The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[jimbob]

In the interest of saving you a click:

Have you heard about this movie, Top Gun: Maverick?

In tangentially related news, MSN says that Twitter says that the Ukrainians say that they shot down a plane, that this guy may or may not have been flying.

Top Gun: Maverick is a movie about a fighter pilot who is old.

Anyway, one thing is certain. Whether this guy was flying a fighter jet over Ukraine or not, he probably shouldn't have been, according to a fighter pilot we interviewed, who is old like the main character in Top Gun: Maverick.

There's a new movie out, called Top Gun: Maverick. You should see it.

The article is also poorly edited, which I cannot do justice to here. Hopefully Top Gun: Maverick had a decent editor.

Wow, you weren't inaccurate.

It's something when the BBC Russian automatic translation is easier to understand.

Although it is interesting if the Russian military is getting mercenary jet pilots from the Wagner group.

 

[theprestige]

Wow, you weren't inaccurate.

It's something when the BBC Russian automatic translation is easier to understand.

Although it is interesting if the Russian military is getting mercenary jet pilots from the Wagner group.

Yeah, that would be an excellent story for a serious mainstream media organization like MSN or the BBC to investigate and report on in some depth.

 

[theprestige]

NM

 

[I Am The Scum]

If the Russians are reverting from T-72s to T-62s, the west can probably revert from Javelins to Dragons and still come out ahead in this game.

I hope this ends with something akin to the Gun Museum scene from Demolition Man.

 

[theprestige]

I hope this ends with something akin to the Gun Museum scene from Demolition Man.

I won't be satisfied until there's Viking longships on the Volga once more.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Then Perun is an idiot. The US can't possibly deploy a full spectrum, totally integrated supreme battlespace instantaneously all at once. Sometimes the Marines are going to want to pop off with anti tank and anti air while they wait for the rest of the stuff to settle in and start getting busy.

First, Perun is not an idiot, which you'd know if you watched his videos. Second, please explain the scenario you posit where the US sends in ground troops without first establishing air supremacy. Note that a single carrier battle group significantly overmatches the air forces of nearly every potential US adversary.

Additionally, as Perun also explains, Stinger is obsolete, nearing the end of its storage life, and in need of replacement. But the US military is in no rush to adopt a successor, such as the UK's Starstreak, because of the perceived lack of need.

 

[SpitfireIX]

If the Russians are reverting from T-72s to T-62s, the west can probably revert from Javelins to Dragons and still come out ahead in this game.

The US Army does not have any Dragons left: ADMC destroys Army's last DRAGON missiles. A quick search didn't turn up any information about whether the US Marines do, but I suspect not, and even if they or any US allies do, they're likely past their shelf lives. In any case the Dragon was not a very good ATGM; MILAN, though the earlier versions are vulnerable to countermeasures, might be a possibility, depending on NATO countries' inventories.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The US Army does not have any Dragons left: ADMC destroys Army's last DRAGON missiles. A quick search didn't turn up any information about whether the US Marines do, but I suspect not, and even if they or any US allies do, they're likely past their shelf lives. In any case the Dragon was not a very good ATGM; MILAN, though the earlier versions are vulnerable to countermeasures, might be a possibility, depending on NATO countries' inventories.

Ukraine has already received Milan from France.

 

[gnome]

Ukraine has already received Milan from France.

...and Italy was OK with this?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

 

[Andy_Ross]

...and Italy was OK with this?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

They have Milan 2

 

[SpitfireIX]

Italy has also given MILAN to Ukraine, so apparently they are.

 

[Drewbot]

T-62 tanks?

* Kennedy was president when the T-62 was introduced.
* They are really a modified T-55, which was introduced post- ww2
* Time to get some A-10 Warthogs over there.
* Any modern Anti Tank weapon will tear these apart.

 

[crescent]

T-62 tanks?

* Kennedy was president when the T-62 was introduced.
* They are really a modified T-55, which was introduced post- ww2
* Time to get some A-10 Warthogs over there.
* Any modern Anti Tank weapon will tear these apart.

Looking on twitter today, the T-62's seem to be showing already up in areas that are already firmly under the Red Boot - places where they would mostly be used against lightly armed resistance groups.

That frees up better tanks from the occupation forces to be sent into the Donbas meat grinder.

 

[Dr.Sid]

T-62 tanks?

* Kennedy was president when the T-62 was introduced.
* They are really a modified T-55, which was introduced post- ww2
* Time to get some A-10 Warthogs over there.
* Any modern Anti Tank weapon will tear these apart.

You still need anti tank weapon to tear them apart. In tank on tank they might be at great disadvantage .. but there is not that much tank on tank in Ukraine. If you want to roll through village and shoot civilians, they will do just fine.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Looking on twitter today, the T-62's seem to be showing already up in areas that are already firmly under the Red Boot - places where they would mostly be used against lightly armed resistance groups.

That frees up better tanks from the occupation forces to be sent into the Donbas meat grinder.

of course that's what they are for.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You still need anti tank weapon to tear them apart. In tank on tank they might be at great disadvantage .. but there is not that much tank on tank in Ukraine. If you want to roll through village and shoot civilians, they will do just fine.

You don't need tanks for that.

If they are going to the trouble of activating and deploying them it's because they have nothing better left.

 

[jimbob]

You don't need tanks for that.

If they are going to the trouble of activating and deploying them it's because they have nothing better left.

There are still anti tank rifles that have been used by Russian clients in Donbass.

So an APC or IFV would be vulnerable in a way that a T-62 or T-55 wouldn't, as well as having a bigger gun

 

[dudalb]

I won't be satisfied until there's Viking longships on the Volga once more.

Well, see the movie "THe Northman" and you will be satisfied....

 

[dudalb]

Bring back the T-34s! I mean, they *are* fighting Nazis, right?

Don't laugh but a few T 34's are still on active duty is some Third World Militaries.....

 

[theprestige]

First, Perun is not an idiot, which you'd know if you watched his videos. Second, please explain the scenario you posit where the US sends in ground troops without first establishing air supremacy. Note that a single carrier battle group significantly overmatches the air forces of nearly every potential US adversary.

Additionally, as Perun also explains, Stinger is obsolete, nearing the end of its storage life, and in need of replacement. But the US military is in no rush to adopt a successor, such as the UK's Starstreak, because of the perceived lack of need.

I stand corrected. I take back every mean thing I said about Perun.