How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Tux]

22 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I think the major flaw here is that somehow we can “routinely counter” unmanned systems to the point that their utility comes into question and therefore the moral ethical “rightness” can hold sway.  Like other disruptive technologies unmanned will go far and wide (already has) and likely remain a competitive space for decades, if not centuries.  There is no “whelp that was unpleasant” followed by “now we can go back to the way things were”.  It does not apply to military application nor regulation.  

We cannot unsee or unknow what has already happened.  There is no magic wands to make it all go away.  Even unmanned counters will remain a highly competitive space where arms races to counter-counters will occur all the time.  Hoping that unmanned weapons will somehow disappear is like hoping bullets disappear because we invented body armor.

I appreciate the challenge but their utility doesn't have to be in question any more than any other weapon system.  It's their deterministic necessity that undeniably will, one day, be questioned.  Not all unmanned systems - I am not saying we try to "go back to the way things were" - but the most egregiously dangerous and offensive ones.

My very first point was a reflection of the fact that C-UAS will absolutely be highly competitive, dynamic, and ever changing.  So I mentioned that it might be an idea for forward-thinking nations to focus on autonomous C-UAS now, even more than on autonomous ground-attack drones.  Get ahead of the game.  Establish and then try to maintain C-UAS superiority.  Lead everyone to question the deterministic necessity of these things as soon as possible.  Once you do that the imperative to develop and use them is weakened and maybe people will fear the systems more than they will the consequences of not having them.  Because, let's be honest, fear is always the arbiter of this kind of thing.

 

22 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This paradigm shift has been decades in the making.  This war has only demonstrated that it has arrived.  We will likely try to regulate - hell we try to regulate every new weapons technology, but like air power, cyber and space the punchline is inevitable.  So what?  Dive into the game and be better and faster than opponents.  Blunt the effects and understand what unmanned superiority means.  Shape future battlefields now through rapid smart adoption.  Not military cultural conservatism or pinning hopes on the “better angels”.  We are in a new age of warfare, there is no getting past that.  All that remains is how well we can navigate this new reality.

I understand that this has been and still occasionally is challenged, even on this thread.  It is not the target of my argument, though.  Please, yes, let's navigate this new reality.  As a starter for 10, how about we give absolute priority to autonomous C-UAS?

Edited April 17 by Tux
Courtesy

[LongLeftFlank]

Then they came for der Mittelstand....

I keep posting energy tech stuff because the modular/miniature/precision armaments revolution is absolutely experiencing the exact same dynamics, just not so well documented (yet).

The West will innovate, but the Chinese will beat us to mass market, every time. With quality more than adequate for purpose. As innovative firms and their ecosystems starve and die, so too will innovation.

Solar panels are now used as fences in Germany because they are more affordable than the usual fencing.

The market standard for solar panels is now moving to Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (#TOPCon) technology, which improves solar cell architecture to reduce efficiency losses.

The technology was developed by Germany's Fraunhofer Institute in 2013, but large-scale manufacturing takes place mostly in China.

"European manufacturers have no money to change to the new technology. So now there is no competitive advantage anymore and they have to sell old technology."

https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/squeeze-on-european-solar-manufacturers-curbs-innovation-cementing-china-s-lead-81072375

 

[cesmonkey]

WarGonzo says:
https://t.me/wargonzo/19418
 

Quote

️3 weather balloons with explosives were shot down over the Bryansk region️

The Russian Ministry of Defense reported the suppression of an attempt by the Kyiv regime to attack the Bryansk region with a new terrorist weapon - a group of weather balloons with explosives. Thanks to the competent work of the air defense, there were no casualties or destruction.

The day before, air defense forces in the Lipetsk region worked on the same flying object.

Essentially, a weather balloon is a converted disposable unmanned balloon filled with explosives that are released upon a signal.

 

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, Kraft said:

Prisoners under Wagner survived on average 3 Months, those under official russian strafbats only 2 months.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-68819853

 

Interesting.  Of course this is the BBC and they are mainstream, so this is all Fake News put out by the establishment to trick us into believing Russia is weak when really they are the strongest nation on Earth and we should bow to them.

With that bit of sarcasm out of the way...

I want to highlight the average 3 and 2 month survival rates include whatever minimal training time the Russians might have given their cannon fodder.  At the time of Wagner's use of prisoners, IIRC it ranged from 2-4 weeks.  Which means they likely only survived for about 1-2 months of active service.  That's not very good, is it?

Steve

[chrisl]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That is one hopeful theory but I think history is not entirely onside.  As we see in Ukraine, warfare is not simply political, it is personal.  So if/when an opponent’s unmanned bubble collapses they may very well refuse to accept defeat and fight on.  They will do so by various means that will cause you casualties. There will be a lot of pressure to reduce those casualties.  Autonomous weapons will be one of the best ways to do this. So I do not see a winning side simply switching modes mid-war.  In fact attacks on the will to fight are very often pointed directly at populations…we are literally seeing this unfold everyday in both Ukraine and hr Middle East.  So fully autonomous as terror weapons against civilian populations is tragically predictable.

Further, just because one can collapse an opponent’s unmanned systems bubble does not mean it will stay collapsed without destroying that opponent’s ability to access/produce more systems.  That will mean attacks on deep industrial infrastructure and varying degrees of resistance.  Trying to managed semi vs full autonomy based on ethical grounds in this sort of environment is a challenge few nations will do and even fewer will do well.

And this assumes the war stays a clean standup fight and does not go hybrid.  Insurrection, partisan resistance and guerrilla warfare will ensure that fully autonomous stay on the forefront of any modern force.  But it will also be very attractive to hybrid resistance for all the same reasons - can’t jam/EW easily, faster and more lethal, range.

The advantages are too strong, the effects too deterministic, the stakes too high.

I'm going to go hang some bird block around the yard now to keep our future drone overlords from getting too close to the house.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Tux said:

My very first point was a reflection of the fact that C-UAS will absolutely be highly competitive, dynamic, and ever changing.  So I mentioned that it might be an idea for forward-thinking nations to focus on autonomous C-UAS now, even more than on autonomous ground-attack drones.  Get ahead of the game.  Establish and then try to maintain C-UAS superiority.  Lead everyone to question the deterministic necessity of these things as soon as possible.  Once you do that the imperative to develop and use them is weakened and maybe people will fear the systems more than they will the consequences of not having them.  Because, let's be honest, fear is always the arbiter of this kind of thing.

Ok, I am still not entirely clear on your theory of change here to be honest. We can focus on C-UAS but then why would we not also focus on UAS themselves for offensive operations as well?  Superiority means “freedom of own action while denying same to enemy”.  We want to stop their autonomous systems cold and allow ours to maul them with impunity.  This gives me deterministic options for both deterrence and compellance.  Otherwise I am stopping their UAS cold and then still have to risk human lives to finish them off which is not going to be politically acceptable.

 Now if I can demonstrate autonomous unmanned superiority from the outset the war doesn’t even need to start (I.e. deterrence)…no?  But superiority has to be for both offence and defence.  And offence is going to involve those nasty ones.  Fear is the arbiter of these things and our fear of losing lives will likely drive us toward more fully autonomous solutions as opposed to regulating them.

We will likely try to manage these systems under existing LOAC frameworks and create collateral damage calculus to mitigate.  Outliers and rogue actors will of course let the damn things off the leash and do all sorts of bad.  I honestly do not see a total weapons ban standing (the existing one or a new one) based on the wind direction.  Super C-UAS will spin off more super UAS that can go in and do the killing at a distance.  The quest will be to the badest complete system on the battlefield.

[cesmonkey]

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[Tux]

10 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Ok, I am still not entirely clear on your theory of change here to be honest. We can focus on C-UAS but then why would we not also focus on UAS themselves for offensive operations as well?  Superiority means “freedom of own action while denying same to enemy”.  We want to stop their autonomous systems cold and allow ours to maul them with impunity.  This gives me deterministic options for both deterrence and compellance.  Otherwise I am stopping their UAS cold and then still have to risk human lives to finish them off which is not going to be politically acceptable.

 Now if I can demonstrate autonomous unmanned superiority from the outset the war doesn’t even need to start (I.e. deterrence)…no?  But superiority has to be for both offence and defence.  And offence is going to involve those nasty ones.  Fear is the arbiter of these things and our fear of losing lives will likely drive us toward more fully autonomous solutions as opposed to regulating them.

We will likely try to manage these systems under existing LOAC frameworks and create collateral damage calculus to mitigate.  Outliers and rogue actors will of course let the damn things off the leash and do all sorts of bad.  I honestly do not see a total weapons ban standing (the existing one or a new one) based on the wind direction.  Super C-UAS will spin off more super UAS that can go in and do the killing at a distance.  The quest will be to the badest complete system on the battlefield.

Ok, well I will have to take the hit on not being fully understood. I will think about it some more.  I’m not entirely sure the idea I’m trying to communicate is valuable enough to justify the thread-space it’s consuming, at this point.

[cesmonkey]

 

[danfrodo]

I hereby swear that if M Johnson actually allows for big aid package to Ukraine that I will not call him any more bad names.  Until the next UKR aid package he blocks.  UKR needs this so badly.  I wonder how long before US 155mm & patriot ordnance is actually on site at the front?

 

[JonS]

21 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

  I wonder how long before US 155mm & patriot ordnance is actually on site at the front?

The one thing that the US is indisputably great at is logistics. I would say "days".

[FancyCat]

what a goddamn useless sham, 2 months of waiting for literally the same version as the Senate bill.

[cesmonkey]

Quote

In this episode of the Need to Know, host John Milewski explores the evolving landscape of warfare shaped by unmanned aerial vehicles with his guest, Dr. Jack Watling. Dr. Watling is a Wilson Center Global Fellow and senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute. They discuss a new study, co-authored by Jack, that focuses on the impact of UAVs on land forces, drawing insights from contemporary conflicts like the one in Ukraine. From precision strikes to procurement challenges, this discussion navigates the complexities of adapting military strategies to technological advancements. It also provides valuable information for lawmakers who will be making funding decisions on weapons systems that are changing the way wars are conducted.

 

[poesel]

6 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Then they came for der Mittelstand....

I keep posting energy tech stuff because the modular/miniature/precision armaments revolution is absolutely experiencing the exact same dynamics, just not so well documented (yet).

The West will innovate, but the Chinese will beat us to mass market, every time. With quality more than adequate for purpose. As innovative firms and their ecosystems starve and die, so too will innovation.

Solar panels are now used as fences in Germany because they are more affordable than the usual fencing.

The market standard for solar panels is now moving to Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (#TOPCon) technology, which improves solar cell architecture to reduce efficiency losses.

The technology was developed by Germany's Fraunhofer Institute in 2013, but large-scale manufacturing takes place mostly in China.

"European manufacturers have no money to change to the new technology. So now there is no competitive advantage anymore and they have to sell old technology."

https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/squeeze-on-european-solar-manufacturers-curbs-innovation-cementing-china-s-lead-81072375

 

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:

- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future

Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.

OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

3 hours ago, cesmonkey said:

 

This makes me think, that the idea behind Johnson's obstruction was to delay the Ukraine aid for so long, that once he stops stalling, he will be allowed to present it as "Johnson's plan" and will actually take political credit for it. That would be a really devious plan. Macchiavelli could not hold a candle to him.

[billbindc]

23 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

This makes me think, that the idea behind Johnson's obstruction was to delay the Ukraine aid for so long, that once he stops stalling, he will be allowed to present it as "Johnson's plan" and will actually take political credit for it. That would be a really devious plan. Macchiavelli could not hold a candle to him.

No.

Johnson is a weak speaker with weak convictions presiding over a weak majority that has strong factions whose only unifying element is that they reject whatever Democrats want. Any three loons can stall and sidetrack legislation and often do. That is slowly translating into a more or less coalition government as Democrats over time become the essential element in keeping Johnson in office.

[danfrodo]

4 hours ago, poesel said:

no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare

Vertically oriented solar panels are a thing, I just saw a whole video about it (w manufacturers/installers/users being interviewed).  They are not installed as fences, but can double as fences.  Installing solar panels as fences would be really stupid & expensive, unless these are old, worn out ones that don't work anymore.

edit: By the way, california generated enough renewable energy to provide 100% of grid demand for for 30 of last 38 days.  That's california, the 6th largest economy on earth.  

Edited April 18 by danfrodo

[Battlefront.com]

Recently Rep Greene has been babbling the "Ukraine is Nazi" Kremlin talking point lately in her crazed attempt to help out Putin.  She got her butt handed to her in Congressional testimony:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601264-moskowitz-confronts-greene-on-ukraine-nazi-remarks/

And a Dem was kind enough to point out that Greene has openly embraced white supremacy (aka American Nazism):

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601568-frost-condemns-greene-for-disavowing-white-supremacists-damn-hypocrisy/

It's always entertaining to watch real Nazis say we shouldn't fund fake Nazis in their fight against real Nazis.

Steve

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Recently Rep Greene has been babbling the "Ukraine is Nazi" Kremlin talking point lately in her crazed attempt to help out Putin.  She got her butt handed to her in Congressional testimony:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601264-moskowitz-confronts-greene-on-ukraine-nazi-remarks/

And a Dem was kind enough to point out that Greene has openly embraced white supremacy (aka American Nazism):

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601568-frost-condemns-greene-for-disavowing-white-supremacists-damn-hypocrisy/

It's always entertaining to watch real Nazis say we shouldn't fund fake Nazis in their fight against real Nazis.

Steve

ah yes, the most powerful kingmaker in the GOP, showing her brilliant colors again.

Meanwhile, stuff happening in the war.  Airfield hit in Crimea.  Tank has much bigger instantaneous bavovna than one would expect.  And flooding in RU, where residents go online to chastise Putin for the lack of sufficient response & aid -- that'll go well for them.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/4/17/2235660/-Russian-stuff-blowing-up-Ukraine-launches-devastating-attack-on-Crimean-airfield?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web

 

[MikeyD]

21 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It's always entertaining to watch real Nazis say we shouldn't fund fake Nazis in their fight against real Nazis.

Remember when Tucker Carlson was interviewing Putin who recited his boilerplate spiel about invading Ukraine to 'de-nazify' it, and Tucker looked personally offended by the remark.

[OldSarge]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Recently Rep Greene has been babbling the "Ukraine is Nazi" Kremlin talking point lately in her crazed attempt to help out Putin.  She got her butt handed to her in Congressional testimony:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601264-moskowitz-confronts-greene-on-ukraine-nazi-remarks/

And a Dem was kind enough to point out that Greene has openly embraced white supremacy (aka American Nazism):

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4601568-frost-condemns-greene-for-disavowing-white-supremacists-damn-hypocrisy/

It's always entertaining to watch real Nazis say we shouldn't fund fake Nazis in their fight against real Nazis.

Steve

And CNN's Erin Burnett is calling her out for being the talk of Russian State TV:
Here's what Russian media is saying about Marjorie Taylor Greene's push to end Ukraine aid

'The Gipper' has to be rolling in his grave to know there are GOP members, like MTG, who are opposing the very type of bills he would've support - and being congratulated by our  enemies for it.

A portion of the Ukrainian aid package is earmarked for expanding and modernizing US muntions production:

"The Biden Administration has proposed that $3.1 billion of a much larger Ukraine aid bill be spent on munition production and modernization. "
https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2024/02/army-aims-double-155mm-shell-production-october/393943/

 

Edited April 18 by OldSarge

[chrisl]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

Vertically oriented solar panels are a thing, I just saw a whole video about it (w manufacturers/installers/users being interviewed).  They are not installed as fences, but can double as fences.  Installing solar panels as fences would be really stupid & expensive, unless these are old, worn out ones that don't work anymore.

edit: By the way, california generated enough renewable energy to provide 100% of grid demand for for 30 of last 38 days.  That's california, the 6th largest economy on earth.  

If your panels aren't on a 2-axis gimbal you probably want to install them tilted at the same angle as your lattitude.  Germany is far enough north that it will put them 45-50 degrees-ish, so they'll be high enough to be a fence and at about the right angle.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, OldSarge said:

And CNN's Erin Burnett is calling her out for being the talk of Russian State TV:
Here's what Russian media is saying about Marjorie Taylor Greene's push to end Ukraine aid

'The Gipper' has to be rolling in his grave to know there are GOP members, like MTG, who are opposing the very type of bills he would've support - and being congratulated by our  enemies for it.

A portion of the Ukrainian aid package is earmarked for expanding and modernizing US muntions production:

"The Biden Administration has proposed that $3.1 billion of a much larger Ukraine aid bill be spent on munition production and modernization. "
https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2024/02/army-aims-double-155mm-shell-production-october/393943/

 

To paraphrase the comedian Jeff Foxworthy...

"You know you are a Kremlin shill when you appear on Russian TV more than American TV".

There would also be something about a porch and how the American TV doesn't work but the Russian TV, which sits on top of it, works fine.  But I don't think that's necessary to get my point across.

Steve