Russian Special Military Operation in the Ukraine - Mark IV: The Partitioning of Discussion

[The Ugly One]

Stealth planes are only stealthy to electronics. Satellite imagery and cameras can still see them

Cameras and radar systems both do fundamentally the same thing, respond to electromagnetic waves bouncing off things. The reason cameras suck is the wavelengths they react to are so small that they bounce off anything and everything, including crap like dust particles and water vapor. It's why a camera can be defeated by a cloud.

Radar reacts to wavelengths thousands of times longer than visible light, which don't bounce off much. Steel, aluminum, goose meat...the atmosphere, not so much. That's why with radar, I don't need a high-res photographic image to know there's something coming at me.

Imagine if you could sweep the sky with a spotlight, and objects up to 60 miles away would glow so brightly that you could see them through clouds, during the day. That's basically what a radar is.

 

[prolapsed_cranium]

A better question is how much air power can the US project after a month of maximum intensity operations. Even better is how many sorties will they manage after ~6 months.

And access to GPS + com + intel sats. What happens if the US loses that? Even if its just intermittent or local to the battlefield.

Even better question: how many airframes can the USAF tolerate losing before they stop sending planes into a contested AO?

 

[make_it_so]

I don't think it's "staged" per se, but it instead speaks to the tactical doctrine the Russians are using for their drones.

The grenade drone videos show the drones being used overwhelmingly as "harassing fire", where they're used against sleeping/resting/resupplying troops (presumably) away from the front lines, similar to the tactics of the Night Witches and their PO-2s in WW2.

The videos of the Lancets show them being used for similar-ish targets, like converting mobility-killed (but still recoverable) vehicles into hard-kills without the need to be within LoS and use a slightly more expensive Kornet (~$28k vs ~$20k). I've also seen the Lancets used for various forms of "harrassing fire" against rear vehicle targets as well.

The drone warfare seems to be mainly used as a "nowhere on the battlefield is safe" weapon, which aids in stressing out the enemy, forcing them to maintain full vigilance and guard during times that would normally be a chance for R&R, etc. It also gives opportunities to take out targets that would otherwise be inaccessible or inadvisable given the risk/reward. That's been my observations on this at least.

Okay, that's all neat and everything, it doesn't address the point I was making about that video.

There's no one there. There is zero indication that anyone is there. You have an armored vehicle with an open door, an open hatch, and an unmanned turret. There's no sign of any activity that any supplies are being taken from that truck into that MT-LB. And when that drone crashes into the truck, there's no sign of anyone looking out of the MT-LB to see what the fuck just happened, much less any sign of them starting the thing up to get the hell out of there.

Which is why I say the thing looks staged. It looks like they just found an abandoned vehicle or two, and set it up so they could film a Lancet "attack" for propaganda purposes. I think this is further strengthened by the fact that the Lancet went after the truck rather than the MT-LB, which shouldn't be a problem since the Lancets have shaped charged warheads that will perforate armor. To me that shows that they know it's abandoned (or it's already one of their own) and they don't want to destroy it because they want to use it.

 

[JoseRaulChupacabra]

Cameras and radar systems both do fundamentally the same thing, respond to electromagnetic waves bouncing off things. The reason cameras suck is the wavelengths they react to are so small that they bounce off anything and everything, including crap like dust particles and water vapor. It's why a camera can be defeated by a cloud.

Radar reacts to wavelengths thousands of times longer than visible light, which don't bounce off much. Steel, aluminum, goose meat...the atmosphere, not so much. That's why with radar, I don't need a high-res photographic image to know there's something coming at me.

Imagine if you could sweep the sky with a spotlight, and objects up to 60 miles away would glow so brightly that you could see them through clouds, during the day. That's basically what a radar is.

This. Not to mention you'll need to get their heading as well.

Remember, you're dealing with a vehicle that can travel much faster than the speed of sound. In order to kill a fighter plane you need to plop a missile somewhere along its projected flight path, and it needs to be quite precise because the pilot can perform evasive maneuvers.

I'll also add that people don't seem to understand just how fast these objects are as most speed is expressed in km/h (or miles if you use freedom units). To put things into perspective, IIRC, the typical cruising speed for a fighter is around Mach0.7 which is ~238 meters in ONE SECOND.

If a missile mistimes even by a little, the plane is already far away. Now just imagine the sort of headaches ICBMs are with their much faster speeds.

 

[WelfareNiggerQueen]

Warning: Gory - Recent drone video of grenades being dropped on UA troops, Seversk direction:
View attachment 4953313
View attachment 4953317

from /chug/:
Russians: Fly the Yak-42 ㅤㅤㅤㅤ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-42
View attachment 4949956
Ukes: Fly the ACK-42%
View attachment 4949972

Bonus: New Lancet vid

edit: fixed first videos to local archive

I foresee shotguns coming back into common usage but not normal 12 gauge shit. larger bore shotguns still with buckshot but more of it along with more powder behind it. Do Eastern Euros still pass off failed auto cannon barrels to shotgun factories?

Didn't Israel oy vey the entire arab world with like 6 mortars? Even if we agree that an IDF Supermensugen is worth 50 mutts, it is still not a glowing endorsement for kebab kombat ability.

Russia is not at its peak, but it was the absolute rapemachine that beat the best drilled, most disciplined, smartest lead army in the world ever, and reduced half of Europe to the 19th century by burning it to dust and first put a man in space.

Comparing them to kebabs and senor cartel el cokes is a mistake. It is like comparing syphilis and aids to rabies. Even if we grant that the US has the best air force, the Russians aren't bad enough to compare with the other two in that sector. Saddam also did not want to deploy the around 100 working fighters he had. The Russians have like ten times more at least, and the Americans thirty times more, though it mostly is the F-16, but hey, it is an old reliable one.


And you know the kicker? Most well funded of European nations are closer to Iraq then Ruskies or Burgers in terms of an air force. Uk has around 200, Romania has 30, half of them F16s, the rest old MIGs. Hungary has 12. Unless Uncle Joe sends over a LOT of his old F-16s to eastern europe, eastern european air forces will be about as useful as a wet paperbag protecting the popcorn from Nickocado Avocado.

If you switched out the modern aircrafts to the old WW2 air fleets, it would propably do just as well due to just how ridiculously small number of modern planes europoors have.

I find it funny when Euro's flex their military might and pride themselves on it. Like damn nigger oooooo so mighty, you only have 10 of our old stock broken aircraft downgraded for export. I see Finn niggers doing this shit a lot and while praising their crack head prime minister that always has a deer in headlights look like she's currently zoinked out on Meth or something.

 

[Betonhaus]

This. Not to mention you'll need to get their heading as well.

Remember, you're dealing with a vehicle that can travel much faster than the speed of sound. In order to kill a fighter plane you need to plop a missile somewhere along its projected flight path, and it needs to be quite precise because the pilot can perform evasive maneuvers.

I'll also add that people don't seem to understand just how fast these objects are as most speed is expressed in km/h (or miles if you use freedom units). To put things into perspective, IIRC, the typical cruising speed for a fighter is around Mach0.7 which is ~238 meters in ONE SECOND.

If a missile mistimes even by a little, the plane is already far away. Now just imagine the sort of headaches ICBMs are with their much faster speeds.

I may be mistaken, but doesn't some of the latest generation of American fighter planes have very poor maneuverability because it was assumed they are so fast they could outfly anything trying to attack them? I'd imagine that doesn't work as well when their flight path is being predictable enough that you can fire missiles to the location they're going to be in

 

[Cold Root Beer]

Okay, that's all neat and everything, it doesn't address the point I was making about that video.

Yes, it does. In the video it looks like the vehicle may be stuck in the mud or threw a track:



So, lacking an ARV at the moment to recover/repair it the crew bails out and leaves it to be recovered later. Later never comes because the drone converts it to a hard-kill without the need to occupy the territory.

The same phenomena can be observed with the "grenade dropped into open hatch" videos: tank gets stuck/mobility killed, crew bails and doesn't shut the hatches behind them, drone turns recoverable mobility-kill into hard-kill.

The "there is no one around" is a feature, not a bug. Presumably these are the targets the slower moving drones are looking to target to avoid the risk of wasting it due to AA or small arms fire.

 

[Meh123]

This. Not to mention you'll need to get their heading as well.

Remember, you're dealing with a vehicle that can travel much faster than the speed of sound. In order to kill a fighter plane you need to plop a missile somewhere along its projected flight path, and it needs to be quite precise because the pilot can perform evasive maneuvers.

I'll also add that people don't seem to understand just how fast these objects are as most speed is expressed in km/h (or miles if you use freedom units). To put things into perspective, IIRC, the typical cruising speed for a fighter is around Mach0.7 which is ~238 meters in ONE SECOND.

If a missile mistimes even by a little, the plane is already far away. Now just imagine the sort of headaches ICBMs are with their much faster speeds.

I don't think anyone think shooting down incoming MIRV is feasible by any means. In space, maybe, maybe not, still extremely hard.
ICBMs are most vulnerable while still ascending, before warhead separation.
You won't shoot down a warhead coming in 8km/s that is also armored to withstand reentry heating.

Edit:

Yes, it does. In the video it looks like the vehicle may be stuck in the mud or threw a track:

View attachment 4955496

So, lacking an ARV at the moment to recover/repair it the crew bails out and leaves it to be recovered later. Later never comes because the drone converts it to a hard-kill without the need to occupy the territory.

The same phenomena can be observed with the "grenade dropped into open hatch" videos: tank gets stuck/mobility killed, crew bails and doesn't shut the hatches behind them, drone turns recoverable mobility-kill into hard-kill.

The "there is no one around" is a feature, not a bug. Presumably these are the targets the slower moving drones are looking to target to avoid the risk of wasting it due to AA or small arms fire.

Note that the drone actually stuck a van parked next to the radar. Adds credibility to the repair story.

 

[JoseRaulChupacabra]

I may be mistaken, but doesn't some of the latest generation of American fighter planes have very poor maneuverability because it was assumed they are so fast they could outfly anything trying to attack them? I'd imagine that doesn't work as well when their flight path is being predictable enough that you can fire missiles to the location they're going to be in

If you mean the F-35, the news of its poor maneuvrability is mostly from a control calibration test (IIRC) that was sensationalized. There's plenty of footage online showing off its agility.

 

[Rubick]

You can use more power but that comes with more noise to process out, or you can use another frequency band, but that makes it harder to track the target.

True, to everything you say. On the other hand processing power hasn't stood still. So filtering noise and or coexistence of different radio-frequency sources at the same time and in the same frequency band has come a long way. And generally it's rare that MiC uses the latest chips.

 

[JoseRaulChupacabra]

I don't think anyone think shooting down incoming MIRV is feasible by any means. In space, maybe, maybe not, still extremely hard.
ICBMs are most vulnerable while still ascending, before warhead separation.
You won't shoot down a warhead coming in 8km/s that is also armored to withstand reentry heating.

What I mean to say is that there are people out there asking why the burgers can't just intercept an ICBM if they get directly involved in Ukraine and trigger Putin.

It's literally too fucking fast, too fucking high, and or too fucking far.

 

[White_N]

Another terrorist attack, now in St. Petersburg, a bomb blast killed Vladlen Tatarsky, a well-known Russian military correspondent

Spoiler

Vladlen with Dugina

---

The Insider managed to identify two of the three Russian servicemen whom the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine suspects of raping a resident of the Kiev region. One of them is Irkutsk native Kholmurzaev Kirill Saydumarovych, born in 2000.

The "Book of Executioners of the Ukrainian People" states that the settlement where the rape took place was Bucha. Kholmurzaev responded to the message and stated that he had not been there in March 2022 and, accordingly, had not raped a local resident. After that, he sent the following message and added the journalist to The Insider's black list.

https://t.me/theinsider/18025

 

[Meh123]

Back to the drone spergery - another lancet video from the same channel - refueling truck gets hit next to a tank. You can see a guy running away around 0:20

 

[Yak-130 Mitten]

I may be mistaken, but doesn't some of the latest generation of American fighter planes have very poor maneuverability because it was assumed they are so fast they could outfly anything trying to attack them? I'd imagine that doesn't work as well when their flight path is being predictable enough that you can fire missiles to the location they're going to be in

You are thinking of 3rd gen, like F-104. In recent years supermaneuverability became very imortant, partly because sukhois were performing cobra fairly effortlessly on every air show and partly because it greatly aids in dogfights or missile defence.

 

[Meh123]

What I mean to say is that there are people out there asking why the burgers can't just intercept an ICBM if they get directly involved in Ukraine and trigger Putin.

It's literally too fucking fast, too fucking high, and or too fucking far.

Also, the russians moved a bunch of their ICBMs to mobile launchers which are much harder to preemptively destroy or intercept at launch.

 

[JoseRaulChupacabra]

True, to everything you say. On the other hand processing power hasn't stood still. So filtering noise and or coexistence of different radio-frequency sources at the same time and in the same frequency band has come a long way. And generally it's rare that MiC uses the latest chips.

I think there are also physical constraints to it because of the way wavelengths interact with antenna sizes. Not to mention once you start cramming power into a system, you inherently increase its cooling requirements, and detecting an object with a very small RCS from far away would require A LOT of power if brute signal strength would be the method of detection.

Now I could be wrong and maybe such things are not really a concern.

Definitely where radar tech would go would be very interesting.

 

[Rubick]

I think there are also physical constraints to it because of the way wavelengths interact with antenna sizes.

No expert, but that makes sense.

Not to mention once you start cramming power into a system, you inherently increase its cooling requirements, and detecting an object with a very small RCS from far away would require A LOT of power if brute signal strength would be the method of detection.

Now I could be wrong and maybe such things are not really a concern.

Definitely where radar tech would go would be very interesting.

Cooling is less of a problem for ground based stuff. It's the overall power requirement that's the hurdle. From what I read.

As far as where radar tech is going. Photonic radars are around the corner.

 

[Yak-130 Mitten]

To the radar thing, I remember a short bit in a science fiction book series called Lost Fleet (It's really good, it gets my seal of approval). In a solar system that's been cut off from military updates for centuries, maybe even millenia, the fleet encounters a radar probe. They are easily dispatched, and the fleet commander comments on how useless they are, especially in space. Radar waves have to travel to the target and come back, while optical sensors only need to pick up the photons of the object traveling at the speed of light.

I think we are going the same way, where optics eventually get so good that they will be able to track targets in real time across distances limited only by curvature of the earth (which in itself already is a problem for normal radars, so wouldn't be surprised if these kind of defences would be put up in space). Think satellites, only much quicker, and able to track multiple targets at the same time in real time.

 

[Sock-to-Lurk]

A big aspect is that the US imperialism is getting worse and worse.

Trade in dollars and pay for KFCs? Sure. Better than soviets.

Do all that, suck the troondick, rapefugees and get depression for the ukraine?
Worse than soviets.

Russia and China aren't good. In fact they are bad.
But globohomo and USA has gotten objectively and noticably worse.

It is what Uganda had realised. De know da wae.

Its a scale, the benefits of being a buddy of the US are better than the Russo-China block no doubt.
But as things are currently the US is doing nothing but degrade its quality of life and R&D purely for an ideological mind virus that gives nothing in return, very similar to how the islamic golden age of science and technology ended when the most fervent anti-science dumbfuck got in charge of the caliphate.
Meanwhile Russia and China despite their obvious cultural and economical flaws are very practically minded. focused on raw tangible results to improve their standing on the world and now that US money is no longer in the table they have to scrap by and get creative with what they have to make do, which is great for creativity.
I can't predict the future of course, for all i know the Russo-China block could collapse tomorrow and the US get a second golden age, but if things continue like this it'll probably take only a generation for the scale to tip to the other side

 

[WENDY DENG 2020]

Is it just me or does NAFO really fucking glow?

Absolutely. I am currently fucking with them. Calling them glow niggers.