User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:13:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4xGM300m]
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Taboot: Petreus says the M1 is too heavy and maintenance intensive for use in Ukraine, and you need special equipment to extricate them from the field if they fail or become stuck. You would have to set up a whole manned facility in Poland for them, even just a few. Lighter tanks, like the Leopard and surplus T-60s, 70s and 80s from NATO stocks are more appropriate. This was from a recent DW interview with him on YouTube. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Taboot: Originally Posted By fervid_dryfire: Originally Posted By Zam18th: I just saw CarmelBytheSea's poll in gd about the US sending tanks to Ukraine. So far 60-40 say no, even if they pay for them.  I'm not going to read the thread. Just thought you'd get a chuckle out of gd doing gd things. Maybe they want those tanks to be "in-house," and not thousands of miles away, once our next civil war invariably kicks off. There isn't much left. Battle Tank Dismantling, a company in Germany scrapped over 20k NATO AFV in the last 30 years because these idiot politicans in Europe believed the Russians would scrap their AFVs too. No treaty with the Russians is worth the paper.   |
|
|
NV, USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:17:41 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
Honestly a pretty clever urban tee pee. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:19:31 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AeroE: Biden is not capable of a decision. His handlers will be in increasingly close watch to steer him away from any substantial decision, comment, or action. It's time for Biden's resignation. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AeroE: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By stone-age: Suicide how? Is NATO going to respond with nukes? No. If NATO responds with conventional forces then russia will use more nukes. What is it that russia would be afraid of that hasn't been done to them already? Most isolated and sanctioned country on the planet, russian response "So what." Russia wants to win this no matter what. I respectfully disagree. The russians are idiots, but the ultra rich are going to do their best to keep what they have, and if nukes are launched, they will lose everything. Yup. I'm 99% sure NATO will buttfuck Russia without even needing nukes. Biden may be a fool, but he's also not a pushover- I think he's totally capable of ordering severe strikes on Russian forces if they are stupid enough to use nukes. What will NOT happen is large strikes on civilian centers. It's time for Biden's resignation. Harris is just another puppet too. Biden and Harris, are interchangeable. The DNC insisted on both of them to simply by front-people for the deep state people running things. (And really elderly drunk Pelosi too.) We really don’t know who is running this country, which is a first. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:20:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bama_Rebel: you reckon the lack of ATACMS in the aid package has more to do with not wanting the tech to potentially falling into russian hands (dud or shot down) or the official reason? I think the public admission of sending ATACMS was kept back as leverage in case of further Russian escalation. It is being phased out for a new system. I'm actually surprised that Russian air defense is not capable of adequately defending from standard Himars rounds, the ATACMS is even more capable against air defenses. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:25:47 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lorazepam: I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:30:20 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:32:18 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lorazepam: I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:33:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:37:35 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
I think even the dumbest of the Orc propaganda department are seeing the west would completely push Russia shit in without using nukes if Russia were to let one off. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:37:37 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kncook: I bet it’s also the easiest to get away with corruption and falsifying records. The only way you get caught (as a commander/supervisor) of skimming off the top and neglecting the Strategic Nuke Forces in Russia is if they try to actually use them…..and getting caught wouldn’t really be that big of an issue when that rolls around. And the warheads are an entirely different thing from their delivery systems. Have the Russians rigorously been keeping their strategic rocket forces refreshed and rotated, in addition to whatever maintenance they do or don't on the warheads themselves? Keeping those mobile launch vehicles up on maintenance schedules? Keeping those boomer subs in tip-top shape and regularly testing and verifying the launch mechanisms? *Can* Russia refresh and refurb a modern or even recent-design missile, or have they fired pretty much all their airworthy Kalibrs at Ukraine already? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:40:24 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
Girkin is a man without a moral compass, but he is far from being stupid. And among the various Putineers, he is one who'll call a spade a spade. He realizes that the use of nuclear weapons by Russia against Ukraine would be a point of no return, and that NATO would become involved directly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:40:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M What’s the track record of Russian equipment actually performing to published spec? |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:42:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: anono]
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Not only that, but ever notice in the videos of them driving out to their launch points that they are pretty straight pathways carefully manicured to not have shrubs and trees in their way? Nah, we'd never see that on satellite and SAR imagery from billions of dollars of spacecraft and technology dedicated just for finding those.  What interests me is that EVERY guided Russian weapon they took apart in this war has used commercial chips and parts. Just food for thought, but we celebrated over 400 SM-3 exoatmospheric interceptors made. They mostly go on mobile Aegis ships, and Aegis ashore bases in Poland, and Romania, and the Japanese navy. These are advertised as ascent and midcourse phase. Over 500 SM-6 terminal phase Interceptors. Hundreds of THAAD rounds, 10,000 Patriot rounds. CHAMP and HiJinks emp cruise missiles, etc. It was done quietly, but we've been eroding the rules of MAD for awhile, and it is accelerating. Another point is that the Russians likely haven't retrofitted their missiles with counter-measures. It's a costly and difficult process. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:52:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Bama_Rebel]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: I think the public admission of sending ATACMS was kept back as leverage in case of further Russian escalation. It is being phased out for a new system. I'm actually surprised that Russian air defense is not capable of adequately defending from standard Himars rounds, the ATACMS is even more capable against air defenses. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By Bama_Rebel: you reckon the lack of ATACMS in the aid package has more to do with not wanting the tech to potentially falling into russian hands (dud or shot down) or the official reason? I think the public admission of sending ATACMS was kept back as leverage in case of further Russian escalation. It is being phased out for a new system. I'm actually surprised that Russian air defense is not capable of adequately defending from standard Himars rounds, the ATACMS is even more capable against air defenses. The himars effect seem to multiply when the HARM, or whatever the radiation seeker is called, arrived on the scene. The new himmar pods ought to have that capability, if needed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:55:06 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tiberius: Supposedly containing a large cobalt jacketed nuke intended to generate a tsunami to make our coasts uninhabitable for decades. While Russians are sick enough to develop such a thing I wonder if it’s really just a fantasy weapon to freak out the libtards and give the puffers a stiffie. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tiberius: Originally Posted By Bama_Rebel: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By Jack67: I know (roughly - not a DoD insider) what we’ve done wrt interception. It’s fantastic and it’s something we’ve done very, very right instead of being complacent since 1991. But are you confident we could get all leakers from a first strike? Theoretically speaking. Even if the answer were “yes,” I’m not advocating we do that and no one is - but just as a probability exercise. My understanding was our combined interception capabilities weren’t there yet, but I’m not an expert. This is a good conversation to have, not a frightening one. Because it underscores our ability to prevent a Russian - or anyone’s - first-use. With MAD not an operable part of force and strike calculations, Russia becomes relatively impotent. Reminding them of that is very likely what the State Dept. has been doing recently. If we wanted to, we could prevent a Russian nuclear use by simply saying “we view putting Ukraine under our nuclear umbrella as a logical corollary to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.” It is quite possibly what has already been done quietly. Heck, we could make “The Budapest Corollary” a part of history more important than the Monroe Doctrine. I wonder if Russia's recently announced 'doomsday torpedo' the nuclear powered unmanned underwater drone armed with a big nuke that if launched would wind its way across the ocean and detonate (maybe a month later) near some city...was in recognition that Russia's nuclear deterrence (sub or land launched missiles) have been diminished or even thwarted? Poseidon Supposedly containing a large cobalt jacketed nuke intended to generate a tsunami to make our coasts uninhabitable for decades. While Russians are sick enough to develop such a thing I wonder if it’s really just a fantasy weapon to freak out the libtards and give the puffers a stiffie. I wonder the same. Seems like they had a nuke powered rocket that would fly back and forth that would pollute the atmosphere at one time too. Who comes up with shit like that. I wanna see some new shit, like lasers from space. There one minute, laser vapor the next, poof. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:55:33 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jack67: The Monroe Doctrine didn't enable that; it was an engine in motion already. But the Monroe Doctrine did delimit what Euro powers did in the Caribbean basin. It was weak at best because it only honestly acknowledged the realpolitik that England and the alliance had de-facto kicked France and Spain to the curb during the Napoleonic Wars and already effectively taken them off the board. Since it aligned with UK policy, it got a free ride. The Monroe Doctrine is one of those things IMO with a big name and little real world effect, hence why I picked it as a comparison. ;) Sorry, for some reason my brain said "Manifest Destany". After the Napoleonic Wars France and Russia wanted to invade Latin America and return them to the Spanish king. UK said "no", so nothing happened. The RN in fact protected South America in practice. The most significant thing for the modern world IMO is that Anglo-Saxon navies have dominated the surface of the world's oceans since at least 1805, with exception of ~the first half of 1942. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:57:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: What’s the track record of Russian equipment actually performing to published spec? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M What’s the track record of Russian equipment actually performing to published spec? Failure rate admitted to by Russia for their latest Bulva submarine ICBM is 40% and was accepted into service when the sub could fire four in a row. It's an interesting read. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava We would greatly increase their failure rate. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:57:24 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Having lived through the cold war, I too share a sense of “cant do anything about it so why worry”. I’m not afraid of a nuclear war as much as I am having to survive afterwards. I do feel like something is much different than before. The Soviet Union had hope and power during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That let them act rationally, even with a defeat on the issue. They were still growing and expanding as an empire. . . . They left forces in Cuba, it wasn't as much a defeat for them as our media claimed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 5:59:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bama_Rebel: I wonder the same. Seems like they had a nuke powered rocket that would fly back and forth that would pollute the atmosphere at one time too. Who comes up with shit like that. I wanna see some new shit, like lasers from space. There one minute, laser vapor the next, poof. no that was us. |
|
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:00:12 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 4xGM300m: There isn't much left. Battle Tank Dismantling, a company in Germany scrapped over 20k NATO AFV in the last 30 years because these idiot politicans in Europe believed the Russians would scrap their AFVs too. No treaty with the Russians is worth the paper. Imagine how much money they could have made selling them to Americans on ebay. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:01:02 PM EDT
[#21]
  A LAV 6.0 Armoured Combat Support Vehicle (ACSV) found on the Federal Motorway 20 in Germany, as part of a $500 million package of Canadian military aid for Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:01:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bama_Rebel: I wonder the same. Seems like they had a nuke powered rocket that would fly back and forth that would pollute the atmosphere at one time too. Who comes up with shit like that. I wanna see some new shit, like lasers from space. There one minute, laser vapor the next, poof. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bama_Rebel: Originally Posted By Tiberius: Originally Posted By Bama_Rebel: Originally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By Jack67: I know (roughly - not a DoD insider) what we’ve done wrt interception. It’s fantastic and it’s something we’ve done very, very right instead of being complacent since 1991. But are you confident we could get all leakers from a first strike? Theoretically speaking. Even if the answer were “yes,” I’m not advocating we do that and no one is - but just as a probability exercise. My understanding was our combined interception capabilities weren’t there yet, but I’m not an expert. This is a good conversation to have, not a frightening one. Because it underscores our ability to prevent a Russian - or anyone’s - first-use. With MAD not an operable part of force and strike calculations, Russia becomes relatively impotent. Reminding them of that is very likely what the State Dept. has been doing recently. If we wanted to, we could prevent a Russian nuclear use by simply saying “we view putting Ukraine under our nuclear umbrella as a logical corollary to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.” It is quite possibly what has already been done quietly. Heck, we could make “The Budapest Corollary” a part of history more important than the Monroe Doctrine. I wonder if Russia's recently announced 'doomsday torpedo' the nuclear powered unmanned underwater drone armed with a big nuke that if launched would wind its way across the ocean and detonate (maybe a month later) near some city...was in recognition that Russia's nuclear deterrence (sub or land launched missiles) have been diminished or even thwarted? Poseidon Supposedly containing a large cobalt jacketed nuke intended to generate a tsunami to make our coasts uninhabitable for decades. While Russians are sick enough to develop such a thing I wonder if it’s really just a fantasy weapon to freak out the libtards and give the puffers a stiffie. I wonder the same. Seems like they had a nuke powered rocket that would fly back and forth that would pollute the atmosphere at one time too. Who comes up with shit like that. I wanna see some new shit, like lasers from space. There one minute, laser vapor the next, poof. That was us. Project Pluto. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:01:32 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bama_Rebel: I wonder the same. Seems like they had a nuke powered rocket that would fly back and forth that would pollute the atmosphere at one time too. Who comes up with shit like that. I wanna see some new shit, like lasers from space. There one minute, laser vapor the next, poof. We came up with the rocket, and then said ,”that’s dumb, we’re not going to do that !” THEN they tried to copy the idea, and blew up their test rig, or something like that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:06:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By borderpatrol: The USA can revoke his retirement (SS/Military/FERS/CSRS) for treason. Let him go back to work at his new location. Since the US isn’t engaged in conflict with Russia that’s not accurate. The right of Americans to serve as enlisted soldiers or volunteers in foreign wars (and presumably in foreign press as he would claim) as a matter of conscience is established by the Court and was an appropriate decision. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:08:28 PM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:12:24 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By theskuh: no that was us. Project pluto |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:13:44 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sq40: Harris is just another puppet too. Biden and Harris, are interchangeable. The DNC insisted on both of them to simply by front-people for the deep state people running things. (And really elderly drunk Pelosi too.) We really don’t know who is running this country, which is a first. Agreed. It's kinda scary. We used to be a democracy and now we have Milly-Vanilly "leading" us. Right now, most of us agree with the US handling of this conflict. Even though it seems to be their Plan "B". But if things get stupid and go sideways we have no idea who to blame. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:13:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TxRabbitBane]
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Failure rate admitted to by Russia for their latest Bulva submarine ICBM is 40% and was accepted into service when the sub could fire four in a row. It's an interesting read. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava We would greatly increase their failure rate. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M What’s the track record of Russian equipment actually performing to published spec? Failure rate admitted to by Russia for their latest Bulva submarine ICBM is 40% and was accepted into service when the sub could fire four in a row. It's an interesting read. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava We would greatly increase their failure rate. So realistically there is a greater than 50% chance that their ICBMs won’t launch at all. Of the percentage that get off the ground, I wonder how many can fly, and what smaller percentage has functional guidance, and what subpercentage is capable of producing a chain reaction? Fractions of fractions of fractions approach zero really quickly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:20:00 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stgdz: So what is the strategy here with doubling the himars? Are they going to stop using them on strategic assest and start going for fixed tactical locations, Aka trenches? We’ve already seen a shift from logistics and command nodes as targets to more and more counterbattery. That’s a good thing. It means they have enough systems and munitions to expand their use. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:20:51 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kipple: Serious question: How could that be done without RU lobbing some nukes toward us or whoever? If we launch nukes first targeted at their launch points, they will see ours and launch as well. Could we get aircraft into their airspace and strike without them seeing us coming and shoot down the aircraft? I'm assuming there would be no way for us to get people on the ground to the deed. I'm also assuming we don't have some sort of star trek lasers on satellites that could do it. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just not comprehending how we could first strike their nukes. Russia relies on long range radars for detecting incoming nukes, which is relatively short ranged and unreliable. They have about half the warning that we would have. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:21:03 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MelGibsonEnthusiast: Apparently these 18 HIMARS won't get to Ukraine for about a year or two. The AP article says they're contracts for purchases. If true this is a mistake. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:21:56 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Taboot: Petreus says the M1 is too heavy and maintenance intensive for use in Ukraine, and you need special equipment to extricate them from the field if they fail or become stuck. You would have to set up a whole manned facility in Poland for them, even just a few. Lighter tanks, like the Leopard and surplus T-60s, 70s and 80s from NATO stocks are more appropriate. This was from a recent DW interview with him on YouTube. The M-1 is heavy and maintenance intensive but could be done. The Leo 2 is not appreciably lighter. Poland is getting an Abrams maintenance facility because they are getting Abrams. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:24:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: So realistically there is a greater than 50% chance that their ICBMs won’t launch at all. Of the percentage that get off the ground, I wonder how many can fly, and what smaller percentage has functional guidance, and what subpercentage is capable of producing a chain reaction? Fractions of fractions of fractions approach zero really quickly. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TxRabbitBane: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By TxRabbitBane: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By sq40: Originally Posted By lorazepam: Originally Posted By Jack67: Yep, it is the mobile ground launchers that are the problem. Everything else can be hit within their reaction window. Our interception capabilities are not up to that task yet, and Europe’s are almost nonexistent. I personally am not worried about the mobile launched nukes. I doubt they have been maintained for the years they have been bouncing around in those shitty trucks. Are the mobile ones true ICBMs with reach to the US, or are they range limited to be more of a European threat? Yes, capable of both. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM_Topol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT-2PM2_Topol-M What’s the track record of Russian equipment actually performing to published spec? Failure rate admitted to by Russia for their latest Bulva submarine ICBM is 40% and was accepted into service when the sub could fire four in a row. It's an interesting read. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSM-56_Bulava We would greatly increase their failure rate. So realistically there is a greater than 50% chance that their ICBMs won’t launch at all. Of the percentage that get off the ground, I wonder how many can fly, and what smaller percentage has functional guidance, and what subpercentage is capable of producing a chain reaction? Fractions of fractions of fractions approach zero really quickly. Exactly. The more complex the system the more chances of a failure. The company that makes the Bulava admitted they can't machine to the tolerances required, among other things. Seems like a common problem for them. We assume all theirs work though. |
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:26:48 PM EDT
[#34]
Always a calm voice of reason. I like the way you think.
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:27:35 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ryan_Scott: Russia relies on long range radars for detecting incoming nukes, which is relatively short ranged  Attached File |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:28:15 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DonS: They left forces in Cuba, it wasn't as much a defeat for them as our media claimed. And shortly after the USSR removed their nukes from Cuba, the US removed our nukes from Turkey I believe, as part of the agreement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:30:36 PM EDT
[#37]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:30:47 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rhum_Ham: Always a calm voice of reason. I like the way you think. thanks |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:33:36 PM EDT
[#39]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:33:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
More proof even they don't believe their own bullshit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:37:14 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Charging_Handle: It seems likely Russia equals or exceeds our 10+ year total number of combat deaths during the entire Vietnam War today. Let that shit sink in for a moment. When they hit the 10k mark I wondered when this day would arrive. It didn't them very take long! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:37:46 PM EDT
[#42]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:40:12 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:43:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Easterner]
[#44]
Two explosions in Dnipro this morning about 1 am. Rattled the windows. Fuck these pigs.
Instagram for Dnipro posted a picture of a nice glow in the distance.   Attached FileETA: Also mentioned aircraft activity over the Sea of Azov. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:43:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: doc540]
[#45]
I'm still hoping today is the historic day that Lyman becomes encircled.
And the only route out becomes the Orc Highway of Death. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:50:51 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AROKIE: Not sure if this has been posted.... the russian TV news guy, ol putins friend got called up for the draft and is having a shit fit, even kicks off the other guy on the show cause he called him a pussy and coward, lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcvJSKzW1hM  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcvJSKzW1hM  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:52:19 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By doc540: And the only route out becomes the Orc Highway of Death. I've heard it charmingly referred to as "The Rat Trail" along which the orcs must scurry without their equipment, in order to save their rat lives. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:52:53 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By m35ben: Tucker Carlson pretty much telegraphed that last night in his Russian talking points. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By m35ben: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
I remember you mentioning that last night and so we come full circle.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 6:53:49 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By m35ben: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/390973/unknown-56-2542344.png LOL!! |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 7:01:16 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Freiheit8472: Still catching up…. But had to comment on what an accurate description of this man as a useful idiot. He even is adopting a fake russian accent. And i bet he was even more head over heals for them when they gave him a little chest candy. Another reminder of the true value of all those soviets with practically a suit of armor of medals Jackass https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/539199/AC166510-D02C-4D2F-946A-352DB03427EE-2542562.png Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Freiheit8472: Originally Posted By Prime:
Still catching up…. But had to comment on what an accurate description of this man as a useful idiot. He even is adopting a fake russian accent. And i bet he was even more head over heals for them when they gave him a little chest candy. Another reminder of the true value of all those soviets with practically a suit of armor of medals Jackass https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/539199/AC166510-D02C-4D2F-946A-352DB03427EE-2542562.png He should get it on. Russia should draft him and sent him to the front lines. |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
