Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Sorry if it's straying from the main topic, but why it seems that having missiles fly at lower altitudes is harder to make than missiles flying at higher altitudes? Or why doesn't HF fly at lower altitudes then?
terrain and targeting. if you fly low, your missile must be able to detect where the ground and obstacles are, or else it'll fly into a wave, tree or mountain. That means having altimeters and navigation sensors that can react fast enough to tell the missile to avoid obscales, or have a software fix i.e. pre-programming of flight paths and profiles that are already mapped out. You also need to target something that is low on the radar horizon without being able to actually see it on the missile's own radar.

That's why its very hard to attack mobile ground targets from far away and armies still have to get up close and personal.
 

caudaceus

Senior Member
Registered Member
terrain and targeting. if you fly low, your missile must be able to detect where the ground and obstacles are, or else it'll fly into a wave, tree or mountain. That means having altimeters and navigation sensors that can react fast enough to tell the missile to avoid obscales, or have a software fix i.e. pre-programming of flight paths and profiles that are already mapped out. You also need to target something that is low on the radar horizon without being able to actually see it on the missile's own radar.

That's why its very hard to attack mobile ground targets from far away and armies still have to get up close and personal.
I see, didn't realize that terrain hugging is also challenging in the sea where I assume there's nothing aside from water.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
I see, didn't realize that terrain hugging is also challenging in the sea where I assume there's nothing aside from water.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and even in calm seas, there can be specular reflection from a calm water surface, so only exactly top down radar altimeter will work, not forward looking terrain following radar. A problem for coastal targeting.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
The main limiting factor against supersonic AShM flight at low altitudes are range and materials related rather than navigation.

The air is much denser the closer to sea level. Flying fast through denser air produces more air resistance that translates to increased drag and heat from air friction.

Flying at Mach2 at effectively sea level would drastically reduce the range of the missile, but the biggest issue is that the prolonged exposure to the high temperatures from flying that fast that low will require vastly more heat resistant and structural strength for the missile to survive the flight. Just taking a baseline HF and programming it to fly low the whole time will cause the structure of the missile to fail before it can reach its intended target long before the range limitations from all the extra fuel burn would become an issue.

Traditional supersonic AShMs all went with the fly high route to avoid those problems. The best current compromise is with the Russian Klub missile that married subsonic low level cruise with supersonic terminal dash. That it’s still a compromise because if the missile is engaged at extended ranges, while it’s still in subsonic cruise mode, it’s pretty easy to shoot down.
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
Are there real instances of hostile interception of supersonic anti-shipping missiles in its intended role? Seems like almost all usage of ashm in history has been subsonic and we don't actually know how will supersonic missiles perform against modern AA.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
The main limiting factor against supersonic AShM flight at low altitudes are range and materials related rather than navigation.

The air is much denser the closer to sea level. Flying fast through denser air produces more air resistance that translates to increased drag and heat from air friction.

Flying at Mach2 at effectively sea level would drastically reduce the range of the missile, but the biggest issue is that the prolonged exposure to the high temperatures from flying that fast that low will require vastly more heat resistant and structural strength for the missile to survive the flight. Just taking a baseline HF and programming it to fly low the whole time will cause the structure of the missile to fail before it can reach its intended target long before the range limitations from all the extra fuel burn would become an issue.

Traditional supersonic AShMs all went with the fly high route to avoid those problems. The best current compromise is with the Russian Klub missile that married subsonic low level cruise with supersonic terminal dash. That it’s still a compromise because if the missile is engaged at extended ranges, while it’s still in subsonic cruise mode, it’s pretty easy to shoot down.
the pressure difference between 10 m and 150 m is negligible. there's only a 1.5 kPa difference between 0 and 150 m. Atmospheric pressure at sea level is 101 kPa.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

drag is linearly related to pressure (linearly related to density which is linearly related to the isothermal isovolumetric pressure), so you only need 1% extra fuel consumption.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

MarKoz81

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ukrainians ruled the USSR. Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev, all Ukrainians. There were, of course, actual victims of Soviets in Ukraine. Not what most people think though.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Not comparable to China and Japan. There weren't Chinese emperors or ministers of Japan.

You realize that the same Wikipedia that you cite contains all the information necessary to prove that you're lying and not very well?

Let's start with emperors and ministers:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Khrushchev was born on 15 April 1894,[2] in Kalinovka,[3] a village in what is now Russia's Kursk Oblast, near the present Ukrainian border.[4] His parents, Sergei Khrushchev and Kseniya Khrushcheva, were poor peasants, and had a daughter two years Nikita's junior, Irina.[2] His ethnicity is disputed, with some sources claiming that he was Russian[5] whilst others say that he was Ukrainian.[6]


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

His parents lived in Brezhnevo (Kursky District, Kursk Oblast, Russia) before moving to Kamenskoe. Brezhnev's ethnicity was given as Ukrainian in some documents, including his passport,[5][6][7] and Russian in others.[8][9] A statement confirming that he regarded himself as a Russian can be found in his book Memories (1979), where he wrote: "And so, according to nationality, I am Russian, I am a proletarian, a hereditary metallurgist."[10]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Gorbachev was born on 2 March 1931 in the village of Privolnoye, then in the North Caucasus Krai of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, Soviet Union.[4] At the time, Privolnoye was divided almost evenly between ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians.[5] Gorbachev's paternal family were ethnic Russians and had moved to the region from Voronezh several generations before; his maternal family were of ethnic Ukrainian heritage and had migrated from Chernihiv.[6]

So we have Khrushchev who was born in Russia, Brezhnev who was Russian, and Gorbachev who was Russian because of Russia's patrilinear tradition. In Russia you're not "mixed ethnicity". You're what your otchevstvo indicates which is that "Sergeyevich" part of Gorbachev's name.

But what's more importantly since Dzugashvili the political structures of the USSR were disproportionately controlled by ethnic Russians because Dzugashvili being Georgian himself understood that he had to have the backing of the largest group in the country if he wanted to stay in power through internal division.

Dzugashvily was an incompetent pranoid sociopath who couldn't rely on charisma or intelligence because he had neither. So instead he relied on terror and murder. It was his choice to at the same time push for forced collectivisation which caused Soviet economy to be structurally inefficient and at the same time push for nationalist rhetoric to use old prejudices within former Russian empire to retain control. He also promoted pseudoscience of Lysenko which really suggests that he may have been a Russian nazi, more than what he styled himself as. Also the cult of personality shows an obnoxious level of narcissism that is a typical trait of aggressive, insecure ugly midgets like Dzhugashvili or Beria or the rest of degenerates.

But why were there German collaborators in Ukraine? Nazis are bad! Unlike Dzugashvili, Beria and NKVD. They were so not bad that the party denounced them and established KGB in 1954 because a purge of NKVD/MGB wouldn't be enough to clean up the filth.

Now about Ukraine and Germany.

Let's start systemic repression of population under Dzugashvili's idiotic economic plans which resulted in a country-wide famine and the Holodomor in Ukraine specifically - because of Dzgugashvili's anti-Ukrainian stance.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Add to that regular terror by NKVD relatively few of whom were recruited from Ukrainian population because of cultural links of Ukraine to USSR's enemies - Poland and Germany/Austria. Ukrainians were repressed throughout the entirety of Dzugashvili's rule and only under Khrushchev it changed. And not because Khrushchev was Ukrainian but because he simply wasn't a sadistic degenerate like Dzugashivili and had ambitions to improve his country, not just stay in power at all cost.

Then there's the distinction between territory of Ukrainian SSR and historical region of western Ukraine sometimes described as "Ukraine proper" which never was fully under Russian control until 1795, and with its westernmost parts not falling to Russia until Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939. Instead it was heavily influenced by Polish and German culture because western Ukraine was under Austrian control from 1772 to 1918 - following the partitions of Poland-Lithuania of which it was part since 14th century - long before a Muscovite prince called himself the ruler of all Russians.

584px-Rzeczpospolita_Rozbiory_3.png


Austria was also the inspirator of the Ukrainian national identity. Under Poland-Lithuania "Ukrainians" were referred to as "Rusyns" following the traditions of Kiyvan Rus and the Rurikid dynasty and Russians were called Muscovites which is historically correct.

Germany backed the creation of independent Ukrainian state in 1918 while Bolshevik Russia attempted to put it under its control by force. But before that happened they had to fight first the Ukrainian People's Republic under Petliura, then Germans, then Poles during the Polish-Bolshevik war. At the same time large parts of Ukraine war were under the control of Makhno's faction.

This is Ukrainian People's Republic at the time of Brest-Litovsk Treaty ending war between Germany and Russia:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

1024px-UNR_2.1918_Brest-Litovsk.png


Here's a Russian Imperial map of languages from 1914 (large file). Note the extent of "Ukrainian" indicating that Russian Empire recognized the differences.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Russian Empire treated Ukrainians the same way they treated Poles - and attempted to forcibly "Russify" them against their will. Ukrainians seem similar only because of their use of cyrilic alphabet and Orthodoxy. But saying that Ukrainians and Russians (Muscovites) are one people is like saying that Italians and Spaniards are one people because they use Romance language and Latin alphabet. Or that Czechs and Poles are one people.

In short the "actual victims of Soviets in Ukraine" from western Ukraine were simply people who never lived or accepted Russian rule and did not want to be part of a country that repressed and mass-murdered them. Soviet Union under Dzugashvili was a genocidal state with ethnic cleansing being part of policy to expand government control. People were forcibly re-settled by hundreds of thousands.

But even then they were mostly a minority because Hitler's Germany was founded on a racist ideology which viewed Ukrainians - even those friendly to Germany - as racially inferior and unwanted. They first treated them as all Slavs and only turned to Ukrainian volunteers when they began to lose and those volunteers weren't helping Germany as much as attempting to prevent Russian takeover.

Among those volunteers there were also Russians because opposition to USSR, especially under Dzugashvili never ended despite the terror.

These traditions of Russian nazis live to this day, and you can find them among Russian forces in Ukraine. In fact there are many more neo-nazis fighting for Russia than there are "nazis" fighting for Ukraine. Ukrainian "nazis" are mostly extreme nationalists using nazi symbolism rarely and mostly as provocation. They have their own relatively niche ideology that is more a type of Slavic ethnic chauvinism than German racist supremacism. They're similarly dumb but not identical. Russian neo-nazis are actual nazis. They're not Slavic chauvinists but bizarre Russian German wannabes. And that absolutely takes the cake because what type of moron does it take to be a nazi in Russia. But for some reason there are so many of them. It's almost as if a sub-culture of angry idiots dissatisfied with their post-Soviet country took the most contrarian position imaginable. That of another group of angry idiots who wanted to conquer their country and failed.

That's enough off-topic. Next time you try to write an edgy comment try to be smarter than a Russian nazi. Because that's what I call denying historical fact of crimes against humanity and saying "only Nazi collaborators suffered under Soviets in Ukraine".
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
You realize that the same Wikipedia that you cite contains all the information necessary to prove that you're lying and not very well?

Let's start with emperors and ministers:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



So we have Khrushchev who was born in Russia, Brezhnev who was Russian, and Gorbachev who was Russian because of Russia's patrilinear tradition. In Russia you're not "mixed ethnicity". You're what your otchevstvo indicates which is that "Sergeyevich" part of Gorbachev's name.

But what's more importantly since Dzugashvili the political structures of the USSR were disproportionately controlled by ethnic Russians because Dzugashvili being Georgian himself understood that he had to have the backing of the largest group in the country if he wanted to stay in power through internal division.

Dzugashvily was an incompetent pranoid sociopath who couldn't rely on charisma or intelligence because he had neither. So instead he relied on terror and murder. It was his choice to at the same time push for forced collectivisation which caused Soviet economy to be structurally inefficient and at the same time push for nationalist rhetoric to use old prejudices within former Russian empire to retain control. He also promoted pseudoscience of Lysenko which really suggests that he may have been a Russian nazi, more than what he styled himself as. Also the cult of personality shows an obnoxious level of narcissism that is a typical trait of aggressive, insecure ugly midgets like Dzhugashvili or Beria or the rest of degenerates.

But why were there German collaborators in Ukraine? Nazis are bad! Unlike Dzugashvili, Beria and NKVD. They were so not bad that the party denounced them and established KGB in 1954 because a purge of NKVD/MGB wouldn't be enough to clean up the filth.

Now about Ukraine and Germany.

Let's start systemic repression of population under Dzugashvili's idiotic economic plans which resulted in a country-wide famine and the Holodomor in Ukraine specifically - because of Dzgugashvili's anti-Ukrainian stance.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Add to that regular terror by NKVD relatively few of whom were recruited from Ukrainian population because of cultural links of Ukraine to USSR's enemies - Poland and Germany/Austria. Ukrainians were repressed throughout the entirety of Dzugashvili's rule and only under Khrushchev it changed. And not because Khrushchev was Ukrainian but because he simply wasn't a sadistic degenerate like Dzugashivili and had ambitions to improve his country, not just stay in power at all cost.

Then there's the distinction between territory of Ukrainian SSR and historical region of western Ukraine sometimes described as "Ukraine proper" which never was fully under Russian control until 1795, and with its westernmost parts not falling to Russia until Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939. Instead it was heavily influenced by Polish and German culture because western Ukraine was under Austrian control from 1772 to 1918 - following the partitions of Poland-Lithuania of which it was part since 14th century - long before a Muscovite prince called himself the ruler of all Russians.

584px-Rzeczpospolita_Rozbiory_3.png


Austria was also the inspirator of the Ukrainian national identity. Under Poland-Lithuania "Ukrainians" were referred to as "Rusyns" following the traditions of Kiyvan Rus and the Rurikid dynasty and Russians were called Muscovites which is historically correct.

Germany backed the creation of independent Ukrainian state in 1918 while Bolshevik Russia attempted to put it under its control by force. But before that happened they had to fight first the Ukrainian People's Republic under Petliura, then Germans, then Poles during the Polish-Bolshevik war. At the same time large parts of Ukraine war were under the control of Makhno's faction.

This is Ukrainian People's Republic at the time of Brest-Litovsk Treaty ending war between Germany and Russia:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

1024px-UNR_2.1918_Brest-Litovsk.png


Here's a Russian Imperial map of languages from 1914 (large file). Note the extent of "Ukrainian" indicating that Russian Empire recognized the differences.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Russian Empire treated Ukrainians the same way they treated Poles - and attempted to forcibly "Russify" them against their will. Ukrainians seem similar only because of their use of cyrilic alphabet and Orthodoxy. But saying that Ukrainians and Russians (Muscovites) are one people is like saying that Italians and Spaniards are one people because they use Romance language and Latin alphabet. Or that Czechs and Poles are one people.

In short the "actual victims of Soviets in Ukraine" from western Ukraine were simply people who never lived or accepted Russian rule and did not want to be part of a country that repressed and mass-murdered them. Soviet Union under Dzugashvili was a genocidal state with ethnic cleansing being part of policy to expand government control. People were forcibly re-settled by hundreds of thousands.

But even then they were mostly a minority because Hitler's Germany was founded on a racist ideology which viewed Ukrainians - even those friendly to Germany - as racially inferior and unwanted. They first treated them as all Slavs and only turned to Ukrainian volunteers when they began to lose and those volunteers weren't helping Germany as much as attempting to prevent Russian takeover.

Among those volunteers there were also Russians because opposition to USSR, especially under Dzugashvili never ended despite the terror.

These traditions of Russian nazis live to this day, and you can find them among Russian forces in Ukraine. In fact there are many more neo-nazis fighting for Russia than there are "nazis" fighting for Ukraine. Ukrainian "nazis" are mostly extreme nationalists using nazi symbolism rarely and mostly as provocation. They have their own relatively niche ideology that is more a type of Slavic ethnic chauvinism than German racist supremacism. They're similarly dumb but not identical. Russian neo-nazis are actual nazis. They're not Slavic chauvinists but bizarre Russian German wannabes. And that absolutely takes the cake because what type of moron does it take to be a nazi in Russia. But for some reason there are so many of them. It's almost as if a sub-culture of angry idiots dissatisfied with their post-Soviet country took the most contrarian position imaginable. That of another group of angry idiots who wanted to conquer their country and failed.

That's enough off-topic. Next time you try to write an edgy comment try to be smarter than a Russian nazi. Because that's what I call denying historical fact of crimes against humanity and saying "only Nazi collaborators suffered under Soviets in Ukraine".
So you admit that Khrushchev is Ukrainian. OK, thanks.

Brezhnev claimed he was Russian, but your own quoted section says that his passport says Ukrainian ethnicity. Do you believe in trans or not? If someone with 'man' written on their passport identifies as woman, you'd laugh. Yet here, where Brehznev's passport says 'Ukrainian', and he wants to identify as Russian, you agree.

Then you think that Hiwis, who were concentration camp guards, were merely fighting to prevent a Russian takeover. What was Treblinka, can you tell? Where were the Russians when this was happening? Where was Treblinka, was it near the USSR?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

During its entire operation, Treblinka I's commandant was Sturmbannführer
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
He ran the camp with several SS men and almost 100 Hiwi guards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top