Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй


Eastwood

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

I’m glad we’re sending anti-drone systems, but what the hell took so long? We heard about them purchasing Iranian drones a couple weeks ago

your question may have been answered by your question.

 

I would guess we werent sure the Iranian things would actually work correctly.   So we waited.  unforutnately a bit too long as it turns out the damn things have the 1944 V1 technology built into them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

tell me how the Russian ethos could develop to something WORSE than it is

 

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And at each fork in the road....they somehow manage to become even WORSE

You somewhat answered your own question.  We don’t know how, but history is one sided. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2022 at 1:55 PM, Bevo said:

I don't know if what you state is true, but if Russia lost half of its people, half of its oligarchs, and all of his satellites, with all of the oil and gas money still coming in, his personal profits would be much, much higher than they were before the war.

 

The Producers (Kino Lorber, NR)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Let them run. But might not be that easy. 

 

Makes sense why they got the pontoon bridge up and running in the last 48 hours under the Antonovskiy bridge. I think this may coincidence with the weather really turning for the worst before the ground freezes. The only operation the Russians have pulled off with any kind of remote success was the withdrawal from Kyiv. 

 

If they blow the dam, and besides all the downstream damage, what does that do to the upstream reservoir for the nuke plant? 

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

4 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Ok so remind me what happens next when Kherson falls?

That river is a formidable obstacle and we should not expect major offensives to the left bank if Russia abandons Kherson or is defeated there.

The symbolism and political meaning is profound. Put simply, the annexation gambit has failed. The idea was always that by annexing, these regions would become untouchable just like Russian territory. Kherson is as Russian as Ivanov. And this will demonstrate perfectly that it isn’t true, that these regions are contested, that Russia views them as different from Russia within its borders. And that will further embolden Ukraine and its supporters to dismiss more idle nuclear blackmail threats. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

I’m not going to defend Israel, but we should be willing to provide PATRIOT systems around Kyiv and Western Ukraine and show that they can be handled by Ukrainian forces, without risk of falling into Russian hands.

Shit, we sold them to the Saudis, pretty sure the Russians have had a look.

Patriots are going to be a pretty poor match to the Iranian drones that have been a problem. Ukraine needs something that can shoot them down cheap. I would think C-Ram is the best bet from our current stuff. But our various laser interceptor programs are probably perfectly suited to this task. Maybe we can get some of the test beds down there somehow. Patriots may be useful against some of Russia's more advanced ballistic and cruise missiles, but at this point those aren't the primary threat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

And Iran, the Italy of this WW, is also in a bIt of a “let’s overthrow the regime” mood.

Iran is the Japan of this Axis.  They'd lose, but it'd be a tough nut to crack that would involve some very nasty amphibious landings.

Belarus is the Italy of this Axis.  Lukashenko is going to end up strung up by his heels at a gas station.

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Patriots are going to be a pretty poor match to the Iranian drones that have been a problem. Ukraine needs something that can shoot them down cheap. I would think C-Ram is the best bet from our current stuff. But our various laser interceptor programs are probably perfectly suited to this task. Maybe we can get some of the test beds down there somehow. Patriots may be useful against some of Russia's more advanced ballistic and cruise missiles, but at this point those aren't the primary threat. 

We have some CIWS that work on land.  We used them to protect the Green Zone in Baghdad.  I would think those would be ideal for countering these V1.2s.

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

2 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Iran is the Japan of this Axis.  They'd lose, but it'd be a tough nut to crack that would involve some very nasty amphibious landings.

Belarus is the Italy of this Axis.  Lukashenko is going to end up strung up by his heels at a gas station.

We have some CIWS that work on land.  We used them to protect the Green Zone in Baghdad.  I would think those would be ideal for countering these V1.2s.

Is that something besides C-Ram? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Is that something besides C-Ram? 

No--that's what I was talking about.  I couldn't remember what it was called.

Just now, Gravy Train said:

CIWS has a stupidly-complex (and expensive) maintenance requirement.  Even test-firing of the unit requires a tear-down afterwards.  CRAM isn't feasible because that lead would be dropping over civilians.

That didn't stop us in Baghdad.

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

1 minute ago, Gravy Train said:

CIWS has a stupidly-complex (and expensive) maintenance requirement.  Even test-firing of the unit requires a tear-down afterwards.  CRAM isn't feasible because that lead would be dropping over civilians.

See, we're back to what I suggested: platoons of trained goose hunters with big-ass shotguns.  Back when I was a kid watching lots of old WWII movies, I thought that would be my dream duty: working the AA batteries.  I'd have put more Zeroes in the drink than any gunner in naval history, I'm sure of it!

Just now, Rimbo said:

stealing this

To use in conversation, or to claim as a title?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

CIWS has a stupidly-complex (and expensive) maintenance requirement.  Even test-firing of the unit requires a tear-down afterwards.  CRAM isn't feasible because that lead would be dropping over civilians.

Certainly cheaper than a 2 mil per shot patriot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Patriots are going to be a pretty poor match to the Iranian drones that have been a problem. Ukraine needs something that can shoot them down cheap. I would think C-Ram is the best bet from our current stuff. But our various laser interceptor programs are probably perfectly suited to this task. Maybe we can get some of the test beds down there somehow. Patriots may be useful against some of Russia's more advanced ballistic and cruise missiles, but at this point those aren't the primary threat. 

May I modestly propose one of these, with a shotgun attachment:

https://www.kipaero.com/sopwith-aeroplanes/sopwith_1_1-2_strutter_kit/

image.png.1addaaff6b7189f8a4339692f5e8bb6c.png

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

19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

See, we're back to what I suggested: platoons of trained goose hunters with big-ass shotguns.  Back when I was a kid watching lots of old WWII movies, I thought that would be my dream duty: working the AA batteries.  I'd have put more Zeroes in the drink than any gunner in naval history, I'm sure of it!

You think that's easier than training the geese to take them down?

 

 

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

Buy a few hundred Toyota Hulux and mount M-134s in the bed. M-134s have been around since 1963, so we should have quite a few available, and 7.62 ammo is cheaper than 20mm. Serves a dual purpose, shoot down Iranian drones, and cut through Russians. Even civilians have a few:

CHIEF

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Gravy Train said:

CIWS has a stupidly-complex (and expensive) maintenance requirement.  Even test-firing of the unit requires a tear-down afterwards.  CRAM isn't feasible because that lead would be dropping over civilians.

The rounds for ones used on land self-destruct in the air if they don't hit the target. The biggest problem is the range and the amount of ammo we'd need. The range is only ~2.2 miles. It would take a metric shit ton of CIWS to defend the cities and I don't think we'd have enough if we stripped every US facility and ship. We definitely wouldn't have enough self-destructing ammo.

Without a huge scale-up, CIWS are not a practical solution defending entire cities, they are really only practical for defending smaller areas, like the capital, or downtown. 

Edited by Pods
  • Hook 'Em 2
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...