Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Parliament 14,128]

Just now, SimonBolivar said:

@Al_4_ISU

I spoke with him just now.  He was on his way to Ames to trade his Busch Light for Coors.

[MillerEP 30,339]

 

 

[BachelorTrek 2,934]

Just now, atomheartbevo said:

1234.  My wife is not that much younger than me, but she does not remember that stuff.  Those of us who remember the duck and cover bullshit, The Day After, World War III (the mini-series with Cathy Lee Crosby and Starsky or Hutch). 

She remembers Red Dawn, but watched it years later because of who was in it.

Mmmm, I will never forget Cathy Lee Crosby. 

['stache 21,761]

I'm not understanding these "additional sanctions" being mentioned every few hours. Either go full sanction or don't. What else do you need to see to put on the full court press?

Edited March 1, 2022 by 'stache

[Neonmoon 38,127]

3 minutes ago, Parliament said:

I spoke with him just now.  He was on his way to Ames to trade his Busch Light for Coors.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

It would also allow the reeling Ukes to resupply as well.  Let's not pretend that they are not in a precarious situation.  They are the ones surrounded and desperately in need of supplies.

The Russians need a ceasefire more than the Ukrainians, because they have a massive monster of a logistics clusterfuck they need to fix, and them being able to clear up roads and get supplies to the mechanized units that need them would benefit them more than the Ukrainians.  We (the West) can keep on feeding Ukrainians the smaller weapons as we are currently doing.

[FartingMonk 3,606]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I'm not understanding these "additional sanctions" being mentioned every few hours. Either go full sanction or don't. What else do you need to see to put on the full court press?

Must not be a surly lawyer.  Otherwise you would know the power of strenuously sanctioning someone.  It's way more effective than a regular sanction.

[Prepuce of Doom 20,983]

42 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Thanks a lot assholes... now I got Shattered stuck in my head.

I can't give it away on 7th avenue.

Shapoopie

[Grade of D as in David 13,253]

1 hour ago, Trey3216 said:

Shattered, one might say  

Two Stones references in this thread today.

 

Thread is really moving fast but at this point wild horses couldn't drag me away

[FartingMonk 3,606]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

The Russians need a ceasefire more than the Ukrainians, because they have a massive monster of a logistics clusterfuck they need to fix, and them being able to clear up roads and get supplies to the mechanized units that need them would benefit them more than the Ukrainians.  We (the West) can keep on feeding Ukrainians the smaller weapons as we are currently doing.

The Ukranians cannot afford a ceasefire.  A ceasefire would surely mean no more weapons from the west as part of the agreement.  Russia has time to adapt and reload. It's either fight now or become Russia.

 

[Trey3216 15,325]

7 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

Honestly, I’m not expending any of my equity in Donetsk or Luhansk at this or from the jump tbh 

[BachelorTrek 2,934]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Must not be a surly lawyer.  Otherwise you would know the power of strenuously sanctioning someone.  It's way more effective than a regular sanction.

It really should be an Eiger Sanction.   Lulz.

[Deej 76,542]

31 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

right and with unsecured communication, launch commanders would in all likelihood need to get verification and validation of the order giving everyone else quite a bit of additional time. 

Jeezus. If Russia were a Resturant it would be a one star Arbys

How dare you bring Arby's into this. Now i have to go get a beef and cheddar while listening to "Shattered".

Thanks.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

This was posted probably 10+ pages back, but it's from November of last year and accurately predicted the Russian supply problems (and it gets into why Russians have a hard time firing lots of rockets):

https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/

"Russia’s truck logistic support, which would be crucial in an invasion of Eastern Europe, is limited by the number of trucks and range of operations. It is possible to calculate how far trucks can operate using simple beer math. Assuming the existing road network can support 45 mph speeds, a single truck can make three trips a day at up to a 45-mile range: One hours to load, one hour to drive to the supported unit, one hours to unload, and another hour to return to base. Repeating this cycle three times equals 12 hours total. The rest of the day is dedicated to truck maintenance, meals, refueling, weapons cleaning, and sleeping. Increase the distance to 90 miles, and the truck can make two trips daily. At 180 miles, the same truck is down to one trip a day. These assumptions won’t work in rough terrain or where there is limited/damaged infrastructure. If an army has just enough trucks to sustain itself at a 45-mile distance, then at 90 miles, the throughput will be 33 percent lower. At 180 miles, it will be down by 66 percent. The further you push from supply dumps, the fewer supplies you can replace in a single day.

The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades. To gain familiarity with Russian logistic requirements and lift resources, a useful starting point is the Russian combined arms army. They all have different force structures, but on paper, each combined army is assigned a material-technical support brigade. Each material-technical support brigade has two truck battalions with a total of 150 general cargo trucks with 50 trailers and 260 specialized trucks per brigade. The Russian army makes heavy use of tube and rocket artillery fire, and rocket ammunition is very bulky. Although each army is different, there are usually 56 to 90 multiple launch rocket system launchers in an army. Replenishing each launcher takes up the entire bed of the truck. If the combined arms army fired a single volley, it would require 56 to 90 trucks just to replenish rocket ammunition. That is about a half of a dry cargo truck force in the material-technical support brigade just to replace one volley of rockets. There is also between six to nine tube artillery battalions, nine air defense artillery battalions, 12 mechanized and recon battalions, three to five tank battalions, mortars, anti-tank missiles, and small arms ammunition — not to mention, food, engineering, medical supplies, and so on. Those requirements are harder to estimate, but the potential resupply requirements are substantial. The Russian army force needs a lot of trucks just for ammunition and dry cargo replenishment."

--------

The whole article is worth a read, seriously.  This reinforces the idea that some are discussing, that Russian forces all over Ukraine have run into serious problems once they got a certain distance form their supply dumps, and that it's not just problems with destruction/surrender, but also the roads/terrain.  And if you have Russian truckers who are slow-rolling for one reason or another (scared, not wanting to make too many runs), it can jam up everything.

And everybody worried about that big-ass convoy - because of the near-freezing temps, every one of those trucks/vehicles are probably running their engines, even if they aren't moving, to keep the troops/etc. warm, which puts engine wear on those vehicles, and more importantly, uses up fuel.  And the reluctant drivers are probably more than happy to use up lots of fuel.

[Grade of D as in David 13,253]

1 hour ago, BamaATL said:

And coming from Erdogan of all people, just fucking weird.  It's Putin with a smaller dick, if that's possible.  Just fucking weird, I guess his upshot would be protection of some sort against an uprising?

The world's first example of an innie penis.

[MillerEP 30,339]

 

[TexPx 2,312]

Yeah, we are fucked. My son is in Santa Fe and will be in Annapolis. My parents go between Houston and Santa Fe. We are building in Northern Idaho, but there is a submarine base there of all places. So, I guess I just have to hope that I am on vacation in Tulum if shit goes down.

Pend Orreille?

[InkaUtexas 25,496]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

This was posted probably 10+ pages back, but it's from November of last year and accurately predicted the Russian supply problems (and it gets into why Russians have a hard time firing lots of rockets):

https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/

"Russia’s truck logistic support, which would be crucial in an invasion of Eastern Europe, is limited by the number of trucks and range of operations. It is possible to calculate how far trucks can operate using simple beer math. Assuming the existing road network can support 45 mph speeds, a single truck can make three trips a day at up to a 45-mile range: One hours to load, one hour to drive to the supported unit, one hours to unload, and another hour to return to base. Repeating this cycle three times equals 12 hours total. The rest of the day is dedicated to truck maintenance, meals, refueling, weapons cleaning, and sleeping. Increase the distance to 90 miles, and the truck can make two trips daily. At 180 miles, the same truck is down to one trip a day. These assumptions won’t work in rough terrain or where there is limited/damaged infrastructure. If an army has just enough trucks to sustain itself at a 45-mile distance, then at 90 miles, the throughput will be 33 percent lower. At 180 miles, it will be down by 66 percent. The further you push from supply dumps, the fewer supplies you can replace in a single day.

The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades. To gain familiarity with Russian logistic requirements and lift resources, a useful starting point is the Russian combined arms army. They all have different force structures, but on paper, each combined army is assigned a material-technical support brigade. Each material-technical support brigade has two truck battalions with a total of 150 general cargo trucks with 50 trailers and 260 specialized trucks per brigade. The Russian army makes heavy use of tube and rocket artillery fire, and rocket ammunition is very bulky. Although each army is different, there are usually 56 to 90 multiple launch rocket system launchers in an army. Replenishing each launcher takes up the entire bed of the truck. If the combined arms army fired a single volley, it would require 56 to 90 trucks just to replenish rocket ammunition. That is about a half of a dry cargo truck force in the material-technical support brigade just to replace one volley of rockets. There is also between six to nine tube artillery battalions, nine air defense artillery battalions, 12 mechanized and recon battalions, three to five tank battalions, mortars, anti-tank missiles, and small arms ammunition — not to mention, food, engineering, medical supplies, and so on. Those requirements are harder to estimate, but the potential resupply requirements are substantial. The Russian army force needs a lot of trucks just for ammunition and dry cargo replenishment."

--------

The whole article is worth a read, seriously.  This reinforces the idea that some are discussing, that Russian forces all over Ukraine have run into serious problems once they got a certain distance form their supply dumps, and that it's not just problems with destruction/surrender, but also the roads/terrain.  And if you have Russian truckers who are slow-rolling for one reason or another (scared, not wanting to make too many runs), it can jam up everything.

And everybody worried about that big-ass convoy - because of the near-freezing temps, every one of those trucks/vehicles are probably running their engines, even if they aren't moving, to keep the troops/etc. warm, which puts engine wear on those vehicles, and more importantly, uses up fuel.  And the reluctant drivers are probably more than happy to use up lots of fuel.

Damn good Blog. Mom used to publish on it some of her thoughts on East Africa. 

[Trey3216 15,325]

6 minutes ago, Grade of D as in David said:

Two Stones references in this thread today.

 

Thread is really moving fast but at this point wild horses couldn't drag me away

That feisty old bird wanted the Dead soldiers to sprout  some Flowers in their beloved soil 

[JerrysJheriCurl 977]

7 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Must not be a surly lawyer. 

 

[Constant 6,722]

 

[Parliament 14,128]

That seems like alot.

[27-25 2,040]

1 minute ago, Constant said:

 

City name checks out.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

So the thinking is that if the US and/or NATO intervened militarily to crush Russia for good, it'll be nuclear war. If the sanctions successfully isolate Russia and starts causing real starvation and related problems, what is to stop Putin from using nukes anyway? Once humans invented the goddamned things we guaranteed our own future demise. Why not now? Only half-way facetious here. If we intervene and can get Putin out of power right away maybe he doesn't have time to launch nukes, or maybe someone within would stop him from pushing the button. In reality, it's probably not worth poking that bear as fucked up as what they're doing to Ukraine is, but I am quite certain that we will extinct ourselves eventually.

Soviet/Russian doctrine has almost always involved nukes on the battlefield if things go to shit.

It's why Western armies, at least the US, still trained with MOPP gear well into the 90s (and there is still the fear of somebody in the third world deploying chemical/bio weapons on a large scale).

The Soviet/Russian thinking is that if things go poorly for them, they drop some tactical nukes to help slow things down on the battlefield, and as a calculated risk that the West won't escalate too much and that both sides will end up at the bargaining table.

"Escalate to deescalate" basically.

And Putin is a gambler.  I don't see him using nukes, but I don't see him keeping them off the table either.  Too me, trying to assassinate the Ukrainian leader is damn near close to the nuclear option in terms of fallout (no pun intended) - both are guaranteed to turn Russia into North Korea.

[Nicole44 22,027]

1 minute ago, Constant said:

 

Fuck ya! Lots of tanks to blow up. Keep at it!

[Captainant 27,442]

2 minutes ago, Constant said:

 

I wonder if that was the Ukrainian SU-25's making an appearance, considering the lack of air cover the rooski AF has provided

Fuck me though, 800 vehicles is a serious blow to the russian military. Their material losses alone are going to be staggering, possibly insurmountable.

[Deej 76,542]

2 minutes ago, Parliament said:

That seems like alot.

Up to. That could be just one.

[FartingMonk 3,606]

5 minutes ago, Constant said:

 

I'm at the point of pictures or it didn't happen.

[Constant 6,722]

2 minutes ago, Deej said:

Up to. That could be just one.

Just the messenger. I hope it was 800 stuffed to full capacities of people and supplies. 

['stache 21,761]

3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

And Putin is a gambler.  I don't see him using nukes, but I don't see him keeping them off the table either.  Too me, trying to assassinate the Ukrainian leader is damn near close to the nuclear option in terms of fallout (no pun intended) - both are guaranteed to turn Russia into North Korea.

If the assassination thing is true, it's fucking crazy. We're avoiding direct intervention because of international norms under NATO, but I'm pretty sure assassination attempts are also a direct violation of international norms from some treaty or agreement somewhere. I think the rules are all about to go to shit whether we want them to or not.

[Nicole44 22,027]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I wonder if that was the Ukrainian SU-25's making an appearance, considering the lack of air cover the rooski AF has provided

Fuck me though, 800 vehicles is a serious blow to the russian military. Their material losses alone are going to be staggering, possibly insurmountable.

Makes you wonder how many tanks are in the other convoys. You think it really is the SU-25's if this can be verified...?

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

1 hour ago, Steel Shank said:

Living in Lubbock is staring to look pretty good.

Pantex and Dyess are both within 2 hours or so of Lubbock.  Good luck with that, since both will get hit, and the wind will eventually get you all.

[Dahobbs 17,437]

3 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

I'm at the point of pictures or it didn't happen.

Unfortunately or fortunately, there have been a lot of pictures of the destruction generally. So I assume you'll see pictures and video soon enough of this. I still can't fathom Ukraine's air assets still being allowed to operative.  

Edited March 1, 2022 by Dahobbs

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

My guess is the military leaders know a hell of a lot more of the realities of he battlefield than Putin does....and there will be more of this in the near future of things continue and the truth gets out (as it always does eventually)

Agreed.  Here's the interesting thing:  They aren't refuting Ukraine's numbers on dead Russians/destroyed equipment.  While I think those numbers would be great if they are half of what the Ukrainians are claiming, the fact that the Russians aren't coming out and saying "actually it's only 50 Russians murdered by the Nazis" is telling, and not just because the Ukrainians could easily trot out 200 Russian corpses.

If the Russians aren't willing to acknowledge any numbers, even if only 10% of what Ukraine claims, it means that they know the population at home is not buying this war, and there would be a chance they would be refuted. They also know the population probably wouldn't buy official Russian numbers (not after Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya, etc.).  They also don't want to boast

The leaders are very self-aware about how things are going.

 

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

That was a red herring floated by Putin. 

Putin doesn't want us there IMHO. His gamble is that we won't show up. 

Yep.  Hell, even if we wiped out his supply dumps and trucks and air defenses, that would be enough to put the Russian army on the run back to Russia.

What's he going to do, have the troops shot?  That will go real well - risk being shot by the Ukrainians if you fight them, and definitely be shot if you flee.  Those troops will surrender.

I've been wondering if Putin's forces were so small because he thought he could A) pull it off and B) the force was small enough that it wouldn't be seen as escalating beyond Ukraine.

[Bevo 13,524]

33 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Secret submarine base?  They used to have a training reactor where some of the nukes would go for prototype but that's long gone.  That's also the location we found out the army can't.be trusted with a nuclear reactor.

The Navy's Most Vital And Secretive Submarine Base Is In... Idaho?!?

By

Tyler Rogoway

 

The US Navy's submarine bases are some of the most high-security installations in the world, but one of their most important and shadowy submarine outposts is not located along the ocean, but rather in a lake in landlocked Idaho.

The Navy's Acoustic Research Detachment (ARD) at Bayview, Idaho, which is some 375 miles from the ocean, is where new submarine and surface ship shapes and subsystems are tested in a sub-scale environment that closely mimics the ocean. In other words, ARD Bayview is the Navy's lower-key subsurface Area 51, and massive Lake Pend Oreille is a water based, smaller, and more outsider friendly Nellis Range Complex.

The lake's depth (it's deeper than Loch Ness at about 1150 feet), large size, clear water and quiet conditions provided by steep tree-lined shores and a flat muddy bottom, along with a constant chilly temperature under 100 feet, are all key factors that have made it such an attractive testing location for the US Navy since WWII. Also, the lake stays remarkably calm for its size, allowing for fantastic testing conditions.

[Hefeweizen 5,307]

Piece of dick is my new expression for everything.

 

The Chechen assassins were not on my 2022 bingo card.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If the assassination thing is true, it's fucking crazy. We're avoiding direct intervention because of international norms under NATO, but I'm pretty sure assassination attempts are also a direct violation of international norms from some treaty or agreement somewhere. I think the rules are all about to go to shit whether we want them to or not.

Putin is ex-KBG. I have no doubt that he'd think that if he assassinates the Ukrainian leader, that the resistance will collapse.

We know they sent sabotage teams into the cities (and there are reports some of those teams were put in well before the invasion).

 

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I wonder if that was the Ukrainian SU-25's making an appearance, considering the lack of air cover the rooski AF has provided

Fuck me though, 800 vehicles is a serious blow to the russian military. Their material losses alone are going to be staggering, possibly insurmountable.

I doubt it was 800 vehicles, but say it was just 100 trucks, and based on that article I posted earlier (https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/), those 100 trucks were making 2-3 trips a day.

Those 100 trucks represent 200-300 truckloads.  They would have to add an additional trip to 200-300 trucks to make that up, and at this point I have a feeling they are bringing in the bare essentials (fuel, ammo, troops, food), so every truckload lost would fuck up a forward unit (say a platoon) for a day or two or three.  And if it were fuel trucks, that would really screw things up because the terrain/mud/need to keep the vehicles warm in cold weather is causing them to burn through fuel far faster than normal.  Food would put them into foraging mode, which opens them up to being picked off in small numbers.

And if they fucked that convoy up - wrecked vehicles, etc., that's going to slow that entire route down while the road is repaired and destroyed vehicles are cleared, so those 200-300 truckloads wouldn't be replaced so fast (assuming that Russia has those extra supplies in their supply dumps on that route and not in another part of Russia or Ukraine or Belarus)).  Instead of trucks making 2-3 trips along that route per day, they might only be able to make 1 trip.  So that loss of 100 trucks is not going to be made up within a day or two.

Edited March 1, 2022 by atomheartbevo

[Longhornlove 4,779]

18 minutes ago, Constant said:

 

If this is true, there has to be drone footage to confirm, I can't believe that until I see it.

[Brisketexan 104,557]

19 minutes ago, Constant said:

 

 

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I wonder if that was the Ukrainian SU-25's making an appearance, considering the lack of air cover the rooski AF has provided

Fuck me though, 800 vehicles is a serious blow to the russian military. Their material losses alone are going to be staggering, possibly insurmountable.

So, y'all know the countless posts here reminding y'all to take reports with a grain of salt?

Take this one with one of those ridiculous himalayan salt lamps of salt:

I'd love it to be true.  But that is at the top of the "too good to be true" list, so slow your roll.

[FartingMonk 3,606]

6 minutes ago, Bevo said:

The Navy's Most Vital And Secretive Submarine Base Is In... Idaho?!?

By

Tyler Rogoway

 

 

The US Navy's submarine bases are some of the most high-security installations in the world, but one of their most important and shadowy submarine outposts is not located along the ocean, but rather in a lake in landlocked Idaho.

The Navy's Acoustic Research Detachment (ARD) at Bayview, Idaho, which is some 375 miles from the ocean, is where new submarine and surface ship shapes and subsystems are tested in a sub-scale environment that closely mimics the ocean. In other words, ARD Bayview is the Navy's lower-key subsurface Area 51, and massive Lake Pend Oreille is a water based, smaller, and more outsider friendly Nellis Range Complex.

The lake's depth (it's deeper than Loch Ness at about 1150 feet), large size, clear water and quiet conditions provided by steep tree-lined shores and a flat muddy bottom, along with a constant chilly temperature under 100 feet, are all key factors that have made it such an attractive testing location for the US Navy since WWII. Also, the lake stays remarkably calm for its size, allowing for fantastic testing conditions.

One of my weapons officers did his doctoral program on UUVs and he was out there.  Basically a bunch of research grant stuff out there.  As far as chance of getting nuked.  Pretty low on the list.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

2 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

If this is true, there has to be drone footage to confirm, I can't believe that until I see it.

Yep.  But if you took out a few dozen trucks/vehicle towards the front, you could slow/stop that 800-vehicle convoy rather easily.

[Longhornlove 4,779]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

 

So, y'all know the countless posts here reminding y'all to take reports with a grain of salt?

Take this one with one of those ridiculous himalayan salt lamps of salt:

I'd love it to be true.  But that is at the top of the "too good to be true" list, so slow your roll.

I agree, that would make the highway of death look like a I 35 pile up.

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

Maybe we can get Georgia into the mix.  That'd freak Putin out.

 

[Longhornlove 4,779]

Just now, atomheartbevo said:

Yep.  But if you took out a few dozen trucks/vehicle towards the front, you could slow/stop that 800-vehicle convoy rather easily.

No, don't get me wrong, it is possible just unlikely.

[BigDHornfan 6,535]

[atomheartbevo 89,407]

Some images floating around for phone wallpapers

 

 

[Grade of D as in David 13,253]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

We had a good run. Time to let the cockroaches take back over.

No man fuck that I'm not letting TCU run shit

[Blotto 23,427]

This tweet in particular is interesting from Rubio. It seems understood that the messaging he's been putting out is agreed upon by more people than just Rubio. So whats the point of this tweet if not to start the debate? Our intelligence has been dead nuts on, so presumably they expect a "medieval siege" to be the plan. 

We've sanctioned just about everything, so what other options are there? Assassinate Putin? Try and stage a Russian coupe? I just doubt the rest of the world will sit back and watch him murder tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians. We will have to deal with this Russian fuckstick sooner or later, as he has crossed a line where his only options moving forward are to escalate.