blandy Posted February 20 Moderator Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, chrisp65 said: Hey look, I’ve been wrong about this for 2 years now. Let’s see how much longer I’m wrong about it. No offence, but I don’t recall your specific takes over the past 2 years. Mine has been that no one wins or can win”nationally”. Neither Russia nor Ukraine. Not Western Europe, nor the USA. Of course some middlemen, some parties will enrich themselves, others will take a big hit and others still will just about manage. In terms of the uk and beyond, perhaps, it will drive energy policy, defence spending, cooperation with friendly nations one way and adds to the demise of the current government via household costs. But really, no one wins in the round. The world is worse as a consequence of Putin’s lunacy. Spivs, chancers, vultures may feed, other folks will be valiant, selfless, generous and so on. Most of us will just keep our heads down and crack on with life. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 2 hours ago, blandy said: No offence, but I don’t recall your specific takes over the past 2 years. Mine has been that no one wins or can win”nationally”. Neither Russia nor Ukraine. Not Western Europe, nor the USA. Of course some middlemen, some parties will enrich themselves, others will take a big hit and others still will just about manage. In terms of the uk and beyond, perhaps, it will drive energy policy, defence spending, cooperation with friendly nations one way and adds to the demise of the current government via household costs. But really, no one wins in the round. The world is worse as a consequence of Putin’s lunacy. Spivs, chancers, vultures may feed, other folks will be valiant, selfless, generous and so on. Most of us will just keep our heads down and crack on with life. No I don’t think we can expect people to keep records of conversations from months ago, that’s what work and stalking are for. I’m probably just overly cynical about those big international holdings, the whole military industry, and current government, when it comes to doing the right thing, at the right time, for the right reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Gerasimov seems to have popped up, there’s a video of him handing out medals to the Russian soldiers who took Avdeevka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Quote Ukraine war: Dozens of Russian troops 'die in air strike' - BBC News At least 60 Russian troops have been killed after a training area in occupied eastern Ukraine was hit by two missiles, reports say. Sources familiar with the situation told the BBC that troops had gathered at the site in Donetsk region for the arrival of a senior commander. Video footage of the incident appeared to show large numbers of dead. A Russian official confirmed that a strike took place but described the reports as "grossly exaggerated". The attack reportedly came hours before Russian President Vladimir Putin met his Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu. The idiocy of these commanders is laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 44 minutes ago, villa89 said: The idiocy of these commanders is laughable. I dare say there are incidents where a bunch of new Ukrainian soldiers are blown to bits by a Russian missile but it doesn’t make it to the Western news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Worrying times really, seems all dictators know they need to escalate for their own survival and the West have shown weakness in the face of it all. The response has been to drip feed weapons as not to escalate, only emboldening the aggressor. Provocations on the Polish border, Finnish border, the paralysis in US congress, the fact our nukes wont even launch/misfire. Putin’s year has just got better and better since the mutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Just now, BleedClaretAndBlue said: Worrying times really, seems all dictators know they need to escalate for their own survival and the West have shown weakness in the face of it all. The response has been to drip feed weapons as not to escalate, only emboldening the aggressor. Provocations on the Polish border, Finnish border, the paralysis in US congress, the fact our nukes wont even launch/misfire. Putin’s year has just got better and better since the mutiny. All playing into China's hands. Wait for this mess to wear everyone down and then make your move in the south China sea, Taiwan and maybe annex a few more places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted February 21 VT Supporter Share Posted February 21 32 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said: Provocations on the Polish border, Finnish border, the paralysis in US congress, the fact our nukes wont even launch/misfire. Putin’s year has just got better and better since the mutiny. The fact our nukes not working is worrying, more worrying is its on the news, why would this leak out? Surely it should be kept a secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, tinker said: The fact our nukes not working is worrying, more worrying is its on the news, why would this leak out? Surely it should be kept a secret. The military has been angling for budget increases 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 21 VT Supporter Share Posted February 21 2 hours ago, tinker said: The fact our nukes not working is worrying, more worrying is its on the news, why would this leak out? Surely it should be kept a secret. It's nothing to worry about mate. Only happened because it was a test. Would definitely have worked in a real world launch. Haven't you read the press? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 I assume we have a whole selection of different nuke options, only this sub-launched one if a bit dodgy (that we know about). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 28 minutes ago, Genie said: I assume we have a whole selection of different nuke options, only this sub-launched one if a bit dodgy (that we know about). I thought Trident was the only nuclear weapons the UK still maintained? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dog Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 Genuine Q - how do you all know all this stuff? It's fascinating to read, I've just no idea, unless you work for the forces, how you'd know all this stuff? If anyone has a simpletons news source or such they might wanna recommend, hit me up, thanks all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 21 VT Supporter Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, Genie said: I assume we have a whole selection of different nuke options, only this sub-launched one if a bit dodgy (that we know about). Nope. The subs are it, the whole of it and all of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 3 minutes ago, sidcow said: Nope. The subs are it, the whole of it and all of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 21 Moderator Share Posted February 21 Trident is part of a whole NATO nuclear response, it’s highly unlikely we'd launch unilaterally without the US and France Also the failure of the missile, according to some former high ranking Navy bod on the radio just now is a nothing burger. His explanation was that the test isn’t to test the missiles themselves, it’s to test the subs launch systems after the massive refit it’s just undergone and the missiles they use for such tests are the really old ones. In a real launch system they'll be using the newer missiles The other thing to bear in mind is that Russia will highly likely have been informed of the test in advance. They'll have been monitoring it anyway so the idea that talking about it in the open is a bad idea is nonsense, it really doesn’t matter. The last time a sub came out of refit 8 years ago, the same thing happened. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, T-Dog said: Genuine Q - how do you all know all this stuff? It's fascinating to read, I've just no idea, unless you work for the forces, how you'd know all this stuff? If anyone has a simpletons news source or such they might wanna recommend, hit me up, thanks all When he's not selling gum this chap reviews sources from both sides, evaluates the data and keeps it simple. I like him. Being called 'Combat Veteran Reacts' will attract some nutty MAGA gun types, and I think he's probably good for them? There's no glory or glamour and he tries to be apolitical, but has called out what he's seen as failures in supporting Ukraine. We know who's responsible for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 All missiles (including nukes) have a failure rate. Even if 95% of our nukes failed we still have more nukes than 95% of the world combined. Having a single failure is inconsequential. Especially when the fault could have already been identified and rectified. Even if the nukes hit their targets there will be plenty that don't detonate. It's exceptionally hard to set off a nuke. In the big scheme of things, nukes haven't been tested to the same extent that we would test any other weapon. Very, very, very few tests have been a true simulation of a real nuke on a long range missile hitting a land target. It's just too expensive, difficult and dangerous. The test failure is embarrassing but inconsequential. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 33 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: All missiles (including nukes) have a failure rate. Even if 95% of our nukes failed we still have more nukes than 95% of the world combined. Having a single failure is inconsequential. Especially when the fault could have already been identified and rectified. Even if the nukes hit their targets there will be plenty that don't detonate. It's exceptionally hard to set off a nuke. In the big scheme of things, nukes haven't been tested to the same extent that we would test any other weapon. Very, very, very few tests have been a true simulation of a real nuke on a long range missile hitting a land target. It's just too expensive, difficult and dangerous. The test failure is embarrassing but inconsequential. The issue with the one this week wasn’t anything to do with the nuke part was it? The engines/burners didn’t start so instead of flying 3000 miles it landed next to the sub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 22 Moderator Share Posted February 22 On 13/02/2024 at 17:14, Panto_Villan said: Basically you won't see them winning many dogfights with the Russians because air-to-air missiles only have good range if you fly high, and if you fly high in a contested area then you're vulnerable to surface-to-air missiles. This is technically wrong, though your conclusion might or might not be correct. In terms of air to air missiles, the altitude at which they are launched doesn’t make much of a difference to their effective range, whether they be typically IR (heat seeking or optical sensing) SRAAMs such as AIM-9 series “sidewinders” or ASRAAMs or typically Radar guided MRAAMS like AMRAAMs. Further, unless at extremely low level, altitude reduces vulnerability to Surface to air missiles in terms of giving the pilot and defensive aids more time to detect and react to incoming threats from the ground. Anyway, on your point about dogfighting, you might be right, nevertheless. The aim is not to get into dogfights anyway- instead to see the enemy before they see you, to launch medium range missiles (AMRAAM for example) and stay beyond the enemy’s engagement zone. So that’s where potentially F16s offer a big improvement over the current UA capability in air defence. In terms of ground attack and interdiction I guess F16s just add to an extremely limited current capability. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts