Russia/Ukraine Megathread V6

[Rob Battisti]

Air superiority is not about controlling the skies directly, but the ground infrastructure and anti-aircraft emplacements.

If you cannot maintain, service, and launch your aircraft you've lost air superiority.

It's not about shooting the drones out of the sky, but destroying the enemy's ability to operate and maintain aircraft at all.

I understand that and agree. I’m specifically of the opinion that it’s rash to state that drones aren’t a cost effective deterrence against tanks if the enemy has air superiority.

 

[SandisLL]

Drones also have their own weaknesses. GPS spoofing can make them think they are somewhere else as well as a lot of other EW to confuse them. Imagine the drone swarm doing a 180 and coming back to who launched them.

Drone actually might operate without GPS.
There are things like pre programmed flowchats, images and inertial navigation.

Ofc with GPS is easier.

However drone/ missile might be targeted on certain images....with 0 GPS or GLONASS usage.

 

[MeatheadMike]

Drones are only useful if you can maintain air superiority and your air infrastructure. Russia can't maintain air superiority so the drones can exploit that weakness. They also have been unable to stop Ukraine from operating their airfields.

Forces opposing US in recent years had access to drones, but they didn't have air superiority or even airbases to operate out of because we destroyed them.

Its crazy that Russia, with an air force 10x the size of Ukraine's (and more technologically advanced), still hasn't been able gain air superiority. I suppose MANPADS are proving to be effective here.

 

[Rational Poster]

I understand that and agree. I’m specifically of the opinion that it’s rash to state that drones aren’t a cost effective deterrence against tanks if the enemy has air superiority.

I didn't say that they weren't cost effective just that they're only effective in certain conditions.

And in particular, they're not conditions US tankers have to suffer.

 

[Rob Battisti]

I didn't say that they weren't cost effective just that they're only effective in certain conditions.

And in particular, they're not conditions US tankers have to suffer.

Oh 100%. No country will EVER have air superiority over us. But, if the question is “is the tank the battleship of WWII” — well that’s an interesting question. Maybe not as it pertains to the US. But other countries definitely have to consider that.

 

[Supereem]

Thank you.
Someone with a normal IQ.
@Supereem could not figure out this part.
@tibba, here is your answer. The shortest distance between 2 points is a straight line! I don't need a 10 line reply.

I wrongly assumed English was your second language. This was based on your interesting use of grammar. I now realise this is likely a result of your socio-economic background, and for this I apologise.

On a positive note, you now know that the British Empire during WW2 was not just confined to the island of Great Britain and that the Empire fought throughout Africa and Asia, so I hope you have benefited from this correspondence.

If you would like to imrpove your English feel free to private message me and I can put you in touch with a good tutor in Oxford.

 

[Supereem]

Oh 100%. No country will EVER have air superiority over us. But, if the question is “is the tank the battleship of WWII” — well that’s an interesting question. Maybe not as it pertains to the US. But other countries definitely have to consider that.

Nothing lasts forever.

 

[Strychnine]

Great job derailing this thread and making it unreadable guys

YES.

If you want to debate WWII (and there's a LOT there to debate), then please make a thread or find an already existing one and continue the sidebar.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Nothing lasts forever.

Our conventional military superiority will last at LEAST another 100 years. That’s long enough.

I say conventional purposefully.

In a war with China, our infrastructure would be subject to horrendous cyber attacks which would be more devastating than any tank or aircraft.

 

[Rational Poster]

Its crazy that Russia, with an air force 10x the size of Ukraine's (and more technologically advanced), still hasn't been able gain air superiority. I suppose MANPADS are proving to be effective here.

Russia tried initially to airdrop on Ukraine's main airports, but all those troops were killed or were scattered by the counterattacks during the first week. They also launched quite a lot of cruise missiles, but were unable to exploit or cause significant damage to UKR air operations. They for years, since the cold war, bragged how they would do this to NATO forces. They didn't need direct air to air superiority, because they would just drive tanks over the airfields.

They tried and failed.

 

[curryjunkie]

Your 'shit' posting on this thread is about as ugly as your avatar mate! Do you ever say anything good or intelligent?

 

[SandisLL]

I understand that and agree. I’m specifically of the opinion that it’s rash to state that drones aren’t a cost effective deterrence against tanks if the enemy has air superiority.

Well.
If drone is large and slow and with high radar/ thermal signature then by simple logic you really are correct.

However looks that for helicoper / fighter plane easier might be to deal with large drone f.e flying ~ 100-6000 m above ground.
Rather than easily to deal with small drones with low signature.

Ofc to spot a large drone like 1,5 - 5 t appartus equiped with turbofan engine, with altitude 200-6000 meters and speed 200-1000 km/ h is easier than small drone with low thermal and radar signature.

Most likely this is reason why russia uses drones for info gathering more preferably than the same Su-25 stuff etc alike.

 

[Blayt7hh]

The British were fighting in 1 front, Americans were fighting in 2 fronts (Germany and Japan).

This was your statement... you're incorrect. Glad you can see that now.

You’re right but the real war effort against the Japanese was carried out by the US with hell from the Asian countries Japan was occupying. The European nations were soundly routed in the Pacific at the outbreak of the war.

While everyone was fighting on multiple fronts, none of the Allies were doing so to the degree the US did. I’m not trying to minimize other countries, but I do think credit is due here. The US pulled off an incredible feat in WWII that I see a lot of poster brush past.

 

[curryjunkie]

I saw footage of a wrecked T900 in an open field, and the reporter said a drone knocked it out.

I understnad that NATO anti-tank weapons in urban settigs are really effective, but are we in a world where drones and knock out Russia's best battletank?

If so, the fuck? Are tanks the new battleships of 1940?

the russians arent using combined arms tactics so no air defense , no infantry deployed with tanks and basically they are ill equipped, undertrained and poorly led, add powerful anti tank weapons able to be carried by a single soldier and they are getting creamed. baffles me why their air force is so underused.

 

[ShadowRun]

One could argue alaska was once part of russia

Oh man what would happen if they invaded Alaska ? Ukraine would send us billions and billions of dollars and weapons ?

 

[Cole train]

Who cares about ww2 in a thread about 2022 war.

Might as well start talking about ww1

I love the spear gun cavalry they had back then

 

[Joe]

Oh man what would happen if they invaded Alaska ? Ukraine would send us billions and billions of dollars and weapons ?

Ukraine has weapons the US doesnt have? Jfc

 

[Joe]

 

[Strychnine]

That’s a great point and I would argue, yes. Drone swarms are coming, if not already here. The kill ratio of a drone vs tank has to be off the charts. The cost ROI has to be astronomical.

Future warfare is here and it looks a whole hell of a lot like drone warfare.

This is from the game "Ghost Recon: Breakpoint". This game was made years ago. We can only imagine what's been in real life R&D since then.

 

[PEB]

This is fascinating. Definitely worth the full watch.

Drones in use in this recent video.