Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй


Eastwood

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Is this when we get to kiss the Kerch bridge goodbye?

And hopefully these were already prepositioned in Europe and ready to be handed over in short order.

If Russia could mobilize a hundred thousand or more like they claim they are currently doing and get them to the front lines, what do they do if Ukraine takes out that bridge?  Most of those soldiers would be in the north and golf carts and Scooby Doo vans aren’t an effective means of transport,  I guess they could move them back to the intact railheads and then try to get them down along the coast above Crime.

Speaking of railheads, imagine how many more railheads and engines are now within range?  Russia will have to keep their in-theater trains on the move and get them unloaded fast.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

And hopefully these were already prepositioned in Europe and ready to be handed over in short order.

If Russia could mobilize a hundred thousand or more like they claim they are currently doing and get them to the front lines, what do they do if Ukraine takes out that bridge?  Most of those soldiers would be in the north and golf carts and Scooby Doo vans aren’t an effective means of transport,  I guess they could move them back to the intact railheads and then try to get them down along the coast above Crime.

Speaking of railheads, imagine how many more railheads and engines are now within range?  Russia will have to keep their in-theater trains on the move and get them unloaded fast.

Did Russia not finish that rail line they were building though Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Storm Shadow/Scalps are better for the Kerch Bridge. 

Theyve had Storm Shadows. And they haven't gone full out after the bridge yet. By this logic, either they didn't have enough storm shadows to do the job, or didn't want to waste them on the bridge etc. That means either the ATACMS they are getting now can/will be used on the bridge, or they don't deem the bridge valuable enough to waste on ATACMS. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Theyve had Storm Shadows. And they haven't gone full out after the bridge yet. By this logic, either they didn't have enough storm shadows to do the job, or didn't want to waste them on the bridge etc. That means either the ATACMS they are getting now can/will be used on the bridge, or they don't deem the bridge valuable enough to waste on ATACMS. 

I think it's that they need more than one angle of attack to take out such a heavily defended target as the Kerch bridge. ATACMS is a ballistic missile that comes in at mach 3 or 4 out of the stratosphere, Storm shadow/Scalp are stealthy sub/transonic coming in low, and the MALDS decoys can add even more chaos to the scope of an ivan air defense operator. 

I'd bet a dollar that Kerch isn't standing by summer. If Ukraine can cut that lifeline it will completely change the complexion of russias impending offensive 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Captainant said:

I think it's that they need more than one angle of attack to take out such a heavily defended target as the Kerch bridge. ATACMS is a ballistic missile that comes in at mach 3 or 4 out of the stratosphere, Storm shadow/Scalp are stealthy sub/transonic coming in low, and the MALDS decoys can add even more chaos to the scope of an ivan air defense operator. 

I'd bet a dollar that Kerch isn't standing by summer. If Ukraine can cut that lifeline it will completely change the complexion of russias impending offensive 

While I tend to agree that it doesn't bode well for the Kerch Bridge, I'm simply poiting out the flaw in the concept that the Storm Shadow is better. If it was better, then why the fuck is the Kerch Bridge still standing? And that's not a critque of 956, I'm just saying that clearly some component was missing before, otherwise that Kerch bridge would already be toast. 

Here's to that mothefuker going boom soon. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

While I tend to agree that it doesn't bode well for the Kerch Bridge, I'm simply poiting out the flaw in the concept that the Storm Shadow is better. If it was better, then why the fuck is the Kerch Bridge still standing? And that's not a critque of 956, I'm just saying that clearly some component was missing before, otherwise that Kerch bridge would already be toast. 

Here's to that mothefuker going boom soon. 

My understanding is they are better used elsewhere and may not have many of them. I think someone also mentioned much of Russia's military traffic no longer uses the bridge. 

It also makes sense to leave it open so civilians can escape once they start pounding Crimea with ATACMS. :D

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NorthLoop said:

What's the range of the Storm Shadow? 

Roughly 550km.  They are much easier to shoot down than atacms because they are much slower and fly horizontally to their targets.

Edited by kevwun
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Parliament said:

I totally understand the possibility the bridge may not have strategic importance and be worth the ordinance.  But…

The symbolism of destroying it makes me hard.  

maxresdefault.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the main "lines on maps" strategic overview analysts on YouTube just put out a pretty good video on the recently passed Ukraine aid package, going over what's in it and what's not, how it came to be, and it's complications in delivery.

It touches on the congressional process to explain the mechanical "how" but does not go into the politics, so noCR

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bolverk said:

"Corpses everywhere. They're all ours."

"There's war, but this... it was a meatgrinder here."

 

Looks just like the land around Avdiivka 

Edited by B00M
He does in fact say “this is Avdiivka direction” at the 4 minute mark
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

That's 10-13,000 rounds per day. Ukraine is around 2,000 rounds per day before US funding going to about 6,000 per day for a single year after funding. No matter what, Ukraine is going to have to figure out how to increase its own manufacturing of munitions.  I wonder what it takes for Ukraine to manufacture its own rounds. I'm sure Russia isn't paying US manufacturing rates to get to 13,000 rounds daily. I'm no expert on financing weapons and have no clue whether Russia or Ukraine have all the raw materials on hand or if it has to source and pay for certain things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/24/statement-from-national-security-advisor-jake-sullivan-on-russias-veto-of-the-un-security-council-resolution-on-the-outer-space-treaty/
 

Quote

Today, Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, proposed jointly by the United States and Japan, that would have reaffirmed the fundamental obligation of States Parties to the Outer Space Treaty not to place nuclear weapons in orbit around the Earth. The resolution also would have called on all Member States not to develop nuclear weapons specifically designed to be placed in orbit. Placement by a State Party of a nuclear weapon in orbit would not only violate the Outer Space Treaty, but would threaten the vital communications, scientific, meteorological, agricultural, commercial, and national security services that any and all satellites provide to societies around the globe. As we have noted previously, the United States assesses that Russia is developing a new satellite carrying a nuclear device. We have heard President Putin say publicly that Russia has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space. If that were the case, Russia would not have vetoed this resolution.

 

  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

A month or two ago, there was a news story I happened across on one of the UFO subreddits that there was something in space that was gravely concerning to the US government. A week or so later, there was a news story about a satellite deorbitting and burning up in the atmosphere. Of course they said it was some ordinary satellite, but I wonder if that was a cover for us shooting down a satellite with a nuke or maybe an EMP. Prime tinfoil hat stuff, yes, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

A month or two ago, there was a news story I happened across on one of the UFO subreddits that there was something in space that was gravely concerning to the US government. A week or so later, there was a news story about a satellite deorbitting and burning up in the atmosphere. Of course they said it was some ordinary satellite, but I wonder if that was a cover for us shooting down a satellite with a nuke or maybe an EMP. Prime tinfoil hat stuff, yes, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility. 

I would take seriously the grave warnings but wouldn’t get too excited about any alleged U.S. kinetic action in space— which would undermine the warnings we are sending out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...