The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[Andy_Ross]

**** me ! If even remotely true there are definitely shades of 1930's Germany there and their fascination with alternative histories - in their case Arian history.

By coincidence I saw this story today

A Bored Chinese Housewife Spent Years Falsifying Russian History on Wikipedia


https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkgbwm/chinese-woman-fake-russian-history-wikipedia

 

[Jack by the hedge]

**** me ! If even remotely true there are definitely shades of 1930's Germany there and their fascination with alternative histories - in their case Arian history.

The parallel is so crassly obvious that it diminishes the likelihood that Putin literally believes weird alt-hist stuff like that. But it's hardly unusual for nations to tell themselves they have a Manifest Destiny for greatness or to love sharing their own founding myths or made up stories about how their ancestors were the true cradle of civilisation or whatever.

So while I'm sure he finds this sort of nonsense politically useful, I'm not going to assume he actually believes it just because Fox News found someone who suggested he might.

 

[The Don]

Meanwhile, according to ISW, Russia continues to make tiny gains in the East and dig in elsewhere expecting a Ukrainian counteroffensive.

IMO counteroffensives will have to start happening comparatively soon so that gains can be consolidated before the onset of "mud season" in the early autumn. I'm sure that the Ukrainians are well aware of this - even if the Russians seemed oblivious.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

By coincidence I saw this story today

A Bored Chinese Housewife Spent Years Falsifying Russian History on Wikipedia


https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkgbwm/chinese-woman-fake-russian-history-wikipedia

That's an impressive hobby she had there. So prolific, her sprawling invention eventually supplied its own references. It looks as if the key was to write about a topic sufficiently obscure that nobody challenged it as it grew.

Seems like a waste though. If she'd written it as historical fiction she might have found success as a novelist or screenwriter.

(Apologies for topic digression.)

 

[ponderingturtle]

Story is fiction, but the capabalities of the A 10 fire power is pretty accurate.
Why does the concept that fiction can be quite accurate in details seem to pass you bye?

I get it people love the gun on the A10. Doesn't mean it can practically survive as an effective weapon in the air defense environment of Ukraine. You can armor around the cockpit and make it less likely to lose the pilot when you lose the aircraft but you can't make aircraft so that WWII anti aircraft weapons would be ineffective. You just can't pile enough armor on something and get it off the ground.

So at best compared to other aircraft you might have the A10 make it back to base to be scrapped when another aircraft would be shot down but that is still a lost aircraft.

Now there are reasons to think that not all near peer fighting would be like this but there is just an incredible volume of AA weapons in ukraine and neither side has the capacity to suppress the others capabilities in this regard.

This weekends Perun video on helicopters goes into this

 

[ponderingturtle]

**** me ! If even remotely true there are definitely shades of 1930's Germany there and their fascination with alternative histories - in their case Arian history.

The british had a lot of similar ideas too.

 

[Garrison]

You are saying Russia should be rewarded for it's ethnic cleansing campaign. This will just result in more invasions and more genocide. But good to know you don't see genocide as a problem...

I should remind you he is also a holocaust denier.

 

[Oystein]

I don't see any [problems with the concept of "territories which don't want to be Ukrainian"], but you are welcome to point out some if you think you know them.

I think it is best, most educational for you to try to figure this out yourself, with some guidance.

Now, in our modern age, it seems logical (to me, at least) to make, from time to time, some border adjustments to take the sociological reality of said territories into account (one may think about Kosovo, Crimea and so on).
...

Ok, please take out a blank paper with the pre-2014 borders of Ukraine drawn on it, and then mark with a red pencil the "territories which don't want to be Ukrainian", taking into account "the sociological reality of said territories".

Or rather, explain in some actionable detail how exactly you would go about identifying those territories so you can put them on a map.

You may want to consider how "the sociological reality" has been changing - since 1990, since 2000, since 2014, since 24 Feb 2022 - and how those changes should affect the territories you choose to mark red.

You may want to think about what units of territory to poll - oblasts? Cities? Individual villages? Individual residential plots?
You may want to think about how and when to poll territories.

You may want to take into account that the "very bloody battles" you wish to avoid have already been forced upon Ukraine by Russia - and whether you propose that, as a general rule, the sociological results of such bloody ought to be heeded - that indeed, according to you, bloody battle is a legitimate and advisable way to change sociological realities and borders. Or why else would you place the burden on Ukraine, not Russia?

Go!

If you cannot, without further ado, describe in your very next post that process and consequently suggest a definitive map, then I propose you do have problems with the concept, and merely feign not to see any.

 

[Lplus]

The british had a lot of similar ideas too.

Yeah, but they were justified.

 

[The Don]

Looks like the EU has agreed to reduce energy consumption:

EU energy ministers have agreed for their countries to cut gas use in case Russia halts supplies.

Following talks on Tuesday, EU members agreed countries should voluntarily reduce gas use by 15% from August to March.

"This was not a Mission Impossible!", tweeted the Czech Republic, which holds the rotating EU presidency.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62305094

It's not all good news though

However, draft plans seen by the BBC suggest the deal had been watered down, with countries able to seek exemptions.

 

[Drewbot]

I get it people love the gun on the A10. Doesn't mean it can practically survive as an effective weapon in the air defense environment of Ukraine. You can armor around the cockpit and make it less likely to lose the pilot when you lose the aircraft but you can't make aircraft so that WWII anti aircraft weapons would be ineffective. You just can't pile enough armor on something and get it off the ground.

So at best compared to other aircraft you might have the A10 make it back to base to be scrapped when another aircraft would be shot down but that is still a lost aircraft.

Now there are reasons to think that not all near peer fighting would be like this but there is just an incredible volume of AA weapons in ukraine and neither side has the capacity to suppress the others capabilities in this regard.

This weekends Perun video on helicopters goes into this

Remember if the A-10 were being used , American air strikes on anti aircraft radars and missile sites would proceed the A-10's runs. In the 80's /90s they called these wild weasel attacks. Once the Anti aircraft batteries' radar is switched on, US has missiles that lock on to that, clearing the way for A-10 & Apaches to do their thing.

 

[theprestige]

By coincidence I saw this story today

A Bored Chinese Housewife Spent Years Falsifying Russian History on Wikipedia


https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkgbwm/chinese-woman-fake-russian-history-wikipedia

While certainly possible, I doubt the "bored Chinese housewife" narrative.

 

[theprestige]

Remember if the A-10 were being used , American air strikes on anti aircraft radars and missile sites would proceed the A-10's runs. In the 80's /90s they called these wild weasel attacks. Once the Anti aircraft batteries' radar is switched on, US has missiles that lock on to that, clearing the way for A-10 & Apaches to do their thing.

Turns out that the same planes that excel at striking air defense systems also excel at striking the ground forces those systems are trying to protect. You don't need a whole separate plane. Just give the F-15s, F-16s, and F-35s their new targets (or the Rafales, Typhoons, and Gripens, as the case may be).

The A-10 used to be a unique plane perfectly suited to a particular niche. Nowadays, it's unique plane awkwardly straddling the uncanny valley between multirole attack jet and helicopter gunship. Rotate the knob one click in either direction, and you land on a much better tool for the job.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Remember if the A-10 were being used , American air strikes on anti aircraft radars and missile sites would proceed the A-10's runs. In the 80's /90s they called these wild weasel attacks. Once the Anti aircraft batteries' radar is switched on, US has missiles that lock on to that, clearing the way for A-10 & Apaches to do their thing.

Not in the context of giving them to the Ukrainians. That would involve them flying in the air defense situation as it is on the ground in Ukraine right now, and as such their ability to fly missions of the variety envisioned in this discussion is highly questionable.

Without the american airforce to suppress the AA capabilities, as well as finding out exactly how good the active defenses of the A10 are against the IR tracking MANPADS used in high numbers by both sides, it is questionable if the A10 would be able to sortie more effectively than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft that Ukraine already has.

 

[ponderingturtle]

And the A10 is not a flying tank, lets look at one of the premier airdefense guns and anti tank guns of WWII, the German 88mm gun.

No modern tank would take it as a serious threat, but while it might have difficulty hitting and a10 it would make a mess out of any it did hit. I think the A10 would not like getting hit by even say the 4 20mm cannons of the Wirbelwind.

So while WWII air defense guns might not be as able to hit as modern AA guns, they would still damage and A10 unlikely say an Abrams that would laugh off any WWII antitank munitions.

You just can not put enough armor on something and make it fly to make it be able to take hits like you can ground vehicles.

 

[Mike!]

Not in the context of giving them to the Ukrainians. That would involve them flying in the air defense situation as it is on the ground in Ukraine right now, and as such their ability to fly missions of the variety envisioned in this discussion is highly questionable.

Without the american airforce to suppress the AA capabilities, as well as finding out exactly how good the active defenses of the A10 are against the IR tracking MANPADS used in high numbers by both sides, it is questionable if the A10 would be able to sortie more effectively than the helicopters and fixed wing aircraft that Ukraine already has.

I think it's been demonstrated already in this conflict, that Ukrainian pilots are mighty ballsy SOB's that'll happily fly just a few meters above ground, and well below enemy radar if it suits their objective.
If the Ukrainians have a way to make use of them effectively, and they want them, I say them them have at it!
It already feels like we're making them fight a war with one hand tied behind their back as it is.

 

[SpitfireIX]

That was what immediately sprung to my mind as well.

And mine also.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think it's been demonstrated already in this conflict, that Ukrainian pilots are mighty ballsy SOB's that'll happily fly just a few meters above ground, and well below enemy radar if it suits their objective.
If the Ukrainians have a way to make use of them effectively, and they want them, I say them them have at it!
It already feels like we're making them fight a war with one hand tied behind their back as it is.

Do they, by this article they don't want the A10

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/air-force-may-give-a-10s-to-ukraine/

https://www.airforcemag.com/ukraine-says-it-needs-fast-and-versatile-aircraft-not-the-a-10/

Seems like they want high speed multirole jets not the dedicated A-10.

The main systems I have seen them focusing on is artillery and heavy ground weapons not aircraft.

I would support giving them a bunch if they wanted them, I just can't find evidence that they actually do want them.

 

[crescent]

What advantage would an A-10 have over an Su-25?

They share similar roles. Su-25 cannon has less ammo and a slower rate of fire, but there is no evidence that either side has even used those cannon in this war. (I saw one video of a claim that a Russian Su-25 used its cannon, but the video conveniently ended before the actual use of the gun).

Current use of the Su-25 seems to be to fly very low until close to the front, then "pop up" and fire unguided missiles. Attack helicopters are being used the same way. Nobody is flying around looking for targets to hit, they find them first with drones or satellites and then hit them one at a time.

Precision hits now seem to mostly be made with ground-launched missiles (Ukraine) or ground, sea or air launched strikes by the Russians, with the air launched ordnance being fired by aircraft still well over Russian controlled areas.

 

[Mike!]

Do they, by this article they don't want the A10

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/air-force-may-give-a-10s-to-ukraine/

https://www.airforcemag.com/ukraine-says-it-needs-fast-and-versatile-aircraft-not-the-a-10/

Seems like they want high speed multirole jets not the dedicated A-10.

The main systems I have seen them focusing on is artillery and heavy ground weapons not aircraft.

I would support giving them a bunch if they wanted them, I just can't find evidence that they actually do want them.

As I said, IF they want them. I had no knowledge if they did or didn't, so I speculated. I stand corrected.