Dude played that whole thing perfectly, linking it back to Marxism, of which he is clearly not a big fan. Discounting the fact that the country which is fighting for their existence has more motivation than the invaders is just dumb, but like y'all said, the woman is toeing the party line
just to be clear, that same guy has said all sorts of nutty things on that same program / same format. Tonight he'll say something like "we're in a stalemate in Eastern Ukraine, we need to nuke Poland."
Technology to take down mortars and drones of all sizes. Article was posted last night. https://www.rtx.com/news/news-cente...rd-team-up-to-defeat-multiple-mortars-and-lar "With an effectively infinite magazine and near-zero cost per shot, HEL is now the proven answer to asymmetric threats like drones and mortars."
That would be funnier if it wasn’t so sad. Let’s also ignore the serial numbers on them, the unit markings and the fact that there’s more of them blown up and abandoned than the Ukr Army has ever had in their inventory, but yeah, obviously just a ploy to demoralize you guys.
Stupid question of the morning. Is the future of these icbm, cruise, and hypersonic missile defense? Lasers would seem to over come the speed of target issue.no idea what range would be though.
They've been testing HEL BMD (High energy laser ballistic missile defense) forever; from my understanding the primary issue is energy requirements, target tracking, and targeting multiple targets long enough to destroy them, which is harder with a big mother missile. With ICBMs especially, you're not dealing with one target most of the time any more, especially by the time it gets into targeting range/line of sight; by then it's reached its max altitude, has shed a few rocket body stages (which one has the missile on it, says the radar), has multiple maneuverable reentry vehicles (now you have several targets, all of which are moving, mixed in with separation debris) and your laser needs to stay on target long enough to damage/destroy it. For shorter range ballistic missiles add those problems plus a very short potential engagement time, which means you're going to have a massive power requirement to keep the HEL ready to go at all times. For cruise missiles it's more of a detection before attack sprint phase issue; cruise missiles can skim the surface below the targeting and early warning radars, so you're going to rely more on fast-reaction point defense systems (look up CIWS). Hypersonic cruise missiles, nuclear powered cruise missiles, and hyper-glide vehicles combine both those problem sets.
So appropriately a more likely near-future use for HELs is anti-satellite operations. They follow very predictable orbits, theres no terrain masking hiding them from targeting radars (or even optical sensors), they're very expensive to maneuver and eventually run out of fuel if you do move them, and they're delicate.
I have a friend at Northrupp that’s working on the satellite lasers. This was several years ago but he told me they’d take them to testing locations and fire them into the sky at targets. He had no idea if they were real targets or not.
Back when I was following this stuff I recall they had the problem of keeping the laser focused on a target long enough to disable it - burning through a missile skin and detonating propellant is easier than hitting something that doesn't necessarily explode easily. But, as you said, targeting a missile in boost phase is difficulter; it requires systems be able to target missiles early on, which makes decisionmaking hard because the info/warning has to go up the ladder and the order to shoot be made in minutes (and you either have to station HELs over your potential opponents or take a really long shot perhaps using mirrors). And missile skin vaporizes slightly when you hit it with a HEL, which means that the HEL then has to burn through the vapor in addition to the skin. It ends up taking longer, and holding a laser on a tender spot on a far away target for long enough is just reeeeeaallllyy hard
Everything I’ve read has said the easiest way to take out an ICBM is to fire a smaller nuclear missile at it and let the EMP fry the electronics. Skips the need for a kinetic kill (physically hitting it) and at that altitude the fallout would be minimal. Like, still bad but not AS bad. The down side is detonating an EMP in low earth orbit can ROYALLY fuck with power grids on the ground over a massive area. Basically what happened in MW3
Depends how close you have to get to get an EMP kill. Close only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades, and nukes.
I doubt even Russian friendly countries will want to get involved in that BS. If it happens, it will be a Russian kangaroo court. I would think there is way too many possible long term negatives participating in that type of thing compared to some short-term benefits Russia may offer. Seems much safer to offer military supplies than give up a judge for a show court.
I keep reading things like this and each time I hear in my head "We are just one play away" or "Next year is our year!" and I realize that no one knows. There is something to be said about when you back someone into a corner and it becomes life or death, like it is to 100s of thousands of Ukrainians. Then you throw in the support of most NATO nations in providing advanced weapons, targeting, intelligence, and I have to assume planning, and this thing looks worse and worse for Russia every day. It is incredible to see the efforts most NATO nations have gone to in order to provide the Ukrainians with both weapons and targeting data. I have to assume we are continuing to document and communicate Russian troop movements daily to those leading the defense for Ukraine. I would be interested to learn if we are even going as far as to suggest mission packages of potential targets which we believe would do the most damage to Russian forces. My only question now is how much suffering and pain is Putin willingly putting his population through as these sanctions start to have further effects later this year....
haven’t read the thread yet but the other guy that post updates said Russia is finally doing night raids which may make the fight in Donbas harder. maybe they finally got equipment but I agree that there seems to be a negative inevitability where some just don’t believe Russia can continue to be this bad and doom post so hard to separate fact from assumptions
Just to be clear, that guy (Neil Hauer) isn't doom posting, he's a reporter in eastern Ukraine (in Donetsk Oblast rn).
Russia's not going to have an endless streak of losses. As long as Ukraine makes those little Russian gains painful in terms of troops and equipment they are still winning if they can keep their own losses down.
tough to tell from the video tbqh. Also, I was unaware countries were still using armored trains. I'm interested to learn the vintage on those suckers. I know the Soviets used tons of them in WW2 to protect against Nazi Stukas and FWs, but kinda figured the concept was obsolete.
The concept was always pretty stupid since rail is too easy to disrupt (see Civil War Sherman campaign) but the second aerial bombing became a thing they were obsolete