So now that its confirmed that ukraine will recieve "long range ATACMS" in the next weeks. which ones?

So now that its confirmed that ukraine will recieve "long range ATACMS" in the next weeks.
which ones? Your bet /k/? Can these toys take down certain bridge if they need to do it?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I think they’ve sent some stuff at the bridge already that either got shot down or didn’t do much damage.
    Russia can probably do air defence pretty well if they know where their opponent wants to hit and they obviously know that Ukraine wants to hit that bridge. They need good hits with large bombs and probably need several hits.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia can probably do air defence pretty well
      Thats what i am suspecting - basically that this bridge is under the heaviest air defence umbrella russia has - mobiks are replaca
      I really think maybe only taurus or other stealth missiles would work.

      Anybody have any info how many s300/400 batteries and tunguskas are guarding the bridge?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Anybody have any info how many s300/400 batteries and tunguskas are guarding the bridge?
        no, the russians keep it super duper secret for obvious reasons.

        The odd time, a ukie partisan will spot one and share it to someone who gets the info to the AFU, which is basically how we see Ukraine destroy one air defense system in Crimea about every month or two consistently lol.

        One such movement is the Atesh movement, there is lots of open source info on them; they have a huge social media following and sometimes even post the pics their partisans send them.

        i guess you just cant hide em all

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Sort of the nature of the weapon system, if its working it needs a fairly clear space around the radar and preferably if you can get it, a bit of height over the surrounding countryside. If they're reduced to hiding in a shed or under some trees, they're effectively suppressed and you've got clear skies to just do what you want.
          Apart from holes in the bridge, because a 3rd time would be hilarious. I'm also looking forward to some TZD on the Black Sea fleet and other assets on the Crimean peninsula

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I really think maybe only taurus or other stealth missiles would work.
        Why would the taurus be better than atacms?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Why would the taurus be better than atacms?
          you would only need 100-200 taurus to destroy the kerch bridge (ultimate giga peremoga)
          as opposed to the 1000 or so atacms you would need

          >pic related, the bridge
          surely 300 taurus could destroy that...right?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >100-200 taurus
            lol what. That's an extra 0.
            We do have the leaked conversations, anon. Did you forget? They stated that doing it with 10 or 20 Taurus missiles might be enough to destroy the bridge, but that's a tough sell, and they were thinking more would be better.

            >1000 or so atacms
            If you're using cluster bomblets only, but that's moronic.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              lmfao, no they said 60 or 70, which is still utter delusion
              lmfao
              >pic related
              and

              https://i.imgur.com/kTdqlYV.jpeg

              >Why would the taurus be better than atacms?
              you would only need 100-200 taurus to destroy the kerch bridge (ultimate giga peremoga)
              as opposed to the 1000 or so atacms you would need

              >pic related, the bridge
              surely 300 taurus could destroy that...right?

              >pic related
              basically nothing short of a tactical nuke could delete this bridge

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >basically nothing short of a tactical nuke could delete this bridge
                You don't have to delete the entire bridge to render it useless, moron. Remember that a bridge that spans 99% of the gap moves as much traffic as a bridge that spans 0% of the gap.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You don't have to delete the entire bridge to render it useless, moron. Remember that a bridge that spans 99% of the gap moves as much traffic as a bridge that spans 0% of the gap.
                the bridge was literally built expecting exactly precisely the nonsense atacms shit going on now.
                the bridge will stand forever

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Is this the same forever as the Unbreakable union of freeborn republics that Great Russia had united FOREVER to stand?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I have no idea what this esl-slop post of your means,
                but you will meet santa-clause face to face before Russia has a civil war and balkanizes itself, or the kerch strait bridge is hit with a salvo of 70 taurus's

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Anthem_of_the_Soviet_Union#English_versions

                When Russians say forever, they mean 50 years tops. Also, not like we've already seen a Moscow-based government balkanize in the past 40 years, not to mention a few coup attempts here and there.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                absolutely fricking delusional kek,
                i literally cannot believe youre still clinging to the
                >"Ru...Russ Russia will break apart in a huge civil war be...bec...because Poooty lost!"
                holy absolute shit

                https://i.imgur.com/AXnxyA1.png

                >lmfao, no they said 60 or 70
                Black person

                German spoke specifically about delivering 50, then 50 again, and that it would take nearly ALL of them to make any sort of real impact against the bridge

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >German spoke specifically about delivering 50, then 50 again, and that it would take nearly ALL of them to make any sort of real impact against the bridge
                Cool story, bro. Too bad the article says otherwise and you're pulling it outta your ass.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Too bad the article says otherwise and you're pulling it outta your ass.
                lmfao, its in the fricking recording dipshit, its on fricking google

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >uh, it would take like 100 taurus
                >maybe 200
                >ACTUALLY 300
                >1000 ATACMS
                >OR A TACTICAL NOOOOOK
                utter Black person

                >Too bad the article says otherwise and you're pulling it outta your ass.
                lmfao, its in the fricking recording dipshit, its on fricking google

                >its in the fricking recording dipshit
                why are you acting like this is a revelation you stupid Black person?
                Look again at

                https://i.imgur.com/AXnxyA1.png

                >lmfao, no they said 60 or 70
                Black person

                >'in the leaked call-'
                yes, it is called writing an article about a call transcript.
                Why are you such a disgusting brown creature?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >yes, it is called writing an article about a call transcript.
                and they cut into 1/10th or 1/5th the german military was explicitly mentioning in the audio recording, which cites two potential delivers of 50, then 50 again, under the auspice it could take 50+ to do any discernible damage to the bridge

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                anon, read

                https://i.imgur.com/TnJNery.png

                >100-200 taurus
                lol what. That's an extra 0.
                We do have the leaked conversations, anon. Did you forget? They stated that doing it with 10 or 20 Taurus missiles might be enough to destroy the bridge, but that's a tough sell, and they were thinking more would be better.

                >1000 or so atacms
                If you're using cluster bomblets only, but that's moronic.

                >they stated that doing it with 10 or 20 Taurus missiles might be enough to destroy the bridge, but that's a tough sell, and they were thinking more would be better.
                >might be enough to destroy the bridge, but that's a tough sell, and they were thinking more would be better.
                >and they were thinking more would be better.
                yes, this isn't a revelation either
                they were giving ranges and possibilities for which 10-20 was entertained.
                >which cites two potential delivers of 50, then 50 again
                The context of 50 then 50 delivery wasn't JUST for tossing ALL OF THEM at the Kerch bridge in the call, they were talking about how many they were going to give IN GENERAL, timelines, and raising their concerns that the Ukranians had used their SCALP/SS stocks very quickly, and how long they may burn though Taurus deliveries.

                This has fricking nothing to do with expecting 1000 ATACMS or 300 Taurus missiles on a shitty bridge that was completely disabled for the better part of a year by a few UAS craft carrying a few hundred kilograms of explosives.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Cool story, bro. Link the recording or shut the frick up.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Cool story, bro. Link the recording or shut the frick up.
                google it homosexual, "not your personal army"

                https://i.imgur.com/HcHUUNN.jpeg

                Not sure about the civil war, but the consequences of the power vacuum after his death would be the greatest political event of XXI century.

                krokodil tier delusion

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Just write here the name of the less moronic monkey's descendant and he will fall out of the window the next month.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                comes up when googled

                https://i.imgur.com/AXnxyA1.png

                >lmfao, no they said 60 or 70
                Black person

                guess you're just a Black person ;(

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not sure about the civil war, but the consequences of the power vacuum after his death would be the greatest political event of XXI century.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >lmfao, no they said 60 or 70
                Black person

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >basically nothing short of a tactical nuke could delete this bridge
                They made a respectable go of it with a truck bomb.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                how long was it closed for?

                Exactly how fricked would the bridge be if they blew up both of the arch spans?

                >Exactly how fricked would the bridge be if they blew up both of the arch spans?
                hard sayin, the bridge was designed exactly precisely for such attacks, and its got modular sections that can be built on land, then towed out to sea

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It was open to limited traffic fairly quickly, but full repairs took months and months.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >"no strategic effect"
                got it^

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I dont speak "BBC POCCNR",
                im from Indiana

                It's very difficult to destroy a bridge with Artillery and bombs. You can blow up the concrete and damage it but you really need to attack the steel support to collapse it. Also Bridges like this are even more difficult because every pier is like its own mini bridge. So overbridging is really easy. Even if you collapse a section and they could build an steel truss bridge to replace it.

                >It's very difficult to destroy a bridge with Artillery and bombs. You can blow up the concrete and damage it but you really need to attack the steel support to collapse it. Also Bridges like this are even more difficult because every pier is like its own mini bridge. So overbridging is really easy. Even if you collapse a section and they could build an steel truss bridge to replace it.
                its almost like the bridge is a military feature itself in integrity, "hardened" you might say

                Anon, terminal engagement of ballistic missiles is the hardest AD target. The only Russian systems that can intercept TBMs reliably are the new S300/400 missiles with an active seeker, the older missiles can maybe do it but have suboptimal fuzing and accuracy with the TVM arrangement.
                [...]
                The difficulty in attacking bridges is in hitting the fricking thing. Cruise missiles have imaging seekers for terminal accuracy, unitary ATACMS variants supposedly have accurate enough GPS+INS combo unit. A single hit on the suspended section could very likely drop that span of the bridge, and it cannot be repaired in place like the other sections.

                >it cannot be repaired in place like the other sections.
                its even easier, you build it on land in safety, then float it into place later

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh Lord its the fricking schizo that was fixated on Ukrainians shitting in bags again. Aren't you actually Australian?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                it was fully reopened 4 months later, question is how much explosives truck had

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >how long was it closed for?
                both spans restored in 6 months, SIX MONTHS. That's with zero damage to support, only spans. with several supports destroyed you can see it opening in a year or two(so basically never)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >how long was it closed for?
                Most of a year.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's very difficult to destroy a bridge with Artillery and bombs. You can blow up the concrete and damage it but you really need to attack the steel support to collapse it. Also Bridges like this are even more difficult because every pier is like its own mini bridge. So overbridging is really easy. Even if you collapse a section and they could build an steel truss bridge to replace it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Laughable, there is nothing built by non whites that cannot be destroyed by the white man.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      M39A1 cluster with HE frag, and M39A3 with BAT anti-tank would both be extremely useful for combat and any of the unitary warheads would be great for infrastructure.
      The tri-mode fuse with delay would be the best for the bridge.

      >Russia can probably do air defence pretty well
      Thats what i am suspecting - basically that this bridge is under the heaviest air defence umbrella russia has - mobiks are replaca
      I really think maybe only taurus or other stealth missiles would work.

      Anybody have any info how many s300/400 batteries and tunguskas are guarding the bridge?

      Really depends how many missiles they end up getting, the hundred series SAMs don't get that many missiles per site and could be overwelmed by 24 missiles even assuming 100% intercept rate.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    To aim at the bridge first you must aim at the air defence, so there should be a bunch of shaping operations where they peel that shit apart before the killing blow comes in because they just won't get many shots with the 300km missiles.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Gotta love the US for breaking the western TBM barrier. Why are other western nations such pussies

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      UK broke some barriers first when they send storm shaddows. US government was too afraid to send ATACMS (the first batch they send was 150km range version) until some chad republicans forced them to. It was UK who broke missile and advanced weapons taboo.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The US broke those barriers when they sent GMLRS. Sorry

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That was a joint effort both the US and UK sent GLMRS munitions at the same time. Keep up.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        ALCMs aren’t TBMs. TBMs are much more flexible because they don’t require an aircraft to launch. Huge barrier broken by the US

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Ukrainians seem to have done a great job using SCALP/Storm Shadow with their Su-24s, but they’re very limited aircrafts, so it has impacted their role.
          Maybe when the F-16s arrive, we can see the US give some ACMs as well, or Germany stops being moronic and give Taurus.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >or Germany stops being moronic and give Taurus.
            I think it would be more likely that they'll give Taurus to the Brits, with the intention that this will free up more Storm Shadows to be sent.
            And then the Brits just give the Taurus to Ukraine for a laugh.
            Then the Germans can shrug their shoulders and say "that was not our intent" if Russia gets a bit pissy.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              If that's what it takes, so be it. It's not like Britain is going to be shooting Taurus missiles at Russia unilaterally anyways.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >And then the Brits just give the Taurus to Ukraine for a laugh.
              That's not how arms trading works.
              UK won't/can't pass on weapons without the manufacturing nation's consent

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            When they finally get F-16s I hope we give them all the old JSOWs, there are a heap of early models laying around and Raytheon got a big order for new ones 6 months ago.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          You have to walk before you can run.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This. Every time Russia sets a red line, the Brits cross it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No wonder why Russia has seethed over Britain for the last 300 years.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This. Every time Russia sets a red line, the Brits cross it.

        Bong here
        Our government’s a pathetic stain on this nation, but if there’s one thing they’ve somehow managed to ace it’s their foreign policy with regards to russia and ukraine. It’s so surprising in fact I’m almost convinced there’s gotta be some deep state defence strategy committee calling the shots on it as opposed to the actual government who are too incompetent to run their own country let alone foreign affairs.

        As someone currently doing training with the reserves and aiming to join the british army fully after uni, I can tell you right now we are not a rich nation militarily speaking, so I’ve been very fricking impressed by the boldness and (relative) quantity and quality of help britain’s been giving (the training we’re giving them is pretty ally too, every portaloo and building older than a month in the training areas I’ve been in this year was covered in ukrainian graffiti kek)

        Frick the russkies, the great game never ended.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Brits may be incompetent at domestic policy forever but their foreign policy game has always been top notch (except giving up Hong Kong expecting it to be the poison pill of western decadence for the chinese. rookie mistake maggie)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I’ve always found this phenomenon utterly mystifying. In many countries (older than a few decades) through changes in government and ideology, the fundamental aspects and directions of these countries foreign policies manage to remain relatively compatible from one administration to another - sometimes even being directly consistent - whilst the domestic policy often changes radically, or the ideology changes. Look at russia for instance; yes the ideology has changed, and arguably a Tsarist russia would be much less ideologically opposed to the capitalist west than communist Russian was, but these two mutually exclusive forms of rule for russia both shared a roughly equivalent foreign policy with regards to the buffer in europe, the assimilation of central asia, etc. You could say this is just due to the fact that different administrations will simply acknowledge the same realities of their geographical and geopolitical situation and thus take the same reaction, but they do not do this for domestic issues; so why is this?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Me against my brother, me and my brother against the outsider.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I’m almost convinced there’s gotta be some deep state defence strategy committee calling the shots on it as opposed to the actual government who are too incompetent to run their own country let alone foreign affairs.
          How can you be so ignorant of your own culture?

          Brits may be incompetent at domestic policy forever but their foreign policy game has always been top notch (except giving up Hong Kong expecting it to be the poison pill of western decadence for the chinese. rookie mistake maggie)

          >rookie mistake maggie
          It was worth a shot and anyway, it's maybe putting a brave face on a forced move. No way China could keep HK vs a PRC blockade, let alone invasion.
          When the front line of a battle is Boundary Rd Kowloon, the mainland falls immediately. The island isn't going to survive being cut off and blockaded, the population is a lot bigger than West Berlin was.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      UK broke some barriers first when they send storm shaddows. US government was too afraid to send ATACMS (the first batch they send was 150km range version) until some chad republicans forced them to. It was UK who broke missile and advanced weapons taboo.

      It's about Russia crossing the red line. USA warned Russia that if it's use North Korea rockets, USA will rethink not giving Ukraine long-range missiles.
      Russia used North Korea rockets, and now suffering consiquences.
      USA red lines is real, unlike Russian brown lines.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I actually thought they'd have had a pop at it with Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs by now.
    I guess there's some shaping to do first. Might be why a lot of AA has been targeted in Crimea lately.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't think the GLSDB has the range to reach the Kerch bridge.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >which ones?
    yes

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They wont use them on the bridge. They're going to use them on SAMs and airbases. Expect Sukhois and S-400s to get got.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This, despite the hype, ATACMS is NOT that effective against hardened targets. I doubt it would cause more than a hole in a section of the bridge, and I'm even more doubtful it would be able to take down a support structure. Storm Shadows and Scalps are a much better contender for that sort of job.
      What we're likely going to see from ATACMS is strikes on S-300 and S-400 batteries to clear up airspace for drones and cruise missiles. Lowest hanging fruit would be airbases in Crimea, I can see maybe a dozen or two heli's and jets getting whacked, but not much beyond that. VKS has moved damn near all of their assets away from Crimea, and ATACMS will likely keep it that way.
      In addition to that, I can see them being used to target equipment bases in Crimea, and deep in Luhansk and Donetsk. See pic related, it's Gvardiyske in Crimea. This base has quite the number of trucks and armor, a perfect target for an area effect warhead.
      What would make me jizz buckets would be if they were used within Russian borders. Millerovo, Stariy Oskol, Morozovsk, Taganrog, Yeisk, etc. If the US would have the balls, damn near half of the VKS' assets would be wiped in these strikes.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        In order to take down that bridge, you need a certain crew of Poo's and a certain container ship.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >What would make me jizz buckets would be if they were used within Russian borders. Millerovo, Stariy Oskol, Morozovsk, Taganrog, Yeisk, etc. If the US would have the balls, damn near half of the VKS' assets would be wiped in these strikes.
        I don't really get why US even cares. Ziggers started this war, ukrops are clearly in the right, who even cares that they used gibsmedats missiles to blow ut military shit in Russia? What's Putin going to do, scream to the international community how Ukrops attacking them is unfair?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They're university-educated pussies who actually think Putin will nuke.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    attacking the bridge from the sky doesn't make sense, they'll fix it quickly
    It's better to use waterborne drones and aim for the support structure, if they got like 3-4 hits they could take one pillar for good and repairing that would take months

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If they destroy the arches, it won't be a quick fix. The arches for the rail bridge were built on land, transported by barge, and towed to their final position. Either way, any attempt to fix it will take a year or more and will be easy to harass.

      A few strikes at the abutments of the arches should have fun results.

      But of course, considering that Crimea can be supplied by sea, there's probably bigger fish to fry ATM. Let's see how much stuff they're supplied with and if they can achieve some degree of air superiority over Crimea.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bridges are great targets
    Expanding the possible list of targets though- 300km is about the combat radius of a lot of Russian helicopters. So there might not be too many of their bases left capable of reaching the front lines in Ukraine's eastern regions

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They'll just use temporary FOBs for choppers, have a few Mi-8s drop a heap of fuel and ammo and operate from a clearing for a couple of days before moving again.
      This increases logi load and means those Mi-8s aren't being used elsewhere so it'll hurt Russia but they can work around it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        If the RU-airforce is reduced to hopping between hobo camps set up in the woods every few days to avoid a HIMARS strike, its still a fair bit of a win, even if they say knock 1/4 or 1/3rd of the rate of helicopter involvement in delivering aid and equipment or strikes. That's effectively a lot less off the top you have to deal with.
        Given the focus and analytics going on from orbit, they would probably have a hard time keeping on the hop and an even worse time maintaining the craft

        https://i.imgur.com/sbhZGaf.jpeg

        [...]
        Bong here
        Our government’s a pathetic stain on this nation, but if there’s one thing they’ve somehow managed to ace it’s their foreign policy with regards to russia and ukraine. It’s so surprising in fact I’m almost convinced there’s gotta be some deep state defence strategy committee calling the shots on it as opposed to the actual government who are too incompetent to run their own country let alone foreign affairs.

        As someone currently doing training with the reserves and aiming to join the british army fully after uni, I can tell you right now we are not a rich nation militarily speaking, so I’ve been very fricking impressed by the boldness and (relative) quantity and quality of help britain’s been giving (the training we’re giving them is pretty ally too, every portaloo and building older than a month in the training areas I’ve been in this year was covered in ukrainian graffiti kek)

        Frick the russkies, the great game never ended.

        Hell they had to get 'something' right because the rest of it is a bit of a fricking shambles. Straight up though its the correct approach when dealing with any kind of 'intimidation'
        >I'm crossing the red line now, what you gunna do c**t?
        >oh, you did nothing
        >didn't think you would, b***h

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I still think it's funny that there's a missile called "Attack 'ems".

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It also sounds like it could be an American breakfast cereal. "Attack 'Ems, exploding with flavor!" They're in the same aisle with Captain HIMARS "Oops, All Tungsten!" flavor.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >which ones?
    Personally? I'm hoping for YES.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'm a moderate, so I'm hoping for tactical nukes.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    M39A1s or M48s. We'll want to keep the good stuff for ourselves just in case China gets uppity before the PrSM is available in quantity.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Exactly how fricked would the bridge be if they blew up both of the arch spans?

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Ukies would be fools to blow their ATACMS on the Kerch bridge. At most they’ll just close it down for a few months, and at worst they’ll waste their shots uselessly against AD (which is quite extensive). ATACMS is a simple ballistic missile, the easiest kind of missile to detect and intercept so if they plan to use it to hit an AD-protected target they need to pair it with a serious level of AD saturation / decoy ops.

    And finally, there’s just nothing in range valuable enough for such an attempt. Even the Kerch bridge isn’t that important because Ukies have no way to actually threaten Crimea thanks to the land bridge they failed to cut off. They tried to create a beachhead over water, but that’s barely a toehold that is just able to survive, forget surging forth and liberating territory. All the strategically vital targets are far inland Russia far beyond ATACMS range. Best they can do is hit targets of opportunity, ie, shredding meat wave assaults — which doesn’t help them besides alleviating pressure on the front, not creating a fundamental change in the balance of power. If Ukies had anything like a meaningful maneuver warfare capability built up then these could be used to effect a break-through and destroy responding forces — but they have no such capability, Ukie formations are thread-bare, basically just guys in trenches and basements, There’s basic mobility, but nothing like what would be needed to conduct an mechanized assault for example. All we’re talking about here is helping them clear meat waves.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Even the Kerch bridge isn’t that important because ukies have no way to actually threaten Crimea thanks to the land bridge they failed to cut off.
      with morale buck-shattered, the bridge has become the afu's main tactical focus, and a strategic obsession

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >We didn't want anything within 300km of the frontlines anyway

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, terminal engagement of ballistic missiles is the hardest AD target. The only Russian systems that can intercept TBMs reliably are the new S300/400 missiles with an active seeker, the older missiles can maybe do it but have suboptimal fuzing and accuracy with the TVM arrangement.

      It's very difficult to destroy a bridge with Artillery and bombs. You can blow up the concrete and damage it but you really need to attack the steel support to collapse it. Also Bridges like this are even more difficult because every pier is like its own mini bridge. So overbridging is really easy. Even if you collapse a section and they could build an steel truss bridge to replace it.

      The difficulty in attacking bridges is in hitting the fricking thing. Cruise missiles have imaging seekers for terminal accuracy, unitary ATACMS variants supposedly have accurate enough GPS+INS combo unit. A single hit on the suspended section could very likely drop that span of the bridge, and it cannot be repaired in place like the other sections.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >long range ATACMS
    is this really that big of a deal? how much of an improvement are these over the normal atacms they've already received?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's an increase in range from 160km to 300km

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's an increase in range from 160km to 300km

      It puts the entirety of occupied Ukraine in range of ground-launched weapons.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why hasn't Ukraine or US Ally's developed a cheap gps guided rocket that can be produced enmass something with maybe 70km range and accurate to about 300 meters. Something super simple and can be launched like 200 at a time. If Hamas can make shitty unguided rockets with the garbage laying around Palestine surely Ukraine could use phone GPS sensors hooked up to a raspberry pi and some rudders to guide something

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      With how GPS guidance works there isn't any real cost increase for accuracy so you could easily get 10m CEP for the same price.
      The real cost comes from storage requirments because if you want to put a machine in storage for 20 years and have it work after that you need to avoid a lot of cheap options like rubber and steel.
      IMO we should develop non-storable systems as a cheap option that can have a production line quickly spooled up but we don't make them until they are needed to avoid the storage issue.

      This way you have a factory gathering dust with minimal maintainence which is effectively free if state owned and you could still shit out hundreds or even thousands of units a month when shit kicks off.
      Catch is we don't like nationalized production these days and any corporate board would see a factory gathering dust and either want to convent it for something they have orders for or sell it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Non-storables is a bad idea because you don't have a buffer to work on. Say it is "storable" for a few years like 5. When you wished you had a reserve stockpile of 20 years to blow through quickly you won't have it and can only be reactive. When you want to spool up production you'll be limited by downstream supply like rocket motors. Even if you expanded that production it would be at tremendous cost. If anything disrupts production like a process changeover from your downstream supplier or EPA mandated ban of certain chemicals you're fricked.

        >nationalized production
        Already exists as GOCOs like Lima tank plant. Government owned, contractor operated. The idea is they can "flick the switch" for production scaling.

        The real problem you're facing is the Peace Dividend when everyone thought Russia finally would frick off after 1991 and the even worse decision of "dude just trust me" when it came to China. So much for the end of history.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Have a minimal supplied that is used for training and keeping the manufacturers trained in how to make them

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Again the issue is if it doesn't stay good for close to a decade your ramp up for manufacturing has to be insane. I can mentally envision cold storing the production lines but to try to ramp from say 1,000 arbitrary munitions a month via 1 shift on 1 line to then going to 100k a month isn't easy at all and you're likely not to keep up with actual battlefield demand due to a shallow stored buffer.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *