The Ukraine is barely fighting anymore hence the non existent counter offensive. In reality Russia has already won and now nato are just sending weapons straight to Russia while decreasing their own standard of living. It’s based as shit.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (25)
sorted by:
You're chatting shit. That is uncalled for speculation outside of the point raised.
They upgraded their fighters and choppers in many Eastern European countries to newer western equivalents. Hence they donated older Soviet stocks. Older Soviet Anti Aircraft systems are upgrading. Tanks are upgrading. Artillery is upgrading. Some nations have larger orders of new ships and subs of various descriptions. As well as drones and other equipment rockets, shells, etc.
Meanwhile there are huge debates currently on Russian capabilities with the whatever nonsense about hypersonics being shot down. Tanks and other equipment. With Western missile defenses suggested to be beating hypersonics, tell me what happens to those sales. Tanks again were shown and suggested to have problems.
I am not getting into what you assume is better. Rather I am stating facts, bigger spending into the Nato front is occurring. As suggested it isn't donated, it's also upgrading new equipment. Meanwhile factories globally are manufacturing increasing arms and munitions. This has become for both sides, as this conflict continues.
HIMARS, what about other missiles, missile systems. Tanks. Drones. It stands to reason. Outside of capabilities. If I get rid of a warehouse, what do I fill it back up with? It doesn't sit there empty. It sooner opens a new factory. Sell more and replace stock. Read the news. Not simply the propaganda. Donated to the Ukrainian weapons charity's. Hahaha.
Upgrading with what? Some electronics shit that adds nothing to reliability if not worsen it? Catalysators to the tanks exhaust? Replacing glass optics with camera and LCD?
It's impossible with anything today. If you have something that maneuver at hypersonic speed, no existing system could do that. You need hypersonic missile more meneurable than hypersonic target and have at least same speed.
Seems nobody here get the main thing about Russian hypersonic missiles. Main thing is not that they are hypersonic. Main thing that they constantly maneuver approacing the target at hypersonic speed. That was the main breakthrough and main achievement, not their speed. Many ballistic missiles have hypersonic speed approacing the target. But they could be easily shot down because their trajectory is completely predictable. Just blow something with ton of nails on the trajectory, ant hypersonic ballistic missile is done. Same with 60s variants of hypersonic cruise missiles. They are fast, but can't maneuver at that speed.
Maneuverring at hypersonic speed is very complex problem. It was more complex than solving problems with maneuverabiliyt that appear with transition from subsonic to supersonic speed. Same thing with supersonic to hypersonic. Old tricks does not work at all. And this is the key feature of hypersonic missiles. They are unpredictable. You can't catch them with a trick that works with ballistic missiles, that are hypersonic too. You could blow something on its way, when it is dozens miles away, but it just will not pass that cloud of debris. And since it moves too fast and change course also too fast, no existing AD system can even reliably target and track them. Even S700 that is in development had no success in shooting maneurable hypersonic targets, AD missiles have to be much more maneurable than target at at least the similar speed and for hypersonic speeds it is a very complex problem.
You could shoot AD missiles randomly, in the hope it occasionally hit the target, but as a circus with Patriot in Kiev shown, that does not help at all. Yes, I know that Patrion is far from gold standard of AD, but things will not be any different with any other system including S*00s.
Laser systems have a chance, but there is no radars fast enough to make tracking of hypersonic possible to target laser beam on the hypersonic for noticeabe time to burn it through. And all that weather things like clouds, fog and rain with snow don't make things easier for laser weapons.
And that retarded Russian missiles use old style inertial targeting, so to jam their targeting system you have to invent something that changes gravity and inetrtial mass. TR3B anyone?
And still can't produce fucking dumb 152mm shells for only reliable howitzers that really work on battlefield.
I see that as something completely insane and as a giant flashing sign with "something is totally wrong!" text on it.
NATO could make as many 155mm shells as it want, but there no single 155mm howitzer that could survive long enough to utilise them. But at the same time each old soviet howitzers from 60s easily shoot 152mm shells in quantities more than all NATO howitzers cobined shoot during that war in total. And they, suddenly, don't need maintenance, they don't freeze in winter and overheat in summer, their optical sight don't need batteries and electronics replacement after the rain or ford. They just shoot, as howitzers should do.
There is something broken in the core of Western MIC. It can produce "advanced" weapons, overcomplicated, with bells and whistles, but completely unable to make reliable, working ones. They make Lamborginis and Bentleys instead of Toyota 4WD pickups with lifted suspension, completly ignoring all that mud and lack of roads.
Western car and agricultural machinery industry have similar problem. Even web development suffer from that bells and wistles problem, It is something very wrong in the very core of all Western industry. If presentability and modernity becomes much more important that reliability, repairability and simplicity, than it is regress, not progress.
That is the main goal - sell more. Nothing else matters. Don't you see a huge and fatal problem here?
And you didn't name anything that could be named modern western weapons that have some really useful features of the scale of maneuverability at hypersonic speeds. Force shields? Completely new propulsion system? Adamantium or neutron matter? Anything?
PS: And meanwhile, radiation levels in Khmelnitsky seems have new background level. https://redata.jrc.ec.europa.eu/chart/timeseries/daily/UA33429 Stays around 0.15 uSv/h since May 12 with same variations as earlier. Seems sensor is fine. So, only two possibilities left - some local uranium glass vase near sensor or something slightly radioactive was blown with warehouse.
No, it's trajectory, let's suggest a few launchers are covering an area, creating a field of fire, they are possibly being detonated like flashbangs, or countermeasures, prior to collision, the explosion causes the incoming missile to be brought down, and also firing off all the rockets to stop one. Literally what they did. Then they inserted fictious numbers of what they downed. Because they're begging for more rockets. They emptied out dozens of rockets depleting their supply, it takes how long to reload. Then they claimed they shot down loads with them. Honk.
Outside of this is the trajectory and tracking their signature. Now all the press is claiming the Russian scientists who made the hypersonics committed treason. It means they sold off key blueprints, causing competing systems to identify them. Now the trajectory is being calibrated by opposing anti-aircraft?
I am inclined to agree with radioactive something left larger atmosphere traces. I am not sure why the reading spiked prior to the explosions. How are encased shells radioactive? The debate was and is they leave traces on firing and impact. In a shell being handled and loaded, how, sounds real stupid. But exploded can possibly leave readings if that's what it was there?
Debate on artillery systems, Russia has been superior in this conflict. Look at map. But it doesn't mean much if it's just an artillery war.
Factories producing munitions and armaments are faster increasing their outputs globally for both sides.
My point was and is Nato have also been upgrading. There are much larger orders outside of the charity donations. Examples of unlimited or billions spent on rockets and ammo and drones. So what's building them? If they empty out stocks giving them to charity. They're replacing them with what. Same stock or upgrades?
Let me explain something.
I'm looking for any signs of some real scientific and technology progress. Not that stupid computerisation of everything and not naming things as what they are not. I don't care who do that progress.
My theory of everything in conspiracy theories world is that sometime around 1970 scientific and technological progress of humanity was intentionally stopped by evil forces ( repliloids, TPTB, whatever ) who really rule the world. So, to determine who is that evil forces, their connections and where their influence is weaker you need to track any science and technology advancements all over the world.
I thought that they use West as their base to rule the world, but today that assumption looks very weak.
That situation with ammunition and warfare tells a lot from that point of view. In the previous history of humanity wars, ironically, often was a kikstart for many inventions that are useful for humanity and that eventually rised humanity on the curve of development and progress.
It is obvious for me now, that West is lost its status of TPTB base or was never their base really. Things on the West looks even worse than things that happened after destruction of USSR. Degradation of industry and science is unbelivable. Serioulsy, it is worse than what we expirienced in 1990s with destruction of education, science, manufacturing, and so on.
However I don't see any progress here, in Russia too. It is mostly legacy and Russian ingenuity, not something that could be really named scientific/technological progress as it had to be.
I'm thankful for our converstions, because it is important to hear critical voice to stay reasonable.
Thats what make me do my conclusions - AD missiles is consumables. It should be produced in large quantities to make AD systems ready to do the job. But as MSM states US MIC could produce only ~250 Patriot missiles a year. How is that? It is insanely low amount accounting number of systems on duty and that AD missiles have definite shelf life and have to be replaced periodically. Before the war Ukraine had more than 200 of S300 systems with hundreds of missiles for each one. And it's only Ukraine. You could not maintain decent preparedness without ability to manufacture tens of thousands AD missiles a year.
That means either US MIC have nothing to do with any battle preparedness, either it have something that makes AD missile systems obsolere and latter means huge breakthrough in technology I'm looking for. But there is nothing pops up about that at all.
So, the progress is effectively stopped not only in "third" and "second" world, but in the "first" one too.
I told you - big amount of old encased shells will be radioactive. And it will be cases that emit radiation, due to long term exposure to radioactivity from inside. Fe is not very subjective to radiation, but any steel have a lot of additions like Ni, Mn, P, C, Cr and so on that gladly produce radioactive isotopes under influence of radiation from the core. May be that is the reason why that shells was dumped into Ukraine. It is even profitable than to utilise them due to old age as radioactive garbage according to UK norms.
Rockets are produced by the West in so small quantities, that is beyond insanity for the war time. As for drones, I think China have a huge profits on drones. But amounts are not impressive, really. One MLRS salvo is dosens of rockets and in decent battle you have dosens of MLRS salvos from one MLRS, while drones are still in the state of experimentation, not full deployment. Shakhids/Gerans could be accounted as on duty, but they are closer to shells or rockets than to what we usually account as "drone" today.
Also interesting thing with soviet TU-141 drones that was build when there was no such word. Ukraines most succesfull (except one TU-141 who decided to fly to Croatia, through multiple borders undetected) drone strikes was done using that old beasts presumably slightly modernised for supplement GPS system to assist main inertial navigation in hope to add some accuracy. But in USSR that drones for some reasons was produced in very small quantities (around 100), and was never accounted as something that could be really useful. Why? Who told higher command that this things are useless? Why the same things today are suddenly considered very useful and modern?
AFAIK, US also had some drones in 70s but also decided that they are not worth attention. And then, suddenly, drones become a thing. Everywhere, among all top military powers.
That is 100% bullshit.
Who told you these figures, and they're lying big time.
Production increases with demand. So new factories, and production increase output. They start making drones and rockets and shells. Or they make the components towards, lifting the load of other factories. You have several missile manufactures. Not just patriots. They have increased output, as Israel goes through these rapidly. Aside they're putting this patriot defense in many coalition places. Like Taiwan even. It will be real short real quick if attacked on a few fronts. The demand won't keep up with production. 250 a year. Literal disinfo from the 90s. Tell me how that works. Because it doesn't. Meanwhile it has supposedly proved stopping the hypersonic. Demand has just increased outside of its other arrangements.
So speculate here. UK has promised unlimited missiles in the latest package. It is manufacturing something. Correct? Europeans again are buying billions worth of ammo. How, if it doesn't exist?
These bullshit figures on what can be built become nonsense in increasing demand. They always have. They start making new factories, and production, and get other factories making components. Etc.
As far as archons go. It's an A.I they're communicating with. It is behind almost all evil today. Everything gets plugged into it, and it enslaves more.
Watch documentary like WW2 on V2 production. F16 programme. Etc. One factory making 250 handcrafted Rolls Royce a year. Not today.
No. These shells would leave signatures everywhere. So I doubt it was that reading, until exploded.
Drones several big manufactures, several more are starting. Turkey is huge. Iran. But there are far more start ups. Depending on types. I don't like getting into this topic. Read between the lines and use your head. Or literally watch documentaries about how stuff works.