Continuation The Russian invasion of Ukraine part 6

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dasmiller

<snip>



I agree with all this, but I want to add that there may be some real anti-droned progress, too. The big, high-altitude drones are effectively traditional aircraft, with the well-known and constantly-evolving countermeasures, counter-countermeasures, etc. The new cheap, expendable drones, however, are very low, slow & close compared to traditional aircraft, and will have very different vulnerabilities. There may be some relatively inexpensive but effective countermeasures that we just haven't seen yet.

That being said, I don't expect any new trick will simply defeat the drones, and I have no doubt that drones will be a major new factor on the battlefield for the foreseeable future. But maybe the current drone "happy time" will end. A good analogy would be the way convoys ended the "happy time" for the U-boots in WWII. Submarines continued to be effective (and still are), it just stopped being so easy.

(remainder snipped)

The obvious weapon system against such drones is a medium or light flak gun.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by jimbob

The obvious weapon system against such drones is a medium or light flak gun.

The not so obvious weapon for use against small drones is microwaves. Raytheon and other companies have working prototypes. Although my personal opinion of Raytheon is a bit low given some of the crap they turned out in the last 20 years that should never have been deployed even for testing.

Edited to add a link for one from General Dynamics called Stryker Leonidas. I think they plan to build more than 300 of them.

https://defence-blog.com/epirus-show...pon-in-action/

[crescent]

Interesting thing about the drones is that they seem to make some of the "obsolete" antiaircraft systems relevant again. The things you need to shoot down an Su-27 or F-15, a Tu-95 or B-52, or an F-35 are all very different from what's needed to get a quadcopter that's hovering 150 meters above you and dropping little bombs, or a fixed wing thing with a ten foot wingspan and a top speed of 150 mph that can shoot a couple of anti-tank missiles off.

The electronic countermeasures are part of that as are anti-aircraft missiles. But old fashioned guns that are useless against "modern" aircraft are suddenly useful again.

Anti-aircraft missiles can get them as well, but I would guess that we'll start to see greater proliferation of much smaller anti-aircraft missiles, both shoulder fired and air-to-air. If nothing else, cost and fuel savings of smaller rockets for small and slow targets.



Drones are hardly new, but for whatever reason they're much cheaper and more widely available than they were even a decade ago. That's going to result in some changes.

[sackett]

Drone tactics will develop rapidly too. A few months ago in this thread, I was, I confess, wittering on about heavier and cheaper kamikaze drones. (Capt. Swoop ordered me to belay my jawin' tackle about toy airplanes. But I didn't and I won't.) Now we see Iranian Shaheds in plentiful use, doing damage with what look like primitive tactics. Garage inventors could improve on that.

[Craig4]

The Medvedev boy says power may be restored if Ukraine recognizes Russia's demands. https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news...-22/index.html

At first I thought this was for domestic consumption but then again, the Orcs might really be this clueless.

[pzkpfw]

Originally Posted by crescent

...
Anti-aircraft missiles can get them as well, but I would guess that we'll start to see greater proliferation of much smaller anti-aircraft missiles, both shoulder fired and air-to-air. If nothing else, cost and fuel savings of smaller rockets for small and slow targets.
...

It's often blamed on not having full control of the air, but the Russian losses of KA-50 (25% !) and SU-25 seems to show the smaller scale anti-air defences already have a huge impact.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by sackett

Drone tactics will develop rapidly too. A few months ago in this thread, I was, I confess, wittering on about heavier and cheaper kamikaze drones. (Capt. Swoop ordered me to belay my jawin' tackle about toy airplanes. But I didn't and I won't.) Now we see Iranian Shaheds in plentiful use, doing damage with what look like primitive tactics. Garage inventors could improve on that.

You can buy a drone for a couple of hundred bucks at Best Buy...

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Craig4

The Medvedev boy says power may be restored if Ukraine recognizes Russia's demands. https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news...-22/index.html

At first I thought this was for domestic consumption but then again, the Orcs might really be this clueless.

I admit, I love the nickname Orcs, being a long time Tolkien fan..good 20 years before the movies.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

You can buy a drone for a couple of hundred bucks at Best Buy...

And it looks as though some of the drones that Ukraine used to strike Sebastopol were literally sold on Aliexpress for a couple of thousand bucks.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Doubt

We may be far enough into this war to think about what it foreshadows in future conflicts. Still a bit early for conclusions but that won't stop me from trying. So what will the next conflict hold?

1.) Artillery rules the battlefield. Not just missiles. The little noted Excalibur shells have also been present but are not getting news coverage. Not seen in this conflict but in existence are precision guidance kits for normal shells. Super long barreled long range and even rocket boosted shells that can match the range of MLRS systems are in development.

2.) Tanks technology has trouble keeping up with anti-tanks weapons. Tanks are not going away but they need to stay back and let the infantry clear the way until enemy tanks show up.

3.) Drones are a wild card. The potential is not fulfilled in this conflict. This is as much a problem of imagining how you can use them and that the drones being used are not quite cutting edge technology. There is more to come here.

4.) Air defense is effective even when there is a less than comprehensive, nation covering shield. Stealth might slow it down but the limited ordnance of a stealth platform will force aircraft to act in ways that expose themselves to short range infrared systems.

5.) Air defense is more than missiles and guns. Drones make jammers and other technology more important. Incoming shells can even be intercepted now.

Probably needs to be a longer list.

As an ex US Army Redleg, I could have told you that.....

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I admit, I love the nickname Orcs, being a long time Tolkien fan..good 20 years before the movies.

The ironic thing is that apparently some Russians started calling themselves Orcs.

The guy I'm quoting is pretty reliable in my view.
The snipped quote is what he considers credible sources.
https://scrutable.science/viewtopic....131997#p131997

Quote:

<snip>

Right now, for example, autotranslated text has a lot of mentions of raisins. That's because іІзюм literally translates as Raisins. There's also a tendency to translate equipment names (Soviet/Russian artillery is named after flowers, while AA systems are named after rivers), and there's a lot of memes and slang to look out for. Cotton, for example, refers to explosions on Russian held territory, as it's a pun on the phrasing Russian commentators use to downplay such events. Russians, meanwhile, are orcs*, vatniks* or katsaps*** most of the time.

The channels I mentioned are general analysis ones, and post a lot of the same sort of things as one gets on twitter, but often a bit earlier. It's important to note that the etiquette on Ukrainian telegram channels is a lot less squeamish about combat footage/aftermath than English-speaking twitter. Keep the sound off, and it is likely you will see stuff you would rather not see, especially if you go digging around for primary sources.



*The habit of referring to Russians as orcs actually started on the Russian side of things.
**term mocking Russian ultranationalists, I've seen it used by Russians as well as Ukrainians.
***ethnic slur, allegedly derived from a Turkic word for butcher.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Doubt

2.) Tanks technology has trouble keeping up with anti-tanks weapons. Tanks are not going away but they need to stay back and let the infantry clear the way until enemy tanks show up.

5.) Air defense is more than missiles and guns. Drones make jammers and other technology more important. Incoming shells can even be intercepted now.

Tank armor technology has trouble keeping up. We're probably reaching a practical/technological limit on how much armor we can put on a tank.

But active protection technology for tanks is barely out of its infancy. The current round of tank upgrades, and the latest (western) tanks include turret-mounted devices that detect and shoot down incoming projectiles.

I think one of the things we're going to see real soon now is the evolution of such turret-mounted APS systems into independently-operated APS systems. Automated turrets mounted on tank chassis, trucks, jeeps, and drones, firing off these smaller-cheaper projectiles at incoming drones.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Doubt

... So what will the next conflict hold?
...

Do you want to self-report, to have this post and replies moved to its own thread, or should I do it for you?

This thread is about this conflict (RU-UA), not the next.

[Wudang]

Bloody hell. https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/sta...89803239849988

Quote:

Ukrainian infantry are being trained by NATO instructors.

Russian infantry are having to crowd source basic training from volunteers organized by a Telegram channel called "Rokot Z."

This isn't a wealth, technology or capability gap - it's basic state competence.

For the first time I feel like using the phrase "I can't even.".

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Wudang

Bloody hell. https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/sta...89803239849988



For the first time I feel like using the phrase "I can't even.".

Lots of videos showing utter chaos in the Mobiks. Given little ammunition, only small arms and given only raw potatos and forbidden fires or cooking.

Meanwhile Oryx tries to document Russian lies about Ukrainian equipment losses.

More than 1000 TB2 drones. Evidence for about 20, and only 452 have been made.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/1...ssian.html?m=1

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Wudang

Bloody hell. https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/sta...89803239849988



For the first time I feel like using the phrase "I can't even.".

I'm just trying to figure out the amount of copium you'd need to ingest, to conclude that an army that needs crowdsourced training videos on social media is an army that can be salvaged by crowdsourced training videos on social media.

[Wudang]

I just watched a documentary on the Battle of Britain focused on the 15th September 1940 and how big a factor was bad data from the front to Berlin that many British fighters were being shot down leading the brass to conclude it would be an easy fight

[Dragon]

Originally Posted by Wudang

Bloody hell. https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/sta...89803239849988



For the first time I feel like using the phrase "I can't even.".

One of the replies to that tweet which I’m stealing - https://twitter.com/henrytheduff/sta...92STvRUz-AH-2w

Quote:

Russia is at war with Ukraine who is armed with NATO's left pinky. "It's a war against NATO". No it's not. The fact that only a miniscule amount of NATO firepower is rolling back Russia speaks volumes about Russia as a state and a military.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Dragon

One of the replies to that tweet which I’m stealing - https://twitter.com/henrytheduff/sta...92STvRUz-AH-2w

"Hostomel airport."

"Ukrainian willpower."

"1st Guards Tank Army."

"Ukrainian willpower and Javelins."

"Okay but massed Russian artillery."

"Ukrainian willpower and HIMARS."

"Okay but Iranian putt putt drones."

"Ukrainian willpower and NASMS."

"Okay but-"

But nothing. Ukrainian willpower in this fight is like a royal flush. NATO support is like a pocket joker wild, that adds up to another royal flush. And Russia is holding a bottom pair at best.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Wudang

I just watched a documentary on the Battle of Britain focused on the 15th September 1940 and how big a factor was bad data from the front to Berlin that many British fighters were being shot down leading the brass to conclude it would be an easy fight

The 15th of September is celebrated annually as Battle Of Britian day in the UK.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Lots of videos showing utter chaos in the Mobiks. Given little ammunition, only small arms and given only raw potatos and forbidden fires or cooking.

Meanwhile Oryx tries to document Russian lies about Ukrainian equipment losses.

More than 1000 TB2 drones. Evidence for about 20, and only 452 have been made.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/1...ssian.html?m=1

God, remember the first ten minutes of the movie "Enemy At The Gates"?
That is what this is sounding like..

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by dudalb

God, remember the first ten minutes of the movie "Enemy At The Gates"?
That is what this is sounding like..

Not even. At Stalingrad, Russians were fighting for their homeland, fixing the Nazis in a fight for the city while Russian forces massed for devastating counterattacks on the Nazis' flanks.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I'm just trying to figure out the amount of copium you'd need to ingest, to conclude that an army that needs crowdsourced training videos on social media is an army that can be salvaged by crowdsourced training videos on social media.

Not to mention the fact that the mobiks aren't even allowed to have smartphones.

[a_unique_person]

Smartphones are a security risk.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

As an ex US Army Redleg, I could have told you that.....

I immediately thought of riffing on this meme when I saw your comment

6yr999.jpg

Well for 250 years at least

[ginjawarrior]

https://mobile.twitter.com/bayraktar...56804673339392

Unmanned boats attacked Russian ships in Sevastopol. Looks like they got the Markov.

Second video is quite special

[theprestige]

It's like something straight out of 1886. Small craft (semi-submersible then, UV now) creeps up on warship in port, hits it with an explosive charge of some kind.

The destroyer class of warships was originally conceived as a "torpedo boat destroyer" class - smaller ships designed to screen the real surface combatants from these small but dangerous gadflies. Screening the capital ships has been the destroyer's primary role ever since. From submarines, from aircraft, and now once again from torpedo boats. The fact that these boats are drones puts a nice modern touch on a hundred and fifty year-old doctrine.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by theprestige

It's like something straight out of 1886. Small craft (semi-submersible then, UV now) creeps up on warship in port, hits it with an explosive charge of some kind.

The destroyer class of warships was originally conceived as a "torpedo boat destroyer" class - smaller ships designed to screen the real surface combatants from these small but dangerous gadflies. Screening the capital ships has been the destroyer's primary role ever since. From submarines, from aircraft, and now once again from torpedo boats. The fact that these boats are drones puts a nice modern touch on a hundred and fifty year-old doctrine.

See also UAV use on land. Arguably the most important role is reconnaissance and artillery spotting with a few dropping improvised grenades etc

[Lord Emsworth]

Originally Posted by theprestige

It's like something straight out of 1886. Small craft (semi-submersible then, UV now) creeps up on warship in port, hits it with an explosive charge of some kind.

The destroyer class of warships was originally conceived as a "torpedo boat destroyer" class - smaller ships designed to screen the real surface combatants from these small but dangerous gadflies. Screening the capital ships has been the destroyer's primary role ever since. From submarines, from aircraft, and now once again from torpedo boats. The fact that these boats are drones puts a nice modern touch on a hundred and fifty year-old doctrine.

I think these tactics find even yet older predecessors in fire ships. Those were certainly not semi-submersible, though, but ideally unmanned.

[sackett]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Do you want to self-report, to have this post and replies moved to its own thread, or should I do it for you?

This thread is about this conflict (RU-UA), not the next.

Reading you numbah one. A thread in sci-tech for weapons development and the wars to come. Ovah.

A thread that can never end. Alas.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by jimbob

I immediately thought of riffing on this meme when I saw your comment

Attachment 47389

Well for 250 years at least

The situation has changed. Killing something with one shell was barely possible in the late 20th century. Now it is to be expected. The old copperhead shells, which were laser guided, were very expensive, not common, and prone to fail based on just clouds.

Time spent laying in guns now is very short since you don't see artillery officers with compasses trying to figure out where they are placing the guns. GPS has ended that.

Air power is still a threat to the guns. But given that the artillery does not stay in place for very long any more they are now a lot safer.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by theprestige

It's like something straight out of 1886. Small craft (semi-submersible then, UV now) creeps up on warship in port, hits it with an explosive charge of some kind.

The destroyer class of warships was originally conceived as a "torpedo boat destroyer" class - smaller ships designed to screen the real surface combatants from these small but dangerous gadflies. Screening the capital ships has been the destroyer's primary role ever since. From submarines, from aircraft, and now once again from torpedo boats. The fact that these boats are drones puts a nice modern touch on a hundred and fifty year-old doctrine.

The torpedo boats were mostly pretty simple. Semi submersibles were civil war tech using spar torpedos.

A lot of those firing steam torpedos were very simple, cheap steam boats with a single torpedo. The secret to them was not how good they were but how bad the gunnery was on the big ships. The perceived threat to the UK navy was getting overwhelmed by large numbers of them that collectively still cost a lot less than a battleship. The boats were attrition units. The destroyer killed the idea for a short while better gunnery ended it.

Then aircraft showed up and the attrition model found a new way to get used.

[sackett]

Napoleon said, "It is with artillery that you make war."

But he was a gunner and would say that.

[jimbob]

Meanwhile these memes of Zelensky were made by pro Russian accounts.

https://twitter.com/NovelSci/status/...qOMViowJMNZq4A

Not sure they would be particularly effective.

[Doubt]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Meanwhile these memes of Zelensky were made by pro Russian accounts.

https://twitter.com/NovelSci/status/...qOMViowJMNZq4A

Not sure they would be particularly effective.

Kaiju Zelensky?

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Doubt

We may be far enough into this war to think about what it foreshadows in future conflicts. Still a bit early for conclusions but that won't stop me from trying. So what will the next conflict hold?

1.) Artillery rules the battlefield. Not just missiles. The little noted Excalibur shells have also been present but are not getting news coverage. Not seen in this conflict but in existence are precision guidance kits for normal shells. Super long barreled long range and even rocket boosted shells that can match the range of MLRS systems are in development.

2.) Tanks technology has trouble keeping up with anti-tanks weapons. Tanks are not going away but they need to stay back and let the infantry clear the way until enemy tanks show up.

3.) Drones are a wild card. The potential is not fulfilled in this conflict. This is as much a problem of imagining how you can use them and that the drones being used are not quite cutting edge technology. There is more to come here.

4.) Air defense is effective even when there is a less than comprehensive, nation covering shield. Stealth might slow it down but the limited ordnance of a stealth platform will force aircraft to act in ways that expose themselves to short range infrared systems.

5.) Air defense is more than missiles and guns. Drones make jammers and other technology more important. Incoming shells can even be intercepted now.

Probably needs to be a longer list.

I'm not sure we're talking about the next war. This one is evolving at such a rate that what you're talking about could be in the field in this war.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Doubt

Kaiju Zelensky?

Someone replied with
"Zelenskyzilla?"

[jimbob]

Quote:

Christo Grozev
@christogrozev
·
3h
A short �� on how Russian intelligence launders fake news by using helpful EU "media".
A leading headline in Russian state media today is that "Poland plans to capture Western Ukraine and hold a referendum". The cited source is "the Belgian portal Modern Democracy".

https://twitter.com/christogrozev/st...MmagJrSXEsAxCA

Worth a read

ETA

https://twitter.com/christogrozev/st...MmagJrSXEsAxCA

Quote:

Christo Grozev
@christogrozev
So you wonder what Polish media would come up with this nonsense.. and then you look up it's editor in chief Adam Kamiński never existed, And the photo used for his profile was , does not exist, and his fake account uses a photo of an unsuspecting Lithuanian orthopedist.

[lobosrul5]

So, Russia is now blocking grain exports again. War strategy of starving Africans and driving up world food prices. Ukraine needs Harpoons. I'm wondering if Turkey relies on Ukranian grain and what their reaction might be.

[theprestige]

I'm pretty sure I was seeing reports of Russia blocking grain shipments at least a couple days before this strike.