Roman Alymov Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 2 minutes ago, alejandro_ said: At the site of the fire and several dozen meters from the tank moving along the dirt road, huge clouds of dust rise up - one of the main reasons why today in the Donetsk direction the crews prefer to work in bad weather. I wonder where they are getting bad weather, as entire region is now bone-dry after record hot and dry summer, with little to no rains in few month. Look at this video of pro-Ukr POWs walking away from Urledat - note the field road (not even road but fieldside) is rock solid, covered in layer of dry dust https://t.me/boris_rozhin/139180 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandro_ Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said: I wonder where they are getting bad weather, as entire region is now bone-dry after record hot and dry summer, with little to no rains in few month. Look at this video of pro-Ukr POWs walking away from Urledat - note the field road (not even road but fieldside) is rock solid, covered in layer of dry dust https://t.me/boris_rozhin/139180 I would say crew has served for a few years, experiencing different types of weather? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 8 hours ago, Roman Alymov said: It depends on who is "Russia" for you. Deputy minister of defence who was responcible for this storages construction is in prison under investigation for corruption (was arrested before the strikes on depots), and it is not in interests of his friends still left in MoD and Gov to raise public attention to the topic. "Big media" like Soloviev and other "guardians" will nlot tell - they are in fact deeply pro-Western on personal level and their private interests are to get some (actually any) sort of reconcile with West to get back to their Italian villas and assets (or buy new ones, as they are well paid enough for that). Don't forget they are the same people who for years were ranting about "No alternative to Minsk agreements", "Donbass is Ukraine " etc. And real pro-Russians on the frontline and in the rear see nothing special in such cruise missiles strikes - after all people are killed dayly by other West-provided weapons.... Do you remember tourists killed on Crimea beach by cluster ATACMS strike? Nothing happened, the case was swept under the carpet..... Regardless, non of the donated western systems have the range. About the only thing that would is AGM-158B or ground launched tomahawk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanoid Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 Is it possible that Ukr SF teams are launching drones from within Russia? It's kinda a big country, you know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 1 minute ago, urbanoid said: Is it possible that Ukr SF teams are launching drones from within Russia? It's kinda a big country, you know... A hundred of them?!? It seems very, very unlikely… I think it had to be some kind of home grown UAV/cruise missile, the only question to my mind is what type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanoid Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 Well, right, definitely not a hundred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_goat Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 10 hours ago, Roman Alymov said: Propaganda video of Leopard-2 tank delivered to UralVagonZavod for study. Note the hit into main gun "root" https://t.me/anna_news/71312 For those who do not have telegram. Probably it has no signficance for this war, but hopefully later they will publish some details about its armor structure. This also means that Leo-2 users should look for a replacement soon, the relevant details will not be secret anymore for Russia & allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanoid Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 2 minutes ago, old_goat said: For those who do not have telegram. Probably it has no signficance for this war, but hopefully later they will publish some details about its armor structure. This also means that Leo-2 users should look for a replacement soon, the relevant details will not be secret anymore for Russia & allies. No, it doesn't mean that. At all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soldier36 Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 Footage of the delivery of the German Leopard 2A6 tank to the Russian Uralvagonzavod has been published. The tank was previously used by the Ukrainian army. The plant's experts will analyze the tank's units, systems, and assemblies to assess the real military-technical level of various systems and the captured combat vehicle itself. The design of the 1,500-horsepower MB 873 Ka-501 engine and transmission will also be studied and their bench tests will be conducted. The Leopard 2A6 tank began to be produced in Germany by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann in 1997, based on the Leopard 2A5 tank. The main armament of the modernized tank is the new 120-mm smoothbore L55 tank gun from Rheinmetal with a barrel extended by 1.3 meters. The survivability of the Leopard 2A6 tank barrel is about 700 shots. Effective firing range: from a standing start - 3,500 meters, on the move - 2,500 meters. The tank received new control systems and a block with a transverse engine arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yama Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 6 hours ago, urbanoid said: No, it doesn't mean that. At all. Much like Russia replaced all T-72's after Desert Storm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn239 Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 (edited) Analysis on the war of attrition. Josh - in around the 10-12 minute mark he goes into detail on the conscript vs. contract armies. After the 1 year service is up and they're due to demobilize, the army does try to get conscripts rotating back to civilian life to sign contracts instead, hoping for about 80,000 to join each year from this, Edited October 1 by glenn239 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Alymov Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 16 hours ago, urbanoid said: Is it possible that Ukr SF teams are launching drones from within Russia? It's kinda a big country, you know... What do you mean "possible"? There was at least one such case uncovered (in Belorussia, with FPV drone damaging A-50 on parking. So it is not only possible but done in practice. Another question is if it is possible to do it with big, plane-size drones -and, again, there is a theory in pro-Russian circles that some of the big drones that hit StPete, Murmansk area and Volga region are in fact launched from Estonia, Finland/Norway and Kazakhshat respectedly -even without cooperation with NATO, it is relatively easy and safe to do. Below is my old post with documentary about attack on airfield in Belorussia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssnake Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 Surrender monkeys are always looking for excuses to quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 20 hours ago, Josh said: A hundred of them?!? It seems very, very unlikely… I think it had to be some kind of home grown UAV/cruise missile, the only question to my mind is what type. Well there is a long list. Some of them look remarkably close to British Target drones. http://www.hisutton.com/images/Ukraine-OWA-UAVs.jpg http://www.hisutton.com/Ukraine-OWA-UAVs.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 3 hours ago, Roman Alymov said: What do you mean "possible"? There was at least one such case uncovered (in Belorussia, with FPV drone damaging A-50 on parking. So it is not only possible but done in practice. Another question is if it is possible to do it with big, plane-size drones -and, again, there is a theory in pro-Russian circles that some of the big drones that hit StPete, Murmansk area and Volga region are in fact launched from Estonia, Finland/Norway and Kazakhshat respectedly -even without cooperation with NATO, it is relatively easy and safe to do. Below is my old post with documentary about attack on airfield in Belorussia Yeah, thats not happening. Im sorry to say but the most likely explanation is that Russian air defence has been significantly degraded, because most of their stuff is in Ukraine. As for range, at least some of the drones ive seen have bene modified light aircraft, which with a long range tank and a propeller engine throttled back, likely does have the range to read Murmansk, and a good many other places further distant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn239 Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Im sorry to say but the most likely explanation is that Russian air defence has been significantly degraded, because most of their stuff is in Ukraine. Doctrinal problems on the Russian side as well, in that their radar defense systems are largely ground based. Airborne systems (A-50) are not plentiful enough for 24/7 coverage of wide spread targets, and nothing but 24/7 coverage is adequate. Some sort of blimp mounted radar for SAM batteries is required, but seems not to exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 22 hours ago, old_goat said: For those who do not have telegram. Probably it has no signficance for this war, but hopefully later they will publish some details about its armor structure. This also means that Leo-2 users should look for a replacement soon, the relevant details will not be secret anymore for Russia & allies. Weakening NATO is always good. Especially as the Western tanks have proven to be outclassed by Russian systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrustMe Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 hour ago, glenn239 said: .... Some sort of blimp mounted radar for SAM batteries is required, but seems not to exist... Airship mounted radar's have been tried out but lack the all weather capabilities of manned aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 1 hour ago, glenn239 said: Doctrinal problems on the Russian side as well, in that their radar defense systems are largely ground based. Airborne systems (A-50) are not plentiful enough for 24/7 coverage of wide spread targets, and nothing but 24/7 coverage is adequate. Some sort of blimp mounted radar for SAM batteries is required, but seems not to exist. For the size of Russia, they need far more AWACS than they are able to build anyway. You only have to look at how far the E3 can cover Ukraine, and despite its capablities, its pretty feeble for the amount of territory that needs to be covered. I think even cheap radar systems mounted on concrete towers, or failing that, Sergei with a quad bike, a mobile phone and a tent, and lots of them. But they dont seem to want to do either of those either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 Defeating a concentration of a hundred low altitude cruise missiles is simply going to be largely impossible for most anyone. The best combat example was Israel in April, and that involved a full effort from several countries over a relatively narrow, well defined axis of attack. Israel and the approaches to it are tiny compared to Ukraine, let alone Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 Not worth keeping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roman Alymov Posted October 2 Share Posted October 2 Close-up Stryker IFV with mineroller somewhere in Kyrsk region, note melted armoe with ceramic parts, 18+ https://t.me/boris_rozhin/139473 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soldier36 Posted October 3 Share Posted October 3 Footage has been published of a Russian Su-34 fighter bomber attack, presumably with an ODAB-1500 vacuum bomb. The video was filmed in Vovchansk, Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine. There is no official ODAB-1500 bomb, but the presence of the bomb was confirmed by Colonel General Alexei Kim in March 2024, reporting at a meeting to Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu on the use of such an aerial bomb. It is possible that the ODAB-1500 bomb was created in Russia in the 2000s. The first ODAB-500 bombs were produced in the 1970s by the Bazalt Federal State Unitary Enterprise, a development of the GSKB-47 design bureau. The ODAB-1500 aerial bomb is activated sequentially during combat use: first, the active substance is sprayed, and then it oxidizes in the air with ignition and subsequent detonation. Based on the data on ODAB-500, the radius of destruction of the thermobaric charge of the ODAB-1500 bomb is not less than 500 meters, with a pressure of 120 atmospheres at the epicenter of the explosion. The damaging factor of the ODAB-1500 bomb is thermal radiation and a jump in atmospheric pressure. A large area of destruction allows to reduce the cost of the ammunition by reducing the requirements for accuracy of impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Posted October 4 Share Posted October 4 On 9/24/2024 at 3:38 PM, Josh said: Question regarding ammunition storage: I presume that propellant and rocket motors are somewhat more easily cooked off than HE shells. As such, are all three of these things more typically stored separately? I don't think you can make that generalisation. It's more about the nature of the compounds. Generally speaking, from a Western perspective at least, more modern munitions will be much less reactive than old ones, but the Insensitive Munitions classes don't really differentiate. If as suggested the Toropets facility was reworking NK artillery shells, then I wouldn't be surprised if they met no IM standards at all. If you have time, it's worth checking the definitions used for IM levels to get a sense for what they mean - it ranges from terrible (Hugh order detonation )to pretty unpleasant (burns vigorously without much propulsive effect), there's not really a "safe" category for real world systems. (This from memory, so might be oversimplified or otherwise mildly inaccurate.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk Posted October 4 Share Posted October 4 But for handling an storing this makes a huge difference. Anything that "just burns" is a lot easier to handle than things that explode. Burning needs a few earth berms, water supply and a skilled and equipped fire fighting unit to relatively easily handle accidents or even attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now