(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
Mr SuperAwesome posted:The New York Times is a reputable newspaper, I’m sure they will have checked their facts and to claim that the NYT is pushing propaganda is a bit silly. Is the NYT supposed to be pro-Russian now? I don’t think so. Pro-Ukrainian propaganda. It makes Russia seem scarier and tries to convince people to make more shells/make them for cheaper if possible. As far as difference between the 'fancy shell' and 'regular one'? According to the Russians, a fancy shell is worth many regular shell. Because they're much more accurate and more powerful, so you get a lot more literal bang for your buck. Or rather, the ENEMY gets a lot more bang for your buck. the holy poopacy posted:It's not clear where the $5k/shell figure comes from but one thing to bear in mind is the concept of marginal cost. The US Army has standing procurement deals for 155mm shells at something like $800/pop, but since 2022 NATO has been trying to spin up new production and that adds upfront costs that means that those "extra" shells cost more per unit than what NATO was getting out of its existing production capacity. There have definitely been emergency rush orders going through to produce the same shells at $2-3k/pop, which would come down over time if they keep getting produced at that rate. So there are individual shells getting sent to Ukraine that someone paid $3k for (or at least paid $3k to replace), but the average cost per unit is much lower. I have not seen any sources citing $5k-per-shell production contracts though. He specifically claims that it just plain costs 7 times more per shell. I don't think he cares to be accurate, since he specified in one article that he's talking about European shells (which makes the '7 times more made' super dubious) and cost 7 times more (which the main European shell being made does cost about 800 dollars per). At the same time, the price is basically immaterial right now because even 5000 dollars for a 'fancy' shell is pretty cheap and the cost has never been the bottleneck, it's capacity to build that is.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
saratoga posted:This would have been a reasonable opinion about 90 years ago, but by WW2 you already would have been behind the times. The Napoleonic wars had fancy shells too. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:05
|
|
|
Tehdas posted:It does make a good interview question. How would you move an 80m submarine across 500kms of Russia? Dig a canal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Elon's interfering with the war again by providing the Russians with cybertrucks: https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1702382938669633670?t=x6SX_8efdHtbf6q0mJBquA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:16
|
|
|
fuctifino posted:The ship put up a fight First time for everything
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
Tehdas posted:It does make a good interview question. How would you move an 80m submarine across 500kms of Russia? You salvage anything capable of being removed and trucked, sell the hull for scrap, and build a new submarine where you want it. Will be cheaper and faster than actually moving it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
EDIT: Nevermind. Beaten to the joke.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:22
|
|
|
Tehdas posted:It does make a good interview question. How would you move an 80m submarine across 500kms of Russia? Let the KGB work on it until it agrees it's in the Black Sea. That's what I thought. "When did Musk start making lovely cyber trucks in Eastern Europe?" vvv Nervous fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Sep 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:Elon's interfering with the war again by providing the Russians with cybertrucks: looks like an average-quality cybertruck
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:Elon's interfering with the war again by providing the Russians with cybertrucks: Smaller panel gaps than the real cybertruck
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Tehdas posted:It does make a good interview question. How would you move an 80m submarine across 500kms of Russia? The answer is clearly bagger 288 (13500t!) But yeah - for that mass (2300t) a crawler transporter would be the only way. The NASA ones could do it - some googling tells me that a Saturn V stack was about 3000t, so the same order of magnitude. The aforementioned bagger 288 did a land move of about 22km in three weeks, which cost approx $7m USD in 2001. So it's feasible, I _guess_....
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
Tbh I think all of the chatter itt regarding artillery really comes down to results, whose winning the artillery fight? Ukraine is. They’re making more efficient uses of their resources and destroying more Russian tubes, personnel, and ammo dumps while losing fewer of their own and advancing. If Russia really was making 7x or whatever the number of shells then why aren’t they landing on Ukraine? It’s because their abilities to deliver is rapidly waning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
Yeah, to me the artillery question comes down to this: Russia early on was firing ridic amounts of shells and turning fields into moonscapes, and were barely advancing after their initial surge. Ukraine is firing far fewer shells but are getting more hits--and are advancing. Number of shells is meaningless if you can't hit poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Yeah, to me the artillery question comes down to this: That's the power of better shells and why going "Oh our shells are 7 times more expensive and they're making 7 times more!" is some guy running him mouth trying to drum up support. Even if it is true, according to the Russians they need 10 times as many shells to do the same as a single 'fancy' shell. Russia would love the more expensive shells.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:But Russia loses a landing ship and a submarine in one night and no one bats an eye. The Russian fleet in the black sea is kinda poo poo in quality. It's rather trivial, if not fast, to move a ship or sub with an sbmt. You don't need NASA poo poo. Couple weeks ago a combined Russian/Chinese fleet showed up "technically not inside" Alaska waters. That's a drat clear sign Russia isn't worried about running out of Navy yet. It also means China/Russia relations are improving.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Your point about people over reacting to Ukrainr losing 1-2 tanks is real valid though. That's not impactful at this scale at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
Much closer footage of the damage to Minsk in drydock: https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1702363501744783744?s=20 Superstructure is pretty melty, looks like the main hull is fine but who knows how bad the internal damage is. Either way this thing might as well be eternal drydock buddies with the Kuznetsov, Crimea could be returned to Ukraine before this thing is fixed from this strike.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:Either way this thing might as well be eternal drydock buddies with the Kuznetsov, Pre war the Baltic fleet was doing poo poo like 4 years drydock for every 2 years of service. It's hard to understate how not sea worthy that fleet is. Here's a link to the wiki on just this type. Buncha ships that were decommissioned in under 20 years. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ropucha-class_landing_ship BillsPhoenix fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Sep 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
If they had done the repairs at wet dock the fires would never have spread
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:The Russian fleet in the black sea is kinda poo poo in quality. It's rather trivial, if not fast, to move a ship or sub with an sbmt. You don't need NASA poo poo. An eleven ship fleet isn't a particularly big one, especially for a combined fleet. As far as the SBMT, I'd say it's probably a lot less trivial given the terrain it'd have to go through.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Kchama posted:That's the power of better shells and why going "Oh our shells are 7 times more expensive and they're making 7 times more!" is some guy running him mouth trying to drum up support. Even if it is true, according to the Russians they need 10 times as many shells to do the same as a single 'fancy' shell. Russia would love the more expensive shells. For what it’s worth, there’s been a number of reports out there that NATO has been producing quality 155 mm shells for much less than $5k /unit. Back in July a report came out that the US contracted with Bulgaria to produce 800,000 rounds at ~$500 a piece. I would assume that some of the larger price tag estimates come from standing up brand new production facilities, not from bells and whistles (truly fancy ammo costs a lot more than $5k/shell) or evil capitalist grift. https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023/07/us-paying-contractor-quietly-supply-bulgarian-155mm-shells-ukraine/388480/
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:Much closer footage of the damage to Minsk in drydock: Did they sink Russia's Blyattleship? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
Kchama posted:An eleven ship fleet isn't a particularly big one, especially for a combined fleet. It's not big, but it's not something you do if you're critically concerned about your fleet. I dunno what Russia uses, but a mamoent can go on pretty much any major road. Again it's real slow, and if Russia has to resort to it, it would be a major sign ukraine is realistically going to reclaim its Crimea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Kaal posted:For what it’s worth, there’s been a number of reports out there that NATO has been producing quality 155 mm shells for much less than $5k /unit. Back in July a report came out that the US contracted with Bulgaria to produce 800,000 rounds at ~$500 a piece. I would assume that some of the larger price tag estimates come from standing up brand new production facilities, not from bells and whistles (truly fancy ammo costs a lot more than $5k/shell) or evil capitalist grift. The numbers from that source are completely speculative. quote:The $402 million contract could buy as many as 800,000 155mm shells at $500 apiece, though George cautioned that shipping, packaging, and other services would likely drive the per-unit cost higher.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
Yeah good point they might spend $4500 on bubblewrap for each round.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:It's not big, but it's not something you do if you're critically concerned about your fleet. They're not concerned about their fleet outside of the Black Sea because it's not currently in danger, so they have no problem using it in ways that won't put it in danger. Those ships are a lot safer trying puffing up their chests and pretending to stir up trouble than they are going anywhere near the Black Sea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Yeah good point they might spend $4500 on bubblewrap for each round. That's how arm contracting works, yeah. I remember old news stories about the US government paying like 20 dollars per AA battery in Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:That's how arm contracting works, yeah. I mean this is just purely speculative in the other direction, so I don't see how it's helpful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
Groggy nard posted:The largest problem for Russia that I see right now isn't even the artillery, it's the counter-battery radar.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 22:06
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:It's not big, but it's not something you do if you're critically concerned about your fleet. Given that Turkey doesn’t allow Russian warships to pass through the Bosporus the Black Sea Fleet is pretty much its own thing now, separate from the rest of the Russian Navy. You can be deathly worried about the state of the Black Seas Fleet without giving a poo poo what the Far East Fleet is up to. (To be honest that’s kinda been the issue with the Russian Navy in general for ages, the fact that they’ve got multiple theaters that have a difficult time mutually supporting each other in the event of war.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 22:42
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:That's how arm contracting works, yeah. I'm not even going to try to pretend that there isn't an absolutely unholy amount of grift in US MIC aquisitions, there absolutely is. It's just a complete cluster gently caress. BUT The picture is always much more complicated than it appears. Yeah you'll hear stuff like $10,000 wrenches and so on. From a specific point of view, that is accurate. There are very, very expensive things in the world. It also tends to elide a lot of the complexity. That $10,000 wrench could be made from some exotic material required for a specific application, like inside a functioning nuclear power plant on a carrier vessel, or near an MRI so it has to have X amount of tensile strength and not be ferrous *AT ALL*, and there's only ever, say, 100 of them manufactured at a time until they all break and then someone has to dig around in the warehouse to find the molds used to make them 11 years ago and spin up another production run of 100 more. Or you hear about how the government pays $5,000 for a desktop computer and it sounds absurd. Then you read the actual contract and it turns out, it's a contract! It's not paying $5,000 for a DELL Latitude. It's paying DELL for 4 years of contracted support and a guarantee that this desk, in this building, will have a functioning Latitude on it at all times and if there is ever not a functioning Latitude on that desk, DELL has to pay whatever it takes to make that happen. In Afghanistan. During a war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:09
|
|
|
The Russians used a pencil 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:34
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Yeah good point they might spend $4500 on bubblewrap for each round. You joke but I’ve failed export hazardous cans for the use of bubble wrap as the sole securing material in the container.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:48
|
|
|
It's like in a hospital when people complain about $50 tylenols. It's not just a tylenol, but the entire support staff ensuring that the medication you're getting is the correct one at the correct time so that you can get better and gtfo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
The American hospital system is another great example of wildly inflated prices that don't reflect actual costs. Same with education.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:55
|
|
|
wet_goods posted:Tbh I think all of the chatter itt regarding artillery really comes down to results, whose winning the artillery fight? Ukraine is. They’re making more efficient uses of their resources and destroying more Russian tubes, personnel, and ammo dumps while losing fewer of their own and advancing. If Russia really was making 7x or whatever the number of shells then why aren’t they landing on Ukraine? It’s because their abilities to deliver is rapidly waning. I think "rapidly" is not supported right now. It is more accurate the say the Russian artillery is more constrained in what it can do and how often it can do it. Between the supply dump hits and the need to stay outside AFU detection/artillery range in between missions, they have adapated to mitigate the loss rate but they are still very much active in the fight and prevent AFU engineers from being able to neutralize the minefield threat. The Russians also have access to lots of mortars to support their defense which is likely too dispersed and not valuable enough to warrant artillery strikes. So for now they are still relegated to their slow crawl tactics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
Kinda interesting: https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1702359902016950683 Kyiv Post claims that patrol boats were damaged by drones today, Russian MOD claims all drones were destroyed. The same type of boats Russia claims to have destroyed 3 drones yesterday. There's speculation that the drones were actually after merchant ships and then got taken out by the patrol boats on escort duty. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/09/ukraines-attack-on-sevastopol-also-targeted-important-ships-crossing-black-sea/ It would be really something if Ukraine can assert control over shipping lanes with drones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:People did this in an age where ships were about the size and mass of a semi-trailer truck and had to be moved maybe hundreds of meters or a few kilometers over flat terrain. Sooo.... we're going to need a lot of mobiks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 01:12
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Sooo.... we're going to need a lot of mobiks?  Haven't noticed the flag on this painting before...
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:You joke but I’ve failed export hazardous cans for the use of bubble wrap as the sole securing material in the container. Hah, that sounds like a fun day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2023 01:31
|
|