Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
psydude
Apr 1, 2008

aphid_licker posted:

Someone in another thread posted Russian milbloggers complaining about himars doinking command posts etc real good and I wonder if that's really bad opsec, if they're attempting some reverse psychology, or if the success of those strikes is so obvious that you don't need to be opsec about it and can complain about them on telegram as much as you like

I don't know why, but this reminds me of how the Canadians keep bombing American celebrities in the South Park movie.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

fatherboxx
Mar 25, 2013

aphid_licker posted:

Someone in another thread posted Russian milbloggers complaining about himars doinking command posts etc real good and I wonder if that's really bad opsec, if they're attempting some reverse psychology, or if the success of those strikes is so obvious that you don't need to be opsec about it and can complain about them on telegram as much as you like

A lot of newly popular Russian milbloggers on telegram (retired officers, people from volunteer units and close to Wagner or just nobody experts riding hype) are not directly controlled and dont follow the approved playbook (unlike a lot of established accounts who operate under networks and have salaries) and some tend to be extremely emotional so they divest from party line. Some of them tend to believe themselves as part of a new civil society of true patriots which mostly means believing that loud whining would result in millitary taking significant steps to solve issues (yeah man nobody thought of searching and hitting HIMARSes before you wrote a freaking POST). Of course they forget that they are in Russia and so, serf should not give advice to the lord, so it is mostly theater for their thousands of followers.

fatherboxx fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Jul 8, 2022

Godholio
Aug 28, 2002

Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

M_Gargantua posted:

Treetops are still good-ish against modern AAA, its just not a reliable defense. There is only so much advanced hardware can do about physics. An A-10 with a modern ECM pod at treetops? Good odds on the A-10

Strong disagree.

Edit: I think there are some situations where A-10s would be useful and survivable for Ukraine in this war. Those situations are few and far between; as mentioned these jets require a bunch of logistics and training, and they're an extremely limited commodity. Any significant battle damage stands a good chance of being just as effective as a kill, given the lack of ability to easily ship it to depot to be rebuilt.

Godholio fucked around with this message at 14:33 on Jul 8, 2022

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

I'm starting to suspect that the Russian doctrine of 'treat minefields as if they don't exist' might not be sound

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1545351615703556096

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
Treetop flying is neat and all, but it also means the pilot has really limited to zero SA on targets. It's hard to sling a Maverick from anything close to max range when you can barely see a mile down your nose due to terrain obstructions. This kinda works with a fast jet doing JDAM drops where you can actually go fast, loft them, and run the gently caress away (like a guided version of what we're seeing the VKS and UAF do with lobbed rockets). There was one video of a similarly high risk but at least apparently effective SU-24 pass dropping time delay ordnance along a Ukrainian fortification line from extremely low, but to do that you have to have a very good idea of where the enemy is and a rather quick aircraft like the SU-24 for it to be remotely survivable. And even then "remotely" is the operative term.

The SU-25, post-improvements from Afghanistan, has been very impressive in taking a beating and getting its pilot back to base. Multiple examples between Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine of an engine getting absolutely shredded and the pilot coming home. Plane almost certainly is a write-off, but impressive none the less. Apparently they added a beefier armor separation panel between the engines after Afghanistan.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

Alchenar posted:

I'm starting to suspect that the Russian doctrine of 'treat minefields as if they don't exist' might not be sound

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1545351615703556096

Realizing the minefield had a pre-set kill limit, I simply sent wave after wave of my own tanks at it until it reached the limit and shut down.

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice
How does self preservation not kick in there? Being fifth in line and then being first in line I would think a few seconds of situational analysis would occur, if even just because it took time for things to repeat down to your position.

Marshal Prolapse
Jun 23, 2012

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS
:nms:
This is a general warning, nothing in the embed image itself, but lots of switchblades making RF forces having a very bad day. You do see people highlighted and the switchblade diving, but I don’t think any gore, but obviously I wouldn’t want to spring that on anyone randomly.

The craziest thing is how much like a video game it looks like. Like a drone perk in some BF or COD game. These things seem extremely easy to operate (with proper training of course) and work quite well.

https://twitter.com/666_mancer/status/1545404160438329346?s=21&t=9TD4500H-Oj6Wh8t0dgSmA

Just Another Lurker
May 1, 2009

Alchenar posted:

I'm starting to suspect that the Russian doctrine of 'treat minefields as if they don't exist' might not be sound

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1545351615703556096

That is soooo beyond stupid. :staredog:

fatherboxx
Mar 25, 2013

Marshal Prolapse posted:

:nms:
This is a general warning, nothing in the embed image itself, but lots of switchblades making RF forces having a very bad day. You do see people highlighted and the switchblade diving, but I don’t think any gore, but obviously I wouldn’t want to spring that on anyone randomly.

The craziest thing is how much like a video game it looks like. Like a drone perk in some BF or COD game. These things seem extremely easy to operate (with proper training of course) and work quite well.

https://twitter.com/666_mancer/status/1545404160438329346?s=21&t=9TD4500H-Oj6Wh8t0dgSmA

Switchblades so far have not a very good reputation in UA forces, they prefer homemade grenade+drone combo. Main issue is that using those is very difficult and they are not very reliable for their cost and they have impact of a small grenade.

fknlo
Jul 6, 2009


Fun Shoe

Just Another Lurker posted:

That is soooo beyond stupid. :staredog:

Engineers can only carry 3 mines so the odds were in their favor!

Hannibal Rex
Feb 13, 2010

bird food bathtub posted:

How does self preservation not kick in there? Being fifth in line and then being first in line I would think a few seconds of situational analysis would occur, if even just because it took time for things to repeat down to your position.

I have no idea how survivable anti-tank mines are for the crew, and I really wouldn't volunteer for testing it, but if Russian tankers know more than I do, this looks like one possible way to sabotage the war effort through malicious compliance and maybe sit out the next few weeks in a hospital.

A.o.D.
Jan 15, 2006
What's the crew survival rate on a pressure triggered AT mine? Gotta be better than a top attack PGM, right? Could this be a calculated tactic by those crews to get themselves out of combat?

E;fb

Kaal
May 22, 2002

through thousands of posts in D&D over a decade, I now believe I know what I'm talking about. if I post forcefully and confidently, I can convince others that is true. no one sees through my facade.

fatherboxx posted:

Switchblades so far have not a very good reputation in UA forces, they prefer homemade grenade+drone combo. Main issue is that using those is very difficult and they are not very reliable for their cost and they have impact of a small grenade.

My understanding is that some of this may be true, but there's also a degree of Russian propaganda going on since the weapon is very much seen as an icon of American influence. So just as they immediately wanted to push back on the effectiveness of the HIMARS, they also wanted to push back on the effectiveness of the Switchblade. One of the very real problems is that the Switchblade 600 is in extremely short supply because it hasn't entered into production yet and they're literally built by hand. There's a fair number of the Switchblade 300s around, but they lack the range or firepower for artillery duels. The current phase of the war doesn't feature a lot of nearby infantry or light vehicles for them to target.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

A.o.D. posted:

What's the crew survival rate on a pressure triggered AT mine? Gotta be better than a top attack PGM, right? Could this be a calculated tactic by those crews to get themselves out of combat?

E;fb

Given the fact the turrets are all still attached, it looks like it's mostly mobility kills.

pygmy tyrant
Nov 25, 2005

*not a small business owner

Anecdotally, semiconductor manufacturing for military stuff tends to be the exact opposite of state-of-the-art in terms of both processes and density. I'm sure there's some :nsa: stuff out there, but there's also places running ancient poo poo like 'our cleaning step is a guy with a spray bottle of HF' on 10cm wafers. You don't necessarily want 5nm transistors in a missile either, you want something robust enough to survive acceleration and cheap enough to not care when it explodes.

Semiconductor fabs also make a lot more than the CPUs people tend to think of when they read computer chips. Russia already has some native manufacturing of the kind of less profitable but ubiquitous bits that made the chip shortage so bad for the auto industry, etc. If they were to try crash development of their own semiconductor industry, I suspect they'd start by there by building a couple dozen separate industries just to provide sufficiently high quality feedstocks to run their existing lines

GD_American
Jul 21, 2004

LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AS IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT!
Is an A-10 more survivable than what they’re currently using? If so, seems like a winner

HolHorsejob
Mar 14, 2020

Portrait of Cheems II of Spain by Jabona Neftman, olo pint on fird

pygmy tyrant posted:

Anecdotally, semiconductor manufacturing for military stuff tends to be the exact opposite of state-of-the-art in terms of both processes and density. I'm sure there's some :nsa: stuff out there, but there's also places running ancient poo poo like 'our cleaning step is a guy with a spray bottle of HF' on 10cm wafers. You don't necessarily want 5nm transistors in a missile either, you want something robust enough to survive acceleration and cheap enough to not care when it explodes.

Semiconductor fabs also make a lot more than the CPUs people tend to think of when they read computer chips. Russia already has some native manufacturing of the kind of less profitable but ubiquitous bits that made the chip shortage so bad for the auto industry, etc. If they were to try crash development of their own semiconductor industry, I suspect they'd start by there by building a couple dozen separate industries just to provide sufficiently high quality feedstocks to run their existing lines

From what I've read, this more or less tracks in that semiconductors for military stuff tend to be older, proven commodity CPUs, microcontrollers, etc...

...which are at the very heart of the current supply crunch. Especially since fabs are pressuring customers to update their designs to use chips built on more recent nodes so they can dump their old equipment and commit their floorspace to more recent (read: profitable) nodes.

Anyways, Russia building microcontrollers & cpus domestically seems like a nonstarter for the time being. No equipment or consumables from western semiconductor manufacturing supply chain means they need to spin up alternate suppliers. I'd imagine the Kremlin is putting all their eggs into the "import substitution" basket for this one. My guess is they're scouring the world's secondhand market/junkyards for consumer products that contain the semiconductors they need.

aphid_licker
Jan 7, 2009


fatherboxx posted:

Switchblades so far have not a very good reputation in UA forces, they prefer homemade grenade+drone combo. Main issue is that using those is very difficult and they are not very reliable for their cost and they have impact of a small grenade.

Weren't they used with little issue by US grunts in Afghanistan?

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice
Trying to go Full Juche is technically possible I guess, and honestly probably the best option left when you refuse the "Stop being murderous invading assholes" one, but I don't see it working out well for like a solid decade under the best, most coordinated circumstances lacking corruption and bribery problems. You could probably build a semiconductor factory in a few years, but what about the factories that supply those factories and so on down that chain plus all the people that know how to run every step of the process?

RFC2324
Jun 7, 2012

http 418

Isn't the only reason NK can go full juche because they have china and russia quietly propping them up?

Hannibal Rex
Feb 13, 2010
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1545454489674678272?s=20&t=sjsj7eI-ZxKf6TzkOowoUw

No freedom, no fries

Deteriorata
Feb 6, 2005


The deep-fried turnips are delicious, though.

CRUSTY MINGE
Mar 30, 2011

Peggy Hill
Foot Connoisseur
Didn't they have a surplus of onions at the beginning of the war? So many that they left kitchen trucks full of them for Ukrainians to find after they ran out of fuel?

Onion rings, bitches.

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

CRUSTY MINGE posted:

Didn't they have a surplus of onions at the beginning of the war? So many that they left kitchen trucks full of them for Ukrainians to find after they ran out of fuel?

Onion rings, bitches.

Have Russian not-McDonald's troll everyone who remembers these and wants them back: https://mcdonalds.fandom.com/wiki/Onion_Nuggets

pygmy tyrant
Nov 25, 2005

*not a small business owner

BIG HEADLINE posted:

Have Russian not-McDonald's troll everyone who remembers these and wants them back: https://mcdonalds.fandom.com/wiki/Onion_Nuggets

yo what the gently caress

CRUSTY MINGE
Mar 30, 2011

Peggy Hill
Foot Connoisseur
Never really thought about it until now but mcdonalds is one of the few places that doesn't have onion rings.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

It was a sad day when Burger King started making you specifically request the onion ring sauce.

Marshal Prolapse
Jun 23, 2012

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS
https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1544694036216389632?s=21&t=c8IgUO1ugw77HuFqgFh2nA

Same person from this video

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1544694086229282818?s=21&t=lHmBeGoG6_QqoNWQp0n89Q

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

psydude posted:

It was a sad day when Burger King started making you specifically request the onion ring sauce.

Bad news there, friendo - supposedly they've gotten rid of the "Zesty" sauce for good.

Of course, maybe that's just down here in Freedomland.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

BIG HEADLINE posted:

Bad news there, friendo - supposedly they've gotten rid of the "Zesty" sauce for good.

Of course, maybe that's just down here in Freedomland.

Cayenne pepper is considered spicy here, so I'm gonna assume it never caught on.

Kesper North
Nov 3, 2011

EMERGENCY POWER TO PARTY

BIG HEADLINE posted:

Bad news there, friendo - supposedly they've gotten rid of the "Zesty" sauce for good.

Of course, maybe that's just down here in Freedomland.

Whoa. Dark times indeed.

30 years from now maybe Rick and Morty can get it to come back

Jimmy Smuts
Aug 8, 2000

BIG HEADLINE posted:

Bad news there, friendo - supposedly they've gotten rid of the "Zesty" sauce for good.

Of course, maybe that's just down here in Freedomland.
gently caress. That stuff is straight up smack in food form. We truly are living in the end of times.
Also, today I learned that Burger King is still operating in Russia, but apparently, they're giving all their profits to Ukrainian humanitarian aid organizations.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Is this the first big conventional war where one side is operating mixed sex combat units? (not really counting Israel)

Cimber
Feb 3, 2014

Alchenar posted:

Is this the first big conventional war where one side is operating mixed sex combat units? (not really counting Israel)

Those foxholes ain't gonna repopulate themselves!

Godholio
Aug 28, 2002

Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

GD_American posted:

Is an A-10 more survivable than what they’re currently using? If so, seems like a winner

Roughly on par, but without the ability to be repaired/replaced, and the further problem of having to teach the pilots to fly it, how to use the weapons because the ones they know aren't compatible, and the equivalent training for the ammo troops, and maintenance.

And during that time, you're pulling all those people out of the war.

BIG HEADLINE posted:

Bad news there, friendo - supposedly they've gotten rid of the "Zesty" sauce for good.

Of course, maybe that's just down here in Freedomland.

I had it this week.

piL
Sep 20, 2007
(__|\\\\)
Taco Defender

Alchenar posted:

Is this the first big conventional war where one side is operating mixed sex combat units? (not really counting Israel)

It was probably WW2, though I'd be curious as to the relative numbers.

See:
Aleksandra Samusenko (who was convinced to let Joseph Beyrle fight along side her u nit)

It's hard for me to find from simple googles who else was in Maria Oktyabrskaya's tank crew, but I assume the crew of that tank was probably mixed and not all female. Manshuk Mametova dominates searches for the 100th Khazakh Rifle Brigade. Not sure what the prevalence was, but there was at least some.

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
Probably a double post for a bunch of people who monitor several threads, but resposting my summary from yesterday's Senior Defense Official briefing.

mlmp08 posted:

Here's the tl;dr from the DOD today.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3088129/senior-defense-official-holds-a-background-briefing/

Short version:
-New delivery of HIMARS will bring total from 8 to 12.
-HIMARS effective in targeting C2 and disrupting Russian plans, no specific details
-Denies HIMARS has been hit by Russia
-Denies HIMARS has been used to target any targets inside Russia proepr
-1,000 "more precise" 155mm rounds, absolutely refuses to confirm or deny if Excalibur
-Will not comment on Russian claims of striking Harpoon systems
-Sounds like no plan to issue out ATACMS to Ukraine
-NASAMS fielding is months away from happening
-US thinks this conflict and supplying western arms will be months or years process
-There is zero plan for any pilot training for Ukrainian pilots on Western aircraft
-Official said there's accountability when weapons are issued out, but had zero real answer for how that would work, so....................

SDO press briefing excerpts - full in link above posted:

The United States first initiated a training program for Ukraine in 2015 -- yes, 2015 -- on helping Ukraine with its capacity to man, train, equip, deploy and sustain combat arms units. It is this background that's important for understanding how early in the war, Ukraine was able to face a larger, more capable Russian force, able to stay nimble, empower subordinates, achieve commendable successes, already be trained on certain capabilities that the United States as well as other countries had provided -- notably Javelins but not only Javelins -- and therefore, Russia was walking into a battle back in February with a far more capable military than it expected and that it -- it had frankly faced back in 2014.

And then early in the war, the surge of assistance from the United States and allies and partners ended up proving vital to supplement the training and capability Ukraine had built over those seven years in thwarting Russia's multi-access offensive, which was aimed at overthrowing the legitimate government of Ukraine and that is evidenced in the fact that Kyiv was one of the major priority axes of attack.

And what we saw in Ukraine's successful fighting off of the initial attack was that the years of training, equipping and advising, coupled with the surge of key capabilities such as 11,000 anti-armor and almost 1,500 anti-air weapons just in those first weeks, along with critical intelligence sharing, enabled the Ukrainian Armed Forces to successfully defend Kyiv and force the Russians to pull back and reassess their battlefield objectives and their approach.

And part of this -- a main element of this that we're kind of forgetting, I think, as the months have gone on, is that Russia's large scale invasion also was thwarted by Ukraine's very capable use of air defense capabilities, both those that Ukraine owned at the start of the battle -- legacy Soviet capabilities -- and the surge of assistance that the United States and allies immediately turned to in order to provide Ukraine with additional Soviet era legacy air defense systems, spare parts, repairs, more missiles.

And as a result, Ukraine denied Russia from gaining air superiority. And Russia -- and Ukraine continues, to this day, to sustain that capability and to deny Russia air superiority, which has forced Russia to limit its operations to the battle we're seeing today.

Now, coming to the battle today, as Russia's focus shifted to the offensive in eastern Ukraine, our assistance shifted, as well, because it's a different kind of battle, it's a different kind of set of requirements.

At first, Ukraine relied upon, again, its Soviet legacy howitzers, artillery and armored capabilities, but the United States immediately moved to surge over 100 NATO standard 155 millimeter howitzers and over 260,000 155 millimeter artillery rounds from DoD stocks to support what was clear to our military leaders was going to be primarily an artillery battle, and that's what you're seeing play out.

Then, in the next couple of weeks, in the next stage that you will see in this package today, which is the focus on higher capability, precision, further range weapons, and in the case of the United States, that's the provision of the HIMARS system, and the multiple launch rocket systems and the ammunition to enable Ukraine not just to conduct defenses with artillery, which are effective and important but not precision strike capabilities with insufficient range to be able to range Russian C2 nodes, logistics nodes.

And what we've seen now, as the United States surged HIMARS systems and the missiles for those systems, that Ukraine has now been successfully striking Russian locations in Ukraine, deeper behind the front lines, and disrupting Russia's ability to conduct that artillery operation.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: So the President -- the White House will be announcing the President has decided to provide another round of presidential drawdown authority the following capabilities: four high-mobility artillery rocket systems, HIMARS, and additional ammunition for those HIMARS. This is the capability I just referred to as being especially important and effective in assisting Ukraine and coping with the Russian artillery battle in the Donbas.

Three tactical vehicles to recover equipment, to support Ukrainian efforts to repair, resupply as this battle continues. 1,000 rounds of 155 millimeter artillery ammunition. This is a new type of 155 millimeter artillery ammunition. It has greater precision. It offers Ukraine precise capability for specific targets. It will save ammunition. It will be more effective due to the precision, so it's a further evolution in our support for Ukraine in this battle in the Donbass.

In addition, the package will include demolition munitions, counter battery systems, and importantly spare parts and other equipment because it's not just the new weapons systems but it's the ability of Ukraine to repair, maintain, and sustain the effectiveness of the systems that we and allies and partners have been providing over the last few months. So that is what you'll be hearing announced from the White House later this afternoon.

...

Q: Hey, thanks for -- thanks for this. Two quick questions. You mentioned the 155 munitions and they're a bit more advanced. Can you give a bit more details on what that is? And just more broadly, do you see Russia now having the momentum in the war or do you still sort of see the battle in terms of momentum?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yes, I can't -- other than describing the -- this new set of 155 munitions, I can't get into details for, you know, operational reasons -- but simply to confirm that these are precision capable systems compatible with the 155 howitzers, so that's what I can share on that.

...

On momentum, I mean, the Russians are making very, very incremental, limited, hard-fought, highly-costly progress in certain, select, small spaces in the Donbas. They're way behind on their timelines. They're far behind on their objectives. The Ukrainians are in localized places launching effective offensives. And now increasingly in the last week what we've seen is the ability of the Ukrainians to use these HIMAR systems to significantly disrupt the ability of the Russians to move forward even where they make that grinding, slow offensive.

...

Q: OK. And if I could, can you say -- you just mentioned there are places where the Ukrainians are -- I think the words you used are significantly disrupting Russia. Where is that happening?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can't give you specific locations -- as other of my colleagues have said, we don't want to help the Russians do their battle damage assessment or anything like that, but it is -- these are locations behind the frontlines of where the Russian forces are concentrated, where you see every day the battle is going on. It is the lines behind C2 logistics nodes, so in the Donbas definitely and in the battle space just further back behind the front lines.

...

Q: And very quickly, is there any consideration being given to any kind of oversight or monitoring mechanism for the vast amount of weapons and value of the weapons that you're transferring to ensure they don't fall into the wrong hands? Is there anything you're either doing to monitor that or considering monitoring that?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yes. We absolutely track the -- from the time we send the capabilities to Ukraine, deliver them to Ukraine, they move them to the battlefield. Our military leaders and experts and professionals are in communication with the Ukrainians to understand how they're employing those capabilities, what their usage rate is, what their -- I mean, it's a really important element of deciding what goes into our next assistance package is to understand how they're employing those capabilities, what their usage rate is, what their -- I mean it's a really important element of deciding what goes into our next assistance package is to understand how they're employing them, at what rate they're employing them and battlefield conditions they are employing them.

So we are tracking that very carefully and we are very mindful of our duties and obligations to maintain awareness of the capabilities we're providing to Ukraine.

[My personal note: That was NOT an answer to the question asked]

...

And most importantly, I would say, for the Russians to know that the Ukrainians are going to be able to continue the fight. Because if the Russians think they can outlast the Ukrainians they need to rethink that because this effort -- we are already pivoting towards thinking about what the Ukrainians will need in the months and years ahead.

...

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: So I can't get into -- again, this is operational security details on the timing of when the HIMARS will get there. But I will tell you, we have -- we have anticipated that this new set of HIMARS would be part of a Presidential drawdown authority and already work to ensure that they can get their -- the battlefront rapidly. But I won't give you a timeline.

...

Q: Will you -- will more Ukrainians be trained on HIMARS or do you have sufficient number they just need the systems?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: We'll be continuing to train them because, again, we see this as a sustained battle and the crews will need to take rest. I mean there's all kinds of reasons that you would want to continue to train sets of -- units of Ukrainians to be able to operate the systems.

...

On Russian damage to other -- Russian damage to other U.S.-supplied capabilities, same thing -- we're not going to do the -- Russia's battle damage assessment for them. I can clarify and deny that they have not damaged HIMARS. I'm not going to get into, you know, sort of any other, you know, speculation or evidence about -- that would help the Russians figure out what's going on on the battlefield, other than (CROSS-TALK)

...

Q: Thanks. I appreciate that. I just got to say -- we have gotten, on these same backgrounders, specific information about numbers of Ukrainians being trained, training that is ongoing, for other systems in the past. Candidly, the same thing with, you know, it -- you're willing to say that they haven't hit any HIMARS but won't talk about other systems.

It truly feels like you guys are cherry picking information to provide us here and saying that other things are operational security concerns, and I don't -- I really, candidly just don't understand the justification of it. Is it possible to take both of those questions and see if there's any more visibility that can be provided? I'd appreciate it. Thank you.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can take the question on the number of trainees on the HIMARS and get back to you. My guidance right now is to not provide that because of operational security concerns. So, you know, please understand.

On cherry picking, I was simply responding to a specific question of how many systems there are and do the Ukrainians have those systems. So I don't think that's cherry picking, I think that's being responsive.

...

Q: Yes, hi. I was wondering -- can you be more specific about the 155 projectiles? We're -- we're talking about Excalibur rounds here, right?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can't get into the specifics here.

...

And Russian claims about using HIMARS to strike beyond -- outside of Ukrainian territory, those claims are false. Ukraine is using those capabilities to fight the battle that its forces are facing and they are using them effectively in that battle.

...

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Sure. Eight have been delivered to date. With the package that is being announced today of four, it will be 12, but eight have been delivered to date.

...

Q: But they haven't asked for ATACMS?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: They have asked for capabilities to help them prosecute the -- the current battle in the Donbas, and that is what we are providing with the HIMARS and the GMLRS.

Q: Could you say whether or not it's been considered or is on the table?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I'll just repeat -- the focus is on helping Ukraine defend its territory and fight the Russians on Ukrainian territory, and that is, I think, welcomed by and -- and worked actively with the Ukrainian military and political leadership.

...

Q: Yes, I am. Thank you for calling on me. Two questions. One, I was wondering if you can give us on the NASAMS? All right, they -- is the contract signed? When would you expect those to reach the frontline? And secondly, there's some legislation in Congress. Ukraine keeps asking. Is DoD doing any advanced planning for pilot training for Ukrainians to fly F-16s or advanced planning or discussion regarding the transfer of F-16s or facilitating that transfer? Thank you.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: So on the NASAMS question, it's moving forward, you know, now that it's been decided by the president. I can't give you details of where it is in the contracting process, but you know, we don't see any challenges. It -- as your question suggests and you're right that use of USAI is a different authority. And so, it has a different timeline, but you know, that was expected. But we don't foresee any specific challenges and I can't give you a specific timeline at this point. But no issues at all with that. It's been -- you know, it's well underway.

On training of pilots, there are no current plans to train Ukraine on any, you know, air platform other than those that they are using everyday effectively in the battle right now, and those pilots already trained on those platforms.

Q: And just a follow up on that. Is there even like a number of months away that you think that that would be in the battlefield? Thank you.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can't give you a number, but it's certainly -- and again, it's a good question. It's a reasonable question. I would say it's several months.

aphid_licker
Jan 7, 2009


mlmp08 posted:

Probably a double post for a bunch of people who monitor several threads, but resposting my summary from yesterday's Senior Defense Official briefing.

Thanks for doing these!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

kill me now
Sep 14, 2003

Why's Hank crying?

'CUZ HE JUST GOT DUNKED ON!

Godholio posted:

And during that time, you're pulling all those people out of the war.

I would say Ukraine has passed the point of this war being an immediate existential battle for national survival. Unless they just plan on running their pre war pilot cadre into the ground until they are all dead you will eventually have to pull them off the "front lines" to train new pilots and/or retrain on new aircraft. They also can't exactly replace their SU-25 losses either.

I don't think the A-10 is the aircraft that the UAF should prioritize adding to their fleet, but they will, at some point have to transition away from ex-soviet aircraft.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply