Jump to content

Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine


maqroll

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

This is one of the new anti-personnel HIMARS warheads that the Ukrainians are using (containing thousands of tiny tungsten balls, like a giant hand grenade). I almost feel sorry for the Russians; I would NOT like to be near one of those when it went off.

 

Lands exactly on top of the target as well.  Amazing the accuracy of these weapons.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 18.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bickster

    1816

  • magnkarl

    1484

  • Genie

    1273

  • avfc1982am

    1145

1 hour ago, Panto_Villan said:

This is one of the new anti-personnel HIMARS warheads that the Ukrainians are using (containing thousands of tiny tungsten balls, like a giant hand grenade). I almost feel sorry for the Russians; I would NOT like to be near one of those when it went off.

 

I know it's war but can't help thinking of the human cost in a weapon like that.

Putin spinning it as western aggression , wonder if he will ever lose the PR battle in Russia, thats where this war will be won or lost with Russian public opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rich192 said:

Apologies if this is an obvious question, or has been answered previously, but what are the chances of Ukraine (or Europe) being able to ‘intercept’ or stop a nuclear missile? 

Quite high at a guess.  The West has been thinking about this problem for 50 years.

I doubt a single missile would make it,  it would need to be multiple.  Multiple means no more Russia and there is still no guarantee they would get through at all, the West is not going to let us know its full capabilities in this area but I suggest the US for example has spent Trillions on it over the years,  the levels of corruption in the US compared to Russia is miniscule.  They probably have something amazing. 

Putin tries to Flex with the nukes but he is words only.  I wouldn't waste time thinking about it mate,  that's what Putin wants and we can't influence responses.

Looking at their military expertise (Russia) there is a significant chance that never fired missiles that have stood for 30-40 years would be more dangerous to the operators than targets 1000's of miles away.  They can't even look after trucks or planes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said:

50-60k civilians forced to head 'deeper into Russia'. Wonder if any of them will be allowed to leave

Sounds more and more like slavery to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

Massively embarrassing for Russia they can’t protect them in their homes.

No, not embarrassing, just unfair because they've got to fight the entire western world who are all infiltrated by Nazis. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Quite high at a guess.  The West has been thinking about this problem for 50 years.

I doubt a single missile would make it,  it would need to be multiple.  Multiple means no more Russia and there is still no guarantee they would get through at all, the West is not going to let us know its full capabilities in this area but I suggest the US for example has spent Trillions on it over the years,  the levels of corruption in the US compared to Russia is miniscule.  They probably have something amazing. 

Putin tries to Flex with the nukes but he is words only.  I wouldn't waste time thinking about it mate,  that's what Putin wants and we can't influence responses.

Looking at their military expertise (Russia) there is a significant chance that never fired missiles that have stood for 30-40 years would be more dangerous to the operators than targets 1000's of miles away.  They can't even look after trucks or planes.

My guess is that on a “per missile” basis the chance would be fairly high, but the chances of effectively stopping an attack would be low. Only a few need to get through to cause complete carnage. Also, I hope we never find out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the chance of taking out ICBM's is actually quite small at the moment. Whilst the West has had 50 years to consider it, they've not seen it as a serious danger.  Shooting down cruise missiles is a completely different kettle of fish. 

I think the chance of their missiles just not working or being wildly innacurate is more likely.  But enough will get through / unintentionally explode to end the world anyway. This is not a prospect we want to test. 

I suspect, especially with North Korea now developing ICBM's you will see the west focus on this more seriously now though, but it will take years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rich192 said:

Apologies if this is an obvious question, or has been answered previously, but what are the chances of Ukraine (or Europe) being able to ‘intercept’ or stop a nuclear missile? 

There are many types of missile.  Russia is unlikely to uses one of the larger ICBM.  It’s not designed for a limited strike.  
Cruise missiles are smaller, more precise. but easier to intercept if spotted and fired in small numbers.  
The hardest to stop would be an old fashioned bomb delivered by a bomber with a strong fighter escort.  But this is also the action most likely to be detected in advance. If it was detected, NATO would thrown everything at the formation and it wouldn’t stand a chance. 
Lastly we have the hypersonic missiles.  These have not been tested in battle.  But they are theoretically very hard to detect and destroy.  
The last consideration is where the attack took place. Kiev is going to be much better defended that the smaller cities. 
But the most likely target would be some military formation.  A devastating warning shot.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

Lastly we have the hypersonic missiles.  These have not been tested in battle.  But they are theoretically very hard to detect and destroy.  

Define Hypersonic missile. If we're talking goes above Mach 5 then yes Russia has the Kinzhal, which has been used already in Ukraine.

There is, however, nothing modern about this weapon, it is a platform that began development in the 1980s

Russia also has the Iskander, which is used extensively (or was) in Ukraine, this is also technically a hypersonic platform.

Neither of them are really what people are referring to as proper Hypersonic missiles. Proper Hypersonic missiles fall into two camps HGVs (Hypersonic Glide Vehicles) and cruise missiles using  scramjet engines

Russia reportedly has one experimental HGV platform but the HGV's are essentially ICBMs in their initial launch phase into orbit so are very detectable in that phase. No country in the world has demonstrated a working scramjet hypersonic cruise missile

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bickster said:

Define Hypersonic missile. If we're talking goes above Mach 5 then yes Russia has the Kinzhal, which has been used already in Ukraine.

There is, however, nothing modern about this weapon, it is a platform that began development in the 1980s

Russia also has the Iskander, which is used extensively (or was) in Ukraine, this is also technically a hypersonic platform.

Neither of them are really what people are referring to as proper Hypersonic missiles. Proper Hypersonic missiles fall into two camps HGVs (Hypersonic Glide Vehicles) and cruise missiles using  scramjet engines

Russia reportedly has one experimental HGV platform but the HGV's are essentially ICBMs in their initial launch phase into orbit so are very detectable in that phase. No country in the world has demonstrated a working scramjet hypersonic cruise missile

How about a Ramjet?

image.jpeg.5c8cc859a12ac65cc5da9847ba9a8623.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Looks like he’s also lowering the age for conscription 

 

Showing the kids their last line of defence against the Nazis massing on their borders waiting to destroy the motherland.  Start the brainwashing nice and early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rich192 said:

Apologies if this is an obvious question, or has been answered previously, but what are the chances of Ukraine (or Europe) being able to ‘intercept’ or stop a nuclear missile? 

As well as what everyone else has said, i assume that the USA knows where every Russian nuclear missile is kept and the second they see any activity at any of those bases, some extreme back-channel discussions will take place between USA and Russia to make sure that Putin's orders are not followed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this war does end i think we could see a lot of bombings by Ukrainian groups in Russia. They eventually will retaliate that their home land has been destroyed.

The innocnet russia people who are probably not in favor of this war are the ones that will suffer unfortunately thanks to putin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â