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.
 
Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


mutata posted:

Russian fascist dictator, go gently caress yourself.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


nvm, beaten

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Russia is smugly targeting Ukraine power infrastructure before winter to terrorize the civilian population into forcing them push for surrender. This of course won't have the desired effect.

However I wonder if Russia has consider that it's playing with fire, because large portions of Moscow and St. Petersburg are still heated via an ancient network of steam pipes for winter. Said network is entirely serviced by one or two pumping station, and would take little to no effort to cripple the entire thing.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Oct 18, 2022

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Icehawk posted:

The Phase 3 Hawk system, a major update released in 1989 and what they would be getting, is actually still good. Spain is already sending 4 Phase 3 launchers to Ukraine and Sweden and Romania and bunch of other western allied countries still use the system as well. Honestly US should have offered these systems much sooner since they are just sitting on them.

They honestly would be doing us more of a favor by taking them off our hand more than other way around. It's been up hill battle against politicians to replace many legacy ground based AA and AAA with modern and in several cases, cheaper replacements, as they'll point to our existing arsenal and say it good enough, even though it's several generations behind what the replacement is capable of. It's also harder and more expensive keep them stockpiled, largely because many of core components, parts, and computers that are used in these system are not mass produced anymore and have to be special ordered from extremely expensive workshops.

A prime of example of this problem, while neither AA or AAA weapon, is the Tomahawk missile.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Dirt5o8 posted:

I'd be curious as to what exact vehicle that is. MRAPs are designed to fall apart like Legos, which absorbs the blast and protects the crew. That looks like a more conventional armored vehicle that I wouldn't have thought would be able to take a mine hit so we'll.

That second video got me right in the feels. No translation needed

French were and still are early adaptors for full protection systems of NBC, I forget the name of APC (it's was designed in the 60s) in question featured in the video, but it's got an armored segmented hull between the crew compartment and the troop section, with an optional armored divider for further internal protection, on top the armor on the hull of the vehicle. It wasn't purpose built to be mine-resistant, but all the other considerations and design decisions unintentionally (or intentionally) make it so.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Moon Slayer posted:


What kind of armored vehicle is that?

In which tweet?

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Kraftwerk posted:

If a bunch of challengers show up at any battle I imagine that one specific battle would be a massive propaganda victory for Ukraine. Demonstrating they can use it responsibly and win on a tactical level then opens up the doors for a large shipment of leopards or Abrams.

So far the fighting with all the Soviet level equipment, smorgasbords of MRAPs, small arms and AT weapons and random assorted artillery doesn’t have quite the same impact psychologically as seeing a western MBT ploughed through a wall take RPG hits and then wreck some T-72s.

You not going to be seeing anything like that with Challenger tanks, at least they shouldn't be used that way. Out all the MBTs NATO has to offer Challengers are the least suited for urban combat or medium range engagements due their large size and weight; Their main gimmick is they have some of the longest engagement capabilities out of any tank credited chiefly to their rifled cannon (Leopard and Abrams use smoothbore cannons) which where they really shine. Long range combat.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Hey guys, this is the wrong thread to be talking China/Tiawan reunification/independence. Mind taking it to a more appropriate thread? Thank you.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


litany of gulps posted:

Turning Iran into our enemy?

Turning? They were already our enemies.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Comstar posted:

So in a more related to the thread question. Why are Ukrainian vehicle camo a single olive grab and not multiple colours? I've also noticed a distinct lack of painting anything white in winter. Why is that?

Minor reason, olive is the ideal camo for the area, where you're dealing with mostly flat grasslands and mud plains. The major reason why they don't is despite being supplied heavily by the west, most of Ukraine's arsenals is mostly made up of soviet era equipment and vehicles, same as the Russian. Having multiple units decks out in various different camos makes it that much harder to distinguish friend from foe. This is why you'll see many of Ukrainian's infantry and vehicles forgo camo all together and covering themselves from head to toe in bright yellow/blue reflecting tape.

On top this you also have to contend with drones, thermal sights, and other long range electronic observation equipment which haven't quite render camo worthless, but it has definitely lessened it importance in the overall scope of things. In this war, staying out of sight via hard cover like buildings and covered trenches has become more important than staying hidden in plain sight via camo.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Nenonen posted:

I don't think that the naval turret has any radar or anything, just visual aiming. For same effect they could have used just ZU-23 twin barreled 23mm AA technicals, I think.

It's entirely manned turret with no electronics other than the motor it sits on (that neck looking part) and it virtually unchanged since being introduced in WW2, they were awful for AA then, they're awful AA now. As for the comment it might be good for shooting hull down, I say it would be terrible for that largely because it's not very well armored and there is about 1000 rounds ammo bins sitting on the other side of the gunner just begging to be touched-off.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


mobby_6kl posted:

Yeah I know but (having never fired a stinger, obviously) my understanding is that the problem is that it's difficult to see the plane/chopper at night to aim the missile at it. So amplifying the normal visible light could be enough. Or maybe not :shrug:

Something to keep in mind but most NVG shift your field of vision a little, when you view a scope through, say an old Gen II mono NVG, what you think your aiming at may not necessarily be what your actually aiming at.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Mar 11, 2023

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


cochise posted:

Eh, the props aren't going to cut up much on that jet. The reports say the Su-27 clipped the props of the drone and it forced the USAF operator to send it into the water because they had no power after the collision.

if the pilot used the nose cone to nudge the prop, I guarantee he basically ruined the plane. The nose-cone contains one of the most important part and most expensive part of the plane, the radar array. And that poo poo is extremely sensitive, and bashing it with a metal arm spinning a couple hundred mphs is guaranteed to have damaged it.

Unless they can replace, the only thing that plane is good for is spare parts.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5