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.
(Thread IKs: fatherboxx)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Kraftwerk posted:

Is there much difference at this point between using an M4 and using a submachine gun?

Yes, the difference are leagues in scope.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


E: Wrong thread, sorry

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Nenonen posted:

The thing is though that despite ERA working once, you have to ask yourself how lucky do you think you are, punk? Because no ERA is without weak spots, you just can't cover everything with ERA tiles because you have guns and sensors and seams and all. You also don't know if they don't have something beefier aimed at you next that could penetrate the ERA with ease. So it is a good moment to consider moving to a better protected hull down or even turret down position and try to figure out where the shot came from. But it's the mission and tactical situation that guide the reactions. It's not different from an infantry squad getting hammered with artillery, sometimes you want to get away and find some concrete basement to wait out in, but sometimes you will just need to hold the line.

Speaking of infantry, you don't want them anywhere near a ERA equipped tank, which makes for quite an oxymoron; tanks need infantry support.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


mlmp08 posted:

Tanks don’t necessarily need infantry standing 6 meters away.

It's very common for deadly fragmentation from ERA casings to be thrown much greater than just 6 meters.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Warbadger posted:

The newer stuff is better on the protection side with better protection from shock and spall for the people inside, less chance of burning everyone alive if the fuel lights up, better escape options to improve the odds of escaping stricken vehicle, etc.

Both are similarly protected against light arms and vulnerable to heavier stuff.

BMP-1 are light skinned vehicles with barely enough protection to stop rifle round, BMP-2 offer slightly better armor protection can probably take a couple of 20mm rounds from the front, and BMP-3 are mobile powder kegs designed to kill their own troops.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Nenonen posted:

Now do BMD clown cars

All BMDs are design to only come to a complete stop once a troop disembark early to gum up the wheel works, two if on an incline.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Charliegrs posted:

I watched that trench clearing video and it was gruesome as hell. I don't remember if the red bearded guy was carrying a weapon? I don't want to watch it again to find out. Because if he was, well milblogger or not that's all fair game.

I’ll save you the trouble, yes he had a weapon and yes he had it at the ready. Almost all the Russians in video did.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


DarklyDreaming posted:

Ok I was going to make a jokey guess at this but everyone responding to that tweet seems to know more about tanks than me and they're all going "What the hell is that?" so I'm just going to re-iterate:

What the hell is that? :kstare:

Someone figured it out, apparently it the first prototype turret for the cancelled Black Eagle tank

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


ought ten posted:

That looks believable but it still doesn’t explain the twin beaks.

For holding insanely thick gun mantel armored plates that they never ended up making.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


It should be noted, and I feel stupid having to mention this, the reason why the excalibur artillery round is so expensive is because it’s in low production order, which means it’s out of testing phase but still being assessed by the military. Which means they have to be made by special order, hence why they cost 100,000 dollars each. Once they enter full production their cost will drop significantly, probably down to 50,000, and once they reach a certain surplus it will drop down to 20,000 and beyond.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Jun 29, 2023

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010



Full production of 5000 rounds after two years? That’s sound like contractor bullshit to me.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


OddObserver posted:

Also that those are overwhelmingly military deaths, and include Russian citizens.

Well, there were a lot of civilian deaths too, but most of that was caused by what the fake "separatists" were doing, which is exact same thing the Russians are doing; aka looting, raping, torture people for fun, and many other horrible horrible things.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Cpt_Obvious posted:

Edit: vvvvvvv interesting, how many?

Lasers, EM guns, AA missile systems, Stingers, mobile ECM warfare vehicle, etc etc.

Literal tons and tons of stuff.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Malachite_Dragon posted:

Jon your hand-wringing is telling me, at a most charitable interpretation, that you believe Ukraine will turn around and do the exact same things back to Russia as Russia is doing to them if they are supplied with the same armament.

I think you are pretty heavily biased here.

Not mention, every time they've carried out an operation in Russia, they've been extremely careful not target civilian or civilian infrastructure.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Lot of cluster round this and war crime that, but a not single word about Ukraine is probably going to disassemble them and use the bomblets on drones to help clear out trenches, stationary vehicles, and other fortified positions.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Vox Nihili posted:

Yeah, and this is a big part of why I'm not sure the attrition strategy that Russia has adopted (or really been forced into by default) is necessarily a losing one for them. A lot of that old Soviet production capacity for things like tube artillery shells, firearms, and IFVs is still there, whereas EU nations are essentially making arms on a hobby scale by comparison.

Kind of, not really though. Most of that production infrastructure for the Soviet Union was located in the satellite states, not to mention a lot of Soviet era machining equipment that was located in Russia itself has been, up to this point, either been stolen, smuggled, sold to other nation states, or scrapped for equipment build in the west. What factories did survive are currently overwhelmed building parts to maintain the equipment that's currently in service and/or bringing older inventory back to being serviceable, they don't really have the resources to be spooling up new production. That's not even getting into the weeds of them suffering from labor shortages and the value of the ruble is starting to collapse.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Moon Slayer posted:

Okay but is using "Chinese" as a synonym for "manufactured in China" racist?

Please don't take the bait. We really don't need another derail.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Ripperljohn posted:

Doesn’t the US profit immensely from it’s weak partners in NATO?

Everyone knows they need the US, everyone buys or develops weapons with them, no one can afford to step out of line.

I think you could argue that the US let the lax spending get out of hand for too long given the current situation, but it was absolutely in their interest to maintain the status quo for as long as they have.

It’s more like the opposite, we buy more weapons and fund more military research project from Europe than they buy from us because we’re the only thing stopping Europe’s MIC from collapsing.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


LifeSunDeath posted:

there was another drone attack in moscow, not sure much about it other than the video of it.

It's most likely they hit a Russian troll factory base on a lot of paperwork people are finding in the surrounding area.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010



Proxy war, really? That's tankie talk. :colbert:

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Kith posted:

i'm sorry people these mass graves full of obviously executed civilians and mobile crematoriums used to obfuscate bodycounts and highly documented organized kidnapping of children do not fully constitute a genocide, they are merely on the level of sparkling slaughter

Let’s not forget the mass deportations of the Tatars, the intentional destruction of Ukrainian historical sites, literature, and culture centers, as well as the denial of their existence as a people and culture, the rampant targeting of civilians education centers and hospitals (whether directly or indirectly).

That’s even getting in the weeds of the sheer mass of banditry, pillaging, and rape the Russians are committing.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


There are a lot of things up for debate in this thread, denying or dismissing Russia is committing one sure as poo poo ain’t one of them. :colbert:

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


fatherboxx posted:

Easy way to not meet a drone - dont stay at Moscow City towers working night shift. Pretty easy task for 10 million Moscow inhabitants!

You do realise that airports get disrupted all the time for such short breaks?

Winter is just right around the corner, if Russia start hitting infrastructure meant to help people heat their homes, these drone could very well do the same in Moscow. It’s easy to forget but most of Moscow is still heated via steam, Ukraine would only have to hit a couple of key pumping stations to deprive the people in Moscow their heat for several months.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Tomn posted:

Does it count as Clancychat when we're literally chatting about Clancy novels?

The rule of law says no, the spirit of the law says yes.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Chronojam posted:

So 80 years ago. Apparently they had problems with coastal gun airburst shells periodically detonating on seagulls.

That is a feature, not a bug!

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Fidelitious posted:

Well apparently India assassinated a Canadian citizen in Canada so I don't know why Russia would hesitate.

Because the US tends to retaliate, violently.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4218467-mccarthy-vows-to-strip-ukraine-money-from-pentagon-bill-after-greene-no-vote/amp/

Sorry for linking The Hill, I grabbed the first article I could find, but it looks like Republicans have started to push dropping support for Ukraine. They’re going mask off.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Nenonen posted:

How do you passively execute someone? Lay mines in their path of retreat?

Anyway a description as vague as this could be anything, from commanders shooting unobliging soldiers in the heat of battle, to more formally court martialling men and then fusillading them. It could be just anything. Or nothing.

In a sense, yes or in a similar vain you send a troop to patrol a heavily contested area by themselves or with other “undesirable” in the hope they are killed by the enemy. Essential your sending a soldier to do a task that you know is dangerous with express purpose it gets them killed, not to complete the task.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Oct 27, 2023

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Popete posted:

My impression was partly Ukraine wanted to leave Russia a path to not invade but also other NATO countries (I think France?) were saying Russia wasn't going to invade more so because they were doing so with an insufficient army to actually take control of the entire country and it seemed too stupid. Russia really did seem to think Ukraine would collapse on it's own and they would be greeted as liberators.

The funny thing with France is that they were so smug about how Russia wasn't going to invade because they signed a peace-agreement with Russia that guarantee Russia wouldn't invade Europe, a couple of days before they did. What fools.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Nov 29, 2023

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


small butter posted:

What is this peace agreement? Was it a treaty?

Did Russia try to justify the breaking of the agreement by saying that "Ukraine isn't Europe" or something?

Macron flew out to Russia to talk to Putin directly, made a big deal about signing a few documents that basically said Russia is a country of peace and has no intentions of invading Ukraine/Europe. Macron then started blowing smoke out his rear end that maybe if the West was more open, Russia wouldn’t have to be so aggressive when it came to peaceful diplomacy and other such bullshit. Within the same week, Russia invaded Ukraine.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Groggy nard posted:

https://youtu.be/DeB8x9ljGwE?si=VGFUxYip3fGuScKp

If the plane was flying away from Belgorod, then its not likely Ukrainian prisoners were aboard.

Didn’t watch the video, not to play devil’s advocate here, but the plane could have been on approach toward a runway which would require it to landed in very specific direction, passenger or cargo planes can span hundreds of mile in extremely wide circle to approach landing strips at the right angle and position.

RoyKeen posted:

But I still want to talk about the death of people.....

gently caress off, I just made a single comment in response why a plane might be flying in a particular direction.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 24, 2024

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010



I don't want to watch a video analyzing the death of people that happened only a handful of hours ago where the context isn't entirely clear yet.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Libluini posted:

A lot of Germans would agree with you, since they both think all Americans are uniquely stupid, and want to be Americans. :v:

I can't tell you the number of times a German has to come to Houston for a business deal and leave extremely disappointed because it wasn't desert, cowboy hats, and horses like an old west movie. Just trees and Highways as far as the eye can see, as one of them describe it.

Back Hack fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Feb 7, 2024

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Paladinus posted:

Took them only half a year and another war to figure out. Insane that it was all in one bill with the intention that it would be easier to pass that way and now it's three separate bills anyway. I still expect something wacky to happen this Saturday that will delay the Ukraine bill specifically.

There was no "figuring out" anything, the delays were entirely the point made by the usual case of bad actors doing Russia's bidding.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


OddObserver posted:

Lack of HE on a tank is shocking given even I know they mostly don't fight other tanks....

There is a reason the US military has been fighting congress since the 80s to have a light tanks. The US military has fully developed dozens of light tank programs and every single one has been cancelled because congress goes "herp derp. We have tonk, why need new tonk? New tonk smaller and weaker than old tonk. No need new tonk. New tonk bad". The fact the Booker/Griffin got approval is a loving miracle, and probably because the army didn't everything in power have this thing categorize as a light reconnaissance vehicle.

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


Ynglaur posted:

Actually, 35mm seems to be The Way.

The US has 120mm MPAT now, which has a variable fuse that let's it be HEAT, HE, or airburst. I'm sure it's wonderful, but I wonder if development time is why I never had HE.

It doesn't have HE because the programs that lead to its production never finished their research before they were cancelled by congress: See Ares xm274 & MRAAS; AKA, that 75mm machine gun Eugene Stoner (Yes, that Stoner) and the programmable telescoping cased ammo eventually made for it, over the span of 4 separate attempts by the US Army to build a light tank around the weapon platform.

E: So you can blame congress we don't have the anti-everything gun because they hate light tank.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Back Hack
Jan 17, 2010


GD_American posted:

Not wishing to dive past OPSEC, but are they being integrated at the squad level in infantry? Because that's where the biggest sea change seems to be occurring. We were a pioneer of drones at the operational level, but the small,cheap, and deadly seem to have really taken things over.

Imo, yes most definitely yes. Based what the US military has revealed, no, but that’s intentional.

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