War in Ukraine, technical and military aspects only

[Stuart Galbraith]

17 hours ago, seahawk said:

Absolutely not. Russia does not need those capabilities.

Russia is shitting a brick from the thought of losing Telegraph, I rather think it does need those capabilities.

[glenn239]

3 hours ago, ink said:

What's the weather like?

 Sunny with a chance of FAB's.

Edited September 11 by glenn239

[ink]

2 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

 Sunny with a chance of FAB's.

Quick glance at a couple of weather apps indicates that you're not wrong - i.e. it does look pretty sunny (or at least dry). So the Ukrainians won't have to rely (exclusively) on those paved roads for the next few days at least. 

[glenn239]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Its not going to happen, because Russia will end up destroying all their satellites too.

We don't know what the Russians will do, we just have to sit back and find out.   Personally, I think they're best move just might well be to grumble through to the end of October without responding and then start using nukes about 2 days before the US election.  Vote for Trump if you don't want to die has a nice ring to it, don't you think?

[Stuart Galbraith]

No Glenn, you were happily asserting they would go after American satellites, on no evidence whatsoever. And im telling you they wont, because of a simple incident that occurred in 2007, that the world is still suffering from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test

The 2007 Chinese ASAT test created the largest field of space debris in history, with more than 3,000 pieces of trackable size (golf ball size and larger) officially catalogued in the immediate aftermath, and an estimated 150,000 debris particles.

Now imagine they do that, there is the obvious danger of knocking out many of their early warning satellites, communication satellites, even their global positioning system. Think they are going to take that risk? I dont.

As for tactical nuclear weapons, their usage is probably better discussed in the other thread, for its a political, not a military discussion.

[seahawk]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Russia is shitting a brick from the thought of losing Telegraph, I rather think it does need those capabilities.

Russia know that a total war with the West can not be avoided and must be fought to guarantee national survival. They will prepare and they will win.

[glenn239]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

No Glenn, you were happily asserting they would go after American satellites, on no evidence whatsoever.

The discussions on the use of nukes at the moment are WRT the use of nukes in space against satellites.

[Josh]

18 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I've got no clue what the Chinese think of the scenario of deep range NATO weapon strikes in Russia, and neither do you.

I certainly do know China does not want its orbital constellations destroyed. I do not need to ask anyone for clarification on the matter, and I cannot imagine you do either.

[Josh]

18 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I don't think the Democrats want a nuclear war before November - Trump might get elected.

I’m confident no one wants one ever. In any case, if the Biden administration is not allowing ATACMs strikes into Russia I do not see why JASSM would be treated differently. There is no shortage of targets inside occupied Ukraine.

Edited September 11 by Josh

[Josh]

6 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Its not going to happen, because Russia will end up destroying all their satellites too.

Russian orbital assets are marginal. But it will not happen for for a raft of other practical reasons. Were Russia to go nuclear, they would find some other target.

Edited September 11 by Josh

[crazyinsane105]

On 9/9/2024 at 6:57 PM, KV7 said:

Is there 5.45 mm ratshot ?

Would be particularly useless if it even existed. No rifle round is worth transforming into ratshot 
 

Underbarrel grenade launchers do have ammunition that have birdshot capability. Not sure if it’s widespread in Russian military though 

[Josh]

3 hours ago, glenn239 said:

We don't know what the Russians will do, we just have to sit back and find out.   Personally, I think they're best move just might well be to grumble through to the end of October without responding and then start using nukes about 2 days before the US election.  Vote for Trump if you don't want to die has a nice ring to it, don't you think?

There would be a high price to pay for nuclear first use. It at least used to be one of China’s biggest concerns since 2022, and I cannot imagine that their current economic malaise has made them more enthusiastic for a market destroying event that likely triggers shit ton of secondary sanctions against Chinese companies. But I agree it could tip the election if well handled by Trump.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/china-responds-putin-nuclear-weapons-warning-1879113

[Josh]

4 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Would be particularly useless if it even existed. No rifle round is worth transforming into ratshot 
 

Underbarrel grenade launchers do have ammunition that have birdshot capability. Not sure if it’s widespread in Russian military though 

I would think an under barrel shotgun workable as well. I think it has been done with AR-15 type rifles before, though not as an issued weapon. A grenade launcher would be multi purpose but a shotgun could be multi shot.

[KV7]

37 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Would be particularly useless if it even existed. No rifle round is worth transforming into ratshot 
 

Underbarrel grenade launchers do have ammunition that have birdshot capability. Not sure if it’s widespread in Russian military though 

Yeah I was half making a joke, I don't think it is an effective solution. Though it also could be cheap enough to be cost effective.

[Soldier36]

An episode of testing of a new FPV drone armed with the Soviet RPG-18 Mukha grenade launcher has been published in Ukraine. Technical details and who is testing the drone are not reported. Judging by the characteristics of the RPG-18, the drone will be able to hit targets at a distance of up to 200 meters. Taking into account the weight of the grenade launcher, the flight time of such a drone will be about 10 minutes. For aimed shooting, the drone will have to fly close to the target. The RPG-18 can penetrate armor up to 300 mm thick.

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Imagine this, but with Javelin.

[ink]

Just now, Stuart Galbraith said:

Imagine this, but with Javelin.

Would require a bigger platform. And as you go up in size, you lose the advantages of being small (i.e. being hard to detect and shoot down).

[Stuart Galbraith]

Sure, but not that much bigger.And I think the Ukrainians already have one with Babi Yaga IIRC.

Yes, but think of the possiblities. Tactical missile teams are vulnerable, right? So you displace them off about a kilometre from your defensive position, then when the artillery bombardment is done, then fly them in. You are in effect replicating the mobility of light archers in medieval times, and whats more, they wont have any line of sight issues.

You could even, and this is where it gets crazy, instead of devolving atgm to company, have them all centralized in an ATGM company, and mass them in a critically threatened sector, as you need them.

Basically, it has the potential to make breakthroughs far more costly, if not impossible. The Defence is once again beating the offence.

 

 

 

[Josh]

The much better alternative is a UAV built around the Javelin warhead. Eg Switchblade 600 or ALTIUS 700M.

[Mighty_Zuk]

21 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

No Glenn, you were happily asserting they would go after American satellites, on no evidence whatsoever. And im telling you they wont, because of a simple incident that occurred in 2007, that the world is still suffering from.

fr

ASAT capability needs to undergo a substantial technological evolution to ensure 0 debris. Something that can catch a satellite and push it back to earth instead of smashing into it.

 

Not the first time claims were made that Iran transferred BMs to Russia. I don't know if these were vaporware or maybe Russia kept them as some reserve for a rainy day if their own production gets rekt. But this one at least seems credible. Babak usually asserts things as facts, which sometimes get refuted. He certainly needs to speak with less confidence. But he's more or less credible.

 

[Josh]

5 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

fr

ASAT capability needs to undergo a substantial technological evolution to ensure 0 debris. Something that can catch a satellite and push it back to earth instead of smashing into it.

Pushing satellites to the atmosphere would be incredibly hard to achieve, especially with one that was non cooperative. That is a capability that is needed long term to clear space junk but it is not a viable weapon system. Other options include chemical sprayers, high powered microwaves, and kick motors to spin the satellite. ECM might be a viable option as well - satellites in higher orbits could easily be jammed by organized prolific constellations of smaller orbiters in LEO. The inverse square relationship of signal strength and distance heavily favors the satellites at much lower altitudes.

 

[bojan]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Imagine this, but with Javelin.

If you knew how Javelin works you would know why it is unworkable.

[MiGG0]

5 minutes ago, bojan said:

If you knew how Javelin works you would know why it is unworkable.

Just use small ”bomber drone” with SMArt type of bomblets. Altough cope cages might make smaller bomblets ineffective.

Edited September 12 by MiGG0

[Markus Becker]

1 hour ago, bojan said:

If you knew how Javelin works you would know why it is unworkable.

Do tell, please.  

[JWB]

The empire strikes back!