|
cant cook creole bream posted:Yeah, Germany is still at like 99% gas capacity. They literally can't buy any Russian gas right now even if they wanted to. I and many others haven't even turned the heating on this fall, due to high gas prices. EU gas storage capacity is at 95%+ as of today and still (very slowly) climbing thanks to this very well timed, continent wide, long autumn heatwave. Thats beyond even the most wildly optimistic estimates from earlier in the year. The original stated goal was to have capacity hitting 80% in mid-October before it started to be used/go down.
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2022 12:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:30 |
|
|
The Question IRL posted:People I talk to do (almost brag) about not turning the heating on, but let's not pretend you have to conserve heating oil like it's bullets in a Resident Evil game. If someone is part of the poorest 20% of society struggling to put food on the the table then thats literally what they have to do, every extra euro spent on heating is a euro less available for food/rent.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
The thread moves too fast for me to keep up consistently but I just wanted to say thanks for those news round-up effort posts cinci zoo sniper. They're a great reader's digest way of keeping up to date on things fairly quickly and easily. If you had a blog and posted them to it I think it would probably get a fairly decent amount of traction in time, sites like Oryx have shown how much interest is out there on the internet for lots of civilians tracking/keeping up to date with this conflict. If you were at all interested in that mind you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2022 12:54
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:I'm doing them out of a calculus that this way the thread is less likely to go on a protracted, tedious tangent when there's a regular stream of news. As such, I'm far from enjoying feeling the pressure to spend my time on them consistently, as the primary feedback loop of “cannibalistic derails are less likely to happen” is not that exciting. If you did them as a weekly digest it might result in you feeling less pressure to spend time on them? You could possibly just bookmark any interesting articles you come across yourself during the week as it goes along so the research would feel a bit more organic/less forced. But whatever works, either way your effort is appreciated!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:They're far away from the centers of power (Moscow and St. Pete's), not critical to the oil and gas extraction industry and their governors probably want to curry favour with the Kremlin by supplying lots of troops. Whats the region with a significantly higher average monthly income than Moscow or St. Petersburg?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2023 17:02
|
|
|
Lum_ posted:Probably a mostly uninhabited Siberian region where the only people there are working in resource extraction of some sort. Ah, interesting, makes sense. Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
The US has 4,500 Bradleys in service with another 2000 in storage apparently. It should be fairly easy to supply Ukraine with large numbers of them hopefully.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:German gas stores are still 91% full. Assuming a regular remaining winter like in 2016, the storages will be at 65% at the end of April and filling them up over the summer is not going to be very difficult. The weather is really not on Russia's side lately. Europe wide we're at 83% too which is far above historical norms. At this same point in 2022 storage was only at about 55%.  You can track it here: https://agsi.gie.eu/ On quite a few days recently storage levels have actually been going up thanks to the heatwave across Europe. Which is obviously very unusual for late December/early January, it couldn't have happened at a better time. Refilling reserves this summer from a point 20-30% higher than expected is going to make a huge difference to getting in enough supply for winter 2023-24, its very bad news for Putin's influence.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2023 17:21
|
|
|
Are there any reliable figures out there on how many Abrams the Saudis have lost on their misadventures?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
The Moroccan tanks is new and positive news. They've apparently sent 20 T72s to Czechia already to be modernised/prepped this week, and have a contract in place to send up to 120 over the coming weeks. Speculation is they'll have the tanks replaced by Abrams from the US given they also operate those tanks. There are a few other African operators of the tank too that could hopefully be bribed with money or Abrams to send their Soviet origin tanks to Ukraine, it could hopefully result in a couple hundred tanks for Ukraine in the short term overall. https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/ukraine-conflict/1674409784-morocco-gives-tanks-to-ukraine-report https://www.military.africa/2022/12/morocco-choose-sides-supplies-t-72b-tanks-to-ukraine/
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2023 12:54
|
|
|
Saladman posted:I'm kind of confused by that, as Wikipedia says - with a citation needed marker - that "14 T-72M were delivered in 2021 from the Czech Republic." Morocco was buying T-72Ms from Czech Republic in 2021? No idea as to the "why" of why Morocco was buying T-72s in 1999, but they apparently had 158 as of last year. So the 120 figure for Ukraine is probably a reasonable estimate of how many of them might be in vaguely working order. I'd guess the 14 T-72Ms being "delivered" from Czechia were their own tanks being sent back to them after modernisation, just badly phrased on Wiki. The other near term country I've seen listed as most likely additional supplier is Kenya, which has 77 T-72AVs that were actually bought from Ukraine in the early 2000s, and friendly relations with the West. Georgia (143) and Malaysia (48) would also be on the Western friendly and open to US replacements list though. Any of Algeria (500), Uganda(50), Nigeria(100 estimated), Congo(100 - bought from Ukraine in 2010) Ethiopia(approx 200 - also bought from Ukraine), and Angola(44) as suppliers I presume would be more for cash schemes than Western replacement munitions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:It's going to be pretty wild what the Ukrainian military looks like in a year or 2. Like you'll have a military with Abrams Tanks, patriot missiles, and submarine drones, alongside BMP1s, GRAD rocket launchers, and MI8 helicopters etc. Like a mix of some of the most high tech equipment the west can provide with all the really old Soviet era legacy stuff they still have. Nevermind a year or two when the transition will still be ongoing, the five year window is more interesting I think. Ukraine will probably end up as a bigger, even more militarized, Israel. It could end up as one of most capable local force projection militaries on the planet given its combat experience and ever increasing Western support.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
There was a great map of Russian casualties that was doing the rounds last May, this: Has anyone seen a more recent version of it? I'd be very curious to see how their casualties have developed in the intervening 8 months.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:BBC Russia and Mediazona each have their own non-overlapping data project, check them out. Ah interesting, thanks, this is it I'm guessing? https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/20/casualties_eng They have a geographic map of the casualties by province about halfway down which is useful, its not per capita thought unfortunately so a bit less easy to digest.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
I wonder what the undetermined are? The last of their T-72s? The Economist this week had a nice graph on the Leopard supply: 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:AP story on Ukraine learning how to repair NATO gear Thats a pro-read, some really interesting stuff in it. This is also cute: quote:Just days before Milley visited the base, Ukrainians traveled to the Poland facility for parts. The visit gave U.S. soldiers a chance to meet someone from their chatrooms face-to-face and swap military patches.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:Jack Watling doesn't seem to (want to) grasp that the only operator that can spare a single platform in the required quantities is the USA. Blut posted:The Economist this week had a nice graph on the Leopard supply: There are close to 2200 Leopards in service in Europe (not including Turkey). Thats more than enough to supply the 300 or so tanks that Ukraine said it needs, particularly if done gradually in blocks of 50 or 100. Germany in general, and Scholz in particular, will be looked on very unkindly for deliberately delaying the supply of these tanks for no good reason. All their months of prevarication did was cost Ukrainian lives.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 11:52
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:The Economist is counting countries like Austria, Switzerland, Turkey, which will never part with their Leos, plus demilitarised hulls sitting on scrapyards as inventory. Strike those and NATO commitments and your list of available tanks shrinks precipitously below what Ukraine has said it needs. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/germanys-leopard-tank-move-puts-spotlight-its-maker-rheinmetall-2023-01-25/ Rheinmetall have said they by themselves can deliver 139 Leopards to Urkaine. There are 1,998 Leopards in Europe currently in service without counting Austria, Switzerland or Turkey. Ukraine has said it requires 300 tanks. So 160 odd from current stocks, or about 8% of the total. "The only credible provider of uniform tank models is and remains the USA." is a blatantly untrue statement. There was no justifiable reason for Scholz to delay delivery of them to Ukraine other than cowardice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 12:23
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:Did you read your own link? It deals primarily with Leopard 1 sitting on a scrapyard. Leopard 1 is not Leopard 2, it's a very different model. And why would you take a private company hoping for large contracts at their word? The Ukrainians requested Leopards. Either Leopard is a huge upgrade from what they currently have. I would take a large, publicly traded, company at their word because its of more value than the word of very defensive German Something Awful forums poster "Antigravitas". In service in American English 1. in use; functioning said esp. of an appliance, vehicle, etc. 2. in the armed forces See full dictionary entry for service The Ukrainians don't care about which tank model, they've just requested Leopards. Because, any, any Leopard model is a big upgrade from their dwindling Soviet stock. I'm not assuming every operator on that list is willing or able to part with tanks. But given in the first week after Germany finally deigned to allow transfer of Leopards we saw instant pledges of 58 tanks, or about one third of the total required, and other countries on the list that have yet to pledge have indicated their willingness to do so, its not much of a leap to assume the demand will be met in the coming months. Its wild to me that you think you know better than the Ukrainians themselves, and global military experts, who have all specifically said the Leopard is the best tank for their requirements - taking into account all procurement, performance, and supply issues. Why are you trying so hard to defend Scholz's terrible policy not to send tanks, that dragged for months, that almost anyone objective can now admit was pointless?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 14:14
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:I'm going to pick your post apart in-line. I'm sorry if this comes off as aggressive, but it's hard to keep things straight otherwise. Every single one of those tanks is "in the armed forces", or did you not understand that definition? How are we not talking about Ukrainians? I specifically stated "The Ukrainians requested Leopards". There is no tangent about Scholz. My very first post on this had two lines in it, one of which said "Germany in general, and Scholz in particular, will be looked on very unkindly for deliberately delaying the supply of these tanks for no good reason. All their months of prevarication did was cost Ukrainian lives.". Which you apparently disagreed with, and have repeatedly tried to defend his actions by claiming the US was the only country that could supply Ukraine with enough tanks. Posts of yours like: "the only operator that can spare a single platform in the required quantities is the USA." "The only credible provider of uniform tank models is and remains the USA. It is wild to me that anyone would dispute this. " etc are just completely factually incorrect. As evidenced by the number of Leopards in service in Europe, the number already committed to Ukraine in the last week alone, and again, as evidenced by the requests of the Ukrainians themselves and the opinions of any military experts posted to this thread. The Leopard is the best fit for Ukraine's needs in 2023 (and was in 2022) too. They should have had them months ago, and would have if it wasn't for Scholz and his government's morally abhorrent delaying tactics.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
That WaPo article is good. Further proof of Scholz's ridiculous delaying tactics, his government managed to delay Ukraine getting Leopards for months for absolutely no good reason.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
The Economist this week has a good article on how South Korea still refuses to send arms directly to Ukraine. But that the Koreans don't seem to care about sending arms to countries to replace their arms (even if they're identical - like artillery ammunition) so that those countries can send their original arms to Ukraine: https://archive.is/0wrfl Could be something along those lines happening here too - purchasing of Korean not-HIMARs will allow to Poland to send more actual-HIMARS to Ukraine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:There's zero chance of them getting F-35 so it's seems both pointless and cruel to give them a taste of it. The Typhoon is a lot closer to what they might eventually get. Unless we're just providing the airfields for f-16 operatirs to do the training. I'd imagine the RAF has the infrastructure to at least do the first 4-8 weeks of training for F16s if not the actual advanced flight training on the airframes themselves - class room, simulators, basic maintenance stuff for ground crews etc. So this could simply be an effort by the UK to get things started. Even if they're only able to partially train Ukrainians it will speed things up noticeably. And it will also help put pressure on actual F16 operators to get involved, like with the very limited numbers of Challengers by themselves not achieving much but helping to move NATO 'red lines'.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
Acute Grill posted:There was a lot of speculation about Ukraine getting F-16s in the first few weeks when everyone was paying attention to the air war and a bunch of people who didn't know what a No Fly Zone meant wanted NATO to enforce one. ? The Ukrainians have repeatedly, very publicly, asked to receive Western planes to modernize their air force. This is from last week alone: quote:Top Ukrainian officials have in recent days escalated their public lobbying campaign for US-made F-16 fighter jets, arguing they need them urgently to defend against Russian missile and drone attacks. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/31/politics/ukraine-escalates-public-push-f-16-fighter-jets/index.html
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2023 15:15
|
|
|
I've heard both of those terms used but in British English. There are far more glaringly bad examples in that "conversation" though: Security-Adviser: What happened? Is it the Trump ignoring the Intel and going to try to hit the Syrians? AS: I don't know. None of this makes any sense. We KNOW that there was no chemical attack. The Syrians struck a weapons cache (a legitimate military target) and there was collateral damage. AS: They're showing amazing restraint and been unbelievably calm. SA: But I get the get the feeling are simply trying this approach for as long as they feel it might work. etc None of that is how two Americans speak to each other in a voice conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Crazy casualties Are these losses deaths (ie actual casualties including wounded would be approaching 500% this) or all-in casualties (deaths & wounded)? If its the former Russia will be blowing through the mobiks within a few months.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
persopolis posted:Also worth noting that: The PRC brutally crushing Hong Kong has had far more to do with Taiwanese support for unification dropping off a cliff than anything else. Its been a very clear lesson in potential future outcomes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
Chalks posted:https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/1625562610602020886 Thats great to see. It reminds me of reading about the Arsenal of Democracy in WW2. edit for image content: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:One of the reasons for Russia's missile campaign against Ukrainian infrastructure was to run them out of missiles for their S-300s and other air defenses, and RUSI was warning months ago that Ukraine was running low and Russia could resume air attacks unless sufficient Western systems were supplied. I guess we might see about that fairly soon. You can just put the link into archive.is to get around the paywall: https://archive.is/i8KEB
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2023 12:57
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Simpler explanation is that somebody believes Putin is mad they aren't using their fancy planes enough The analysis that I've seen is with the Challenger/Abrams/Leopard announcements, the supply of Patriots/other air defense, and lots of murmurings about F16s etc, is that Russia is concerned that Western support for Ukraine is only making it stronger long term. So Putin is going to try to make one more big push once the ground is firm enough and the air force will have to be used extensively as part of that, costs be damned. Which does make some sort of sense to me, but we'll see how it actually plays out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1626244170917478400 Good to see Mitch McConnell trying to shore up support for Ukraine in the US.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Yeah, my impression is that it's more of the same so far, grandpa huffing his farts. So much for hype and the dank fake billboard memes. That FT article is great, really informative with well presented data.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2023 13:26
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:Speaking of de-mothballing, its happening Very interesting to see. Russia only had 600 left combined in reserve + storage in 2013 according to wikipedia (and presumably significantly lower than 100% of those are actually usable in 2023), so they won't be lasting too long if they're destined for the front.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2023 14:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:30 |
|
|
Saladman posted:That's completely meaningless anyway. The current constitution allows him to "legally" be president until 2035, as he can be elected again in 2025 ("first term under new constitution") and 2030 ("one re-election allowed under the constitution"). So even if he kept his word, he would only be out of power in summer 2035, just after his 82nd birthday. He would only be a sprightly, middle aged dictator by then, so I imagine the people will demand an exception be made to this strong figure of the fatherland, and he will need to extend it again by one or two times. That or he intends to retire when Russia annexes Belarus at some point this decade, as was apparently the plan.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2023 13:31
|
|