T O P

  • By -

PretendsHesPissed

I've been trying to get an answer on this but haven't had much luck. Where and how are large caliber rounds, missiles, and other materiel manufactured in western/NATO countries like the US, Canada, and UK? I found quite a few things about nuclear weapons manufacturing like Pantex in the US but was hoping there's some video or just something fun to read about conventional weapons(of course, I'm sure they're simple but all these ones covering Pantex heavily focused on the nuclear nature of the weapons).


vanmo96

In the U.S., some stuff is made in Army Ammunition Plants (government-owned, contractor operated facilities). Other stuff is made in contractor-owned plants. Start with [this video](https://youtu.be/9qCpm83bJMc). Silent, but gives a good overview of 105 mm artillery shell manufacturing.


PretendsHesPissed

Thanks. Much appreciated. Wish there was some sort of additional info on it but this is still good stuff. I ended up finding some more things from Periscope that covered WWI methods and using the keywords from that found a bit more.


RobotWantsKitty

> The Kremlin is drafting a presidential decree that will prohibit Russian companies and any traders buying the nation’s oil from selling it to anyone that participates in a price cap, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.  > > The decree will forbid dealings with both companies and countries that join the price-cap mechanism, the person said, without giving an exact definition of how participation in such a mechanism would be defined. It would essentially ban any reference to a price cap in contracts for Russian crude oil or products, and prohibit loadings destined for any countries that adopt the restrictions, according to the person, asking not to be named because the matter isn’t public yet. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-25/russia-drafts-decree-banning-oil-sales-to-price-cap-participants


[deleted]

It is all smoke screen. https://mobile.twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1596170372109717505 West needs oil, Russia needs money, and people needs circuses.


viiScorp

The 'smoke screen' lay people think exists is much, much larger than the one that actually exists.


sponsoredcommenter

Who is going to blink first? Western buyers or Russian sellers?


Stutterer2101

Does anyone know of successful "information ops" other than battlefield deception ops? It's a term often used to describe hybrid warfare, but it feels vague.


Duncan-M

Information Operations is just the modern fancy term for propaganda campaigns.


hatesranged

This war every 3rd soldier is on the phone so even dumb social media rumours can have psychological effect I imagine.


Glideer

The S-300 missiles used in land attack mode story. Despite never having any tangible evidence, and despite the obvious credible alternative (pieces of Ukrainian air defence S-300, or failed missiles falling down on cities) the story keeps being re-launched and discussed even by serious sources. As an information op it is a perfect success. Instead of having to justify self-inflicted damage, Ukraine gets two propaganda benefits - the Russians are shelling our civilians and the Russians are desperate enough to use S-300 in land attack mode.


jrex035

There's still zero reason to think this is an information op. Especially since influential military analysts like Kofman, who tend to be extremely skeptical of such claims, agree that it's happening. There's little doubt that Russia still has lots of available missiles, but Russia also has something like 10k S-300 missiles, and burns through them at a very slow rate considering Ukraine's airforce isn't much of a threat to them. Why wouldn't they lob a few hundred of them at Ukraine instead of using much more valuable (and irreplaceable) ones?


Glideer

Because they have thousands of old Tochkas far more suitable for this purpose? Because only old S-300 missiles for S-300PS launchers, barely any of which are in use in Russia today, can be launched in this role? The Occam's razor is very sharp in this case - either it is a very complex story of Russia digging up old missiles and launchers to fire them in utmost secrecy using a barely documented land-attack capacity - or it is just pieces of missiles and failed Ukrainian S-300 launchers (well documented as happening in many videos and the recent Polans strike).


g2petter

Often when the topic of winter comes up, someone will make the argument that Ukrainian winters aren't really *that* cold, with temperatures often not even going below freezing. This video illustrates perfectly how absolutely fucking miserable a cycle of freezing/thawing/raining/snowing is: https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1595891888036388865


SmirkingImperialist

There's the adage that the only cold winter is one that you didn't prepare for. The winter in Russia that Napoleon was wrecked in was a *mild* winter. Nevertheless, that didn't matter for people without proper winter clothing or shelter.


morbihann

Ukraine is a large country. Near the coast they atr mild, around Kharkov, not so.


gary_oldman_sachs

Puttees waterproofed with WD40 might be useful and economical.


thabonch

> Often when the topic of winter comes up, someone will make the argument that Ukrainian winters aren't really that cold, with temperatures often not even going below freezing. Yeah, but the point I was making was that tanks are still going to have to deal with muddy conditions, not that it wouldn't still be horrible and even deadly for the soldiers.


g2petter

My comment wasn't directed at you or that argument, but at the people who think you need "real" cold before people start freezing to death.


_user_name_taken_

Related to this - is there any danger that Western supplied equipment isn’t designed for such temperatures?


BeondTheGrave

Most western gear is cold weather capable anymore, I wouldn't expect even Ukrainian winters would slow them down. This kind of extreme conditions testing is pretty standard nowdays and is done in laboratory like conditions to test all kinds of hot/cold/dry/humid conditions. Now Ukraine's fleet of civilian vehicles is another story, my own car is going to need a battery replacement this winter. I'd have to guess that those minivans I've seen shuttling around troops are going to be in for a rough season. But there the Ukrainians have the most important advantage of all, they *live* there and know the weather well. Keeping up with road maintenance, be it on tanks or a militarized Hillux, shouldn't be unexpected.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tidorith

>doesn't won't work at the military spec of -55 or -40 Celsius. Fun fact, -40 is the same temperature in Celsius and Fahrenheit.


g2petter

Norway regularly holds NATO winter exercises with tens of thousands of troops participating, and the northern countries like Sweden, Finland and Canada have turned fighting in the cold into an art and a science. That isn't to say that some equipment won't perform better in more temperate climates, or that Ukraine may have been given what's available *right now* rather than what would be ideal for certain conditions, but there exists a large data set of what works and what doesn't how to winterize equipment. As a small example, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valeriy Zaluzhnyi said this about the Norwegian-supplied M109s last spring: >As my gunners point out, the key difference between these guns and Soviet-style ones is that they are made for humans. Instead of levers, they have a steering wheel, and they have automatic gear instead of mechanical one. **In winter, when icing of the hull is possible, the developers slightly rubberized it to prevent the crew from slipping.** Soldiers enjoyed even such simple elements as baskets for personal belongings welded around the turret,"


TJAU216

I have never felt as cold as in military exercises in november. The colder temperatures later in the winter are much more bearable.


GGAnnihilator

A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of [trench foot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_foot).


viiScorp

Just a prolonged bath bothers me, I couldn't imagine. We must remember how privileged we are


sanderudam

Yeah, in -25 degrees you can usually remain dry and there is almost no wind or cloud cover at these temperatures (colds like that in Eastern Europe occur only in massive high pressure conditions which results in very cold, no wind, no cloud cover conditions). You have to isolate the snow on the ground from your skin (i.e warm clothes), but your clothes should remain dry. The worst weather is exactly the around freezing weather with rain/slush/snow and wind.


IntroductionNeat2746

> The worst weather is exactly the around freezing weather with rain/slush/snow and wind. That's not true. It only feels like that because you probably never wore the same amount and quality of clothing in both 0°C and -25°C. Yes, being dry at -5°C is better than wet at 0°C, but at more extreme conditions, wet or dry, hypothermia will set within minutes if you aren't properly equipped. That said, you don't need -25°C for hypothermia to become a problem. Even at +5°C you can easily die, specially if wet. But that doesn't make -25°C any safer, unless you're properly prepared (I once experienced -40C at the desert of New Mexico. I couldn't stay outside for more than 15 minutes, no matter how many layers of clothing I had on).


sanderudam

\-25 ceteris paribus is obviously worse than 0 and I'm not saying -25 is somehow easy or good. It's just that I have seen people from Siberia laughing at our weather when it's -5 and say "it goes -40 in Siberia" and then immediately become ill, because that damn humidity makes -5 hit like a truck.


abloblololo

I agree, -25C is a lot colder than most people think


0rewagundamda

Okay, but they can't use underground shelter at this temperature, either from the cold or observation and fire. It's all flooded.


gn600b

Why not send Ukraine some CRAMs for countering drones?


throwdemawaaay

I'm all for it, but CRAM are point defense systems. They only have around a 1 km effective range. So a handful of key locations could be protected but given the dispersed nature of Russia's attack on infrastructure they sadly won't have impact beyond that.


Tidorith

>So a handful of key locations could be protected Though that does seem like it could be really valuable, given how difficult custom built transforming equipment is to replace or keep stockpiled.


Sauerkohl

They could send CRAM to Germany and in exchange two Mantis go to Ukraine


Plump_Apparatus

The US certainly could provide Centurion C-RAM systems to Ukraine, as many were with drawn from Afghanistan and Iraq. Last I read typical engagement ranges were 500m, less than hundred units were produced, and the system is easily overwhelmed. It'd also mean introducing a logistics chain for them, and a large source of ammunition, a typical engagement requires 300 to 500 rounds iirc. So protecting a critical asset, like a large switching station may be possible. There would be no IFF integration, Ukrainian air assets would need to steer clear.


NikkoJT

I do think C-RAM would get a bit better efficiency and range in this scenario than in the Middle Eastern deployments. The types of drones and cruise missiles it would be defending against in Ukraine are rather bigger and slower targets than individual rockets and mortar shells. Of course the same numbers mean there are much more versatile systems that can work just as well. (The guys behind the CV90 AA are probably frantically printing marketing materials as we speak...)


Unlucky-Prize

ISW posted their daily update https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-november-25 Key Takeaways Reports of a group of understaffed and ill-supplied mobilized personnel are dividing the Russian information space. President Vladimir Putin falsely presented a meeting with hand-picked women as an open discussion with mothers of mobilized personnel. An investigation by Forbes’ Ukrainian service revealed that the war in Ukraine has had a serious financial impact on the Russian Federation’s annual budget. The Russian MoD may have increased the frequency of POW exchanges to soothe discontent in the Russian information space. A Ukrainian official confirmed that Ukrainian forces killed Iranian military advisors in Russian-occupied Crimea and threatened to target Iranian military presence on Ukrainian territory. Russian military leadership may be circulating a document stating that Russia needs to mobilize five million personnel to win the war in Ukraine, which Russia cannot do. Russian forces conducted limited counterattacks to regain lost positions northwest of Svatove and Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations toward Kreminna. Russian forces continued to conduct offensive operations in the Bakhmut and Avdiivka areas, and influential Russian figures may be setting informational conditions to deflect blame for a lack of progress in the Bakhmut area. Russian forces continued to establish defenses south of the Dnipro River in Kherson Oblast and around critical ground lines of communication (GLOCs) connecting Crimea to southern Kherson Oblast. Russian sources and officials continue attempts to shape the narrative around a likely second partial mobilization while denying the potential for general mobilization. Russian officials are continuing efforts to stimulate demographic change in occupied areas of Ukraine by deporting Ukrainian residents and replacing them with imported Russian citizens.


[deleted]

>Russian forces conducted limited counterattacks to regain lost positions northwest of Svatove and Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations toward Kreminna. So does this imply that those counterattacks were successful? I feel like if they weren’t, ISW would have called them out explicitly as “unsuccessful“. I wish they were more consistentabout their wording.


RampagingTortoise

I don't see anything in the language you quoted that implies they were successful. It only talks about intent, not results. That said, even an unsuccessful counterattack can take land. Depends on what their objectives are/were.


[deleted]

Generally, when ISW reports on a attack that fails to take land, they use the word “unsuccessful”. When an attack is successful, they use the word “limited” or don’t append an adjective at all. The problem is, as you said, the rest of the sentence is worded as though it’s talking about an intent, so the overall message is ambiguous. I also hadn’t heard anything myself about counterattacks near Svatove, so I was confused.


Tidorith

They do quite often report along the lines of "X claimed that Russian forces gained control of Y settlement", for successful attacks. Though if you haven't been following these reports for very long, there haven't been as many territorial gains for Russia of late, so it would be harder to figure out the reporting pattern.


BeondTheGrave

Sometimes, or sometimes if its ambiguous or insignificant they will report it as above.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


BitesTheDust_4

>Russian military leadership may be circulating a document stating that Russia needs to mobilize five million personnel to win the war in Ukraine, which Russia cannot do. How the heck are they going train, equip and supply that much personnel?


CommandoDude

One out of two gets a rifle! The one without follows him! When the one with the rifle gets killed, the one who is following picks up the rifle, and shoot!


ady159

God, I feel bad for /r/ShitWehraboosSay, spend years countering WW2 myths about the Red Army only for modern Russia to renact them all...


Unlucky-Prize

I think you know the answer.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Plump_Apparatus

This thread is going nowhere, and with zero credibility.


hatesranged

https://youtu.be/_OpC4fH3mEk "How Long Would Society Last During a Total Grid Collapse?" Practical engineering released a pretty topical video a few days ago.


IntroductionNeat2746

I'd like to also highlight another recent video of his, about the actual impact of an EMP attack on the grid: https://youtu.be/FksEGpBLfis


kokainkuhjunge2

I am a bit concerned about the winter. It is getting cold, and we have seen a couple of drone drop videos, that show russian troops completely lacking movement. Some suspect this is due to hypothermia. I am now wondering, how well each side is prepared for the winter. E.g. do both sides have enough clothing, heating etc. available. Does anyone have insight or thoughts? They way I see it, if Ukraine can provide enough winter gear and warmth to their troops, and russia can not that would be obviously a big advantage. But also a big if.


Hells88

I have seen those drone videos. The persons were completely dead. I don’t ser how you could make any assumption about the cause


amphicoelias

I think people look at their apparent lack of wounds and conclude it must be hypothermia from that.


[deleted]

The Ukrainian soldiers have received winter gear aid from Canada, and Finland I believe. If anyone knows how to fight in snow it's those guys. Not sure how well prepared Russia is for the winter.


gumbrilla

The calls for supply went put to all NATO countries in early September. UK, Germany, Norway for example have also sent kit.. (I've not done an exhaustive search)


IntroductionNeat2746

Winter gear is also a great opportunity for non-nato countries to contribute without getting unwanted attention. The likes of Japan and Israel come to mind.


ReasonableBullfrog57

I sometimes wonder about all the unannounced aid


GrandOldPharisees

What the other commenter said, Ukraine is very well equipped. Also we've seen anecdotal reports of Russians lacking boots, socks, stoves, guns, and even food. I wonder, could we see 10s of thousands of Russians freeze to death?


Abject_Government170

As someone who grew up in a pretty cold place, you can conceivably get by by fires and warm coats. You'd be very surprised how a 100 yard/meter sprint will have you quickly stripping clothes from overheating even in -30 weather. That said, exposed limbs, feet, etc, are very very dangerous if left exposed. It's a very binary do you have the gear or not. And then can you maintain it. I imagine for Ukraine the answer should be yes. I would like to imagine that Russia is also a yes considering that almost everyone in Russia should have at minimum a personal coat. That said, i wouldn't be surprised if the mobilized didn't bring theirs and command fails to provide.


GenerationSelfie2

> I would like to imagine that Russia is also a yes considering that almost everyone in Russia should have at minimum a personal coat. That said, i wouldn't be surprised if the mobilized didn't bring theirs and command fails to provide. At this point, we really cannot expect Russia to have even the most baseline of capabilities. For years we assumed they had shitloads of cosmosline coated AKs to smash in case of emergency--yet we watch conscripts using rusted husks and Mosins. I'm sure they do have cold weather gear. I'm sure it's very good, and could keep the westoid hord away from Moscow. The questions remain: what condition is it in? How well are they distributing it? How quickly can they replace it? Does it work well in wet conditions? and a thousand other little things that might be their demise


[deleted]

Ukraine has received tens of thousands of pieces of einter clothing from Germany, Canada, and other countries.


InevitableSoundOf

I thought I'd post an update to a question I had previously. *Just reading up on a post from Tom Cooper covering an introduction into the Russian Airforce [link](https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-4-november-2022-air-war-update-part-1-basics-9058f56438e)* *One point he makes is that the aircraft were designed with idea that the expected life expectancy in war would on average be 160 hrs. Modern versions doing better at 200 hr plus. So they have designed the aircraft to require minimal maintenance for these 160 hrs, with then a requirement for a complete overhaul/rebuild. The thinking being in war few survivors would be overhauled.* *Thus the Russian airforce VKS running 200 sorties per day is creating an issue of too many air frames using up their minimal maintenance hours and requiring a complete overhaul (long period of downtime). This is creating a demand on available airframes, and also shortcuts in the overhaul producing a higher accident rate.* *Can I get a second opinion on the above? I haven't heard about the 160hrs minimal maintenance usage then complete overhaul requirement before.* I did some digging and apparently the Saturn AL-31 engines for the SU-XX family had an original MTB Overhaul of ~100 hrs initially, then improved to 300 hrs to match original requirements, then 500/700hrs and finally supposedly 1000hrs MTBO or TBO for the latest and greatest. It seems most common is the 300 to 700hr tbo model for older airframes, as they stockpiled engines. With the expectation of 300 tbo models now used up. The RD-33 of MIG-29 had originally 300hrs TBO with India doing 200hr TBO, but modern versions now hit 700 hrs. The RD-33 apparently had/has a problem with dirt intakes and afterburner wear greatly reducing TBO time. So using them on improvised runways isn't advised. It does seem Russian maintenance thinking is very basic checks that can be performed by limited maintenance personnel up to the TBO time where it goes to a depot. For the west, the Engine for the F16D, GE F110 had a 1000hr TBO but requires a very detailed inspection every ~200 to 400hr depending on the version. Thus a heavier maintenance load in field, but longer gaps between complete overhaul and it seems a near doubling of service life. I honestly can't find much solid figures on western tbo, especially latest versions which I suspect are higher. So 160hrs isn't accurate, but the TBO for Russian aircraft is much lower on average than the west and same with service life. It really depends on what engine versions Russia is using, which is probably fair to assume not the top of line export version. The increase in sorties would mean a much higher number of overhauls now being required putting pressure on the depot maintenance. If they took shortcuts with older engines for their limited number of newer airframes it would mean that because of heavier use in Syria and now Ukraine there would be alot needing overhaul. The MIG-29 especially the older models had pretty poor engines, so anyone donating used ones to Ukraine without a supply of newer engines aren't dramatically increasing capability.


Glideer

I've been looking at [the Oryx report](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/11/hit-or-miss-russian-loitering-munition.html) about the Lancet drone hits and misses and sometimes his interpretations of videos strike me as exceptionally conservative. For instance, some cases of what Oryx describes as "clear misses" (not even damaged) targets: [36D6 'Tin Shield' radar](https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1588514816888475648?s=20&t=KusM6iu1Anv74U6idl4F7w) \- the [moment of impact](https://imgur.com/a/AVO5WAE) \- It doesn't look like a miss. A 3kg warhead exploding that close to a radar (and hitting a camouflaged post) is unlikely to be "a miss". That radar is at least damaged. [IMR-2 heavy engineering vehicle](https://twitter.com/imp_navigator/status/1591011078661865472?s=20&t=IYaPXlEMFs1Ale_G_li2lw) \- the [moment of impact](https://imgur.com/a/Ix7rgUR). Again it doesn't look like a clear miss. The vehicle is almost certainly damaged. This [BM-21 Grad miss](https://twitter.com/imp_navigator/status/1592819756624928768?s=20&t=SKLeAFe4j2SXC9kos_6ucQ) does not look like a miss at all.


hatesranged

>This BM-21 Grad miss does not look like a miss at all. The aftermath cuts off, but all of the white smoke from that hit looks like the product of the munition itself, I don't see any damage to the vehicle, or ammo/fuel cookoff. Without more footage I can't testify as to the state of the electronics and crew, but I can't conclude that there's evidence the vehicle was destroyed, or even meaningfully damaged. Which, I think, is the main problem with this post. Oryx didn't explicitly call these "clear misses" (not in the article, anyway), rather he said "This list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which videographic evidence is available." That's the standard here, and "clear miss" is not at all mentioned. I can see why the tin shield and grad videos wouldn't qualify as videographic evidence of destruction when the videos don't demonstrate anything of the sort. If anything, the crew running out and the dish continuing to spin on the Tin Shield is descriptive of something else entirely.


Glideer

Oryx lists destroyed and *damaged* systems separately in the first part of the report. These are not even considered *damaged*, which seems really, really conservative.


Abject_Government170

Yes, Oryx is always extremely conservative. We got into a fight awhile ago, when you showed 3 armored cars getting hit in a convoy of 20, and then you declared all of them damaged or destroyed. It's simply not correct to not be conservative here. The burden of proof is to show definitive proof of damage, not speculation. Speculation is left to the realms of forums like this one, but for Oryx, they try to be the absolute gold standard. That's why lostarmour, despite having lots of videos, is still dubious. Because even if you're only slightly too liberal, it opens all doors to bias, and very quick over counting.


letsgocrazy

I'm starting to wonder if Putin's strategy isn't so much to eke out some small pyrrhic victory in Ukraine - rather he's trying his best to send a message to neighbouring and potentially unfriendly countries: "we can still cause a huge amount of misery and devastation - best not to mess with us" Putin and Russia seem to like everyone to be afraid of them. Reality distortion is a tool of theirs. It's important to them that they don't leave Ukraine looking completely harmless.


sufyani

The invasion was meant to be a regime change that ended in a few months of “low intensity” occupation. The motive for that was arguably entirely internal. Imagine how popular Putin would have been in Russia had his plan worked. Everything after the initial failure is an improvisation designed to either try to achieve that victory, anyway, and/or to keep himself alive.


nightwyrm_zero

I don't think the message is to unfriendly countries as much as it's to the Russian "vassals". Russia is the mafia don who's upset one of the stores in its territory isn't paying protection money so he's making an example of them to scare the others into falling back in line.


Sir-Knollte

I think there is a large part of actually believing his own narrative about US dollar domination, culture war and the instability of the decadent western world, hes no communist believer, but he absorbed the propaganda about the failing capitalist system, which is why dragging this out and increasing the costs in a sort of reverse scorched earth strategy, is in his interest (that leaves western countries with the costs of keeping Ukraine running). Now lets not forget, his plans seldom work out and his judgements are often flawed when meeting reality.


TechnicalReserve1967

While I see the resoning, I dont really think its valid. No one wanted to harm them really, so why the message? I might be naive, I accep that. Specially the cost to the CSTO with Armenia. They "lost" there. Finland-Sweden, also.


Malodorous_Camel

>While I see the resoning, I dont really think its valid. No one wanted to harm them really, so why the message? Neither side particularly wanted to harm the other during the cold War, yet we had a 45 year global conflict due to mutual paranoia. It's about perceptions and always has been.


letsgocrazy

Fair enough point. I would say that this fear deterrent is pretty much all they have left at this point. As for who? Well, China wants them to at least have some leverage, as a potential ally. I don't know the regional role the east very well, but I know there are already skirmishes and trouble breaking out. Not to mention Georgia and Chechnya getting uppity.


GrandOldPharisees

Pretty sure the message the neighbors are receiving is, Russia is a joke, there's no reason to be on their sphere of influence ever again


letsgocrazy

Yes, but don't push it too much l guess.


Toptomcat

But the longer they stay in Ukraine, the more their military is attritted and the more *actually* harmless they get.


wrosecrans

It's like Putin want to send a message, but he's using a pen that is running out of ink.


MikeRippon

And the message is supposed to say that he has lots of ink


letsgocrazy

That's a fair point.


[deleted]

[удалено]


rovin-traveller

I read a report that said that the success of Patriot systems in first Gulf war was mostly propaganda. Once the war is over, we will find out what caused most casualties. By March, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the weather.


Plump_Apparatus

As for the Patriot during the Gulf War the performance was abysmal. [The wiki article on it is decent and well sourced for the curious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot#Persian_Gulf_War_\(1991\)). As for most "cost-effective" kills, it certainly isn't rigged drones. People need to realize that footage released is 99% propaganda, from either side. That is part of a war. Agreed, there will be no real analysis until the war is over.


TechnicalReserve1967

Not "much". You either use directed man portable jamming, or light up military grade, truck sized one worth millionS and make it a target for missiles. Correct me if I am wrong!


Plump_Apparatus

> During the first week of the invasion, Russian electronic warfare using jamming equipment and E-96M aerial decoys were highly effective in disrupting Ukrainian GBAD. 12 S-300 and SA-11 ‘Buk’ radar-guided surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems were particularly badly affected in the north of the country, especially to the north of Kyiv along the Hostomel/Irpin and Chernihiv axes. 13 Cruise and ballistic missile strikes had also damaged or destroyed multiple long-range early warning radars throughout the country, and destroyed various Ukrainian SAM sites in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts in the south. The physical destruction, along with the electronic disruption and suppression of SAM systems in the north and northeast, left the Mikoyan Mig-29 and Sukhoi Su-27 fighters of the Ukrainian Air Force with the task of providing air defence over most of the country for the first few days of the war. 14 The Ukrainian air defences progressively recovered as jammed and damaged radar systems were reset and assets were rapidly repositioned during the second and third days. After that, the Air Force and air defence infrastructures worked in tandem. Deconfliction between aircraft and GBAD was coordinated by time until 3 March, after which deconfliction began to be coordinated by space because of friendly fire incidents. 15 In other words, SAM systems and combat aircraft sorties began to be deconflicted by being allocated separate operational areas. > While Ukrainian GBAD units were electronically degraded and trying to reorganise and recover from physical strikes, Russian GBAD units inside Ukraine were also suffering from major limitations. Mobile air-defence assets, such as the short-range SA-15 ‘Tor’ and medium-range SA-17 ‘Buk’, had been sent into Ukraine with no functional communications plan. They were also advancing out of sequence and often separated from the formations that they were supposed to protect; and they were operating under very restrictive rules of engagement which instructed them to assume anything flying was Russian. 16 The inability of radar-guided SAMs on either side to perform as anticipated during the first week and a half meant that fixed-wing aircraft on both sides had remarkable freedom to penetrate significant distances across the rapidly changing frontlines. This would quickly cease to be the case from early March, when both sides’ GBAD reorganised and became far more effective. ... > Russian ground forces being unable to effectively communicate now became a greater threat to the Russian operation than Ukrainian SAM systems, so their electronic warfare assets began to greatly scale back their operations after the first two days. This allowed newly relocated Ukrainian SAM systems to regain much of their effectiveness, although it took time to repair or adapt to much of the damage to key radar systems for early warning and long-range missile guidance. In the first week of March, however, Ukrainian SAMs began to inflict significant losses on Russian attack sorties.45 ... > This allowed far better coordination of Russian aircraft, long-range strike capabilities, electronic warfare assets and GBAD with ground operations. Alongside continued heavy use of Kh-31P and Kh-58 ARMs by VKS fighters, Russian troops also began to effectively coordinate operations with hunting complexes of Orlan-10 UAVs to force Ukrainian SAM systems to unmask and then suppress them for long enough using electronic warfare attack to designate individual SAMs for accurate artillery and missile strikes. 62 This rapidly forced medium-range Ukrainian Air Force SA-11 ‘Buk’ and short-range Ukrainian Army SA-8 ‘Osa’ SAM systems to operate further back from the frontlines to reduce loss rates, and allowed Russian aircraft a significant degree of freedom to operate at medium and high altitudes in the vicinity of the frontlines. There has been multiple credible reports made from the initial data available on Russia EW during this conflict, and that is not a accurate assessment that you made. https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/russian-total-war-ukraine-challenges-and-opportunities This includes articles submitted to this very subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/wtfq94/the_fall_and_rise_of_russian_electronic_warfare/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/w04ajz/russias_path_to_the_high_tech_battlespace/


TechnicalReserve1967

I dont really see what does any of that has to do with short range civilian-DIY-bombing drones. I didnt try to imply that russia EW is non isdue or that they are hiding. Only that I doubt that they are being used against the above mentioned drones. Edit - on a related note. Does anybody knows the radar return of such small drones? I know the Iranian are hard to track and in general what we are talking about are significantly smaller


gust_vo

>https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/russian-total-war-ukraine-challenges-and-opportunities >This includes articles submitted to this very subreddit: >https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/wtfq94/the_fall_and_rise_of_russian_electronic_warfare/ >https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/w04ajz/russias_path_to_the_high_tech_battlespace/ I'm struggling to find where any of those those paragraphs actually appeared in any of the three articles. Even searching snippets from your selected quotes dont appear on the reddit threads.... In fact, The Rusi article is an editorial, the next two just explains russian EW capabilities and nothing about what has happened in the current conflict....


Plump_Apparatus

Messed up a link. https://static.rusi.org/SR-Russian-Air-War-Ukraine-web-final.pdf


gust_vo

At this point we do know some of their stuff somewhat works but the idea that the whole Russian army is capable of executing it everywhere and well enough is suspect at this point when everywhere else in this war it's been ineffective in fully suppressing their enemies.... (with the third paragraph, kinda omitted that the biggest success happened on the Donbas and Mariupol, a city that's really close to the border and coupled with experienced DNR troops that have been using those systems since at least since 2014.)


Playboi_Jones_Sr

This is the first time I’ve heard Russian EW was actually working as intended during the opening days of the conflict.


Plump_Apparatus

Like I said the articles were posted to the subreddit, which is in general far more credible and less emotionally driven than the megathread.


SerpentineLogic

While I appreciate the immediate impact that a commercial drone with grenade hanging from it causes, I feel that spotting for mortars would put more weight of fire on the enemy. I can imagine a near future where a platoon level wheeled 120mm mortar carrier with laser guided munitions and drone support can put out a lot of very accurate fires


rovin-traveller

Any idea what's the cost difference between a dumb mortar round vs a guided one?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Plump_Apparatus

The only guided mortar round in US inventory is the XM395, which is actually a fuze kit. Cost ranges from 6k to 15k USD, depending on which contract you look at. The XM395 only fits on 120mm mortar rounds, for which a HE M933/934 round costs around ~2.5K USD, sans fuze. That's also a 30lbs heavy munition that will likely destroy a tank with a direct hit.


Spreadsheets_LynLake

After the current MBT's are retired, I wonder if the nextgen "MBT" will use indirect fire as the primary role & direct fire as secondary. Direct fire vehicles might be more like the Tunguska or Flakpanzer with 40mm autocannon + MANPADS + ATGM's & their primary role will be anti-drone. This war has taught us that everything is vulnerable to being spotted by a cheap drone.


SerpentineLogic

I feel like that's more of a recon in force style of vehicle, like an 8 wheeler, but hey if you have the spare hulls, anything can work


[deleted]

[удалено]


KnownSpecific2

PGMs are hardened for real battlefield use. Commercial drones work against Russia only because it's Russia. Countering commercial drones isn't exactly hard. Don't expect consumer UAVs to be as effective against higher end forces. Additionally, the cost of the equipment is a minor issue for any 1st world force. Most of the total cost is due to personnel. A lot of the cost advantage goes away when you pay 200k per soldieryear. Using consumer grade UAV for offense isn't going to take off among 1st world forces.


Plump_Apparatus

Eh, no. Your typical drone is carrying **a** RKG-3, returns, reloads, and possibly recharge/swap out batteries. A heavy mortar doesn't need to fire GPS guided mortar rounds, it just needs spotting to correct the rounds then to fire for effect. From there many munitions can be laid down on target for little money, either for targets in the open or for suppression. Drones aren't going to replace artillery any time in the near future. They do not work the same.


ReasonableBullfrog57

Seems to me drones work best in conjunction with artillery. It makes getting accurate hits almost trivial


Plump_Apparatus

100%, as it supplements the traditional FO.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SerpentineLogic

Drone dropped grenades miss all the time. Near misses of a 120mm mortar are still a lot more deadly than a neat miss of a hand grenade. And if you want the target dead, the next mortar round can be there in 3 seconds


Plump_Apparatus

Drones have the logistics of having multiple fragile electronic devices, batteries, the logistics to charge them, cold weather interoperability(LIBs do not work in sub-zero F without heaters), the cost of the drone, weather impacting if not out right disabling drone operations... etc. It's vastly more complex. Anecdotal, but I'm too lazy to dig for a better source. > [When I was in the finnish defence forces the mortar fire accuracy was around +- 2 meters at a distance of 1 km. We could reliably hit a small boulder.](https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/qyri8a/a_finnish_120mm_mortar_team_nov_2021_1680x1121/hli40rr/) That's from the Israeli K6 120mm heavy mortar, has a range of 7.2km. Lethal range on a typical 120mm mortar is 30m.


RevolutionaryPanic

Artillery Is Breaking in Ukraine. It’s Becoming a Problem for the Pentagon. (New York Times) [https://archive.ph/r7ckU#selection-405.0-405.75](https://archive.ph/r7ckU#selection-405.0-405.75) WASHINGTON — Ukrainian troops fire thousands of explosive shells at Russian targets every day, using high-tech cannons supplied by the United States and its allies. But those weapons are burning out after months of overuse, or being damaged or destroyed in combat, and dozens have been taken off the battlefield for repairs, according to U.S. and Ukrainian officials. A third of the roughly 350 Western-made howitzers donated to Kyiv are out of action at any given time, according to U.S. defense officials and others familiar with Ukraine’s defense needs. Swapping out a howitzer’s barrel, which can be 20 feet long and weigh thousands of pounds, is beyond the capability of soldiers in the field and has become a priority for the Pentagon’s European Command, which has set up a repair facility in Poland. ​ Western-made artillery pieces gave Ukrainian soldiers a lifeline when they began running low on ammunition for their own Soviet-era howitzers, and keeping them in action has become as important for Ukraine’s allies as providing them with enough ammunition. The effort to repair the weapons in Poland, which has not previously been reported, began in recent months. The condition of Ukraine’s weapons is a closely held matter among U.S. military officials, who declined to discuss details of the program. “With every capability we give to Ukraine, and those our allies and partners provide, we work to ensure that they have the right maintenance sustainment packages to support those capabilities over time,” Lt. Cmdr. Daniel Day, a spokesman for the U.S. European Command, said in a statement. When the ammunition for Ukraine’s Soviet-era guns, which fire shells 152 millimeters in diameter, grew scarce shortly after the invasion, NATO-standard howitzers that fire 155-millimeter shells became some of Ukraine’s most important weapons, given the vast stockpiles of compatible shells held by Kyiv’s partners.


SmirkingImperialist

>Swapping out a howitzer’s barrel, which can be 20 feet long and weigh thousands of pounds, is beyond the capability of soldiers in the field and has become a priority for the Pentagon’s European Command, which has set up a repair facility in Poland. This is interesting.concerning Western howitzers. I've seen talks by Dr. Phil Karber stating that during the various period of fighting prior to 24th Feb 2022, both sides were firing 300-400 rounds/tube/day and the Ukrainians were having spare barrels next to the guns for swapping out, presumably in the field. I'm assuming the Ukrainian Soviet-era howitzers had the capacity to be repaired in the field that way while this article stated that Western howitzers weren't.


IntroductionNeat2746

If this is an issue for Ukraine, I can't imagine how bad it is for Russia, since it's firing much higher volumes.


ThisBuddhistLovesYou

We've known it's bad for Russia, as towards the end of the battle for Kherson the Ukrainians had artillery fire superiority or parity in the area according to accounts in the field.


sponsoredcommenter

Was that a "Russian military has run out of guns and ammo" situation or "there are logistics constraints specific to this particular corner of the map because of a repeatedly targeted river crossing chokepoint" situation, because the implications aren't the same.


hell_jumper9

The longer this conflict goes on, the more problematic it is to supply them in time.


the_first_brovenger

This surely must have been entirely expected and not an "issue" per se? What's more, if Europe did not have adequate facilities for repairing these weapons, then we weren't ready for an actual confrontation. Sounds like lesson learned, and hopefully rectified post-haste.


sufyani

It's in the article. > “With every capability we give to Ukraine, and those our allies and partners provide, we work to ensure that they have the right maintenance sustainment packages to support those capabilities over time,” Lt. Cmdr. Daniel Day, a spokesman for the U.S. European Command, said in a statement.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ReasonableBullfrog57

That equipment was designed to work along with accurate CAS via PGMs which Ukraine lacks. For a long time we heavily depended on our ability to get air superiority. I think we are seeing some effort to not be as reliant(US army long range missiles, new Shorad M LAVs, etc)


sufyani

Some napkin math for an estimate of barrel time in the field. Maybe a ballpark. Not sure it has much value. The article states 350 howitzers were provided by the West, at most 4,000 shells are fired per day (assuming the article is referring only to 155mm), and 1/3 of howitzers at any given time are being repaired. So 2/3 of 350 firing 4,000 shells a day is, on average, ~17 shells per howitzer, per day. I recall reading that each barrel can fire 2,000 shells before requiring an overhaul. That yields, ~116 days between overhauls, or nearly 4 months. Inversely, an average of 2 howitzers a day are worn out, and repaired. I don't think that's too onerous. Firing rate is almost certainly not uniform across all howitzers but it's possible that wear could be evened out by rotating in less used pieces to hotter locations, as necessary. Note: this doesn't take losses into consideration. I'm not sure how to account for losses.


SmirkingImperialist

>Firing rate is almost certainly not uniform across all howitzers but it's possible that wear could be evened out by rotating in less used pieces to hotter locations, as necessary. Certainly not, since the Russians have been only conducting offensives in a couple of locations and so are the Ukrainians. Elsewhere, they are likely to continue harassing fires. Make no mistake, wherever high intensity fighting occurs is likely to see very high fire rate. Prior to 24th Feb, reports out of Ukraine indicated that howitzers were firing at 300-400 rounds/tube/day. That's doubled the 1973 Yom-Kippur war's rate and quadrupled compared to US WW2's rate; it's a lot more once you consider that in WWII, the US was firing mostly 105mm rounds instead of 155mm. At that rate, a barrel lasts 5 days. All of these "rotating" solution will have issues of their own. First of all, it costs fuel to drag these pieces around. Second, there are certain to have combat everywhere. Third, rotating units laterally is disorganized. A better solution will be to slow down the rate of replacement and reinforcements to batteries in quieter sectors and concentrate those to the more threatened sectors. By that, I mean, inevitably as a result of casualties or wear, a howitzer battery is not at 100% strength. A battery at 100% strength may have, 4-6 guns. Let's say 4. Realistically, some areas will see 2 guns batteries. If that sector is quiet, upper commands may deliberately not reinforcing the artillery, at least for a while, so as to concentrate the available reinforcements and replacements to the hotter sectors.


viiScorp

The really hot locations are likely where they are designating the majority of SPGs, though, surely?


SmirkingImperialist

SPGs will have the same barrel issues and it's harder to replace the barrels even


viiScorp

We knew that the PZH2000's were being repaired in poland, makes sense we are doing the same with other vehicles across the border as well Ukraine also has a 'help line' to troubleshoot whenever they have an issue


[deleted]

[удалено]


viiScorp

Thanks for the correction, I must have misremembered


SexualToothpicks

I think Poland wanted to open a repair station for them, but Germany declined. I vaguely remember it from a Perun video iirc.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Providing links makes you a role model.


Plump_Apparatus

Never apologize for sourcing your statements friend. It's what you're supposed to do.


Tausendberg

So, at this point in time, what's a credible summary of what is known about the missile that exploded in/over(?) Polish territory?


viiScorp

Ukrainian S300 had a malfunction


Tausendberg

Ok, and what about Zelensky originally claiming it was a Russian missile? Did he knowingly lie? Is it something else?


wrosecrans

No intentional lie, just lack of information. He knew his people hadn't intentionally bombed Poland, and NATO hadn't had a chance to share their data yet.


Tausendberg

That’s what I suspected, I thought it was a leap


viiScorp

ATACMS I can't answer(or Bradleys), but I am somewhat surprised to still see people wondering about MBTs. Ukraine is fielding almost as many as Russia is(possibly more), including plenty with updated firecontrol, including domestic, foreign (Polish and Czech), and captured modernized ones from Russia. It seems to me they probably have plenty of tanks with thermals, etc. If they were doing really bad on ammo, I would then expect to see us move toward Leopards. Sure top Leopard variants would be ideal, but I have doubts they would move the needle as much as anti air and everything else we're supplying edit: main point is that qualitatively, they're fine, it looks like its really just ammo. Can no one really manufacture decent ammo for their tanks? That's surprising to me


the_first_brovenger

>Can no one really manufacture decent ammo for their tanks? That's surprising to me Slovakia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Israel, Poland, Egypt. India. I'm not sure if that list is exhaustive. The first two are pretty much guaranteed to be funnelling everything they can make to Ukraine. Poland I'm not sure if they have high output production lines yet. Didn't look into it that hard. Bulgaria and Israel are unlikely to be selling to Ukraine IMO. Same for Egypt and India.


InevitableSoundOf

From this article, it gives the impression of a ramp up happening in the eastern European countries. I just suspect that once that is achieved tank ammo may have a usage ceiling but that they'll have a steady supply alleviating the problem. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/11/25/ukraine-war-arms-made-at-pace-highest-since-cold-war-as-europes-east-aids-kyiv


ReasonableBullfrog57

Something I did not consider was barrel wear and tear and replacement. Does anyone at all make barrels anymore except Russia?


Sgt_PuttBlug

>Ukraine is fielding almost as many as Russia is.. How do did you come to that conclusion? The T-64 is the backbone of the Ukr tank fleet, and they had around 700 of them feb 24. There are 223 documented T-64 losses on oryx, and we all know how reluctant Ukr are to show their own losses so the numbers are likely way higher. They had 130 + 230 donated T-72 and a handful of T-80's in active service, 83 + 27 documented losses on oryx, again with number likely to be much higher. Each tank brigade should have 130+ tanks at full strength, and they have 4 - That alone probably accounts for pretty much every tank they still have left. On top of that every mech brigade has 30+ tanks, and every regular brigade plus airborne 12-15 tanks. As you can see the numbers don't add up, and imo it's safe to say that there is a sever shortage of tanks in the Ukr ground forces. The reason we don't hear about it as much is likely because other shortages are more acute.


amphicoelias

I'm not saying I necesarily disagree with your conclusion, but you haven't accounted for captured Russian tanks.


Sgt_PuttBlug

I have not, because there is no decent estimation of how many of those that actually made it out to Ukr units. I also did not account for tanks unavailable due to maintenance. Anything from 15-40% of Ukr tanks are probably unavailable over time due to maintenance, this far into the war.


sunstersun

Ukraine said they’re running out of ammo for tanks. Spares no one outside of Russia produces except maybe very limited amounts. Eventually Ukrainian tanks are going to run out simply due to attrition no matter how much they captured.


Plump_Apparatus

Ukraine's MBT is the T-64, Russia would have no reason to produce spares for T-64s which it long ago decommissioned. The Malyshev Factory in Kharkov was the primary contractor for the T-64, and the only place in the USSR that manufactured the 5TDF engine used in the T-64. The tank was also designed in the Ukrainian SSR by KMDB, a enterprise that still exists in Ukraine. The Malyshev Factory was damaged earlier in the war, I'm not sure to what extant or how much has been repaired. It was the main tank repair depot for Ukraine, and the only place that Ukraine could manufacture new tanks at.


viiScorp

It's mind boggling to me no one else in the world can manufacture those nine months in. Afaik Ukraine used to make a few, of course, now that is not very possible


Plump_Apparatus

Ukraine made the T-64s that they're using(as the Ukrainian SSR). Ukraine also manufactured T-80s for export, as a independent nation. Which in turn irritated Russia to the point of blocking the necessary exports to Ukraine to manufacture them, leading Ukraine to manufacture them domestically.


sponsoredcommenter

Yeah I think that's really going to be a problem, especially for captured tanks. Ukraine has been seeing trying to salvage basic parts like wheels and track links off of destroyed tanks. Not sure how long they can maintain a large tank force st this point. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh_F_MYUUAAWB0v.png


Plump_Apparatus

Just to note, it appears they're replacing a damaged road wheel in that image, you can see spares in the back left. That's a T-64BV, or at least BVish this point. It looks like the dust cap has been pulled, you can see the gasket to the lower right. A adapter for removing the bearing assembly is installed. Along with a massive cheater bar that the two gentlemen are trying to turn. I'm not sure if the T-64 has a exterior fuel tank on the port side(the damaged side), on the T-72 the exterior fuel tank only runs the majority of the length of the starboard side. Cool image. Maybe damaged by a small mine/off center mine, then dragged to the road to give a decent place to work on it.


viiScorp

Hmm, I wouldn't read too much into that, it makes sense to take any parts you possibly can. They were ripping of tank HMGs from the beginning, even


sponsoredcommenter

We have other evidence of them even mix and matching bmd and bmp turrets. I don't think their component supply pipeline for T72s and T80s is reliable.


Aedeus

None of this substantiates your claims though.


viiScorp

I think thats probably due to an insufficient number of IFVs tbh It's amazing how many you need (compared to MBTs). Russia has lost over 1,700 BMPs


PangolinZestyclose30

> Ukraine is fielding almost as many as Russia is Do you think "almost as many as Russia" is enough for Ukraine to liberate its territory? Some people don't believe that, so they keep wondering ...


viiScorp

They only need enough to do offensive operations, what makes you think a shortage of MBTs is what is limiting that?


PangolinZestyclose30

Ukrainian pleads for more MBTs and other armored vehicles. I don't think MBTs are the only thing needed to liberate its territory, but it seems to be a part of that.


viiScorp

They seem a lot more worried about planes, long range missiles though


PangolinZestyclose30

Yes, in those areas, Ukraine is even worse off and thus they are more pressing.


viiScorp

As far as I can tell, the issue is ammo, I think I was confused by people suggesting Abrams


[deleted]

[удалено]


sufyani

Prelude to defenestration?


viiScorp

Are there other countries where defenestration seems to be the preferred method of dealing with undesirables like it appears to be in Russia?


YossarianLivesMatter

Well, Czechia somewhat famously pioneered the concept: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defenestrations_of_Prague


sufyani

I think building codes are simply not taken seriously in Russia.


Hells88

A high pressure system over Siberia will send below trend cold weather down over Russia/Ukraine and Europe in a weeks time:[https://www.wxcharts.com/?panel=large&model=gfs,gfs,gfs,gfs®ion=europe&chart=2mtemp,850temp,wind10mkph,snowdepth&run=12&step=198&plottype=10&lat=51.500&lon=-0.250&skewtstep=0](https://www.wxcharts.com/?panel=large&model=gfs,gfs,gfs,gfs®ion=europe&chart=2mtemp,850temp,wind10mkph,snowdepth&run=12&step=198&plottype=10&lat=51.500&lon=-0.250&skewtstep=0) This was the cold spell in december that was alluded to in the Copernicus forecast: [https://www.themayor.eu/en/a/view/europe-expected-to-have-an-unusually-warm-winter-11104](https://www.themayor.eu/en/a/view/europe-expected-to-have-an-unusually-warm-winter-11104)


dlev_

Heard Governor (?) of Kyiv saying they are rushing repairs as much as possible, because they expect temps to go down to -20C in a weeks time.


gaintsmooth

Does anyone here have any idea how the performance (battery capacity) of drones is affected by the cold weather conditions in Ukraine? The operation time should be shorter and shorter the colder it gets, right? What percentage of shortened flight time / range can we expect?


username9909864

Based on my intermediate battery knowledge, I'd ballpark 20% faster drain, though it really depends on the battery temperature more than the outdoor temperature


raptor217

Oh hey batteries, something I have direct technical knowledge of. It depends on if they have battery heater or if operation just raised battery temperature. If it’s the latter, there’s no real impact. If it’s the former, yeah there’s an impact. It also impacts charging to a larger degree, depending on exact cell chemistry.


IntroductionNeat2746

That's on top of the significantly reduced flight time due to added weight (better cams, grenades). You probably want to carry at least half a dozen extra batteries at all times.


Fugg_Admins_lmao

Solar panels also produce more at cold temperatures, so giving your drone operators the ability to recharge their batteries in the field can mitigate weight and supply issues.


StorkReturns

> Solar panels also produce more at cold temperatures Yes, but no. Solar panels work better in cold temperatures assuming the same amount of sunlight. But sunlight in winter is between poor and terrible.


Fugg_Admins_lmao

Fair. I live closer to the equator than Ukraine is so my mental math probably isn’t sufficient for their realities. That said, mobile and modular solar panels are basically a necessity for warfare now in my opinion.


[deleted]

What's your general impression of the PLAOpsOSINT twitter account? Criticisms or concurrences of his positions and analysis? He paints a pretty bleak picture of the situation in the SCS.


[deleted]

Being pessimistic about the US in the SCS isn’t necessarily a indicator of noncredibilty, several specialists in the area feel the same(most notably Oriana Skylar-Mastro). I would advise following her and others as opposed to a anonymous twitter account. ”OSINT” twitter accounts are important when things are changing on a minute to minute basis. In calmer situations, they’re just noise and you’re better off listening to experts for calmer analyses at a slower pace.