Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[atomheartbevo 89,674]

36 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

So send out a 2 craft sortie, launch 4 HARMS in a loitering mode just as you launch a full HIMRS salvo at the target. As soon as the air defense moves from passive to active mode the HARMS lock and hit the radars while the HIMRS then follow in right behind unopposed.

Would be a bit tricky from a timing standpoint, but makes a bit more sense than trying to pull off strike aircraft doing the close-in work with the limited air assets the UK has.

The beauty is that we have plenty of HARM missiles to give them.  Hell, the one that Russia displayed was manufactured in 1991 for F-14 Tomcats.  We’ve got some pretty deep storage if we can give them 30 year old missiles that were meant for fighters that haven’t flown in 15 years.  

[Judge Roybeanbag 11,819]

43 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

The problem is the river. The UK has essentially blanketed the entire river and wiped out all crossings and targeted the various engineering battalions as well. So either they are rushing troops in to reinforce their side of the river or they are going to have to mass them further east and hope they can fidn a crossing at a point that 1, they can actually do it and 2, wont be a disaster.

I'm guessing they are reinforcing "their" side of the river and also to keep existing troops from fleeing further toward Crimea.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

That video of folks just out for a stroll in Kerson is bizarre. Ukrainian babushkas give zero fucks.

[BabaYaga 15,298]

40 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

So send out a 2 craft sortie, launch 4 HARMS in a loitering mode just as you launch a full HIMRS salvo at the target. As soon as the air defense moves from passive to active mode the HARMS lock and hit the radars while the HIMRS then follow in right behind unopposed.

Would be a bit tricky from a timing standpoint, but makes a bit more sense than trying to pull off strike aircraft doing the close-in work with the limited air assets the UK has.

That was what the "Wild Weasel" pilots did in Vietnam.  Hairy game of chicken.  Bombers went in, Vietnamese air defenses lit up, and the weasel pilots got in between the bombers, trying to draw off missiles and destroy the launch pads

[The Dog 44,054]

 

[The Dog 44,054]

 

[Rimbo 25,936]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

That’s kind of where I’m at. Unless Ukraine looks like they are getting into Crimea proper.  Losing Kherson, Putin won’t do shit.

 

Are you kidding? The Russians are winning this war, apparently.

 

[Brisketexan 105,144]

1 hour ago, Scheiss Meister said:

An offensive like this can cut both ways.  If the Russians can stop the Ukrainians and throw them back, they would want to keep the pressure on and counterattack wherever Ukraine is weakest.  Russia could be trying to reinforce to hold, set the situation to allow a withdrawal, or reinforce to throw back the Ukrainians and take the offensive themselves.  If I were in charge of the Russian forces, I would try for going on the counterattack.  With their logistical difficulties, it may be the best option.  See also Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain at Little Round Top during the Battle of Gettysburg.

With the caveat that we don't actually KNOW what's happening on the ground........this seems like the best play for Russia.  If your enemy is coming at you and you need to disrupt him, you don't play defense alone.  The best and most disruptive defense is a counterattack.  Throw everything you've got at the enemy, preferably in the weakest spots where he won't expect it (Battle of the Bulge says "hi").  That said....if you throw everything you've got at them.....and it doesn't work....and now you're out of "stuff" (like artillery rounds).....then the end-game isn't pretty for you.  It's a big gamble.  But it may still be their best play.

[Parliament 14,260]

19 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

The beauty is that we have plenty of HARM missiles to give them.  Hell, the one that Russia displayed was manufactured in 1991 for F-14 Tomcats.  We’ve got some pretty deep storage if we can give them 30 year old missiles that were meant for fighters that haven’t flown in 15 years.  

 

[Brisketexan 105,144]

4 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Are you kidding? The Russians are winning this war, apparently.

 

That treasonous fuckwit needs a foil-tray frozen turkey dinner rammed up his ass sideways, preferably while he's a passenger on a one-way flight dropping his sorry ass in Kherson for a "Putin victory party."

[Chad Fuck 17,683]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

The US Air Force has had MiG-29s for around 25 years, so I’m assuming they’ve had a little help with the “integration”

There's a privately owned Mig-29 that was at Oshkosh this year. 

Once again, communism's weapons are capitalism's play things.

 

[Parliament 14,260]

Do the Russians have any American fighters?

[Brisketexan 105,144]

1 minute ago, Parliament said:

Do the Russians have any American fighters?

Yep.....

[Trey3216 15,346]

15 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Are you kidding? The Russians are winning this war, apparently.

 

[Parliament 14,260]

Guys, there's an entire CR thread for CR talk.  Let's not ruin a good thing.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3,868]

An offensive like this can cut both ways.  If the Russians can stop the Ukrainians and throw them back, they would want to keep the pressure on and counterattack wherever Ukraine is weakest.  Russia could be trying to reinforce to hold, set the situation to allow a withdrawal, or reinforce to throw back the Ukrainians and take the offensive themselves.  If I were in charge of the Russian forces, I would try for going on the counterattack.  With their logistical difficulties, it may be the best option.  See also Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain at Little Round Top during the Battle of Gettysburg.

RU has repeatedly shown the inability to establish river crossings even before HIMARS arrived. The Dnipro at Kherson is about 300 meters wide. RU ain’t going on any offensive beyond the river.

[elfenix 34,243]

2 hours ago, Scheiss Meister said:

Ok, Ukraine.  Time to fuck up some trains.

*south austin's mom has entered the chat*

[Brisketexan 105,144]

2 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

RU has repeatedly shown the inability to establish river crossings. The Dnipro at Kherson is about 300 meters wide. RU ain’t going on any offensive beyond the river.

They've got a large chunk of troops and equipment on the north (UKA) side of the river to use.  In fact, with the river at their back, it may well be a "use em or lose em" situation.  Might as well attack, if you can.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3,868]

They've got a large chunk of troops and equipment on the north (UKA) side of the river to use.  In fact, with the river at their back, it may well be a "use em or lose em" situation.  Might as well attack, if you can.

UKR officers are going to need medical attention after 4 hours at the thought they wouldn’t have to engage 20K RU troops in fortified urban combat.

[Serak The Preparer 3,431]

16 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Guys, there's an entire CR thread for CR talk.  Let's not ruin a good thing.

There is nothing CR about making fun of a Russian mouthpiece for saying Russia is winning this war.

[Brisketexan 105,144]

Just now, Serak The Preparer said:

There is nothing CR about making fun of a Russian mouthpiece for saying Russia is winning this war.

Also correct.  This thread is full of post after post of Russian journalist outfits blathering on with Russian propaganda.  Tucker is no different.  Literally -- no different.  The fact that we have a Russian mouthpiece openly supporting Russia on the country's "most-watched" news channel fits right into this thread.  Sorry if that makes some folks uncomfortable, but what's true is true.

[The Dog 44,054]

18 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Guys, there's an entire CR thread for CR talk.  Let's not ruin a good thing.

agreed in general (that we should stick to news) but he's a vatnik peddling Russian disinformation and deserves to be clowned. 

NAFO will take care of him so let's move on.

[The Dog 44,054]

 

 

[The Dog 44,054]

 

[The Dog 44,054]

 

[Rimbo 25,936]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

That treasonous fuckwit needs a foil-tray frozen turkey dinner rammed up his ass sideways, preferably while he's a passenger on a one-way flight dropping his sorry ass in Kherson for a "Putin victory party."

what do you have against airplanes that you'd put him on one

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[Viper 12,109]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

This move has very Nicholas II energy about it.  In September 1915, Nicholas II sidelined his cousin and took over the role as commander-in-chief of Russian forces.  His problem was that it made him personally responsible for the outcome of the war (which didn't turn out too well).

Well that and he left Alexandra (and by extension Rasputin) in charge back in St. Petersburg. 

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[Fico 1,778]

2 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

So send out a 2 craft sortie, launch 4 HARMS in a loitering mode just as you launch a full HIMRS salvo at the target. As soon as the air defense moves from passive to active mode the HARMS lock and hit the radars while the HIMRS then follow in right behind unopposed.

Would be a bit tricky from a timing standpoint, but makes a bit more sense than trying to pull off strike aircraft doing the close-in work with the limited air assets the UK has.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think we have seen evidence of Russia AD being able to intercept GMLRS? If they could they would have used them to protect the bridges and larger ammo depots that have been hit repeatedly. 

My guess is the HARMs are being used in conjunction with TB-2s and other larger UAVs. Or generally hitting targets of opportunity to keep the Russians moving and radars turned off.

[Rimbo 25,936]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

This move has very Nicholas II energy about it.  In September 1915, Nicholas II sidelined his cousin and took over the role as commander-in-chief of Russian forces.  His problem was that it made him personally responsible for the outcome of the war (which didn't turn out too well).

Putin also has even less military knowledge than the guy he is replacing.

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[Chad Fuck 17,683]

2 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

One false move and ole Luka is getting the Ceaușescu treatment.  

 

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[Chad Fuck 17,683]

2 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

This move has very Nicholas II energy about it.  In September 1915, Nicholas II sidelined his cousin and took over the role as commander-in-chief of Russian forces.  His problem was that it made him personally responsible for the outcome of the war (which didn't turn out too well).

Also reminds me of the chain of command of this other guy with ties to Russia.

[Pescado_Rojo 19,416]

7 minutes ago, Fico said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think we have seen evidence of Russia AD being able to intercept GMLRS? If they could they would have used them to protect the bridges and larger ammo depots that have been hit repeatedly. 

My guess is the HARMs are being used in conjunction with TB-2s and other larger UAVs. Or generally hitting targets of opportunity to keep the Russians moving and radars turned off.

The goal is to get them to turn on their radars and try.

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[Fico 1,778]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

With the caveat that we don't actually KNOW what's happening on the ground........this seems like the best play for Russia.  If your enemy is coming at you and you need to disrupt him, you don't play defense alone.  The best and most disruptive defense is a counterattack.  Throw everything you've got at the enemy, preferably in the weakest spots where he won't expect it (Battle of the Bulge says "hi").  That said....if you throw everything you've got at them.....and it doesn't work....and now you're out of "stuff" (like artillery rounds).....then the end-game isn't pretty for you.  It's a big gamble.  But it may still be their best play.

Agree with you however I'm not sure losing Kherson is when you make that play. Similar to Severodonetsk for the Ukrainians, this looks like bad fight for the Russians. It's the furthest theater from home (and closest for the enemy), vulnerable supply lines, semi encircled, strong enemy air defense over the battlefield, etc. If I was the Russians, I would save the last ditch counter attack for the Donbass. Grated, as a genius once said, "we are lucky the Russians are so stupid."

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

 

 

[BabaYaga 15,298]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

With the caveat that we don't actually KNOW what's happening on the ground........this seems like the best play for Russia.  If your enemy is coming at you and you need to disrupt him, you don't play defense alone.  The best and most disruptive defense is a counterattack.  Throw everything you've got at the enemy, preferably in the weakest spots where he won't expect it (Battle of the Bulge says "hi").  That said....if you throw everything you've got at them.....and it doesn't work....and now you're out of "stuff" (like artillery rounds).....then the end-game isn't pretty for you.  It's a big gamble.  But it may still be their best play.

This was what happened so often in WWI.  Attack and counterattack.  Rinse.  Wash.  Repeat.  Tannenberg.  Ypres.  Galicia.  Cambrai.  The Marne.  The list goes on.  

This is going to turn into a protracted war of attrition as so many opined about early on. 

[MillerEP 30,455]

^Most likely to prevent the IAEA team from getting there.

 

[Fico 1,778]

11 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

The goal is to get them to turn on their radars and try.

Ideally yes but if they are driving around constantly with piss running down leg and not turning the radars on that works too. SEAD vs DEAD. Either way it opens up opportunities for other systems to start doing work on unprotected grunts. 

[MillerEP 30,455]

^😆

[Laxtonto 12,080]

10 minutes ago, Fico said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think we have seen evidence of Russia AD being able to intercept GMLRS? If they could they would have used them to protect the bridges and larger ammo depots that have been hit repeatedly. 

My guess is the HARMs are being used in conjunction with TB-2s and other larger UAVs. Or generally hitting targets of opportunity to keep the Russians moving and radars turned off.

They claim that they can prior to the war, but I have some doubts. Combat testing in the field so far has at best shown that they have not been as effective as claimed, putting it nicely. 

That being said, overlaying multiple systems (which goes back to the larger depot/COC approaches) would have a much more likely chance of doing so, and it’s either do that which is supposed to be state approved doctrine or to pull back farther from the front and face Moscows wrath.

Earlier in the the conflict they tried to set stand alone and/or mobile systems at key bridges with little real effect. That was what brought out the questions about actual operational capability vs. RU claims.

I have my doubts how effective they really can be, but they the other option is essentially to forgo any supply depots that could be reached by HIMARS and admit the loss of tactical control of your ability to resupply. 
 

They can’t not do something, so if the best option is to do hardened multi system overlays to try and protect them, so be it. In doing so, they now force the UKR to adapt with the HARMS.

 

[MillerEP 30,455]

^Occupied Kherson

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[MillerEP 30,455]

 

[The Dog 44,054]

The building in Kherson above that's on fire is a Russian base.

Edited August 30, 2022 by The Dog

[MillerEP 30,455]