kimbosbread Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I don’t get how Ukraine isn’t seizing Russian tankers. “They” can go after Wagner in Africa, but aren’t allowed to board a few tankers and take them (overtly or on the sly)? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Rabb Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 3 hours ago, The_Capt said: Deep SOF actions are all about projecting uncertainty and creating negative decision pressures…and this is exactly what that looks like. Totally. I assume that RU air force has some sort of equivalent of the U.S. Air Force Security Forces. With the war in Ukraine I am curious just how well defended RU air force bases are deep inside Russia where Russians do not expect to be attacked. Really would not be surprised if at least some those guys are fighting in Ukraine right now. I mean we already have Russian sailors fighting on the ground in Ukraine. Would be cool if the AFU can do more of these kind of actions deep inside Russia, and if it would force RU to spend more resources defending their bases inside Russia instead of having them in Ukraine itself, still good. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beleg85 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) Reportedly another Russian assault on Synkivka ending in predictable way. “Through endurance we conquer", as Ernest Shackelton famously wrote. I bet Russian generals whisper something like that while posing their muscles before mirrors or presenting orders for another decoration. Perhaps it's earlier clip just shot from another drone. Level of casualties is still stunning, though. Edited January 4 by Beleg85 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cesmonkey Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Rabb Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Quote Germany's latest military-aid delivery to Ukraine has been reported and it has interesting newcomers. Here are the following items: - 1x Skynex air defense system with ammunition - 10x Marder 1A3 IFV - 2x Hensoldt TRML-4D air surveillance radar units - Undisclosed number of IRIS-T SLM Missiles - Undisclosed number of Leopard 2 ammunition - 9,080x artillery ammunition (155mm) - 2x "Wisent 1" Mine-clearing vehicle - 1x "Biber" Bridge-layer vehicle - 10x ground surveillance radars GO12 - 30x drone detection systems - 3,350x helmets - 10x Zetros trucks - 3x truck tractor trains 8x8 HX81 and an additional semi-trailer - 34x various vehicles (trucks, minibuses, all-terrain vehicles) - 305x assault rifles MK 556 - 750,000x small arms ammunition - 1,152x winter camouflage nets - 2,000x winter camouflage ponchos In planning/execution: - 4x IRIS-T SLM air defence systems - 1x Skynex air defense system with ammunition - 8,000x Anti-Tank mines - 20x drone detection systems - 41x Mercedes trucks - 26,850x combat helmets - 4,695x assault rifles MK 556 - 450,000 rounds for small arms Good stuff. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beleg85 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) More about North Korean missiles: Curious if this will have any effect on Republicans in Congress. Also, first reports of something hitting Crimea and possibly Belgorod again. Edited January 4 by Beleg85 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 3 minutes ago, Beleg85 said: Curious if this will have any effect on Republicans in Congress. Wouldn't they be in favour of this development? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddy Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, sburke said: Seems that issue with Russian oil tankers off India went further south. Russian oil tankers bound for India are turning around amid scuffle over payments to Moscow (yahoo.com) Russian oil tankers are turning away from India amid disagreements over payment. The tankers had been hovering near the shores of India and Sri Lanka for about a month. India is paying for Russian oil in UAE currency, but one major supplier has been unable to accept payment. Russian oil ships drifting near India's shores have begun to turn away amid unresolved payment disputes between the two countries. According to ship-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg, five oil tankers carrying Sokol oil, which have been idling close to India and Sri Lanka for about a month, are now headed eastward toward the Malacca Straight. Another Russian ship — the NS Century — is still drifting near the shores of Sri Lanka. The tanker has been idling for over a month as Indian officials mull over whether to let the ship unload its cargo, Bloomberg previously reported. The turnaround comes as Indian refiners are paying for oil with Russia in dirhams, the currency of the United Arab Emirates, people familiar with the matter told Reuters last week. But a unit of Rosneft, one of Russia's state-run oil giants, hasn't been able to open a bank account in the UAE, meaning it's unable to accept payment, sources added. As of October, India had at least seven oil shipments from Russia that hadn't been paid, Reuters originally reported. India is also under pressure to remain on good terms with the US, which sanctioned the NS Century late in 2023 for trading oil with Russia above the $60 per barrel price cap. Those restrictions are part of the West's attempt to ramp up pressure on Russia's energy revenue that it is using to fund its war against Ukraine. India has become one of Russia's largest oil customers since the invasion of Ukraine began in 2022. Russia now exports nearly all of its oil to China and India, Russia's deputy prime minister said last week – though shipments to India have recently stalled on payment issues. Russian oil exports in India cratered in December, with Indian refiners receiving no Sokol crude that month at all, according to Kpler data cited by Bloomberg. More on this here => Ignore the click-baity title of the vid. It's a reasonably informative take. According to this guy the problems with the delivery are caused by 1. Currency. The agreement was that India would pay half with Chinese yuan and half with the UAE dirham for the Russian oil. The Indian Govt. was reluctant to use yuan, and now the UAE banks are reluctant to provide dirham because they are concerned that the deals are in breach with of the oil price sanction and they don't want to face secondary sanctions 2. Russia has increased prices of its oil to above $60 a barrel while Iraq has reduced its price to around the same. Therefore for India, it's less risky to buy the Iraqi oil 3. Clampdown on sanctions. Some of the ships have cargoes that are above the $60 a barrel sanction cost and the Indian ports Seems a reasonably solid explanation and he does by and large provide sources. Russia rather desperately needs this money. Their economy is under considerable strain and their rainy day fund won't last forever. Income down, expenditure up and diminishing reserves can't last forever or even very long in a war of this intensity. Especially if they splurge 100s of millions of dollars in missiles on non-military targets. That said, economies are resilient and these conditions can take years and years to have a decisive impact. This is obviously a land-centric wargaming forum and that's what we are mainly interested in but the economic stuff is really, really important. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 3 hours ago, Beleg85 said: Reportedly another Russian assault on Synkivka ending in predictable way. “Through endurance we conquer", as Ernest Shackelton famously wrote. I bet Russian generals whisper something like that while posing their muscles before mirrors or presenting orders for another decoration. Perhaps it's earlier clip just shot from another drone. Level of casualties is still stunning, though. yes, this was seen previously. Better quality footage though. PS: Speaking of better quality footage, How Hawt Is Ukraine Gonna Get? Part Trois. Edited January 4 by LongLeftFlank 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paxromana Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 7 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said: Even if RU Air Force mechanics will be able to get this SU-34 running again. The idea that a Ukrainian "James Bondko" is running around in Russia setting fires to RU aircraft in Chelyabinsk of all places, while giving out heavy metal salutes will not help morale inside the RU Air Force at all. This is priceless. For the record I had to look up where this part of Russia is. Wow you were not kidding that is deep Russia. Operating out of Kazakhstan, perhaps? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letter from Prague Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 5 hours ago, kimbosbread said: I don’t get how Ukraine isn’t seizing Russian tankers. “They” can go after Wagner in Africa, but aren’t allowed to board a few tankers and take them (overtly or on the sly)? I'm sure the West forbids it in some way, like many other things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 5 hours ago, kimbosbread said: I don’t get how Ukraine isn’t seizing Russian tankers. “They” can go after Wagner in Africa, but aren’t allowed to board a few tankers and take them (overtly or on the sly)? Does Ukraine have this capability? Legally I am pretty sure they would be on safe ground - at least in Ukrainian waters. (Anyone here know about international waters?) Boarding an unarmed civilian vessel is something any Somali pirate can do. Doing an opposed boarding is something few SOF nations can do. Of course this raises the question of targeting Russian tankers. Is that an option? I would think, yes, inside Russia. Again on the high seas? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 3 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said: I'm sure the West forbids it in some way, like many other things. Is it West bashing day already! First one of 2024! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimbosbread Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 21 minutes ago, The_Capt said: Does Ukraine have this capability? Legally I am pretty sure they would be on safe ground - at least in Ukrainian waters. (Anyone here know about international waters?) Boarding an unarmed civilian vessel is something any Somali pirate can do. Doing an opposed boarding is something few SOF nations can do. Of course this raises the question of targeting Russian tankers. Is that an option? I would think, yes, inside Russia. Again on the high seas? In international waters, it would have to be don’t ask don’t tell (ie Somali pirates). I don’t think you’d need to be very “high seas”. Last I checked these things are parked off India, and off Morocco. No opposed boarding needed. Just drive by these things on a speedboat and put an RPG or 3 through the bow. Or a seababy if you want to operate from a distance. You don’t need to destroy the ship or take it over; just damage it enough it cannot move. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 4 minutes ago, kimbosbread said: In international waters, it would have to be don’t ask don’t tell (ie Somali pirates). I don’t think you’d need to be very “high seas”. Last I checked these things are parked off India, and off Morocco. No opposed boarding needed. Just drive by these things on a speedboat and put an RPG or 3 through the bow. Or a seababy if you want to operate from a distance. You don’t need to destroy the ship or take it over; just damage it enough it cannot move. Instigating people in India or Morocco to attack shipping going into India or Morocco is going to severely piss off India or Morocco, and it would get shut down very quickly. These are not lawless failed states where that could function for long. Ukraine has done this sort of thing on land in Africa, but AFAIK only in Sudan specifically. Sudan is in a state of civil war and Wagner has taken a side in that war, so the other side in that war has nothing to lose by letting Ukraine SOF operate on its territory. That dynamic doesn't translate to just anywhere else. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 18 minutes ago, kimbosbread said: In international waters, it would have to be don’t ask don’t tell (ie Somali pirates). I don’t think you’d need to be very “high seas”. Last I checked these things are parked off India, and off Morocco. No opposed boarding needed. Just drive by these things on a speedboat and put an RPG or 3 through the bow. Or a seababy if you want to operate from a distance. You don’t need to destroy the ship or take it over; just damage it enough it cannot move. only one is still stationary and it is off the coast near Sri Lanka. The others are already on the move toward Indonesia. Risking an environmental issue near Indonesia or Malaysia or anywhere else for that matter isn't the best way to make friends. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) 17 minutes ago, sburke said: only one is still stationary and it is off the coast near Sri Lanka. The others are already on the move toward Indonesia. Risking an environmental issue near Indonesia or Malaysia or anywhere else for that matter isn't the best way to make friends. And we are back to opposed boardings. I am pretty sure if it was just an issue of blowing stuff up the UA would have solved it. And they do not need Western "permission" for SOF actions - hell we probably do not even know what SOF they have in play. How cool would it be if they managed to steal one? Of course finding a port that will let you in is a problem. Edited January 5 by The_Capt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimbosbread Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I wonder how much Khat/cocaine/hookers it would take to convince some Malaysian or Somali pirates to go after a few of the tankers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) 53 minutes ago, The_Capt said: they do not need Western "permission" for SOF actions Probably not legally, but I doubt they'd start messing with international trade without at least a heads up. Wouldn't they likely need support from Western enablers (ships, aircraft, basing) anywhere outside the Black Sea? It's usually a bit tricky to load a duffle of C4 and firearms onto a Lufthansa flight. Edited January 5 by JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 14 hours ago, Butschi said: The nifty thing about this class of models is not precisely "just" natural language processing (which in itself is awesome, remember the chat bots we used to have just two years ago?). What really makes them interesting is that you don't train them to do a specific job like you usually do in machine learning. It just trains to predict the next word and from there it can be used to do many things by just giving it the proper prompts. Train it alongside some image processing model (such that it learns to associate images with words) and you can easily make an image classifier out of it by basically telling it "I give you an image of a human face and you tell me if the human is laughing, crying, etc." Probably doesn't sound very dramatic to the uninitiated but normally you would train a model specifically to do just that (and then it can't really do anything else). Here, same model, just a different prompt and you predict whether a car is going to turn left or right (given, of course, that the corresponding examples were in the database). And so on. Brilliant explaining! 31 minutes ago, The_Capt said: And we are back to opposed boardings. I am pretty sure if it was just an issue of blowing stuff up the UA would have solved it. And they do not need Western "permission" for SOF actions - hell we probably do not even know what SOF they have in play. How cool would it be if they managed to steal one? Of course finding a port that will let you in is a problem. see below 23 minutes ago, kimbosbread said: I wonder how much Khat/cocaine/hookers it would take to convince some Malaysian or Somali pirates to go after a few of the tankers. OK, just this once I am going to take the sober and conservative side. JonS can have the crazy side just this once. The reason there have not been more attacks on tankers is that the entire Western strategy in the war is to reduce the world price of oil, and therefore Russian income. And if they can't reduce it that way, to to limit what Russia gets paid thru sanctions. Anything bad happening to tankers anywhere tends to make the price oil go UP. This exactly contrary to what "The West" is trying to make happen. Russia of course is doing whatever it can to promote chaos in the Mideast because of course that makes the price go up. Indeed Biden is sort of, kind of, maybe, making up with Venezuela in large part to put downward pressure on the price of oil. There are other considerations but that is certainly one of the top two. I strongly suspect that the Venezuelan threat to invade Guyana and disrupt the opening of large new offshore fields there was done at Russias behest, and I assume a lot of money changed hands on that one, because Venezuela has a lot to gain from sanctions free oil sales that don't involve the risk of starting a shooting war. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, JonS said: Probably not legally, but I doubt they'd start messing with international trade without at least a heads up. Wouldn't they likely need support from Western enablers (ships, aircraft, basing) anywhere outside the Black Sea? It's usually a bit tricky to load a duffle of C4 and firearms onto a Lufthansa flight. I was thinking more of sabotage/deep strike. Most likely in Russian ports before ships pull out. Ukraine has its own intel and SOF complex, they likely have as much freedom of action they want. But then things like asset burning kick in. 1 hour ago, dan/california said: The reason there have not been more attacks on tankers is that the entire Western strategy in the war is to reduce the world price of oil, and therefore Russian income. And if they can't reduce it that way, to to limit what Russia gets paid thru sanctions. Anything bad happening to tankers anywhere tends to make the price oil go UP. This exactly contrary to what "The West" is trying to make happen. Russia of course is doing whatever it can to promote chaos in the Mideast because of course that makes the price go up. Ok, except the part where 1) Russia has to sell to India and China, who are very likely taking gross advantage of Russia’s position and not likely to pay fair market prices. And 2) don’t we have this cap thing in place? So doesn’t it matter less what the overall price does? And for that matter if Russia’s oil and gas is compartmentalized then how would the loss of a tanker drive the global price up? Cynically the oil industry kinda feels like it will use any excuse to drive prices up but I am really not sure that is how it works. Any tankers taken out would largely be symbolic and force Russia to spend resources on protection and security. Plus it would be nice and high profile so there is that angle. Finally I am not sure it is as simple as “tanker go boom, price of Dino-juice go up, Happy Vlad spends like a drunken sailor”. Those Nordstream explosions kinda seem complicated in overall effect. Yes prices went up but it also forced Europe off Russian gas. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/12/nord-stream-pipeline-attack-theories-suspects-investigation/676320/ I suspect there are some complex factors at play. Edited January 5 by The_Capt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet 0369 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 3 hours ago, kimbosbread said: In international waters, it would have to be don’t ask don’t tell (ie Somali pirates). I don’t think you’d need to be very “high seas”. Last I checked these things are parked off India, and off Morocco. No opposed boarding needed. Just drive by these things on a speedboat and put an RPG or 3 through the bow. Or a seababy if you want to operate from a distance. You don’t need to destroy the ship or take it over; just damage it enough it cannot move. Yup, and potentially causes major oil spill of maybe say a couple million gallons of oil into the Indian Ocean or another near by sea! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 5 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said: yes, this was seen previously. Better quality footage though. That's now three different views of this particular battle. Each one gives us a little more information about how things unfolded, this one being the most detailed. I didn't see the FPV drone hitting that BMP in the other videos. I also didn't see how it nearly got cooked by the exploding tank and then narrowly missed hitting surface mines. Didn't change the outcome. I'm guessing the second tank was hit by a direct center mass Javelin hit, though I couldn't see any evidence of the missile itself. I don't think a mine could set off all of the tank's ammo at once like that. Even after 2 years of seeing these sorts of explosions that one stands out as impressive. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, The_Capt said: So doesn’t it matter less what the overall price does? I think the free market price matters because no one is going to deal with hassle of buying sanctioned Russian oil if they can buy on the open market for less. The Chinese, Indians, and others are going to want a significant discount even if the free maket price gets down toward $60, which is the theoretical price set in the sanctions. Quote https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/traders-offer-sanctioned-iranian-crude-to-india-as-chinese-purchases-peak-123112300334_1.html Suppliers of sanctioned crude oil, led by Iran, are flocking to Indian shores following India’s encouragement of imports of cheap Russian crude last year. This move defies Western pressure and sanctions, allowing Moscow to capture over 40 per cent of India’s oil market. Traders in West Asia have approached Indian state-run refiners in the past few weeks with offers for sanctioned Iranian grades at deep discounts, as confirmed by refining officials. The traders offered Malaysian blend crude, a euphemism for Iranian oil. However, Indian refining officials rejected the offers outright, despite the discounts being much higher than the $4-5 per barrel Interestingly now that India has gotten in the habit of buying sanctioned oil, the Iranians seem to be trying to undercut the Russian price. Which is funny in a very dark way, and might maybe cause at least a tiny bit of friction in the budding Russian/Iranian partnership. Quote https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/01/03/vast-amounts-of-the-worlds-shipping-sails-unseen Vast amounts of the world’s shipping sails unseen New AI tools could help to eradicate blind spots on the oceans This is a great example of how AI can process much more data than existing systems, and vastly reduce the amount of stuff that gets missed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinophile Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 4 hours ago, kimbosbread said: In international waters, it would have to be don’t ask don’t tell (ie Somali pirates). I don’t think you’d need to be very “high seas”. Last I checked these things are parked off India, and off Morocco. No opposed boarding needed. Just drive by these things on a speedboat and put an RPG or 3 through the bow. Or a seababy if you want to operate from a distance. You don’t need to destroy the ship or take it over; just damage it enough it cannot move. Yes, but the sea, the moon,, wind and tides still move? Just spitballing here, but: Destroying an oil tanker's ability to control itself is asking for a gigantic environmental disaster. Sure yes, but tug boats. Maybe. If they can get there in time and are strong enough, and it's good weather, and local prevailing winds keep the ships away from shore. And nothing else is happening. Blyat,, that's a few too many IFs for me... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.