How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kimbosbread]

2 minutes ago, Ts4EVER said:

Much can change politically in that timeframe, including a more direct involvement by China or some other unforeseen crisis that changes global outlook significantly...

That’s why Ukraine is building their own Surovkin line. I think we can confidently say that Russia will be even worse at breaching a km or five of minefields than Ukraine is.

If China get directly involved, well, that’ll be interesting, because they are awfully dependent on trade. Wouldn’t want naval drones to start hitting their cargo ships would they?

[Battlefront.com]

17 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I don't want to pretend I'm an expert (unless we're talking machine learning or build a data warehouse) but even before the war, I read that the difference between Russian and Western navies is how much crew they have - Russian run much leaner and (at that time the article presented it as a good thing) rely on machines and automation instead having many people around "watchstanding".

I think now we (possibly) see that this is not because the Russians are smarter than us, but because they lack the ability to attract competent people for their navy, train them and retain them (and have for decades) and this is how they make do.

So they might not actually have that many guys with guns to go out and shoot drones.

Yes.  And a heavy reliance upon conscripts makes it worse.  The Moskva sinking revealed something like 1/4 (I don't remember the specifics) of the crew were conscripts.  That was a shock.

Steve

[mosuri]

44 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

What I don't get, as you don't, is how can they not be doing rather inexpensive and practical drone counter measures better than they apparently are.  Maybe they used to think having a couple of guys with a PKM was sufficient, but by now they should have learned it absolutely is not.

It's torpedo boats and quick firing guns all over again... more dakka seems like the solution. Still, the Tarantul that was sunk before (Ivanovets) did have turreted 30mm gatling guns for close in defence and it didn't help -- that system is maybe suited for aerial targets only in automatic mode but per Wikipedia it has manual operation mode as well, but again, didn't help. Either the targeting system doesn't work with sea targets, guns don't depress enough, gunners were drunk, or somefink. Heck, maybe someone sold the ammo in port for vodka money.

 

[Kinophile]

27 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

So they might not actually have that many guys with guns to go out and shoot drones.

Even then, strip a crew from one ship in a class to fill out the others. Christ, watch a telegram video or two of FPVs hunting soldiers and go DURRR MAYBE THESE GUYS COULD STAND ON A DECK AND DO THE SAME THING AGAINST A USV? 

Good God. Two, TWO Drone Ops could have fought off that USV attack on the Sergei, or at the very least prevented the double/triple tap that sank it. 

Edited March 5 by Kinophile

[kimbosbread]

Just now, Kinophile said:

Even then, strip a crew from one ship in a class to fill out the others.

Haven’t they stripped some of those to get blown up in trenches though?

[FancyCat]

Didn't they find out the Moskva radar was nonfunctional? Wouldn't be surprised if essential systems on the BSF are dead in addition to lack of crew.

[Kinophile]

1 minute ago, kimbosbread said:

Haven’t they stripped some of those to get blown up in trenches though?

Some but not much, and mostly from non-BSF units (Eg Far East, the North etc). 

[Battlefront.com]

28 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I swear to gawd if you are not kevinkin back on another account I will be shocked. 

He's not.  As the Admin I know things

The world is not short of people who will push a point of view without regard to facts or debate, then calling out the side that is using facts and debate as a convenient way to protect a problematic opinion.  Unless the posting style is similar I presume it's just a "birds of a feather" situation rather than "sock puppet Kabuki".

Steve

[hcrof]

One thing that struck me is that a relatively small ship got hit by multiple massive (900kg) warheads and yet only 12 deaths? Was the ship operating with it's full compliment? If not then no wonder they can't have multiple people manning deck guns 24/7

[zinz]

1 minute ago, kimbosbread said:

Haven’t they stripped some of those to get blown up in trenches though?

That's why putting lots of cpnscripts on a ship that is not expecting to fight a peer naval war but mostly in the support role and freeing up marines for the trenches wasn't the worst idea of the Russians. Only problem for them is that Ukraine can kill their ships without a navy. 

[Battlefront.com]

10 minutes ago, mosuri said:

It's torpedo boats and quick firing guns all over again... more dakka seems like the solution. Still, the Tarantul that was sunk before (Ivanovets) did have turreted 30mm gatling guns for close in defence and it didn't help -- that system is maybe suited for aerial targets only in automatic mode but per Wikipedia it has manual operation mode as well, but again, didn't help. Either the targeting system doesn't work with sea targets, guns don't depress enough, gunners were drunk, or somefink. Heck, maybe someone sold the ammo in port for vodka money.

 

It's all about arcs and threats.  One gun can only cover, at most, about 200 degrees and only a limited portion of that at any given point in time.  The more degrees between threats, the slower the response. 

The drone threat requires, more than ever, 360° coverage capable of engaging multiple threats concurrently in any combination of sea, under sea, and air.

That's not an easy thing, but holy crap Russia could be and should be doing better.

Steve

[FancyCat]

Now the navy isn't really important....except if Crimea comes under threat of supply lines being cut, so still good Ukraine thinks wiping out Russian naval assets is useful. They are also important in securing the bridge. May Russian shortsightedness incur their result sooner than later.

I know Medvedev is a idiot but still, I think Russia fundamentally is relying on breaking Western unity, and part of that is signaling to Poland, Romania, Hungary that they too can benefit from a partition of Ukraine. We are talking about people with delusions of empire, also is it just me or did Belarus get nothing? 

Also in terms of Russian negotiations, I think they signaled Poland gets more of western Ukraine and that patch of Romania looks like compensation for Russia keeping Odessa, and they stopped wanting Kiyv divided.

 

[Letter from Prague]

16 minutes ago, hcrof said:

One thing that struck me is that a relatively small ship got hit by multiple massive (900kg) warheads and yet only 12 deaths? Was the ship operating with it's full compliment? If not then no wonder they can't have multiple people manning deck guns 24/7

Why would you assume they're telling the truth? Remember when Moskva went down they were pretending the crew survived using old and faked videos and stuff.

Or maybe, hitting the ships while under the bridge means they can't maneuver and are easier to hit but it's also easier for crew to survive.

[Kinophile]

4 minutes ago, hcrof said:

One thing that struck me is that a relatively small ship got hit by multiple massive (900kg) warheads and yet only 12 deaths? Was the ship operating with it's full compliment? If not then no wonder they can't have multiple people manning deck guns 24/7

Well,  its Russians saying 12 (ie, a lie) so double that as a rule of thumb. 

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, squatter said:

I literally don't know where you are going with this any more? 

I am saying a) US will be pivotal whatever happens, and b) arguing for ceasefire doesn't make you automatically a MAGA nutjob 

These statements shouldn't be fodder for argument, they should be self-evident

 

Sure, right. Not nuts. 

 

[hcrof]

6 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

Why would you assume they're telling the truth? Remember when Moskva went down they were pretending the crew survived using old and faked videos and stuff.

Or maybe, hitting the ships while under the bridge means they can't maneuver and are easier to hit but it's also easier for crew to survive.

To be fair I thought the Ukrainians said that it was 12, but I lost the original quote and can't seem to find it again. Also it doesn't say much about the condition of the rest of the "evacuated crew"...

[FancyCat]

I actually think Macron is right to start rattling the cage with talk of NATO personnel in Ukraine, I mean look at Russian rhetoric right now, it's worse than last year, where Russia was bleating about ceasefires and seeking territorial movement pauses. Russian rhetoric has only increased in escalation from that freeze, we have 5 oblasts annexed to Russia, including 3 only partially.

Okay sure, Medvedev issued a map where Russia gets less (the initial goal being taking all or most of Ukraine with a neutral rump Western Ukraine centered on Lviv), but the West gets more. That does not imply Russian acknowledgement of reality, that Ukraine will be free on it's remaining territory, it implies Russian understanding that the West has shown it's strong, but the solution to walking out of the conflict isn't some sort of accommodation with Ukraine, it's a accommodation with the West, where Poland and Romania and Hungary benefit, (and whatever Russian long term designs on NATO), and so Western Ukraine gets NATO protection and annexation, with Kiyv a neutral state that Russia can hope to seize in the middle term.

Instead of encouraging Russian de-escalation, Western actions like Tartus and that pitiful smattering of Bradley's and Abrams only serve to reinforce and validate Russian views of Ukraine.

[holoween]

I dont think this has found its way here yet.

https://en.zona.media/article/2024/02/24/75k

This is an article primarily trying to estimate russian losses but does a comarison with ukraine aswell.

Its a russian news org so take with a grain of salt but from a read through and a quick glance at their other work it at least isnt an obvious propaganda site.

 

[The_Capt]

50 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

He's not.  As the Admin I know things

The world is not short of people who will push a point of view without regard to facts or debate, then calling out the side that is using facts and debate as a convenient way to protect a problematic opinion.  Unless the posting style is similar I presume it's just a "birds of a feather" situation rather than "sock puppet Kabuki".

Steve

In some ways I think I would be happier if it was kevinkin coming back around.  Oh well, onto the seldom used ignore list then.

[Kinophile]

52 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It's all about arcs and threats.  One gun can only cover, at most, about 200 degrees and only a limited portion of that at any given point in time.  The more degrees between threats, the slower the response. 

The drone threat requires, more than ever, 360° coverage capable of engaging multiple threats concurrently in any combination of sea, under sea, and air.

That's not an easy thing, but holy crap Russia could be and should be doing better.

Steve

FPV, UAV drone op team organic to each ship. 4 guys for a corvette, when in harbour, bump up to 6-8 (2 teams w/ tech support) when faffing around on the waves. 

[cesmonkey]

Did anyone else see this nutty story?

https://www.rt.com/news/593781-no-f35s-ukraine-pentagon/
No F-35s over Ukraine – Pentagon
Singapore’s defense chief earlier claimed that Washington had used the jets to spy on Russian surface-to-air missile sites

[JonS]

8 hours ago, TheVulture said:

... 3 drones hit against the armoured hull, ... detonate behind the armour, ...

Warships, especially the little ones, don't really have meaningfully "armoured" hulls anymore, do they? Strengthened, sure, so they can better deal with heavy weather and battle damage, but not armoured as such.

[TheVulture]

8 minutes ago, JonS said:

Warships, especially the little ones, don't really have meaningfully "armoured" hulls anymore, do they? Strengthened, sure, so they can better deal with heavy weather and battle damage, but not armoured as such.

Modern hull thicknesses are probably in the 10-50mm range depending on the ship, as opposed to the 200-300mm (or more) of WW2 era battleships, so not exactly armoured, but probably still enough that there's a substantial difference for an explosion outside it vs inside (depending on the explosion size obviously. The Tsar Bomba' blast isn't going to be noticeably attenuated by 10mm of steel)

[Battlefront.com]

12 minutes ago, TheVulture said:

Modern hull thicknesses are probably in the 10-50mm range depending on the ship, as opposed to the 200-300mm (or more) of WW2 era battleships, so not exactly armoured, but probably still enough that there's a substantial difference for an explosion outside it vs inside (depending on the explosion size obviously. The Tsar Bomba' blast isn't going to be noticeably attenuated by 10mm of steel)

To emphasize what you're saying, earlier in the war there were some strikes on ships that didn't do very much.  Lots of scorch, not much penetration.  Obviously Ukraine learned what needed improving!

Steve

[Beleg85]

So, with great regret, we most probably have first (confirmed) destruction of Himars.

Russian troops destroyed the M142 Himars system launcher belonging to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The destruction was the result of counter-battery fire conducted by the Russian 9K515 Tornado-S missile system. Nikanorovka, about 40 kilometers from the contact line at Horlivka.

After all this time and countless media flipflops on their part it frankly looks like proof that Russia Sux rather than Russia Rulez. At least in this narrow field.