Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:28 pm

art wrote:
Can anyone see a way of Ukraine gaining a decisive advantage militarily except through the western democracies providing appropriate weaponry in appropriate quantities?


:roll:

What is the appropriate quantity? What are the appropriate weapons? What is the appropriate time line?

No one knows. We are finding out now that the West may not have sufficient artilery shells to support the current consumption rate. What other deficiencies are there in the system? Do they not have sufficient number of working Leopard 2 to donate? Apparently not because they have to consider Leopard 1.

I still trust in what Perun has published last year about the strength of the Westerner economy and also the ability of Russia to withstand sanction. He said it was down to the matter of will of the West to stay for the long haul.

Biden's visit has put an exclamation point on that thought.

So now we just have to wait for the West's military industrial complex to ramp up. From my non-expert view, I see the newly build arms will not flow steadily until late this year. So I don't see Ukraine kicking out Russia this year. But by 2024, they will have sufficient long range artilery and sufficient tanks to take the rest to the Donbas.

I have confidence that Ukraine will have Western planes by then as well.

Yes, more people will be killed because of the delay in certain weapons. But it is better to get it right than rush things and ending up doing what the Russians are doing.

bt
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:36 pm

marcelh wrote:
In a Dutch podcast they mentioned Russia had a MiG31 airborne armed with a Kinzhal missile when Biden took the train to Kyiv.


And NATO had the airspace monitored. Even if the MIG launched the missile there would have been time to stop the train and helo POTUS out of danger before the missile arrive.

From other news, it was said the siren during the time Biden was at the church was because Russian planes were taking off as well. From the reaction on the ground, it seems that they were not concerned.

bt
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11974
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 2:46 pm

So Russia had the chance to remove the instigator of all things wrong in their world and chose not to act, or at least the means to cause the trip to a war zone to be cancelled, yes, a war zone, why did they not choose the latter? I thought he USA to them and their supporters is Axis of Evil One?
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 3:28 pm

par13del wrote:
why did they not choose the latter?


:mrgreen: Because they knew that they had a very slim chance of success and the consequences would be overwhelming.

It's so nice to be able to intimidate your opponent without having to use the nuclear card. :bigthumbsup:

bt
 
oldJoe
Posts: 1180
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:13 pm

GDB wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
GDB wrote:
France initially sent older MILAN ATGW systems to Ukraine, which will also likely be on the Marders too, as well as some of the interim Javelins procured before getting these into service in numbers;

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX-xHR ... g9QbPL5odQ

I am a little bit confused. You speak of MILAN (EIS 1977) and the link of AKERON (EIS 2017). If you can believe WIKI (I know) then the AKERON was delivered. The JAVELIN's were only an interim solution until enough AKERON's were delivered. Who knows what might be true?


EIS is one thing, fully equipped another. Javelin most likely procured for deployments such as Afghanistan and Mali, no armour threat but buildings, sangars etc.
In 1982 some were bemused when regiments took their MILANs down to the Falklands, where’s the enemy armour save for a few Panhard armored cars on the very few roads?
Then came assaults on some mountains where rocky sangars had been constructed by the enemy often as machine gun nests...

Certainly Javelin was used by UK and US forces in Afghanistan, with France likely much of their MILAN stocks would be aging and becoming life expired with a gap between these and widespread deployment of a system under development, hence the Javelin buy.

I don't want to be petty and I accept all statements from your post but that still doesn't answer my question. You talk about MILAN and the link about AKERON which is a big difference. Only one of the two can be truth, which one please ?
 
marcelh
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:24 pm

bikerthai wrote:
art wrote:
Can anyone see a way of Ukraine gaining a decisive advantage militarily except through the western democracies providing appropriate weaponry in appropriate quantities?


:roll:

What is the appropriate quantity? What are the appropriate weapons? What is the appropriate time line?

No one knows. We are finding out now that the West may not have sufficient artilery shells to support the current consumption rate. What other deficiencies are there in the system? Do they not have sufficient number of working Leopard 2 to donate? Apparently not because they have to consider Leopard 1.

I still trust in what Perun has published last year about the strength of the Westerner economy and also the ability of Russia to withstand sanction. He said it was down to the matter of will of the West to stay for the long haul.

Biden's visit has put an exclamation point on that thought.

So now we just have to wait for the West's military industrial complex to ramp up. From my non-expert view, I see the newly build arms will not flow steadily until late this year. So I don't see Ukraine kicking out Russia this year. But by 2024, they will have sufficient long range artilery and sufficient tanks to take the rest to the Donbas.

I have confidence that Ukraine will have Western planes by then as well.

Yes, more people will be killed because of the delay in certain weapons. But it is better to get it right than rush things and ending up doing what the Russians are doing.

bt


IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.
 
GDB
Posts: 17059
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:46 pm

oldJoe wrote:
GDB wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
I am a little bit confused. You speak of MILAN (EIS 1977) and the link of AKERON (EIS 2017). If you can believe WIKI (I know) then the AKERON was delivered. The JAVELIN's were only an interim solution until enough AKERON's were delivered. Who knows what might be true?


EIS is one thing, fully equipped another. Javelin most likely procured for deployments such as Afghanistan and Mali, no armour threat but buildings, sangars etc.
In 1982 some were bemused when regiments took their MILANs down to the Falklands, where’s the enemy armour save for a few Panhard armored cars on the very few roads?
Then came assaults on some mountains where rocky sangars had been constructed by the enemy often as machine gun nests...

Certainly Javelin was used by UK and US forces in Afghanistan, with France likely much of their MILAN stocks would be aging and becoming life expired with a gap between these and widespread deployment of a system under development, hence the Javelin buy.

I don't want to be petty and I accept all statements from your post but that still doesn't answer my question. You talk about MILAN and the link about AKERON which is a big difference. Only one of the two can be truth, which one please ?


France likely did what the UK MoD would call an Urgent Operational Requirement buy, lots of them for Iraq and Afghanistan and usually off the shelf for the sake of speed and deployment.
Given that their replacement for MILAN was a new generation system, in early development at the time, France clearly wanted something newer and more capable than their diminishing stocks of MILAN, for combat operations.
Before all this, the UK decided not to start or take part in a new generation program, this was the late 90's/early 2000's and like most Western armies, the armoured threat had greatly reduced. MILAN still needed replacing so they went with Javelin.

The US has stated that the large numbers of Javelins they sent just before and in the wake of the invasion, were mostly older stock with only a limited shelf life left, not an issue as they would soon be expended.
Ditto the UK with NLAW and probably Javelin too.
It's also true of artillery rounds and other items.
AKERON looks to be a new generation system, in some ways more advanced than Javelin, which given that the US system was developed in the 1990's should not be surprising.

Away from that, some who have reported from Ukraine for The Guardian reflect on meeting and telling the stories of ordinary Ukrainians.
Luke Harding is an expert of Russia, he was the paper's Russia correspondent and must have been doing a good job since he and his family were harassed and threatened and he was eventually expelled.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... -reporting
https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/4 ... ke_Harding

And the experiences over the past year of some Ukrainians;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... ar-russian

Certainly more truthful than the latest ranting speech by Putin, as assessed here;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... art-treaty

A geographically based look at the the last year, in terms of amount of land held;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-in ... in-ukraine
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11974
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:12 pm

marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.

So to be clear, when the war started and the EU and other European nations were warning the USA that they should ensure that they consult before taking any action because they were on the other side of the pond and would not suffer the consequences they were just blowing smoke and expected the USA to just ignore them and go do what they want to do?
 
johns624
Posts: 6763
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:19 pm

par13del wrote:
marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.

So to be clear, when the war started and the EU and other European nations were warning the USA that they should ensure that they consult before taking any action because they were on the other side of the pond and would not suffer the consequences they were just blowing smoke and expected the USA to just ignore them and go do what they want to do?
Some just like blaming the US for everything. Just like others blame the UK for everything. It keeps them from looking in their own backyard.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:54 pm

petertenthije wrote:
Biden’s trip to Kyiv was shrouded in secrecy, yet Moscow was apparently notified hours before leaving of Biden’s visit? Then why take away the journalists phones and all other measures? That seems to be a bit strange?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... n-war-zone


I'd love to know the exact wording of the message we sent to Russia.

I bet it has some language along the lines of "if we find out you leaked news of the visit there will be severe personal consequences for Russian leadership".

Many of them have children and others that live in the West, it'd be a shame if any fell out of a window. Just sayin'.

Putin is paranoid about his personal security which probably made them decide to obey the suggested protocols.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 12532
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:01 pm

I am sure the notice was A) Directed at the military channels that are controlling combat in Ukraine; and B) was to ensure awareness that they would be attacking the sitting President of the USA if there was an attack that happened to occur during the visit. By being advised they couldn't claim it was purely "accidental" as they didn't know/were unaware.

Tugg
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:06 pm

art wrote:
In his 'State of the Nation' speech today Putin said that contrary to a predicted 20%-22% fall in GDP in 2022 (source unknown to me), the fall was reported to be 2.2%-2.9% (according to a Russian agency).

Right, and before the invasion their economy was supposed to grow by 2-3% so the swing was more in the range of 5-6%.

The swing of the GDP during the GFC was in the range of 4%.

He's just rattling off numbers without providing the context that would make one realize it's a huge f'in problem for the Russians.

Soon after Russia invaded and sanctions were being prepared, I recall a number of western commentators predicting a dire reduction in Russian GDP, a reduction so severe that it could be seen as a collapse of the Russian economy. That does not appear to have happened and it does not seem likely to happen, to me. With the Russian economy failing to implode and the western democracies failing to provide the armaments to put Ukraine in a winning position militarily, this war shows no sign of ending, to me.

Give it time.

2022 had two months (Jan-Feb) that were with no sanctions, the most important sanctions on oil and gas were late in 2022 and early in 2023 so they already fell 2-3% just in 2022 before the sanctions really kicked in.

Their military was mostly running off stockpiles of men and materials, now that a lot of them are gone and production has to be ramped up to replace them.

Men in the military need to be fed, supplied, trained and paid, and once they become wounded they need hospital care, and once they get killed their family gets benefits.

Men who fled Russia are typically not contributing what they used to contribute to the tax base and the productivity of their employers.

Let's see what the 2023 GDP drop looks like, remembering again that most normally functioning economies grow and even zero growth is viewed as a problem.

Can anyone see a way of the war ending except by Ukraine gaining a decisive advantage militarily?

The fall of the Russian government. The death of Putin resulting in a civil war. All kinds of things can happen as long as we keep the pressure on them.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:16 pm

marcelh wrote:
Revelation wrote:
At some level, Putin and the rest of his followers have to feel pretty isolated right about now.

I’m interested to hear what Xi has to say this Friday about supporting Russia. Russia is still exporting to the two most populated countries, so much for “isolated”.

That's why I wrote "at some level"...

I mean, people like Solovyev can't visit their dachas in Europe, their wives can't go shopping for shoes in Paris, etc.

If Russia wants to form some sort of block with China and India, good luck with that.

I think they'll find that China and India actually like the benefits of trading with the rest of the world and won't give that up just to keep Putin happy.

Plus, I think Putin will find that Xi will expect to be the senior partner in such a linkup, so he better be prepared to kiss some Chinese butt.

Putin will find the Chinese will drive a hard bargain and he'll wish for the good old days when he was pumping oil and gas to Europe with fat profit margins instead of having to tanker it to China and India.

Overall, IMO such a block will just not work, despite whatever PR statements they're now making.

As you suggest, talk is just talk.
Last edited by Revelation on Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:21 pm

marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”


In the first moths of the war the US rushed in as much light infantry weapons as the Ukrainian were able to absorbed.

Later, it rushed in as much artilery as they could spare (see the current artilery supply situation to see why they could not rush in more).

Why not more M-1? Because there is no exportable M-1 readily available. Why not the non-exportable M-1? Because they do not want to risk the tech to fall into Russian hands, not because the are worried about Russia, but they are worried that the tech would end up in China, a potential future opponent. And there is also a thing called US ITAR regulations dictated by US laws.

As for F-16s, we'll my guess is the same export rules applies. Biden did say no US F-16 for now, but did not restrict exported versions from alies.

Yes there was some hesitation in donating some advanced weapons last year. But given the current purge of corruption in the Ukrainian government, it seems that some of the hesitancy was justified.

Hopefully once trust is fully established, we can get on with donation of more advanced weapons. Even so certain flow of weapons will be dependent on production rate. No matter how frustrating it is, it can not be helped.

bt
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:30 pm

art wrote:
Putin is launching a major verbal attack on the west along the lines of 'the west is evil, responsible for all the evil in the world and is intent on destroying Russia.' Sounds to me like he wants to return to as cold a cold war as can be..

Well, yeah, that is what he believes, because he believes Russians and Ukrainians are one people, and he's doing all he can to make them one nation, and we're intent on stopping that from happening. We're stopping him from recreating Old Rus. Same old rhetoric. He views the collapse of the USSR as the greatest tragedy of the 20th century. He buys into the Eastern Orthodox rhetoric that their mission is to retake Constantinople/Istanbul from the Turks. He views the West as evil because he's a homophobe. Same old stuff.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 15205
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:17 pm

 
art
Posts: 5719
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:26 pm

par13del wrote:
marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.

So to be clear, when the war started and the EU and other European nations were warning the USA that they should ensure that they consult before taking any action because they were on the other side of the pond and would not suffer the consequences they were just blowing smoke and expected the USA to just ignore them and go do what they want to do?


I think greater clarity of purpose is required. When western democracies (ie politicians) say to Ukraine: "We are backing you to the hilt!" one does not expect them to then prevaricate about providing the backing promised or hinder others doing so. That has been a problem in my opinion.
 
artflyer
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:08 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:39 pm

Revelation wrote:
petertenthije wrote:
Biden’s trip to Kyiv was shrouded in secrecy, yet Moscow was apparently notified hours before leaving of Biden’s visit? Then why take away the journalists phones and all other measures? That seems to be a bit strange?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... n-war-zone


I'd love to know the exact wording of the message we sent to Russia.

I bet it has some language along the lines of "if we find out you leaked news of the visit there will be severe personal consequences for Russian leadership".

Many of them have children and others that live in the West, it'd be a shame if any fell out of a window. Just sayin'.

Putin is paranoid about his personal security which probably made them decide to obey the suggested protocols.


The message to Russia was not that Biden will enter Ukraine, but that he is now entering Ukraine. My guess is it was sent about time when Biden landed in RZE, which is approx. 1,5h before his train ride started in Przemysl, Poland. So the Russians were left without an opportunity to protest, make threats and create problems that would be difficult to attribute to them.

If they were told two days before the trip, they would respond that on this very day that Biden planned to enter Ukraine, they prepated heavy shelling of Kyiv or the train track and advice against this visit. What would US do then?

Upon US AF1 landing in RZE, the Russians must have realised anyway what is happening. They do have satellites, don't they?

-

OT:

I hope that after the war they will turn these train carriages into some sort of museum, partially in Przemysl, Poland, partially in Kyiv. They have seen all sort of world leaders during the last year.

The railway station in Przemysl, where the train starts (some photos attached), is a bit oversized for a 50k town, but it was built in XIX century, when the train line Cracow-Lviv on which it is located, was within one country and much more frequently used. The station served as the first reception point for Ukrainian refugees coming by train in February 22.

Image
Autorstwa Travelarz - Praca własna, CC BY-SA 3.0 pl, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p ... d=35260477


Image

Image
 
GDB
Posts: 17059
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:42 pm

A lot of assessments just prior and at the start of the war, were based on comparing sizes of armed forces, there is however a lot more to it than that, which has been demonstrated;
https://www.forces.net/world/comparing- ... -and-scale

A small but important addition to the US package;
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX-xHR ... 6gCWaP3NRG
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:44 pm

art wrote:
I think greater clarity of purpose is required. When western democracies (ie politicians) say to Ukraine: "We are backing you to the hilt!" one does not expect them to then prevaricate about providing the backing promised or hinder others doing so. That has been a problem in my opinion.

Looks like all we said is we're backing them to the handle of the sword ( Ref: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hilt ) -- feel free to interpret as necessary.

artflyer wrote:
I hope that after the war they will turn these train carriages into some sort of museum, partially in Przemysl, Poland, partially in Kyiv. They have seen all sort of world leaders during the last year.

The railway station in Przemysl, where the train starts (some photos attached), is a bit oversized for a 50k town, but it was built in XIX century, when the train line Cracow-Lviv on which it is located, was within one country and much more frequently used. The station served as the first reception point for Ukrainian refugees coming by train in February 22.

Thanks for the on-topic background info on the start of Biden's train journey, and especially the photos!
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1761
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:24 pm

For those who might be curious for the details about what Putin is saying in one of his most significant annual speeches, and near the anniversary of the start of the war, the Kremlin has posted an English transcript here:

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/70565

Many news articles have reported on the speech, but tend to focus on specific parts of it to fit a given story.

For my own part, the reason I wanted to look it up was to understand the current narrative being pushed in Russia. It should go without saying, but propoganda warning for the following excerpts:

One year ago, to protect the people in our historical lands, to ensure the security of our country and to eliminate the threat coming from the neo-Nazi regime that had taken hold in Ukraine after the 2014 coup, it was decided to begin the special military operation...

Since 2014, Donbass has been fighting for the right to live in their land and to speak their native tongue. It fought and never gave up amid the blockade, constant shelling and the Kiev regime’s overt hatred. It hoped and waited that Russia would come to help.

In the meantime, as you know well, we were doing everything in our power to solve this problem by peaceful means, and patiently conducted talks on a peaceful solution to this devastating conflict.

This appalling method of deception has been tried and tested many times before. They behaved just as shamelessly and duplicitously when destroying Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, and Syria.
....
The threat was growing by the day. Judging by the information we received, there was no doubt that everything would be in place by February 2022 for launching yet another bloody punitive operation in Donbass.
....
Let me reiterate that they were the ones who started this war, while we used force and are using it to stop the war.
....
None of them cares about human casualties and tragedies because many trillions of dollars are at stake, of course. They can also continue to rob everyone under the guise of democracy and freedoms, to impose neoliberal and essentially totalitarian values, to brand entire countries and nations, to publicly insult their leaders, to suppress dissent in their own countries and to divert attention from corruption scandals by creating an enemy image.
....
Neo-Nazis are open about whose heirs they consider themselves to be. Surprisingly, none of the powers that be in the West are seeing it. Why? Because they – pardon my language – could not care less about it. They do not care who they are betting on in their fight against us, against Russia.
....
The West is using Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia and as a testing range. I am not going to discuss in detail the West's attempts to turn the war around, or their plans to ramp up military supplies, since everyone is well aware of that. However, there is one circumstance that everyone should be clear about: the longer the range of the Western systems that will be supplied to Ukraine, the further we will have to move the threat away from our borders. This is obvious.

The Western elite make no secret of their goal, which is, I quote, “Russia’s strategic defeat.” What does this mean to us? This means they plan to finish us once and for all.


These are talking points we have heard before, re-arranged and collected together to update the framing of the war: The "special military operation" was initiated to defend the innocent people in the Donbass who spent the 8 years before the war peacefully destroying towns like Pisky and major portions of Avdiivka. But the alleged Ukrainian plans to attack the Donbass were just a smaller matter enabled by western governments propping up the "Nazis" in Kyiv in pursuit of the bigger goal of destroying Russia.

From there, he spends significant time thanking the people of Russia and occupied Ukraine (in light of the "referendums") for their ostensibly near-universal support for the war and their sacrifices, and then talks about how Russia is making the occupied areas better. He set up his intended context for talking about the sacrifices they are making by asking for a moment of silence for all those killed by "the neo-Nazis." He also talks about efforts to correct the chaotic and neglectful treatment of soldiers, while at the same time minimizing it.

He talked extensively about plans to increase production of modern military equipment while bolstering the general welfare and mitigating the impacts of sanctions. On the latter, he continued to claim that Europe is suffering far worse from those sanctions than Russia is, and that Russia's economy is being transformed to be better than ever. There is a lot of, "We have a plan and everything is going according to plan. Trust us," regarding the economy. With that said, there seem to be some fairly concrete efforts underway to improve transportation infrastructure to the Caspian Sea and to the east, which matches the shift to increasing reliance on trade with Iran and China. In general, there is a lot of talk about new government funded projects, and no significant talk about how to pay for it.
 
tomcat
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:28 pm

Revelation wrote:

artflyer wrote:
I hope that after the war they will turn these train carriages into some sort of museum, partially in Przemysl, Poland, partially in Kyiv. They have seen all sort of world leaders during the last year.

The railway station in Przemysl, where the train starts (some photos attached), is a bit oversized for a 50k town, but it was built in XIX century, when the train line Cracow-Lviv on which it is located, was within one country and much more frequently used. The station served as the first reception point for Ukrainian refugees coming by train in February 22.

Thanks for the on-topic background info on the start of Biden's train journey, and especially the photos!

I join Revelation and thank you as well for taking this train station out of anonymity.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11974
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:23 am

artflyer wrote:
The message to Russia was not that Biden will enter Ukraine, but that he is now entering Ukraine. My guess is it was sent about time when Biden landed in RZE, which is approx. 1,5h before his train ride started in Przemysl, Poland. So the Russians were left without an opportunity to protest, make threats and create problems that would be difficult to attribute to them.

If they were told two days before the trip, they would respond that on this very day that Biden planned to enter Ukraine, they prepated heavy shelling of Kyiv or the train track and advice against this visit. What would US do then?

Upon US AF1 landing in RZE, the Russians must have realised anyway what is happening. They do have satellites, don't they?

If Russia could launch some drones towards Kyiv along with a couple cruise missiles one hour before POTUS arrival the Secret Service would push cancellation and it would be up to POTUS if he has the authority to override and continue the visit.
The PR on the Russian side would have been huge and if cancelled I would not expect the USA to start a bombing campaign, face is an issue in Russia, not as much in the west, POTUS would have gotten some credit for attempting to make the visit.
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:56 am

artflyer wrote:
Upon US AF1 landing in RZE, the Russians must have realized anyway what is happening. They do have satellites, don't they?

He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.

I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.
 
johns624
Posts: 6763
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:36 am

Vintage wrote:
artflyer wrote:
Upon US AF1 landing in RZE, the Russians must have realized anyway what is happening. They do have satellites, don't they?

He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.

I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.
Any plane the president is on is AF1.
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:58 am

johns624 wrote:
Any plane the president is on is AF1.

Not this time. Biden's plane had the call sign “SAM060”.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 5652
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 2:53 am

johns624 wrote:
Any plane the president is on is AF1.

Not always. Sometimes it is SAM or RCH if they don't want the profile of flying as AF1. It's unusual, but just because the president is on board does not always mean it's AF1.

Vintage wrote:
He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.

I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.

That's not how that works. The 747 isn't AF1. The president could be on a Gulfstream and still have it designated as AF1. It's a callsign, not an aircraft. Like I said above though, just because the president is on board doesn't mean they necessarily want the AF1 callsign. It's rare, but in these circumstances, it will sometimes operate with a different callsign for a lower profile.
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:48 am

Vintage wrote:
He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.
I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.


atcsundevil wrote:
That's not how that works. The 747 isn't AF1. The president could be on a Gulfstream and still have it designated as AF1. It's a callsign, not an aircraft. Like I said above though, just because the president is on board doesn't mean they necessarily want the AF1 callsign. It's rare, but in these circumstances, it will sometimes operate with a different callsign for a lower profile.

For sharpshooting purposes you are technically absolutely correct. But for people who are not ex-Air Force and don't engage in Air Force trivia, it is standard practice to use AF1 to refer to the specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief (one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000).

Technically, “Air Force One” is used to designate any Air Force aircraft carrying the President, but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief.

Today, this name refers to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000. The Air Force designation for the aircraft is VC-25A.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh ... force-one/
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 4:40 am

Alright fellas, let the speculation begins.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/2 ... ign=recent

The part about Ukrainian striking targets in the south and the rumors of possible JDAM use.

If they are truly starting to use JDAMs then I am speculating that the Ukrainian are confident that the Russian offensive has burned itself out and the the time as come to start preping the area for the coming spring offensive.

Four weeks of JDAMs and the spring offensive can start in late March?

bt
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 12532
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:13 am

Vintage wrote:
Vintage wrote:
He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.
I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.


atcsundevil wrote:
That's not how that works. The 747 isn't AF1. The president could be on a Gulfstream and still have it designated as AF1. It's a callsign, not an aircraft. Like I said above though, just because the president is on board doesn't mean they necessarily want the AF1 callsign. It's rare, but in these circumstances, it will sometimes operate with a different callsign for a lower profile.

For sharpshooting purposes you are technically absolutely correct. But for people who are not ex-Air Force and don't engage in Air Force trivia, it is standard practice to use AF1 to refer to the specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief (one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000).

Technically, “Air Force One” is used to designate any Air Force aircraft carrying the President, but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief.

Today, this name refers to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000. The Air Force designation for the aircraft is VC-25A.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh ... force-one/

And, however, the aircraft carrying the President of the United States can, at anytime, reassign itself Air Force One. Which no other flying aircraft can do. (Though some say it can only apply to military aircraft, I have read - https://www.military.com/history/air-fo ... -know.html - it applies to any aircraft.)

Fun

Tugg
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:19 am

Tugger wrote:
And, however, the aircraft carrying the President of the United States can, at anytime, reassign itself Air Force One. Which no other flying aircraft can do. (Though some say it can only apply to military aircraft, I have read - https://www.military.com/history/air-fo ... -know.html - it applies to any aircraft.)

Fun

Tugg
But for people who are not ex-Air Force and don't engage in Air Force trivia.................................................
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1761
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:45 am

bikerthai wrote:
Alright fellas, let the speculation begins.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/2 ... ign=recent

The part about Ukrainian striking targets in the south and the rumors of possible JDAM use.

If they are truly starting to use JDAMs then I am speculating that the Ukrainian are confident that the Russian offensive has burned itself out and the the time as come to start preping the area for the coming spring offensive.

Four weeks of JDAMs and the spring offensive can start in late March?


Daily Kos should probably look at a map before making assertions like this:

Mariupol is outside of HIMARS range for Ukraine. So is this the first appearance of the longer-range GLSDB rockets?


The Port of Mariupol, which is in the southern part of the city, is 82 km from Vuhledar. The nearest point of the front lines to the tip of the northern industrial district is about 65 km.

The US only officially gives the range of GMLRS as "greater than 70 km." The most commonly cited number for the actual range is 92 km. The number Daily Kos cites for JDAM-ER is 72 km. Outside of GMLRS range seemingly means outside of JDAM-ER range, too.

But assuming the bigger number is correct, it appears GMLRS can reach basically all of Mariupol while still being launched several km from the front lines, and can very easily reach northern portions of Mariupol.

It has previously been reported that Mariupol is being used as a staging area for additional Russian forces being brought into southern Ukraine, so potential targets include the railroad infrastructure there, troop or equipment concentrations, or leadership targets.

I'm not sure how Ukraine will best utilize JDAM's, but getting maximum range out of them means release at high altitudes, visible to and likely in range of long range SAM's like the S300, and medium range SAM's like the Buk positioned closer to the front lines. Such attacks would generally be expected to be closely coordinated with SEADS operations, which is not something I'm aware of either side doing effectively so far.

Their means of striking Mariupol aside, I would be very happy to see this turn out to be preparation for a Ukrainian counteroffensive in the south. However, there remains uncertainty about their readiness to conduct such an operation, so I'm just going to wait and watch for more info.
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 6:07 am

iamlucky13 wrote:
Their means of striking Mariupol aside, I would be very happy to see this turn out to be preparation for a Ukrainian counteroffensive in the south. However, there remains uncertainty about their readiness to conduct such an operation, so I'm just going to wait and watch for more info.

The advantages gained if they can seize Melitopol, which would allow them to cut the road and rail lines to Crimea, would be so great that I can't imagine them heading anywhere else.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 5652
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:24 am

Vintage wrote:
Vintage wrote:
He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.
I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.


atcsundevil wrote:
That's not how that works. The 747 isn't AF1. The president could be on a Gulfstream and still have it designated as AF1. It's a callsign, not an aircraft. Like I said above though, just because the president is on board doesn't mean they necessarily want the AF1 callsign. It's rare, but in these circumstances, it will sometimes operate with a different callsign for a lower profile.

For sharpshooting purposes you are technically absolutely correct. But for people who are not ex-Air Force and don't engage in Air Force trivia, it is standard practice to use AF1 to refer to the specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief (one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000).

Technically, “Air Force One” is used to designate any Air Force aircraft carrying the President, but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief.

Today, this name refers to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000. The Air Force designation for the aircraft is VC-25A.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh ... force-one/

It's not "air force trivia", it's the actual answer. This administration most frequently uses the B752 for AF1, AF2, and EXEC1F, but the type never matters. I haven't worked AF1 as a B742 since the last administration, only the B752. There's nothing trivial about that.
 
marcelh
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:41 am

par13del wrote:
marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.

So to be clear, when the war started and the EU and other European nations were warning the USA that they should ensure that they consult before taking any action because they were on the other side of the pond and would not suffer the consequences they were just blowing smoke and expected the USA to just ignore them and go do what they want to do?

Exactly. No one knew that time what we are knowing right now. There isn’t a “one size fits all” solution without knowing the facts, circumstances and evolution of a war. My government is buying tanks (T72, Leo1 and hopefully they get an agreement with Germany about Leo2) and willing to sent F16 to Ukraine, because of what we know. I couldn’t even imagine it a year ago. Germany has made a 180 about sending weapons and is training Ukrainians at Leo2A6 right now. Why? Because the world has changed dramatically and despite their hesitation they are going forward.
 
Vintage
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:48 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 11:09 am

atcsundevil wrote:
It's not "air force trivia", it's the actual answer. This administration most frequently uses the B752 for AF1, AF2, and EXEC1F, but the type never matters. I haven't worked AF1 as a B742 since the last administration, only the B752. There's nothing trivial about that.

The people who 'own' the plane and the naming rights see it differently.
I have a citation, this is from the White House web site.
"but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief"
"Today, this name refers to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000. The Air Force designation for the aircraft is VC-25A"
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh ... force-one/


A number of journalists found it interesting that Biden left the 747s parked and so did I.
If Biden has been using AF 757s all along in his term of office, that is also interesting in itself. But it doesn't change the fact that the 747s with tail codes 28000 and 29000 are AF1&2.

When you say "I haven't worked AF1..." are you saying that you are on active duty with the Air Force and your duty station is at the White House / Andrews?
It would surprise me if you are making that claim.
 
GDB
Posts: 17059
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 11:18 am

On the frontline of a near deserted village, reporting with attached video;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... -frontline

Trouble in Putinville;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/ ... kraine-war

Ukrainian graveside memorials, note the ones well above military age;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/galle ... n-pictures

UH-60's appear in Ukrainian service;
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3prwM ... FnYap9-Tls

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/u ... ry-service

Training on the type;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3mNoZrx8qA
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:12 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
I'm not sure how Ukraine will best utilize JDAM's, but getting maximum range out of them means release at high altitudes,


I'm curious about that also. The technique I envision was a Mig can launch the JDAM in a ballistic trajectory. But 70+ km seems quite long for a winged bomb.

More speculation that it was GLSDB.

https://youtu.be/71DV7tKuvq4.

bt
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:17 pm

Vintage wrote:
When you say "I haven't worked AF1..." are you saying that you are on active duty with the Air Force and your duty station is at the White House / Andrews?
It would surprise me if you are making that claim.


His handle atcsundevil suggests he worked air traffic control and could have directed AF1 when it visited Arizona ;) .

And yes, facts, how ever interesting, can be trivia. So let's get back to see if the Ukrainian, in fact have received GLSBD.

bt
 
marcelh
Posts: 2400
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:02 pm

johns624 wrote:
par13del wrote:
marcelh wrote:
IMHO this post shows the lack of “can do” attitude the US had in the first months of the war. Lack of Leo2? Why not bring in some M1? European nations are considering adding F16 into the mix, but Biden said “no”. If the USA wants to be the great power of the free world - step up and show your leadership. Action speak louder than words.

So to be clear, when the war started and the EU and other European nations were warning the USA that they should ensure that they consult before taking any action because they were on the other side of the pond and would not suffer the consequences they were just blowing smoke and expected the USA to just ignore them and go do what they want to do?
Some just like blaming the US for everything. Just like others blame the UK for everything. It keeps them from looking in their own backyard.


I’m not blaming the US for everything, it looks you may have some issues with inconvenient questions.
Also I’m very well aware “my” backyard is very empty when it comes to military hardware, but we are trying to solve it with other solutions. But it’s telling my country is willing to buy those 18 leased MBTs and send them to Ukraine, while your backyard has several thousand M1 in store but unable to sent some over to Ukraine.
BTW: we have some F16 the Ukrainians may want, you only have to say “OK”.
Just my €0,02
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:05 pm

marcelh wrote:
while your backyard has several thousand M1 in store but unable to sent some over to Ukraine.


Sad, but sometime Export laws recarding ITAR can be infuriating.

marcelh wrote:
BTW: we have some F16 the Ukrainians may want, you only have to say “OK”.


I though the US has made it clear that it did not object.

bt
 
GDB
Posts: 17059
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 1:36 pm

Russian tank has likely encounter with Partisans/SF forces;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNj4g3iEiI4

General round up, failed Russian attack, Biden and Putin's speeches, the latter doubling down on nuclear rhetoric but with a test that did not go well...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njmEExVYtsI
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 5652
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:11 pm

Vintage wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
It's not "air force trivia", it's the actual answer. This administration most frequently uses the B752 for AF1, AF2, and EXEC1F, but the type never matters. I haven't worked AF1 as a B742 since the last administration, only the B752. There's nothing trivial about that.

The people who 'own' the plane and the naming rights see it differently.
I have a citation, this is from the White House web site.
"but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief"
"Today, this name refers to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000. The Air Force designation for the aircraft is VC-25A"
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-wh ... force-one/


A number of journalists found it interesting that Biden left the 747s parked and so did I.
If Biden has been using AF 757s all along in his term of office, that is also interesting in itself. But it doesn't change the fact that the 747s with tail codes 28000 and 29000 are AF1&2.

When you say "I haven't worked AF1..." are you saying that you are on active duty with the Air Force and your duty station is at the White House / Andrews?
It would surprise me if you are making that claim.

I don't really care what a White House page says that's designed for people who know nothing. You have been given the correct answer by several people, yet for some reason this is still a discussion. One needs look no further than the opening paragraph on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_One

My username would likely suggest how I've interacted with VIP aircraft. And no, I've never been air force, which is why this isn't "air force trivia", it's reality. If you don't want correct answers from people who know what they're talking about, then just say so.

bikerthai wrote:
His handle atcsundevil suggests he worked air traffic control and could have directed AF1 when it visited Arizona ;) .

Half right. I work in a facility that sees AF1 pass through on a very frequent basis.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:17 pm

atcsundevil wrote:

bikerthai wrote:
His handle atcsundevil suggests he worked air traffic control and could have directed AF1 when it visited Arizona ;) .

Half right. I work in a facility that sees AF1 pass through on a very frequent basis.


For business or leisure (and I am talking about the VIP here, not you :lol: )
 
johns624
Posts: 6763
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:46 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
johns624 wrote:
Any plane the president is on is AF1.

Not always. Sometimes it is SAM or RCH if they don't want the profile of flying as AF1. It's unusual, but just because the president is on board does not always mean it's AF1.

Vintage wrote:
He didn't use AF1, he flew in an Air Force 757.

I don't know exactly why, but I agree that AF1 would look out of place at RZE.

That's not how that works. The 747 isn't AF1. The president could be on a Gulfstream and still have it designated as AF1. It's a callsign, not an aircraft. Like I said above though, just because the president is on board doesn't mean they necessarily want the AF1 callsign. It's rare, but in these circumstances, it will sometimes operate with a different callsign for a lower profile.
Thank you for the correction. I was wrong (hint, hint).
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:46 pm

For those who are glutton for punishment, tank and tank armor is covered under USML regulation Category VII with separate sections for the vehicles type and sub components like armor, turrets and hull.

The regulations themselves do not prohibit export of any category. However each export must be independently approved. Approval requires all sorts of technology control and mitigation plans to prevent re-export to the "enemy".

Things like Patriot batteries that are located behind the front line is more easily protected. Things like tanks and fighters need a mitigation plan in case they are shot down or get caught behind enemy lines.

Mitigation plan may include a 2000 JDAM to make the vehicle in-op. But as you can see, such a plan is risky.

bt
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 28729
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 4:29 pm

bikerthai wrote:
The part about Ukrainian striking targets in the south and the rumors of possible JDAM use.

If they are truly starting to use JDAMs then I am speculating that the Ukrainian are confident that the Russian offensive has burned itself out and the the time as come to start preping the area for the coming spring offensive.

Four weeks of JDAMs and the spring offensive can start in late March?

Yeah, I saw a burst of JDAM and/or GLSDB speculation last night after the Mariupol 'careless smoking' incident last night.

I hope it's true, but there are lots of different ways that target can be attacked.

I think we've seen all kinds of attacks that look like they're prepping for the spring invasion, near Kherson, near Crimea, etc.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 4:47 pm

Revelation wrote:
I hope it's true, but there are lots of different ways that target can be attacked.


We'll have to see the next few days. Ukraine has a few long range options. However those option don't seem to be available in quantities and they would want to save those for striking Russia proper.

If we begin to see consistent strikes in quantities, then my money would be JDAMs and GLSDB (for the longer ranges).

Note that both JDAMS and GLSDB have penetrating capabilities to take out bunkers/harden shelters, building basements and bridges/road ways.

bt
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 7031
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 4:56 pm

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/u ... arterbacks

So these spotter Bradley's in combination with GLSBD, should make up some of the shortfall of not having close air support.

bt
 
tomcat
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Wed Feb 22, 2023 6:04 pm

bikerthai wrote:
iamlucky13 wrote:
I'm not sure how Ukraine will best utilize JDAM's, but getting maximum range out of them means release at high altitudes,


I'm curious about that also. The technique I envision was a Mig can launch the JDAM in a ballistic trajectory. But 70+ km seems quite long for a winged bomb.

bt


According to Wiki,
The wing kit will triple the range of JDAM to 80 km for the same accuracy


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Direct_Attack_Munition#JDAM_Extended_Range

But there is little chance they would climb to 30k+ ft to drop the bomb. So I think this wing kit could indeed be useful to give the bomb some range when launched in a ballistic trajectory from low altitude as you suggest. This way they could deliver precisely a 500 pounds ordinance a few miles beyond the front line. Rail tracks or bridges located close to the front line could be potential targets although one would think this is the domain of the HIMARs.

Then there is also this option which could have some utility: Precision aerial minelaying with modified Mk-80 series.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Direct_Attack_Munition#Precision_aerial_minelaying

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 1337Delta764, casinterest, marcelh, petertenthije and 27 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos