The War in the Ukraine

Y

yugocrosrb95

Junior Member
Registered Member
Santamaria said:
Personally I think that they are really North Korean shells, no Chinese.

North korea is a heavily industrialized country of 25 million people that dedicated 20% of their economy to military production.

If there is one country that can provide such number of shells is probably North Korea. Westerners like to promote the idea of China because:
1- They use it to propagandize against China
2 - The though of North Korea overmanufacturing the full EU is too painful for the pride of typical Europeans.

But the trade North Korea Russia seems totally logical since is very beneficial for both. North Korea get again petroleum, carbon, has access to missile and rocket technology and in general support with other things. Russia get access to very cheap industrial output that exceed the EU and US, forcing them into submission or big economical pain.

Strategically since the start of this trade the effects are, Russia smashing the front plane in Ukraine (not only due to this but this helps), North Korea launching its first succes spy satellit, and getting access to several technologies.
This Also make North Korea more powerful and dangerous, forcing the US to spend resources in south Korea that can’t go to Ukraine

Is a total win win for both Russia and North Korea, and indeed for China without participating.

It is important to notice that apparently the joint programs go further away than militar. Now some Russian regions are hiring north korean state companies to build infrastructur, instead of use immigrants from central Asia that create too much trouble and probkems. north Korea uses that money to buy petrol and other things from Russia. Both countries win.

PD: One advantage of the West was always that their economies are very integrated, and that bring down cost. Germany manufactures this, Netherlands that…But anti west economies were always divided and isolated.

Now with the free trade between Russia and Iran plus trade from Russia to North Korea they will create several synergies that will increase the power and economy of the 3 countries a lot.
Click to expand...
Only technology North Korea could want from Russia would involve space launch vehicles along manned aircraft.

Everything else DPRK can make and design that satisfying to their own needs.
 
S

SlothmanAllen

Junior Member
Registered Member
So given how this conflict has played out so far, how do other users see future militaries adjusting the posture of their forces?

For example, the US recently cancelled their Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program largely as it was viewed as obsolete for current and future conflicts. That is just one example of a prominent program being cancelled.

What about attack helicopters? Will they play a role in future conflicts or is their time up as well?

Interested to hear what other users think!
 
Maikeru

Maikeru

Captain
Registered Member
SlothmanAllen said:
So given how this conflict has played out so far, how do other users see future militaries adjusting the posture of their forces?

For example, the US recently cancelled their Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program largely as it was viewed as obsolete for current and future conflicts. That is just one example of a prominent program being cancelled.

What about attack helicopters? Will they play a role in future conflicts or is their time up as well?

Interested to hear what other users think!
Click to expand...
Ka-52 has continued to play a big role on the Russian side, albeit with heavy losses. I think attack helos will still be a thing but with longer ranged ATGMs and less emphasis on chain guns and rocket pods. Scout helicopters such as H-19 much less so, with their role taken over by UAVs.

Every vehicle in the direct fire zone will require some form of APS. Cope cages will also proliferate, as will gun/DEW based SPAAA for counter-UAV use. We will also see proliferating UGVs.

At sea I'm going to make the surprising statement that USVs are not the game changer many think. Yes, they will be a thing, but Ukraine uses them due to a lack of any other realistic options, and gets away with it due to Russian incompetence.
 
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
yugocrosrb95 said:
Only technology North Korea could want from Russia would involve space launch vehicles along manned aircraft.

Everything else DPRK can make and design that satisfying to their own needs.
Click to expand...
DPRK is country with much of its production&life still stuck in the 1950s - even food security is still not completely solved.
Yes, Chinese equipment is available to them in principle(so is western, if there are sufficient intermediates) - but it isn't like they have money to do it.
Even their MIC - yes, DPRK can do a lot of genuine stuff. They never had neither resources nor the capacity to push forward actual research for military-related sciences etc. Russia has all that and more.

Overall, from Russia, they may need literally everything. And now they have all the resources they need to do the buying.
 
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Ka-52 has continued to play a big role on the Russian side, albeit with heavy losses. I think attack helos will still be a thing but with longer ranged ATGMs and less emphasis on chain guns and rocket pods. Scout helicopters such as H-19 much less so, with their role taken over by UAVs.
Click to expand...
from what i can say, after the end of early(maneuver) period of war and with some fine-tuning of tactics, helicopter losses on both sides dropped down to a bare minimum and are long since covered by production/procurement.
Ukraine is in a somewhat more precarious position(they're still loosing helicopters from time to time, and since they aren't producing them - there is a roof of what's possible), but overall neither is nowhere near the point where losses are having any impact on helicopter operations.

UAVs are a complicated match for scout helicopters - the larger ones(matching range) aren't as capable(not meaning sensors, but "ground" part of helicopter - the ability to deliver/exfiltrate recon teams, land near suspicious tracks, etc); smaller drones (that can inspect) aren't flying anywhere as far.
Realistically - it sounds like FARA was killed not so much because it wasn't needed, but for the same reason it happened several times before - i.e. sudden higher priority in the procurement list. From capability point alone - recon helicopter is still needed, and drones aren't really competing with it, much more complementing it.
This turn won't really improve their relationship with SOCOM, who are now sorta screwed.

For the modern US army that's pretty obvious - suddenly army ground defense has to turn into a very dense shield, starting from almost nothing. That's expensive.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Ka-52 has continued to play a big role on the Russian side, albeit with heavy losses. I think attack helos will still be a thing but with longer ranged ATGMs and less emphasis on chain guns and rocket pods. Scout helicopters such as H-19 much less so, with their role taken over by UAVs.

Every vehicle in the direct fire zone will require some form of APS. Cope cages will also proliferate, as will gun/DEW based SPAAA for counter-UAV use. We will also see proliferating UGVs.

At sea I'm going to make the surprising statement that USVs are not the game changer many think. Yes, they will be a thing, but Ukraine uses them due to a lack of any other realistic options, and gets away with it due to Russian incompetence.
Click to expand...
UGVs are not going to be as popular as USVs IMO.

RF wavelengths with the 2 way bandwidth to communicate in continuous real time video is small on the order of cm. These propagate line of sight and are blocked by metal grates with spacing on the order of the wavelength.

You need real time video for UGVs because they need to move in complex 3D environments with obstacles and limited line of sight. These RF signals will also have trouble penetrating steel reinforced concrete buildings due to absorption from the concrete and reflection from the metal structures inside (i.e. steel reinforcements, metal roofs, metal gratings, metal plumbing pipework, etc). IFF is a huge problem especially if using monochrome cameras or low resolution.

So you basically need a local LoS to operate them remotely.

For USVs they move in a 2D or limited 3D medium without obstacles or overhead cover. This means non LOS signals like overhead satellites can be used. And with less obstacles and easier IFF, you can use buffered video, waypointing or even completely automated control etc.
 
Maikeru

Maikeru

Captain
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
UGVs are not going to be as popular as USVs IMO.

RF wavelengths with the 2 way bandwidth to communicate in continuous real time video is small on the order of cm. These propagate line of sight and are blocked by metal grates with spacing on the order of the wavelength.

You need real time video for UGVs because they need to move in complex 3D environments with obstacles and limited line of sight. These RF signals will also have trouble penetrating steel reinforced concrete buildings due to absorption from the concrete and reflection from the metal structures inside (i.e. steel reinforcements, metal roofs, metal gratings, metal plumbing pipework, etc). IFF is a huge problem especially if using monochrome cameras or low resolution.

So you basically need a local LoS to operate them remotely.

For USVs they move in a 2D or limited 3D medium without obstacles or overhead cover. This means non LOS signals like overhead satellites can be used. And with less obstacles and easier IFF, you can use buffered video, waypointing or even completely automated control etc.
Click to expand...
Interesting observations. Would AI help with the UGV comms problem?
 
S

SolarWarden

Junior Member
Registered Member
Wth is going on with the French? Why so itchy for WW3?

The Chief of French military wants to start some coalition of willing to send to Ukraine
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1764729759852789843

Weeks ago like everyone else when the report came out about French wanting to send troops to Ukraine in some capacity I rolled my eyes as a nothing burger but now... they haven't shut up now you have the top French General blabbing. When did the French get "tough?" Is there presidential elections soon?
 
S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
SolarWarden said:
Wth is going on with the French? Why so itchy for WW3?

The Chief of French military wants to start some coalition of willing to send to Ukraine
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1764729759852789843

Weeks ago like everyone else when the report came out about French wanting to send troops to Ukraine in some capacity I rolled my eyes as a nothing burger but now... they haven't shut up now you have the top French General blabbing. When did the French get "tough?" Is there presidential elections soon?
Click to expand...
Canada said they are willing too
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Though they said "not in the current situation"
whatever that means
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top