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
Madurai
Jun 26, 2012

The Russians did the creeping Little Green Men thing to Ukraine for eight years, it seems fair that they should find out what "I'm not touching you!" on the national scale feels like in return.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

shame on an IGA
Apr 8, 2005

I mean if you're going to take advantage of neo-nazis having a shared enemity with the dudes that are shelling your country to hell sending them on a diversionary suicide mission has to be the least objectionable way to go about it

Hieronymous Alloy
Jan 30, 2009


Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!




Morbid Hound

bulletsponge13 posted:

Using Ukrainian equipment means little in that region, I would imagine- so much has been captured by both sides, I imagine that's part of the 'fun'.

Technically speaking, according to Russian political propaganda, *all* the Ukrainians are just disaffected Russians.

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

shame on an IGA posted:

I mean if you're going to take advantage of neo-nazis having a shared enemity with the dudes that are shelling your country to hell sending them on a diversionary suicide mission has to be the least objectionable way to go about it

Yeah. Treat them like unwanted change... drop them in a pocket and forget about them. Although you really want to be sure the suicide part of the plan to kicks in before they get near the nuke store.

Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 19:13 on May 23, 2023

Cimber
Feb 3, 2014

psydude posted:

Of course it's a Ukrainian-run operation. They're denying it while winking just like they have with every other attack they've done on Russian soil.

More to the point: does it really matter if it is? What's Russia going to do, invade them more?

Pretty much. The only thing the Russians have left is nuclear weapons, which they are not going to employ.

Der Kyhe
Jun 25, 2008

Cimber posted:

Pretty much. The only thing the Russians have left is nuclear weapons, which they are not going to employ.

And even with them it is a question mark how deep the rot is on their nuclear arsenal with the economic crisis of 90's and deep deep corruption afterwards, but for a very obvious reason no-one wants to find out the answer to that.

Ronwayne
Nov 20, 2007

That warm and fuzzy feeling.

Der Kyhe posted:

And even with them it is a question mark how deep the rot is on their nuclear arsenal with the economic crisis of 90's and deep deep corruption afterwards, but for a very obvious reason no-one wants to find out the answer to that.

Yeah, I don't think gambling on "absolutely, 100% of their nukes do not work/will not launch/will not detonate, and any attempted world ending will fail" is a good idea.

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

Does anyone else remember National Security experts losing their poo poo after the fall of the USSR? I remember reading and hearing scare stories of Soviet SADM Rucksack Nukes and pilfered material. I wonder how many were accurate.

Quackles
Aug 11, 2018

Pixels of Light.


Alan Smithee posted:

the Finnish are already sending troops

Russia started it, they Finnish?

Loezi
Dec 18, 2012

Never buy the cheap stuff

Alan Smithee posted:

the Finnish are already sending troops

Gotta avenge that one early volunteer's Best of Kake Randelin CD.

PurpleXVI
Oct 30, 2011

Spewing insults, pissing off all your neighbors, betraying your allies, backing out of treaties and accords, and generally screwing over the global environment?
ALL PART OF MY BRILLIANT STRATEGY!

bulletsponge13 posted:

Does anyone else remember National Security experts losing their poo poo after the fall of the USSR? I remember reading and hearing scare stories of Soviet SADM Rucksack Nukes and pilfered material. I wonder how many were accurate.

Turns out all the nuclear weapons that were missing from the stocks just never existed, but were invented to make things look good to high command.

https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1661122966334197760

quote:

A large unit of 28 Russian soldiers surrendered to Ukrainians together with officers. After a defeat in Avdiivka by the UAF's 59th Motor Rifle Brigade on 21 May, surviving soldiers of the Russian 110th Brigade, assault platoons specifically, surrendered, and recorded a video accusing the Russian command of sending them to sure death. The most senior officer is in the rank of Captain.

Feels like the first time I've seen surrendered officers. That's also a pretty big bunch to surrender all at once.

orange juche
Mar 14, 2012



Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

Well, if they are truly independent of Ukraine we should probably all be hoping the Russians kill them before they can get to Belgorod-22.

Well, Belgorod-22 is under control of the 12th GUMO since they store nukes there, and I doubt that 12th GUMO got hollowed out like the rest of the Russian military. (according to wikipedia, the unit in charge of Belgorod 22 is v/ch 34037 Graivoron p. Golovchino (Belgorod-22)) How can you go "muh nooks" if your troops guarding and handling the nooks are no more? They probably are pretty high on the hog as far as gear and training in the military, and assaulting Belgorod-22 would be a quick ticket to a body bag.

Orrr it could be like the USAF dudes out at like Minot ND and they're miserable as gently caress, underpaid, underappreciated, and no-one gives a gently caress about them, their morale is poo poo and they have high suicides. Can't really tell because Wikipedia says they're more secretive than the fuckin GRU.

If they somehow manage to reach Belgorod-22 yeah that's really bad though. They wouldn't be able to do poo poo with the weapons if they acquired them, but revolutionaries having access to nuclear material is really high on the "oh poo poo" list.

orange juche fucked around with this message at 01:05 on May 24, 2023

Murgos
Oct 21, 2010

psydude posted:

I just find the notion of a band singing about World War I and World War II too cheesey, even by power metal standards.

Listen to 1916 by Motörhead. I don’t see how you could call that cheesy.

Comrade Blyatlov
Aug 4, 2007


should have picked four fingers





And the band played waltzing matilda

Acebuckeye13
Nov 2, 2010

Against All Tyrants

Ultra Carp

mlmp08 posted:

Putting the image macro on, but leaving it all nazi symbols on the uniforms, 2/10.

Good news! This was noted and addressed

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
An interesting tidbit. Otherwise, today's DOD press brief didn't have much about Ukraine. There are only so many ways to ask "when will Ukraine get F-16s" and receive an answer of "Don't know yet" or ways to ask "Was defending Bakhmut worth it" and getting the answer of "Ask Ukraine, but Russia took a lot of casualties" in return.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...press-briefing/

quote:

GEN. RYDER: You know, look, as I mentioned before, we have been working very closely with our allies and partners to help Ukraine build up its combat power. They have nine mechanized armored brigades that we've provided, they have significant air defense capability. The entire world has come together to ensure that they have ammunition, and importantly, we're also providing training and we're working very closely with them on sustainment and logistics aspects.

So as they prepare to conduct counter-offensive operations, they have got a very strong hand and we're very confident that they have the combat capability that they'll need. And so again, our focus now is going to continue to be on providing them with the security assistance required to sustain and defend - sustain their fight and defend their country.

Q: And if I may on Belgorod, footage circulating on social media accounts about the units that attacked Belgorod showed what it - seems to be some Western and American-provided vehicles or weapons, to include Humvees and at least one MaxxPro MRAP. Is the DOD confident that none of the weapons provided to Ukraine were used on Russian territory? Thank you.

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, so we've seen those reports, something that we obviously continue to monitor very closely. I will say that we can confirm that the U.S. government has not approved any third party transfers of equipment to paramilitary organizations outside the Ukrainian Armed Forces, nor has the Ukrainian government requested any such transfers. So again, it's something we'll keep a close eye on. Thank you.


Let me go to Kasim.

Q: General, I will follow up on that. So if you haven't authorized the Ukrainian military to - to - to give the U.S.-provided armored vehicles to the groups associated with the military, then does that mean that there were some diversions of the - some of the equipment provided by the United States and found their ways into the hands of paramilitary groups that went into the Russian territories? And what - what's going to be the U.S. response if this - the footages are authentic?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, thanks, Kasim. So - so a couple of hypothetical questions there, right? Again, we're - it's something we're keeping a close eye on. As you know, the United States has communicated regularly with Ukraine that the security assistance that we're providing them is for them to use inside Ukraine as part of their efforts to defend their country and their sovereignty.

You know, I would tell you that when you see imagery like that - you know, again, something we'll look into - I don't know if it's true or not, in terms of the veracity of that imagery. I mean, you'll recall yesterday there were some bogus images of reported, alleged explosions at the Pentagon. So, you know, we just - all of us, both within the DOD and I'm sure in the journalism - journalistic community, have to take a look at these things and make sure we get the facts before we make assumptions.

Like I said, at this point in time, we have not authorized any transfer of equipment, they have not asked for transfer of equipment to so-called paramilitary organizations, and we've put in place some very strict protocols, in terms of end use monitoring, and have had good success working with our Ukrainian partners toward that end.

So again, we'll keep an eye on it, and just leave it there.

And this bit:

quote:

Q: Thank you, General. Regarding to F-16s, what assurances do you have from Ukraine that they will not use these F-16s to fire into Russia -- I mean, their territory, which could widen this war? Thank you.

GEN. RYDER: Yeah. I would just refer you back to the president's comments during his press briefing over the weekend, where he stated that President Zelenskyy assured him that these aircraft would be used within Ukraine. Thank you.

Qtotonibudinibudet
Nov 7, 2011



Omich poluyobok, skazhi ty narkoman? ya prosto tozhe gde to tam zhivu, mogli by vmeste uyobyvat' narkotiki

bulletsponge13 posted:

Does anyone else remember National Security experts losing their poo poo after the fall of the USSR? I remember reading and hearing scare stories of Soviet SADM Rucksack Nukes and pilfered material. I wonder how many were accurate.

https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=33596 is a fun read regarding all the material laying around that needed to be got rid of, not least because it was still an ongoing task in like 2020

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1661037540076290048?s=20

Okay, this one made me check to see if it wasn't an imposter account

Carth Dookie
Jan 28, 2013

mlmp08 posted:

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1661037540076290048?s=20

Okay, this one made me check to see if it wasn't an imposter account

Ukraine NOOOOO :ohdear:

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006

Carth Dookie posted:

Ukraine NOOOOO :ohdear:

It's trolling Girkin. He really loves Harry Potter to the point where a few months ago he wrote some extremely racist Harry Potter fanfiction in which Hogwarts was overrun by Chinese and Indian people

https://vk.com/@iistrelkov-progulki-po-hogvartsu-s-ritoi-skiter

PurpleXVI
Oct 30, 2011

Spewing insults, pissing off all your neighbors, betraying your allies, backing out of treaties and accords, and generally screwing over the global environment?
ALL PART OF MY BRILLIANT STRATEGY!

HonorableTB posted:

It's trolling Girkin. He really loves Harry Potter to the point where a few months ago he wrote some extremely racist Harry Potter fanfiction in which Hogwarts was overrun by Chinese and Indian people

https://vk.com/@iistrelkov-progulki-po-hogvartsu-s-ritoi-skiter

Just when I thought Girkin couldn't become sadder. I can't even hate him, even though he's a war criminal that killed civilians, he's just... such a loser.

Parkingtigers
Feb 23, 2008
TARGET CONSUMER
LOVES EVERY FUCKING GAME EVER MADE. EVER.

HonorableTB posted:

It's trolling Girkin. He really loves Harry Potter to the point where a few months ago he wrote some extremely racist Harry Potter fanfiction in which Hogwarts was overrun by Chinese and Indian people

https://vk.com/@iistrelkov-progulki-po-hogvartsu-s-ritoi-skiter

As cringe as those AI photos are, it’s also an accidental trolling of JK Rowling as well. She’d love to retweet that and show support for Ukraine, but the thumbnail of the tweet is an actor who is staunchly pro-trans rights in direct opposition to JK’s bigotry so she’ll probably quietly seethe and pretend she never saw it.

Hannibal Rex
Feb 13, 2010
https://twitter.com/Sandbagger_01/status/1661329915113816064?s=20

Bestest of friends.

Stultus Maximus
Dec 21, 2009

USPOL May

Just like us and Israel.

PurpleXVI
Oct 30, 2011

Spewing insults, pissing off all your neighbors, betraying your allies, backing out of treaties and accords, and generally screwing over the global environment?
ALL PART OF MY BRILLIANT STRATEGY!
https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

psydude
Apr 1, 2008


Given the performance of Russia's hypersonic missiles so far, I think China might want to ask for their bribe money back.

Xakura
Jan 10, 2019

A safety-conscious little mouse!

PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?



Making things that go under water is really hard, including navigation and talking to it (ie target selection)

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice

PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?



My best rear end-pulling guess is difficulty of radio communications under water.

Slo-Tek
Jun 8, 2001

WINDOWS 98 BEAT HIS FRIEND WITH A SHOVEL

PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?



Underwater drones, a.k.a torpedos are some combination of slower and shorter range and more expensive. A boat floating on the surface lets you get a lot of speed and a lot of payload for cheap. Also, way easier to talk to from the surface.

VictualSquid
Feb 29, 2012

Gently enveloping the target with indiscriminate love.

PurpleXVI posted:

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?


Communicating with a submersed partner is a lot harder then with a normal one. In practice that means that you would need impractically larger antennas on at least one end of the control loop.

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?


Harder to RC control a submerged drone I figure. You also probably want to avoid inventing semi autonomous torpedoes. I could see some kind of automated “dive and evade and dead reckoning navigate to international waters before surfacing” mode but are there international waters in the Black Sea ?

E: beaten like a Wagner platoon

M_Gargantua
Oct 16, 2006

STOMP'N ON INTO THE POWERLINES

Exciting Lemon
All of your "Why not do X?" questions had been answered since 1997 with the initial rollout of the Mk48 Mod 5.

The reason Ukraine isn't using them is that they're $4,000,000 a pop and require an equally capable launch platform.

PurpleXVI
Oct 30, 2011

Spewing insults, pissing off all your neighbors, betraying your allies, backing out of treaties and accords, and generally screwing over the global environment?
ALL PART OF MY BRILLIANT STRATEGY!
Thanks for the replies, that makes a lot of sense.

M_Gargantua posted:

All of your "Why not do X?" questions had been answered since 1997 with the initial rollout of the Mk48 Mod 5.

The reason Ukraine isn't using them is that they're $4,000,000 a pop and require an equally capable launch platform.

And hey, Ukraine's been given a lot of expensive hardware few people expected so far, give it a couple of months and they might get these, too. :v:

Wasabi the J
Jan 23, 2008

MOM WAS RIGHT
https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1661388123354398723?s=20

Icon Of Sin
Dec 26, 2008



PurpleXVI posted:

Thanks for the replies, that makes a lot of sense.

And hey, Ukraine's been given a lot of expensive hardware few people expected so far, give it a couple of months and they might get these, too. :v:

They’ll kludge one together somehow, and once they can make it organically there won’t be much concern with giving them something purpose-built.

EasilyConfused
Nov 21, 2009


one strong toad

Comrade Blyatlov posted:

And the band played waltzing matilda

:cry:

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



Murgos posted:

Listen to 1916 by Motörhead. I don’t see how you could call that cheesy.

Iron Maiden's Paschendaele too.

Sir John Falstaff
Apr 13, 2010

PurpleXVI posted:

Thanks for the replies, that makes a lot of sense.

And hey, Ukraine's been given a lot of expensive hardware few people expected so far, give it a couple of months and they might get these, too. :v:

Ukraine is working on it, though:

quote:

The Russian Navy has a new problem in the Black Sea. Ukrainian group Brave-1 have shown their Toloka weaponized UUV (uncrewed underwater vehicle). The design is evidently intended to operate as a form of loitering torpedo.

The design consisted of a typical tubular body, but with a large keel and horizontal stabilizers amidships. Thrusters are mounted on the end of each horizontal stabilizer. Intuitively, these are used for steering as well as propulsion. This should allow significant agility. If the mast is always above water then, technically, you could argue that it’s a semi-submersible. In this case however that distinction may be unhelpful. It’s a weaponized UUV.

http://www.hisutton.com/New-Ukraine-Underwater-Maritime-Drone.html

Infidelicious
Apr 9, 2013

PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/kromark/status/1661382232190140416

So one thing I don't quite get, is that everything I've seen so far of marine drones seems to be operating on the surface. Wouldn't they be a lot harder to counter if they were under the surface? I.e. submarine drones? So what it is that that seems to make the surface-operating ones more common?



Controlling something remotely underwater is a much more difficult engineering solution than making a big rc boat.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zamujasa
Oct 27, 2010



Bread Liar
Communication underwater is generally very very difficult because of all the water. Radio waves don't work so good under the waves (heh)

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