Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Schulz2.0 28626]

 

 

[Gatorubet 29538]

3 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

$450,000,000 in today’s replacement dollars… if they could get the parts to build new ones.

[Parliament 13997]

You hate to see it…

But at the same time, you love to see it.

[Schulz2.0 28626]

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/bengal-man-urgen-tamang-duped-into-russian-army-hopes-swift-return-9448678/

[pops 6956]

On 7/15/2024 at 9:59 AM, BamaATL said:

 

Easy come, EZ-GO

[Armybrat 40527]

On 7/15/2024 at 11:59 AM, BamaATL said:

 

That’s par for the course.

[Bevo 13436]

5 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

 

It has been a long time, but do any of y'all remember where the best sniper rifles are being made? It was talked about when we were thinking about sourcing a sniper rifle for Ukraine.

[Parliament 13997]

1 hour ago, Armybrat said:

That’s par for the course.

Would you say it was rough?

[atomheartbevo 88913]

Just now, Parliament said:

Would you say it was rough?

That’s a fair way of putting it.

[Armybrat 40527]

Didn’t see any mulligans either.

[Armybrat 40527]

3 hours ago, Bevo said:

 

It has been a long time, but do any of y'all remember where the best sniper rifles are being made? It was talked about when we were thinking about sourcing a sniper rifle for Ukraine.

You could start here with a basic US made brand in .338 and a good optic will easily double that price, but the Surly experts know their stuff…..

https://www.sportsmans.com/shooting-gear-gun-supplies/rifles/barrett-mrad-gray-bolt-action-rifle-338-lapua-magnum-26in/p/1774584

Edited July 17 by Armybrat

[atomheartbevo 88913]

5 hours ago, Bevo said:

It has been a long time, but do any of y'all remember where the best sniper rifles are being made? It was talked about when we were thinking about sourcing a sniper rifle for Ukraine.

Surprisingly, there's not one single make or model that seems to dominate the top rankings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_recorded_sniper_kills#Confirmed_kills_1,250_m_(1,370_yd)_or_greater

[KYHorn 16707]

If anyone can convince him, it's Boris

 

[KYHorn 16707]

They held that way longer than I thought they would

Can't we arrest this piece of shit immediately upon arrival

 

Edited July 17 by KYHorn

[RPM 26090]

[Schulz2.0 28626]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28626]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28626]

The train of T-54s.

[Scheiss Meister 8308]

I think that hitting Chernobyl would cause enough radiation leakage that Europe would have to respond militarily.  That would be very counterproductive for everyone.

[Trey3216 15308]

15 hours ago, Parliament said:

Would you say it was rough?

Watching them fly like an eagle?  The mental anguish from drone strikes has to be an albatross on their mind.

 

 

[Armybrat 40527]

Russia rushing more motorized vehicles by rail to the front…..

 

 

[Gatorubet 29538]

45 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

The train of T-54s.

I assume that these will be used more as artillery than MBTs. 

[Scheiss Meister 8308]

49 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I assume that these will be used more as artillery than MBTs. 

Or their turrets removed and used as ersatz armored infantry transports.

[atomheartbevo 88913]

On Lavrov, a lot of countries had a lot to say about Russia.

https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15766.doc.htm

Statement by UK Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on multilateral cooperation:

“President [Lavrov] while you tell us how you believe the world order can become more just, democratic and sustainable, your military is systematically bombing civilians in Ukraine in an unprovoked war of aggression and in flagrant violation of the UN Charter. What is just about trying to annex another country’s land? What is democratic about trying to subjugate another country’s people? What is sustainable about waging a war that has killed or injured over 500,000 of your own people? The war in Ukraine is a stark reminder of what kind of world order Russia really wants – a world where might is right, and powerful countries can bully and invade other countries with impunity.”

————

Elmo’s Twitter is of course classifying legitimate statements by Western nations as spam while promoting Russian propaganda.

it’s interesting that Lavrov showed up and was prominently asking for certain guarantees and promises, and efforts to “resolve the Ukrainian crisis”.  My guess is that Russia is hurting more than we realize (golf cart brigades and T-54s out front shoulda told ya!) or they are scared shitless of what’s coming (the gradual destruction of their air defenses that they can’t replace fast enough, F-16s, lifting of restrictions on Western weapons).
 

[MissingInAction 24324]

Russia is piss.

[atomheartbevo 88913]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

I assume that these will be used more as artillery than MBTs. 

54 minutes ago, Scheiss Meister said:

Or their turrets removed and used as ersatz armored infantry transports.

I would lean towards transports. I know we’ve seen them used as massed artillery earlier in the war, but using tanks as artillery, especially these tanks is both a sign of desperation (arty tubes wearing out) and a waste of resources.  

I was what you’d call a spotter (13F), and we never really trained for something like that, because you can’t elevate the tank gun high enough, you can’t vary the propellant, and the tank shells were made for direct fire and lack the range of even 105mm arty (maybe a third of their range).  Tank shells are not as powerful (damage-wise) as conventional artillery either. Those things mean that you have a very small engagement zone/target area, not to mention that Russian tankers these days probably are doing good just to get the gun loaded and fired against a target they can see, much less doing the math on elevation and range.

That’s not to say tanks can’t do it, they can as long as they are close enough to the target (but not too close due to limits on gun elevation) and have a spotter with eyes on the target calling in corrections BUT in place of not being able to elevate the barrel or vary the propellant, you’re going to have to constantly move the tank itself, and you could easily waste multiple shells trying to get one on target, and tanks don’t carry a lot of rounds. 

All of that movement is going to waste fuel and draw the attention of drones and given that even our Abrams has an effective range of under two miles, I can’t see a T-54 having anything around that range, even in indirect fire. That puts them awfully close to Javelin range, and definitely within armed drone range, and it could take several minutes for them to hone in on a target, so the drones will have time.

Edited July 17 by atomheartbevo

[RPM 26090]

17 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

Russia is piss.

[InkaUtexas 24932]

17 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I would lean towards transports. I know we’ve seen them used as massed artillery earlier in the war, but using tanks as artillery, especially these tanks is both a sign of desperation (arty tubes wearing out) and a waste of resources.  

I was what you’d call a spotter (13F), and we never really trained for something like that, because you can’t elevate the tank gun high enough, you can’t vary the propellant, and the tank shells were made for direct fire and lack the range of even 105mm arty (maybe a third of their range).  Tank shells are not as powerful (damage-wise) as conventional artillery either. Those things mean that you have a very small engagement zone/target area, not to mention that Russian tankers these days probably are doing good just to get the gun loaded and fired against a target they can see, much less doing the math on elevation and range.

That’s not to say tanks can’t do it, they can as long as they are close enough to the target (but not too close due to limits on gun elevation) and have a spotter with eyes on the target calling in corrections BUT in place of not being able to elevate the barrel or vary the propellant, you’re going to have to constantly move the tank itself, and you could easily waste multiple shells trying to get one on target, and tanks don’t carry a lot of rounds. 

All of that movement is going to waste fuel and draw the attention of drones and given that even our Abrams has an effective range of under two miles, I can’t see a T-54 having anything around that range, even in indirect fire. That puts them awfully close to Javelin range, and definitely within armed drone range, and it could take several minutes for them to hone in on a target, so the drones will have time.

Thus what could go wrong?

But even as transports they are not going to be great. Open top, not that much room (what, gonna remove the engine?), and open to the environment (rain, sun, snow, drones). Plus it must be great for morale. "Well Ivan, my Grandpa said these were great tanks, and he never lied." "OK Marko, i believe you, just hand me the vodka."

[MissingInAction 24324]

The only practical use I see for them is shields for advancing infantry.

[RPM 26090]

Ukraine should target the distilleries.

[RPM 26090]

1 minute ago, MissingInAction said:

The only practical use I see for them is shields for advancing infantry.

Have you seen what those tungsten BBs do to Russian armor? Not to mention anyone unfortunate to be within 50 meters.

[InkaUtexas 24932]

6 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

The only practical use I see for them is shields for advancing infantry.

Nope, cuz driver is drunk and keeps swerving.

Really I think this is a way to pass down cash and keep those factory owners happy. These will not lead to some big break out. The artillery Ukraine has, even if limited, was designed to destroy MODERN Russian armor. The M1's 105 was designed to defeat these.

So there we go, we must have quite a few 105's sitting in armories around the world. Use them in close support? @atomheartbevo  I know the US had a doctrine at one point of mixed 105/155 batteries and we still have 105's in inventory. Thoughts?

[Chad Fuck 17301]

Who knew we could've just kept a bunch of M47s and M48s and sent them up as even matches against the Ruskies in Ukraine, instead of parking them in front of Army base gates around the world?

Lavrov can suck a big fat dick, btw. 

[InkaUtexas 24932]

But I hear Putin has a tiny dick.

OK, can we get that M-4 the asshole aggy has? Just see what it can do?

So what does Russia pull when these are all gone? They must have some T-34's in storage.

 

[Chad Fuck 17301]

6 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

But I hear Putin has a tiny dick.

OK, can we get that M-4 the asshole aggy has? Just see what it can do?

So what does Russia pull when these are all gone? They must have some T-34's in storage.

 

[InkaUtexas 24932]

The tank crew right before loading.

[Trey3216 15308]

13 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

The tank crew right before loading.

Walking Dead: Vuhledar

[elfenix 34075]

11 hours ago, Armybrat said:

Russia rushing more motorized vehicles by rail to the front…..

 

 

You have an artistic eye, did you ever consider becoming a professional photographer?

Edited July 18 by elfenix

[Gatorubet 29538]

1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

Nope, cuz driver is drunk and keeps swerving.

Really I think this is a way to pass down cash and keep those factory owners happy. These will not lead to some big break out. The artillery Ukraine has, even if limited, was designed to destroy MODERN Russian armor. The M1's 105 was designed to defeat these.

So there we go, we must have quite a few 105's sitting in armories around the world. Use them in close support? @atomheartbevo  I know the US had a doctrine at one point of mixed 105/155 batteries and we still have 105's in inventory. Thoughts?

Taiwan has over 400 M 60 tanks.  Many of them have been upgraded to a larger cannon.   I see where we recently agreed to sell over 100 Abrams to Taiwan.   Taiwan should donate 100 working 60s with the 105 cannon  to Ukraine.     After all, it’s not like they will be facing Russia’s most modern main battle tanks anymore.  and if a Russian drone can take a tank out, I’d rather they take out an M-60 than some newer kit.   it’s not like we can guarantee we won’t lose tanks anymore in our brave new world.

I would love to see some M-60s blowing up some T-55 APCs.    

[Chad Fuck 17301]

Taiwan has over 400 M 60 tanks.  Many of them have been upgraded to a larger cannon.   I see where we recently agreed to sell over 100 Abrams to Taiwan.   Taiwan should donate 100 working 60s with the 105 cannon  to Ukraine.     After all, it’s not like they will be facing Russia’s most modern main battle tanks anymore.  and if a Russian drone can take a tank out, I’d rather they take out an M-60 than some newer kit.   it’s not like we can guarantee we won’t lose tanks anymore in our brave new world.
I would love to see some M-60s blowing up some T-55 APCs.    

I wonder how much it costs to operate an M60 vs an M1? I also wonder what the spare parts supply is for M60s?

In any case an interesting idea.

[Gatorubet 29538]

4 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I wonder how much it costs to operate an M60 vs an M1? I also wonder what the spare parts supply is for M60s?.

I have to think if they have 400 of them they have some spare parts too.  Hell, just keep 30 of the 100 for parts.  Plus, countries like Brazil and Greece had some for a long time.  Greece was going to scrap theirs - and had tried to sell some (contingent upon upgrades).  Maybe they already did scrap ‘em

I think Egypt has a bunch still, but they are too Russia friendly to expect them to give tanks to Ukraine.

Don’t get me wrong, it won’t win the war and all, but I would put my money on an M-60 in an M-60 versus golf cart matchup.    

[flatdawgs 1241]

4 hours ago, Scheiss Meister said:

Or their turrets removed and used as ersatz armored infantry transports.

Why do all that turret-removing work, vatniks? I have it on good authority that the Ukrainians can just pop those right off for ya.

[atomheartbevo 88913]

1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

I think Egypt has a bunch still, but they are too Russia friendly to expect them to give tanks to Ukraine.

Russia destabilizing Africa can’t be good for Egypt though.

[Gatorubet 29538]

48 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Russia destabilizing Africa can’t be good for Egypt though.

Man you’d think. It’s hard to keep up with all this nonsense, but I swear I thought that Egypt agreed to help Russia in someway with its missile issues.  But that might be the old-fashioned talking

[The Royal We 3051]

11 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Man you’d think. It’s hard to keep up with all this nonsense, but I swear I thought that Egypt agreed to help Russia in someway with its missile issues.  But that might be the old-fashioned talking

[Chad Fuck 17301]

27 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Man you’d think. It’s hard to keep up with all this nonsense, but I swear I thought that Egypt agreed to help Russia in someway with its missile issues.  But that might be the old-fashioned talking

[Gatorubet 29538]

9 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

[InkaUtexas 24932]

3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Russia destabilizing Africa can’t be good for Egypt though.

Egypt has done fine with a destabilized Africa. The countries that matter to them are the Nile Nations. Sudan is a basket case, and rumors are Russia is switching sides there since the RFA is about to get his with genocide charges.

So watch Ethiopia, Chad (still in our camp, sorta) and Libya (another basket case with EVERYONE involved on one side or another).

 

[Captainant 26902]

8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

On Lavrov, a lot of countries had a lot to say about Russia.

https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15766.doc.htm

Statement by UK Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council meeting on multilateral cooperation:

“President [Lavrov] while you tell us how you believe the world order can become more just, democratic and sustainable, your military is systematically bombing civilians in Ukraine in an unprovoked war of aggression and in flagrant violation of the UN Charter. What is just about trying to annex another country’s land? What is democratic about trying to subjugate another country’s people? What is sustainable about waging a war that has killed or injured over 500,000 of your own people? The war in Ukraine is a stark reminder of what kind of world order Russia really wants – a world where might is right, and powerful countries can bully and invade other countries with impunity.”

————

Elmo’s Twitter is of course classifying legitimate statements by Western nations as spam while promoting Russian propaganda.

it’s interesting that Lavrov showed up and was prominently asking for certain guarantees and promises, and efforts to “resolve the Ukrainian crisis”.  My guess is that Russia is hurting more than we realize (golf cart brigades and T-54s out front shoulda told ya!) or they are scared shitless of what’s coming (the gradual destruction of their air defenses that they can’t replace fast enough, F-16s, lifting of restrictions on Western weapons).
 

Lavrov has certainly stated clearly his expectations if US foreign policy suddenly takes a hard turn

 

 

[Trey3216 15308]

13 hours ago, Captainant said:

Lavrov has certainly stated clearly his expectations if US foreign policy suddenly takes a hard turn

 

 

Lavrov can laude all he wants, but that ain't what would happen.