So Jellyinsky is not a complete idiot coke - head , like Hitler , who is best left in place ; since he is doing a good job of defeating Ukraine ! His methods " work " in some barbaric ways ! Still the Russians have left this decision making " apparatus " intact !
As long as he makes stupid decisions and remains ineffective there is no need to eliminate him because there is a risk he might be replaced by someone less greedy and self centred and someone competent who cares about his nazis and wants to save them from death.
Edit : the Donetsk bombardment can start in civilian areas , with small demonstrative rounds . The Rats will seek shelter underground to save necks . Civilians then escape . This is followed by heavy bombardment . All Risk can not be avoided , but a balance must be struck !
If it is safe enough for the civilians to escape it will be safe enough for the rats to stay up and shoot them as they try to leave.
Russias problem is that even if the place is already empty of civis they can't know that so they have to treat every area as if it contains civilians...
The core problem is that Russia does not want to kill civilians... Kiev and the west don't care... in fact they want them to kill civilians so they can make them look like the monsters from the west.
Explain why Russia airforce performances is so bad , and not supporting ground troops
correctly. which is basically leaving the russian army on their own ,most of the time without airforce support.
Welcome to planet Earth Vann... the place the rest of us live on knows full well that HATO are a bunch of pussies that are shit without air power... if you want any evidence look at their recent effort in Afghanistan.... there for 20 years and spent billions and three months after their air power left the taliban destroyed them and their allies like they were nothing.
In comparison the Russian VDV entered the territory of a peer enemy with airpower and air defence and seized an airport close to the nations capital city and held on while ground forces moved in to relieve them without total air control and you are trying to claim that is a weakness?
I would say it proves that HATO is a glass house that is vastly more impressive on paper than in reality... it says enough that in Kosovo the west was not prepared to send in ground forces because they were too afraid... and rightly so... the Serbs probably would have ripped them a new one.
Same technique as toss bombing. It obviously increases the rocket's range and keeps the attacker out of MANPADS range. Very simple idea that is easy to understand. BTW the very same forward observers used for accurate artillery strikes are used here. These guys report back on accuracy and the effect on enemy units. No rocket science involved here. So please STOP posting idiotic stuff.
In the west unguided rockets are precision guided missiles that each have to be precisely aimed and destroy one target each.
In the real world rockets are for area targets... groups of enemy spread out over an area where one guided weapon wont cut it unless it is enormous.
When firing at a group of enemy troops crossing a field or hiding in a forest a precise strike of a single rocket is useless... all your rockets landing within 10m of the point of aim is a BAD thing Vann because those rockets only do damage to a radius of 10-20m so if they all land around one point target all their damage is concentrated into one place, which means the targets the first rocket killed will be punctured and torn to pieces by the following rockets, but targets 20 metres away will be perfectly safe.
Lofting them means instead of firing from 2km they can fire from 4 to 6 km from low altitude and turn away immediately making a MANPAD lock almost impossible... but the natural spread of the rocket impacts means fragments and blast cover the area around the point of aim nicely greatly improving their performance.
The hilarious thing is that the new laser homing HATO rockets are also supposed to be lofted into the air to maximise their range, but their guidance allows them to hit point targets so they will be lofting rockets soon too but only single rockets... perhaps eventually they will upgrade their systems to allow lofted rocket attacks... it is hard when you are so far behind in technology though...
This is not anywhere close to carpet bombing..
this is firing a few rockets , very far away without aiming..
in other words..
It is aiming Vann... the coordinates of the target are loaded into the nav attack computer... that is how they know what angle to launch the rockets at based on their current location.
The same way a Grad unit launches its rockets up into the air to hit distant targets too.
This is way below to the tactics that Russian airforce was using in Syria , that they compensate their unguided strikes with Big Bombs and flying right above their targets with help of Computers to aim better the unguided big bombs ,instead of this primitive strikes with weak rockets.
The same navigation bombing systems they use for dumb free fall bombs also work with unguided rockets... in both cases they work with ballistic unguided weapons... a bit like a rifle scope is used to deliver bullets on target... the rifle scope is calibrated to the range and a specific type of ammo so that at the specific range the bullet will hit somewhere near the point of aim.
The system these helicopters and aircraft use is similar but it can store the ballistic features of a range of weapons including rockets so you can lob rockets into the air to hit distant targets from further away.
Not accurate enough for a single cannon shot on a point target like a car or a truck, but with explosive weapons that don't need direct hits to kill targets and being dropped or fired in volleys against area targets it is good enough.
If Russian airforce was using precision missiles with TVvideo images or loitering munition ,every day at least against Air defenses and or artillery ,they would be smashing those artillery positions quick and fast and saving many lives.. . This are stupid tactics..plain and simple and the british pilot questioned it too. Very inefficient and retarded tactics for a modern airforce today.
They don't use volleys of rockets against air defence vehicles or artillery vehicles... they might use rockets against towed guns to get all the crew out in the open but against AD vehicle and self propelled guns they would use ATGMs.
So professionals pilots people who fly combat planes for a living disagree with you ,dumb ass.
In Pussy HATO forces that didn't want to stay in Afghanistan because it is too hard... despite their all powerful air power and their abundance of drones how can there be any Taliban left at all?
NATO for sure is taking notice of this weakness of Russian military and would want to exploit this limitations of Russian airforce.
Finland was planning to deal with a Russian invasion the same way the orcs are... which is why both countries are desperately trying to join HATO I guess.
War is business, and we see one right now going.
War is business, so when the enemy hypes up shit to be super and to not smell bad then you can easily counter that by capturing it and revealing that fact to the world and expose that you now have their super weapons and are going to find things to exploit in their design.
You are quite right that they are inferior to what the Soviets had in the 1980s, but their might be some useful things or bits of technology to make the Russian systems better.
HIMARS can launch ballistic missiles that fly above the range of 90% of Russian air defenses.
Everything the Russians deem important to the conflict will be protected... the fact that it flies high is meaningless... to hit its target it has to come back down where everything from Pantsir and TOR and BUK can obliterate it... not worth wasting S-300 or S-400 on them but S-350 would do a good job too.
So if you think NATO don't know how to make Good weapons ,you are mistaken.
They make very profitable weapons... that is the best you can say... ATCMS is more expensive than ISKANDER which has longer range, is more accurate, and is much harder to intercept and carries a much bigger payload and is faster.
A bit more on the Vinnytsia strike from MoA. This event is seriously hitting the headlines due to the death of a 4 year old and her badly injured mother.
Western media will milk it in a way the opposite to the way they ignore civilians killed in the south and east of the very same country.
If it turns out an Orc SAM launched to intercept the Russian weapons killed them the story will instantly die and never be mentioned again.
Very scandalous report against Zelensky regime , UN finally tells the facts..
Surely you will post the BBC and CNN and Fox News coverage... if they even mention it...
And of course they wont.
This seems reasonable accurate and I don't see a problem especially when combining with Vikhr antitank missiles. Why not fire few rockets as well?
Looks like a good spread of explosive rockets... very efficient way of using them.
It is fukin' unbelievable, that you really waste your time responding to someone, who has obvious mental problems
If we ignore him the voices in his head will tell him he is right...
that claims Himars are not any better than smerch and uragans
Smerch has much better range than HIMARS and carries twice as many rockets, Uragan almost three times more.
or that strike drones useless and not needed.
Over an area the size of Ukraine they would be useless because they are slow and would spend most of their time flying back to base to get more missiles because they carry so few. At 200-300km/h they are much slower than helicopters or planes so transit times to reload would mean most of their time was doing nothing at all.
In comparison a decent recon drone that can fly around for days, does not carry any weapons but has a laser target marker would be vastly more valuable flying over the enemy airspace looking for targets for their vast array of missiles and artillery rockets to engage.
On a separate not, why are Ka-52 crews manually guiding vikhrs instead of using autotrack?
During Desert Storm Apache pilots were told to let the system autotrack the targets, but the number of burning vehicles creating lots of targets the vibrations of firing weapons and manouvering often meant the auto track skipped to other targets meaning the missiles kept missing... using manual tracking allowed the operator to hit targets even if they went behind cover temporarily... like a vehicle traveling down a tree lined road, or to manually lift the point of aim to prevent your missile flying into a bush or other obstruction.
On western propaganda channels like
Don't listen to sources who are not interested in the truth but instead pushing an agenda.
thus allowing ukrop DRGs to infiltrate in case the advance is too fast.
No matter the speed of the advance, infiltration by enemy forces is always an issue including western special forces who are not officially there... but obviously are.
It was extremely fast for sub-sonic Caliber..
No supersonic boom... and 800km/h+ is fast...
How far away is the Russian army from penetrating the last defense line that Ukraine and Nato has been built in the last 8 years around the Donbass? I have heard that after that point the Russian army could advance much faster.
No rush.
A Russian military expert says he is convinced that British and American soldiers are engaged on the ground in Ukraine.
Of course there are, many western groups have admitted to being there but claim they get no support from their government so there will be no blowback... a bit like the CIA destroying democracy and encouraging corruption and evil in a way that the US can deny it was them even though they fund it and it is part of their government.
Serbia is a good example but even then, never facing s300, Buk , or TOR
And refused to send in ground forces of any kind.
Himars has magically low RCS
Its too fast at 2.5mach(nevermind Tochka U reaches mach 3-4)
Its maneuverable(unproven, and not cost effective for a damn narrow rocket)
Russians are incompetent drunk subhumans who lie about having IADS
Most remotely plausible, that HIMARS gps guided rockets have some sort low trajectory that russian SAMs have trouble detecting in enough time
Russian SAMs like pantsir or TOR can't engage more than 1-4 targets at once.
Russian SAMs are already destroyed/captured in sufficient quantities for russians not have an IADS any more.
Russian air defence operates against low RCS systems... otherwise Israeli F-35s would be delivering SDBs instead of stand off weapons from outside Syrian airspace.
Iskander reaches mach 7... and by definition Smerch has longer range and therefore goes faster than HIMARS... they are both essentially rocks thrown by rocket motors... the further you throw them the faster you have to throw them and the faster they fall as they arrive.
Manouvering would dramatically reduce its range. Iskander is a 4 ton missile with a 500km range because it has its engine running all the way and manouvers to evade air defences.
Yet they are so competitive in military terms against the entire western world in every single category... only the US approaches them in terms of the range of systems they make by spending 100 times more...
A depressed trajectory would massively reduce their flight range for the same reason jet airliners climb to altitude to fly any distance because flying low massively increases fuel burn. Flying from Dunedin to Christchurch is about 300km and the first part of the flight is all climbing... then they level off and spend the rest of the flight descending to land. Any fuel spent climbing can be recovered in the descent but running the engines at higher altitudes is more efficient and the drag is lower at higher altitudes too.
Each TOR and Pantsir VEHICLE can handle 4 targets at once... a battery of 6 vehicles of either type can handle 24 targets simultaneously using up to 48 missiles because they used to guide two missiles to each target to improve kill performance.
Improvements in optics and missile electronics and radar means they now generally launch one missile as shown by the results in Syria with Syrian AD vehicles BUK and Pantsir where engagements against 24 targets required 25 or 26 missiles to take down.
If all Russian AD vehicles are destroyed or captured then why are the M777s and HIMARS and other western supplied artillery attacking civilian targets essentially committing war crimes?
Is it because Russian forces just shoot down their missiles and shells?
When has that ever happened with a western force in combat?
The US forces in Iraq couldn't do anything even with 30 minutes warning about Iranian ballistic missiles on their way...
Most plausibly, ukrops fire Uragans and smerch salvoes first, then himars.
If they had that many Uragans and Smerch vehicles left why **** around with HIMARS?
HIMARS has 6 rockets of 227mm calibre... an Uragan truck has 16 x 220mm rockets and Smerch has 12 x 300mm rockets and greater range.
If they were launching enormous volleys of rockets they would be hit by return fire very quickly with that sort of concentration of artillery Russian artillery would be pounding the shit out of them.
The problem is that short of destroying launchers(almost impossible, they're mini hypermobile scuds) or having enough SAMs, this tactic isn't counterable. On the other hand, ukrainians are expending nonrenewable precious smerch rockets just to be used as decoys.
Smerch and Uragan rockets and launchers are being destroyed every other day... it is getting to be like their aircraft... use them and then lose them.
Imnot a civil engineer, so Im really in the dark on this, but could the ukrainians, while russia is closing in on the pavlograd arch, be able to pour enough concrete in a few months to recreate avdeyevka tier defenses throughout kharkov, dneprpetrovsk, nikolaev, odessa, etc?
The Russians are rebuilding the regions they are capturing, there is not need to build fall out shelters just yet... any massive counter attack by the Orcs will be a blood bath... air power and artillery can shred an enormous army of walking conscripts...
The ethnically Hungarian part of Western Ukraine
Hungary or Poland sending any troops into Ukraine will be targeted as enemy combatants and as Poland and Hungary are like the UK are not part of the conflict they will be counted as mercenaries.
If we just go by range/ceiling, in Iraq it was:
And if we contrast and compare the situation in Syria where Buks and Pantsirs and older missiles blunted an attack by western cruise missile platforms and create an airspace Israel fears to enter with F-16s and F-35s even before they were connected together in an IADS.
Looks like Hypersonic Justice to me
Hypersonic is more than 1km per second so it would be difficult to follow with the eye... the flame from the engine perhaps suggests their subsonic cruise missiles have afterburner capacity and might be transonic in the attack phase but no supersonic boom so I would say subsonic... 850km/h is still fast.
1940 tactics.. LOL The Russian airforce is amazing , teaching the world how you achieve "air superiority" in ukraine. lol1
all the internet websites discussing ukraine conflict notice exactly the same..
call this very poor tactics for today modern wars.
Which shows their ignorance... what plane in 1940 had air launched rockets?
The first rockets officially fired from a plane were rockets fired by Polikarpovs in 1939.
The amusing thing is what exactly is HIMARS... ohh that is right... they are ballistically lofted rockets...
Sucks to have to deal with Ignorants fanboys in this forum. Every expert thinks the same like me.. not crazy , those that complain of my findings are simply full of crap and with too low in IQ.
You understand the sources you use are desperate to make the Russians look stupid and bad...
Rockets from an attack helicopter are not used against point targets like vehicles, they are used against groups or area soft targets where a direct hit is bad... you want to land the round amongst the targets so they all get damaged.
A nice spread of half a dozen rockets around the area the enemy targets are located is exactly the best solution that the attack pilot is trying to achieve.
The fact that you don't understand that after it being explained multiple times is a little frustrating, but I am sure anyone else who reads this thread is bored with the repetition.
GEFEST & T is a ballistics system using the navigation and attack computers on aircraft... they can be used to target targets with free fall bombs, but they could also be used to loft said bombs when flying very low so the aircraft using the weapons can turn away and does not have to over fly the target and potentially be hit by enemy ground fire. When flying at 10km altitude there is no need to toss bomb because the bomb impact will be well ahead of your flight position so as soon as you release the bomb you can turn away and again not fly over the target.
With rockets every launch is a toss launch because the rockets are propelled forwards... angling them upwards just makes them hit targets further away.
Toss bombing in 1940s was incredibly inaccurate even with shit like the Norden bomb sight.
They would have 1,000 bombers each carrying 2 tons of bombs to drop on a city to destroy a particular factory and still have go back night after night because they missed it... which shows you the level of accuracy they achieved.
In comparison a 10m CEP over Syria from 10km altitude is astonishing accuracy... if the west could manage that they would struggle to justify even making guided bombs.
The fact that they can use this system to accurately launch rockets must really piss off the western MIC...
I didnt know what it was but figured it out myself when I noticed in videos thry always released their payload at a 30 degree climb. It has a cluster bomb effect of sorts. For infantry and light vehicles it is very good. Vann7 you crazy homie.
Unguided rockets are used against area targets where precision is not much use.
A large group of enemy troops covering open ground is better engaged with a cluster bomb than an ATGM... the helicopter carries rockets and missiles so it could use either... there is a reason it chose rockets.
This is next to useless against Artillery , Command center fortifications ,tanks or well protected storage depots.
That is very true... why the **** do you think they would be using unguided rockets against such targets you idiot.
Against artillery they have ATGMs, but a battery of M777s with trucks and troops spread out firing rockets are the ideal weapon to kill all the crews and damage the guns and the trucks... in comparison an ATGM would destroy one gun or one truck and most of the crew would survive.
Not im not crazy.. Every experts in the internet agree with me ,
Expert shills opposed to Russia and wanting to make them look bad... no wonder Kiev is losing.
If EVERYONE did this, he would soon get bored and leave the forum. He's been on my ignore list for months along with a few other trolls, things are much better when reading the pages.
So people kept saying but he has been here a long time and over periods has been ignored totally... yet he remains...
I think it is important to hear how stupid the opposition to Russia is becoming and how desperate they are...
It would be best if DNR would have extradited him to Syria and washed their hands. Foreign POWs are useless, you can't trade them to Russian/DNR/LNR soldiers, it's impossible to do any political pressure and so on. And executing them is another pile of crap, better hide them where the sun doesn't shine and forget about them. Like what happened to Mariupol POWs.
Can see why the US loves having Guantanimo Bay Gulag facilities.
Looks like Garry was right about Motor Sich. For all intents and purposes , it's history.
If the orcs thought the Russians were sparing it for potential future use they would put their HQs there but also mine the place with explosives so when they had to leave they would destroy everything.
It has likely already been stripped of anything of value anyway.
All their places like this would be repairing tanks and missiles and weapons... destroy them and then you can decide what industries they have moving forward.
Its possible the Russians are using them as a mouthpiece to deliver messages.
A way to test the waters...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
The first recorded combat use of the Lancet-3 loitering ammunition from ZALA Aero against the positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Zaporozhye direction.
PapaDragon
