Kiev Is Burning

[seahawk]

40 minutes ago, ink said:

I know your comments run on über sarcasm but if Russia gets made great again while under sanctions by some of the biggest economies in the world and while fighting a war where there is zero chance of any economic gain, that will be a first in history.

I disagree, because the size and the available raw materials mean that Russia is one of the few countries which could be self-sufficient. Russia is in an absolutely privileged position, there are few countries in a similar position. (USA, China and to a lesser extent Canada, Australia and Brazil) Yet, the economy is not close to China or the USA.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said:

Can't open your link for some reason, what is it about?

I'm sorry but it is not Bolsheviks who are printing USD 1 trillion every 100 days now and pretending it is ok. So called "Russian assets" are peanuts compared to that, after all. And your Gov is following this best practice

UK public debt rises to highest since 1961 ahead of election | Reuters

Its the BBC, I guess the Russian Guvmint must be scared of what they are trying to say.

UK public debt still doesnt match economic output, so I fail to see the problem here. We are good for it.

Yes, but the point is, Russian assets are free. Its all very low hanging fruit, because we dont have to be accountable for Russian financial interest whilst this war is going on.

[ink]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

I disagree, because the size and the available raw materials mean that Russia is one of the few countries which could be self-sufficient. Russia is in an absolutely privileged position, there are few countries in a similar position. (USA, China and to a lesser extent Canada, Australia and Brazil) Yet, the economy is not close to China or the USA.

I'm not sure I understood your point properly. That said, I'm not aware of any country getting rich by being self-sufficient (i.e. isolationist).

The best they can hope for, given the circumstances, is (economic) survival.

[seahawk]

2 minutes ago, ink said:

I'm not sure I understood your point properly. That said, I'm not aware of any country getting rich by being self-sufficient (i.e. isolationist).

The best they can hope for, given the circumstances, is (economic) survival.

Russia has access to many valuable raw materials. It could use it for its own industry or economy, or export some to build up the economy. It also had (as the Soviet Union) the needed industrial base and academic skill. Even the infrastructure was decent by comparison.

[ink]

5 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Russia has access to many valuable raw materials. It could use it for its own industry or economy, or export some to build up the economy. It also had (as the Soviet Union) the needed industrial base and academic skill. Even the infrastructure was decent by comparison.

Sure, those are all things they're going to need to survive. And trade with The Rest of the World™️ will possibly keep them alfoat. But that's without factoring in the cost of the war. That's gonna take its toll.

It's definitely an interesting scenario and it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

[seahawk]

Is the war more expensive than what the corrupt Elite is currently stealing and sending to the West? I doubt it.

[Stuart Galbraith]

The problem you dont address, what happens when the corrupt elite cant steal any more because its going on the war effort, and they cant get it out the country, because ties with the west are broken?

If the Mafia state is anything like the Mafia, then its a pyramid. And if the lower orders are not getting the money they believe are due to them, because the boss is behaving like an idiot, then like as not it increases the threats to Putin. Ok, one or two oligarchs are not going to make much difference. But it is when it gets down to the rank and file, and my guess is they are already starting to suffer.

Once again, we have a Russian Government that believes it can build a solid state whilst indulging in corruption. This is an interesting perception, but one hat has not been borne out at any time in the last 150 years, so I fail to see why its going to work now.

[Josh]

2 hours ago, TrustMe said:

RAF Rivet Joints cannot be refueled by RAF tankers which means that the RJ's have to rely on internal fuel which limits their lottering capability.

 

 

Presumably USAF tankers can be used instead. The bigger limitation over the Black Sea is probably the fighter escort.

Edited July 25, 2024 by Josh

[Josh]

2 hours ago, seahawk said:

I disagree, because the size and the available raw materials mean that Russia is one of the few countries which could be self-sufficient. Russia is in an absolutely privileged position, there are few countries in a similar position. (USA, China and to a lesser extent Canada, Australia and Brazil) Yet, the economy is not close to China or the USA.

There is little prospect for major Russian economic growth due the war, its political system, and its long term demographics. Barring a major geopolitical change, I think the country is headed for stagnation.

[Stuart Galbraith]

7 minutes ago, Josh said:

Presumably USAF tankers can be used instead. The bigger limitation over the Black Sea is probably the fighter escort.

There is probably a case for timely intelligence anyway. By which I mean, if they are locating targets, they perhaps have limited means to hand that information on before they land. It wouldnt make much sense to keep an RC135 on station for a considerable length of time if thats the case.

[Josh]

55 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Is the war more expensive than what the corrupt Elite is currently stealing and sending to the West? I doubt it.

This rather assumes the elite are not still cutting out a share.

[ink]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

Is the war more expensive than what the corrupt Elite is currently stealing and sending to the West? I doubt it.

 

43 minutes ago, Josh said:

This rather assumes the elite are not still cutting out a share.

Yes. This ⬆️

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, ink said:

 

Yes. This ⬆️

No doubt elite is still having their share, but 1) Now this share is staying inside Russia and 2) Elite's share was only part of what was looted (probably, even small part)  - since bigger part was de-facto given by this elite to West for free in return on West supporting this people in their elite position (at least, they believed they were supported).

[TrustMe]

3 hours ago, Josh said:

Presumably USAF tankers can be used instead. The bigger limitation over the Black Sea is probably the fighter escort.

I can never remember the technical terms for refueling aircaft there is two different ways. Whatever the way the USA AF uses is incompatible with the one the RAF uses. That goes for our Eurofighters as well i'm not sure about the F35B's. Of course the RAF Rivet Joints can use the US method.

Edited July 25, 2024 by TrustMe

[Stuart Galbraith]

Its worth remembering, many/most KC135's are hermaphrodites these days anyway.

[Roman Alymov]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

The problem you dont address, what happens when the corrupt elite cant steal any more because its going on the war effort, and they cant get it out the country, because ties with the west are broken?

If the Mafia state is anything like the Mafia, then its a pyramid. And if the lower orders are not getting the money they believe are due to them, because the boss is behaving like an idiot, then like as not it increases the threats to Putin. Ok, one or two oligarchs are not going to make much difference. But it is when it gets down to the rank and file, and my guess is they are already starting to suffer.

No idea about where you get your model of Mafia from - but in Russia the state is not even close to pyramid. It is, rather, complex graph structure (probably, weighted graph would work as approximate model, but weights are constantly changing with time/events) that could be visualized as several overlapsing pyramids, but individual element may belong to more then one "pyramid".

  So the answer to "what happens when the corrupt elite cant steal any more because its going on the war effort, and they cant get it out the country, because ties with the west are broken" is simple: it will change the weights in the graph, some nods will loose their positions (some of them may end up in prison or be eliminated by "collegues" to prevent them spreading information) others will gain extra power...

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Once again, we have a Russian Government that believes it can build a solid state whilst indulging in corruption. This is an interesting perception, but one hat has not been borne out at any time in the last 150 years, so I fail to see why its going to work now.

Well, some Russian Oligarchs believe UK is more corrupt than Russia. But it is up to them.

[Roman Alymov]

U-boat (actually, waterjet converted into remote guidance) washed ashore in Turkey

https://t.me/boris_rozhin/131223

 

[Josh]

1 hour ago, TrustMe said:

I can never remember the technical terms for refueling aircaft there is two different ways. Whatever the way the USA AF uses is incompatible with the one the RAF uses. That goes for our Eurofighters as well i'm not sure about the F35B's. Of course the RAF Rivet Joints can use the US method.

USAF uses rigid booms; everyone else in the entire world (and USMC and USN) use probe and drogue (hoses), with the only other exception I can think of being the half dozen or so 707s of the IAF. The USAF adopted this in its SAC years because it is a much faster refill for bomber sized aircraft. A long time ago there actually were separate TAC probe and drogue tankers for fighter aircraft, but the fleet was consolidated. KC-10s and KC-46s can employ hose refueling pods on their wings to handle both methods and KC-135s can use an adaptor to switch to hose in place of boom.

The RAF Rivet Joint fleet is ex USAF so they are boom receivers unless the Brits modified them.

[Roman Alymov]

Lancet vs. M1 Abrams https://t.me/anna_news/68911

[Roman Alymov]

On 7/24/2024 at 5:45 PM, txtree99 said:

 

Interesting to note the major strike on Izmail port where drone strikes have caused massive secondary explosions (probably, of ammunition stocks transported from NATO by river) and big fire on oil storage

https://t.me/anna_news/68883

https://t.me/anna_news/68914

 

[Roman Alymov]

Drone-assisted trench war https://t.me/anna_news/68916

[txtree99]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

USAF uses rigid booms; everyone else in the entire world (and USMC and USN) use probe and drogue (hoses), with the only other exception I can think of being the half dozen or so 707s of the IAF. The USAF adopted this in its SAC years because it is a much faster refill for bomber sized aircraft. A long time ago there actually were separate TAC probe and drogue tankers for fighter aircraft, but the fleet was consolidated. KC-10s and KC-46s can employ hose refueling pods on their wings to handle both methods and KC-135s can use an adaptor to switch to hose in place of boom.

The RAF Rivet Joint fleet is ex USAF so they are boom receivers unless the Brits modified them.

RAF RC135’s are identical to US versions.  They were converted from KC 135 manufactured the same year as several of the US fleet.   

[txtree99]

 

[TrustMe]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

USAF uses rigid booms; everyone else in the entire world (and USMC and USN) use probe and drogue (hoses), with the only other exception I can think of being the half dozen or so 707s of the IAF. The USAF adopted this in its SAC years because it is a much faster refill for bomber sized aircraft. A long time ago there actually were separate TAC probe and drogue tankers for fighter aircraft, but the fleet was consolidated. KC-10s and KC-46s can employ hose refueling pods on their wings to handle both methods and KC-135s can use an adaptor to switch to hose in place of boom.

The RAF Rivet Joint fleet is ex USAF so they are boom receivers unless the Brits modified them.

Thanks for that Josh I couldn't for the life of me remember the details.

One of the reasons why the UK hasn't made the RAF Rivet Joints compatabile with RAF tankers is that due to the public-private contract that Air Tanker won, is that changing the contract is so costly, that it's beyond the RAF budget to do so. It's that extremely tightly wordered. 

Some other NATO countries have looked at public-private deals - that the UK was first to do - but have realised that why it maybe cheaper it's not flexible enough for most air forces, and results in it being more costly in the long term.

Edited July 25, 2024 by TrustMe

[TrustMe]

24 minutes ago, txtree99 said:

RAF RC135’s are identical to US versions.  They were converted from KC 135 manufactured the same year as several of the US fleet.   

There were a lot of differences between the US an UK Rivet Joints but it's all classified so I have no idea what. I'm sure that certain US technology that the US wanted solely for themselves was removed/downgraded. Likewise certain technology that the RAF wanted we don't let the US get access to it was added.

Edited July 25, 2024 by TrustMe