How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[ArmouredTopHat]

55 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The F-35 argument is distracting.  Fine, if it makes you feel any better I will say you are 100% correct about the F-35.  I can afford to do that because it has zero impact on any of the relevant arguments I've been making here.  All I have to do is go back and revise my initial F-35 post and swap in the Littoral and the point I made is exactly the same.

I think the conclusion is that there are good projects and bad projects, based on goal, time, funding and outcome. Countries are capable of undergoing both. 
 

33 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I think the F-35 program is pretty interesting, because if the stealth works as well as it should (and we have some evidence from Israel it does, but not a lot), it is a genuinely transformative.

If Ukrainians has 100 F-35s, which could fly and drop smart bombs, not only over the frontline but also hundred kilometers into Russia, because they are untargetable to Russian air defence, the war would look very different.

If the stealth doesn't work as well as it should, then it is still good upgrade from F-16 or whatever due to the networked sensors and unmanned integration, but not as good and maybe not worth the money.

Stealth does not quite work like that in practicality. Stealth does not confer a guaranteed invisibility as such but more a much reduced ability to target your platform at certain ranges. Russian AD will be able to pick up an F-35 on Radar...but only at much closer ranges than say a 4th gen, at least in order to get an accurate track to fire a missile. 

What makes stealth so dangerous is that in the case of F-35 going up against AD, it can get far closer to said defence than a 4th gen platform to launch its own weapon systems. The same principle applies to air combat. In both cases the F-35 can also forward this information to other platforms in range to make the strike and even conduct EWAR against the target in question. Its that combination of low observableness and battlefield management that make it so good. You cannot fly with impunity but you can fly with a hell of a lot less constraint against things that would otherwise easily target a 4th gen airframe. 

Edited July 8 by ArmouredTopHat

[ArmouredTopHat]

To further nip this in the bud, here are some additional bits of information and context.
 

F-35s were able to achieve objectives in the most harshest of air combat environments that 4th gen platforms could not (which also suffered heavy losses) These exercises really in effect showed that 4th gens are increasingly less viable going forward in peer to peer combat.

New graduates on the F-35 were easily out flying veteran pilots. That alone should be telling you something. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/psychological-effect-f-35-stealth-legacy-fighter-2017-5

Fighting against 5th gens is an utter nightmare:

Legacy jets, with the help of AWACs “may have a general idea that there’s an F-35 out there, but they don’t know exactly where we are,” said Flatley.

The distinct information disadvantage causes pilots to get tunnel vision, according to Flatley.

“Everything they see becomes the F-35 out there,” said Flatley. “Every radar hit, every communication is about the stealth jet. They want to illuminate or eliminate a threat they can’t handle.”

The fear and paranoia caused by the presence of stealth jets in a battle has a widespread effect on adversaries that “includes extremely capable legacy jets and certainly includes everything available to adversaries,” said Flatley of updated F-16s, F-15s, and even enemy air defences like Russia’s S-400.

Even extremely capable operators fall prey to the F-35’s psychological advantage. “It has nothing to do with their skill or technology. They’re at such a technological disadvantage,” said Flatley. “I’ve seen guys in F-18s turn directly in front of me and show me their tails cause they have no idea I’m there.”

In the end, “It aggregates to a completely inept response to what we’re doing in the air,” said Flatley. “People are so hellbent on shooting down the stealth fighter that they invariably make mistakes that I can exploit.”

A further note on the sensory abilities of F-35:

Well the largest obvious attraction is it's a (5th generation) stealth fighter. This makes it harder to track by radar and IR which increases it's survivability against other fighters and ground based air defence systems. But the real improvement for the aircraft is it's sensor systems and how they work together. It has a very advanced multi-function radar in the nose that can track air and surface targets simultaneously while also being used by the electronic warfare system. The radar does all of this while being very difficult to track and target by carefully controlling the radio waves it sends out (this is called low probability of intercept, LPI) It can also create insanely high resolution ground mapping in near real time. Unlike most 4th generation fighters the F-35 carries a IR targeting pod internally, it also acts as a long range IRST for passive air tracking as well as ground tracking and targeting. It then has a 360 IR based camera system that allows for target tracking and identification all around the aircraft, it also allows the pilot to see through the aircraft using the helmet mounted display on the visor of the helmet, it's also part of the missile warning system. All this information that is gathered is fused together (this is the term sensor fusion that gets thrown around a lot) and only relevant information is shown to the pilot in as simple of way as possible reducing work loads. All the information, even the stuff the pilot doesn't necessarily get shown, is shared seamlessly between multiple F-35's as well as command and other friendly forces.

In short, F-35 is the culmination of many lessons learned in modern air combat and stands to be the new standard for 5th gen platforms going forward, all delivered at a relatively good price to the point where a lot of countries can afford it whilst also serving as a fantastic force multiplier for current jets thanks to its sensory systems. We talked about ISR dominance going forward in general, the F-35 is the personification of that in the airspace. Its going to see you before you see it, and its likely kill you without you even realising it. It is absolutely the future. 

I apologise for the slam dunk but I have seen enough F-35 misinformation to be tired of it. 

Edited July 8 by ArmouredTopHat

[Battlefront.com]

42 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

I apologise for the slam dunk but I have seen enough F-35 misinformation to be tired of it. 

And this has almost nothing to do with this thread and so I've tired of it as well.

Now a message for all.  I agree with Kraft that we've gotten ourselves too deep in the weeds of the tech and are losing focus on the war.  I know there's not a lot of information being churned out right now, but what is coming into this thread is not really getting enough attention.

As one that has helped derail us into the weeds, I'd be happy if we returned to 1 page of posts per day that are all relevant.

Steve

[Holien]

Thanks  

[ArmouredTopHat]

This really does seem pretty intentional, outside of a malfunction on the guidance. 

[Eddy]

Here's Ander's summary of the war right now for those who might have missed it

 

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

Seems it was not the only medical facility hit in Kyiv today either. 

[dan/california]

 

47 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

And this has almost nothing to do with this thread and so I've tired of it as well.

Now a message for all.  I agree with Kraft that we've gotten ourselves too deep in the weeds of the tech and are losing focus on the war.  I know there's not a lot of information being churned out right now, but what is coming into this thread is not really getting enough attention.

As one that has helped derail us into the weeds, I'd be happy if we returned to 1 page of posts per day that are all relevant.

Steve

Well let me at least make an attempt. This missile is the way to knock back the glide bomb problem. It is the only even vaguely viable way of doing that I have seen, and Ukraine needs it YESTERDAY. 

Edited July 8 by dan/california

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/china-bealrus-polish-border-nato-summit-drill-ukraine-russia-war-defense-aggression-fight-ministry/

China and Belarus hold joint drills near Polish border ahead of NATO summit

Two key Russia allies claim to be responding to the “aggressive foreign policy” of Western countries.

 

If there is a better way for the bad guys to clarify peoples thinking before the NATO summit, I can't figure out what it would be.

[Eddy]

45 minutes ago, dan/california said:

This missile is the way to knock back the glide bomb problem. It is the only even vaguely viable way of doing that I have seen, and Ukraine needs it YESTERDAY. 

I think it's only in a testing stage at the moment.

Here's the War Zone article about it that appeared while the thread was, erm, discussing other things 

AIM-174 Super Hornet-Launched Variant Of SM-6 Missile Breaks Cover In Hawaii (Updated) (twz.com)

Quote

The missiles are marked as inert (meaning no warhead is fitted) and also carry blue bands to denote this and that they do not have a live motor. A black and yellow marking close to the center of the missile body appears to be a calibration marking — making it easier to study the behavior of the missile after it is released or for captive-carry tests.

 

[Battlefront.com]

Washington Post article detailing the success Ukraine is having in containing the Kharkiv incursion forces.  Successful interdiction of Russian supplies has meant they are without food, water, and ammo:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/07/08/ukraine-intercepts-russia-kharkiv-supplies/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e3e5ce%2F668c0a5416f37038eab83da9%2F5b6a1f5bade4e277958a3cb5%2F18%2F54%2F668c0a5416f37038eab83da9

Steve

[sburke]

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Washington Post article detailing the success Ukraine is having in containing the Kharkiv incursion forces.  Successful interdiction of Russian supplies has meant they are without food, water, and ammo:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/07/08/ukraine-intercepts-russia-kharkiv-supplies/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e3e5ce%2F668c0a5416f37038eab83da9%2F5b6a1f5bade4e277958a3cb5%2F18%2F54%2F668c0a5416f37038eab83da9

Steve

in case folks can't access. I posted some of the content on the previous page.  Good article.

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, sburke said:

in case folks can't access. I posted some of the content on the previous page.  Good article.

Hah!  I thought some of it looked familiar

We've seen some reports prior to this article that indicated that Ukraine is doing a good job at interdicting Russian supplies.  However, it is possible some of the success might be due to the Russian units being largely abandoned.  They did what they were supposed to do to the extent they were able to do it, now they aren't important enough to care about.  We've seen it before.

Steve

[ArmouredTopHat]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Hah!  I thought some of it looked familiar

We've seen some reports prior to this article that indicated that Ukraine is doing a good job at interdicting Russian supplies.  However, it is possible some of the success might be due to the Russian units being largely abandoned.  They did what they were supposed to do to the extent they were able to do it, now they aren't important enough to care about.  We've seen it before.

Steve

It really makes me wonder at what point do units get fed up enough to stop enabling this abandonment. 

[omae2]

1 hour ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

This really does seem pretty intentional, outside of a malfunction on the guidance. 

Because it is. Why wouldn't they do this? Who gonna hold them responsible? Do you think that putin or his staff gonna sat in Hague waiting for judgment over his crimes? The point of these attacks is to rub it into the noise of the Ukrainians. To make them feel like all this is futile. There will be no justice. So they feel more sick of this war. When Israel came under attack the strongest western armies flew to help, when Ukrainian hospitals getting bomb daily its business as usual.

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

 

If there is a better way for the bad guys to clarify peoples thinking before the NATO summit, I can't figure out what it would be.

What the heck is China doing???  Siding with disruptive evil empire that has no money against its long time trade partners.  So unbelievably stupid.  Dictator just keeps doubling down on militant nationalism instead of trying to help bolster world economic stability which is something China really needs.  All the major trading nations want stability.  The only folks that don't are Putin, other WannaBeDictators, and Lords Littlefinger and Sauron.

 

[FancyCat]

History of Russian airstrikes on hospitals is extensive, going back to Syria. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/world/middleeast/russia-bombing-syrian-hospitals.html

Poland and Ukraine signed a agreement that includes provisions for discussing future cooperation for Poland to potentially shoot down targets heading towards Poland from Ukrainian territory or targets that cross into Polish airspace before entering Ukraine. 

Quote

Today in Warsaw, Poland’s Prime Minister @donaldtusk and I signed the Agreement on Security Cooperation between Ukraine and the Republic of Poland. This unprecedented document includes a provision for shooting down Russian missiles and drones in Ukraine’s airspace that are fired in the direction of Poland. We are committed to implementing it. We will also cooperate on combat aircraft—both those already transferred by Poland and the possibility of transferring more in the future. In our security agreement, we have formalized the formation and training of the Ukrainian Legion, a new volunteer military unit, on Polish territory. This unit will be trained in Poland and equipped by our partners. Thank you for your solidarity with our country and people, and for all your support and assistance!

 

From Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-poland-security-deal-aid-package-war-russia/

Quote

Zelenskyy and Tusk also agreed to discuss the possibility of shooting down Russian missiles and drones fired in the direction of Poland. Several such weapons have crossed over Poland’s airspace, but Warsaw has not intercepted them.

 

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

History of Russian airstrikes on hospitals is extensive, going back to Syria. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/world/middleeast/russia-bombing-syrian-hospitals.html

Poland and Ukraine signed a agreement that includes provisions for discussing future cooperation for Poland to potentially shoot down targets heading towards Poland from Ukrainian territory or targets that cross into Polish airspace before entering Ukraine. 

 

From Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-poland-security-deal-aid-package-war-russia/

 

This is an interesting development.  It is the first overt agreement I can recall that explicitly ties a NATO country to direct military action against Russia.  I'm sure there were plenty of behind-the-scenes warnings to Russia, in particular about shipping in the Black Sea, so my guess is Russia crossed some line they were warned not to cross.

Steve

[Letter from Prague]

I'm pretty sure the Russians will now try to hit Poland to see if they flinch. We'll see if they do.

[dan/california]

2 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I'm pretty sure the Russians will now try to hit Poland to see if they flinch. We'll see if they do.

Taking a risk of broadening the war before the U.S. election seems less than bright, even by Russian standards.

 

Edited July 8 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

21 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Taking a risk of broadening the war before the U.S. election seems less than bright, even by Russian standards.

 

It's not much of a risk.  The pro-Russian group will be pleased and the isolationists and Russian propaganda brainwashed people will say "this is exactly why we shouldn't be helping Ukraine"

Steve

[The_Capt]

56 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I'm pretty sure the Russians will now try to hit Poland to see if they flinch. We'll see if they do.

That will risk tripping and Article 5, at least if it is overt.  Maybe some under the waterline shenanigans but overt long range strikes into a NATO nation?  Well then a lot of this will truly become academic.  We will either see WW3 or the full on collapse of NATO (if they fail), either way all bets will be off.

Not sure Russia is at that point yet.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, FancyCat said:

History of Russian airstrikes on hospitals is extensive, going back to Syria. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/world/middleeast/russia-bombing-syrian-hospitals.html

Poland and Ukraine signed a agreement that includes provisions for discussing future cooperation for Poland to potentially shoot down targets heading towards Poland from Ukrainian territory or targets that cross into Polish airspace before entering Ukraine. 

 

From Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-poland-security-deal-aid-package-war-russia/

 

I honestly cannot understand the Russian logic in any of this.  First, is the theory that if they keep hitting children’s hospitals that Ukraine will tap out?  Why on earth is that even thought to be viable? Especially after they tried a bunch of brutality in this war and it got them nowhere.  And then there is the response from the West.  Killing sick children only leads to us pushing more resources and taking the leash off targeting restraints.  Does Russia honestly think we are going to go “whoa, hey they are hitting hospitals…we should back off?”

It is phenomenally dumb and has no win angle.  Do they think that Russian support for this war will go up by hitting hospitals?  No evidence of that.  I simply cannot see a “win” by doing stuff like this in any direction.  It does not attack critical military infrastructure. It does not aid military objectives.  It does not aid strategic objectives, or political ones for that matter.  It comes off as spiteful and small…not to mention illegal.

So why would they decide to do this?  It makes no sense.

[FancyCat]

at this point, if i wanted to win money, i would bet on Russia launching a attack that is maiming primarily civilians on occasions of NATO - Ukraine cooperation. i doubt Russia would try and hit Poland, maybe another test of flying missiles or drones into Polish airspace before entering Ukraine, hell maybe a attempt to force Ukraine to fire another air defense missile that hit the farmers previously. So this agreement might be helpful for ensuring no ARTICLE 5 issues actually if Poland intercepts stuff over Western Ukraine. 

In a very morbid manner, if Ukraine wants to hit the Crimea bridge, domestic and international opinion will not be too negative. Also the chances of Ukraine striking major Russian cities is gonna increase, including ballistic missiles, i mean sure the West has banned their equipment but only a fool would believe that Ukraine isn't trying to develop and manufacture their own missiles at this point, Hirm-2 as a example. 

1 minute ago, The_Capt said:

I honestly cannot understand the Russian logic in any of this.  First, is the theory that if they keep hitting children’s hospitals that Ukraine will tap out?  Why on earth is that even thought to be viable? Especially after they tried a bunch of brutality in this war and it got them nowhere.  And then there is the response from the West.  Killing sick children only leads to us pushing more resources and taking the leash off targeting restraints.  Does Russia honestly think we are going to go “whoa, hey they are hitting hospitals…we should back off?”

It is phenomenally dumb and has no win angle.  Do they think that Russian support for this war will go up by hitting hospitals?  No evidence of that.  I simply cannot see a “win” by doing stuff like this in any direction.  It does not attack critical military infrastructure. It does not aid military objectives.  It does not aid strategic objectives, or political ones for that matter.  It comes off as spiteful and small…not to mention illegal.

So why would they decide to do this?  It makes no sense.

Pretty simple! Brutality and Terror. I mean, their record, if you expand it, does have dividends. Chechnya is ruled by Russia's puppet, Syria remains under Assad somewhat ish. And if your attitude is that the lives of those you are bombing aren't worth anything, and their economic value is worthless, and that the only thing that matters is their obedience to satisfy your desire for your rulership, it's clear that Russia regards Chechnya and Syria as victories, and so its no wonder acting the same at Ukraine is not much a issue. 

And brutality is not merely a message to the victim, but also a message for the other potential future victims of Russia. 

And there are definitely dividends politically and strategically, and potentially militarily. If Russia's objective is to drain Ukraine, meaning things like draining the ability of the Ukrainian people to resist, certainly bombing hospitals and other civilian infrastructure is essential for forcing more refugee outflows to the rest of Europe. Civilian infrastructure is money, the more you destroy, the more it needs replacement. 

[The_Capt]

23 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Pretty simple! Brutality and Terror. I mean, their record, if you expand it, does have dividends. Chechnya is ruled by Russia's puppet, Syria remains under Assad somewhat ish. And if your attitude is that the lives of those you are bombing aren't worth anything, and their economic value is worthless, and that the only thing that matters is their obedience to satisfy your desire for your rulership, it's clear that Russia regards Chechnya and Syria as victories, and so its no wonder acting the same at Ukraine is not much a issue. 

And brutality is not merely a message to the victim, but also a message for the other potential future victims of Russia. 

And there are definitely dividends politically and strategically, and potentially militarily. If Russia's objective is to drain Ukraine, meaning things like draining the ability of the Ukrainian people to resist, certainly bombing hospitals and other civilian infrastructure is essential for forcing more refugee outflows to the rest of Europe. Civilian infrastructure is money, the more you destroy, the more it needs replacement. 

I think this is overdone and too simplistic in many ways.  I mean they have been waging terror strikes for two years now, have we seen up surges in people fleeing?  Brutality has to have a political goal, unless this is just spite and vengeance for the UA killing thousands of RA soldiers. There is no evidence of Ukraine being cowed, in fact when these strikes occur the opposite happens.

If this is the Russian theory, it is demonstrably broken.  To the point even they know it. Maybe the money thing, but that is a pretty long play.  
 
Now the one thing that does make a strange sort of sense is demonstration.  It does send a message to other state that may think about splitting away.  But wasn’t that entire facade torn down when they flubbed the invasion in the first place? I mean the Russian track record does not scream ironclad control of anything. Hard to take a menace seriously when it is getting mauled by a squirrel in terms of relative power.

I don’t know. Maybe we are just seeing irrational lashing out. Because it really makes no military or political sense by this point in the war.

Edited July 8 by The_Capt