantasy that Russia can fight a "long war".

Steve

and China (and the world) have learned a very important lesson:  Putin can not be trusted as a business partner.  If you become dependent on what he has, he will use as a device for extortion.  China might be fine getting some below market stuff, but would they ever make themselves dependent on Putin?  I sure wouldn't

[Vacillator]

48 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

You know, just feed the design specs into one end and out pops a chip on the other end.

Now you're reminding me of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Soldiers

Good fun for the kids...

[Haiduk]

Russian soldier uses GSR 1L111M Fara-VR. This is company level device, but judging of captured personnel lists in many cases the duty of radar operator in company HQ is vacant. 

On the video soldier detects with this device a group of Ukrainain soldiers and some vehicle in 1000 m - this is current fights on Azovstal and looks like UKR forces even still keeping some armor. 

He spots marks on display. 

Fara-VR is upgraded version of SBR-5 (Fara-1) with increased range and lower emission and modernized display. In its turn SBR-5 is modernization of Soviet SBR-3 (and PSNR-5 in vehicle variant), which received display, transforming object signatures to corresponding them marks. 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Haiduk

[TheVulture]

33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

 

The response from the "long war" crowd is that China will buy from Russia to make up for the loss of the EU and Chinese banks will lend the rest of what it needs.  More nonsense.

First, China is not going to purchase energy resources from Russia that it doesn't need or can get from its own sources (which are vastly more stable, mind you).  So unless it needs the same volume as Europe cuts off buying, then Russia will be worse off than when the war started.  More importantly, do you think China is going to pay market rate or will it force Russia into selling cheap?  Selling cheap, of course.  That means China would have to important proportionally MORE oil/gas than the EU did.

There's also the consideration that the parlous state of the Chinese property market has got the Chinese economy on the edge of a significant problem that might just tip it in to a full scale crisis if they aren't very careful. 

Even if they were inclined to throw financial support at Russia out of the goodness of their hearts to prop up an ally, it's very questionable how much support they are in a position to give right now. And honestly China is rather more likely to use its leverage over Russia to further its own interests rather than hurt itself to help Russia.

[Haiduk]

Two Stugna-P hits from 1st operative brigade of National Guard. Some improved display with color picture, obviously export version

 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Haiduk

[womble]

34 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

It's crazy though that Russia who was always preparing for war against NATO (or not?) didn't take into account that it can't manufacture its own advanced systems in case of a prolonged war and total embargo. Waging a national war in a multinational universe. 

I don't think they've been prepping for war against NATO, which is why they got so pissy when the people they were preparing for war against joined that organisation. And is probably a contributory reason for the timing of their misadventure in Ukraine: since '14, Ukrainian popular support for application for NATO and EU membership has been growing, for entirely understandable (if you're not a Russian) reasons, I gather.

I also don't think they planned for a prolonged war at any point. They assumed that the EU (and hence NATO) wouldn't get involved for risk of losing their gas supply. So maybe the adventure in '14 was the first mistake, since it woke at least some people up to the possibility that RUS might not be the best people to be dependent on for anything, and some progress, at least, had been made in some quarters to provide contingency plans for the disappearance of Russian supplies, which has made the rest of the EU less petrified that they'll freeze without Russian gas.

[c3k]

27 minutes ago, womble said:

A slightly relevant personal experience:

The assembly plant where I work used to get a large number of the HDPE mouldings we attach to the units from one factory. But then it burned down. All of it. It took three months before we started getting any more mouldings that hadn't already been en route. That's simple plastic mouldings. Imagine how long it would take to find a supplier for precision or high tech parts and get them ramped up to standards and volume for large war-scale production.

I was never in procurement. However, I understand that some of the cost of military aircraft is that the USN/USAF also include a contractual clause that the production machinery needs to be stored even after the build is done.  At least, I know I read that about one specific (expensive) aircraft. That requirement was a large part of the per airframe cost.

The obvious reason is to maintain an ability to restart production should the need arise.

About moldings, etc.: some market efficiencies will tend towards a single-source solution. Competitors will be winnowed away until only one is left. Having multiple vendors available should keep prices under control...and add resiliency to the supply chain.

Critical defense needs should have multiple domestic sources of production.  That costs money.

[Haiduk]

Australian Bushmaster already in service

 

[c3k]

26 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

There's also the consideration that the parlous state of the Chinese property market has got the Chinese economy on the edge of a significant problem that might just tip it in to a full scale crisis if they aren't very careful. 

Even if they were inclined to throw financial support at Russia out of the goodness of their hearts to prop up an ally, it's very questionable how much support they are in a position to give right now. And honestly China is rather more likely to use its leverage over Russia to further its own interests rather than hurt itself to help Russia.

I'm speaking out of my depth here, but I listened to an interesting report about Chinese finances. Their property bubble is a huge issue. Apparently, the burgeoning (hell, "explosive") growth in Chinese middle class has fueled a speculation bubble. With their newfound excess income, they had to invest in something. They cannot invest in traditional western/capitalist forms. The primary place to invest (for retirement, growth, etc.) has been pretty limited to just real estate. 

This is a big problem for the CCP. (Let alone the individuals/families who will see years/decades of wealth accumulation and savings just evaporate.)

Again, a bit out of my depth, so take with a few pinches of salt.

[Hapless]

Zooming down from 30k feet to about ten feet: apparently CCTV footage of the attack on the Transnistrian Ministry of State Security building (or whatever it's called).

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/uddy8q/the_footage_of_the_shelling_of_the_building_of/

Doesn't exactly look professional: maybe it's not supposed to, maybe whoever it is is just crap.

I for one can't help but hear Benny Hill music when I watch the first guy trying to dodge the other two backblasts... and failing.

 

[danfrodo]

41 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Australian Bushmaster already in service

 

I really like the height of the vehicle for allowing  an ATGM soldier standing on the roof to be able to fire from deep hull down or even behind a low building.   Very glad to see these guys not driving around in hyundais.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, TheVulture said:

Even if they were inclined to throw financial support at Russia out of the goodness of their hearts to prop up an ally, it's very questionable how much support they are in a position to give right now. And honestly China is rather more likely to use its leverage over Russia to further its own interests rather than hurt itself to help Russia.

Excellent point.  Any plan Russia might think up for ending the war is dependent upon Ukraine's willingness AND fighting capabilities.  Any plan Russia might think up for financing the war is dependent upon China's willingness AND financial capabilities.  I for one do not assume China is both willing or able to do what Russia needs.

A good old saying about expecting someone else to stop everything to help you out applies here "a lack of planning your part does not constitute a crisis on my part".

Steve

[FancyCat]

China was probably content to let Ukraine get eaten up, assuming like the West and Russians themselves were correct in Russia being stronger than they really are, and then have a strong ally to further confront and divide the West, instead Putin has ****ed it all up so badly  NATO suddenly looks real good again. 

Yes, China can gain more influence over Russia, but a Russia relying on financial support from China is not in China's interest, a fellow authoritarian state that can ally with China and oppose Western influence worldwide was the goal, and instead Russia's actions have only strengthened Western resolve and tossed Russia into the garbage bin. 

The raw resources in Siberia are great and all, but the market China sells to is the West, and their domestic market aint ready to replace that trade, and so like Russia, any goals for opposing Western action involves dividing the West to ensure trade actions and sanctions fail, and all Russia has done is drive Ukraine fully into Europe, driven Europe and the U.S closer, China may punish Russia simply out of anger at the outcome of this.