Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй


Eastwood

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

https://news.yahoo.com/2-patriot-system-components-damaged-211420847.html

 


 

It’s funny how we had Mullet drop drive-by dumbassery, mock everyone for the possibility that debris or other could have damaged the battery, and shit on the idea that the intercepts were successful. Then just vanishes.  He’ll be back the next time there’s some breathless Russian bullshit to crow about. 
 

 

I was wrong on the Patriot damage. 
 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

Duh.  Anyone with interests within 500 miles of the Russian border needs to be gaming for conflict with the Russian federation.

Of course, one of the best first moves of that game should be "do everything you can to help Ukraine wreck Russia's offense-capable weaponry now," followed by "and keep up sanctions and such depriving Russia of the opportunity to replenish that weaponry."

Even if Russia blew up some of our HIMARs and such....we can build more in the next couple of years.  Russia can't rebuild its tank supply, and it's had a huge chunk of its current supply blown the fuck up, with every last remaining tank in Ukraine where it's desperately needed.  As my wife said when I joked about listening for the rumble of Russian tanks heading west when we were near the Russian border in Estonia last month -- "what fucking tanks?"

We're learning a metric shitton about how Russia can and does fight a modern war.  If we aren't gaming for the future based on those lessons, we're dumb AF.  When it comes to such matters, we aren't dumb AF.

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

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

So, Lavrov and the Foreign Minister of …..Uganda….have agreed that neither will be the first to place weapons in space. 
 

(Really just one part of a broader agreement on space cooperation but still funny as hell that it’s in there).

 

Great, wait until MTG misundertands this.  Uganda space lasers!

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

So, Lavrov and the Foreign Minister of …..Uganda….have agreed that neither will be the first to place weapons in space. 
 

(Really just one part of a broader agreement on space cooperation but still funny as hell that it’s in there).

 

Fools. No matter what the treaty says, one day we will quail beneath the Ugandan lash.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Free the vipers?

 

The foot dragging is getting to be kind of a bad look, especially since we have so many. I mean, Draken, a private aggressor contractor, has 24.

I’m sensitive to the very real operational environment concerns. But this has strong “Germany last fall” vibes, and it’s not entirely unfair to say that Jake Sullivan is really dug in on this. 

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

3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The official name for the F-16 is Fighting Falcon but inside the Air Force(s) that operate them, they’re unofficially called “Vipers.” 

I gotta say, I just really don't understand the push for F-16s.  Please explain it to me.  Like, within the US political sphere, I get it.  If the GOP says, "Biden won't give Ukraine F-16s" and they can use that as a talking point, fine.  But it doesn't seem to fill a niche that they need right now and it seems super resource intensive.  In other words, they get get a bigger bang for their buck out of other systems.  It's a head scratcher to me. Unless they want to reach out and touch some Bears out over the sea.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I gotta say, I just really don't understand the push for F-16s.  Please explain it to me.  Like, within the US political sphere, I get it.  If the GOP says, "Biden won't give Ukraine F-16s" and they can use that as a talking point, fine.  But it doesn't seem to fill a niche that they need right now and it seems super resource intensive.  In other words, they get get a bigger bang for their buck out of other systems.  It's a head scratcher to me. Unless they want to reach out and touch some Bears out over the sea.  

I don't think it's a major game changer either but more that their supply of Mig-29s and Su-27s are dwindling and they can't get any more than what is being donated and also cannot get parts for them. These are Russian aircraft after all. Switching to a western aircraft that all of NATO flies means they can get support and parts for these as well as ready replacements. Kind of like swapping out the Russian tanks and APC for western ones. Just my guess.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I don't think it's a major game changer either but more that their supply of Mig-29s and Su-27s are dwindling and they can't get any more than what is being donated and also cannot get parts for them. These are Russian aircraft after all. Switching to a western aircraft that all of NATO flies means they can get support and parts for these as well as ready replacements. Kind of like swapping out the Russian tanks and APC for western ones. Just my guess.

And instead of getting DARPA to jerry-rig MiGs to shoot western weapons, the whole suite is open to you. And yes, it’s the most widely available platform that could be supplied in real numbers. The F-16 is great for AD and for ground support, with the full suite of western weapons and adequate numbers they can do real in-theatre SEAD missions and also fully integrate air support into their offensives. 
 

There’s also an element of “let’s get these while we maybe can” politically. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I don't think it's a major game changer either but more that their supply of Mig-29s and Su-27s are dwindling and they can't get any more than what is being donated and also cannot get parts for them. These are Russian aircraft after all. Switching to a western aircraft that all of NATO flies means they can get support and parts for these as well as ready replacements. Kind of like swapping out the Russian tanks and APC for western ones. Just my guess.

Yeah, it isn't a game changer. But it is important that Ukraine have a viable air force to help keep Russian aircraft at a distance. Remember, missiles fired from altitude have longer range. Having aircraft to lob long range air-to-air missiles is an important part of keeping Russian airpower operating at a distance from the front lines.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m told (I read it on the internet) that the right way to do AD is by layering, with fighters forward being the first layer. There are a lot of F-16s, everybody has plans to phase them out, the really good AAMs are compatible with them. 
 
You’d like to have F-18s or Gripens, requiring shorter runways, but when it’s approaching midnight, sometimes you have to start making compromises. 
 
Hey, I have a question- the Russian arrest of hypersonic scientists- legit security breach or scapegoating for vaunted wonder weapons getting intercepted? The latter seems stupid, even admitting that we have low expectations for the quality of Russian leadership decisions. 

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

9 minutes ago, statsman said:

I’m told (I read it on the internet) that the right way to do AD is by layering, with fighters forward being the first layer. There are a lot of F-16s, everybody has plans to phase them out, the really good AAMs are compatible with them. 
 
You’d like to have F-18s or Gripens, requiring shorter runways, but when it’s approaching midnight, sometimes you have to start making compromises. 
 
Hey, I have a question- the Russian arrest of hypersonic scientists- legit security breach or scapegoating for vaunted wonder weapons getting intercepted? The latter seems stupid, even admitting that we have low expectations for the quality of Russian leadership decisions. 

No one can speak with certainty because of how opaque Russia is. But this has all the signals of old Soviet style targeted prosecutions.  The boss said the missile was invincible. And it would have been, except for dirty tricks by saboteurs. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
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...