Good take on EU positioning.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Not me.
There was no way in my mind Russia would have done this badly.
I'd have completely believed the Russians would have trounced the Ukrainians even with the Raputitsa.
You can't perform like a inept lousy weakling, and blame your competitor for being "evil" and "immoral".
Exactly what I was criticizing: systematic despotism, corruption and inefficient bureaucracy. They are trying to please everyone, trying to make sure every factory gets some VKS orders to survive. The leadership lack the resolve to make the decision to cut off the redundancy and inefficiency.
These are all minor advantages that shouldn't really deserve a "go ahead". Russia can certainly take this route if they have lots and lots of money. If they are rich enough to afford four or five hundreds of each sub type, than sure. But we all know Russia is not that rich.
If Russian Air force can only afford to field 500ish to 600ish flankers, they should only have two variants: Su-34 and Su-35(single and twin seaters).
Su-30 should be merged with Su-35: using Su-35 radar, systems and engines, and be produced on the same production line.
Su-35 should be used to replace Su-27.
Well, just like every other Russia equipment and technology: they have them (a little bit), they know how to make them (mostly), but they simply don't field enough of them to form a credible structure of capabilities.
US got thousands of planes shot down in Vietnam. Afterwards they had a 3 pronged strategy though:
1. never fight countries with even a 0.1% chance of fighting back, so nobody in Europe or Asia, unless forced to. only go after Arabs who have already been defeated by Israel. the best way to not lose to the US is to not lose to anyone else first, which is why this is actually an existential war for Russia.
2. censor all news of shootdowns, blame it on accidents, etc. witness how they reduced direct US Korean War KIA from 54k to 38k by reclassifying 1/5 of KIA as accidents 50 years after the fact, even if the accident was something like "artillery destroyed truck wheel, causing it to crash. clear cut case of traffic accident."
3. actually improved their training and procurement instead of having 100 variations of the F-4.
Not anywhere near enough in my opinion to justify their losses.
They don't need to carpet bomb every inch of Ukraine, just Ukrainian positions. Ukrainians haven't converted into a guerrilla army yet. Use drones/satellites/HUMINT to check ahead and proceed. Artillery range beats javelin range.
There was a video of some heavily pockmarked Ukrainian fields posted earlier, it looks like the Somme. The first time I'd seen it this war. It doesn't matter what NATO or Soviet vehicles you've got, not much survives that. This one.
RuAF have been missing this war, except a few situations like Mariupol. I've speculated why and I'm not a fan of the decision. Even without them it shouldn't be a problem.
Last edited:
FFS. What is Putin thinking? Does he not realise he is at war? First it was Boris Johnson walking around Kiev freely, now this?
the irony is if secretary of defence and former four star general Lyold Austin were to actually go to Ukraine without an entourage, chances are he would be spat upon and called the N word.
Last edited:
i am not sure where this lousing performance narrative coming from. as sortie rate simply not correspond deficiency in training or quality and maintenance of product.
one can hardly stay in the air more than 4 to 5 hours. the other cocpkit and systems are designed for twice as much time if not more with individual hard points on airframe carrying upto 3tons. it give alot more flexibility. the tail of Su-34 is bigger than nose of Flanker.
why should the rely only one factory for such large procurement?. there is things like quality of manufacturing, independent supply chains in addition to the difference in the end product. even AL engines are manufactured at three locations.
well they have 7 A-50U. They have A-100 final product and A-100 lab in testing. They want to make sure the end product is truly a 21st century performance with more powerful engines and EW pods and antennas built into the airframe.
There is another thing in testing called Belarus Swan that an act as force multiplier with more powerfull radar and 13% greater range. even more range than A-100.
Sadly so, but TRUE!
We learned these the hard way from this war.
Yet, for an "existential war", Russia certainly doesn't look very motivated. The last existential war they fought, they put million upon millions of soldier to the frontlines. What are they waiting here? Are they waiting for NATO to reinforce or even train Ukrainians military? Are they waiting for a fully NATO equipped new Ukrainian forces to enter the battle ground before Russians start to really fight?
they might not realize it is existential just like how Egypt and Iraq didn't realize Yom Kippur was not only existential for Israel but existential for itself (they lost and either got regime changed directly or set on the stage for later regime change). Iran-Iraq war was existential for Iraq too, but they didn't realize it yet. Desert Storm was more mop up of a super exhausted and thoroughly infiltrated Iraq after it had fought for 10+ years straight.Sadly so, but TRUE!
We learned these the hard way from this war.
Yet, for an "existential war", Russia certainly doesn't look very motivated. The last existential war they fought, they put million upon millions of soldier to the frontlines. What are they waiting here? Are they waiting for NATO to reinforce or even train Ukrainians military? Are they waiting for a fully NATO equipped new Ukrainian forces to enter the battle ground before Russians start to really fight?
- Status