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

[More AWS-8Q Than You]

you’re going to exotic places like Dayton, Ohio.

The Air Force museum is great and there's a Sheetz there now. On the other hand, if you wanted to impress people, Dayton is not on my list of cities in Ohio that will that in any way that isn't negative.

And yes, I know it's because Wright-Pat is the largest air force base in the world, but it's still Dayton.

 

[Abraham Lincoln]

Not true. Anyone can be beaten if their enemy has the will to actually defeat them. The USA has had no Will To Win since WW2. The solution to dealing with the Taliban was very simple: complete extermination of the Pashtun. This was quite achievable but politically distasteful.

The problem with a "kill then all" mentality in the modern era, is setting up precedent for others to do just the same.

Like our hohol nazi frens deciding it was time to solve the Donbass question once and for all.

I'm sure Russia and China would have been supplying the Taliban then, just to get back at America as well. Like how the Soviets and Chinese supplied the NVA and Vietcong during Vietnam or the Korean war. Where in both wars combined, the tonnage dropped was higher than all of WW2.

Though Afghanistan has had the British Empire invade them, the Soviet Union invade them and America invade them. All them disasters and mixed results.

Only great conquerors like Alexander can rule a place like Afghanistan. And for conquerors, its about submission to great men.

 

[Susanna]

Only great conquerors like Alexander can rule a place like Afghanistan. And for conquerors, its about submission to great men.

Alexander never really ruled anything. He spent the year 336BC "ruling" over Macedonia, but this was really just a matter of settling bribes and appointments so he could leave the kingship behind for his grand asian campaign. All the great reforms that made the Macedonian army under Alexander so successful were the work of Philip, his father. Philip II was the great Macedonian ruler.
Alexander was a splendid conqueror, but as soon as he died (an unparalleled decade of unbroken conquests later), his empire fell apart into the diadochi kingdoms, which spent the next century beating each other up. Some of the diadochi were effective rulers, but Alexander really wasn't. I don't dispute that he was the greatest commander in history, but even the most favourable view of him still only depicts a mediocre king.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

If the CCP decides to get serious, how long would it take for their weapons to get up to spec once heads start rolling?

They're already basically at spec. China can make stuff that's usually estimated to be ~80% as good as US/Japanese/Western European gear at half the price.

China can make a reasonable approximate of every NATO weapon system in use besides some really cutting edge energy weapons, nuclear aircraft carriers, and stealth bombers

Eh… Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that the Sidewinder is an IR missile?!

(Based on German WW2 developments if I’m not mistaken

The Sidewinder was an American invention through and through. The Germans were working on a primitive IR photocel to guide an air dropped anti ship glide bomb.

German AAM development was looking into wire guided missiles.

In other respects: Such as close up dogfights it’s less capable than its predecessors.

The F35 is limited by the fact that too many compromises were made during development. It had to do everything and as consequence is the master of little

The F-35 only has compromises relating to itd B and C versions in relation to the A model.

A stealth F-16 replacement would probably have ended up looking EXTREMELY similar to an F-35A.

The A matches the F-16 in performance excepting when you compare a "clean" unarmed F-16 and a F-35.

The amount of fixed wing combat aircraft killed by guns of fighter jets in the last 40 years is something like.... 1 or 2. It might be zero. I know a Venezuelan F-16 killed a turboprop OA-10 in the 1990s and there might be one more I'm forgetting.

Helicopters, maybe 1 or 2.

Dogfighting is about as relevant in 2024 as BVR or WVR missile combat was in 1950.

Even if the F35 is good, it does take a long ass maintenance and costs a lot.

So I would think that if you ised it, you would need to win quick, or get swamped by less good but still okay copies? Or did I misss something autistically?

It costs a bit less than it's European "peers" and probably less than the S. Korean and Turkish jets that aren't as capable.

Maintenance gets faster as more jets hit the fleet and maintainers get better.

If you're ok with the stealth coating getting degraded it's maintenance it a lot less.

It's Euro jet peers haven't really been used as much or in combat so they're maintained in essentially peacetime environments 24/7.

Basically no data on the Korean, Turkish or Chinese jets.

Russian jets are know for having short maintenance intervals.

A "less good copy" would still end up being a pretty expensive jet, once you get past the small and cheap F/A-50 and JF-17 your cost hits $50 million or more a jet FAST.

It wasn’t created as an über top of the line plane. (That’s what it became in the sales brochures and propaganda afterwards.) It was designed as a cheap (LMAO!) Jack of all trades, master of none-kinda plane.

If you send F35’s up against newer Russian or Chinese planes with a numerical advantage, or against countries with a proper area denial system (The S300 or S400 has a range of hundreds of kilometers) it’ll have less of a great time.

Also don’t forget: The F35 has room for 2 AA missiles in its internal bay. (Could be wrong, it may be four depending on the type.)

4 AAMs internally and there are proposals to use a mounting cradle to fit 6 or even more internally.

2 AAMs plus 2 1000lb or 2000lb (A and C model) JDAMs internal is a common example war load.

Externally there are six underwing hard points for at least six AAMs and probably more with twin missile rails.

The USAF is expected to have more F-35s in service in a few years than the Chinese Air Force has fighter jets. The USAF still has the F-15C/E/EX in inventory and the F-22 and the F-16.

The USAF already has more F-35s than Russia has fighter jets.

The states ranges for any SAM system is under absolutely perfect conditions and doesn't take terrain shadow into account.

The F-35A at ~$80 million is cheap than the Rafale, F-15EX, Typhoon, Gripen E, and Super Hornet.

F-16V is something like $70 million a jet at the moment, maybe ~$60 million for JUST the airframe and engine.

Without getting too much into the kinematics, the aspect(direction of travel) of the aircraft plays a large part as well. If they are traveling towards you, or away from you, all affects how and when you can fire. Not to mention when there are other air and ground based sensors giving a shared picture, which will most certainly have an affect

Yes and the F-35 was designed from day 1 to have sensor fusion aka it's computer takes in data from multiple radars and EO systems and synthesizes a detailed picture of the entire airspace and even ground targets for the pilot. It can also share this data in full with other F-35s and in particular with any plane that has Link 16 capabilities.

 

[Fatniggo1488]

Thoughts from you and @Fatniggo1488 on the new assault rifle adopted by the army?

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/the-army-has-finally-fielded-its-next-generation-squad-weapons.188303/

View attachment 5870743

Half ass tested garbage in short.

It's not a bad rifle but it's obviously still in the prototype phase and not ready for mass implementation. The thing is going to have some major issues when it's actually fielded. It's like the US military just now realized that the M4 is not a great service rifle in spite of decades of evidence saying so, and suddenly need to replace it RIGHT FUCKING NOW with yet another half assed tested rifle with very limited improvements in performance. They should have just went with the 416 which was basically an AR minus the retardation and then stuck with it until they had a real replacement rifle.

My head's still swimming with the shilled up XM8s, and SCAR Ls. Thought they were supposed to be the next wunderwaffe rifles.

I'm also really loving how the LSAT lmg has basically denigrated into nothingness despite being the promised lmg that would replace the absolutely awful m249

Edit:
Anyone who defends the SAW below this post, just laugh at them and move on. They're either trolling or genuinely retarded.

 

[Fapcop]

Maintenance gets faster as more jets hit the fleet and maintainers get better.

Oh please, they’ve been saying that ever since the F35’s rolled off the line.

And guess what: Maintenance is STILL over twice as expensive as with an F16.

Moreover, readiness is significantly lower than expected, lower than with older planes, and costs per flying hour likewise higher.

That price you’re quoting is after all sorts of Pentagon accounting tricks (such as counting the price of the airplane and engine separately.)

It’s an over trillion dollar boondoggle that still isn’t ready, never lived up to its goals and is such a failure that the air force is now considering “upgraded” versions of 4gen fighters.

And the best part is: In combat against a competent peer, it’s likely to get shot down before ever seeing another plane.

Cheap, remote controlled drones are likely the future of air combat anyways.

EDIT: TAXPAYERS BEWARE!

https://www.pogo.org/analysis/has-the-pentagon-learned-from-the-f-35-debacle

The Pentagon claims that they have now learned how to NOT go about buying a new plane, and it’ll all be smooth sailing from now. The next plane they get will be cheaper, better, easier and cheaper to maintain and use, etc. They’re making a VW instead of a Porsche. Which should make everyone worried, since that’s the exact same thing they said when the F22 was too expensive and they set out on the F35 program.

Half ass tested garbage in short.

It's not a bad rifle but it's obviously still in the prototype phase and not ready for mass implementation. The thing is going to have some major issues when it's actually fielded. It's like the US military just now realized that the M4 is not a great service rifle in spite of decades of evidence saying so, and suddenly need to replace it RIGHT FUCKING NOW with yet another half assed tested rifle with very limited improvements in performance. They should have just went with the 416 which was basically an AR minus the retardation and then stuck with it until they had a real replacement rifle.

My head's still swimming with the shilled up XM8s, and SCAR Ls. Thought they were supposed to be the next wunderwaffe rifles.

I'm also really loving how the LSAT lmg has basically denigrated into nothingness despite being the promised lmg that would replace the absolutely awful m249

Edit:
Anyone who defends the SAW below this post, just laugh at them and move on. They're either trolling or genuinely retarded.

What’s wrong with the SAW if you don’t mind me asking?

No arguments on the XM7 being a dog. I’m sure it’s a nice rifle, but as a combat weapon it just doesn’t make sense. As always they learned from last war that they were in, and built a rifle around those expectations.

Guess they’re really enchanted with the idea of super duper “smart” sights making any Tyrone or Jose a master marksman and shhiiiat.

The fact that the special ammunition for the rifle is going to be so expensive and rare, that the Pentagon is considering using special training ammo, really says it all.

 

[Rololowlo]

The Soviets were convinced they could educate the Islam out of the Pashtun. They were wrong.
If they'd actually tried killing all of them, they could have.

To hammer that point home, this is the battle the movie is about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Hill_3234

The commander is all gloom and doom demoralizing his troops (good job Sergei) for what would be yet another victory with completely lopsided casualties.

 

[MrJokerRager]

It's like the US military just now realized that the M4 is not a great service rifle in spite of decades of evidence saying so, and suddenly need to replace it RIGHT FUCKING NOW with yet another half assed tested rifle with very limited improvements in performance. They should have just went with the 416 which was basically an AR minus the retardation and then stuck with it until they had a real replacement rifle.

I believe some other poster said it before me.

But why didn't they do with a collapsible stock and a 20 inch barrel since it would have solved the size and weight problem.

 

[Vesperus]

The Air Force museum is great and there's a Sheetz there now.

Bix Nood?

 

[Hillary Clinton's Ass]

Oddly enough, if any Hungarian politician succeeds at nibbing parts of the Ukraine, he will be remembered as the biggest leader of the 21st century. If not, his political career will be over in a day.

The first step in the reversal of the treaty of Trianon.

 

[Keystone]

Is there even a future for airplane carriers, at a time when hundreds of small drones or hypersonic missiles can sink them? Carriers are rapidly becoming the new Battleship. Too vulnerable and too expensive in resources to risk using in action.

Could always convert them to drone carriers.

 

[Fapcop]

Could always convert them to drone carriers.

Sure, but even then, all it takes is one missile hit and it’s bye bye to 4-10 billion dollars and a decades of work.

The carrier is basically the new battleship.

At some point early in the 20th century, battleships became so expensive and so vulnerable, that an entirely new naval doctrine was born: “Fleet in being.”

Basically it said that the real value of these ships was to sit in the harbor and threaten the enemy, thereby preventing the enemy from using his ships. Actually using them in battle was too risky and dangerous.

This only became more pronounced after WW1, and aircraft carriers have become the new battleships.

They’re fine for showing the flag and showing other nations that X is serious bizness, but sending them off to an ACTUAL war against a peer opponent? Won’t happen.

No President want to be known as the guy who had 10 billion dollar aircraft carriers sunk under his watch.

 

[Kane Lives]

They’re fine for showing the flag and showing other nations that X is serious bizness, but sending them off to an ACTUAL war against a peer opponent? Won’t happen.

No President want to be known as the guy who had 10 billion dollar aircraft carriers sunk under his watch.

Didn't stop the Prince of Wales and Repulse from being sunk by Japanese planes at the start of WW2. Never underestimate the retardation of the political class. It took these two being sunk put to rest any notion that battleships are wunderwaffens that can carry entire navies on its own.

 

[Fapcop]

Welp, what do you know…



America’s ever so wise leaders have managed to drive Russia and China into an ever closer permanent partnership. Something that was wholly preventable and has created a seriously powerful alliance and counterweight.

I seem to recall that Biden a few years ago tried to make Putin sign up on an alliance of sorts against China.

That was unlikely to ever happen.

Putin doesn’t trust the west and has a close relationship with Xi. (They stay at each others places sometimes for vacation. I also seem to recall a report about the two making pancakes together, which sounds kinda adorable lol!).

But Russia could at least have been induced to have a more neutral role vis-a-vis China, if their national and security interests in Ukraine had been taken seriously.

Instead we get Russian ingenuity, military power and resources join forces with Chinas.

We in the west are truly being led by pantshitting retards.

But hey… At least the trannies are thriving!


EDIT: Found it!

“Vlad, could you pass me the caviar please?”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r5qZoT6bbJo

That shrug that Putin makes to Xi when they get the Vodka is really funny.

“Sorry, I know it’s noon but… Come on buddy, we gotta do this!”

 

[Butterschmalz]

@Butterschmalz if anything, I’d say the loser is the one being dragged kicking and screaming to the table where they have to sign a bunch of documents, treaties, and instruments. And the winner is the place that set up that table on their turf, assuming things don’t become a shit show like whatever happened in Yugoslavia and you’re going to exotic places like Dayton, Ohio.

At least that’s the structure I’ve used as a framework since the World Wars.

Sure why not. Loser is the one who is forced to sign. What about the 6 million? Is it a win or a loss? The creation of the state of Israel is one of the the results of WW2 in 1948. Did the Jews win? Did the Europeans win or lose? Or the Americans? WW2 was the biggest mass killing of white Europeans thats been done BY OTHER EUROPEANS. Thats the real tragedy in my point of view and not the holocaust. Is it a win or loss and for whom? Polacks usually hate the Russkies with every bone of their body. I happen to have married into a Polish family which is thankful for Soviet victory, because otherwise they would be speaking German and not Polish and would have not kept their culture and traditions - so they say. With this conflict the same: Ukies killing Russians, Russians killing Ukies. Who is profiting? Surely not the Russians or the Ukies.

 

[Iron Jaguar]

sunk by Japanese planes at the start of WW2.

The usual American-centric view of when WW2 started, I see.

 

[The Ugly One]

Not true. Anyone can be beaten if their enemy has the will to actually defeat them. The USA has had no Will To Win since WW2. The solution to dealing with the Taliban was very simple: complete extermination of the Pashtun. This was quite achievable but politically distasteful.

No, the Taliban won because AK-47s are technological marvels that can defeat any American weapons systems, Fapcop said so. Imagine how badly Operation Desert Storm would have gone if only Saddam Hussein's forces had the mighty AK pattern rifle! Imagine how badly the Afghans would have lost if the USSR had invaded instead!

Couldn't his military advisors show him the results of the Russian war that prove that cheap to mass produce weapons are superior to one-hit-wunderwaffles?

Volume of production isn't the Chinese problem, it's design & build quality, and in China, those kinds of problems are concealed from superiors until it's too late. And I'm not sure that's the right lesson to take from this war. Russia's lack of any stealth capabilities has significantly limited where their aircraft can operate (there are rumors the SU-57 has been deployed a few times and performed well, but I think Russia has fewer than a dozen). American ATGMs have knocked out a lot of Russian armor. American satellites have enabled to the destruction of a couple very expensive warships. The HIMARS has proven to be a very effective weapon.

Plus, China's going to be invading Taiwan, not Ukraine, with a nonzero risk that the USA will intervene directly to aid Taiwan. The technology gap between Taiwan and Ukraine is immense. To have a chance of this not being a bloodbath, China needs sufficiently many weapons that are sufficiently technologically advanced that the US is guaranteed to stay out, bribe or no bribe.

 

[Dick Mason]

https://unherd.com/2024/04/its-time-to-send-nato-troops-to-ukraine/

It’s time to send Nato troops to Ukraine After 75 years, the alliance is locked in the nuclear age​

This arithmetic of this is inescapable: Nato countries will soon have to send soldiers to Ukraine, or else accept catastrophic defeat. The British and French, along with the Nordic countries, are already quietly preparing to send troops — both small elite units and logistics and support personnel — who can remain far from the front. The latter could play an essential role by releasing their Ukrainians counterparts for retraining in combat roles. Nato units could also relieve Ukrainians currently tied up in the recovery and repair of damaged equipment, and could take over the technical parts of existing training programmes for new recruits. These Nato soldiers might never see combat — but they don’t have to in order to help Ukraine make the most of its own scarce manpower.

Crucially, with China coming ever closer to an attack on Taiwan, the US cannot provide more troops than the roughly 40,000 who are already in Europe. Thus a momentous decision is in the post for the other Nato members, especially the most populous: Germany, France, Italy and Spain. If Europe cannot provide enough troops, Russia will prevail on the battlefield, and even if diplomacy successfully intervenes to avoid a complete debacle, Russian military power will have victoriously returned to Central Europe. At that point, Western European powers will have to rebuild their armed forces, whether they like it or not, starting with the return of compulsory military service. Perhaps in those circumstances, we might even witness an outbreak of nuclear nostalgia, foolishly harking back to the illusion that apocalyptic weaponry might be enough to keep the peace.

seem to recall a report about the two making pancakes together, which sounds kinda adorable lol!).

 

[White_N]

https://unherd.com/2024/04/its-time-to-send-nato-troops-to-ukraine/

It’s time to send Nato troops to Ukraine After 75 years, the alliance is locked in the nuclear age​

Spoiler

 

[More AWS-8Q Than You]

Bix Nood?

Someone in another thread said the quality of Sheetz has taken a hit recently, so maybe it deserve that. It's Ohio, so figure in white trash too. Lots of fatal ODs and shootings, Dayton is a bit of Northern Ohio urban decay in otherwise nice SW Ohio.