(Thread IKs:
weg, Toxic Mental)
|
Sounds like someones cornered the himars market.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
Since I am limited on time RN I won't go into extreme detail but. Finland being NATO means that Russia cannot send out it's nuclear subs from St Petersburg undetected. The listening deices will be so close that any sub that isn't already patrolling waters with nuclear missiles will be detected quickly. There's a lot more to that but there's the gist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:07
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Since I am limited on time RN I won't go into extreme detail but.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
xi's reportedly making GBS threads his pants in support of those poor kids the ukronazis murdered
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/snekotron/status/1700985518207676676 New T-80 tank that they claim to be building. Look at that loving reverse speed. Like ffs learn something from all your wasted tanks in this war gently caress me. Russian MIC has the evolution of a Dodo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1700996350429868067#m Second army of the world. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
Tai posted:https://twitter.com/snekotron/status/1700985518207676676 that reverse speed represents about a, what, 600% improvement in what they were working with before
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
Great, now they'll be able to reverse all the way to russia much faster
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:that reverse speed represents about a, what, 600% improvement in what they were working with before Still won't save them from javelins or NLAWs, though they might be able to escape a slower kamikaze drone
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
If you put effort into makoing your tanks reverse faster instead of going forward it means youre winning right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
Why would you need to go any farther forward if you've already won
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
zone posted:https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1700996350429868067#m This reminded me of a prominent twitter tankie who declared that ''NATO was unable to win a coventional war with Russia at this point'' about 3 months ago. I love a bit of comedy
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Since I am limited on time RN I won't go into extreme detail but. Except that Russia has never stationed ballistic missile subs in St. Petersburg. That would be stupid, they'd be stuck in the Baltic regardless of Finland's status.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
Man I'd like to give Putin a punch to the schnoz
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
zone posted:https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1700996350429868067#m We really dodged a bullet here by not sending the Ukrainians any M4 Shermans. Those would have a pretty rough time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:If you put effort into makoing your tanks reverse faster instead of going forward it means youre winning right? The Swedes thought so Philonius posted:We really dodged a bullet here by not sending the Ukrainians any M4 Shermans. Those would have a pretty rough time.  I dont know why real life is resembling War Thunder, but getting uptiered against T-54s in anything from WW2 suuuucksOfc Ukraine has modern stuff 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:47
|
|
|
Fumble posted:Sounds like someones cornered the himars market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:They most certainly don't have the nukes to take on everyone at the same time like the USSR used to have. They at best have a devastating first strike against one enemy (EU, USA or China) or lukewarm general first strike against everyone, and questionable ability to do second strike at this point. This is wildly incorrect
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:55
|
|
|
nukechat? balls?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 22:57
|
|
|
EasilyConfused posted:Except that Russia has never stationed ballistic missile subs in St. Petersburg. That would be stupid, they'd be stuck in the Baltic regardless of Finland's status. I just rewatched my source on this to confirm that I wasnt imagining id heard this. Here's my source: https://youtu.be/9dIjrNwXgrU?si=CgezYl9ED3ktpzv9 minute 13:00 ish Is St Petersburg not the largest submarine base Russia has? https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2022/07/two-russian-nuclear-subs-sailing-st-petersburg-surfaced-northwest-haakonsvern-naval
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
zone posted:Man made it onto a box of breakfast cereal, the highest accolade anyone can receive never forget that vlad was first :format(jpeg)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/46984646/count-chocula-beer.0.0.jpg)
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:I just rewatched my source on this to confirm that I wasnt imagining id heard this. Not all submarine bases can (or should) be used for boomers
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
TLDR is that Russia's nuclear launch capable subs are based out of Severomorsk, Polyarnyy, Olenya Bay, Gadzhiyevo, Yidyayevo, Bolshaya Lopatka, and Gremikha as far as elements of the Northern Fleet are concerned. Russia has other SLBM sub bases in the Far East and some in the Far North but they are not relevant to a discussion about the Baltic sea Severomorsk and all the others are in Murmansk oblast
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:never forget that vlad was first I wouldn't call those marshmallows spooky fun during the day. MAYBE at night.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:I just rewatched my source on this to confirm that I wasnt imagining id heard this. He doesn't say anything about ballistic missile subs. Easy to hear nuclear subs and think of nuclear armed subs tbf.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:06
|
|
|
As far as Russia's makeup of strategic capable subs, as of early 2020 the Russian Navy had at least 10 strategic subs of three different types, of which had 9 missiles onboard. The operational subs can carry 144 sea launched SLBMs that can carry up to 656 nuclear warheads per sub. Just the SLBM component of Russia's nuclear triad would allow for a global first strike, let alone a second strike capability. This is partly why I said Der Kyhe was wildly incorrect about Russia not having the nukes to take on everyone at the same time. They definitely do. Just their sub missiles can do it. Add in the other 2/3 of their triad and Russia has more operational nuclear warheads ready for use than every other nuclear power put together. Russian strategic missile services really love their MIRVs The thing about nukes is, it doesn't necessarily matter how many you have because using 1 is equivalent to using them all, without fail. There will never be such a thing as a localized or tactical nuclear exchange. It will always be an all-or-nothing situation and that's not going to ever change because of the nature of thermonuclear warfare. In a "limited, one or two warhead scenario" you've still vaporized millions of another country's citizens and they have the same weapon capabilities you do. Russia's operational warhead stockpile is estimated at 5,977 warheads. If even 90% of them fail to work then you've still got 598 operational warheads that just erased civilization HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Sep 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:As far as Russia's makeup of strategic capable subs, as of early 2020 the Russian Navy had at least 10 strategic subs of three different types, of which had 9 missiles onboard. The operational subs can carry 144 sea launched SLBMs that can carry up to 656 nuclear warheads per sub. Just the SLBM component of Russia's nuclear triad would allow for a global first strike, let alone a second strike capability. There is the secondary question of how many of their weapons will actually work if they try to use them, which is a question with a very large potential downside, but considering how hard they bang on their nuclear deterrent, it is a question of much interest.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Yeah this entire sideline started because I was wondering if Russia is capable of replacing or building new subs, because they are large, complex mechanical objects that spend a lot of time in salt water. I was editing my post when you were typing this up, and added a bit at the end that you might find interesting as it addresses your point about how much of them work
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:12
|
|
|
EasilyConfused posted:He doesn't say anything about ballistic missile subs. Easy to hear nuclear subs and think of nuclear armed subs tbf. You are correct. That's my mistake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:14
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Yeah this entire sideline started because I was wondering if Russia is capable of replacing or building new subs, because they are large, complex mechanical objects that spend a lot of time in salt water. Imagine the Kursk, but every time a Russian sub goes to launch anything besides trash.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
If anything in Russia's military is properly funded and maintained it would be their sub-launched nuclear deterrent. It above everything else is what guarantees themselves a second strike capability in a decapitation strike scenario and therefore is what guarantees the existence of a continued sovereign Russian state more than anything else. Every other piece of equipment might have been grafted off to pay for a dacha but it would be a dreadful mistake to assume the same of the SLBM-capable submarine fleet at the very least. For any nuclear capable state, that will be the absolute last part of the machine to rot away from corruption and Russia isn't nearly there yet. For context the USSR dissolved and the submarine fleet was so well maintained that they didn't realize anything had happened until the news and new orders were received after surfacing due to protocol about being contactable. It took several days for all the nuclear subs to be contacted and informed of the USSR's replacement by the Russian Federation. The Soviet cosmonauts in space were aware of the fall of the USSR before the nuke sub crews were due to how well they maintained crew discipine and protocol. This was the case while other parts of the Soviet war machine were literally in arms against the government and firing on the Duma, throughout all of that the sub crews were the picture perfect representation of professionalism and discipline.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:I was editing my post when you were typing this up, and added a bit at the end that you might find interesting as it addresses your point about how much of them work I don't know. I'm not eager to take the gamble. But given the general state of the Russian military I think it is a question that is probably being explored by a lot of smart dudes of various kinds, on the topic of "just how real is their nuclear threat?" There are plenty of other nuclear armed states, of course, but given the persistent drumbeat of Russian communications, why haven't they escalated beyond the rhetorical threat to destroy civilization if they don't get the eastern part of Ukraine, or implicitly, whatever they want? e: Looking it up it looks like they built and launched a new one in the post-soviet era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borei-class_submarine so that answers that question. The sub forces probably are in functioning order, if likely closely tracked by the West. Nessus fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Sep 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
Von Pluring posted:Come on, there's a lot of euros itt, we don't understand American football. Do something universal like lacrosse or Aussie rules. International relations are a lot like cricket: the rules are arbitrary and different in every country, it’s very boring to watch, and strikes to the balls are a constant threat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:20
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I see that. What I wonder is: Is that theory actually true, if, for instance, Russia uses a nuclear weapon in Ukraine? If Russia uses a nuclear weapon in Ukraine then NATO will get involved kinetically and destroy what's left of Russia's army using conventional weaponry https://www.reuters.com/world/russian-nuclear-strike-would-almost-certainly-draw-physical-response-nato-2022-10-12/ Russia is loud about the use of nukes because they are one of the few countries that openly incorporates tactical nuclear weaponry into its land battle doctrine. Dating back to the Soviet Union this has been the case https://nuke.fas.org/guide/russia/d...al%20munitions. Read this for more info HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Sep 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:27
|
|
|
putin launching nukes is the same as acknowledging that russia is weak and got dunked by ukraine, it's the ultimate and most shameful "welp i've lost so bad i have literally nothing left" so they'll never do it plus every russian boomer is being tailed constantly when they're out of port and when in port satellites are watching the things in real time. they open those missiles doors and they get a torpedo up their bums or those rods from god turn out to be real and take out the sub pens
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:30
|
|
|
Yeah isn't it a pretty straightforward promise that if Russia uses a nuke then the Black Sea fleet will cease to exist a few mins after?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:If anything in Russia's military is properly funded and maintained it would be their sub-launched nuclear deterrent. It above everything else is what guarantees themselves a second strike capability in a decapitation strike scenario and therefore is what guarantees the existence of a continued sovereign Russian state more than anything else. Every other piece of equipment might have been grafted off to pay for a dacha but it would be a dreadful mistake to assume the same of the SLBM-capable submarine fleet at the very least. For any nuclear capable state, that will be the absolute last part of the machine to rot away from corruption and Russia isn't nearly there yet. For context the USSR dissolved and the submarine fleet was so well maintained that they didn't realize anything had happened until the news and new orders were received after surfacing due to protocol about being contactable. It took several days for all the nuclear subs to be contacted and informed of the USSR's replacement by the Russian Federation. The Soviet cosmonauts in space were aware of the fall of the USSR before the nuke sub crews were due to how well they maintained crew discipine and protocol. This was the case while other parts of the Soviet war machine were literally in arms against the government and firing on the Duma, throughout all of that the sub crews were the picture perfect representation of professionalism and discipline. It's worth remembering that Putin approves if not encourages the Russian mob to extort the strategic rocket forces, which are supposed to be the pride of the armed forces or something. I'm not saying that they're as hollowed out, but I'd expect the sub forces to suffer some degradation in the modern Putin era.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:39
|
|
|
Philonius posted:We really dodged a bullet here by not sending the Ukrainians any M4 Shermans. Those would have a pretty rough time. The Sherman (upgunned with L7 105mm guns) actually had a pretty good showing against the T-55.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:41
|
|
|
Which is why Russia and eventually its arsenal will be neutralised in the way that China is going to do it - nurturing total economic dependence and bribing and blackmailing the oligarchs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:putin launching nukes is the same as acknowledging that russia is weak and got dunked by ukraine, it's the ultimate and most shameful "welp i've lost so bad i have literally nothing left" so they'll never do it Yeah, and Putin doesn't seem that far from that point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2023 23:47
|
|