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

I can't imagine what would be required to make a submersible aircraft carrier but it would definitely be a terrifying ship. I wonder if Russia is secretly building one? They have the motivation and capacity to do so in secret.
Japs made one way back then, just before the end of WW2
But jet airplanes are also far more difficult to use in enclosed spaces like these due to the noise (and thus, vibrations) that they produce. That's one big handicap which would require the creation of a very large submarine
 
Probably the main problem of traditional fleets is that they can be easily tracked by satellites and hit by intercontinental missiles. If you're transporting cargo in relatively safe areas or bullying smaller countries they're fine, but of you have an actual war with a peer power you would need to find a foolproof way to stealth the ships, such as making them submersible.

I can't imagine what would be required to make a submersible aircraft carrier but it would definitely be a terrifying ship. I wonder if Russia is secretly building one? They have the motivation and capacity to do so in secret.

you will probably see submersible drone carriers.
 
At this point is there a historical military unit more synonymous with being inept, useless, and downright dangerous to their own forces than Ukrainian Air Defence?

The Polish Calvary of WW2 had a better track record.

If ww2 style maneuver warfare is no longer possible in the age of constant satellite reconnaissance and missiles
In a larger conflict between near peers the satellites will be targeted. Russia, China and ZOG have all practiced blowing up their own space objects. Once the real time ISR is gone there will still be a need for conventional forces. It won't be all drones and missiles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bullshit and cope article. Russian economic growth isn't entirely fueled by MIC nor are wage growing because of high pay to soldiers

As i said previously




The current growth has a lot to do with manufacturing and replacement of goods from the west especially more of high-added-value goods. Increased in productivity.

And the wage rise is due to shortage of workforce and competition for said workforce.
 
KEK…

IMG_8045.jpeg

Speaks volumes when orders are just ignored.
 
Probably the main problem of traditional fleets is that they can be easily tracked by satellites and hit by intercontinental missiles. If you're transporting cargo in relatively safe areas or bullying smaller countries they're fine, but of you have an actual war with a peer power you would need to find a foolproof way to stealth the ships, such as making them submersible.

I can't imagine what would be required to make a submersible aircraft carrier but it would definitely be a terrifying ship. I wonder if Russia is secretly building one? They have the motivation and capacity to do so in secret.
If any ship can be killed by a dozen hypersonic missiles from shore then its tough to make a ship that costs more than a dozen hyper sonic missiles. And nobody is transparent how effective defense against them is.

Im not sure what a carrier can do against a bunch a hypersonics with tactical nuclear weapons if shit popped off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charred Dinosaur
At this point is there a historical military unit more synonymous with being inept, useless, and downright dangerous to their own forces than Ukrainian Air Defence?

The Polish Calvary of WW2 had a better track record.
My man, I can tell you have zero history knowledge. Ukrainian army is FAR from the worst.

Polish cavalry was arguably the best ground unit employed in the army. Very mobile, very well equipped and resilient. Last units to surrender to germans in 1939 were cavalry units running around in northern poland. Cavalry storming tanks with sabres is, unsurprisingly, a product of american war "reporting".
 
Zelensky just fired the head of Ukraine's Air Force.

View attachment 6364136

I have a feeling more than one F-16 has been destroyed. Probably without having ever fired a shot too.
The F16's are a propaganda trophy like the Abrams M1 tanks.
The reason so few M1s have been destroyed is they are kept away from the front line. As they want the optics to show them as superior western weapons that don't get blown up every 5 minutes (like the inferior ex-soviet tanks)
From a Russian perspective, they are the highest score (high cost) targets in a carnival game. Like the relatively high scoring M1s, they stick out like sore thumbs. But there are few in numbers. in difficult to reach locations. I think the strategy is to only have a few at a time in the country, so there are less target opportunities for the Russian long range missiles.
 
Zelenskyy made the right move. Using F16s for missile lobbing is retarded when helicopters exist.
Helicopters got their own problems. Mainly range and speed.

They gotta use the F16s for something, and throwing them into an air to air battle is too risky. So hit and run missile attacks is probably their best use.
 
Helicopters got their own problems. Mainly range and speed.

They gotta use the F16s for something, and throwing them into an air to air battle is too risky. So hit and run missile attacks is probably their best use.
F16s are not low flying ground vehicles, they’re intended for BVR high altitude combat, their maneuverability suffers dramatically below intended operating altitude. The flight ceiling is 15 kilometers, make use of it or don’t use it at all to lob missiles if you don’t intend it use it correctly. The real reason why an F16 is a dangerous jet to Russia is because it can use guided munitions from a long range.
AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HAARM) having an estimated range of about 35 miles at 30,000 feet altitude. Its purpose is to literally outrange Russia’s Pantsir 25 mile limitation.

I’m seething because shooting missiles from within wire strike altitude is so fucking stupid.
 
They gotta use the F16s for something, and throwing them into an air to air battle is too risky. So hit and run missile attacks is probably their best use.
The first story Ukraine floated was that the F-16 was sent up to shoot down drones during the last mass Russian attack (like the Shaheed) before crashing, which implied it might've collided with one and that was the cause of the crash. Losing a $30 million piece of kit trying to shoot down a $30k drone and then being defeated by it is probably the most retarded use of an F-16 imaginable.
 
The Russian FSB publishes footage of the interrogation of two Colombian mercenaries who took part in military operations on the side of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Link



I bet the Russians are just wondering how they could be this stupid. Believe me, we know.

The real reason why an F16 is a dangerous jet to Russia is because it can use guided munitions from a long range.
Russian aircraft have a longer range. It's not the latest F-16 gen either. Just like the Abrams it's wrong for this conflict. America isn't going to trash the F-15E, F-22, or F-35 for benefit of the retarded hohols they put in nominal charge.
 
The first story Ukraine floated was that the F-16 was sent up to shoot down drones during the last mass Russian attack (like the Shaheed) before crashing, which implied it might've collided with one and that was the cause of the crash. Losing a $30 million piece of kit trying to shoot down a $30k drone and then being defeated by it is probably the most retarded use of an F-16 imaginable.
30.000$ is probably at least twice the price of a Geranium drone. Likely more. It’s literally just fiberglass, a scooter engine, explosives and some electronics. Oh and a Ukrainian SIM card for communication and location.

But yeah, it’s a retarded way to use them, if they were really the target.
 
It's almost as if the communists were right all along and unbridled immigration is really just a (((capitalist))) weapon against the working class. 🤔
Fixed it for you. Skulls are very prominent, Wagner also wears them as pointed out. I still maintain that the hohols lost at least one F-16 to incompetence.
 
Helicopters got their own problems. Mainly range and speed.

They gotta use the F16s for something, and throwing them into an air to air battle is too risky. So hit and run missile attacks is probably their best use.
I'm not convinced its F16 related, its probably Kursk related. But if we assume it is F16 related, then it could be that big Z was actually convinced that the F16 would be the tool to turn around the air war, and wanted to see them employed offensively to shoot down Russian aircraft, under the reasoning that if they can prove it works and take out a lot of Russian aircraft before they run out of F16's, that it will prove they're the tide turner and they can then get more of them.

Any sane commander would nod along and then not do that at all.
 
I'm not convinced its F16 related, its probably Kursk related. But if we assume it is F16 related, then it could be that big Z was actually convinced that the F16 would be the tool to turn around the air war, and wanted to see them employed offensively to shoot down Russian aircraft, under the reasoning that if they can prove it works and take out a lot of Russian aircraft before they run out of F16's, that it will prove they're the tide turner and they can then get more of them.

Any sane commander would nod along and then not do that at all.
The whole point of Ukraine's begging for F-16's was that they could strike Russia from very long range to avoid being instantly shot down by Russian air defenses. There's no way they're going to fly those in close air support for the ground invasion of Russia proper. Just look how much high-value Ukrainian air defense systems have already been destroyed by simply moving them close to the border.
 
Back