Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[blandy]

1 hour ago, HKP90 said:

Given that drones operate over enemy territory, you would have thought there would be some sort of contingency for this, no?

There are several factors, here. The obvious one being that this one wasn't operating over enemy territory, but in international airspace. Of course that doesn't invalidate the question, but it is a different situation to something that in all likelihood might not be expected to return safely.

The next factor is cost - it's a lot more expensive to implement protective/anti-tamper etc. measures into equipment. And then there's the dual considerations of what it is, and what level of classification you might want to protect. Stuff which would be Top Secret US eyes only (for example) needs to be handled differently to stuff which is (say) NATO Restricted - in other words the compromising of the information contained, or of the technology will have different potential adverse consequences as its sensitivity increases.

And finally there's stuff which you might wish to protect, but which is almost impossible to do so - for example, if you take a Radar, the frequency and PRF and Output Power will be classified, but if someone gets hold of the actual equipment it's nigh on impossible to stop that person from ascertaining the information I've just mentioned. Same with its receiver sensitivity and several other parameters.

Short of making the whole Air Vehicle a huge bomb, there's not much that can be done for a fair chunk of the stuff. And obviously, if a UAV had a powerful enough explosive on board to obliterate any secret stuff, you really really wouldn't want that to malfunction.

So to summarise, I'll say what I said before - possibly the Bulk Data store or Mission Recorder type equipment might contain some protective measures, but not much else. Though obviously I don't work on Global Hawk, or for the US military or US Defence industry, so could be mistaken, at least in part.

[HKP90]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

There are several factors, here. The obvious one being that this one wasn't operating over enemy territory, but in international airspace. Of course that doesn't invalidate the question, but it is a different situation to something that in all likelihood might not be expected to return safely.

The next factor is cost - it's a lot more expensive to implement protective/anti-tamper etc. measures into equipment. And then there's the dual considerations of what it is, and what level of classification you might want to protect. Stuff which would be Top Secret US eyes only (for example) needs to be handled differently to stuff which is (say) NATO Restricted - in other words the compromising of the information contained, or of the technology will have different potential adverse consequences as its sensitivity increases.

And finally there's stuff which you might wish to protect, but which is almost impossible to do so - for example, if you take a Radar, the frequency and PRF and Output Power will be classified, but if someone gets hold of the actual equipment it's nigh on impossible to stop that person from ascertaining the information I've just mentioned. Same with its receiver sensitivity and several other parameters.

Short of making the whole Air Vehicle a huge bomb, there's not much that can be done for a fair chunk of the stuff. And obviously, if a UAV had a powerful enough explosive on board to obliterate any secret stuff, you really really wouldn't want that to malfunction.

So to summarise, I'll say what I said before - possibly the Bulk Dat store or Mission Recorder type equipment might contain some protective measures, but not much else. Though obviously I don't work on Global Hawk, or for the US military or US Defence industry, so could be mistaken, at least in part.

Would you have a different spec. for drones operating over enemy territory, though? I would imagine not. Point taken on the other stuff, but I would imagine you don't fly anything, especially recon stuff, anywhere near targets where you can't afford to lose it. Seems job 1 to me, especially if, as you say, short of making it a mission impossible style self destructing bomb, it cannot be kept out of the hands of the enemy.

 

[blandy]

14 minutes ago, HKP90 said:

Would you have a different spec. for drones operating over enemy territory, though? I would imagine not.

It depends. The main characteristics would be the same, but role fit equipment is a thing. That means fitting (or removing) particular systems and units specific to the role (mission) being undertaken and the circumstances of that sortie. My impression is the Global Hawks being used to fly over the sea and look into Russia will have been set up/configured for flights in neutral airspace. If (and it's unlikely they would be) they were to be flown into Russian airspace, they'd be protected differently - maybe escorted, for example. Maybe operating at a different (higher) altitude, maybe some kit would be removed and other kit fitted.

edit - Oh and you might also operate different aircraft/UAVs altogether for the scenario you mention - e.g. stealthy aircraft/UAVs

[Panto_Villan]

On 07/04/2023 at 09:14, blandy said:

Russia has also recovered that Global Hawk UAV from the bottom of the sea. Bad week for US secrets.

Out of interest, what's the source for this? Not seen that reported anywhere.

[blandy]

3 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

Out of interest, what's the source for this? Not seen that reported anywhere.

WSJ, NYT etc.

[magnkarl]

23 hours ago, blandy said:

These leaked documents. Ukraine’s in serious trouble. About to run out of air defence munitions. If/when they do, Russia will be able to resume flights over the whole of Ukraine and bomb the heck out of the troops, Parliament, the dams, the power stations and electricity grid. Anything and everything. Grim.

Agreed, but as I see it the documents can have other aims.

a) Increase delivery of Western AA munitions.

b) Make Russians foolish enough to try to bomb deep into Ukraine with no protection.

Or, as you say, it could be that they're running out. I went to Holland/Belgium/Germany last week and from the looks of things the production of munitions and military equipment within the EU\Norway coalition is up massively. Kongsberg (producer of NASAMS) are said to be churning out 10-20 SAM's per day and have increased staff by over 300% to meet the demand. I'd wager that Rheinmetall are outpacing that quite considerably for the Iris systems.

[magnkarl]

In other news Russia's yearly military parade to commemorate the victory in WW2 has been cancelled. I guess no one wants to see old katyushas and T-52\54's rolling over red square, it'd be too much like the original parade. They're likely also very scared of UA drones as UA have promised a reward to anyone able to land a drone on Red Square.

Edited April 11, 2023 by magnkarl

[Mandy Lifeboats]

4 hours ago, magnkarl said:

In other news Russia's yearly military parade to commemorate the victory in WW2 has been cancelled. I guess no one wants to see old katyushas and T-52\54's rolling over red square, it'd be too much like the original parade. They're likely also very scared of UA drones as UA have promised a reward to anyone able to land a drone on Red Square.

Have you a source for this?

[PussEKatt]

4 hours ago, magnkarl said:

In other news Russia's yearly military parade to commemorate the victory in WW2 has been cancelled. I guess no one wants to see old katyushas and T-52\54's rolling over red square, it'd be too much like the original parade. They're likely also very scared of UA drones as UA have promised a reward to anyone able to land a drone on Red Square.

The real reason for the cancellation might be because they plan to use the T-52/34s and katyushas in their fight against all those nasty nazzies in the Ukraine.

[magnkarl]

1 hour ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

Have you a source for this?

Heard it on the radio this morning, can only find articles on Kursk and Belgorod cancelling theirs and that there'll likely be no air parade in Moscow (due to missing planes?)

[LondonLax]

On 10/04/2023 at 09:21, blandy said:

These leaked documents. Ukraine’s in serious trouble. About to run out of air defence munitions. If/when they do, Russia will be able to resume flights over the whole of Ukraine and bomb the heck out of the troops, Parliament, the dams, the power stations and electricity grid. Anything and everything. Grim.

The documents first appeared on a forum in mid January so whatever information is in them is at least 3 months old now. Not sure where that leaves Ukraine and it’s ammunition shortages.

[blandy]

Just now, LondonLax said:

The documents first appeared on a forum in mid January so whatever information is in them is at least 3 months old now. Not sure where that leaves Ukraine and it’s ammunition shortages.

Not all of them, at least not according to what I've read about it. They first started appearing on some gaming forum back in Jan, but more have since been posted on Telegram and so on, apparently. Maybe they were all garnered at the same time and you're right about the date, or maybe there's been more than one leak event and some are more recent? I doubt we'll be told.

[sne]

 

[villa89]

Surprised Navalny is still alive. It's probably just torture for him at this stage. 

[BleedClaretAndBlue]

Navalny was a Nazi?!

 

[Mozzavfc]

8 hours ago, villa89 said:

Surprised Navalny is still alive. It's probably just torture for him at this stage. 

He's on 'trial' in a few weeks, so they'll probably just keeping him alive long enough to be officially declared a terrorist, traitor, etc. The assassination of the blogger will probably be pinned on him as well 

[bickster]

4 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Navalny was a Nazi?!

 

Navalny isn't well liked in Ukraine. He's also not what people on the outside think of him. Opposition to Putin does not equate to good.

Quote

[...]As one might expect, we questioned them about the remarks Navalny made on Russia’s illegal annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in March 2014. In an interview with Echo of Moscow radio station in October 2014, Navalny admitted that the peninsula had been seized through “outrageous violations of all international norms”, and yet asserted that it would “remain part of Russia” and would “never become part of Ukraine in the foreseeable future”.

His statement was not simply an assessment of the developments around Crimea. When pressed on whether he would return Crimea to Ukraine were he to become Russia’s president, Navalny wrapped his “No” in an odd rhetorical question: “What? Is Crimea a sandwich or something that you can take and give back?” It was clear that his political position on Crimea was that it should “remain part of Russia”.

It is important to point out that our conversation with the two Navalnists took place less than half a year after the assassination of prominent Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov near the Kremlin. The murder of Nemtsov, who vocally opposed Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, allowed Navalny to emerge as the main Russian opposition leader still attempting to do politics in Russia.

The other major opponent of President Vladimir Putin’s regime, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, lived in exile in London and was not directly involved in Russian politics.

Hence, it was not unreasonable to imagine at that time that any regime change in Russia, if it were to happen, would be led by Navalny. That is why we wanted to know what Ukraine should expect from “the wonderful Russia of the future”, as Navalny likes to call post-Putin Russia.

The Navalnists responded that under a democratically elected government, Moscow would keep Crimea despite the fact that the annexation was illegal. That is because their policies would have to reflect the will of the Russian people and the overwhelming majority of Russians wanted Crimea to be within Russian borders.[...]

Al Jaz (more on link)

Really interesting article, which is worth a read

[magnkarl]

6 hours ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Navalny was a Nazi?!

 

Navalny is not a good option for a free Russia. He's staunchly nationalistic, racist and only gets positive views in the West because he's not Putin. 

There are (were?) some fairly democratic circles in St. Petersburg and Moscow centered around the universities, but these have been jailed and removed. Navalny couldn't care less for democracy, he's all about the hugely xenophobic, white supremacist West Russian ideology that Putin is also part of.

Edited April 12, 2023 by magnkarl

[Mandy Lifeboats]

Navalny is definitely no improvement on Putin.   

[avfc1982am]

FFS